What the Olympics taught us about education

A shortened version of this article was featured on the Sept 15th issue of the Nanyang Chronicle.

The sheer joy of victory is something every athlete craves for, and this was most evident in the Beijing Games.

But in the obsession for sporting supremacy, it seems that some athletes have lost the joy of participation, resorting to doping scandals and nasty fights. The Olympics has also become a political sideshow – with protests, boycotts, and sharp criticisms headlining the media.

One wonders if the same thing is happening in our university education.

No doubt, the results are important, but so should be the sheer enjoyment of intellectual pursuit, which seems to have become an oxymoron these days. A proclamation of your love for hitting the books will often be met with this common retort:

“You must be kidding me!”

The current university system in NTU, together with the hectic pace of life in Singapore, makes it rather difficult for students to have a truly enjoyable educational experience. As a basic requirement, students are told to complete all tutorials and readings beforehand, but this may prove difficult.

Consider the other commitments that students often have: co-curricular activities, relationships, and even religious obligations. Some are even actively involved in community or grassroots work which falls outside the purview of the university. It seems unfair that students have to choose between maintaining a decent GPA and having extra commitments outside of school.

There is more the university can do to improve the quality of its education.

Firstly, consider the implementation of the study week – a full one week break from lessons right before the examinations. A common complaint among students is the lack of preparation time before sitting for the papers. The study week allows students to have more time to understand and digest the concepts which have been learnt throughout the semester and to clear existing doubts with their tutors.

Secondly, reduce the number of AUs required for students to graduate. At Columbia University – which is a member of the Ivy League and consistently ranked among the top ten in the world – a student is required to complete only 124 credits to graduate with a Bachelor of Arts degree in four years. In NTU however, students must complete a staggering 146 AUs to graduate with a Sociology degree in the same amount of time. Despite the disparity, it is no secret which university offers a better undergraduate programme – and it is not about how much you study.

It is an illusion that by taking up more modules, students will benefit from greater knowledge. It is a question of width versus depth: with fewer modules to take, students will be able to have a deeper understanding of the subjects they are taking. Also, lessening the requirements for graduation would give students more time to pursue their own interests. These things are the least the university can do to lessen the burden placed on students by a Singaporean culture already obsessed with academic achievement. For students with a desire to be involved with, say, setting up a business, they would be free to do so without worrying too much that their studies will be affected.

And with all the fuss about poor alumni donations among local universities and poor marriage rates, the above measures just might do the trick in alleviating these problems. More free time equals more socialising – resulting in students building deeper bonds with the school and with one another. Expect more young couples to visit the grassy roof of ADM to star-gaze pretty soon.

A paradigm shift is needed – by students, educators, and Singapore society alike, especially when it comes to how we define success. In the Beijing Olympics, China topped the medal standings based on gold medal count alone. But if we look at the total medals count, including silver and bronze, the US is still tops. However, if you factor in population count, Jamaica is king, with 2.2 gold medals per million inhabitants. The US came in at 33rd, and China at 47th.

So instead of merely recognising outstanding academic achievers at the NTU Convocation, special mention –and perhaps even awards – should be given to students with outstanding extra-curricular work. Small financial incentives that are given out annually can be considered as well. These activities should be in addition to the school club the student may already be involved in. To facilitate this, students should be encouraged to list down – at his discretion of course – a list of his outside commitments. This could be in the form of religious activities, entrepreneurial endeavours, and even private language courses. The whole idea here is that everything the student does that can be deemed educational should be recognised.

With these measures, education becomes more of a pursuit of passion rather than just pointless mugging. And when students are allowed to do more of what they like, they will enjoy the process a little bit more, and maybe even perform better.

Usain Bolt, the flamboyant, fun-loving track star who rose quickly to prominence during the Olympics, exemplified what it meant to enjoy what you do – and to do it well. While International Olympic Committee Chief Jaques Rogge criticised “showbolt” for celebrating with crowd-pleasing theatrics before completing the 100m race, others defended him. Just let the guy have some fun, they said.

He broke the world record in 9.69s, and the funny thing was – he was not even trying very hard. Sometimes, having a little bit of fun can get you somewhere.

Is Privacy Extinct?

This article was first edited and published on The Nanyang Chronicle on 25th August, 2008.

Privacy, is going the way of the dinosaurs, and there is nothing Singaporeans can do about it.

Consider this: on a typical day, you would already be caught numerous times on close-circuit television (CCTV) while on the way to campus. Furthermore, when you board the train, somebody might be taking photos of you with their mobile phones, and uploading them onto STOMP, a citizen journalism website run by The Straits Times.

However, it appears that Singaporeans don’t mind that their actions are being tracked, at least on the internet. We do not seem to mind the fact that websites like YouTube, a Google-owned video sharing site, are efficient in gathering information about us by keeping track of our viewing.

And such information can easily fall into the wrong hands. In a US$1 billion (S$1.41 billion) copyright infringement lawsuit last year, Viacom contended that YouTube has been showing 160,000 video clips of its programming without permission. The verdict was controversial: it ruled that Google must hand over the viewing record of all YouTube users.

Fortunately for YouTube users, both Google and Viacom had later pledged to protect all YouTube users’ anonymity in its investigations. This meant that all private information will be used for investigative purpose only.

In the internet age, where we often reveal more of ourselves online, there is a need to define what privacy is. In this case, we are referring to information privacy, where an individual has the right to decide what information one chooses to reveal to others.

With the explosion of information in society today in the form of text, pictures, sound, and video, the possession of knowledge is truly a source of power. Consider the case of Dr Tam Tak Chuen who, according to a Straits Times report in May, was caught on camera having sex with his clinic assistant. The voyeur: business partner Khairul Abdul Rahman, who had long suspected them of having an affair.

The above example illustrates a moral dilemma: should privacy be violated in the name of exposing another immoral deed?

No doubt, whatever individuals choose to do in private is their own personal choice, but they must be reminded that any private action runs the risk of becoming public – especially if society deems it immoral or controversial. Take the case of the Edison Chen sex scandal.

Edison Chen and Co’s privacy were violated when photos of their sex romp were uploaded onto the internet early this year. Yet, we find ourselves laughing at its irony: there is no doubt that Mr Kwok Chun-wai - the 24-year-old logistics clerk who discovered the photos - deserved his comeuppance, but I suspect that the only praise reserved for Mr Chen is his ability to bed many famous celebrity women.

Nevertheless, privacy is an inalienable right of every human being, and this fact must be recognised more strongly in Singapore. This is especially important in the Internet age, where our privacy is under siege by the advent of technology.

The lack of clear privacy protection guidelines in Singapore is apparent, and will only become more so in the future. In 1999, then 21-year-old NUS student Anne Lee told The Straits Times that her SingNet account was hacked into from the Home Affairs Ministry. Later, it was found that a staggering 200,000 accounts were scanned without the users’ knowledge – about half of the total number of internet users in Singapore then.

But this is not an isolated incident.

Last year, SingTel was once again embroiled in a privacy infringement controversy. Local anime distributor Odex obtained court orders that required Singtel and Starhub to reveal the identities of over 2,000 subscribers who were alleged to have downloaded anime illegally.

While the judge felt that copyright infringement must take precedence over privacy protection, Straits Times senior writer Andy Ho wrote in September last year that the individuals who were about to have their information divulged were not represented in court at all. Surely the privacy matters of internet users should be given a better hearing?

Both incidents illustrate the fact that privacy issues would continue to surface, especially in the information age.Therefore, a set of privacy laws will be useful for the government and the Supreme Court: it defines the rights citizens have to information privacy, and would serve as a guideline in future controversies.

The government can look to the European Directive on Protection of Personal Data for inspiration, currently in effect in the European Union (EU). The directive states that for every data collected, there should be a stated purpose, and they should be deleted when it is no longer needed. Also, some data can be deemed too sensitive to be collected, except under extreme circumstances.

Only with such laws can the privacy rights of Singaporeans be safeguarded effectively.

No one left behind

Photo: One of the many homeless in Singapore. Edited version of article published on Vol. 14, issue 10 of The Nanyang Chronicle. Photo extracted from online source.

On a busy Sunday afternoon, Chan Ai Eng, 71, was selling tissue at a crowded street near Bugis Junction. The skinny arch-backed woman carried a large plastic bag filled with packets of tissue. The pale sinews on her arms were almost visible; her translucent skin wrapped around her limbs like parched leather. With a diminutive voice she pushed her wares to bystanders, who waved her away.

Lonely and abandoned, Madam Chan is a forgotten ghost treading the land of rapid modernisation. She is homeless, wandering from place to place, unsure of where she will stay for the night. If she is lucky, kind hawkers will treat her to a free meal. But more often than not, she pays for food with the meagre sum she earns.

Living on such a subsistence level, she has fallen out of the scope of the budget speech, which was delivered by Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam on 15th February 2008. In it, he mentioned how a budget surplus meant that needy Singaporeans stand to gain by receiving ‘hongbaos’ in the form of financial assistance.

However, she will not be receiving growth dividends, which is based on family income and the value of their homes. Top-ups will be given to Medisave accounts, and Public Assistance payouts will be increased, but these mainly service needy families and not homeless folks like her.

An additional $200 million will be pumped into ComCare, and another $10 million will go into grassroots, self-help groups, and voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). However, it is unclear which organisations will benefit from this funding, and how much of it will be steered towards the homeless elderly.

For Madam Chan and those like her, the god of prosperity seems to have passed them by.

Despite the various measures mentioned in Budget 2008, the homeless elderly seemed to have been left behind. While 10 welfare homes exist in Singapore to provide care for about 1,700 destitute people, many are still left wandering the streets. With no caring relatives, no friends, and no way to be contacted, the only hope for Madam Chan is to fall into the attention of some social worker, if they ever find her at all.

While no official figures have been made public about the number of homeless in Singapore, sightings of the destitute sleeping on void decks and on benches are common. They can be spotted sleeping on laid-out cardboard boxes, with their bags as pillows and newspapers as blankets. They carry their belongings with them in plastic bags. Many of them are old, lonely, and abandoned.

While Budget 2008 has not addressed the need of these individuals, it seemed that their families and society in general are not helping much either, content with leaving the problem to welfare organisations, which sometimes lack sufficient funding themselves. In a society where ‘filial piety’ is touted as one of its foremost values, we should not be seeing feeble elderly sleeping out alone and unprotected.

While the budget speech has promised benefits for all, it is doubtful that much of the wealth generated from the additional education, entrepreneurial, and research assistance will trickle down to the bottom of the barrel. The new measures effectively cover the lower-class to the rich, but what about the desperately poor?

The economic benefits coming our way, unfortunately, may remain firmly in our pockets. While many of the middle class and rich will benefit from the new measures, nudging them to “give back to the poor” may not be easy, as present economic realities may make this difficult.

On one hand, the middle class, many of whom are degree holders in middle-management jobs, have inflation to worry about.

On the other hand, the rich, many of whom are living comfortably off their hard-earned money, may find it difficult to give up too much for a philanthropic cause.

Amidst all the buzz and excitement of the ‘New Singapore’; the casino with its opulent splendour, the shuffle of chips at the poker table, and the Singapore Flyer soaring above the skyline, we must never forget to develop into a more compassionate society.

The voice of those like Madam Chan must never be forgotten.

Seeing her at the McDonalds restaurant along the air-conditioned ‘street’, I went up to the old lady and bought tissue, paying extra for it. Her face widened in a wrinkled grin and she thanked me profusely. We then sat down at the table to have a chat.

She revealed that she was left to fend for herself by her only son, who bums around from job to job and stays at their relatives’ place. Her husband abandoned her early in the marriage. Her feeble legs only allow her to work twice a week. She earns less than $10 a day, adding up to barely $20 a week.

Our time together was cut short because she had to go back to selling tissue. With no contact number, it was difficult to meet her again. I left her my number, hoping that somehow we could keep in touch again.

She never called.

Save the planet: RECYCLE LESS

Published on The Nanyang Chronicle, Vol. 14, Issue 7. Photo courtesy of Foo Chee Chang. The article, renamed "Reduce and reuse before recycling," was published on 31st March 2008 in My Paper.

I was wondering what to do with a read copy of a newspaper.

Considering how environmental conservation is becoming a widespread practice, the most obvious answer would be to dump it into the recycling bin.

However, this is an assumption that needs to be challenged.

As global temperatures continue to rise, people have finally warmed up to the 3Rs – Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. Celebrities in Hollywood are jumping onto the environmental bandwagon. For example, Sheryl Crow has a tour bus that runs on bio-diesel, while Cameron Diaz drives a Prius and uses recycled products.

Recycling, however, is hardly an effective solution to our environmental conundrum as it does not cut down on human greed and wasteful consumption, which is the root cause of our current woes. In other words, recycling is a reactionary measure, and not a preventive one.

However, it is the concept of recycling that seems to have hit home with the general public, perhaps due to the visibility of the recycling bin, which has become an iconic symbol of environmentalism globally and in Singapore.

And it seems the practice has caught on among locals; at least that is what statistics are telling us. Latest figures from the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources show that Singapore’s recycling rate – which is the total amount of waste recycled as a percentage of the total amount of waste generated – has risen from 40% to 49% between 2000 and 2005, and the ministry aims to increase this to 60% by 2012.

While recycling does have an important role in environmental conservation, it does not address the root causes of our environmental problem: human greed and high consumption.

But these are problems requiring very complicated solutions. Asking consumers to buy less would be an economic disaster, as advertisers, marketers, and the government are counting on them to spend the dollar and contribute towards economic growth. Therefore the next best solution would be to curb wasteful consumption.

In an article titled “What’s Your Consumption Factor?” published in the New York Times on 2nd January 2008, Jared Diamond shed light on how wasteful consumerism is contributing significantly to the gravity of the environmental problem.

He reveals how people in developed countries have a consumption factor of 32, consuming that number of times more resources than a typical person in many developing countries. In other words, a typical Singaporean consumes 32 times more resources than a Kenyan.

To make matters worse, as countries prosper and develop, the standard of living will increase, and the citizen’s demand for material possessions will rise as well.

Even though the developed nations are moving towards sustainable development, their progress are offset by countries like India and China, who would not only become the biggest engines of growth on the global economy, but also the biggest contributors of pollution.

With a combined population of 2.5 billion people yearning for a taste of the high life, it would seem that we are spiralling inevitably towards an environmental meltdown.

Even as environmental activists, governments, and scientists busy themselves with reversing the planet’s environmental woes, individuals do have a part to play in all of this.

More than just recycling our trash, we need to alter our spending behaviour and stop splurging on wasteful purchases. Diamond shows in his article how people can always work towards maximising resources without having to compromise on standard of living. He then cites the example of Western Europe, which consumes about half as much per capita oil consumption as America, yet enjoys a higher standard of living.

All we need is a little bit of creativity. The January 12th, 2008 edition of The Straits Times reported on how a Swedish state-owned firm is using body heat from a quarter-million commuters from Stockholm’s central station to heat up its office building. Through the use of ventilators and pipes, heat is directed into the building, where it is used to heat up water.

As clichéd as it sounds, the 3Rs – reduce, reuse, recycle – is apt in describing how an individual can contribute towards environmental conservation.

As a result, in the order of importance: first, we reduce, then we reuse, and for everything else – we recycle.

Liberal arts: much to gain and little to lose

Published on The Nanyang Chronicle, Vol. 14, Issue 6

Stacy Hong has always been a model student. She had a stellar CCA record, was the vice-president of the science society, and was involved in numerous student research projects.

She attained straight As for her ‘A’ levels, guaranteeing her a position in the medicine faculty in NUS, where her doctor parents had always wanted her to go.

Now imagine their horrified faces when she comes home one day and told them she has applied to study Philosophy and Religion at Bates College in Maine, USA.

They objected vehemently to her choice, harping on the impracticalities of an arts degree and her rashness in making that decision.

She pleaded tearfully saying that she was just following her passion, and the first question they shot at her is this:

“What are the job prospects?”

An education system to be proud of

Traditionally, the Singapore education system is well known for producing excellent mathematics and science students.

Even its tertiary institutions had a decidedly science and engineering focus in the early years. In a recent Straits Times article on 19th December 2007, it was reported that universities in the US are encouraging trainee teachers to teach “Singapore maths”, while the state of California has endorsed the use of a Singapore maths textbook in its elementary schools.

However, Singapore is undergoing a metamorphosis in its development as a nation, and in the way it shapes education policies. A paradigm shift in the Singaporean mentality is emerging: from pragmatism to idealism; practicality to passion.

Liberal arts degree a pragmatic choice

We are witnessing transformations in the local education landscape – Singapore’s first pre-tertiary arts institute, the School of the Arts, is receiving its first intake in 2008, while the Lasalle College of the Arts has moved to its new urban campus along McNally Street this year, highlighting the government’s willingness to invest in fine arts education and develop Singapore’s nascent arts scene.

In the midst of this transition phase, the government has also pondered the idea of a liberal arts college as the fourth public university in Singapore.

A liberal arts education is a drastic contrast from the more practical and market-oriented education that is now dominating tertiary institutions in Singapore. Instead of gearing the student towards a specific career, a liberal arts college provides students with a vigorous mind exercise, developing within them the ability to think critically, integrate knowledge from various disciplines, and articulate their ideas eloquently either in speech or writing.

The skills acquired by a liberal arts graduate are often not immediately recognised in the workforce. A liberal arts degree does not translate immediately into job prospects, quite unlike an engineering degree.

In a study by CNN.com in 2005 on the starting pay of university graduates, the average liberal arts graduate earns about US$29,000 – 80% of what a marketing graduate (US$37,500), 70% of what an accounting graduate (US$43,000) or barely 60% of what an electrical engineering graduate (US$51,000) earns.

However, it is unfair to base the value of a liberal arts degree on starting pay alone. It is a well known perception that a liberal arts education prepares the student for a highly mobile and fast-paced job market where career switches are commonplace. Effective presentation skills and the ability to write well and work across disciplines and learn new knowledge are traits highly valued by employers across all fields.

A liberal arts education is also well known for producing leaders. According to The Annapolis Group, an alliance of independent liberal arts colleges in the US, even though only 3% of graduates in 1998 were educated at a residential liberal arts college, they account for 8% of Forbes magazine’s listing of the nation’s wealthiest CEOs and 19% of all US presidents.

A liberal arts education may be the most pragmatic form of education after all. Even as Singapore aims to produce more leaders and innovators out of its education system, is setting up a liberal arts college really the solution?

Liberal arts in the local context

While Singapore could benefit from the setting up of a liberal arts college, starting from scratch may not be the best option. Education at a liberal arts college comes at a high price due its low faculty-to-student ratio, its small class sizes, and frequent student involvement in faculty and independent research. As such, a liberal arts college, with a usually small annual intake of 1,000 to 2,500 students coupled with expensive tuition fees, may not be what the government is looking for.

Nevertheless, there are already some elements of a liberal arts education here in Singapore. In SMU, for example, the climax of the Bachelor of Social Sciences programme is the Capstone Seminar which promotes cross-disciplinary dialogue, interaction, and research. Furthermore, SMU practices the seminar teaching approach, which it hopes will promote interaction and critical thinking. The university prides itself in developing an “interactive, collegial environment that models and encourages open communication and life-long learning.”

However, students looking for natural science oriented programmes with a similar teaching emphasis will be disappointed.

Bringing liberal arts into the education system

The best way forward may not be to start a liberal arts college, but to bring liberal arts into existing faculties. The high costs of a liberal arts education would be offset by the sharing of many facilities and student services. There would not be a need to hire as many new faculty members as there are competent ones in the existing faculties.

It is certainly easier to make adjustments to the existing system rather than to start from scratch. Also, to ease parent’s concerns about the value of a BA degree, professional internships could also be included in the programme, as universities like the Colorado State University are already doing.

Changes should also be made to the education system as a whole.

Starting from primary school, students should be taught to think critically and be vocal about issues affecting our nation. Educators should make humanities more interesting for students instead of treating them as second-tier subjects. While the junior college has been adjusted to incorporate more breadth, there is still too much of an emphasis on rote learning and the ten-year series.

Liberal arts for everyone

Skills like critical thinking and rhetoric should not be learnt only when the student has reached college level. Indeed, a liberal arts education is not just a university programme, but a lifelong process that starts from young.

During the holidays, I had the opportunity to teach creative writing at a private education centre for kindergarten and primary school children. The students there are taught to be imaginative and they learn how to write well. However, students should be able to pick up these skills in public schools, and not just in private education centres.

In an interview with The Business Standard, Mr Kamath, chief executive officer of India’s second largest bank, attested to the value of a liberal arts education when he said: “I am probably too technical a person. By training I am an engineer and also did my MBA but I never had an exposure to liberal arts. I wonder sometime that if I had an exposure to liberal arts, probably I could have been a better person, better leader and achieved a little more than what I have [done].

Early in my career I used to feel that technical education is the best education but after 35 years of working I like to admit that I stand corrected.”