Let children from all backgrounds have access to opportunities to nurture talents

This was published in Todayonline Voices on 14th June. Not possible to give the specific (deep) link. Neither Straits Times nor Todayonline was prepared to use the word 'Marxist' and the guiding light to my social analysis was reduced to nought.

The original here:

According to the “French Marxist* sociologist” Henri Lefebvre, binary oppositions do not always help in social analysis. (*Lefebvre, a scholar of Marxist theory, was expelled by the French Communist Party.)

Instead he formulated a system of triadic dialectics. Like a tripod that holds your camera steady, a triad of concepts – a heuristic tripod – allows us to investigate relationships, causes and effects.

In debating inequalities, the question of whether it is ‘nature’ or ‘nurture’ that brings about social mobility is missing a third leg: ‘opportunities’.

This is what middle-class parents do: buy opportunities (tuition, enrichment, moving into school catchment areas) to maximize opportunities for their children.

I wish for a Singapore where children from the poorest families can access those opportunities.

Take my English (for speakers of other languages) student “Hunta”, a refugee and cleaner who works split shifts starting at 4.30am.

Her sons opted to sit gruelling exams and gained admission to one of the best grammar (free) schools in Britain. Every year, 20 boys compete for each place at this school.

Hunta’s older son now studies in a Russell Group university. Her younger has been offered a place at Oxford. After means-testing, both are eligible for substantial fee reductions and other bursaries are required to pay only one-third of the usual fees.

But not every child is academically-gifted.

Our misplaced emphasis on academic brilliance as the only culturally-acceptable path to success has meant that we have lost some two generations of people who could have been trained to be skilled, well-paid AND RESPECTED artisans, technicians, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, designers, print-makers, chefs, specialist craftsmen (and women) in all areas of life.

Instead we now import people to do this work while our own languish. We had been trying to fit square pegs into round holes.

We have sacrificed the futures of these people at the altar of academic prowess and what parents thought – hoped – it could bring. The cycle repeats, and we wonder why our children are distressed.

My job as a parent is to seek out the opportunities to nurture the natural talents that my child has. The role of the government is to ensure that such access to opportunities is not blocked by the accident of one’s birth or gatekeeping interest groups.

We need a new mindset where we seek to discover – and accept – the natural gifts of our children – academic, sporting, technical, relational, or otherwise – no matter what their background might be, and then supply them with the opportunities to excel.

We need a (Swiss?) school system where small class sizes allow (teaching) professionals to identify talents in children.

How else might a cleaner’s son get to Oxford, or a gifted athlete to the Olympics?

==

The published version:
I refer to the report, "Government aiming for 'best of Singapore and Swiss' education system: Ong Ye Kung (June 7), and the recent discussions about tackling inequalities in our society.

In debating inequalities, the question of whether it is "nature" or "nurture" that brings about social mobility is missing a third leg: "opportunities".

This is what middle-class parents do: Buy opportunities (tuition, enrichment, moving into school catchment areas) to maximise opportunities for their children.

I wish for a Singapore where children from the poorest families can have access to those opportunities.

Our misplaced emphasis on academic brilliance as the foremost, culturally acceptable path to success has meant that we have lost some two generations of people who could have been trained to be skilled, well-paid and respected artisans, technicians, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, designers, print-makers, chefs, specialist craftsmen (and women) in all areas of life.

Instead, we now import people to fill these positions and more. We had been trying to fit square pegs into round holes.

We have directed people to chase after academic prowess and what parents thought or hoped it could bring. The cycle repeats, and we wonder why our children are distressed.

A parent's job is to seek out the opportunities to nurture the natural talents that their children have. The role of the Government is to ensure that such access to opportunities is not blocked by the accident of one's birth or gatekeeping interest groups.

We need a new mindset where we seek to discover and accept the natural gifts of our children — be they academic, sporting, technical, relational, or otherwise — no matter what their background might be, and then supply them with the opportunities to excel.

We need a school system where small class sizes allow teaching professionals to identify talents in children.