Skip to main content

Bilingualism for foreigners? Monolingual for Singaporeans?


The likely outcome of our current education policy will result to the above.  Majority of Singaporean students will end up as monolinguals and for foreign students who have their mother-tongue education in their home countries, they are likely to be benefited from our system and become bilinguals when they graduate from our schools.

The examples of USA, UK, and Australia have proved that this is the case. Foreign students, who struggle for a few years in these countries after their primary or secondary education at home, are very likely to be bilingual or bi-culture later in their life. Perhaps, except Singapore students who are weak in mother-tongue.

The challenge for our bilingualism policy is in fact how to master the mother-tongue, i.e. Chinese, Malay and Tamil languages.   The problem is not English as it is the media of instruction in schools.  Comparing to the past, few students find learning English difficult although they may end up learning Singlish.   That is another question and so we have “Speak Good English” campaign.

The learning of mother-tongue will continue to be a challenging issue if Singapore wants to maintain the bilingualism policy. Perhaps, we should shock ourselves by dropping bilingualism for Singapore students. It has become a low productivity movement, especially for Chinese students.  Even with tuition, scoring an A or A * is not as easy as other Science or Math subjects. 

The motivation is just not there even with the lowering standard to Chinese B or using English to teach Chinese. It has ‘dirty’ the meaning of bilingualism.

Hence, the beneficiary of our bilingualism (if there is valid one) is foreign students. These students learn their mother-tongue at their home countries, be it, Vietnamese, Chinese, Indian languages, Bahasa Indonesia, or Thai when they are young. They carry with them the mother-tongue culture, value and language at a younger age. 

These students are likely to be bilingual and perhaps bi-culture (multi-lingual and -culture) after their education in Singapore.
When we look at it from this angle, our bilingualism policy is really serving foreign students well. Our weaknesses have become their strengths.

So, former PM Lee Kuan Yew wants to expose children to two languages at an earlier age:
“Speaking at the launch of the Chinese edition of his book: Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going, he said Singaporeans should be exposed to both English and their respective Mother Tongue languages from a young age.

"If we arrange our education system in kindergarten and pre-school in such a way that our children are exposed to two languages straight away, we will make bilingualism a reality and easily achieved by all," Mr Lee said.

Mr Lee also said that he was convinced that multilingualism or bilingualism is possible. However, one should be a master language."The reality is that we must have English as the master language. Next, we should have the Mother Tongues to identify ourselves.(asiaone, 17 Sept 2011)”

According to Lee, bilingualism is still not a reality and not easily achieved by all in Singapore.

If one remembered correctly, he had even suggested a pre-school and primary education in mother-tongue. But this appeared to be ‘educationally right and politically wrong’. So, he made comprise to have two languages at younger age.  This is ‘patients choosing their own medications rather than the best medication’.   At the end, problems are still unsolved.  

The bilingualism policy, if we really want to see results, has to undergo a shock therapy. Be it a full mother tongue teaching from pre-school to primary 1 or 2 or even go back to the old time of Chinese schools. It looks radical but if there is no shock, there is no gain. If not, it will always remain the greatest challenge for Singapore, for Former PM Lee Kuan Yew and concerned people.

Comments

  1. An insightful observation.

    market2garden pijitailai 2012.07.11

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...