I have just finished reading Malcolm Gladwell's outliers. It is an intriguing book that asserts that a person's environment is a very significant factor in determining future success. The most intriguing idea he has is that minor advantages that are conferred by blind chance are amplified by so-called meritocratic systems.
He gives the example of Canadian Junior Hockey League. Canada is a country that is crazy over ice hockey. Every year, young boys try out for junior hockey league and if they are good enough, they progress on to the next level and so on. This keeps going until they reach the professional league, if they are good enough. Those who are less successful drop out along the way. On the surface, this seems like a meritocratic system based on ability except for a startling fact. Most of the professional players are born near the beginning of the year. If you look at the birthdays of the professional players, very few are born in December.
Why is this so? The explanation given in the book is that the junior league is organised according to age group. Those born in the same year are grouped together. On the surface, this seems fair except for the fact that a 5 year old is much bigger than a 4 year old. Yes, that's the physical difference between a child born on January 1st and another born on December 31st in the same year. The older child would be bigger, have better motor skills and be deemed as more talented by the coach.
So what happens to the 'talented' child who is spotted by the coach? He gets to play in more competitions to improve his skills while the smaller less 'talented' child gets sidelined. This extra exposure and training widens the advantages the older child already has and it keeps doing so over time. So you have a system that doesn't reward innate ability but blind chance.
I see this happening in our education system as well. Let us look at the gifted program in Singapore. It is a program administered towards primary school children deemed gifted by the ministry of education. How do they find these gifted children? They administer a Maths and English test to all primary school children to weed them out from the 'normals'.
This test is flawed because not all children are given the same outside advantages. Some are from lower income family. Some are born in December... There are just so many outside factors that would prevent one from doing well. This test is flawed, it doesn't test talent. It is too early to do so. At best, it test precociousness. At worst, it tests a child's personal fortune.
So what happens to the gifted child? He gets more opportunities compared to the normal child. Firstly, the government spends more money on his education, I have heard from some sources that it is about 7 times the amount spent on a normal student. He gets more encouragement to explore his interest, speak up and becomes more aware of the opportunities available to him.
In contrast, a normal child is discouraged from questioning his teacher and made to study in a less stimulating environment. So whatever advantages that were conferred by blind chance becomes amplified by the education system over the years.
It is not just the GEP program. Whenever there is streaming, there would be similar problems. We would also see this in the streaming of Special, Express, Normal and Normal Technical students.
That is why most of our scholars live in private property and I wouldn't be surprised if most of them were born in the first half of the year. It would be fine if the damage done by our meritocratic system is limited to our education system. This misguided practice is carried on to the civil service and statuary boards where you have government scholars sent to the top (by the system) and eventually becoming our political masters.
The sad thing about our meritocratic system is that it produces people who feel that they got to the top based on their ability. This assumes that one's academic ability translates to an ability to govern. It is obviously flawed and the reason for the arrogance we see in our leaders.
Even sadder, those who need the help the most are given less help than those who need it the least.
For a country that says it values talent, it sure knows how to squander it.
sigh. does anyone see now why i feel guilty for even making it to uni? yeah i know its no reason/excuse to do badly. and the idea that yeahyeah, you know, you can work hard, when you "succeed" then you can do something to help others not the other way round, doesnt stop the dice of life from sucking. because yes its true. you can see the contrast in the lives of people around you. friends who think that they made it (and probably will make it to the upper echelons of goodness knows where) because of sheer hard work and determination, oh and perhaps a sprinkling of talent here and there. and well.. friends whose chances of making it to the higher rungs of whatever theyre climbing because of.. perhaps life chances? the 20 year colleague of mine is certainly not stupid. why then is she not in your place, or mine? life chances?
maybe there should be some statistic thingy done. you know, like average household income, how many breadwinners, etc of students in uni and compare it with countrywide (nearly said nationwide but then.. hmm. never mind. i wont do the state's nation building (state building?) job for them) in my last ps2249 tutorial this week, the tutor brought up a really interesting point which really surprised me. he never struck me as.. you know. one to go outside the prescribed questions to talk about for the week.
we were talking about the electoral system in singapore, and about the grcs, and the racial quota thingos. how here, its called quota. he compared this to the us' education dunno what. where they help minorities get into unis. theres a minimum, but no maximum no of minorities. whereas here, the floor functions as the ceiling as well. i know cannot really compare lah, but just drawing parallels i guess. maybe there should be something of the sort. if we really hold true to the claim that we are a multiracial nation, then any committee (or a committee by any other name) thats set up to specifically look into improving educational prospects shouldnt go by race any more. perhaps it should go by income, or something like that. okay. maybe not committee. maybe the right word is scheme. hahaha. *thinks of the episode of mrbrownshow* its damn farnee lah. as well as super retarded.
oh god. i just got hit by a big dream/idea. omgomgomg. but first i have to become a teacher. *squirms* according to the book right, to become really good at something, you first have to spend 10 000 hours practising it. and for the big dream, i suppose that includes teaching. i dont even know whether its feasible or not. does it go against any.. i dunno. anything?
4:54 am
gail.
loves anything new
gets caught up in causes, events, loves
but doesn't do anything about them.
professes to be a supporter of the green movement
but leaves the lights on
disapproves of mcdonalds
but eats there anyways.
godwise, the jury's still out.
schoolwise, fass rocks my socks
but why do i have like a ton of work to do?
familywise, i guess theyre/its great
we just need to figure out what to do around each other?
freindswise, hey you guys are awesome.
blogwise, realises that the profile section is crappy
but doesn't know how else to fill up the space.
