What I think about the future of Education in Singapore
We all have our grouses about education, especially about the examination-based kind of system that we have, and we constantly say that its a highly stressful and competitive system and the like. But in some sense, it’s inevitable. I would just say that examinations have their place, but an over-emphasis on examinations can instead become a liability towards the process of learning.
If I’m not wrong, Singapore falls into the category of objective-based learning, where examinations are used to verify that students have understood whatever topic there is. The most extreme case of this kind of system are the cram schools in Japan, where students just cram whatever there is on the syllabus. But since Singapore is nothing like that, but there are similar processes at work. In order to ensure their academic success, they are willing to go to that extent of institutionalise cramming. I mean, Singapore students do that on an informal basis, and it basically makes people hate what they learn, since rote learning is hardly fun, and does not fully utilise the value of our mental faculties. So our education tries to institutionalise other things, such as critical thinking, which is so vague, and so varied, that any attempt to try to assess these abilities generally fail and instead increases the necessity to use rote methods in order to get the correct response, which in the end, defeats the purpose of the original objective.
So there is no easy transition from a ojective-based education. The key question that we are struggling with here is how do you assess something that is going on inside that mind? And here, present facts end, and speculation begins.
We all know the deficiencies of our education system. We talk about it so much that we got tired of it, until we feel we need to talk about it again.
And since this is speculation, I would take the freedom and run away with it...
I would first of all, start with the simple things - the physical infrastructure of learning. For one thing, as Moore’s Law continues on, technology in the form of laptops and other forms of sexy electronics will get cheaper and cheaper, until maybe today’s high-end laptop falls to just a few hundred dollars. At that point, I would expect nearly every schoolkid to have a laptop with them, preferably those that have been optimised for the learning process, to encourage technology literacy, and to open up whole new areas for learning - creating new possibilities. And this is not just about the access to technology, this is about immersive learning, about the whole learning experience, and how to create the experience. oh, and when I talk about laptops, I am not talking about the laptops that we have today. I think that laptops in the near future will look more like touch-tops, going even further than today’s tablet, but also incorporating multi-touch capabilities. And from there, it is only a matter of time before the interface from Minority Report becomes a reality, and teachers teach with gloves and moving graphics on a multitouch board.
But this is only the hardware, the basis for greater interaction between the learner and the subject. In due time, we would also see advances in graphics software to fully utilise the hardware capabilities. It would be graphics-intensive, and information becomes transformed into something that is truly interactive. Games like Spore would only be the beginning as hardware capabilities continue their exponential growth. Some facilities that might be possible might be the capability to watch live ongoing expeditions, allowing students to almost participate in the exploration and discovery process. It would be simply amazing, if the capabilities for discovery become democratised, when everyone man, woman and child have that ready access to the technology to explore the cutting edge at their own time and pace. This is the future that I’m talking about, and I know it won’t be coming soon, but it will.
And I forgot to mention the unimaginable possibilities when schoolkids have access to Fab Labs - places where students can make their own high-end design capabilities. For example, the kind of access where students can make their integrated circuits or flesh out their design concepts. It’s the future equivalent of what we know today as D&T or Technical Studies, but instead of the carpentary and plastic work benches, here, we are dealing with cutting-edge manufacturing process akin to those in a chip factory.
The next thing that I’m talking about is sort of abstract, but I think it is also one of the major disruptive technology area. I’m talking about the gap between computation and physical reality. That gap is going to narrow as computing capabilities become more integrated into the digital world. The easiest example would be simply sensors for everything in everything. IR sensors that look at body heat and change the colour of clothes to dissipate heat; materials that change colour in response to physical-emotional factors - the like. All of these things are possibilities for learning as well, when they learn about the physical processes that manifest themselves in tangible things. Most often, the biggest challenge in concept is in its visualisation. It’s become not that easy when you are learning about something you can’t really see. But if physical processes can be made easily tangible, then I think students would be more receptive to it, instead of just learning by rote about something abstract.
The key concept that I want to bring across is that the process of learning is effective when students can contextualise, when they can relate the piece of information to something they can directly experience. Technology is going to play a major part in this process, of transforming information into knowledge.
I know that I have been heavy on the science, but I think similar things can happen and transform the process of learning in the humanities, especially the usage of games such as Sims, or even spore when learning about communities and economics and such. It is all about the application of these technologies in whatever field of learning, and with a bit of creativity, it can be done.
So I’ve talked so much about technology, so the next question invariable is about the role of the human teacher in this whole experience of learning. So with so much technology being applied, would that make teachers obsolete? I mean, it’s only a matter of time before you have avatars that can simulate teachers and the teaching process in giving instructions and all. That might be true, but no, the process only makes sense if students can relate to a human person, a teacher, who can assure and guide students in the process, to inspire and facilitate the student’s entire process of learning. There is all that wonderful technology, but it also means that the potential of abuse isn’t going to go away. There is something irreplaceable with technology and its about things like, moral guidance, about right and wrong. And because the human capacity to learn is so powerful, so unmachine-like, it’s going to require a teacher’s personal capability to assess the capacity of students to learn and advance. Also, I would imagine the rise of social networks of learning, where students would share what they have learnt with a larger community. And the only person capable of monitor these information flows is that of a teacher, who can contextualise what the students have learnt and to guide the community of learners created. And naturally, you would still need subject specialists to have the kind of academic authority. Moreover there are still areas, such as language instruction, that requires a human figure to guide students.
I would actually say that when technology explodes into the classroom, the role of teachers would become even more important, not less, and they would have slightly different roles.
We all have our grouses about education, especially about the examination-based kind of system that we have, and we constantly say that its a highly stressful and competitive system and the like. But in some sense, it’s inevitable. I would just say that examinations have their place, but an over-emphasis on examinations can instead become a liability towards the process of learning.
If I’m not wrong, Singapore falls into the category of objective-based learning, where examinations are used to verify that students have understood whatever topic there is. The most extreme case of this kind of system are the cram schools in Japan, where students just cram whatever there is on the syllabus. But since Singapore is nothing like that, but there are similar processes at work. In order to ensure their academic success, they are willing to go to that extent of institutionalise cramming. I mean, Singapore students do that on an informal basis, and it basically makes people hate what they learn, since rote learning is hardly fun, and does not fully utilise the value of our mental faculties. So our education tries to institutionalise other things, such as critical thinking, which is so vague, and so varied, that any attempt to try to assess these abilities generally fail and instead increases the necessity to use rote methods in order to get the correct response, which in the end, defeats the purpose of the original objective.
So there is no easy transition from a ojective-based education. The key question that we are struggling with here is how do you assess something that is going on inside that mind? And here, present facts end, and speculation begins.
We all know the deficiencies of our education system. We talk about it so much that we got tired of it, until we feel we need to talk about it again.
And since this is speculation, I would take the freedom and run away with it...
I would first of all, start with the simple things - the physical infrastructure of learning. For one thing, as Moore’s Law continues on, technology in the form of laptops and other forms of sexy electronics will get cheaper and cheaper, until maybe today’s high-end laptop falls to just a few hundred dollars. At that point, I would expect nearly every schoolkid to have a laptop with them, preferably those that have been optimised for the learning process, to encourage technology literacy, and to open up whole new areas for learning - creating new possibilities. And this is not just about the access to technology, this is about immersive learning, about the whole learning experience, and how to create the experience. oh, and when I talk about laptops, I am not talking about the laptops that we have today. I think that laptops in the near future will look more like touch-tops, going even further than today’s tablet, but also incorporating multi-touch capabilities. And from there, it is only a matter of time before the interface from Minority Report becomes a reality, and teachers teach with gloves and moving graphics on a multitouch board.
But this is only the hardware, the basis for greater interaction between the learner and the subject. In due time, we would also see advances in graphics software to fully utilise the hardware capabilities. It would be graphics-intensive, and information becomes transformed into something that is truly interactive. Games like Spore would only be the beginning as hardware capabilities continue their exponential growth. Some facilities that might be possible might be the capability to watch live ongoing expeditions, allowing students to almost participate in the exploration and discovery process. It would be simply amazing, if the capabilities for discovery become democratised, when everyone man, woman and child have that ready access to the technology to explore the cutting edge at their own time and pace. This is the future that I’m talking about, and I know it won’t be coming soon, but it will.
And I forgot to mention the unimaginable possibilities when schoolkids have access to Fab Labs - places where students can make their own high-end design capabilities. For example, the kind of access where students can make their integrated circuits or flesh out their design concepts. It’s the future equivalent of what we know today as D&T or Technical Studies, but instead of the carpentary and plastic work benches, here, we are dealing with cutting-edge manufacturing process akin to those in a chip factory.
The next thing that I’m talking about is sort of abstract, but I think it is also one of the major disruptive technology area. I’m talking about the gap between computation and physical reality. That gap is going to narrow as computing capabilities become more integrated into the digital world. The easiest example would be simply sensors for everything in everything. IR sensors that look at body heat and change the colour of clothes to dissipate heat; materials that change colour in response to physical-emotional factors - the like. All of these things are possibilities for learning as well, when they learn about the physical processes that manifest themselves in tangible things. Most often, the biggest challenge in concept is in its visualisation. It’s become not that easy when you are learning about something you can’t really see. But if physical processes can be made easily tangible, then I think students would be more receptive to it, instead of just learning by rote about something abstract.
The key concept that I want to bring across is that the process of learning is effective when students can contextualise, when they can relate the piece of information to something they can directly experience. Technology is going to play a major part in this process, of transforming information into knowledge.
I know that I have been heavy on the science, but I think similar things can happen and transform the process of learning in the humanities, especially the usage of games such as Sims, or even spore when learning about communities and economics and such. It is all about the application of these technologies in whatever field of learning, and with a bit of creativity, it can be done.
So I’ve talked so much about technology, so the next question invariable is about the role of the human teacher in this whole experience of learning. So with so much technology being applied, would that make teachers obsolete? I mean, it’s only a matter of time before you have avatars that can simulate teachers and the teaching process in giving instructions and all. That might be true, but no, the process only makes sense if students can relate to a human person, a teacher, who can assure and guide students in the process, to inspire and facilitate the student’s entire process of learning. There is all that wonderful technology, but it also means that the potential of abuse isn’t going to go away. There is something irreplaceable with technology and its about things like, moral guidance, about right and wrong. And because the human capacity to learn is so powerful, so unmachine-like, it’s going to require a teacher’s personal capability to assess the capacity of students to learn and advance. Also, I would imagine the rise of social networks of learning, where students would share what they have learnt with a larger community. And the only person capable of monitor these information flows is that of a teacher, who can contextualise what the students have learnt and to guide the community of learners created. And naturally, you would still need subject specialists to have the kind of academic authority. Moreover there are still areas, such as language instruction, that requires a human figure to guide students.
I would actually say that when technology explodes into the classroom, the role of teachers would become even more important, not less, and they would have slightly different roles.
