Rallying Point

This being Teachers’ Day in Singapore, I thought I’d say something about the profession that is so close to my heart and experiences as well as comment on the Prime Minister’s Teachers’ Day Rally address.

A Channel News Asia report said the following :

To achieve this [develop leaders for Singapore], he recognised the need for good quality teachers, promising government support and backing.
Mr Lee added the government will also provide teachers with resources and better career advancement.
The Prime Minister said MOE will help the teachers learn and develop professionally throughout their careers.
This will be done, for example, via training courses.
The aim is to keep teaching as an attractive career.
MOE will give details of its plans to do this in a few days.

So I guess this is what hard-headed engineering solutions look like when they’re applied to Education. If there appears to be a shortage of teachers because many leave the profession, throw money at the problem by promising “better career advancement”. If teachers don’t seem to be keeping up with changing knowledge trends, just send them off on another “training course”. There seems to be nothing new in the Ministry’s bag of tricks.

The last time that a Prime Minister addressed teachers in a similar setting was in 2001. I happened to have the bad luck (or good fortune, as it turned out, given the rather novel nature of the eventual address) of being made to attend the thing. Anyway, that Prime Minister actually took a different tack to get across to the teachers: he connected by telling a tale of his own relief teaching experiences after he finished his A-levels. By telling the anecdote he expressed his gratitude to teachers for their willingness to endure the numerous challenges of teaching, which he only briefly glimpsed at during his brief relief teaching stint. And connect he did. By the end of the speech, there were people in the way-back-in-the-corner stands were I was seated waving frantically to him as if he were their next-door-neighbour. The comic aspects of the memory aside, my point is that what REALLY gets teachers usually resides in that zone of altruism normally (and vaguely) termed “not the head but the heart”. I dare say that most teachers become teachers primarily because they belief that they can touch young lives and be a positive influence. And for a brief moment, during that Teachers’ Day Rally in 2001, the room was rife with altruism. Yes, yes, teachers grow cynical, political, bureaucratic, autocratic, and painfully pedantic along the way but I think that what keeps many teachers going is the belief that they’re doing something good.

While the Ministry continues to pay lip-service to the idea that teachers can indeed impact young lives positively, its policies (summed up in “career advancement” and “training courses”) actually deny any true expression of this possibility. In the end, teachers are caught trying to avoid the pitfalls of the system (and hence advance their careers) and trapped in yet another meaningless, faddish “training session” meant to make up their quota of training hours (an privilege, they are told, but one whose enjoyment is somehow always compulsory).

A simple suggestion. Allow teachers the time and freedom to do what they’re passionate about even if it doesn’t fit into the Ministry’s pre-ordained schema of what’s productive. If a teacher reads a book (any damn book ...), count that towards his “professional development”. If a teacher keeps a blog and writes about what she loves, that should count as well. If a teacher’s thing is to hang out with students in the canteen over endless cups of coffee, why should that bother anyone? Of course teachers need to be responsible. But this should never obscure the fact (as it now does) that teachers are first individuals who each have something unique to offer rather than digits that need to be accounted for. If teachers are allowed to do their own thing in place of the meaningless forms that chart their careers’ progress, if they’re allowed to just teach to their strengths instead of adopting yet another silly and irrelevant pedagogical schema (most probably dreamt up by individuals without much classroom experience but an eye on the profits to be made off “the education industry”), much good would be done.

In order to be great teachers, teachers need the space and time to connect with their own hearts. One Prime Minister knew this and he used it to soften and inspire an oft jaded group. This Prime Minister? I don’t think he’ll be telling any relief teaching anecdotes anytime soon.

Neil in the House

Neil Humphreys came to my school today to give his last speech cum autograph session before leaving Singapore for Australia, having lived on our island for the last ten years. Had always wanted to pick up his books after reading a chapter of his first book in Borders by standing in a corner and pretending to flip through it. Cheapskate, I know, but I never pretended I was rich. Anyway, I was pleasantly surprised that they were selling his books with a 20% discount and coupled with the fact that I could get them autographed by the man himself, it was a done deal for me. You can see me looking very pleased with my purchases after Neil had signed them. Neil was looking very pleased himself, maybe due to the long snaking line queuing up for his autograph.



In his little talk that lasted for about an hour, he covered various topics like journalism (funny how his little sharing session has restored a little faith in me about working in the Singapore media industry), his experiences in our tropical island (the man is hilarious, and the situations unbelievable), and of course he touched on issues like how his permanent residence application got rejected after the authorities took offence with a certain article that he wrote for the Today newspaper. I guess it really takes an outsider, or Ang Moh in this case, to see things in a different light and from fresh perspectives, especially when it comes to topics that have been ingrained into our stream of consciousness so much that we are unable to see anything else.

His Singlish is wicked, by the way, for an Ang Moh. I was quite impressed by his pronunciation and syntax, not to mention timing of certain Singlish phrases. He must have said, “Steady, lah!” at least two times at just the right moments.

When he took a question from the floor about whether he had received any preferential treatment as a foreigner in Singapore, he gave us the straight answer: Yes. He went on to describe how the country seems to have this post-colonial hangover which basically meant that the white man must be right, no matter how dubious his background is. He also mentioned how despite his success in writing in Singapore, there was always the doubt that he made it due to his skin colour, which was one of the reasons why he was shipping of to Australia so as to, in a manner of speaking, “make it on his own”. Ironic that a white man had to tell us in our faces that this was what he noticed about us. Maybe he was really being very clever by appearing to be sincere so we would buy more of his books, but upon reflection there is no escaping the truth in his words. Those words seem to ring ever more ominously what with the recent announcement that we are opening up our doors to welcome more foreign talent than ever.

The recent MOE initiative to attract “native speakers” of English to come to our shores to teach comes to mind. After all, being a native speaker of English is not enough, it seems like it is equally important to pick the right country. It seems to me that with the declining population being a major problem hanging over our heads, we are adopting a stance that anyone foreign will inevitably do the job better than us. I’m guessing it manifests from the fact we feel that none of what is in Singapore is original, and whatever that comes from the supposed place of origin will be better than what we can find here. So Ang Mohs will inevitably speak better English than us because they spoke it first. Apple Ipods will always be better than Creative Zen players because Creative is just trying to ride on the success of Apple. Local movies will always suck, because we’ll never be able to reach the pinnacle of excellence that is Hollywood, never mind the fact that local movies are usually about telling stories about Singapore. The list just goes on.

Anyway, back to the topic of native speakers, I guess this video says it better than I do. If you have no idea what the hell Eagle Eye just said in the above paragraph, have no fear! Just watch this extremely funny video.

Indignation 2006 - TCP - Ruby Pan

Feeling Singaporean?

From TODAY 24th Aug Thursday :

THE good news first, as Singapore steps
up its search for new citizens: Nearly nine
out of 10 young Singaporeans say they are
comfortable working alongside someone
of a different nationality.

But when it comes to the question of
whether they would encourage these same
foreigners to settle down and take up Singapore
citizenship, only 63 per cent said
they would.

These lines from an article in TODAY caught my eye and have caused certain thoughts about how foreigners fit into the perceptions of young Singaporeans to coalesce into the following.

In meeting up with people over the three weeks when I was back home, a common theme that emerged was a concern that foreigners were being given too many incentives to come to Singapore. “Too many” being defined by the fact that qualified and talented Singaporeans were being pushed out of jobs and had opportunities for career or academic advancement taken away from them. Here are three anecdotal examples, which cover three major groups of “foreign talent” that Singaporeans have the most concern about:

1. A former student who has just moved into a Hall of Residence at NUS claimed that Chinese students who have come to Singapore on scholarships appear to be the most well-off students in the Hall. He said that with their University tuition paid for and an allowance to cover living expenses, these students end up being able to afford more luxuries in their rooms: mini-refrigerators and special computer gaming equipment, for example.

2. A friend cited a specific company that enthusiastically hired Indian nationals who claimed to be highly-qualified with specialized computing skills, firing a large number of long-time Singaporean employees in the process. As it turned out, the Indian nationals were not as qualified as they claimed to be and couldn’t do the work that they claimed to be able to do.

3. A former lecturer of mine was talking to me about the prospects of teaching Lit at one of the local universities and hinted that having the right skin and hair color (most certainly not mine) gets foreigners of dubious talent into lectureships.

Against these instances, there are the “63%” who seem to be happy to welcome foreigners to come to Singapore and become Singaporean. Of course, 63% is already a pretty neat majority, but in the land of “80% or more”, it surely is a disappointing statistic and indicates that the government will probably put in more effort in changing these “narrow-mindsets”.

I think it is difficult to quantify, without extensive data and studies, whether foreign talent deprives the average Singaporean of opportunities. The standard government claim is that with more foreigners in the country, it doesn’t mean that there is less to go around. In fact, the government has repeatedly claimed that foreigners bring with them more economic investment: the economic pie gets larger and everyone gains. But this isn’t really the issue that I want to get at. I want to consider the emotive side of things: the lingering perception that canvassing for foreign talent to come to Singapore puts Singaporeans at a disadvantage, despite the immense propaganda campaign (including close-ups of distinctly non-Singaporean Chinese faces and shots of Ang Mohs in almost every scene of the latest National Day Music Video ...) to get Singaporeans used to the idea.

Of course having foreigners who live and work in Singapore is not a new phenomenon. When Singapore had to scurry to find some kind of quick form of economic sustenance in the 60s, it opened its doors to the MNCs and large expat workforces. Even the public infrastructure that Singaporeans are very proud of, owes a lot to foreign talent. The tunnels, for example, that make up the MRT were the result of the tunneling expertise of New Zealanders (I believe). Also, there has always been a large number of domestic and construction workers who are foreign. But these sections of Singapore were never really considered as integral to any sense of the nation’s history or destiny.

I think what now irks Singaporeans is the fact that “being Singaporean” is now easily traded, as if it were a commodity. I think that Singaporeans who disagree with government policy feel that extending citizenship so easily to individuals who come to Singapore for plainly economic incentives is a act that might lead to all sorts of unintended consequences. How will these individuals change social norms? Will foreigners be “loyal” to the country or merely use Singapore as a springboard to other lands and richer opportunities? Perhaps there is also a sense of betrayal: after almost four decades of telling Singaporeans that there has been something unique in the manner by which Singapore has managed to overcome the odds of political fortune, the turbulences of its own multi-racial past, and the obstacles of being “a small island with no natural resources”, that there is something unique to be of Singaporean stock, the government now seems all too eager to inject Singapore with a healthy dose of “non-Singaporeaness”, as if it has lost faith in its own populace.

Of course, I bandy the term “Singaporean” about as if it were a clearly defined notion or at least an emotive rallying point that moves the heart in a specific direction each time it is used. It is certainly much more ambiguous, complex, open to manipulation and re-definition than this. And it must necessarily remain in this state; otherwise, it becomes merely an administrative expedient that just affords certain perks to those living in Singapore akin to the quick passage through the immigration lanes of Changi Airport.

In ending, I will refrain from offering what I think a more genuine approach to solving Singapore’s need for more talent should look like. Instead, I’d like to suggest that behind the irritation that newly naturalized “Singaporeans” will gradually play a more active role in defining the economic and social norms of Singapore is a more deep-seated sense that “being Singaporean” doesn’t really mean much to the powers-that-be. Despite the enormous fanfare that accompanies each National Day spectacle, I don’t think the powers-that-be very interested or open to a genuine dialogue or contestation over what “being Singaporean” means.

Mee Siam Mai Hum

Since when did Mee Siam come with Hum?!? That was the first thought that sprang into my mind (I’m sure it was the same for any self-respecting Singaporean) as I watched the Prime Minister delivering his National Day Rally Speech to the masses that he ruled. For the record and the uninitiated, this is the exact excerpt, verbatim I might add, of which I have since come to take offence with.

PM Lee: "So, last year, for the rally I showed two little clips, in a very small way putting my toe into the water … Tau Gay Not Enough and Tau Gay Never Enough. That's a harmless form of the new media. But in fact we have some serious decisions to make because we have to decide how far to go, what tone to set. And it's not just all fun and games. I give you an example. You put out a funny podcast, you talk about bak chor mee. I will say mee siam mai harm. Then we compete. Then what will I do? I will hire Jack Neo to be my National Day Rally adviser. It'll be a fun time, we will enjoy thoroughly, go home totally entertained. But is this the way to deal with serious issues? And the problem is it won't stop with fun and games. You'll go to distortions, you'll go to half-truths, you'll go to untruths. The tone of the debate will go down. Eventually, you race to the bottom."

Mee Siam is a spicy dish with Bee Hoon and maybe a hard-boiled egg sometimes. I’ve never, ever, in my almost 21 years of holding a Singaporean passport, even heard (let alone tasted) of Mee Siam with Hum. Hum is Hokkien for cockles, an ingredient that comes with many dishes popular with the general population, dishes like Char Kway Teow or Laksa. But Hum with Mee Siam? Was the Prime Minister trying to invent a new national dish? Does his personal chef actually serve him the said dish with cockles thrown in for good measure? More importantly, what was he thinking?

I guess he thought he was being funny, but little did he know the joke was on him.

I’m sure the online community has pretty much flamed his comments in every way possible, so I’m just going to stop my frivolous rant here. The serious implication only comes when the laughter has subsided and we sit back and think about how the whole hoo-ha started in the first place: Which Singaporean thinks that Mee Siam has Hum?

It seems anal to insist that my Prime Minister knows that little bit of trivial, but I find it disturbing that he doesn’t. In an attempt to connect with the masses by talking about something close to the hearts of everyday Singaporeans (food) and showing that he has a firm understanding of little details of our lives, he has succeeded in doing exactly the opposite. While saying that he has turned every Singaporean against him with his remarks is probably too extreme, suggesting that he has alienated himself from the general population doesn’t seem too far off. The Prime Minister is always eager to soften his image and prove that he is a man of the masses, but when he tries to do that, even the smallest things matter in order to maintain the image of a bona fide commoner. It seems that this time around, it was indeed the smallest of details about the smallest of ingredients that did him in. The phrase “It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt” comes to mind.

So every time you settle down at the coffee shop located at the void deck of your HDB block, and if your favourite breakfast dish happens to be Mee Siam, you might want to consider asking the Prime Minister along to educate him about something so trivial it seems silly not to know.