Tuesday, September 08, 2009
I have been inspired, for reasons completely unknown, to ramble wearily so that I can take my mind off the scars inflicted on me today by my bacteria and pro euk tutorial.
life is fast entering limbo.
life is a virtually never ending cycle of study, eating (not consumption), running, and sleep.
even so there are good things to remember for in life.
today the newspapers read that victoria's alumni wrote a letter to the ministry of education in protest against vjc's plan to have a 6 year integrated programme. Among things, they claim that it breeds a culture of elitism which Victorian schools do not stand for. Come on.
Already, it is implicit that the school prides itself as one that is not elitist. Given their current standing among singapore schools, how can this be so? Every year, roughly 55 thousand students graduate from primary school, give or take several thousand. Of these, about half are boys. Probably the top 4% of them are shuttled to the top 2 schools, where they engage in a programme ostensibly called the integrated programme. the next few hundred or so join other schools that have also implemented similiar programmes, such as dunman high. Many top students also enter Victoria school, one of the best schools in singapore. Is it not true already that the school can loosely be defined as a conglomeration of supposedly "elite" students?
Therein lies the next part of the arguement against the integrated programme that really, really pisses me off: the arguement that the integrated programme breeds elitism. How does one jump to the conclusion that putting a group of intellectually bright students together makes them elitist?
I suppose the idea of elitism arises from the belief that the intellectually "endowed" tends to treat other people that are not as gifted as themselves condescendingly and with contempt. Indeed, examples in the newspapers bear testament to this. One only has to remember the incident of the rjc student and the elitist comments posted on her blog to assume that all students of this cadre; all students that study under an integrated programme will be elitist because they have no contact with the rest of society.
In my opinion, this claim a huge generalization. How is it that the actions of several elitist students serve as a credible representation of our student body as a whole? Many of these actions are but exceptions to the norm, and it would definitely be unfair to brand all students under this category elitist.
Though it may be conceded that attracting top students to participate in an integrated programme MAY serve as a breeding ground for elitism, should the other benefits offered by the said programme be considered as well? It is argued that the programme provides opportunities for holistic learning; perhaps these benefits could play a bigger part in determining the overall merit of the integrated programme, instead of selecting it based on the grounds of potential elitism.
okay enough ranting for the day. I can't believe I typed this entire passage out on my keypad. I must be asking for carpel tunnel hmm.
posted @10:02 PM
