How to help every gifted child in Singapore.

It occurred to me, today, that Ainan has, unwittingly, helped every gifted child in Singapore. He has done so, by leaving the country. I shall explain.

The reason Ainan left Singapore was because Singapore was not supporting his education adequately: we were receiving a lot of delay tactics, and very little real support. By the time we left, there was no support in place at all. Now, obviously, given Ainan's relatively high profile internationally, it is very embarrassing for Singapore that he should leave. Indeed, even the front pages of the Wall Street Journal commented on the situation (even if the front pages of the Straits Times did not). There is considerable "loss of face" for Singapore, in the situation. Yet, this is actually good for Singapore's other gifted children - for it is likely that Singapore's educational institutions will think twice before being difficult and slow to respond to the needs of other gifted children. They will have, in the back of their minds (such as they are), the memory of one very public departure, because of their own previous failings to support a child, properly.

Thus, although it was not our intention to do so, Ainan's public departure from Singapore, for Malaysia (a much more open country, as far as we have presently experienced), is of great help to all other gifted kids in Singapore. I would be very surprised if Singapore did not take greater measures, in future, to provide for its gifted children. Otherwise, it would lose others to Malaysia and other countries, too. Until Ainan's departure, perhaps they were labouring under the delusion that Singapore was so wonderful a place, that no gifted kid would ever think of leaving. Funny enough, though, we are aware of a mathemetically precocious boy, who was also displeased with Singapore's response to his gifts. He left, too, for the United States, long ago. However, his departure did not come to public attention, because he has a low profile, so his decision would have no effect on the way Singapore does things. Ainan's departure, though, is different and likely to have a beneficial effect for all gifted children remaining in Singapore. The MOE and GEP will not be keen to see Ainan's individual decision, become a flood of talented emigrants, turning their backs on a nation that had, in some way, turned its back on them.

Yet, even though it is likely that the MOE will take greater care of its gifted children in future, there are other possible effects of Ainan's departure. His decision to study at a private University in Malaysia, may inspire other Singaporeans to look at Malaysia as a possible source of education for their children. The private sector in Malaysia is, unlike its public counterpart, rather strong and able to offer a wide range of schooling options which are as good as anything Singapore has to offer in its private sector - though much, much cheaper.

Perhaps, therefore, even though Ainan may inspire a better response from the MOE in future, towards its gifted citizens, he may also inspire some of those citizens to head overseas, despite the MOE's best efforts, in search of alternative options.

I wonder, therefore, what effect, on balance, Ainan's educational decision will have? Will the MOE's renewed efforts to retain talent outdo the impulse to look elsewhere for an education? Will more stay as a result of a change in MOE's attitude? Or will more leave, having learnt from Ainan's example?

It is, at this stage, impossible to say what will happen. I will, however, watch the situation closely, for any clues as to what transpires. It occurs to me, though, that whatever the effect of Ainan's move that it does help every child in Singapore. You see, it will probably mean that MOE will make greater efforts for its charges - which is good for all concerned - but it also means that parents will realize that there is an alternative to Singapore's rigidities. So whether they stay or go, Singapore's talents will benefit. They now are aware of more choices and they are also likely to be helped more, (by the MOE). So, either way, the children win.


(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 6 and Tiarnan, 4, this month, please go to:
http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/
Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/
Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Singapore's love of lying.

You can tell how much is wrong with a nation, by how often it lies. So, by that measure, Singapore must be one of the worst nations on Earth...because it tells among the most lies.

This week, Singapore has told a lot of lies about Ainan and about us. This is what they do when someone turns around, as we have and walks out, because the nation has got to be one the most negligent on Earth where its homegrown talents are concerned. We left - and, instead of admitting that their approach, their rather careless approach, was mistaken, they decide to LIE about it.

There are so many lies in the Singaporean papers about Ainan that I don't know where to begin - or when to stop. Also I am tired of reading them, tired of listening to them, tired of being harrassed by them.


One of the more common lies is that we refused the offer of help from the MOE. This is not true. At the time major decisions were made to walk out on the MOE/GEP there was NO offer of help on the table...absolutely NOTHING. What happened is that we walked out because the GEP refused to arrange practical classes for Ainan, in Chemistry; they refused to let him take classes in any other subject at a higher level; they refused to give him maths support to aid his sciences; they refused to offer any more than one hour a week of theory classes at NUS High (which we didn't ask for...he was able to do the theory at home and the classes they offered were, contrary to the lies being told, BELOW HIS ABILITY at the time). We walked out because there was nothing on the table. However, Singapore, with its lying national tongue, is saying that we walked out on an offer of science workshops at the Science Centre. What crap. That offer came about 6 months after we had ceased all contact with the GEP. How could we walk out when we had ALREADY done so??! The offer is not what it seems either. It was an offer for us to PAY FOR classes at PUBLIC workshops that ANYONE could attend. There was nothing special about this offer. Also, it came after we had made arrangements with Singapore Polytechnic to have practical classes there. We were therefore unable to attend the workshops, in any case, because our son's time was already committed. So, the Singaporean media have created this lie that we walked out on help offered by the GEP to make us look difficult, when the facts are that they were OFFERING NOTHING at the time we walked out. That is WHY we walked out. Their account makes no logical sense, because it is a lie.


Another lie was told by Singapore Polytechnic. They said that they had kept to their commitment to us. How funny. Now is the time to tell the story of SP. Ainan went to classes at SP twice a week for a year. He enjoyed them very much and learnt a lot of laboratory chemistry. We were very grateful for the support. However, SP suddenly went silent and no-one answered emails anymore. The classes stopped. Months passed. Finally we contacted someone else and were told that Dr. Ng Kok Chin, Ainan's mentor there had had a stroke and fallen into a coma. He did not recover. After he was out of action, not ONE person at SP was willing to step and take his place and help support Ainan. It was very telling. You see, Dr. Ng Kok Chin is NOT Singaporean, he is a Malaysian Chinese man (and a very nice man too). However, the staff that remained in charge after he had gone, ARE Singaporean. How interesting, then, that none of them was interested in supporting Ainan once Dr. Ng's influence had vanished.

By the way, Ainan did NOT apply for admission to either NTU or NUS. Neither is, in our opinion, suitable, since both specialize in being uncreative. We sounded out NUS three years ago, about how Ainan could be admitted, and they said they would never accept Ainan unless he took three A levels in one session. NTU said he was too small for lab classes (all we ever asked about). We never asked NTU about admission. So, the Singaporean papers are lying about this one, too.

There is much I could say, but it would make a long and probably boring post. Let just this be said, however: almost all that has been said about Ainan and our conduct with respect to the MOE and his education is UNTRUE, in the Singaporean media. The truth is very simple: the MOE was unwilling to help Ainan in any concrete way, so we gave up on them. That is all. All their self-justifying lies are just attempts to save face and discredit us. Singapore totally neglected Ainan...but that is OK, because the rest of the world won't.

There are two main reasons why we left Singapore. Firstly, by suddenly dropping support of Ainan, Singapore Polytechnic left us with no educational intervention for Ainan at all. Thus, we had no further reason to stay in Singapore and much cause to leave. Secondly, the Singaporean media, in the shape of the New Paper, had begun to tell many lies about the MOE and us, and Ainan's schools and us. We felt we could no longer stay in a country that was actively trying to discredit us and diminish us in the media. So, we left.

Had Singapore Polytechnic not dropped all support of Ainan, without notice or explanation (they refused to answer emails about why they had done it...they just ignored us) and if the Singaporean media had been honest about us and the MOE, we would still be in Singapore.

So, one can only conclude that Singapore values its right to lie and save face, more than it does the need to retain homegrown talent. So, too, we can conclude that there is no genuine interest in educating Singaporeans to the best of their ability, within the education system (otherwise SP would not have vanished, so unexpectedly).

We are, however, happy to have left. So far, Malaysia looks a much better place to be, in every way but one. The only blemish is that the public transport system is rudimentary. Apart from that, as far as I can see, Malaysia is a much superior place to live, than Singapore.

So, Singapore, please keep on lying - and your citizens will keep on leaving. Well done on persuading us to leave. We are happier for it. Our lives have improved so much, I don't even know how to tell you. Thank you.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals. If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

The New Paper and the order of events.

The New Paper today carried an article about Ainan and ourselves, in it. In fact, it had two articles. One article concerned his achievement in passing the O level Physics younger than anyone else has done...two years after he passed O level Chemistry younger than anyone has ever passed an O level. My concern, though, is the second article, for I fear it has quite a few errors of information in it.

I shall explain. When telling a story, the time order of events is very important for understanding the truth of the story. However, the New Paper article muddles up the order of events, to make things look more favourable for the MOE. I find this an interesting failing...

In the article, it says that the MOE offered us workshops at the Science Centre, which we declined, and then it says we walked out of a meeting with the MOE and said we didn't want any more offers of support from them. This is not true. It makes it look like the MOE were trying to be supportive. They were not. The truth is, in fact, very different.

What happened was that we had a meeting in 2007, towards the end of the summer (I think of the summer as the middle months of the year, since I come from Europe), at which two officers from GEP were gatecrashing: they had not been invited by us, but turned up anyway. This is typical inconsiderate behaviour of GEP officers. The relationship was already pretty sour by then, so I am pretty sure they knew we wouldn't want them around - yet they turned up anyway. The Principal of Ainan's school hadn't told us they would be there, either, which is rather off, I think. Anyway, at this meeting, the GEP officers (including our case officer, who was a truly difficult person to deal with), refused everything we asked for. We made SO many different suggestions of ways in which they could help Ainan - and they refused them all. Finally, I asked if Ainan could have practical classes at NUS High (where he had been studying, though to no use, since the class was below the level of his then knowledge and ability - but they didn't respond to that). She said: "No." very firmly. She then went on to say: "If you want practical classes, why don't you find a private school and PAY for them YOURSELF!"

I thought she was a little too aggressive to be a government officer, but there you are, I didn't hire her.

I told her that Ainan has a very practical learning style and needs to do Chemistry, not just read about it.

She said: "Oh we at the Gifted branch think learning style is very important..."

"Well, I have just told you he has a practical learning style, so can he have practical classes?"

She snapped at me: "Oh that is not good enough for us!"

I couldn't take it anymore from this silly woman. She was telling me that the view of the parents, who know the child best of all people in the world, was no good for the GEP: it was to be dismissed.

I rose then and said: "We will never speak again!", though I did say one more thing: "Your problem is that you don't listen!"

Then I left - and we never did speak again, despite what the MOE says in its article in the New Paper (they claim we did some months later).

Now, what I find interesting about the article is that it moves the walk out event above to being AFTER the offer from the MOE regarding the Science Centre. This is so not true it makes me want to vomit. I walked out on the GEP, in the late summer 2007. The offer of the Science Centre arrived in February 2008 - with a bill attached: we would have to PAY for the GEP's "support". I know of no country on Earth that would ask a gifted student to pay for an intervention supposed to help them...except for Singapore of course. Anyway, we declined them, for two reasons: one was that they never actually bothered to explain to us what the workshops were about - and secondly, they wanted us to pay for them and that we just couldn't really do, at that time. The offer of a few workshops at the Science centre came via Ainan's Principal. When I saw that our GEP case officer's name was mentioned in the correspondence, I was not happy - because she had been such a pain to deal with. I said to the Principal that we wanted nothing to do with the GEP. That is all I said. I did not contact the GEP, nor the MOE. I had kept my promise and I never spoke to them directly again, after the walk out. Yet, they state in the article that we told them in February 2008 that we didn't want any more "help" from the MOE. I find that very strange, since we didn't actually speak to them at all - and what we said to his Principal referred only to the interference of the GEP and, more specifically, the officer that we just could not stand having to deal with. So, in a very real sense, the article is not true to events. The order is wrong - and some things just did not happen in the way they say.

We gave up on the GEP because they were refusing to help in anyway: they were turning down all our suggestions. The article has changed the course of events to make it look like we were turning down an offer from the GEP. This is just not true. There was NO offer on the table when we walked away from them. The Science centre "offer" (it is not an offer actually because we would have had to pay for it) came about 6 months after we had had our walk out with the GEP. Thus, changing the order of events, COMPLETELY CHANGES THE MEANING OF WHAT HAPPENED. It makes it look like we were being difficult - when in fact it was our GEP case officer who was being difficult.

Also, the person they interviewed at NUS High was someone who has been caught out in the past in what seems like a lie - because his students contradicted what he said to us. Yet, this was the man they quote with reference to Ainan. All in all, I am not happy with the way the article has distorted events.

Perhaps the distortions of events are unintentional and due to the assumptions of the writer about what must have happened. Perhaps they are deliberate distortions. I do not know - but I know this: all the changes in events make the MOE look better than it should. That all changes were in favour of the MOE does make one wonder why the events were depicted that way. The fact is the MOE was very difficult to deal with with respect to Ainan. The GEP officers were completely deaf to all information that came from us and completely ignored all requests. They did their own thing - and their own thing was always, in our view, inappropriate, insufficient, or just unnecessary. The article did not capture that at all. It created a very different impression - one that tried to make us look as if we were turning away support, when in fact, the MOE/GEP were the ones refusing to support adequately and in a timely fashion.

Another thing the article missed: the offer of the Science centre came a full THIRTEEN months after his O level in Chemistry. Well, excuse me, I think that any gifted intervention programme that takes more than a YEAR to find somewhere to support a kid's interest, should be fired at once...all of them. Then again, the offer was very little. It was just a few workshops in somewhat irrelevant Chemistry. It was also at a price (not free).Furthermore, it was not what we required - ongoing practical experience. The MOE failed to support Ainan. The New Paper failed to report this accurately, but instead tried to diminish one parent's quest for a suitable education for his gifted son.

I must say, though: I am not surprised. In Singapore, the little guy...that is me...has no say or power at all. The big guy will always manage to drown out the little voice and put their version of history across. I am getting to understand that the news here, in Singapore, is often not what it should be: it doesn't accurately reflect what really goes on and will always be slanted to make the system shine in a glossy, blameless fashion. The truth, however, can be very different. The only problem, of course, is that, in Singapore, that is something the readers will never get the chance to evaluate.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals.If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)