Time for Change on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 6:54 pm 

It is already happening. Many have predicted it would. Singaporeans are being marginalized.

Talented Singaporeans are leaving. Foreigners are brought in by the hundreds of thousands to fill the top posts. The children of these professionals have a distinct advantage over the children of Singaporeans.

If this cycle continues, Singaporeans will become the maids and labourers for the PRs and foreigners.

Vote for Change if you love your children.

XIIIblackcat on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 7:26 pm 

As far as I am concerned. This has never ever happened before in Singapore’s educational history! Singaporeans has always come up top in the examination. PSLE, GCE ‘O’ Level, International Baccalaureate. Never had a foreigner before! This is preposterous!

Yueheng on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 7:59 pm 

It’s just a child who did well in her PSLE. Must you guys politicize everything?

simon templar on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 8:42 pm 

I also heard that many of these foreign students get allowances for their studies here in Singapore is that true? One of the secondary school student from Indonesia said he gets free education here plus the generous SG government also gives him $500.00 allowances every month.

Are we suckers or what?

deoxin on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 9:19 pm 

@Yueheng on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 7:59 pm

it’s expected lah.
if the foreigner did badly, the news would still be in negative light ..by saying that the foreigners recruited r low quality.

crosscultural on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 9:46 pm 

In many other countries, the top students are very often from another country so give the little girl a break lah

Tony Pang on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:04 pm 

@XIIIblackcat on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 7:26 pm
“Singaporeans has always come up top in the examination. PSLE, GCE ‘O’ Level, International Baccalaureate. Never had a foreigner before! This is preposterous!”

This is the typical example of “frog at the bottom of the well” thinking. Rather than berating about this – we should be thankful that this girl is here in Singapore – rather than in China or for the record – anywhere else in the world. This is the type of FT we SHOULD attract.

I respect and accept foreigners who are better than me – ‘cos their presence here will indirectly up the playing field – life may not be easy – but i will definitely benefit in the wider global picture.

I would rather struggle amongst the best, than thrive among the weak – such is the correct mentality for progress and success both for the nation and its individuals (perfect models emulated in global metropolitan cities – NY, London, etc….).

For the record – I’m a true-blue Singaporean and I’m not alone in such a viewpoint.

fair and square on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:29 pm 

WELL I SAY CONGRATULATIONS MS QIU.
NEXT,YOU ARE GOING TO A TOP SCHOOL,GOOD!MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT THAT WOULD BE LESS ONE TRUE BLUE SINGAPOREAN PUPIL GOING TO RGS…SO ARE YOU AND YOUR PARENTS BE STAYING ON TO CONTRIBUTE TO SINGAPORE AS IS THE EXPECTATIONS OF MY MINISTERS?
I AM NOT TRYING TO BE SARCASTIC,JUST CONCERNED AS A GOOD CITIZEN OUGHT TO BE?
ALL THE BEST TO YOU AND HOPE TO SEE YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THE BETTERMENT OF MY FELLOW SINGAPOREANS IN A FEW YEARS TIME.
IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO GO BACK TO YOUR MOTHERLAND TO PARTAKE IN HER PROSPERITY AFTER RECEIVING SOME KIND OF SINGAPORE SCHOLARSHIP PERHAPS,I CANNOT BLAME YOU AS YOU ARE NOT TO BE BLAMED IN THE FIRST PLACE…THAT BALME SHOULD FALL ON THE SHOULDERS OF MY HIGHLY PAID CAN-DO-WRONG MINISTERS!

wat? on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:42 pm 

congrats to the kid. i agree. why must TR politicize everything. ITS ONLY PSLE. since when is that an indicator of anything.

Demise of PAP is Near on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:52 pm 

Now PRC Chinese tops PSLE. I think they also are among the tops in ‘O’ and ‘A’ levels. Soon they will be top scholars. Then they will become Multi-Millionaire PAP Ministers.

THEN THEY WILL TAKE OVER SINGAPORE!

Well done, PAP. You are going to get rid of yourself. Your demise is near, very near.

Singaporeans cannot topple PAP, but the foreigners will do it on our behalf, no doubt.

Chinaman on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:54 pm 

She’s just a 13-year-old girl who has done well in her exams. I don’t understand the Singaporean mentality. You feel this only because she’s not from here, she may not stay here. She hasn’t done anything wrong. Her parents are working here as researchers. She came with her parents and studies in neighborhood schools. Why are foreigners studying well so fearful for Singaporeans? Why do you have to win everything?
If you are afraid of your government, why do you always blame foreigners for your own weakness? Just because we are not from here, we have to do worse than you? Just because most of us are not used to use English, you can blame us on English websites?
If you want to horrify the foreigners away, then you have succeed to some extent, and your will not be much happier when we left.
Some kiasu Singaporeans, please think why should such a girl suffer because she studies well?

nicely done on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 11:20 pm 

wah. RESPECK AS FUCK! 290 is a sick score ah. means she got 97.5% for all her subjects eh. even english and science. holllyyyy shit.

give the little girl a break la. singaporean or not. 290 is farkinng good score.

Wa on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 11:30 pm 

Are these foreign students are much older than local students in general? So they have more competitive advantage even in sports.

We should match the same students’ ability from the same age group. Foreign students are disadvantage when they first came and age advantage will become very clear as they proceed to the senior stage of schooling?

Can we ensure a level of playing field in terms of age?

For example: Match the age with the level of primary class, and even allow them to retain in the level/year twice or more until their standards have improved.

Do you notice that many primary school trophies taken by them?

wa on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 11:34 pm 

Do you see?

Are these foreign students are much older than local students in general? So they have more competitive advantage even in sports.

We should match the same students’ ability from the same age group. Foreign students are disadvantage when they first came and age advantage will become very clear as they proceed to the senior stage of schooling?

Can we ensure a level of playing field?

For example: Match the age with the level of primary class, and even allow them to retain in the level year twice or more until their standards have improved.

I won’t be surprised that they will take many primary school trophies away.

wa on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 11:57 pm 

Singapore. Do you see?

These foreign students are much older than local students in general. Are they? So they have more competitive advantage even in sports.

We should match the same students’ ability from the same age group. Foreign students are disadvantage when they first came and age advantage will become very clear as they proceed to the senior stage of schooling?

Can we ensure a level of playing field in terms of age?

For example: Match the age with the level of primary class, and even allow them to retain in the level year twice or more until their standards have improved.

I won’t be surprised that they will take many primary school trophies away.

If they are really good they may score well in secondary schools. But we can ensure a level of playing field in primary schools.

No Stone Unturned on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:09 am 

Yes that’s right. If that girl managed to score 290 she is damn good and we must congratulate her because it takes a lot of efforts and brains to do it. It doesn’t matter whether she is PRC or Singaporean – an achievement is an achievement whichever way you look at it.

We must not be sour grapes, even though we disagree with our government’s policy of allowing unrestrained influx of PRC people. If PRC residents perform better than us we have only ourselves to blame. But if there are more and more PRC residents are competing with us then we can rightly blame the government for changing the playing field.

John Potus on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:45 am 

Time for Change, you are right. While nobody is berating the girl, this is just the indication that Singaporeans are slowing losing out.

This is similar to the case of China PR Zhang Yuanyuan who publicly humiliated Singapore. It is not about China PRs but about government policy flooding this tiny island with foreigners.

Boy, I can see the internet brigade out in force tonite.

John Potus on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:47 am 

Tony Pang on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:04 pm

Please don’t be so myopic. What are the chances that she will stay. Do you have statistics to prove that the majority of PRs become citizens.

If not, than this is just a waste of taxpayers money.

John Potus on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:55 am 

Chinaman on Thu, 26th Nov 2009 10:54 pm

If you want to horrify the foreigners away, then you have succeed to some extent, and your will not be much happier when we left.
Some kiasu Singaporeans, please think why should such a girl suffer because she studies well?
=============================================================

Where in the earlier posts did you see someone criticise the young girl? We are unhappy with government policy of flooding this tiny rock with foreigners without thinking of the consequences.

As you can see for yourself, Singaporeans are not a happy bunch and you leaving Singapore for China will not change that. However, if you took your 1 million countrymen back, it might bring a big smile to our faces.

Just today I saw a Chinawoman cut the queue ahead of a young Singaporean girl. The Chinawoman was clueless that the young girl was already waiting in line to use the ATM. I have experienced it and so have many of my friend. People like you just grab everything without a thought for others.

Goodbye. I can’t say its been nice having your here.

VOTEWISE on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:56 am 

Well,one of the reason or “cover-up” is that PRCs are cheaper
faster better,right?
so no worries lah ,fellow singaporeans;in a few years’ time,maybe we can kick out the expensive SINGAPOREAN CIVIL SERVANTS AND MINISTERS and replace them log stock and barrel
with these cheaper faster better “prc” scholars!!!!
maybe,not too bad lah?
but first,better don’t “corrupt” them at a tender age with that
“merito-crazY” or else they will turn greedy and selfish rather
quickly..then,we all locals “semua mati”(all die)faster…they will send us to become farmers in CHINA if we choose not to “clean their tables” at hawker centres?!!!!
walau!folks,this is so scary!
maybe better faster “chabok” to MALACCA?

rc on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:56 am 

@simon templar

where did you hear that foreign students get allowances for their studies here in Singapore? i think not likely. unless it’s one of those ASEAN scholarships thing. then that’s different. that’s a scholarship. the ostensible aim for that is really to invest in building good relationship with our neighbours in ASEAN.

@fair and square

good point that the girl might not eventually stay in Singapore. but then that would just make her similar to some of the bright local born Singaporeans who go overseas to study and eventually migrate. at the very least, her parents are currently here contributing.

and while she is here, because she is brilliant and going to a RGS, where the girls there are likely to be HIGHLY competitive and driven, she will most probably spur her peers to do even better than if she wasn’t around, thereby raising the quality of everyone.

@Wa

er… this girl’s only 13, i.e. about one year older than Singaporean kids who take PSLE. and depending on when her birthday is, the age gap between her and the local born Singaporeans might actually be narrower than a local born Singaporean born in January and another who’s born in December. by your logic, someone born in January is unfairly advantaged compared to someone born in December.

and even if we adjust for her age, 290 is still damn fwah la. i mean… i’m 29 right, so many many years older than the PSLE age. but if you ask me to take the PSLE, i don’t think i can score 290. and i dare say that that is the case for most adults too!

it is quite disappointing that TR used this as a trigger to launch into a critic of Singapore’s immigration policies. if anything, we should celebrate the fact that this very bright young lady is in Singapore and we have a chance to make her stay and contribute to our nation. do we want to be so xenophobic and drive away someone who’s as smart as she is such that she ends up contributing to our competitors? i mean, if we want to criticize the not so bright ones (i.e. those who score below average), or those who come to Singapore and create social problems, take away low income jobs which could have gone to Singaporeans, ok, fine. at least there is still some grounds for those types of criticisms. BUT THIS?!

perhaps rather than criticizing, let’s think of ways of making her, and bright children, regardless of whether they are born in Singapore or elsewhere, make Singapore their homes, contribute to building our nation and thereby make ALL of our lives better.

reader on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 1:15 am 

The case of Qiu Biqing is a classic example of our immigration policy done RIGHT.

These are the real talents that Singapore must seek to retain, not those a dime a dozen “talents” that come to compete with our lower income workers and fresh grads.

The fact that she has been in Singapore since young, and has had a long time to merge into our culture is an important bonus.

Ultimately she may seek greener pastures elsewhere yes, but so might locals. At the very least, she has the potential ability to really contribute to Singapore, and has no problems merging into our culture.

I’d much rather we take our chances with her, than to continue mass-importing workers who are no different from the average local in terms of capability.

Time for Change on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 1:58 am 

It is normal for foreigners to migrate to Singapore and for Singaporeans to emigrate to the west.

But it becomes totally insane, when you our leaders open their legs wide to bring in 1/2 a million as PRs, put them ahead of Singaporeans without any of the responsibilites, only for them to pack up and leave after they have made their money.

Only a fool would believe that any of these PRs would want to become a citizen. Young Singaporeans couples are no longer able to afford a HDB flat. Young PR couples would also find it difficult to buy a HDB flat. For $360,000 you can only get a 4 room HDB flat in Singapore while in China or Philippines, it could probably get you a 10 room Mansion with an estate the size of Ang Mo Kio township.

If the majority of PRs who came to Singapore took up citizenship, that would be no problem for Singaporeans. The MIW could easily publish the figures and end this contentious debate over the loyalty of the PRs now. But the fact is, just like Sweta Agarwal, Eric Brooks, Sam Ahmed and Zhang Yuanyuan, Prs are here to suck us dry and leave. Even SM GCT said it is right for PRs to proclaim their loyalty to their home country.

We have seen the internet brigade try to hijack this issue about PRs flooding this tiny island by focusing on one individual. But this debate is not about 1 person, it is about 2 million foreigners, yes, 2 million foreigners flooding into this rock outcrop and taking our jobs and pushing the prices of HDB flats beyond the reach of ordinary Singaporeans.

Time for Change on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 2:04 am 

rc on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:56 am

“perhaps rather than criticizing, let’s think of ways of making her, and bright children, regardless of whether they are born in Singapore or elsewhere, make Singapore their homes, contribute to building our nation and thereby make ALL of our lives better.”

You must be one of the newer members of the internet brigade. You are much more eloquent that the others who preceded you.

But it would be wise of you to remember the words of Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the US:

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

fair and square on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 2:08 am 

your point is well taken.
however,i cannot but empahasise our country’s resoource limitations.Of course,one pupil less do not make a significant
difference but if more and more of such take advantage of our
system,they might gradually reduce the chances of more of our very own local pupils of attending the few top secondary insitutions from which,contradictorily,our GAHMEN and SOCIETY
draw talents.
i must-as i said earlier in my blog-that i would not blame
pupils like Ms Qiu for wanting to return to her Motherland
if she thinks so could determine better opportunities for herself there after her “taxpayer’-sponsored education here but
if such smart students/scholars then later choose to put down
Singapore,the Gahmen should bear responsibilities and stop harping about lack of local talents.
just a note b4 i go:which ‘MOTHER’land do not favor her own children whom they hope to rely on some day,perhaps?
you tell me…

Time for Change on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 2:15 am 

You know what John. We know how important education is for Singaporeans. It is a subject close to their hearts. When the internet brigade found out that TR was putting this topic up for discussion, they must have panicked.

Many parents would be terrified at the thought of their children losing out to the children of rich and wealthy PRs. Afterall, their children would be denied places in good secondary schools, JCs and even a place in University by this foreigners, only for them to pack up after they have graduated.

If there wasn’t so many foreigners, their children would get a University education, but since there are so many foreigners here, they could be denied a place in one of the university here. John, don’t forget that more foreigners are brought in from overseas to deny places for locals. And the worse things is the foreigners, both here and those brought in from overseas, usually leave Singapore after they graduate and have worked here for a few years.

It is no wonder that the internet brigade are out in force.

KNN on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 4:50 am 

I don’t mind a talent like her to be in Singapore. What we should mind are those who brought in by the government just to jack up the GDP figure to make the PM look good!!!

xueni on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 6:13 am 

@rc,
Wa has a point. She is one year older then local students.

Please don’t justify it by comparing her to yourself which could not do well in PSLE.

Compare her with a local talented child who is able to achieve much better results if taking the PSLE exam one year more mature. Mind you, at this developing age, one year makes A LOT of differences.

Furthermore, having great number of these “overage” students from prc will stress our primary education system, causing the poor local students think they are not good enough, when in fact they’re just younger.

Nothing against the prc students, but how to level the playing field so that the locals are not unfairly disadvantaged. The government, who set the rules, cannot ignore this, else you cannot blame this matter inevitably being politicized.

Citizen on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 6:40 am 

Her dad and mum are both highly educated persons, so her good results comes as no surprise.

Sad on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 7:22 am 

Tony Pang: I respect and accept foreigners who are better than me – ‘cos their presence here will indirectly up the playing field – life may not be easy – but i will definitely benefit in the wider global picture.
Well, Well, .. Tony. Question is the playing field level? We all are true blue Sg. For eg. Is she a PR or Citizens? Is she here on scholarship. Looking at the reply in TR, I see more objection than support base on your argument. We all respect and accept foreigners. I have stayed in Australia for a period of time. Most foreign students are there on their own expenses. So, if they do well.. nobody will doubt their ability. Another question is not you who accept them. Are the majority and your own children who will accept them? I have a scholar nephew who is already worry about having to be working under this foreigners in the future.

XIIIblackcat on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 9:59 am 

On second thought… It is definitely better to have a high scoring foreigner than a low faring one.

This bet some questions,

-What will happened if a foreigner under performed? (Especially on government sponsored bond?)

-What if our locals completely lose out to this foreigners? Will our government help us or push us aside?

rc on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 12:47 pm 

@Xueni:

if you get the entire cohort of Sec One students to take this year’s PSLE, do you think any of them can score 290? probably not a lot. and if you want to talk about developmental psychology, girls apparently mature faster than boys at the primary school age. therefore girls clearly have an unfair advantage. so why don’t we put them on different scales for PSLE?

i have no doubt that if this young lady takes a General Ability Test that is normed for age, she will nevertheless come out as one of the top, if not the top.

@Time for Change:
yes, i know of the words of Abe Lincoln. what exactly is your point? that what i’m saying is out to fool people? that there is no veracity in my opinions? but the same words apply to what you say, what TR says, what everyone says. so. same to you: You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

and regarding your point: “Only a fool would believe that any of these PRs would want to become a citizen.” in case you didn’t realise, about 20,000 PRs took up Singaporean Citizenship last year. i personally know two with good professional careers (i.e. paying taxes) and are very active citizens (i.e. volunteering their time with VWOs).

it is true that this young lady might not take up Singaporean Citizenship. especially not with all these xenophobia going around.

“Afterall, their children would be denied places in good secondary schools, JCs and even a place in University by this foreigners, only for them to pack up after they have

“their children” can easily be referring to children of well to do local Singaporeans. and you see this. local born Singaporean children of those with high income, do well in exams, take up places in top schools, “deny” places for those from lower income and then they eventually pack up and go.

so the question is not about local born or not. the issue should be about how Singapore can retain talent, regardless of nationality, race, income level.

“when you our leaders open their legs wide to bring in 1/2 a million as PRs, put them ahead of Singaporeans without any of the responsibilites”

what do you mean that PRs are put ahead of Singaporeans? what are the privileges given to PRs which are not given to Singaporeans? true, PRs do not have some of the responsibilities of Singaporeans… actually the only one I can think of is NS for males. but they pay taxes, they abide by our laws, so what other responsibilities that Singaporeans have that PRs don’t?

they should publish a comparison of the privileges and responsibilities of Singaporeans vs PRs. then we can all, at a glance, see whether PRs are indeed put ahead of Singaporeans though even without this ‘at a glance’ comparison, i’m certain that the government in now way gives PRs more than SCs. that said, i do hope that the government slants more privileges in favour of Singaporeans and provides sharper differentiation between Singaporeans and PRs. perhaps

@Sad:
i think we need to realise that because of globalisation, the playing field is not restricted to the borders of Singapore. the arena that we are competing in is the entire world. if this young lady is in another country, our children will still be competing against her.

rather than insulate and mollycoddle our children, rather than be so insecure about ourselves that the only way we can appear to excel is by barring all those who are possibly better than us. rather, let’s pit ourselves against the best of the world so that we may all improve. and if this young lady and other bright PRs and foreigners eventually stay and make Singapore her home (as did 20,000 other PRs this year did), then all the better for us (come on, you can’t deny this, right? would you rather have these people be in another country, playing for another team, earning for another nation or having these people be on our side, bringing in money for us?)

RYAN on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 1:20 pm 

WOW!!!!! SINGAPOREANs GOT OWN by FOreigner…LOL! HAHAHAHA
What The Heck????/!!!!!!!!!

xueni on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 1:43 pm 

@rc,
>>if you get the entire cohort of Sec One students to take this year’s PSLE, do you think any of them can score 290? probably not a lot.

So you agreed that given one more year to mature at 13 years, some local will be able to score 290 at PSLE.

>>i have no doubt that if this young lady takes a General Ability Test that is normed for age, she will nevertheless come out as one of the top, if not the top.

yeah, i’ve no doubt too, but then go and compete with students of her age! If she is one of the top, then why compete with students one year her minor?!??

rc on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 2:06 pm 

@Xueni:
i do agree that an extra year could perhaps put her at an advantage. but do you know if a Singaporean child leaves the country for whatever reasons and returns to Singapore and realises that he/she is better off being in a lower level, he/she can be allowed to be in a level that is FOUR years below his/her actual age. of course, this is not encouraged, but i do know of some locally born Singaporeans who are two or even three years overaged for their level.

and then we hear of stories of how some top JC students came from the Normal Acad stream (i.e. one year older than most A-level students) and we celebrate their achievements, even though they are one year older. the ‘unfair’ treatment arises because most of these Normal Acad students who are featured are Singaporeans! if they were not, i’m sure netizens won’t be so kind to them.

wwm on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 2:50 pm 

Sillyporeans! Why the hell do we need to politicise even PSLE?? They’re just kids, for christ sake! All the foreigner bashing is becoming out of hand!

ta on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 3:46 pm 

Actually, we are left with NO CHOICE but to politicize this because the PAP has politicized every single aspect of life in Singapore with its deep seated presence and policies.

VOTEWISE on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 3:50 pm 

any minister’s or top civil servant’s smart kid in this cohort?
how they fared,huh?
if there are,so no need to fret for the rest of the common parents,lah!

benbak on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 3:53 pm 

walau small girl also want to bully.

Elementary My Dear Watson on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 4:12 pm 

votewise

All the ministers’ kids are studying abroad. You think they gonna let their children be guinea pigs to the education system they created ?

ffff on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 4:24 pm 

no the girl is not being bullied. this incident is just a glimpse of the insidious nature and eventual plan of the PAP.

its Singaporeans who are being bullied.

Lucas on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 4:58 pm 

Elementary My Dear Watson on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 4:12 pm -

Half truth again . . . .

Except for one or two or manybe none, they all studied in Singapore for the kindergarten, primary and secondary education.

Except for the scholars & fathers’ scholars (Lee Wei Ling studied Medicine in Singapore), they also studied at local universities.

Check your “facts” please. LOL.

Bambi on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 5:01 pm 

Wah . . small innocent girl also want to whack.

TR has run of bullets.

Everything is politics now.

Next farting aloud also will be politicised.

Wat a joke!

Singa on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 10:10 pm 

Singaporeans who study in UK or US universities usually come up as TOP students. They eventually take up high posts in MNC and leave Singapore.

Many Poly students who are labeled as ‘poor’ students by this system, make up a high proportion of top scholars in US/UK universities.

Singapore is bleeding out the local talents and take in 3rd world individuals and give them the best benefits on this earth.

Those who think that this girl will contribute to Singapore eventually are plain STUPID and NAIVE. Their family will disappear to US or China in a few years time. They will say THANK YOU STUPID SINGAPOREANS. Ni Men Dou Shi Kai Zhi!!

In the past ten years, thousands of Chinese PRC has used Singapore has a stepping stone. It will continue to happen. Those who do not wake up, you will end up as 3rd world when China is fully developed. Woe to you and your children.

Time for Change on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 11:23 pm 

Bambi on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 5:01 pm

Denying university places to Singaporeans is no laughing matter. As it is, about 60% of university places are set aside for foreigners come from overseas. The remaining 40% of places go to locals. If Singaporeans have to compete with foreigners who are here, then less than 4 in 10 places will go to Singaporeans.

As many of the PR students are from households with one or both parents are professionals, they understandly have more resources than ordinary Singaporeans, in providing for their children’s education. In Ms Qiu case, both her parents are academics.

This could possibly mean that only 1 or 2 out of 10 or the university places available each year will go to Singaporeans. Now that is very sad.

Most of these foreigners will leave Singapore for home or to greener pastures in the west. They would therefore have denied a university education to thousands of Singaporean students who would otherwise have gone to university. Now how does that benefit Singapore.

Sure 20,000 PRs took up citizenship, but how many rejected it and gone home. 100,000? 120.000?

And it is a well known fact that for many PR couples where both spouses work, the wife will take up citizenship, while the husband remains a PR, to extract maximum benefits as they can.

As I said, release the figures of PRs who took up citizenship and how many of those were cases where only one spouse took up citizenship. Let us scrutinize the numbers.

Time for Change on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 11:29 pm 

More and more Singaporean children are coming from homes where one or both parents have lost their jobs to foreigners.

Nov 27, 2009
More children need aid
By Ang Yiying

THERE are more needy children supported by The Straits Times School Pocket Money Fund than ever before.

In the first nine months of this year, a record 11,642 students received financial assistance – the highest since the Fund started in 2000.

The 11,642 total surpasses the previous high of 10,419 during the 2003 Sars-hit year.

Despite reports of an improving economy, the numbers show that many needy families are still reeling from the recession.

Social workers said many affected by the recession are low-skilled workers who find it harder to get jobs. Positive effects of an economic recovery will also take longer to trickle down to them.

National Council of Social Service Deputy CEO Tina Hung said: ‘When the economy goes south, the group that we help as a social service agency tends to feel it the most. Even as you lift the economy, the group takes longer to recover.’

The Straits Times.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_459916.html

Compete with PR children where both parents are professionals. They haven’t got a chance.

Time for Change. Think about your childrens’ future before all the university places go to foreigners.

Protoss on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 1:01 am 

top score will happen la.
there are so many china-born people in singapore studying in our schools.
many already top their university faculties.
by numbers alone, they are significant. so being top of psle is no surprise.

tots on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 1:59 am 

Its very obvious its the same person using different nicks to keep saying that Temasek Review is ‘bullying a little girl’, in hopes of diverting attention from the REAL PROBLEM.

We are the BOSS on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 4:31 am 

I’m so ashame of being a Singaporean now…. looking at some of the comments listed, we are nothing but a selfish bunch. I have been here in China for the past 16 years, I have never get discriminate even though most of the Chinese are better off than any of us. Our ancestors were all immigrants once…
I consider myself as an immigrant in China too (not just me, but there are thousands of us). We leave our homeland mainly due to our government has taken most of our opportunities and freedom… most important, our life. Just ask around, I believe you can easily get someone around you, who have experience living in other countries, tell you a better life they have in oversea. If there is anything to blame, blame it on our elite government, who has made you so kiasu…. because you can not affort to loss.

fpc on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 6:38 am 

I won’t be worried.

How many of these top scorer in PSLE made it big and contribute to the world?

NONE

Time for Change on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 8:26 am 

S’pore loses 1,000 top talents yearly: MM Lee

Clarissa Oon
Wed, Feb 13, 2008
The Straits Times

SINGAPORE is losing about 1,000 of its best and brightest every year and the numbers are growing, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has said, sounding the alarm on the severity of the brain drain.

And the main magnet for these talents is not regional powerhouse China, but the United States and other developed English-speaking countries, he told the United Press International news agency in an interview earlier this month.

Citing figures of Singaporeans who gave up their citizenship and took out their savings and CPF funds, he said this meant ‘losing about, at the top end, 1,000 a year, which is about – if you take the top 30 per cent of the population – about four or five per cent’.

Mr Lee believes this exodus could only grow because ‘every year, there are more people going abroad for their first or second degree’.

Some of these Singaporean talents head for China, but return eventually because, at the end of the day, they do not want to compete with the Chinese, he said.

‘You go to China, you’re going to compete against 1,300 million very bright fellows, hardworking, starving. Do you stand a chance to be on top of that pole? No.’

‘But if you go there as a Singaporean with a different base, speaking English which they can’t, with connections to the world, then you’ve got a different platform.’

In comparison, the pull of US is difficult to reverse, he said, noting that American firms recruited bright Singaporean students straight out of universities there.

After acclimatising to life and work in the US, ‘if they decide to take the Green Card and settle in America, then I think we’ve lost them’, said Mr Lee.

Singaporeans who do not want the stiff competition in the US go to Australia and Canada, he added.

The brain drain has been a regular issue addressed by MM Lee, who has repeatedly said that this is Singapore’s Achilles heel.

To stem this loss of talent, Singapore has wooed many top professionals from China and India here, he said.

The draw for the Chinese is that their children can learn both English and Chinese, while the Indians like Singapore because it is close to home, yet a step up in terms of First World infrastructure.

‘The trouble is many of the Chinese then use us as a stepping stone to go to America, where the grass is greener.’

‘But even if we only keep 30 to 40 per cent and lose 60 to 70 per cent, we’re a net gainer,’ he said. He said, however, that the Chinese would cease to come in 20 to 30 years’ time, when China’s living standards rise to match Singapore’s.

MM Lee aknowledges that PRs will not stay in Singapore. Who is so foolish to believe that PR will become citizens.

xueni on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 11:34 am 

@rc on 27th Nov 2:06 pm

Here we are talking about primary level, when a difference of one year makes a great difference in the development of mental and physical maturity. The example you cited with Normal Acad students doing well in A level is not relevant, because when students is taking A levels at a usual age of 18 years, there is little difference between a 18 year-old or a 19 year-old.

If a foreign students had to start at a lower level in our primary schools on the ground of English proficiency, should he or she be promoted back to the higher level after say, one year of intensive English learning? Just a suggestion.

If it is the government who promote bringing in such foreign students in numbers into our primary school system, then the government has the responsibility to devise policies wisely that level the playing field, and not conveniently at the expense of the local students.

raxip on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 1:46 pm 

at the expense of local students?

what i can see is that local true blue singaporean kids are most interested in their yo-yos and toys than their studies.

granted, she’s 1 year older than the rest of the cohort but hey she couldn’t even speak english 3 years ago. how did she make up for that shortfall? not through govt subsidies, not through govt offers, not through the ‘integration fund’ but through sheer hard work.

opening the floodgates to foreign non-talents is an issue worthy of discussion and ridicule but to me, politicising this issue smacks of non-sequitur. so what if she will pack her bags and leave for other countries after university? don’t our local students aspire to do that too?

when pointing the finger at others, please take a look at ourselves through the mirror. to attribute her achievements as a result of lax immigration policy is a travesty to her willingness to put in the hard work and effort and those are something which i don’t see in quite a number of local children.

Ban G. Lac O w on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 10:42 pm 

Everyone who is a keyboard warrior please.

Oh please.

Look in the mirror and just promise that person you would dare repeat what you said in reality. Not just huddling over your keyboard.

Everyone who is a keyboard warrior please.

Oh Please.

Read Outliers and understand that success is more of environment than anything else. Read up on statistics and understand the law of large numbers. Of the odds that are stacked against us.

Of the odds of Singapore vs World.

Everyone who is a Singaporean please.

Oh Please.

Really

cognitive dissonance on Sat, 28th Nov 2009 11:14 pm 

All the “debates” above missed the pertinent points.

Qiu Biqing’s nationality is NOT a relevant issue but, as usual and most unfortunately, dramatised in MSM with barely concealed agenda of wonder diet of “foreign talent” media beat up. Given age differential,talent no doubt, drive for achievement and her parental background in the academia, her excel in scholastic achievement is no surprise.

The pain in the arse of course, is the subtle “lack” of level playing field. Someone of native origin equal competitive edge a year older than Qiu Biqing might pipped her at the post in the race for top student and MSM would not have even mentioned that this girl is a Singaporean instead of a foreign-born talented child.

The same lack of level playing field annoys parents who wanted their kids to take top honour in the national arena. Which parent does not for his or her talented child? And this lack of level playing field is translated into wider society in later years of University entry, competition there, scholarships and the rest of its in jobs and career on strength of career track demonstrated.

The loose talk of xenophobic tendency among native critics holding dissenting views in this thread is emotional crab of no credibility. Everything that is foreign is talent even if it is mediocre of some of these imports – this comment obviously exclude the example of Qiu Biqing. The queer of idiotic generalisation of the word talent to associate with just ANY foreigners in officialdom and MSM is provoking a citizenry backlash – not that the backlash is necessarily xenophobic.

Australia, Canada, USA etc all has migrants BUT THEY DON’T DRAMATISE AND PARADE MIGRANTS AS FOREIGN TALENTS TO PUT-DOWN LOCALS AS INCOMPETENTLY OF ECONOMIC SURVIVABILITY TO THE POINT OF CONSTANT REMINDERS THAT NATIVES ARE INHERENTLY BORN STUPID. Quality migration as its benefits but in Singapore the lack of quality in migration has concealment and stardom of media and politician’s worship – a kind of loathing of “lesser mortals” in our society sometimes bordering on impression of innate stupidity on global parade for foreigners to laugh and humiliate us like ZYY.

Without dramatising an outlier example of true foreign talent ( in Qui Biqing) in concealment of quality migration neglect, how else could the Government package a liberal immigration policy to the electorate as good public policy?? It is manipulation of deception in propaganda!

All said, if Qiu Biqing progressed to be a top researcher or academic like her father, well and good for her career and achievements. But the reality remains is that at her youthful age, scoring the top honour in national PLSE may NOT be her advantage as well. There are far more things to learn in creativity from “play” than “study”. She ould be in her life the most successful and creative inventor in her field if her focus now is learning more from play school and hard slog academic grade achievements.

In Western society, primary education is mainly play school, and I believe that the learning there account for the fact that much of the world’s invention from from Western societies – despite 5,000 years of history of eastern culture nor Egyptian nor Iraqi Mesopotamia.

This is something NOT thought out in our school system. I don’t believe that international schools here catering to top expatriate community have even the slightest remote interest in following our Singapore school curriculum of hard drilling of academic score at the early age at all. We simply assumed that we got the best primary and secondary education but I doubt many foreign top CEOs here see it in similar light.

fpc on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 4:58 am 

//Time for Change

Why does LKY’s opinion matter?

He is going away in another 5 more years (max) ?

Ok, maybe 10.

Does it matter?

He couldn’t even get the language policy right.

Lim Xue Ning on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 2:42 pm 

How much do Greenridge Primary GET?

laoma on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 3:17 pm 

@cognitive dissonance:

I am interested in this topic because I try to understand how native Singaporeans think of Biqing’s results. Your contribution is long. But it is such a pain to read. Quite a few things to improve, particularly your English. Regards.

cognitive dissonance on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 4:29 pm 

@laoma on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 3:17 pm

Other than my English, you run out of ideas to contribute?

If you prefer I can write in another language for you only – very colourful of expression.

It is short..like DPJF, are you ready to receive?

MeeSiam on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 5:41 pm 

Please spare this little girl !!! She is definitely a talent to be able to learn English at first language level in such a short period !!! Her learning attitude should be learn by those with English speaking family background for complaining about learning Chinese at only second language level !!!!

rc on Sun, 29th Nov 2009 6:59 pm 

@Time for Change:

“As it is, about 60% of university places are set aside for foreigners come from overseas. The remaining 40% of places go to locals. If Singaporeans have to compete with foreigners who are here, then less than 4 in 10 places will go to Singaporeans.”

where did you get this from? are you sure that 60%of uni places are set aside for foreigners? last i checked, only about 20% of all places go to foreigners. of course, some courses might have slightly more foreigners, but i think it’s unlikely to find any course with 60% of foreigners.

jiangbao on Mon, 30th Nov 2009 9:25 am 

Actually she is 13, seems older than PSLE students at 12, so that makes her more mature and a girl usually matures faster than boys. By going to Raffles, she has an express road to A levels, so at the end of the day, she will get her A levels or what not the same time as our singaporean children except she already has a huge advantage by topping the PSLE. Its a fact, results are everything, going into RGS will ensure that you continue to maintain that level.

whats worse that the PSLE is going to be even harder, imagine achieving 290 when the papers are saying that Maths are already very hard.

anon on Mon, 30th Nov 2009 10:24 am 

“of course, some courses might have slightly more foreigners, but i think it’s unlikely to find any course with 60% of foreigners.”

please take a trip to nus.

Mellette on Mon, 30th Nov 2009 11:46 pm 

Why are some of you (parents) so negative when a foreigner (particularly a child)does well in our education systems?? Why do some said we are being suckers?? Dont forget most of us here speaking here today have our forebears coming from a foreign land. We were given the aportunity just like we are giving the same (nearly)apportunity to these immigrants. None of us parents will improve our chidren’s ability by complaining. Afraid to lost out in the competition??..lets face it the number of foreigners in our school system is still very very low..simply spend more time with your child if you really care, everything will be fine.

zaq on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 6:44 am 

These are signs of things to come. Like it or not, it’s happening in every developed countries. Foreigners going into their countries and fighting for their jobs, their place to live and their rights as citizens.

This is what globalisation and capitalism does to every country in the world. Influx of migration and every government competing for more people to reside in their country, so that the CPI looks better (to attract investors), more people will pay tax so that there’is money to sustain the running of the country and pay salary to the politicians.

It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee people. You can complain till the cow comes home or pull up your socks and start learning how to work with these new neighbours, they might become your boss one day.

At the end of the day, everyone in the world is marginalised by capitalism (& greed). Even US is not spared.

laoma on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 8:40 am 

@cognitive dissonance: I went thru your post again very carefully. Now I got your points (2 of them):

* do not dramatize Biqing’s honour; all foreigners are not talents
* current Singapore education system is far to be adequate

I fully agree with you on the above points, especially the last one. I have 2 kids in primary school. Both are doing “well”, or even quite well. But I know that comes with a price, a high price: they are much less exposed to the outside world and other knowledge as it ought to be. Even mentally I see some development I’d qualify as “abnormal” because of the exam system. Sometime I cry inside for them, poor kids. This is not the kind of childhood I’d like to give them. But once settled down (I am from PRC and now citizen), we have no choice but to adapt ourselves to the society and the systems.

As to English, I did not mean to offend or give a lesson. There’s no doubt that you express yourself well in it and much much better than I do. Yet I do see a lot of grammatical errors. This is also common to many other locals. I only feel a bit sad that people make basic errors after so many years of study.

A side comment on ‘reform’ of Chinese teaching under discussion. I simply find it ridiculous. Are there any other kids coming from foreign countries asking that English should be taught this or that way to “suit” them? No, not to my knowledge. My kids who came back to S’pore 1 and 1/2 years ago from Europe (non English speaking) had only to work hard to catch up more than 2 years delay, in English, in Chinese, in Science, etc.

Regards to all.

Dettol your brain please on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 9:14 am 

zaq on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 6:44 am

That is NOT an intelligent comment you offered.

You seen Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, Norwegians,Luxembourg, Ireland, imported foreign populations like Singapore? There are very successful economies and some with small population. Do you see Australian take in immigrants that would fill the rubbish bins – they already have enough from food waste every day!

If we took the quality like Australia and America did, I am sure we get somewhere very high up on competitive map of SECURED FUTURE.

But can we attract the brightest talented innovative minds WHOM WE ARE DETERMINED TO IMPRISONED OF THOUGHTS WORSE THAN THE REGIME IN COMMUNIST CHINA.

Who is going to be invited into your mind prison?, Zaq??

Since we can’t why not open the floodgates to attract loads and loads of prostitutes from elsewhere to keep our two IRs glowing and reputable of tourism “hot spots”??

IS THAT YOUR FORMULAE of economic GDP and success, Zaq?

We might have netted in the talent of Qiu Biqing but can we retain this talent in the future with a view to imprison her talents and thoughts?

Are you sure we have the right climate to foster, germinate and cultivate real talent in this country?

http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/news/story/0,4574,361495,00.html?

My bet is that she is super smart enough to discover this place is NOT GOOD ENOUGH for her talent actualisation. Even more than 80% of local talent educated abroad will NOT come back according to Government sources.

Qiubiqing is NOT blind, fortunately.

If you were her, would you NOT MOVED ON????

fair and square on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 10:55 am 

at the end of it all,what’s the big deal about highly intelligent students like this PRC-even she happen to take up citizenship-if all they ultimatley become is just another
SMART(and shrewd) “talent”?
Come on people,what any country -or what this world- needs now are more people with wisdom,not mere intelligence.
Even the crooks who caused the recent financial crisis are mostly smart people who may have even topped their class from the IVY LEAGUE universaties.
We need talents who possess wisdom and compassion to contribute to the overall good of this wolrd.
We don’t need anymore talents who think nothing of “screwing”
up the livelihoods of common people…in fact,we need to get
rid of them as quickly as possible before they create another
disaster!

zaq on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 1:07 pm 

Dettol your brain please on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 9:14 am

Hi there, I merely shared my point of view. Of course you are entitled to yours too. Whether or not my comment was intelligent, that’s not important, because your reply is far more interesting than mine.

There are many immigrants migrating into those countries you’ve mentioned too. I guess the only difference is those countries are not trying to increase the population size by the millions in the next 10 to 20 years. Which is why the heat can be felt so evidently in such a small island like Singapore.

The fact is, Singapore government (just like any other govts) wants to increase the population size for sustainence reason. Therefore new immigrants will arrive whether you like it or not. The smart Chinese girl only (and wont be the last) indicates the ‘quality’ of the immigrants residing in Singapore. Whether she will move on is still unknown.

Why would anyone wants to move on if they established their future and fortune in where they live? There must be a reason.

Do you want to move on?

Zaq

jiangbao on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 2:04 pm 

I think the question is why do we want so many ppl in singapore? Can we ensure that everyone will have a job then? In time, machines will streamline jobs and manufacturing will leave Singapore, this is a fact. So what is everyone going to do then, work in the IR?

I think no other country as as obsessed as mine in increasing population from a communist country when for decades they have been combating our own communist and imprisoning them. Suddenly communist is good for us?

Dettol your brain please on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 3:05 pm 

zaq on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 1:07 pm

I speak with objectivity of reality even if robustly not to your taste perhaps.

Look at the “quality” of traffic flow. The brightest of Singaporeans and all foreigners, for that matter, flows from whatever sources, to Silicon Valley, Wall Street, London, Canada or Australia, and the “chicken shits” (with exceptions of course) flow the other way round or from other sources into Singapore.

Look at Zhang Yuan Yuan, she got her PR with only a diploma qualification studying here in a private school for a few years. Not any insignificant experience to add value to this country. This is toilet paper grade migration policy quality control here.

SHE IS SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW THIS PLACE ROT, not rock as some strange politicians would want you and me to believe.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Mr Wong Kan Seng said in Parliament on 23 November said that

…”Most did not intend to stay long term, but “a good many” are well-qualified, skilled personnel who decided to stay longer and applied for PR….”

http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20091123-181787.html

If most PR won’t stay and take up citizenship DESPITE THE BAITS OF BORDERING ON BRIBE-TAINTED INDUCEMENTS GIVEN TO THEM, it is telling of ABSOLUTE TERMS, what they think TRULY this red dot offering them of a great future – without the need to utter one disaparaging word of political risks to themselves.

The KEY word here of official ‘WISDOM’ disclosure is ‘MOST”, so, Zaq, are you betting your loose change from hawker centre food purchase, on Qui Biqing will stay and wasting her talent in this suffocating place of no possibility for full realisation of her potential?

http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/news/story/0,4574,361495,00.html?

If it is paradise, most PRs would kiss Pappies ar$e to stay on. And for your informed reminder (maybe already known to you) it is often published in MSM that 80% of the Singaporeans studying abroad in US, UK, Canada, Australia WILL NOT COME BACK.

And we are not counting those who came back and changed their mind to migrate back to countries where they studied before, well accustomed to their culture, society and opportunities.

IF THE QUALITY OF ZYY KNOWS HER FUTURE IS MUCH BETTER IN CHINA, OR ELSEWHERE, I WON’T HOLD ANY BREATHE THAT WHAT REMAINS BEHIND IS CLOSER TO THE DEGENERATED GRADES THAT WOULD FILL UP MY RUBBISH BIN with due respect to exceptions of course.

The economics of migration here is PERVERSE, AND SINGAPOREANS ARE TAKING ALL THE CONSEQUENCES. MANY ARE VERY UNHAPPY, RIGHTLY AND JUSTIFIABLY SO.

But is Singaporeans need so much trash in their rubbish bins?

This election will be telling of message, I HOPE!!!!!!!!!

cognitive dissonance on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 3:50 pm 

laoma on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 8:40 am

Thank you for your rejoin of this conversation. I am robust on ANY blog – be it ANYWHERE ON DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. No one spoke of my English, but some says am aggressive.

But, perhaps, with a little of sober modesty now, maybe you assumed too high of me.

How do you know if I passed my leaving kindergarten examination?

Your two primary kids are maybe brighter and more informed than me!!

As for Qiu Biqing, she is a real talent and a driver of success. I conceded that absolutely BUT I DISLIKE HOW THAT ACHIEVEMENT WAS SUBTLY AND CYNICALLY POLITICISED IT as if locals are innately incompetent of survival possibility and that includes your two kids when reality is that Qiu Biqing is OLDER. For the same age, and nearly competitive ability, your kid or another local born might have won the honour which Qiu Biqing successfully secured for herself. THE MEDIA BEAT UP WAS WAY OVERBLOWN. A subtle, sublimal message is sent to our citizenry that foreign talent ( Qiu Biqing is a shining BUT OUTLIER EXAMPLE) IS WHAT WE SINGAPORE NEEDS – a put down of local as “no talent” and therefore immigration of unlimited quantity is what Singaporeans MUST ACCEPT WITHOUT QUESTIONING.

It is BULLSHIT. You come from PRC. If you look at the quality of ZYY as a measurement yardstick of quality check, I say next to nothing is the quality in Singapore migration intake. THAT IS NOT INSULTING OF YOU AT ALL. I lived for years in China, there are outstanding genius among its young. I have a lot of respect – even grudgingly of them but we cannot just absorb just about any migrant of unlimited quantity and quality.

As for English expression, I know many youths in China write beautiful English – perfect grammer and DEFINITELY BETTER THAN ME even though they cannot speak fluently. I deals with foreigners a lot in my life experiences including those from PRC. Unlike you writing English in a Singapore blog like TR, my spoken Mandarin in PRC would make your PRC kid giggling, maybe even puke if wrong word was spoken. But they still understand by and large.

As for teaching of Mandarin with English, I basically thinks it is a little absurb. I see PRC speak English from Chinese translation of words – I understand but my foreigner friends from Western culture often befuddled. Likewise, I speak Mandarin from English translation, your PRC kids laughing. Good example of hot food, I say “hern sao” ( very fiery) , the correct expression is ” hern thang” (burning sensation). When you teach Chinese using English, you might get this outcome. And Singaporeans learning Mandarin this way wants to do business in China in their adult life?? A bit funny, don’t you think??

Singapore relied on rote learning, maximising acquisition of knowledge but NOT creative and innovative thinking and development. I noticed that inventions came from West, very little from PRC, or Singapore of earth-shattering proportions. We got very little NOBEL prize for achievement even though the maths and science scores at right at the top globally. The root is wrong learning culture. In the west, kids spent the first 6 years of primary school heavily “play” oriented. Parents in eastern cultures frown on these “time wasting” and the education Ministry here is no exception. The reality is that in “playing” kid experiment with all sorts of idea association, thinking outside the box, re-inventing solution to obstacles – THEY LEARN A LOT OF INNOVATIVE SKILLS SUBSCONSCIOUSLY which they transported these skills into adult life of commerce, industry, science and personal development.

In Singapore, we categorise “smart” and “stupid” kids before they are mature to know right is differentiate from wrong and even aware that shapes are NOT defined etc. A lot of good kids got stereotyped as failures and rejects – the insanity of pressure of no relevance to their future life. AND MY ANGUISH IS THAT SINGAPOREAN PARENTS NOT HAVING WORKED, LIVED ABROAD OR DONE BUSINESS ABROAD HARDLY KNOWS THAT EDUCATION HERE IS BASICALLY FLAWED.

AND THIS GOVERNMENT IS INTOLERANT OF CRITICISM OF ANY SMALLEST SLIGHT, how can we progress comepting in a world of globalisation.

I am angry BUT A LONE VOICE HERE, laoma.

I hope you understand why I choose to blog aggressively and robustly. I want a better Singapore in the future for future Singaporean generations including new citizens like you and your family who share our common destiny.

I also wish Qiubiging success and achievement in her life – be it in Singapore or anywhere else.

THIS IS HER LIFE AND SHE HAS RIGHT TO DECIDE WHERE AND HOW HER FUTURE SHOULD BE.

T on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 4:01 pm 

/// reader on Fri, 27th Nov 2009 1:15 am

The case of Qiu Biqing is a classic example of our immigration policy done RIGHT. ///

No way. On the contrary, Qiu Biqing is the perfect example of our immigration policy done WRONG. You have a 13 year-old competing with 12 year old. Why are we short-changing our own children. How about getting our top Sec 1 students (also 13 year old) to take the same PSLE and see who comes out top.

And we gave our prestigious President Scholarship to another China “FT” who was 2 years older than her cohort.

How to win by pitching our middleweight boxer against heavyweight boxer?

laoma on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 5:26 pm 

@cognitive dissonance: bravo to your last post, especially that last part regarding education culture of the young. Curiosity, exploration, and creativity are definitely more important than simple memorization because such knowledge is not living. It’s passive and will be forgotten soon no matter how smart a kid can be. Further, as I said previously, such practice is exclusive, depriving the kids of ample exposure to other knowledge domains that the kids might be interested and even excel later in.

All that said, especially by you, the crucial question now is how change can be made. Or a more plausible question: is it possible to change anything? Persoanlly I am rather pessimistic. I used to work in academics and many of my superiors got their PhD in western countries. But I saw hardly anyone having learnt the basic behavior when dealing with people under them: respect. So it is too much required to change the mindset of people, not only of teachers.

Keep cool. Regards.

cognitive dissonance on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 9:44 pm 

@ laoma on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 5:26 pm

You asked ..”is it possible to change anything?” and you answered yourself…” Personally I am pessimistic”. The academic world is, in my detached judgement, mechanistically moron and the institutions are archaic and dynamically conservative. This is just not PRC but is nearly everywhere including academics themselves who resist change to impossibility.

laoma, you worked in the academic sector and dealing with PHD mostly with no commercial practical experience. They build castles out of thin air in academic publishing much of which is arty-farty fairy tale. How can they change or allow change which may displace their airy-farty fiction publishing and calss room utterances to economic irrelevance outside the ivory towers ( I called that learning mausoleums). The finance meltdown completely discredited the genius concoction of “high priest” finance theories, how else could those finance professors continue to teach fairy-tale high finance concepts to business students and finance postgraduate classes? It is not just Wall Street and London where lots of MBA corpses were littered wioth blood splattered all over the streets to public contempt.

The comedy in Singapore, as I am told, is even a grade higher. Institutions of higher learning here even recruiting teaching academics on higher qualification which ALSO DEMANDED RECORD OF THEIR SECONDARY SCHOOL PERFORMANCE as evaluating criteria. Even the dumbest fool living south of the North Pole knows that knowledge is a living expanding circle. What have you learnt or not learnt of achievement in secondary school of playful age relevant to academic achievement and teaching ability of a prospective lecturer in class room context?? I can’t comprehend this except as a concessionary thought to MORONIC WORSHHIP AND PRACTICE OF ARTISTRY OF DEADWOOD CONSERVATISM.

It is another magic whip to eliminate candidates who might have a good mixed of both academic and practical experience on grounds that their secondary school achievement is inadequate to reflect some kind of intellectual incapacity – NOTING THAT THOSE POSITION ACTUALLY REQUIRED A PHD? Or perhaps, it is the same conservatism of no change of standardised application forms used 50 years ago and now re-constructed in the same web mode – regardless of archaic irrelevance. They might as well require prospective academic applicants to show they actually “passed” their kindergarten leaving examination as proof of scholastic ability!!!!

Universities should be autonomous and surviving on competition. If they can’t perform, let them go just like commercial enterprises but these are sacred cows in Singapore’s context where “atmosphere” limits the stratopheric experimentation, exploration and rigorous of question learning.
Institutions of higher learning should NOT have out of bound markers of rigorous intellectual exploration – be it buiness, politic, law and or Government. They are the seeds of the nation’s future. If those places are not fertile or rendered infertile by political oppression, what is there hope for the future of our generations to come? Foreigners can’t meddle on domestic issues ( where unknown sensitivities cross-over trampled upon brings dire political consequences) – what future there is for this country?

Until the domination power coalition discard rigid imperatives of self-interests and political hegemony, no great foreign talents of sufficient numbers will stay in this stifling oppressive intellectual and academic climate to fertilise success for themselves and for this country. It condemns this country to mediocre achievements – no matter how many gold medals the likes of Qiu Biqings wins regularly in international competition. The good ones will leave – inevitably.

Singaporeans have to decide its future and their childrens’ future. They have to decide between

- retention of the status quo of autocratic dominant power dominant coalition of feudal one-party rule of predictable self-destruction and extinction of this nation. A lot of policies are NOT functioning now, not just education.

or

choose their children’s future and embrace the future with bravery and creative imagination. The world is changing – those remain inactive to adaptation will perish and those who redesign their own future will have time and opportunity to find niche and success in this evolving world.

I want to see big changes away from the status quo – personal preference. The present situation is hopeless!!

Ashton Soon on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 4:32 pm 

I am now Primary 5,I dont know how she even get to the top when she was from China as all of us should know,English holds up to 100 mark,Chinese 100 marks,Science and math 50 each.For Chinese it is a easy subject for her but the rest it has English words in it but then she could get top,Top carrys very high expectation.
When she was in China she was studying Primary 4,but when she came to Singapore she was only 3 which means that she was downgraded.
How did she even know words like English maybe she must even learn alphabets first.So she sure have a hard time,indeed hard time as she has to understand English to do Science and Math or else she wont even know how to do anything.
Reputation,now i am talking about reputation-She sure has achive a good reputation or stablelize reputationto have friends whom care about her.She is a hardworking girl that all of us have to learn from.
Choices has consequnses,now i am talking about this-She chose to study hard to look up to the dictionary to learn words and not to be lazy just flipping like seeing comics.Boos and comics are different,books has more knowledge than comics.Let along to magazine it has not much knowledge.
Understanding,here this is what i am going to say-We have to learn to understand.Like,what a child duty is to do to show respect parents that is one thing that we know,but another one not all of us will understand is that,Parents job is to take care of the children to let the children be safe from any danger or hazard.And the chils’s job is to study and show results good results to make them proud.To do each duty has the meaning of do what ones should do and thats the right thing to do.
It maybe a miracle for some of us that a China girl the tops.But again nothing is impossible,we have choice we make it.
Our future is all in our hands we control it not other people,they can only guide only teach only help to a certain extend the rest is us.Like climbing a mountain it take years for example.First you were just a child so our parents guide us teach us how to climb,whether we hear it or not hear it is our choices no matter how they say its our choice to do it,One day they will fall maybe because of tiredness and then its all up to us.
She is something,she let out the something she is so now she has proven her duty and her ability.

Choices has consequenses
Understanding
Reputation
Hard working
Intelligence
This are some of my values that are helping me in someways.I think she has reached it but i have not.Like Intelligence i have not conquered it as i am not scoring like 4/5 of the total upon 400 score i only scored 243/400 i may be in a sep.school which is difficult but then i also must be good in standard.My school is Nan Hua Primary School.It also is not the best of all school.I am Primary 5 too not yet Primary 6,it sure willbe hard next year this like me writing a composition.Hehe!

laoma on Thu, 3rd Dec 2009 2:02 am 

@Ashton Soon: the values you have are good ones and I believe by your constant effort you will achieve them. I am somewhat surprised by the number of irregular things in your English writing. Maybe it’s just a wrong impression; you did not bother to pay too much attention in the post because you spoke on a Internet forum. You do need to be more careful when you do your PSLE.

My son is also on P5, but from a different school. I’ll check out his English homework. It becomes serious. I wonder why teachers simply leave some many errors uncorrected. Because they are only minor ones?