A look inside a Singaporean company.

I was speaking to a friend who works in finance recently. I won't give too many specifics, lest he be identified, but he is not, originally, from Singapore. He has, however, many years experience of living and working here. He had some interesting things to say about how Singaporean finance workers do their job.

Firstly, he noted that they were always at a loss when asked to do something new from scratch. It seems that their "wonderful education" hadn't prepared them for this. What they would always do when asked to do anything, was to go searching for something or someone to copy. Sometimes, this would work out OK, if they chanced upon the right thing to copy. However, it was not infrequent, that they would find the WRONG thing to copy and completely screw up the task. It was quite beyond them to think for themselves, from the beginning, how to approach the problem and solve it independent of external models. Thus, their only choice was to copy.

He also noted a herd mentality in financial analysts originating in Singapore. Well, there is a good reason for this: they are NOT actually analyzing things for themselves but have simply copied the person they think is the best/most respected in the field. They do this for two reasons: firstly, they are not very good at thinking or analyzing for themselves - and secondly, they don't want to stick their necks out and venture an opinion of their own. They want to be able to say that: "Well, the best guy in the field thought the same thing, so you can't blame me for getting it wrong, too." They see this as a failsafe way to make a living. Tasked to analyze they will just copy the best and use their copying as their best defense against charges of incompetence that might come later, if they prove to be wrong.

Well, my friend, who is a very senior financial person had a solution to this problem of Singaporeans copying all the time. He didn't hire them. He hired an office full of Malaysians instead. Apparently, this was somewhat of an improvement.

So, this brings me back to my primary worry here, regarding Singapore: what exactly is the education system making people into? It seems, from examples from the workplace, that I have encountered, that it creates people unable to think for themselves, unable to create, unable to express an opinion of their own - or unwilling to do so, which amounts to the same thing - and only able to do one thing: copy someone else. To my mind, that doesn't make much of a worker, nor much of a contribution to the world. However, the economy has managed to come this far, based on this way of doing things (though we cannot know how much of this was due to external input from imported talent). Yet, I think there is a severe limit on how far a nation can go when all it is doing is copying other nations, other people and other things. To copy, the object, person or idea must already exist - which means that Singapore can only be second in everything, at best...and that makes for a second rate nation, not a first rate one, as the powers-that-be would have locals believe.

How can this be changed? Well, it would have to start in the classroom but extend throughout the whole culture. The idea that copying is acceptable must be thrown out. It must be discouraged...banned even. Until then, everyone here will take the intellectually lazy way out - and copy their way through working life.

Personally, were this change implemented, I think it would be a great improvement, however I am under no illusions: even if the system was completely overhauled today - it would take DECADES for the way of this place to change. Those who are already adults will not be able to change - it is too late for them. We must look to those who have not yet begun their schooling. So, it would be at least two decades before anything positive could come out of it.

There is one political problem, of course: I don't think that the present government wants a thinking population - and so may very well continue with the present system, indefinitely, for it ensures one thing very well: that people just can't think. Perhaps, that is, in fact, the whole purpose of the education system here. Maybe the output - people who can't think for themselves - was, in fact, the INTENDED product. What a thought. I just hope it is not true. Yet, we are left with two choices: either the education system is competent and has produced its intended output - unthinking, some say robotic, people - or the education system is incompetent and has failed to produce what it wishes to: "creative productive adults" - as they sometimes say they want.

I will leave it to you to consider: is the education system competent or incompetent? Is the end result desired or not? In my view, neither situation is a good one - because the output is not ideal. There are better ways to live, than to live a life of copying. I wonder how long it will take before that is realized around here?

(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.)

In search of freedom.

A couple of days ago, I learnt that someone I knew was leaving Singapore, quite suddenly.

Now, I had thought him well-established here. He is an American and his wife is from South America. He is a teacher. She is a singer/musician. They both had jobs. Between them, their income was very good, surprisingly good, in fact. You see his singer wife is in demand and is very well paid for the corporate gigs that she has been doing. In addition she has been singing for "good money", 3 hours a night in clubs in Singapore. So, financially speaking, they were content here. Yet, something was not right, here. In Singapore, they did not feel free to be themselves.

My American friend's wife was the one most unhappy with it all. The problem was that, in Singapore, she felt that she was living in a kind of straitjacket. She is a creative person, but here she was not allowed to create. Every night she sang and some days, too...but whenever she did, she was never allowed to do her own material, never allowed to improvise, explore or create. All that she was ever allowed to do was "cover versions" of other people's songs. She found the musicians she worked with highly skilled in a technical sense - but none of them showed any creativity - or did not, at least, show any evidence of it, in her presence. They were consumed with the desire to replicate the work of others as faithfully as possible. She found this tiresome. Where she came from, true musicians were always experimenting, exploring and growing. Here, she was not allowed to grow or become or create - she was enforced to imitate.

Now, it is not her fellow musicians, alone, that are the problem. The other problem is that the audience actually seem to crave well-performed cover versions. They enjoy hearing replication at work. They also seem to dislike anything new or experimental. So, even if a musician is creative here, they might find their creativity unwelcome.

They felt the straitjacket in other aspects of life, here, too. There is not much creativity in Singapore...it is a place that excels in conformity. This fact made them uncomfortable. They felt that they couldn't truly be free to be themselves in a place that so expected a uniformity of behaviour from everyone. At least, that is the way it seems to them. They felt, in short, oppressed by the essence of the place. They felt that here, they would never be allowed to be themselves.

So, one day, they both decided to jack in their jobs and leave. They have already bought tickets and have a destination in mind - and even jobs lined up.

The question is: how many creative people is Singapore losing - or never gaining in the first place - because creative people might feel too restricted here? Does this loss of creative individuals not harm Singapore? Does it not reduce the likelihood that anything new or special will come out of this small city state?

I am left to wonder how pervasive the need to conform is, here, when even music is not allowed to live - when even something as inoffensive as the sound that comes to one's ears, must conform, absolutely, to expectation, with no surprises. Surely, creativity should be welcomed...and not pushed away, as they have been?

The funny thing is, this decision of theirs to leave was prompted by a holiday in Bali. To them, the place felt so much more alive and authentic and free...so that is where they are going, now. So who has it right: the self-adoring No.1 nation in the world...or its poorer, but apparently freer, neighbour? Bali may be poor - but a creative couple felt more welcome there.

I think there is a lesson in this tale for ambitious Singapore. It can still learn from its "poorer" neighbours.

(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.)

Where every school is a "military" school

Foreigners can tell us more about a country than any native can. Foreign eyes see things in new ways, having evaluated them from a different perspective. That is why the wise listen to the comments of those from overseas: it is a chance to see one's country as it really is and not as it is said to be.

I have a friend from South America. He is living and working here, with his family. His attention is turning to the choice of schools for his daughter, since she is approaching that age. By chance, he visited my son's school (he lives in the same area as us), drank in the atmosphere, and had a look at the school rules. What he saw, surprised him.

The only type of school that bore comparison to the one in Singapore, that he saw, were MILITARY SCHOOLS back in Latin America. Only in such schools would there be so many school rules and so much restriction of behaviour. His first thought on entering the school was: "This is a military school". The strange thing is, it didn't call itself one: it is a typical Singaporean school.

The question is, therefore, are ALL schools in Singapore "military" by comparison to international standards of regimentation and regulation? Certainly, they seem so to South American eyes. They seem rather too regulated to my eyes, too.

Let us ask ourselves what is the purpose of a military school. It is to create absolute conformity of thought and action and blind, unthinking obedience to every command. It is to create little robots who won't mind getting themselves shot in the name of their country. Could it be, therefore, that the purpose of Singaporean schooling is to create absolute conformity of thought and action and blind, unthinking obedience to every command? What use would that be to a democratic society? None at all. However, it would be of great use if the purpose was to ensure that the population could never think for themselves and would be easy to manage.

I worry, therefore, for my children, receiving such regulated schooling. It is quite stifling to see the burden of rules under which they labour. Surely, there are better ways to educate children than to tie them down, too restrictively - so much so, that, to an outsider, they look like cadets in a military school?

Nothing is accidental in Singapore. I have come to learn that these past nine years. It is no accident, therefore, that Singapore's education ministers come from military backgrounds. They are all former staff of the armed forces. Clearly, they have been chosen for a reason. Clearly, they are expected to bring their military experience to bear on the task of guiding the nation's education. A military man is not to be put in charge of education, unless one wants that education to have a military flavour. That military men are always chosen, to be education minister, rather confirms the impression of my South American friend, that Singapore's schools are rather like military schools from overseas.

Indeed, it is most telling that the new education minister, whose name eludes me right now (he has just been appointed), is also, as I understand it, 2nd Minister for Defence. The connection between education and the military could not be more explicit, therefore.

There is, however, a problem in all this. Military people generally don't think too well. They act. In fact, thinking too much is counter-productive in the heat of battle: it might bring hesitation and that brings death. So, any school system which is militaristic in any way, would tend to suppress thinking in its people. Singapore's system is doing just that.

This is a foolish long term strategy for Singapore. Without a thinking people, Singapore is reliant on overseas talent. Yet, overseas talent will only come here so long as the offer is more attractive than the next place. That is an unsustainable situation, in the long term, because Singapore always has to fight to be more attractive than the next place. There are over 200 other places people could go. I don't see the odds being in Singapore's favour, in the long term. Other places will overshadow it. Other places will be able to offer more.

The answer is, of course, to encourage thinking in its own native population. To do that, one should drop the militaristic style of education here. A good start would be to begin to appoint education ministers who have actually been teachers - and good teachers at that. Preferably teachers who were not trained in Singapore, to teach in a Singaporean way. Then one might begin to get education that is actually about education - and not education that is about absolute conformity of thought and action and blind unthinking obedience to every command.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and one month, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and seven months, and Tiarnan, two years exactly, 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, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

The right answer is no answer.

Different cultures vary in how much they stress uniformity of thought. Some cultures, like those in Asia, are rather keen on it.

It begins in the education system. Education, around the world, too often stresses the "right answer". Students are encouraged to yield to the authority of the teacher and the system, in the matter of what is "right" and, in so doing, give up any native drive to be creative. You see, if there is a "right answer", then the answer must already be known. If it is known, it is not new. If it is not new, it is not creative. So, a "right answer" culture, means a no creativity culture.

Singapore is very much a "right answer" culture. I have taught in its schools, and I was very surprised by the instruction I was given by the Head of the English Department that I then worked in (some years ago, now). I was told that I had to write model answers for all the essays that I set the students. I was then to mark their output against my model answer and grade them accordingly. I found this profoundly disturbing - for it meant, very clearly, that there was only one right answer, in that school, in that system. The education system had reduced a quintessentially creative and expressive subject, like English (and the General Paper, which I also taught and for which I was given the same instruction), to a subject in which only one "right answer" was possible. In so doing, the school was enforcing conformity of thought - for anyone who deviated from the "one right answer" - would be marked down. Anyone whose thought conformed to the model answer would be marked up - and rewarded for their conformity of thought. Such a practice can only lead to a student body lacking in creativity and intellectual initiative - and this is precisely what I observed in them. They were unable to think for themselves or to originate ideas. So often when I, against usual practice, set them tasks that actually required them to think I would hear: "But you haven't told us what to write." Sad, isn't it?

I have written a little on this topic before but I felt that it needed to be revisited, in more detail.

An education system may either be open to its students' thoughts and contributions - or it may close down those thoughts and contributions - by insisting that, for all questions, and for all situations, there is only one right answer. Singapore follows such a system in its public education. Many other Asian countries do - and to a lesser extent many countries around the world. Yet, having lived in Asia, I would say that the tendency is vastly stronger here than elsewhere. Wherever this tendency occurs, students are being ill-served by their education. Many years of such a classroom situation can only erase any native creativity there is in the students.

The only right answer is that there is no right answer - except in matters of maths and science - but even then, there is room for a new answer in science and a new method in maths. Education will only ever be educative, when the teachers and the system realize this.

(If you would like to read of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and no months, and Tiarnan, seventeen 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, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, the creatively gifted, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)