TR EMERITUS

By Amanda Lian Education Policy Proposals The seminar organised by the Reform Party was being held at the Berkshire School’s lecture room on the second level of Shaw Towers on the 23 January 2010, Saturday, 1.30pm. Temasek Review attended the seminar and listened in on the various policy proposals being brought up and compiled it in this article to allow our readers to be updated with the latest news and information, plus what was being discussed by the individuals who attended. Starting the seminar was the Secretary-General of the Reform Party, Mr. Kenneth Jeyaretnam. Other speakers at the seminar included the Reform Party CEC (Central Executive Committee) members, Mr. Tony Tan and Mr. Justin Ong, a member of the Reform Party, Mdm. Hazel Poa, an external speaker, Dr. James Gomez and two special speakers, Mr. Peter Li and Mr. Jason Soh. While at the second level, upon reaching the premises of the school, there were several people seen buying items of the Reform Party which included t-shirts, badges, newsletters and books. At 1.30pm sharp, we were ushered into the lecture room and seated. When the seminar began, Mr. Kenneth Jeyaretnam embarked on the discussion of the key issues which are education hours versus GDP, real income of graduates and productivity in comparison to education investment. The seminar quickly progressed with the next speaker, Mr. Tony Tan, who shared his personal experiences during his education days when he was younger and how it had changed and affected him in real life. Ending his part, he said that while he was on one of the Jurong walkabouts, a bean sprout and bean curd seller said to him, “students nowadays have no heart...” Following closely was a speech by the external speaker, Dr. James Gomez, who is currently also a Head of Department for Monash University, Australia and was a former CEC member of the Workers Party and a General Election 2006 candidate. He touched upon issues like education in Singapore and also education overseas, the differences and how it will affect the next generation. CEC member of the Reform Party and Head of the Youth Wing, Mr. Justin Ong provided his opinions on the education system and also, related his experience when he found out how many foreign students were in the top places in University and on government scholarships. He also recalled that most Singaporean scholars preferred to head overseas for education instead. Following which, questions were opened to the floor. Several pressing questions were asked during this session including “would the Reform Party do an independent research themselves?” and “would there be any form of aid by the Reform Party?” The reply for the latter question was that the JBJ scholarship application was rejected as JBJ was a criminal. After the question and answer session, Mdm. Hazel Poa continued with the next part of the seminar. She graduated from the University of Cambridge with First-Class honours. She went through various pressing issues like the education system in Singapore and even proposed solutions like a thorough education from Primary 1 to “O” Levels, thus abolishing the need for PSLE. Also, she proposed that more subjects be opened up to the students like Business Studies and Communications and Information Technology. This, as quoted by her, was due to the passion and dreams of different individuals as the core practical subjects learnt in school was held in higher regard than subjects like repairing a car for example. She also said that “if all animals were to go through a standard test and the test was to climb a tree, would the elephant and the fish be able to do it?” A break ensued and lasted for 10 minutes as they said that most attention span of individuals lasts for 15 minutes. The seminar then continued with Mr. Tony Tan showing the audience an extract from “Educating our Young”, written by Mr. Tan Kin Lian, covering selfish behaviour. “They learn to compete against their classmates. To be better, they have to keep some knowledge from others. They learn, at a young age, to be selfish and to take care of themselves. This selfish trait becomes part of their character, which sadly is quite typical of a Singaporean.” About the issue on children with special needs and children with disabilities, speaker Mr. Peter Li covered the definition, and problems experienced by the mainstream schools and the parents of the children. Certain mainstream schools are currently only available to children with Dyslexia, Autism, physical disabilities, hearing and visual disability. As of 2010, children with Dyslexia are allowed into all mainstream schools as support is available. Only 10% of teachers are trained in special needs support. Lastly, we have Mr. Jason Soh, who summed up this portion by proposing how Singapore can do more for people with Special Needs. He made comparisons with the United States of America, Singapore and Malaysia. Members of the audience were given a chance to voice out opinions, suggestions and questions. Mr. Michael commended the Reform Party for bringing up the issue of children with special needs and Mr. Alex Tan provided some suggestions to the education system. Mr. Kenneth Jeyaretnam ended the seminar with a short speech and Miss Jeanette informed us that on the second and fourth Thursdays of every month, the Reform Party is offering a free legal clinic where legal advice would be given for all cases except criminal and corporate issues. Appointments are preferred. Temasek Review will leave you to ponder more with a quote from the seminar, “I want all of you to be independent, innovative and critical thinkers by following all that I do and say!”  Read More →

Dear friends and participants, greetings, I would like to start off by thanking the Reform Party for inviting me to share some policy ideas at this Education Seminar. This is an important issue for Singaporeans and I am glad we will be able to spend some time today to discuss the matter. My focus today will be on policies for universities and research institutes in Singapore. In the next few minutes I would like to sketch out some emerging trends and issues affecting tertiary and research institutions and enumerate in broad strokes the type of education policies we should be developing to address some of these key concerns. These policy ideas are organized according to the three questions posed by the Reform Party for this seminar but are clustered specifically to address issues at tertiary institutions and research institutes in Singapore. 1. Policies on curriculum development and delivery of courses at tertiary institutions. a. Tertiary students are increasingly motivated by the need to receive a “practical” education at the university level. Hence, I believe our challenge will be to design programs and curriculum that will increasingly be “practical” but which still need to be underpinned by theories and debates related to subject disciplines. For instance, in communication and media courses, there has been a marked shift towards the practical aspects of the communication industry as opposed to a solely theory based approach to communication studies. This “practical” aspects can also be applied were relevant to other disciplines. b. We need to acknowledge that tertiary students globally, are no longer full-time students. Being a full time-student is a luxury many cannot afford. Students tend to work full-time if not part-time these days. Further many working adults want to pursue undergraduate and post-graduate studies while working. Since this is increasingly the case, we need to look into expanding and building on flexible modes of course delivery. These can include, in addition to the traditional methods, online and off campus modes of delivery as well as intensive course modules. These methods of delivering tertiary courses will also benefit special needs students at tertiary institutions who need special consideration in the way they take courses, turn in assignments and contribute towards assessments. The role of exams as an end of module assessment needs to be revisited in this context. The need for our local tertiary intuitions to cater more for Singaporean working adults wanting to pursue tertiary education also requires attention. c. There has been a rise in the number of service providers and overseas tertiary institutions providing degree level courses as education grows into a commercial sector in its own right in Singapore. This has grown to cater for the demand for tertiary education by Singaporeans as well as foreigners. Here there are two areas of policy concern. One is the quality of teaching and related services that are being provided to the students. Two is the remuneration and working conditions of teaching and other staff employed at these enterprises. These should be reviewed and be brought up to international standards and be made comparable to other tertiary institutions in Singapore. 2. Policies for the inclusion, equity and access to tertiary education for all Singaporeans. a. Entry into university education is becoming prohibitive for many in terms of ever increasing costs. More financial aid instruments need to be looked into in terms of helping Singaporean students meet tertiary education costs. For instance, we can substantially reduce bank loans for tertiary studies through special government subsidies. Essentially, we need to expand the volume of financial support for lower-income Singaporean students. And one way is to increase the number scholarships for Singaporeans. What we don’t want is tertiary students and their family being saddled with large debts in order to pursue tertiary studies. Tertiary education should not be the privilege of the rich. b. Apart from finance, meeting the educational pre-requisites for entry into tertiary institutions is also an important area that requires policy attention. For instance we should set up pathway programs for those wishing to explore opportunities to pursue further studies and training at public tertiary institutions in Singapore. These pathways should supplement existing modes of entry into tertiary institutions and should also target ITE students. In Australia, a Diploma in Tertiary Studies is one way in which entry into university level courses is being facilitated. A pathways program would ensure that an elitist mentality towards tertiary education can be overcome. Working adults and mature students should also have equal access to local government funded tertiary institutions on a competitive basis via a pathways program. c. In the spirit of equity, there should be equal remuneration between Singapore and foreign staff at our tertiary and research institutions. This should be reflected in their pay scales, in fringe benefits such as housing allowance and educational allowances for children as well as relocation packages from overseas to Singapore. There should also be equity in terms of tenure position at tertiary and research institutions. Overall there should be more transparency in terms of promotion, appointment into leadership positions, awarding of tenure, recruitment of academics and termination of contracts. Universities further need to improve their dual track careers for researchers and lecturers with equivalent employment standards and remuneration 3. Fostering an intellectual climate of critical thinking and debate. a. We also need to create an intellectual atmosphere in our tertiary and research institutions that feels free when academics critically engage in issues. An open intellectual environment is necessary to ensure there is critical debate that is beneficial to the nation and beyond. Academics and researchers should feel comfortable in expressing their ideas and not harbor fears of being penalized when criticizing local and international policies. Perhaps we should even consider immunity from libel proceedings for academics. b. We should additionally discontinue the practice of recruiting ex-civil servants as heads of research institutes in Singapore. While there may be benefits from their policy experience, such top positions should be competitively filled by persons from the academic and research community who possess a track record of leadership and service at research institutes. c. Among the several good research institutes we have in Singapore, I would like to see the setting up of an independent regional research institute called the Asian Institute for Democracy and Civil Society in Singapore. Such an institute should be government funded and its directions be set by stakeholders from civil society. It would allow active research and cooperation with individual and institutions on topics related human rights and democracy. In conclusion, I want to end by saying that education policies are an important area of governance. Opposition parties in Singapore have a role to play in challenging and formulating alternative policies that are reflective of the people’s wishes. The policy ideas I am putting forward to you today are not comprehensive but they do reflect part of the ongoing discussions in different quarters in Singapore about how we want our tertiary institutions and research institutes to operate. My remarks are brief and should be taken as policy-ideas-in-progress which is being presented here today for discussion, clarification and refinement. I thank you. Dr. James Gomez Monash University  Read More →

OPINION YPAP Chairman Teo Ser Luck and Vice Chairman Zaqy Mohammad have come under fire lately in cyberspace for their inept handling of the "Eric How" fiasco which is turning out to be a PR disaster for the YPAP. Even before the callous comments made by "Eric How", other YPAP members have incurred the wrath of netizens by their most insensitive, arrogant and over-bearing attitude. YPAP member Sear Hock Rong leaked confidential information about an online critic of the PAP Alex Tan and used it to attack him. Instead of moderating his remarks, other YPAP moderators of its Facebook Edgar Khieu and Genesis Shen joined in the fray. When asked to clarify if there are any conflict of interests between his business interests and grassroots work, Sear challenged netizens to make a report against him. It is almost impossible to maintain a decent exchange on the YPAP Facebook without Edgar Khieu and Genesis Shen issuing warnings to netizens of all sorts to "watch" their words. As leaders of the YPAP, Teo Ser Luck and Zaqy Mohamad should have put a stop to such anti-social behavior by their members right from the beginning. The fact that they did not do so seem to suggest that they condone and endorse such online speech and actions and share some, if not all of their views. When "Eric How" posted his infamous remarks slamming netizens who criticize the government because they did not get any "fruits" from their forefathers, nobody from the YPAP stepped forward to condemn him or distance themselves from it. YPAP Facebook moderators Edgar Khieu and Genesis Shen even joined in the chorus and sing to the tune of "Eric How". Only after two weeks did YPAP bother to put up an "official statement" to protect their asses. What do they treat netizens as? A bunch of idiots to be pushed around by them like this? The media reported that Teo Ser Luck had spoken to one of the "Eric Hows" about the remarks posted after which he lodged a police report. Anybody familiar with the new media would have advised Eric How not to blow the matter up by going to the police and media. In fact, the matter will never be given such an extensive publicity in the press without the tacit support of the senior leadership of YPAP. Not too long ago, a YPAP member wrote in to us threatening to lodge a police report over one of our readers posting his personal particulars on our site. He alleged that he had been "harassed" after that. We advised him against doing so as it will only create more negative publicity for the YPAP and he finally agreed to let the matter rest. The media reports on the "Eric How" fracas sounds like an damage control exercise conjured up by the spin doctors of SPH to get YPAP out of trouble as the negative publicity continues to snowball. Instead of pondering carefully if the "Eric How" who made those comments is indeed an impostor, both Teo Ser Luck and Zaqy Mohamad  jumped straight to the conclusion that he is and therefore the new media is not trustworthy. Teo Ser Luck told Chinese tabloid Lianhe Wanbao that it is a "challenge" to differentiate the truth from the lies on the new media. Zaqy Mohamad told The Straits Times the incident was ‘unfortunate’. ‘But this is the reality of the Internet, who can you trust?’, he added, insinuating that the new media cannot be trusted. As we have more than adequately demonstrated, it is highly unlikely that the "Eric How" responsible for the offensive remarks about netizens is an impostor. (read article here) Based on our preliminary investigation, there is indeed an "Eric How" from NUS Arts and Social Sciences and his family has close connections with the PAP. (If you are from NUS and you know this Eric How, please contact us at [email protected]) At the very least, both Teo and Zaqy should have suspended their judgement until more information is made available instead of accusing the new media for spreading unverified rumors about YPAP members. They are supposedly the "best talents" in Singapore and it is absolutely amazing and appalling that they are unable to spot the loopholes in this case. Being public figures and MPs, their words carry a lot of weight and it is disappointing that they think so lowly of Singapore bloggers and netizens. Since they have wronged the online community, shouldn't they have the decency to apologize to them? We hereby call on Teo Ser Luck and Zaqy Mohamad to apologize to Singapore netizens for the following: 1. Failure to rein in on disruptive, arrogant and brash YPAP members like Sear Hock Rong who went around flaming netizens and attacking their characters. 2. Endorsing the statement made by "Eric How" on 1 January 2010 for more than two weeks by their complete silence on the matter. 3. Wrongly attacking the new media for spreading lies about "Eric How" when the truth of the matter is not out yet. Saying sorry is not enough - Sorry also must explain! Teo and Zaqy should also explain their inaction and actions to netizens: 1. Are they aware of YPAP Sear Hock Rong's incessant attacks on Alex Tan and his business interests in Eunos and if they do, why didn't they speak to him about it? 2. Do they know about the "Eric How"'s remarks on 1 January 2010 and why didn't they denounce them immediately? 3. Why didn't they stop the two "Eric Hows" from making the police reports or did they ask them to do so? 4. What makes them so sure that the "Eric How" is an impostor when all the facts seem to suggest otherwise? 5. Did they check their facts thoroughly before they make those unwarranted remarks about Singapore netizens in the press? It appears from recent events that YPAP is never interested or sincere in wanting to engage the online community. It sets its own rules for engagement and demands that we follow them. Unable to take the heat from their critics, they resort to making police reports to intimidate them into silence and to throw smokescreens via the mainstream media to confuse the public. Since YPAP members and supporters are unwilling to conform to the usual practices of the larger online community, it is better that they stay within their own clique to practice their standard PAP-type of conversations with one another. We call on all netizens in Singapore to BOYCOTT the YPAP till Teo Ser Luck and Zaqy Mohamad show remorse and issue a public apology to us. Do not post on their blogs, websites or Facebooks. IGNORE them completely. If you are already on their Facebook or mailing list, leave immediately. Be careful when posting comments on their sites as any wrong word you use may result in a police report lodge against you. After all, YPAP members have stopped engaging netizens on its Facebook already and it doesn't make sense to continue talking to a "wall" there. In the meantime, we urge the "Eric How" who made those comments about netizens being "donkeys" to be a man and own up. We know who you are and we are just collating the evidence to prove to the public beyond any doubt that you are not an impostor and you exist in real life.  Read More →