Reflections on the Updating on Streaming in Secondary School Education

It has been a very exciting week in Singapore with a few major happenings due to the Committee of Supply debate in parliament on the Budget 2019. One of the major focuses was the changes detailed on the changes in streaming for secondary schools. In other but related news, the Info-Communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) cancelled a concert by Swedish black metal band, Watain, just a day the concert, a move which was backed by the Minister of Home Affairs, K Shanmugam. In view of these 2 major incidences, I have requested my Instagram followers to choose between the 2 choices, of which 65% requested for me to blog on the Changes to Streaming.

For the uninitiated (seriously, you didn't know?) on the changes of streaming? With effect from year 2024, the current Secondary School Streaming system we all know and grew up with will cease to exist. There will be no more "Normal" or "Express" stream as we know them from 2024, nor will there be any "N" or "O" level exams from 2027. Instead, students will be given "Subject Combinations" where they'll take each subject at a certain academic standard, G1, G2, or G3. G3 is the highest standard, equivalent to the current Express standard, whereas G2 and G1 represent the Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) standards respectively. Their first subject combination will be based on their PSLE results, but can change through the course of their secondary school education based on their results. At the end of their 4 (no more 5) years of Secondary School Education, they will take a common national exam instead of the "N" and "O" levels.

On a side note, I think IP Schools, SAP schools, and Specialized schools are still set to remain, which I guess is quite a relief as a constant in a huge slew of changes.

Those who wish to read more can do so at these sites:
  1. https://mothership.sg/2019/03/ong-ye-kung-no-express-normal-academic-and-normal-technical-stigmatisation-secondary-school-moe/
  2. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/streaming-secondary-schools-o-n-levels-ong-ye-kung-11312252?cid=h3_referral_inarticlelinks_24082018_cna
  3. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/end-of-streaming-moe-explains-which-levels-of-subjects-students-qualify-for-with
There are actually many consequences (note: not bad though) that comes with these changes, for example the revamp of posting into post-secondary education to the JCs, Polys, or ITEs. With these changes may also come changes in intakes for universities, and perhaps National Service. However, as these are preliminary speculations which the MOE will announce their changes over the next few years, I will refrain from commenting too much.

The main aim of this change to streaming is to remove labelling on students. Currently, students are labelled either "Express" or "Normal" in mainstream schools. This results in some feeling of inferiority by those in the Normal stream, believing they are incapable of doing things their Express counterparts can do so. There will even be discrimination against Normal students from those in Express or those in the IP/"elite" schools. I do think MOE is trying to set one common path through secondary school education instead of throwing students into different paths from the start.

To the part of which MOE wishes to streamline education to one common path instead of 3 separate paths which is hard to cross over to one another, I think it has succeeded.

However, we must note that this is only a CHANGE to streaming, not a REMOVAL of streaming. Removal of streaming will imply all students take the same academic subjects at the same level, and will not be separated by results. This change to streaming is to introduce a new way of how students will be separated based on their academic ability. 

And it shouldn't remove streaming. 

Streaming is an idea that works. Fundamentally, it is to ensure students of similar academic standard study together. The pace of study is attuned to their abilities, so they learn comfortably, learn together, and learn better. Weaker students can benefit from a slower learning pace to cover the syllabus slowly but methodically. Stronger students can learn at a faster pace and go on to enrichment studies. Streaming is fundamentally sound, and is here to stay.

The only change is rather, HOW we change the streaming. So instead of "condemning" students to go on the path of Express, Normal (Acad), or Normal (Tech), we instead allow one common path for all, and students can charter how they complete the path based on their abilities. In fact, since each student can either take each subject at G1, G2, or G3 level, assuming they take 7 subjects each, we can theoretically have 3^7=2187 ways to work towards the final exam! So it's about giving students more methods to charter the path, rather than putting them into one straight path and labelling them based on this path.

Unfortunately, whether this change can bring an end to discrimination against students who perform poorly, I personally don't think there will be a significant improvement. Streaming, while a very sound and workable idea (as mentioned earlier), results in some people taking on more academic workload, and some people taking on less. There is then inequality, and I don't mean it in the socioeconomic manner. It is inevitable that people who take more G1 subjects will perhaps not be recognized as much as those who take on more G3 subjects. Even currently in JCs, a H1 is not recognized as much as a H2 or H3. Back from NUS High, there is a more "wow" factor taking honours/4th major than just 3 majors.

And this is not to say that those who only take G1 subjects, or those who do only H1s, or those who take 3 majors are bad. My point is that where there is inequality of workload, there will be discrimination. It may not be between students, but it could be discrimination from society, Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), or the workforce.

Even though the mainstream media portrays streaming as the "sacred cow being slain", I really think that streaming is not slain, but rather just re-programmed and refreshed into the idea of subject based banding. And hence, discrimination will still exist. Elitism will still exist. This change alone can not, and will not eradicate elitism. In fact, elitism is also another idea which I feel can be managed and reduced, but never completely removed.

In conclusion, I am of opinion that the changes in streaming does help to remove the existing labels of "Normal" and "Express", and also allows students to customize their learning based on their abilities and interests. However, in the journey towards eliminating elitism or discrimination, this change is at best a stepping stone.

At worst? A command just to "Hentak Kaki".

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Review of Circles.Life (1 Month On)

About more than a month ago, I wrote a blog post about wanting to change telco away from Singtel to a telco which provides more data for lesser costs. During the IT Show, it was down to M1 and Circles Life. I chose Circles Life in the end because of a lower overall cost (looking to the future), considering its popularity, and partially because M1's queue was super long (more than 3 hours wait). After more than a month of usage, it is a good timing for me to blog about my experience using Circles Life, to talk about the pros and cons. Although I got my new SIM on a Saturday, I had to continue using my Singtel SIM until Monday night, when the port over took place. In the meantime, I was trying to figure out the Circles Life app. My new SIM, which was a temporary number from Circles Life, had to be used to activate the app. Afterwards, I registered my existing number for the port over, and then changed back to my old SIM. On Monday evening, I changed over to my new SIM and used WiF...
Read more

Journey to the License: The End (Part 1)

As many who have been following my Instagram and Facebook would know, I've revealed last week that I passed my driving test, and am now officially a qualified driver! Although I passed my test on 4 Jan (9 days ago), I generally kept the pass as a secret from many till my Driver's License came and when I posted last week. I realized that my previous 2 posts on the Journey to the License was not too well received, and perhaps they were a bit long winded. Therefore, I also decided that since I've made my test pass public, I will also wrap up the series by talking about what happened since I passed my internal evaluation till the driving test. As for what happened during stage 2-4, those interested can drop me a message, or maybe one day I'll write about it (or on a separate link). I managed to pass my 5.01 Internal Evaluation on 23 December last year, having secured a rare Session 5 (the OT slot for BBDC instructors). Given that the date was near Christmas, many i...
Read more

On MUN and my High School Life

Before I start, I would like to pay tribute to the late, great Kofi Annan, former United Nations (UN) Chief, who passed away at a ripe old age of 80. Mr Annan lived a life worth remembering, having brought the UN through trying times such as the invasion of Iraq. He was also the founder of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), and set the direction for the UN going into the 21st century. He was not the most successful UN Secretary General, but he certainly left the UN in a better place than when he inherited it. Thank you sir. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recently, I was invited back to NUSHS for the SDYC Dinner and Dance. For the uninitiated, SDYC stands for Sustainable Development Youth Convention, my school's version of a MUN. For the still uninitiated, MUN stands for Model UN, a simulation of the actual UN when youths come together to represent different countries (or stakeholders) and debate on issues concerni...
Read more