What is it that you don't like MOE style of Education, such as?
Apparently they top world standards beating angmoh countries.
Other people say already... Singaporeans good only at exams, but when they compete on other things, such as ability to get into certain industries, Singaporeans aren't that good. Singaporeans are good when industries want hardworking workers (e.g. accountants). Singaporeans aren't so good when industries want creative, innovative people (very few firms do R&D here - most prefer to base elsewhere). Singaporeans workers high exam scores also don't translate to high-tech firms locating their manufacturing here. In spite of our high exam scores - somehow high-tech firms prefer to locate in US, Japan, and Europe. Why do you think so?
As an ex-teacher, I didn't like how we prepared students for exams but not for life. Not all schools do this of course - but my school was like that. Preparing for life is so different from preparing for exams. MOE isn't good at preparing students for life because they tie teachers' and principals' work evaluation to poor metrics like exam results, and winning awards. It's as bad as asking half the cohort of Sec 4 students to drop from two pure sciences to combined science just so we can get more A1s (instead of risking an A2 or B3), to drop from A math + E math to just E math - teachers (with the approval and encouragement of principals) are treating the exams like a game. It's more important to score well in the game than to let students learn. And more than just knowledge - it teaches students life values - that scoring is more important than knowledge, etc. BTW my school is very good at this game - under my principal we went from Band 9 to being Band 1.
And maybe because of civil service yes-man or so-called "wayang" culture - where people don't dare to criticize, and if you criticize you don't get promoted, and if you play ball and do what your boss wants, you do. In the long run, MOE promotes people who work hard and are competent, but are also willing to "wayang", and are not willing to criticize the way the organization does things, and they end up with a yes-man "wayang" culture from top to bottom.
Maybe it's easier if you think about our army. Are we a good army? Do our soldiers pass IPPT, get Marksman, score well on ATEC, win awards, do well on measurable tests, etc? But the real question of whether we have a good army is answered only when we fight a war. But in education you can't avoid the "wars" - every generation grows up to become workers. (Ok lah - not really - when your army is scary enough, nobody want to start a war with you - so maybe our army is very good. :p)
Malay language is known as one of the most beautiful languages in the world. Many words use 2 syllabus and easy to remember. Pity they don't have their own style of writtings, borrowed Latin for their writings.
Jap language more precise to the term they use unlike English to many similar sounds but do not mean the same, and no tone.
Chinese language produces happy sounds and tones and often look like the speaker is smiling or relax talking.
I agree, all languages are very interesting.
But my first love is Singlish - it sounds like home. I like Mandarin too - feels much more intimate than English. English is for work and talking about complex things.
This proves to me that you are very well read, and intelligent.
Thanks!
But no lah, this is my day job. You ask baker how to bake cake or barber how to cut hair, they will also sound intelligent.
