Just read Janelle Lee’s open letter to the education minister.
Frankly, I am not impressed. I’d applaud her for taking the time to comment on an issue that bugs her (especially at a time so close to her Os), and agree that her points are somewhat valid. But other than that?
I was expecting some insight, a fresh perspective, at least a critical suggestion addressing the situation. Instead, I rifted through points that were done to death on TV, in online forums, and across the dinner table. Have we not already explored the rigidity, the textbook-based system, the lack of creativity in Singaporean classrooms?
If I isolate her content and credit style for the apparent effectiveness of the letter, it is similarly disappointing. At best, Janelle is polite. She is fluent and clear. But stylistically, it is empty and somewhat aimless. I know (think?) she feels strongly for the subject, but the passion, the concern, even the interest wasn’t conveyed prettily enough/at all to properly engage a critical reader (and by that I mean one who is thinking not one who is bitchy). Basically she doesn’t have a strong individual voice.
I have nothing against Janelle’s hopes and ideas, but I do have something to say about the uproar surrounding it. If I hadn’t read the comments, I would’ve just gone ‘oh, nice effort!’ and moved on with my life. Everything I’ve said is not a criticism of Janelle per se, because I had no prior expectations of her, and Janelle did not really pride herself for being some sort of great journalistic political matyr or anything. It was the comments that made her seem like so. In this light, should she really be credited for her ‘observations’, ‘maturity’ and ‘ability to question the unquestioned’?
She did make observations – passive ones, and furthermore ones that did not require much analysis of the situation. In fact, they are conventional views – listen and you’ll hear the multitudes, from the elites to the lower rungs, bitching about the system.
Yes she is mature, not in her views and thoughts, but that she channeled her frustrations in a classy manner.
I’d have to disagree that she ‘questions the unquestioned’. That is untrue, because everything she has questioned had been questioned so many damn times they have become a tedium than something of intellectual wonder.
These are my suspicions. Readers continue to laud her brilliant writing and maturity because by themselves, they have
a) No pre-understanding of the discussions on the issue of education. They are probably hermits who’ve newly emerged from deep hibernation since the autocratic times. The presence of dissent, and moreover dissent that they can identify with, sends then into frantic flights of eager admiration.
b) Not given much thought to the issue.
‘WOW. I am impressed!!! So cool! I have never thought about education this way! In fact, I have never thought of education, ever! Actually I’ve never thought, period.’ (okay idk why I’m morphing into such a bitch tart here SRS! I promise this is a friendly benign observation I think I’m just cranky it’s past my bedtime.)
c) The tendency to underestimate youths. Judging from the comments, I think this might be the most pertinent reason of all for the Janelle Lee letter worship. Many are along the line of ‘FOR SUCH A YOUNG AGE, YOU (insert niceties here).’ The temasek review titles it ‘an open letter to the minister BY A SECONDARY FOUR STUDENT.’ Now why the emphasis on her age? If she were a thirty year old businessman, will the letter still be considered ‘impressive’? Would you endorse a kindergarden child’s letter of little sense just because he could spell everything correctly?
People give her more credit than she truly deserves, or may have even exaggerated the true brilliance of her letter because they viewed her age as an intellectual handicap.
The truth: on the Internet, or on any other technological device, youths have a combined intelligence about ten times as powerful as adults (given that the population size of both are equal).
The interwebz are where teenagers and yuppies THRIVE. We’re given a powerful platform that almost forces us to come up with the freshest insights at the fastest speed possible. Most who use the Internet at an impressionable age go through an intellectual rebirth. That is sadly, the privilege of the young. Many competent adults sound like complete retards on the Internet.
My point is, online, youths are the geniuses. Flashes of genius stun adults who otherwise face seeming inert apathy of teens in real life. What may have been the daily online exercise of these teenagers impress them a lot more than it should.
This is what happened, I believe, in the case of Janelle Lee. Now that I’m nearing sleep and on the whole a happier person, I’ll say for a Sec 4 she’s quite a steady thinker. Not the most eloquent, not the most analytical, but still a notch higher than the majority of our youths.
I’m really glad Singaporean teens deposit coherent take on issues that matter, a significant progression from listing what they had for dinner (curry rice and tauhuey jsyk). So yeah. Good for her.
Of all, people should start setting higher standards for the critical skills of students. If you don’t trust us enough to form our own judgement on things – even displaying deep surprise at a simple, somewhat mediocre, show of political judgment – it stifles our ability to think because in return we conform to the expectations you have of us.
THATSALLKTHNXBYE. DON’T HATE I AM SLEEPY AS HELL.
OH YES. For those of you who went through the above without an inkling of what the hell I’m writing about, here’s Janelle Lee’s open letter to the education minister (Mr Heng Swee Keat) where she points out the flaws of the education system:
Q 