\u0110\u00e2y l\u00e0 m\u1ed9t b\u00e0i c\u0169 (2018), \u0111\u01b0\u1ee3c The Economist l\u1ea5y \u0111\u1ec3 ch\u1ea1y qu\u1ea3ng c\u00e1o tr\u00ean Facebook.<\/p>\n
Yet Singapore shows that academic brilliance need not come at the expense of personal skills. In 2015 Singaporean students also came first in a new PISA ranking designed to look at collaborative problem-solving, scoring even better than they did in reading and science. They also reported themselves to be happy\u2014more so than children in Finland, for instance, a country that educationalists regard as an example of how to achieve exceptional results with cuddlier methods of teaching. Not content with its achievements, Singapore is now introducing reforms to improve creativity and reduce stress (see article<\/a>). This is not a sign of failure, but rather of a gradual, evidence-led approach to education reform\u2014the first of three lessons that Singapore offers the rest of the world.<\/p>\n
Where other countries often enact piecemeal and uncoordinated reforms, Singapore tries to look at the system as a whole. It invests heavily in education research. All reforms are tested, with the outcomes diligently monitored, before being rolled out. Close attention is paid to how new ideas and results should be applied in schools. Carefully developed textbooks, worksheets and worked examples\u2014practices often seen as outdated in the West\u2014are used to inject expertise into the classroom. The result is good alignment between assessments, accountability and teaching styles.<\/p>\n
The second lesson is to embrace Singapore\u2019s distinctive approach to teaching, notably of mathematics\u2014as America and England are already doing to some extent. It emphasises a narrower but deeper curriculum, and seeks to ensure that a whole class progresses through the syllabus. Struggling pupils get compulsory extra sessions to help them keep up; even the less-able do comparatively well. An analysis in 2016 in England found that the Singaporean approach boosted results, though it was somewhat watered down in transition.<\/p>\n
The third and most important lesson is to focus on developing excellent teachers. In Singapore, they get 100 hours of training a year to keep up to date with the latest techniques. The government pays them well, too. It accepts the need for larger classes (the average is 36 pupils, compared with 24 across the OECD). Better, so the thinking goes, to have big classes taught by excellent teachers than smaller ones taught by mediocre ones. Teachers who want more kudos but not the bureaucratic burden of running schools can become \u201cmaster teachers\u201d, with responsibility for training their peers. The best teachers get postings to the ministry of education and hefty bonuses: overall, teachers are paid about the same as their peers in private-sector professions. Teachers are also subject to rigorous annual performance assessments.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n