TR EMERITUS

作者：李玮玲  国立脑神经医学院院长 译者：翁鸿珍 我的父亲（编按：内阁资政李光耀）最近坦承对于学校里的华文教学法，他做了错误的决定。我记得在好多年前，林金山(Lim Kim San)先生对我父亲说，要是哥哥、弟弟和我无法学好中文和英文，他不会坚持所有华族学生需以同样的水平掌握这两种语文。 我正式入学后的最初9年里，是在南洋女校度过的，期间在小学读了5年（我曾跳级）、中学4年，学习中文时，我不觉得困难，也不抗拒听写和默写。 听写的时候，老师先念词语，然后学生写，就我所知，学校至今还是这么做；至于默写，学生必须背记整篇文章或整首诗，然后写出来。 每写错一个字扣一分，每写错一个标点符号扣半分，诗词和文章一般上都超过一百字，倒扣到最后有可能是负数。 知道默写是怎么一回事的人，也许听到我说，我喜欢背记文学作品，会感到吃惊，我的默写成绩不曾低于90分，反而是英文听写难倒了我。 我感到自己在书写中文时不觉困难，而英文听写遇到的问题，应该是被英文那奇怪的拼读法所累，一直到多年过后，我才发现自己在学习英文时有诵读障碍。到今天，用“d”或“t”，用“v”还是“z”,我有时还是会感到犹豫，对元音我更是难以掌握，幸好电邮和文字处理程序可进行拼写检查。 在准备华文测验时，我特别喜欢到两个地方背记，一个是总统府园地里的一棵树，它的枝干可坐也可背靠；另一个是总统府外墙的壁架，我可以坐在那里或靠着墙。 这两处是总统园地的最佳观景地点，树木、灌木丛、绿草地、池塘全都尽收眼底。暮色苍茫时，我联想到背诵过的诗词中所描绘的意境，眼前所见就是烟波浩渺的湖光山色。 当然，我随时都有可能从树上和壁架上摔下来，也就是因为这危险，让我提起精神读书，效果比咖啡因还好。 背记文学作品是一大乐趣，背书锻炼了我的脑力，往后的日子里，在背记许多医学实例时，我不觉得困难。在背这些文学作品的时候，训练了脑力，同时也灌输了我许多价值观，一些已深植我心中，无法抛开了。 华文中学逐渐被淘汰，华文课程也有了改变，不是每篇课文的内容都带有文化意涵和道德寓意，记得我的侄儿（现在是21岁）曾抗议道：“以中文来读安徒生童话，学什么中华文化？” 我打从心里赞同他的看法，据我所知自那时开始学校使用的课本已改了，我只希望改得比以前好。我参加了两大华文考试，一次是在南洋女中的中四华文第一语文 会考；过后上了莱佛士书院（RI）读高中，我参加了O水准华文第二语文考试，这是因为书院里的所有同学都考华文第二语文，两次考试我都得到优等成绩。最近在翻找旧文凭时，看到一本练习本子，里面整整齐齐地贴着一篇篇华文作文剪报，是我写的。 我还记得作文在报纸上刊出后得了10元的稿费， 在那个年代， 10元对我来说是好大的一笔钱，这些作文是母亲替我剪下，将它们整整齐齐地贴在本子上。我最近重读这些作文。这些年来，我的中文已经荒废了，只是有时候和病人交谈时用到华语，书写的能力已大不如前，加上华文从繁体字改为现在的简体字也让我觉得困难。我十几岁时的华文作文水准，我知道现在写不出了。父母亲把我送进华校，一直到中四，我从不觉得有遗憾，也不认为花那么多时间背记经典文章或诗词是白费功夫。 我学习到为人要正直有如君子──有文化修养，行为方正的人。在念书的时候，所有科目中，我下最大苦功的是华文，但值得。 然而，我也认识到不是每一个人都能掌握高程度的两种语文，尤其是英文和华文，这两种截然不同的语文。对许多家里讲英语的学生而言，华文可说是一门外语而不是母语，在小学一年级里，这类学生人数的比例正不断增加。 科技的发展也使得华文作为日常用语发生了变化，某些语文技能如写字，就显得不那么重要。 学校必须与时俱进，华文教学法也要应不同类别的学生作出调整。通过学生可以理解的方式教导，让华文成为一门可以学以致用的学科。至于语文考查的方式，应测验学生在日常生活中应用华文的能力。这么一来，新加坡华人将不会失去对华文的兴趣，让更多人一辈子用华文。 来源：《海峡时报》2009年11月29日 英文题为”Morals and Morale”  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent DBS economist Irvin Seah had spoken out against the Singapore government's foreign worker policy. He said that low-wage foreign workers have contributed to the widening of the income gap as they are more willing than local workers to accept less pay for lower-skilled jobs. According to Mr Seah, some Singapore workers are struggling to keep pace as the economy develops and are in danger of losing their jobs. His comments came in the aftermath of the release of the Singapore Competitiveness Report which showed that Singapore's labour productivity - measured in terms of total output per employee - lags that of developed countries including the United States, France and Norway, as well as Asian neighbours Hong Kong and Taiwan. The report also found that productivity here is falling in the sectors of manufacturing, construction, hotels and restaurants, business services and wholesale and retail trade - which, taken together, employ two-thirds of the workforce and make up 60per cent of the economy. Another economist who declined to be named suggested the increasing number of foreign workers as a cause for the lower productivity: "One reason for the lower productivity may be the large influx of foreign workers in recent years. With more workers available, each worker doesn't have to work as hard," he said. Citigroup economist Kit Wei Zheng said that Singapore's rapid growth over the last few years has been mostly driven by a massive increase in the workforce. "Between 2006 and last year, the number of workers in Singapore jumped an average 6.5per cent a year, largely due to liberal immigration policies......But it is clear that growth powered by importing foreign labour is simply not sustainable," he added. Foreigners accounted for a third of the three-million-strong labour force om 2008, up from only a quarter in 2004.Singapore's economy boomed correspondingly with average growth of 8.2per cent a year between 2004 and 2007. But while sheer numbers have fuelled growth, the actual productivity of each individual worker has fallen. The Economic Strategies Committee, set up to find new ways for Singapore to grow over the medium term will look into the problem of the declining productivity of Singapore workers. Singapore's income gap is the highest among developed countries after Hong Kong whose figures are skewed by an exceptionally higher number of billionaires. The worsening income gap between the poor and rich was accentuated by the relentless influx of low-wage foreign workers into the labor force. MM Lee Kuan Yew dismissed the significance of Singapore's widening income gap during a recent ministerial forum at NUS. He opined it is more important to create jobs for Singaporeans. Despite the rising resentment and disgruntlement on the ground at the government's liberal immigration policy, senior leaders continue to insist that foreigners are essential to Singapore's continued growth, as measured by GDP growth figures. A substantial portion of Singapore ministers' multi-million dollar salaries are pegged to GDP growth as defined by the market value of all final goods and services made within a country in a year. Low-wage foreign workers keep business costs down, thereby helping to boost the performance of the economy and indirectly contributing to GDP growth, but it does not enhance labor productivity. With diminishing returns over time, Singapore's over-reliance on low-skilled workers is unlikely to sustain its economic growth for long.  Read More →

OPINION When PAP MP Halimah Yacob proposed introducing a citizenship test like some other countries for prospective new citizens, she was not cut down to size by a geriatrician MP for suggesting a "highfalutin" idea. Community Development, Youth and Sports Minister Vivian Balakrishnan described it as "quite sensible" and would study the feasibility of implementing it on the ground in the future. The Straits Times then followed up with a series of articles to "sell" the idea to Singaporeans as a panacea for Singapore's immigration woes. A mock pre-citizenship test was even conducted among locals and foreigners to prove the point that Singaporeans do not know that much about their nation either. Knowing that the Singapore media is completely under the control of the ruling party, one should take its proposals with a heavy grain of salt. The proposal of a citizenship test is no more than a PR exercise to show Singaporeans that the government does listen to them and to divert attention from the crux of the issue: that its immigration policy, or rather experience has gone awfully wrong. Singapore would not end up having this hot potato on its hands had the government not opened the floodgates indiscriminately to the tide of immigration a few years ago in an ambitious bid to increase Singapore's population to 6.5 million. Overnight, countless of immigrants find themselves Singapore "citizens", some of whom do not speak a word of English or stay here for only a year or two. Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng admitted that two out of three applicants for PRs are successful over the last few years which is extremely high among developed countries. The criteria set for becoming a Singapore PR appears to be very lax as there are no mandatory period of residence unlike in other countries like Australia (2 out of 5 years) and United Kingdom (5 years). It was revealed in the papers recently that China national and Singapore PR Zhang Yuanyuan who sparked a furore by proclaiming her allegiance to China on CCTV7, received her PR within 2 months of application after finishing her studies in a private institution in Singapore. By harping constantly on the citizenship test, the media is cleverly switching the issue from the rate of immigration to the rate of integration of the new migrants in the hope that the public will forget the atrocious blunder made by the government. A citizenship test will not reduce the inflow of foreigners so long the government does not introduce more stringent criteria to control the types of migrants allowed to take up Singapore citizenship. Neither will it help to identify those who will better integrate in Singapore society because a motivated applicant can always read up about Singapore to prepare himself/herself for the test. It will serve no useful purpose other as a psychological tool to lull Singaporeans into a sense of complacency and to appease them. The government's current immigration policy still stands. With elections around the corner, the ruling party is afraid that the immigration issue may cost them to lose some votes and hence the need to put up a charade to show that they understand the concerns of citizens. Recent speeches made by senior leaders indicate that they are still committed to increase Singapore's population via immigration and there will not be any radical changes made to the policy. Singapore's low fertility rate is unlikely to improve in the near future and immigration remains the easiest option to boost its flagging population for both economic and political reasons. The key question we must ask is not whether the new citizens are able to integrate into Singapore society but if we are accepting too many of them in the first place. If we impose stringent criteria on the prospective applicants such as mandating them to stay in Singapore for a number of years before they can apply for citizenship, then we will not have to deal with the problem of integration which arises because too many foreigners are allowed to become citizens when they have spent too little time here. Foreigners who are keen to become Singapore citizens must learn to integrate into our society on their own instead of the government using taxpayers' monies to help them integrate. It is disingenuous of the Straits Times to promote the citizenship test as a panacea for Singapore's immigration woes in order to deceive and mislead the public. If the government had studied the policy carefully and thoroughly before implementing it in a haste, we will not end up with so many problems now with the locals feeling threatened by the newcomers who have not quite settled down in Singapore yet. As the population of new citizens continue to increase, the divide between the two groups will be accentuated as the migrants will tend to mix among themselves in their own cliques rather than to reach out to the locals. Social integration is a natural process which takes place slowly over the years. One do not become a naturalized Singaporean overnight in a few years by staying within one's own community from China, India or other countries. The government is making a serious mistake in thinking that integration can be managed and facilitated artificially by throwing money at it which is tantamount to making another mistake just to cover up the first.  Read More →