RJ 5

Choo Hong Wei (5) 4I2 8/4/12

Reflective journal V: Reflect on Education

Through the class discussion, I have realised that the priorities of America and China are quite different, and the problems they face are essentially what the other country is prioritising. This has got me thinking: could an ideal education system be created by merging the quintessential good points of both systems?

Firstly, the priorities of the Chinese education are to prepare students for their college entrance exam and can create a group of “competent mediocrity”(Jiang Xueqin), while the American education aims to promote creativity amongst students but at the same then preparing them for the industry. Perhaps it is then possible where we have an education system where the students are placed in a situation where they have to work hard to understand the basic concepts, but are encouraged to speak up more to challenge the fundamentals of these concepts. For example, a subject such as physics can use this method. The basic concepts of, say, how energy is transferred can be taught to the students and a few examples could be given to them for them to memorise and use and apply. In further tutorials, students could be given a future problem which they would have to suggest solutions and present their ideas to the class, which ultimately allows for a strong grasp of the concepts and the capability to think more about the topic.

One aspect of this ideal education system we have to note is how the students are tested for their knowledge and understanding of the topics, as well as how to test their ability to think out of the box. Standardised testing is the chosen form of testing in both countries, but it has evidently proved to fail to test the students adequately. Standardised tests merely force the children to study the same boring topics and are tested in a way where rote memorisation is the best way to solve it, stifling creativity by a large amount. Ultimately, students may find it useful for their tests, which determine their future as the university they can go to depend on this, to forget about thinking out of the box and simply study what is given to them, regurgitating out everything they have learnt. In China, there are cases where two students would have the same essay, word for word, despite them not sitting next to each other in a test. It was then discovered that they had both memorised an entire model essay and simply wrote it off their memory during the test.

What we truly require for tests is a more qualitative approach, where the students’ thinking is measured and his or her capability to apply basic concepts and produce new ideas is also measured. One example is when a student converses about a concept or idea with his friend and a teacher is able to pick out the points highlighted in their conversation and count it for their grades. To put it simply, an interview of sorts would be more personal and test the true knowledge of the students.

However, this form of testing is near impossible to be carried out in today’s context. The advantages of standardised testing are that it provides empirical data which allows the easy sorting of people into their different standards, and it is also one of the most efficient methods of testing as it requires little manpower and the tests are simply mass-copied for every individual taking the test. Such a qualitative testing method is too taxing on the resources required and the testers all have to be properly trained such that the true knowledge of the student can be measured, and it is by no means an easy feat.

So what can be done in our society today? I think that the mixed education as mentioned above would work fine, but for the testing component, standardised testing still has to be the way to go. What we can do now is perhaps to introduce more questions that require students to challenge what they have learnt in their lessons, or have another component that is part of the results they get at the end of their education. Primary education could even adopt simpler forms of project work and count it in the students’ scores. For example, in the context of Singapore, projects can be done more often starting from primary schools. This provides students with the time to adapt to this critical thinking that they are required to do and also allows for the development of both their fundamentals and higher thinking, allowing the students to be competent at the most basic things they have to do while at the same giving them the platform to develop their potential.