Reply to a letter

In today's Forum section in ST (17th March), a certain Mdm Lam wrote in to draw a comparison between "an international school and an autonomous school in Singapore". Among other things, she suggested that the former has better customer-service, later starting hours, "curriculum that allows learning to take place; good and motivated teachers; small classroom size; no pressure on students/staff to win accolades; minimal homework and tests/exams; hiphop dancing exercise for PE and, best of all, cellphone and laptop usage".

And also, the most incredulous thing in the letter is this "Everyone is using cellphones everywhere, except in our conservative schools. How do you expect students to learn to use their phones properly in public if they are not allowed to do so in school? Education is also about teaching them responsible use of the phone during lessons."

---

First, it amazed me that this letter is published in the first place - what is the editor thinking? What purpose does this letter serve? Does it do anyone any good? Secondly, the quality of the argument is outright silly and ridiculous, and I don't think I'm the only one to hold this opinion.

All right, a point by point reply to her letter:

• It is an unqualified generalisation to say that international schools offer better customer-service. Service is all dependent on the individual. Even if the majority of school teachers here supposedly scream at students in class, there are always those who treat students with respect, like myself (I'm not shy to admit that btw).
• It is costly to study in international schools, so of course they should have a better teacher:student ratio. Previously MOE also officially said that most parents do not want school to start later because they want to send them to school first before going to work.
• Does she mean that the curriculum in government schools (autonomous or otherwise) does not allow "learning to take place"? What kind of statement is that?
• Again, the motivation of teachers is dependent on the individual. I think NIE does a good job at trying to inspire student teachers to make teaching a passion as it is.
  
• I can't see why trying to win accolades is a negative matter: Competition boosts standards and teaches students certain values.
• I can see teachers in school already minimizing homework, so that there can be immediate feedback for them in class and also to ensure that the work gets done and returned. Anyway this depends on the policies of individual teachers, so there's nothing much to comment on. As for minimal tests and exams, I have this to say: If it is worth knowing, it is worth testing.
• Hiphop dancing in PE? I'm not impressed - what's so great about that? It is just an attempt to do something odd. I do know that PE teaching in many secondary schools are substandard though, refer to my previous post here.
• About teaching responsible cellphone usage: The only "responsible use of the cellphone" we need to teach is that they should not be used in the classroom, period. What else is there to teach about it?

I have half a mind to send this response to ST, but am too lazy to draft a more appropriate sounding reply. Anyway, people might think I'm equally silly to even try to reply to such nonsense.