Labour and Specialisation - Our Way Out?

The world seems to need division of labour and specialisation, though they are incomplete, without a basic core of values to guide them along, in order to survive.

DPM Tharman commented on a speech that in Singapore and in many industrialized countries, a general degree is ''less highly prized and those that deal with technical skills (delivering high-end services or working with sophisticated machines) would have "more jobs"'. 

He refered to Europe and America's shortage of people in technical skills and oversupply of people with general degrees, who are either unemployed or end up in jobs that don't require a degree. He pointed out that the aim is not to max the no. Of uni grads - this strategy "has not worked yes well". 

This at least makes much more sense than saying not all competent ite grads can go on to polytechnics (Lawrence Wong). Well, isn't our main point in Singapore to maximise opportunities in our citizens, so that we can be our best?
 

Original Article Here

Hope and wisdom for Singaporeans without jobs

There is a recent report from Bloomberg showing that only 30% of new jobs created go to Singaporean citizens and permanent citizens. The rest are foreign residents.

I guess if there are few new jobs for Singaporeans in proportion to the total jobs created, then I presume it is not enough for new graduates from Singapore's institutes of higher learning.

Or put it this way, the whole education and social system failed to put Singaporeans to adapt to the new knowledge-based learning, as society is too over-competitive to allow self-improvement to better oneself for the ever-changing world, and educational attainment kept deliberate low, way below the number of locals capable of completing a degree locally in Singapore, judging from recent Wikileaks revelations.

Also, critical thinking in Singaporeans in general seem to be less apparent than in other regional countries, especially Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia.

A combination of these factors makes up a despondent situation in Singapore for Singaporeans. Now I feel the rage in Singapore - if not, even much-reported troubles within the opposition Workers' Party, they even roughly managed to retain almost around 90% of their party's votes, from the 2011 General Elections.

We need both hope and wisdom to overcome this situation. Now all we need is a few writers to inspire, heal and rejuvenate Singaporean broken souls in the face of globalisation.

Inclusive Education for All Special Needs Singaporeans

Inclusive Education for All Special Needs Singaporeans

There is a need for all Singaporeans to be educated, under a common core education to prepare for a knowledge-based economy, as well as having a common educational experience to build forging national identity and cohesion. (Ministry of Education website)

Some Singaporeans are not covered under the Compulsory Education Act. He (or she) could have been exempted from compulsory education, especially for children studying in some private primary schools (designated schools in MOE terms, such as San Yu Adventist School) and homeschools. Granted, these students also study for the Primary School Leaving Examination and go through the National Education test. They also fit into the aims and objectives of ‘a common education experience for national cohesion’ in their unique manner, and receive a ‘common core education’. So they also receive a uniquely Singaporean education.

Some Singaporeans, though, do not have the chance to get to national schools or even the designated schools. They are deemed to have physical and intellectual disabilities. Few national schools can cater for them, due to a lack of facilities. Perhaps most importantly, though, most Singaporeans with physical and intellectual disabilities could only receive an education in special schools that are not funded by the Ministry of Education. In other words, special education in Singapore is not under the purview of the Ministry of Education, the provider of education to 99% of all Singaporeans, from a parliamentary reply by the current Minister of Education Heng Swee Keat on March 8 2012.

Are we going to forge national identity together without the people with disabilities and special needs (PDSNs)?

Granted, they have a different core education to receive from the rest. This is why they are in their special schools in the first place. However, note at why these special schools are not under the compulsory education structure – because they do not fit under the government’s stated policies of a common core education for the knowledge-based economy.

I just want to know whether this affects society’s reactions towards them, as part of our society.

These special needs people are presumably native-born or born to native-born Singaporeans. Every year, perhaps about two, or three hundred of them, who are males, will receive the notification that they will be exempted from National Service (NS). Given the pro-NS culture and the lack of common educational experience with the mainstream society, is it really possible that these special needs Singaporeans are part of our society? Will they be seen as a group of people who have Singaporean citizenship, but are regarded as people whom we try our best to forget and be abandoned in a corner? Don’t they have their pink Identification Cards when they are older?

We need to send a strong message to all Singaporeans. We need to tell all of our people, all Singaporeans are uniquely Singaporean, with our common Singaporean experience. We are one whole nation united by our common destiny, for our land.

To bring the common experience, we do our best to make sure all Singaporeans are in the same governmental supervision for all students. The agency responsible for 99% of Singaporeans’ education is supervised by the Ministry of Education (MOE). It is only natural for the special needs community to ask the MOE to include the 1% of the students, current not under its purview due to them enrolling in special needs schools, to be under their purview. This can be done with input from the Ministry of Community, Youth and Sports, with their Community Chest funding.

The integration of special needs schools with MOE may not be smooth. Special needs students do not seem to have a common core with the rest of the students in mainstream settings, as they do not need to take the Primary School Leaving Examination. They do not seem to go to National Education trips. They also do not have the capacity to, intrinsically from their behaviors, to feel themselves being part of Singapore. This had been the reason why MOE had been reluctant to bring these people of uniquely different needs separate from the rest of the student population.

However, MOE should signal its students that some things are more important than just reading, writing and other skills for the economy. The perception of cohesion for all Singaporeans is one. Although the special needs students are not part of the mainstream society, they are, after all, part of our society. Under common management of all special needs education in Singapore, including the management of special schools, inclusive education, integrating special needs resources for students with special needs in a mainstream setting, could be more likely achieved for the Singapore education system.

This would bring success for students with special needs as a whole. From an UNICEF report on special education, inclusive education group was found to have “achieved significantly higher levels on a number of academic measures and equivalent scores on others without special needs.”  The children included in the mainstream classroom also had better attendance records than those who are not included in mainstream classrooms, from a study by Geoff Lindsay, done in 1997. This shows that inclusion is not only beneficial in terms of achieving higher academic results for all students in general, but also better for the societal outcomes, which is deemed to be more fair, and have more altruism throughout society.

In my opinion, Singapore is better off having a centralized management of education. I think the Government should extend provision of compulsory education to special needs students, as well as central management of all educational services, will bring benefits to Singapore in the long run. Compulsory education for all Singaporeans is the way forward for Singapore.

Effects of an elite education on Singaporeans with special needs

There is a certain university that accepts only 8% of its applicants in Singapore. This is roughly equivalent to the admission rate of prestigious universities, such as Harvard, Stanford and Yale - three of the most selective universities in the United States.

I know a few friends who get admitted to that university in question. The low admission rate for their stringent requirements exalts their social standing in their friends. They deserve it wholeheartedly though, because they really have the passion, competence and most importantly, critical thinking, to be able to be deemed able to get admitted to the university.

I think of the possibility if any student with special needs gets admitted to that university. If it is true, then I thought, at least, in the context of current society, it shows that the person with special needs is indeed able to go to the university and do good for the world in general. He has a better chance of creating acceptance for the special needs community if he feels like, and wants to, doing all he can for the special needs community.

However, even with a 8% admission rate, does it mean that the students in the universities are really unique and be successful for being chosen for a common social goal - be the social force of the society?

I doubt so.

Society chooses an elite. So long as the people in general decides the attributes to leadership: credibility, intelligence, connection with the people, inspring social change, moving all of society forward and effective improvement of the society as a whole.

Going through a narrow door means one can be in a better position as an elite, to move and shake society. To succeed in leading the society upfront, one has to lead the way. Through his (or her) high competencies in intelligence through IQ or standardised tests, his place of birth, his life experiences, his connections with other people and his intrinsic positive motivation to do good things, he can have a better chance to succeed to be the cream of the crop of society.

However, it is difficult to ascertain the ability, however, to inspire social change. Some able and credible people just do not have the opportunity to bring about social change, connect with the people, improve society and move all of his society forward - because of different circumstances. The elites may be recognised in some way or another, but because of their special needs, or because of society's reluctance, society may still not change, even when special needs students get into elite placing. Indeed, in my observations, the PDSNs in elite schools may be consumed with their own circumstances, that they may slowly lose the ideals and visions they have when tasked with dealing with problems on an immense scale.

Say, these people are dealt with investigating the exclusion of special needs people from pay rises and training due to age, tainted relationships with bosses and perceived inability. There is a certain moral hazard in these people to deal with these issues half-heartedly, especially when they themselves are subjected to lower pay and slower promotions than their normal counterparts, because they themselves are victims, and do actually aggressively leadership positions to assert their existence in the Earth. They, being previous elites, now do want to be the elites of the disadvantaged. This is in contrary to the original purpose of propelling the disadvantaged into the elite - to make a more accepting society for the society, and to change the elites to create more opportunities, for special needs people to move forward with upward social mobility in life.

To me, it is one thing to say, 'you should have gone to JC and NUS, for it is good for you', when others did the same and still achieved nothing. It is also another thing to say, 'too bad, your conditions are just not suitable, try other professions' when one is excluded from industrial training.

Maybe it would be good to instead try to say, 'just do what you can. I am sure you have talents in a certain area - just try it. Who knows you can do it? I'll support you in your endeavors.'

So, elitism even in the special needs society may stray the community further from its common pursuit of an inclusive society. It, if badly managed, could harm more than help Singaporean society. It would be best if the society begins with accepting amongst themselves, to give support to each other.

Why we can't just form a PDSN group for those in JCs

Initially, I agree with the view that PDSNs with JC may be in a position to work for societal good, given current social emphasis on qualifications in Singapore. If we just work with like-minded people who can do common tasks, with people graduated from JCs and local Universities, we will achieve a large critical mass of talents to create social change.

There is indeed a valid concern that PDSNs from JC could be marginalised because of their perceived book-based intellect. Entrusting responsibility in a structured leadership framework that ensures continuity in A-CASE, respect for all members, as well as developing vocational and career skills in JC PDSNs would be most essential for all JC PDSNs in our group, as JCs really neglect relevance to the job market - and JC PDSNs do indeed have the ability to read books, and apply them on writing and speaking in Project Work. In this way, JC PDSNs not just achieve self-improvement, but also develop responsibility for the special needs community and the wider society - something all societies value tremendously. We can increase our capacity to serve our wider community, through JC PDSNs.
However, we also have the need to recognise different models of excellence. Just because one has 20 points or lesser in O Levels doesn't mean he is approved and stamped to be a critical thinker we need. We need much more than qualifications, but we also need to be much more inclusive than having only good O Level scorers (that can go into JC).

We should not dismiss people based on their lack of scores, current situation or otherwise. We should look at how we work to rally together behind a cause.

Indeed, for 95% of the Aspies in Singapore, they need a technical education that trains them in specific jobs that does well in most organisations. They can ill afford a higher probability of being stressed out and unhappy with the JC curriculum, in which they will probably be stressed at a higher incidence than in Polytechnics and ITEs. There will always be a 5% who may not find any course in our ITEs/Polytechnics/vocational institutes useful, but they are the rare minority exceptions.
Discriminating people just because of them not having the intellectual level does no good for us. I even think tuition schemes by Aspies for Aspies bring us further away from functioning and surviving in society, which wants us to do technical skills.

It is wrong to push students to JCs, when ITEs or even other technical/vocational institutes work better for them. It is also wrong to push Aspies and other PDSNs through university, when they are mostly better suited for non-Singaporean Universities or Singaporean technical/vocational training, where they are more likely to finish through the courses in time and be immediately productive in the work force, through specialised training in their skills.

I also think any PDSN group fully consisting of just JC students or alumni is untenable, because it works for only 5% of our PDSN population, and is not representative of our larger PDSN community's larger interests.

So we still accept late bloomers, who can't get into JCs in time. Reason being this is a defect in Singapore society in particular - we only accept a focused person from infancy to work. It's only natural that they have their own concerns in job employment. They need encouragement.

Just by looking at one case where one JC PDSN bullies another, it shows that JC PDSNs propagate the claim 'you are ok so you don't need help' to a worse state. And this questions the credibility of JC PDSNs as a group.

My personal experience also tells me it is possible to have both meltdowns and depressions that plague so many PDSNs AND have good intellectual abilities. There are common stress points for all PDSNs, regardless of IQ or educational levels.

Intellect has little bearing with survival - but the ability to self-improve has. I can safely say until the moment Aspies improve on their ability to be more open with others and be more trusting of other people, Aspies will not get 'self-improvement'. But here's the irony of the Aspies... they ARE Aspies.
The social support group I founded with people with disabilities has not diverted time and resources from the JC or more intellectual PDSNs to lower functioning ones. Because simply put, the natural state of things is that able people help the not-so-able.

Though some Aspies choose to remain not accepting other fellow Aspies, I am sure reality will move us forward and opens new possibilities to help us accept other people on the Spectrum.
We can have both intellectual and lower-functioning members here. All we need is just the commitment to make it happen. We can achieve this.