- News Front Page
- Arts and Culture
- Health & Living
- Opinions & Analysis
- Campus Stuff
- Upfront Interviews
- Sports
Written on March 23, 2009 by Kelvin Teo
Rethinking the term “elitism”
Moving away from an exam meritocracy to a talent meritocracy
(photo credits:Raymond)
SINGAPORE – When Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek interviewed our then education minister Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the latter made a tacit admission that the Singapore system has not been effective in producing world-beaters.
One puzzling fact was that Singapore churns out only few truly top-ranked scientists, entrepreneurs, inventors, business executives or academics despite being number 1 in the global math and science rankings for school children. It doesn’t come as a surprise that our students perform well in standardized tests since we have always been known to produce exam-smart students. It wouldn’t be that difficult for the latter to score top marks in their math and science exams.
Thus, Mr Shanmugaratnam had to concede that the Singapore system is an exam meritocracy, whilst the American one is a talent meritocracy, which saw the latter producing world-beaters in abundance. During the PAP Policy Forum at the beginning of 2006, he suggested a revamp of our education system that will see it move from an exam meritocracy towards a talent meritocracy.
Yet, this so-called exam meritocracy still remains the platform for the segregation of future “elites”, the wheat, from the chaff, us ordinary joes. Thus, academic “elites” who are top performers form the bedrock of our future ruling “elites”, as the latter are awarded scholarships and given the opportunity to reach top leadership positions within our administrative service.
Whilst Mr Shanmugaratnam deserves at least some credit for his honest assessment of our education system and suggestion for relevant changes, the pertinent question is whether the public would be willing to adopt a wholesome outlook of our students’ talents. Thus, now instead of academic “elites”, we have musical “elites” for our little Mozarts, soccer “elites” for our future Fandis and Sundramoorthies, artistic “elites” for our little Picassos and what not.
Yet, this so-called exam meritocracy still remains the platform for the segregation of future “elites”, the wheat, from the chaff, us ordinary joes. Thus, academic “elites” who are top performers form the bedrock of our future ruling “elites”, as the latter are awarded scholarships and given the opportunity to reach top leadership positions within our administrative service.”
I have always been skeptical of the exam meritocracy-government scholarship axis in identifying future high flyers. In short, I was never convinced that high academic standing would guarantee a successful career. The basis of my disagreement lies in a seminal study by Shulman and Bowen on the admission preferences given to student athletes by Ivy League and other selective universities, which they published in a book titled “Game of Life”.
What the study revealed was that student athletes presented significantly lower high school (pre-university) GPA and SAT scores than the rest of their peers. And they are usually ranked in the bottom tier of their classes during their time in university. In Singapore’s academic parlance, such student-athletes are considered average at best. However, they turn out to be high-fliers after they graduate, enjoying higher renumeration than their peers with higher academic standing.
Shulman and Bowen attributed their successes to their personality and psychological make-up. Conditioned by their previous sporting background, these former student athletes exhibit an unwavering determination towards achieving their goals, be it in closing a deal or successfully completing a project, which to them is like winning a game. They also have other qualities such as the willingness to work hard over a long period of time, and can seamlessly fit into a team-based setting. And Shulman made another apt observation that student-athletes see themselves as leaders and value leadership skills. Even after they graduate, they continued to provide leadership in civic activities.
I am hardly surprised at Shulman and Bowen’s findings. Sports can impart many important life lessons that cannot be picked up in the classroom, for instance the ability to face failure and adversity, and how to turn defeat into victory. Thus, the moral of the story? A good sportsman with an average academic ability definitely has the ingredients to be far more successful than a student with straight As on his academic transcript but with little or no background in sports.
Hopefully, the move towards a talent meritocracy will also see a shift in paradigm, which is a shift in focus away from purely academic achievements. Yet, there is this odd reminder now and then to everyone out there to pay deference to the elites in power, according to Mr George Yeo a long time ago, and I quote “remember your place in society and make distinctions what is high, what is low, what is above and what is below”.
As a matter of fact, I learnt an important core value imparted to me by my instructors when in military service, the same organization where Mr George Yeo holds the rank of Brigadier-General:”Rank is what you wear, respect is what you earn”. And any individuals who has proven his talents, at least in my eyes, deserves my respect. I have no problem respecting talented military men, politicians, musicians, sportsmen and what-not for that matter.
1) Tharman Shanmugaratnam’s interview
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663340/site/newsweek/print/1/displaymode/1098/
2) Review of Shulman JL & Bowen WG “Game of Life”
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/6903.html
15 Comments on "Rethinking the term “elitism”"
Other Reviews
Was NUS student really approached by ISD?The Temasek Review recently ran an article from an anonymous ...
Flooding woes – the critical cause of poor soil qualityThere is an old Geography adage that goes “earthquakes don’t ...
OTHER NEWS HEADLINE
- No talk on politics and religion without license: NTU
- Foreign Students inundate NUS recruitment talks
- GV: $10 to watch DVD in Cinema
- Immigration to be hottest topic in Singapore yet
- Mixed response to National Day Rally
Feature
How safe are our Facebook comments?by The Kent Ridge Common
MORE STORIES
Proper Reasons for Orchard Flood, pleaseAuthorities have switched their official explanation for the cause of the recent flood in Orchard Road to the inability of the Stamford Canal to withstand the capacity of a heavy downpour.
- Did he obstruct justice or did he not?
- Should new citizens serve compulsory time at the grassroots level?
- Why ban Lim Hock Siew’s footage?
- Are Singaporeans becoming more easily irritable?
- Spain face German blitzkrieg
- World Cup Semis – Any chance, Uruguay?
Have Your Say
on Foreign Students inundate NUS recruitment talks Hi Linus, My point exactly. I think that local students have a lot to learn from the foreign students in NUS, and vice...
on Foreign Students inundate NUS recruitment talks Thanks for your comments, Mr. Koh Lester
on Foreign Students inundate NUS recruitment talks a lot of people have this thing called self hate you know
on Foreign Students inundate NUS recruitment talks I don't disagree with you that one's nationality would have very little (if none, at all) on whether a person...
on No talk on politics and religion without license: NTU Happy is the Man who is not struck by Lightning Bolts in this Island of the Main. Hence the Shield of Apathy is a...
HAPPENING ABOUT TOWN
NUS Dance Ensemble - Lights offRunning into its 18th successful year, the NUS Dance Ensemble is proud to present The Next Wave 2010 – Lights Off. The Ensemble is one of the university’s distinguished dance groups, and has developed an extensive repertoire both locally and internationally.
Poll
Loading ...
The Kent Ridge Common is the independent newspaper of the National University of Singapore.All comments, opinions and feedback are welcomed.
All content/images copyright
© The Kent Ridge Common 2009-2011, unless otherwise stated.
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Daily SG: 24 Mar 2009 on Tue, 24th Mar 2009 12:10 pm
[...] Re education – The Kent Ridge Common: Rethinking the term “elitism” [...]
Rethinking the term “elitism” : The Online Citizen - a community of singaporeans on Wed, 25th Mar 2009 9:21 am
[...] Excerpts from The Kent Ridge Common: [...]
Kelvin Tan on Wed, 25th Mar 2009 1:41 am
Singapore's educational system works under the chinese philosophy that it is nature that determines how good you are.
All of us have a certain CEP, or career ending point, and it is the objective of the education system to discover who are the ones with the highest CEP.
Thus, once we identify them, we give them scholarships. By definition, these people will have the highest CEP, and will succeed in whatever they do later.
This is similar to the wuxia theme, that everyone has a certain level of internal strength and, the hero of each novel, regardless on whether they are Guojing, Yang Guo or Zhang Wuji, must, by definition, have the highest level of internal strength, and hence will be the most successful.
Kelvin_Teo on Wed, 25th Mar 2009 1:58 am
Dear Kelvin:
Now the question is which one has higher potential?
Student athlete + average academic ability / non-student athlete + very high academic ability?
Shulman and Bowen's studies seem to favor the former.
I am a follower of Louis Cha's novels. Zhang Sanfeng, Wuji's master at Wudang had a Shaolin master who mastered Jiu Yang Zheng Jing. However, that doesn't make Sanfeng's masters the elite martial artist despite having one of the top internal strength.
And in the Condors trilogy, top internal strength is not required to be among the top four martial artist. Southern begger's Xiang Long Shi Ba Zhang is a waijia form of martial art, but the beggar is still among the top four.
And how about the late bloomers?
Sincerely yours
eternalhap on Wed, 25th Mar 2009 8:53 am
I have always been skeptical of the exam meritocracy-government scholarship axis in identifying future high flyers. In short, I was never convinced that high academic standing would guarantee a successful career.
From what I understand, 'high academic standing' is insufficient for a government scholarship. Scholarship boards look at non-academic indicators e.g. leadership in CCA activities, testimonials by schools and of course, if the candidate can perform well during interviews. Good grades are normally used to determine if the candidate is worth the board's time to interview him. So I think the impression given here of a totally exam-based meritocratic system is tilted.
In short, if a person with straight As also can do other things damn well, I think it's good for society he is part of our governing elite. Can we ordinary Joes be as good as them in governing, if given similar opportunities? Maybe. But I doubt society has the appetite for the risk.
Kelvin_Teo on Wed, 25th Mar 2009 9:10 am
Why not?
The Shulman and Bowen study has shown that college sportsmen with average results have gone on to be successful in their careers. And they do take up leadership positions after they graduate in civic societies. And the fact is, they do better than their peers with higher academic standing. Then, how do you explain the findings of their study?
That's why scholarship agencies should be diverse. Why not take in an excellent sportsmen with an average transcript for that matter? I think it's far more risky having excellent academic results plus those clubs and societies participants (even if they are leaders in their ECA for that matter) types. The profile of such scholars are shockingly too similar. Even more risky to put your eggs into this basket right?
The way you put it, it seems that the sportsmen + average transcript type is risky. Which I disagree to be honest.
Sincerely yours
Kelvin Tan on Thu, 26th Mar 2009 8:11 am
Well, since we are in this topic, the only reason why the North Begger felt Guojing is suitable to learn the 18 dragon subduing palms, especially the first of those palms, "The Mighty Dragon regrets", is also because the former notice Guojing had high internal strength, an honest character, and a kind heart.
Therefore, I can agree with you that high potential is not sufficient to excel in Singapore. I am merely arguing that it is necessary. Guojing may have a heart kind enough to ensure that the palm strength can be controlled well but, again, without the necessary high internal strength, he won't even have the ability to learn it.
As for Jueyuan, Zhang Sanfeng's master, he is not a top master simply because he is a dedicated pacifier and peacemaker, but everyone who saw him, Yang Guo and gang, after the 2nd Huashan tournament, knew that his potential was very high.
Again, this shows that high potential is necessary to be an elite in Singapore, certainly not sufficient.
eternalhap on Fri, 27th Mar 2009 5:20 am
Hi, I’m not challenging the findings at all. It’s common sense that people succeed in their careers not just because of academic performance. The study which you quoted simply gave empirical evidence and explanations.
eternalhap on Fri, 27th Mar 2009 5:21 am
No doubt S’pore is moving to a talent meritocracy. But do you seriously think schship agencies will hand out awards to ‘excellent sportsmen with an average transcript’?
Schship agencies and applicants have a fundamental problem of information asymmetry. Schship agencies do not know which is the capable person, and how is he capable. On the other hand, applicants have a tendency to stress their good points while carpeting their bad ones.
So to separate the cherries from the lemons, schship agencies have no choice but to look at the indicators which are fairest to all – grades and CCA. Good performance in both academic and non-academic aspects is a preliminary reflection of the applicant’s ability. Then at the interview stage, schship agencies will then pick the real cherries.
I don’t think sportsmen + average transcript are risky – it’s the schship agencies, and the interests they represent, which think so.
“The profile of such scholars are shockingly too similar. Even more risky to put your eggs into this basket right?”
Any evidence to support this?
Kelvin_Teo on Fri, 27th Mar 2009 6:29 am
I thought you answered your question regarding typical profile of scholars – good grades and CCA.
The fact is that if we observe the American system, going back to the study by Shulman and Bowen, the fact remains that good academics and CCA is the profile of an average student who gets into a top university. There is another way to get in and that is through sports. And what Shulman has shown was that the sports people did better after that.
The fact is as you mentioned just now, you will never find a top sportsman with average transcript in the army of our scholars right? And if you analyzed the profile of our President's Scholars, how many are sportsmen and women? Yes, do they a bit of everything besides being good in studies such as sports and societies, but sounds more like a Jack of all trades profile to me.
Sincerely yours
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Weekly Roundup: Week 13 on Sat, 28th Mar 2009 11:08 am
[...] “..the Singapore system is an exam meritocracy, whilst the American one is a talent meritocracy, which saw the latter producing world-beaters in abundance.” Kelvin Teo [...]
Kelvin_Teo on Sat, 28th Mar 2009 7:40 am
Dear Kelvin:
Pardon my mistake for mixing up the directions. It's supposed to be Southern Emperor/Monk Yi Deng and Northern Beggar Hong.
With that in mind, the way you portray internal strength is as though it is a static entity. The fact that it is not. Yang Guo learnt the basics of Ha Ma Gong from Western Venom Ouyang Feng, then he developed his internal strength sleeping on the iced bed in Gu Mu Pai, came across Jiu Ying Zhen Jing (part of it) and finally ate the snake livers that his condor friends gave him. All these boosted his internal strength. The same for Guo Jing. He drank the snake's blood, and he learnt the full version of the Jiu Ying Zhen Jing. Even Beggar Hong cultivated his internal strength using the Jiu Ying Zhen Jing over the years.
Thus, the internal strength of the characters are not static, but are boosted over the years. And Jiu Ying Zhen Jing is something like an internal strength booster. And there is more to Jiu Ying Zhen Jing. You may recall that Central Divinity Wang Chongyang designed the Quanzhen Big Dipper formation using principles from the Jiu Ying Zhen Jing. Even Ouyang Feng became more powerful (albeit ku ku in the head) after learning the reverse Jiu Ying Zhen Jing.
Thus, sports can be seen as the same analogy as Jiu Ying Zhen Jing. It equips student-athletes with important skills, and acts as a booster to their further development, which makes them more successful in their future after they graduate.
Sincerely yours
DrHuang on Sun, 29th Mar 2009 3:12 pm
Hi Kelvin,__It Is good of you to challenge conventional wisdom ( or PAP’s sacred cows).__How many Singaporeans ( and many bloggers even here) are just regurgitating what the PAP says that scholars are the “Mandrinate” needed to secure Singapore’s edge and that to do otherwise is to take “risk”.__I know for a fact that some JC’s actually earmark students who they think will be selected for the President Scholarship. In the name of bringing glory to the alma mater, top students may be made leaders of their societies ( or even Head Prefectship) – sometimes on silver platters. So on CV’s they look terribly impressive, but the real person is not remotely like what’s on the CV! __I agree with the part about top level athletes/average academics having better chance of success in life later on. But I think it is too narrow to consider only athletes. My gut feeling is that those who excel in extra-studies activities ( music/ civil society) make better leaders than those “straight A but nothing else” types .__Kelvin, for Singapore to progress, we must continuously challenge and slaughter sacred cows.__If not Singapore becomes irrelevant and fossilizes.__
Sunny Tan on Mon, 11th May 2009 12:39 pm
Can we expect the mandarin military officers with all the As in the world to lead their ah beng soldiers by example and I mean from the front. I bet these mandarins are dead scared to die and they will kick the ah bengs to run in front and die – instead of them.So, wait and see and if there is a small war.
Alexander the Great was a brilliant soldier and he led from the front all the time. He had many wounds and lady luck smiled on him and he did not die fro it. He was poisoned and it killed him.
Blindman on Tue, 12th May 2009 7:15 am
How come no one considered the example of Einstein? He was just a poly-grad, to put it in Singlish terms. He was a patent office clerk, not something Singaporeans will deem successful. If there was ever an Einstein amongst us, in Singapore, do you think he could have surfaced as Einstein did?
Part of the problem I think is that we are too over reliant on foreign talent, rather than genuinely cultivating local talent. As with a lot of things, we simply go through the motions. It is a Singapore culture. And it is Singaporeans too to work smart than hard, even from the days when LKY brought in the MNCs. And we dont say what we mean, and vice versa.
The schools and MOE are just part of the social system that make Singaporeans who they are. There is the larger social and political context too, which may be more important than just the schools. Constant change to the education system is like flogging a dead horse.