Lives of Dark & Quiet Desperation

ST Feb 15, 2008
Refuse to send your kids to school? Govt may step in
MOE may consider taking parents of six children to court if they do not respond to counselling
By Theresa Tan

THE Education Ministry (MOE) may have to consider court action against some parents who have refused to send their children to school.

The six children involved have stopped school for some time, or only show up for classes from time to time despite extensive counselling and mediation.

If the ministry presses charges, it will be the first time it is doing so under the Compulsory Education Act, which was implemented in 2003.

The Act stipulates that anyone who fails to ensure that his child attends school shall be guilty of an offence.

If convicted, the person may be fined up to $5,000 or jailed up to a year, or both.

The authorities say they may have to consider using 'penal sanctions' because of the parents' poor response to counselling efforts by the schools involved and the Singapore Children's Society, a charity engaged by the ministry to counsel parents who do not enrol their children for Primary 1 classes.

In some cases, social workers have been trying to change the parents' minds for the last three years, but have come up empty.

When contacted by The Straits Times, the Children's Society said it was not authorised to give more details about the six cases.

But according to the ministry, there are several reasons why the children are 'not attending school regularly or stopped attending school for some time':

They come from dysfunctional families.

They have indifferent or lax parents.

They also may be influenced by older siblings who are school dropouts.

Opinion was divided on whether charging the parents would solve the problem or make matters worse.

What kind of parents wouldn't send their children to primary school?

Many kinds, actually. Let's see. Daddy could be dead, in jail, schizophrenic or completely broke. Mummy could be suicidal, alcoholic, disabled or regularly getting beaten up by her lovers. Or any permutation of the above.

So the kids have a big problem and it isn't the kind that is necessarily solved by fining or jailing one or both parents for not sending the kids to school. In fact, criminal punishment could well make things worse.

When I was a Deputy Public Prosecutor, I had sneak peeks into many lives of dark and quiet desperation. There are many people out there with huge personal problems, and some of them would end up in police files, and so I saw my fair share of them.

Today, as I type this, I recall one particular case of mine that crossed my desk many years ago. The man had been arrested for drug trafficking, following a dramatic CNB raid on his HDB flat. He, like his lover, was a drug addict.

The woman was pregnant. We had some suspicion that she too was a drug trafficker, but the evidence was too weak and so we proceeded on consumption and possession charges against her. As she was a repeat offender, she would be spending a long time in jail.

Whatever happened to that baby? Did the woman eventually give birth in prison? Who looks after babies whose mothers are still convicts? And if the baby was born at all, was it born normal? Or was its health permanently damaged by its mother's heavy drug abuse?

I don't know. I get sneak peeks, that is all, into these other lives. I read the police files, I appear in court, I prosecute my cases. Then I close the file and I move on with my own life, just as everyone else has to move on. Criminals and victims included.

That baby, if it had been born and if it had survived, should be a 7-year-old child by now. Time for primary school. Dear baby, do you even know your mother's name?

Suddenly, The Singapore Media Discovers That Gays Are Human Beings After All

A vaguely amusing article from Today:

Banks and the pool of pink talent
Wednesday • January 30, 2008
By Neo Chai Chin

AMERICAN investment bank Lehman Brothers is planning an unusual initiative in Singapore, Financial Times reported recently. It is specifically targeting gay and lesbians who aspire to be bankers. This follows the success of a presentation and buffet dinner for 50 gay students in Hong Kong.

Today has learnt that the banking giant is not alone. Global banks around Asia are breaking new ground to attract and retain the best and brightest. Increasingly, their hiring and diversity policies are taking into account the homosexual community, which makes up as a significant part of the talent pool.

At UBS Singapore, for example, benefits including health insurance are extended to a staff's "significant other", defined as "a person who has cohabited with an employee for a continuous period of 12 months". The couple does not need to be married, and sexual orientation is not an issue.

Money is a factor in the competition for talent, but keeping up with social changes is also important.

"This is why our benefits policy is designed to be as flexible and inclusive as possible," said Ms Leona Tan, UBS Singapore's diversity advisor.

Merrill Lynch, on its part, has four professional networks in the Asia-Pacific region for its staff, one of which is the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender network, set up last April. The other networks are for women, young professionals and parents. The firm even has an annual diversity week, when it hosts speakers, events and conferences for the various networks.

"Our efforts in the area of diversity are about how we can create the most effective and inclusive environment, one in which we value diversity rather than simply tolerate it," said Mr Roman Matla, spokesperson for the bank's diversity and inclusion team.

I suppose this article is useful for public education purposes in Singapore. On the other hand, I could not help finding it somewhat funny.

The article suggests that by taking gay people into account in their HR policies, foreign banks are doing something really unusual and innovative – “breaking new ground”.

Actually, this is nothing new at all. Practically all US and European banks have global HR policies recognizing the rights of their gay employees worldwide. Such policies would have been in existence for many years.

For example, my current employer has a HR policy which promotes fair and equal treatment of all employees. Among other things, the policy says that no employee is to be discriminated against on the basis of his race, nationality, age, religion, gender, marital status, disability or sexual orientation.

As a matter of fact, this isn’t even unique to banks. You see it across different industries, among a wide range of global MNCs. Here are a few examples, from the world’s best-known corporate names:

Microsoft: “It is our policy to recruit and hire applicants for employment opportunities based solely on the qualifications. We do not unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, marital status, age, or disability in any of our recruitment, hiring, training or promotion practices.”

British Airways: “British Airways offers an inclusive environment to all of our employees, whether gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. British Airways has for many years included sexual orientation in its the diversity policy.”

Deutsche Bank AG: “We think of Diversity in its broadest sense, embracing all of those differences that make up the exciting, challenging world in which we live. These include age, culture, ethnicity, gender, nationality, personality type, physical ability, religion, sexual orientation, and work style."

General Electric: “GE's commitment to the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender communities is supported by the GLBT Forum, as well as our offering of benefits for domestic partners.”

BP: “Our code of conduct, distributed to all BP employees, states that the company will not discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation and identity.”

Nike: “Nike works closely with Stonewall, Britain’s leading gay equality organization, and other members of the program, to improve the working environment for our lesbian, gay and bisexual employees.”

Nokia: “Among those rights that Nokia views as fundamental and universal are: freedom from any discrimination based on race, creed, color, nationality, ethnic origin, age, religion, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation ....”

If the above surprises you, it’s only because you live in Singapore. “Gasp!” you say. “How could all these respectable companies openly employ criminals?!”

Well, yes, the Dark Ages still prevail in Singapore. However, most other developed countries moved on long ago. They already discovered that gays are human beings too, you see.

How To Teach Your Kids To Read

ST Jan 30, 2008
Revamp to Reading Scheme Ups Its Pass Rate
Instead of remedial lessons, English Learning Support Programme focuses on skills
By Ho Ai Li

AN IMPROVED version of a programme that helps pupils who are weak in English has led to higher passing rates for them, the Ministry of Education (MOE) said yesterday.

The scheme, known as the Learning Support Programme (LSP) for English, emphasises pronunciation and recognition. Under it, pupils who had barely understood two-letter words later learnt how to read long passages and passed their exams.

Around 65 per cent of the 402 Primary 2 pupils in this pilot scheme eventually made the grade compared to only 40 per cent previously, the ministry said.

The new scheme has made such a difference that it has been rolled out in all primary schools.

Around 5,600 pupils who are less proficient in reading than their peers will come under this scheme. This comprises up to 14 per cent of each Primary 1 cohort.

While the old lessons were remedial and no different from the usual English classes, the new ones focus on skills, said Ms Thoo Mei Lan, a senior reading specialist at MOE.

Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education Masagos Zulkifli gave reporters an update yesterday, saying that the ministry had looked into improving the LSP as its pass rate had been 'hovering at 40 per cent for a long time'.

Many pupils start Primary 1 not being able to read words like 'on' or 'is', said Ms Thoo.

Now, they are taught to recognise the letters of the alphabet and to decode and spell words. After going through the programme, they should be able to read even polysyllabic words such as 'sapphire', she added.

This article makes me feel a little sad. It's not that difficult for parents to teach their little kids to read.

My son knew all the letters of the alphabet even before he could talk. (If you wrote out all 26 letters of the alphabet, he would be able to correctly point out whatever letter you randomly asked him to point out). Before he could even hold a pen properly, he could already spell words like “cat”, “dog” or “house”.

My daughter is three years old and can recognize probably around 200 different words with no conscious effort. She has a good grasp of phonics and that enables her to break down more complicated words (“COM-PLI-CA-TED”) and figure out how they sound, even if she doesn’t know the meaning.

What’s the simplest way to teach a toddler his ABCs? Put him in front of a TV, and play a Sesame Street VCD. That’s it.

As the child progresses, you substitute with more advanced VCDs. I highly recommend “Between the Lions”, for kids who have learned their ABCs and moving on to learn simple words. The storylines are so wickedly humorous and entertaining and the music so good that as an adult, I enjoy watching the show too.

Many people think that TV is bad for kids, but that has not been my experience. In my opinion, it largely depends on what programmes you let them watch. These days, plenty of excellent children’s shows are available. You just have to choose intelligently.

Of course, books are also of vital importance.

The trick to teaching a little kid to read is to make it fun. There should be no coercion or pressure – it would kill the kid’s natural joy for learning.

Buy a wide variety of children’s books and leave them in your kid’s room. Always let the kid choose what he wants to read. If the kid loses interest halfway and doesn’t want to read anymore, just stop right then.

Where can you get lots of good children’s books, without burning a hole in your wallet? Look out for the book sales by Times or the National Library, at the Singapore Expo. At these events, books go at extra cheap prices. Buy in bulk. I go to these events with my suitcase, no kidding.

If you don’t want to wait for these events, go to the Children’s Book Store on the 4th floor of Bras Basah Complex. This is a place where kindergartens and playschools regularly source for children’s books. You get brand new books here at very cheap prices – most books would be between $3 and $8.

When you read to your child, be sensitive to the material. Different books can be used, and are designed to be used, in different ways.

Don’t read like a tape recorder. Keep the process interactive. Give the kid time to point and poke at the pictures. Before you turn the page, ask the kid to guess what’s going to happen next.

Read dramatically. Act out the story as you go along. Ask your child supply the sound effects (for example, if you are reading a story about the Dark, Dark Woods, ask him to howl like a lonely wolf).

As your child’s reading skills improve, take turns with him to do the reading – get him to try reading the next word, or sentence or paragraph. Invite questions – talk about the animals, or the flowers, or different countries, or good manners, or whatever the book is about.

Young kids often like to read the same book again and again. This is normal – they need the repetition to learn. Don’t be impatient or bored. Get innovative in the way you read. Entertain them, and yourself.

Reading with your child is a good way to bond. It’s also like aerobic exercise. 20 minutes a day, three or four times a week, is enough for excellent results.

Safety in the Syllabus

While we're still on the topic of education, I'll share a few thoughts on a recent interesting experience of mine.

Last week I took a day off from work, to give a talk at a secondary school. The other guest speaker was Stella Kon, one of Singapore's best-known playwrights. We spoke about creative writing, to an audience of about 60 literature students.

By the way, I don't get paid for doing things like this. However, students in Singapore do study a few of my literary works from time to time (as these works are included in the Education Ministry's official resource book for literature teachers).

So I am happy to offer my time, meet students and help to make Literature, as a subject, come alive for them. (And before anyone asks, no, my real name is not Catherine Lim).

Anyway, a few of my observations from this experience.

My session was just one of several events comprising a Literature camp for the students. Among other things, the students made field trips; took photos of various places discussed in local literature; wrote their own poems and short stories and acted them out; and came up with different ways to represent literary works (for example, through art or music).

My first impression was that such activities could be too challenging for the average Secondary 3 student. On the other hand, it really depends on how the teachers conduct the activities.

If the activities are conducted with the stern seriousness of typical Singapore education, then they would become quite stressful. On the other hand, if they are conducted with a sense of play and the freedom to go wrong, then they would be a great way for the students to experience what Literature is all about

I felt that most of the students did enjoy my session a lot. "I am your homework, " I said, "and it's not often that you get to talk to your homework, and ask questions about itself." I was promptly peppered with a wide range of questions, including "Do you have a day job?" and "How has your religion influenced your writing?".

All in all, I felt that the school deserved credit for organising a camp like this. Certainly, when I was a student and doing Literature myself, we never got to try our hand at such interesting activities. Meeting a real, live writer wasn't an option either, since we mostly studied the works of dead white men like William Shakespeare.

I also had the opportunity to chat with a few of the teachers. I learned that Literature was not a popular choice for Secondary 3 students. Most students want to do the triple sciences (Physics, Chemistry and Biology) which leaves them room for only one Humanities subject. The preferred choice then becomes History or Geography, for the reason that Literature is perceived as being more difficult to score well in.

Well, some things don't change, do they. As you may have heard, in recent years, many schools don't even offer Literature anymore, as it tends to drag down the overall pass & distinction scores.

A final observation. I was curious as to why the school had invited me to speak at this event. Yes, I am an MOE-endorsed local writer, but in my opinion Singapore has several other writers who are more interesting and more active than myself, on the literary scene.

"Like who, for instance?" the teacher asked.

"Well, like Cyril Wong," I said. Cyril Wong, by the way, has published seven books and was the 2005 Young Artist of the Year for Literature; and the winner of the 2006 Singapore Literature Prize; and a former runner-up for the NAC-SPH Golden Point Award. In my opinion, he is perhaps the most significant and talented writer, among Singaporean writers living today.

"Ummm, Cyril. Well, we visited his blog," said the teacher, "and it had a picture of a naked man. We didn't think Cyril was very appropriate for our Literature students."

Cyril is gay, you see. The gay theme emerges in some of his writings, sometimes subtly, sometimes overtly. As a matter of pure literary merit, he produces some of the best works in the history of Singapore, but this achievement cannot be fully acknowledged in our schools. We are still a homophobic society.

Along the same lines, Alfian Saat is also a "dangerous" writer. He is hugely talented, and his works are very thought-provoking. But because Alfian's works are so sharply political, so sharply critical of the government, they will have no place, or only a very limited place, in the Singapore classroom. In effect, he is censored from the minds of young Singaporeans. Thanks to Lui Tuck Yew (again), Alfian isn't even allowed to do relief teaching in our schools.

Sad, but true. In the end, the students will just have to settle for staid old Mr Wang. And even then, the Ministry of Education only picks my more-conservative works.

The Modern Risks of Information and Advice

In my earlier post, I wrote about the school principal who had strongly urged her Secondary 5 students to give up studying for their O-levels and go to the ITE instead. This incident reminded of Freakonomics, a very interesting book that I had read some time ago.

Here's the relevant point from Freakonomics. As society grows more complex, more and more specialists evolve. Doctors, lawyers, financial advisers, property agents, journalists, religious leaders and car salesmen - all of them are specialists of a different kind.

The individual cannot possibly be an expert in every field relevant to his life. So he must often rely on advice from different specialists. For example, if he is ill, he will consult a doctor. If he wants to buy a car or sell an apartment, he will talk to a car salesman or a property agent.

The Freakonomics authors warn us that very often, the specialist's self-interest is not fully aligned with the self-interest of the person seeking information or advice. In other words, it often does not serve the specialist to tell you everything that you should know.

For example, it may take too much time for the specialist to tell you everything you should know, and there is no reward for doing so - therefore he won't.

Or the specialist might deliberately withhold certain information about his product / service, because if you knew all its flaws, limitations or disadvantages, you might not want his product / service any more.

Or he may deliberately slant or angle his advice in certain ways, so that you will be inclined to make a decision that serves his own self-interest.

And there is usually no equal footing, because the specialist, by virtue of being a specialist, already knows more than you. He holds the edge.

Let's now consider our education system. Socially, we are conditioned to think of education as a noble thing, and of educators as noble people. Certainly this view has some validity - some people would say, a lot of validity.

But at the same time, we must realise that there are different actors within the school system. Different actors means different self-interests, and that means the Freakonomics info/advice problem must arise again.

What's good for the Ministry of Education is not necessarily good for the principal. What's good for the principal is not necessarily good for the teachers. What's good for the teachers is not necessarily good for the students.

And what's good for the students may not necessarily be good for the teachers, principal or the Ministry of Education.

(Minor digression - here is a brief account of how I, as a student, went against the government's then-prevailing career advice for young Singaporeans. I thereby became quite rich and successful).

It is very good for the principal, if the school achieves a high overall pass score. An ambitious principal may well aim to achieve, say, a 98% or 100% pass score. It is conceivable that such an ambition may heavily shape a principal's advice to the students or the way the principal runs the school.

For example, the principal may discourage students from exploring knowledge outside the formal school syllabus (such extra learning may be good for the students, but will not help the overall pass scores).

Or the principal may prevent the students from taking subjects which the students are interested in, but which are considered harder to pass (for example, Further Maths, or Art, or Literature).

Or the principal may seek ways to put extreme pressure on the students to work as hard as possible, such that a few of the less-resilient students will inevitably suffer severe stress.

Or the principal may advise the weak students to leave the school and pursue other options elsewhere (if these students stay, and fail their exams, then the overall pass scores would be damaged).

And the students may never realise that their education is being shaped, not by considerations of what is good for them, but of what is good for their principal.

The Freakonomics authors do not say, of course, that in every case, specialists are out to hurt the advisee's position. In many situations, the interests of the advisor and the advisee could be well-aligned - this means that the advisor has a strong incentive to be genuinely helpful.

What Freakonomics does warn us is that when we receive any specialist advice, we should pause to ask ourselves - what are all the possible reasons why the specialist is telling us what the specialist is telling us?

Final food for thought. Here's that Bertrand Russell quote again:

"Passive acceptance of the teacher's wisdom is easy to most boys and girls. It involves no effort of independent thought, and seems rational because the teacher knows more than his pupils; it is moreover the way to win the favour of the teacher unless he is a very exceptional man. Yet the habit of passive acceptance is a disastrous one in later life. It causes man to seek and to accept a leader, and to accept as a leader whoever is established in that position." - Bertrand Russell.

So beware of the specialists in your life, whoever they may be.