How Successful Was Singapore F1?

Now I am the first to declare that I am not an F1 fan. The second to declare that is my hubby. Yet both of us ended up watching snippets of the first ever night F1 race last night which was telecasted live on TV. We couldn't help it. It was a news event and I was curious how the Singapore organizers would handle the mega-spectacle.

The day after, it was no surprise that the reporters from the nation's Straits Times declared the Singapore F1 a roaring success, and possibly the best ever Grand Prix.

But I was surprised to come across a reader's favourable comment from the on-line version of The Star of Malaysia. These unconfirmed statistics were quoted: Singapore spent SGD40million (note: other sources put it closer to SGD150million of which 60% is footed by the Singapore government) whilst Malaysia spent RM286million for initial outlay. Singapore sold more expensive tickets, had a wider TV audience because the night-timing suited Western audiences and did not have to set aside physical space for the project. Unconfirmed numbers put the profit so far to SGD 100million. Would that not be a good return on investment?

Pure speculation, the detractors commented.

It would indeed be interesting to see the true numbers but I doubt we ever will. Regardless, making money from the event is only a secondary objective of this venture.

From a marketing perspective, the event would have achieved its ultimate objective. That is, to put Singapore on the world map. That will tie in nicely with the overall tourism strategy for the country with the completion of the Marina Bay IR end-2009 and the Sentosa IR the year after.

There is obviously excellent synchronized strategic management in the Singapore civil servants - you have to give it to them. Wish I could say the same for the Malaysian counterparts. Would Azalina Othman ever be able to rise to the challenge?

Singapore: Primary School Overhaul

Education is my passion. Yesterday, I wrote to REACH, the Singapore Government's official feedback unit giving my views on the recent changes in the Singapore primary school, some of which I have blogged earlier (see my previous post). Below, I reproduce the full text:

"To recap, in the diagnosis of the Singapore education system, it has been found that it is too exam-oriented. That's why the new Minister of Education decided we needed to re-balance the system.

I am surprised therefore that MOE has not mentioned anything about exams in its initiatives. It seems to me the panacea is not addressing the root cause. I wonder when is it that MOE will realise that assessment/exams is an integral part of education.

Incorporating all the other changes is good, but it is not enough. Parents will not be convinced to support the new programme if the PSLE remains a Damocles sword hanging over their heads. This is the reason why the school system in Singapore is examination-oriented. Parents have little choice if they want their children to survive the school system here.

The same approach was taken when "Teach Less Learn More" was introduced and we all know now how parents responded - remember the litany of complaints that "nothing" is taught in school? With the new programme, I can only see more tuition centers fluorishing as schools aim to provide that well-rounded education which is not appreciated by most parents. There might even be more complaints from parents about schools not doing enough while the teachers are already tearing their hair out and walking the tight rope to meet the demands of MOE. It's a classic case of mismatched expectations. Ultimately, it's the students who will end up more stressed than ever.

There are many ways how we can place students in secondary schools. There are many ways how we can tweak the PSLE, if there is no derring-do to have a sweeping change, so that the end result is less emphasis on exams.

For a tweak, we can do away with having a single score for the PSLE. Really, is a student who scores 272 better than one who scores 270? WE know it is probably not true but the child is conditioned to think that way and it is not healthy. It leads to extreme competitiveness and an unbalanced life for the child.

Simply adopt the O level format, go by the number of A*, A etc. Too many students scoring 4A*'s? Then give schools the flexibility to choose students. This will introduce subjectivity to the selection system and then maybe parents and students will re-orientate their thinking and be less exam-focused.

Another variation is to have a mix of centralized exam and school-based assessment, to make up the final grade.

If we opt for more sweeping changes, we can forgo “streaming” as it is understood now. Students need not be streamed into Express, NA an NT strictly. This is a broad-brush approach, using the PSLE as the tool.

Instead, we can adopt the modular approach instead such that students can choose to take more advanced modules for the subjects they are good at and vice versa. Their aptitude is determined by their teachers who are well-qualified to be the judge. In the long run, this builds up the self-esteem of students and truly ensure that every individual reaches his maximum potential. The PSLE which is primarily a placement exam will then be made redundant.

As I say, if there’s a will to re-look at the PSLE, there are many ways that we can improve on the system."

Primary School Changes

Interestingly, both Singapore and Malaysia chose to announce changes to the primary school education system on the same day.

But what I find incomprehensible is that Malaysia opted to re-format their UPSR, the primary school leaving exam, to include school-based assessments, while Singapore did not. Singapore instead chose to re-focus and re-balance its curriculum to incorporate more life skills, to aim for single-session schools and to have an all-graduate primary teaching force by 2015. But there is no mention of any changes to the PSLE.

Why I find this incongruous is that Singapore is infinitely more capable to implement changes to the examination format. They have the skilled teachers, the relative homogeneity of students and a culture that champions systematic approach, transparency and objectivity. Malaysia does not have any of these - but it has the derring-do (some may call it foolhardiness).

I have been advocating changes to the Singapore's PSLE for years. To reduce a student's total ability to a single score which will determine the child's progress into the next stage of life is draconian. This is the reason why the school system in Singapore is examination-oriented. Parents have little choice if they want their children to survive the school system here.

At this stage when Singapore's MOE recognises the shortcomings of its education system as being too examination-oriented, I am surprised that nothing is done to the PSLE format. Incorporating all the other changes is good, but it is not enough. Parents will not be convinced to support the new programme if the PSLE remains a Damocles sword hanging over their heads. I can only see more tuition centers fluorishing as schools aim to provide that well-rounded education which is not appreciated by most parents. There will be more complaints from parents about schools not doing enough while the teachers are already tearing their hair out and walking the tight rope to meet the demands of MOE. It's a classic case of mismatched expectations. Ultimately, it's the students who will end up more stressed than ever.

For once, Singapore should take a leaf out of Malaysia's books and, as they say, just do it. Slaughter the sacred cow once and for all.

As for Malaysia, I do not think I need to comment on anything right now. I dare not think how many U-turns this new policy will have before we see anything happening. However, if you were to ask me, I would say, don't do anything to the UPSR format. Malaysia is just not ready to do anything fancy with the education system. It cannot think it can leapfrog ahead of others. Things are not so simple. Get the basics right first. Err.. by the way, are they going ahead with the teaching of Math and Science in English or are they reverting to Bahasa Malaysia?

Brainless Blaine

Can't stand this guy. This David Blaine and his stunts.

What's the point? He is wasting everybody's time. The doctor could use his talent better off elsewhere attending to the really sick. The newspapers and TV networks could use their journalists in more meaningful ways. And the public? Sigh, focus on something useful, please.

A Popiah Story

I read this entry from The Star On-Line citizen blog and felt sad and indignant enough to post it here. This is one of the many manifestations of racism that still exists in the country. But I would like to assure the writer that not all Malaysians are like that. There are many of us who will do our own parts to make sure that we live harmoniously together.

"Posted by: kaleiselvi71

I was at a pasar malam just an hour ago about 5.30pm and as we passed by a popiah stall, my kid asked for some. So i went over and one guy was standing there while two ladies was serving. He asked me what i wanted and i said, popiah for RM2. While waiting, i took out my money and i noticed the ladies started serving (muslim) customers who came after me first. I waited, o..k... one customer, 2 customers.. 3 customers... then I looked at the guy enquiringly. He asked "u pun puasa ke?". I was not sure how to react. Then he kept repeating that to the other customers, "dia puasa kot!" and grinning away. Whatever he meant, I didn't want to know and I knew it was better to let it go for everyone's sake. So, i just said nevermind and walked away without buying. As we have always let things such things go for decades.

My 8 year old kid asked what was the problem, i wasn't sure whether i was ready to drag her into all this unpleasantness.I came home and an anger started in me.. not at the popiah guy .. but at the big people up in their towers.. who keep making decisions that they think will keep them in power but care the heck not at the deterioration that's taking place societal level."

SPM Students Suffer

It is proven again and again that the ordinary people ultimately suffer when the policy-makers and civil servants are inept.

This is a simple case of examination time-tabling, (or mis-time-tabling) The SPM is a major national exam, affecting thousands of students.

Let's see - this is the schedule for Nov 18:

Add Math Paper 1 8 - 10 am
Add Math Paper 2 10:30 - 1 pm
Moral Education 2:30 - 5 pm

Good job, civil servants.

In the first place, how can the Additional Math Paper 1 and 2 be scheduled on the same day? With just half an hour apart between the two papers? This makes a mockery of why there should be Paper 1 and 2. Essentially, it is 4.5 hours of straight math. My gut feel is that the people organizing the time table have never taken Math seriously nor are they good at it. That's why they probably do not know that Math requires Thinking and Concentration.

Worse, in the afternoon the students have to sit for the Moral Education paper. This paper can be organized to another day (19th Nov), as somebody has suggested, without any clash.

This is another example of how citizens suffer as they go about their daily lives when the civil servants do not think. I can think of countless other examples, starting with how traffic is organized, but that will mean writing until the cows come home.

Please-la, THINK, THINK, THINK!

ISA Stands For What-huh?

Incredibly Silly Acts

I-memang Suka Arrest-anyone

Insecure & Stupid, Alamak!

The above are all over the internet.

Yeah, this is something that Malaysians are very good at. Malaysia Boleh!

Halal Dim Sum For Buka Puasa

I was greatly encouraged to read this news report about a Malay businessman selling dim sum and chee cheong fun at a ramadan bazaar at Ipoh. The dim sum and chee cheong fun are halal, of course, made from chicken, prawn and crab meat and he is enjoying a roaring business.

Just shows how multi-racial Malaysia can be.

ISA Arrests In Malaysia

I am totally shocked at the arrest of the reporter Tan Hoon Cheng under ISA for "allegedly threatening security, peace and public order". Ms Tan is the reporter who wrote about the racist remarks made by UMNO Division Chief Ahmad Ibrahim, who called the Chinese "squatters" in the country. This created an uproar in the Chinese community, many of whom cited the role played by the Chinese during the fight for independence, the blood loss fighting alongside the Malays and Indians during World War 2 and the roots that have been firmly sunk in this land.

Ms Tan, an award-winning journalist from a chinese newspaper here, was merely doing her job when she reported what Ahmad Ibrahim said. For the record, Ahmad Ibrahim never denied what he said, he refused to apologise and his excuse was that his remarks were made in front of a totally Malay audience. For his racist remarks, he was only suspended by UMNO for three years.

This is a shocker. This can very well throw the country into turmoil. There will be cries of injustice. Is this a last-ditch political game played to retain power?

The arrest of popular DAP MP Teresa Kok is baffling, to put it mildly. It is believed that she was picked up over the role she played over some residents petition over a mosque. This is not a fresh happening. The question is: Why now? Is it not a provocative move?

I have nothing to say about Petra Kamaruddin's arrest. This guy, he has been going in and out of the police detention center and he seems to be able to take care of himself very well. His arrest, as cold as it may sound, is unlikely to make waves. But the two ladies?

The winds do not bode well....

Foreign Workers Dormitories In Serangoon Gardens

The recent uproar from residents of Serangoon Gardens over the possibility of the conversion of an old school building to foreign workers dormitory quarters is understandable. Serangoon Gardens is a middle-class residential area that is different from most estates in Singapore because it is largely made up of landed properties.

I have known Serangoon Gardens for over 20 years and in spite of the recent upgrading of Chomp Chomp, the constant change in the faces of shops and the smattering of monstrosities built in place of the modest single storey houses, the complexion of the estate remains the same.

This begs the question: What were the government officials thinking of when they contemplated converting the unused school here to a dormitory for foreign workers? In short, factors considered when the Ministry of National Development assesses a site for foreign workers housing are as follows: 1) Availability of adequate infrastructure serving the site and 2) Sufficient parking spaces and enough ancillary facilities to serve the workers. That's all. If this is the type of guidelines that are typical in government bodies, no wonder our policies are often seen as hard and lacking in the heart factor.

There are many reasons why I do not support the housing of foreign workers in Serangoon Gardens or anywhere near existing housing estates.

In the first place, those who argue on the need for integration is way off the mark. The government has no intention of letting this group of foreign workers stay here for the long term. These are not the PRs or PR wannabes. They are here on a contract basis, with a job to fulfil and after that they will go home. This is the fact. No doubt if they are able to integrate into the society within the short time, that will be wonderful, but is it realistic and at what cost?

These foreign workers have a different way of life. I am not saying our way of life is better nor am I insinuating that we are socially superior. Culture is oft-said to be descriptive, not evaluative. What I am saying is that we are different.

Of course it is not impossible for different groups of people to live together and assimilate and grow a new blended culture, but it takes time. And time is something that we do not have because these are not permanent workers here. Most are here for two years. So the hardship that accompanies the change process will come to naught in the end. Is this fair to the Singapore residents?

Those who argue on humanitarian grounds have missed the point as well. We all agree we should treat our foreign guests well. We appreciate their contributions to the development in Singapore. We need to house them in suitable and decent accommodation.

Think about it. There are Chinatowns all over the world. Little Italy, Little India, Greek enclaves, little townships filled with the Lebanese, the Vietnamese, the Hispanics.... people like to live among their own kind when they are abroad. It is their home away from home. If we house the foreign workers in their own communities, I believe they will be more comfortable and happier. They need a place where they can be themselves after work, relax among their own people and do the things they are used to doing, away from the prying, and often critical eyes, of the locals.

I applaud the government's move to build self-contained foreign worker dormitories in Lim Chu Kang. Facilities such as shops and recreational spaces are catered for. Even then, there are the humanitarians who objected for various reasons. I wonder are they really assessing the situation objectively or are they blindly guided by an all-compassing moral compass?

There is no short-cut to the solution. George Yeo did mention that there are plans to create special townships for our foreign guests. I hope he sees it through.

We need foreign workers and we appreciate their contributions. The way I see it, there is only one decision that the government can make. The unused school can be used for other purposes. The most obvious is for it to be used to house an international school. Not to see the obvious will have deep political implications to the government.