i like this..an answer to my long-time question

A letter to the Forum

As an educator of 20 years the letters on education in Singapore and the West by Mr Gan and Ms Bava beckon a response from me. The crux of the discourse stems from our understanding of “teaching to test” and “teaching to develop skills”-critical thinking skills.

Based on the comments, the perception is that the Singapore education system is based on rigorous testing while the West – the UK and the US –encourages critical, creative thinking. Both these methodologies of instruction have their merits and flaws.

In Singapore and the West, the measure of success in education is based on test cores, so teaching to test will boost the students and society’s perception about the intelligence of these students. Teaching to test also requires quite a bit of drills, often repetitive and boring, going over the same problems, the same situations in various forms. This is boring for both the student and teachers.

As an educator in Los Angeles, my experience of teaching critical, creative thinking is filled with mixed results. Students are encouraged to speak up and participate, and they generally do. The problem with this form of participation is that the discourse has no merit because it is based on their personal opinion that contradicts generally accepted data. The premises of their arguement are substantiated not by facts but by fantasies.

In truth , “teaching to test” and “teaching creative , critical thinking” are not mutually exclusive methodologies; rather , they complement each other. It would be to the students’ advantage if they could use the information generated from readings and respond critically and creatively to the ideas. The task then is for the teachers to come up with various types of lesson plans , using materials that apply to students’ lives , or materials form the past that are still applicable today. This is true for all levels of students.

Ong Wooi-Chin