By TAN SAI SIONG
MR LAWRENCE SIA, president of the Singapore Teachers' Union, warned earlier this month that the new school programmes should be implemented gradually or the pressure on teachers may reach "bursting point". Many teachers, interviewed at the union's biennial conference, agreed.
It is understandable why they are worried by the two mammoth initiatives unveiled: the National Education programme hot on the heels of the launch of the $2 billion IT masterplan to have all schools here use computers in teaching and learning.
There is a fixed rhythm in a teacher's life. She goes through a syllabus, tests, teaches and invigilates; one semester follows another, broken by school holidays and then the whole cycle begins again. Her customers - schoolchildren - are locked in for one whole year at a time, and enjoy a service not much varied from one cohort to the next.
In a life filled with so much predictability, the recent government moves must feel like handfuls of pebbles being flung constantly into a placid lake, making it impossible for the ripples in the water to settle down for long.
But our teachers' apprehension is probably misplaced. The changes introduced will open new horizons for them, providing a heaven-sent chance for each to shine. I refer in particular to that part of the National Education programme which will involve the imparting of Singapore's history to more school children and in greater depth.
The competition to become a star in teaching this subject is wide open while the material for original approaches to the topic paves our streets, literally.
First, the absence of serious competition. Trained competence in this field is scarce.
Alumni records dating back to 1953 show that the National University of Singapore has produced a total of 2,600 graduates who offered history as one of their subjects in the final year. This is miniscule compared to a total of more than 90,000 graduates from the NUS.
The Ministry of Education employs 479 teachers to teach history in its secondary schools and junior colleges, compared to a payroll of 10,149 for these establishments.
Upcoming competition, too, does not appear to be much. The National Institute of Education, which started its bachelor programme in 1991, has so far sent 153 history graduates, who are also qualified teachers, into the world.
Meanwhile, the number of students offering history for A-level has fallen from 1,118 in 1992 to 607 last year, in line with an unrelenting drop in the arts stream's enrolment. And not all A-level history students will do history at the university, while those who do, not all will opt to teach on graduation.
Unless there is a sharp reversal, the future supply of indigenous expertise in the teaching of history is unlikely to turn into a flood.
History lesson at the museum ... older teachers would have the advantage of experiencing recent historic events first-hand.So, those already in the teaching profession can stake their claim on the subject, if they desire. For older teachers - 54 per cent of teachers are aged 40 and above - they would have the advantage of having experienced many of Singapore's more recent historic events first-hand.
This brings me to the richness of materials available for teachers who want to go beyond text books or want their lessons to be more than dates, facts and who did what to whom.
The National Archives has a repository of 7,000 hours of tapes of mostly Singaporeans speaking about their part in Singapore's history. Of the 1,901 persons interviewed since 1979, about 1,200 - or 85 per cent - have agreed to share their spoken thoughts and memories with the public.
NA staff are friendly and accessible and will open their collection to teachers and pupils. For those wanting pointers on where to begin their pursuit, it offers an excellent two-volume guide to the sources of history in Singapore.
The books are available for reference at its premises, providing not only information on the comprehensive public records held by the NA but also inspiration on what topics might be explored rewardingly.
If the material at the Archives is considered a little over the heads of primary and lower secondary school children, then teachers need look no further than the constituency where they live, the street corner they pass every day or a popular shopping venue like Ngee Ann City for alternative ideas.
Each will embody a potential topic for a lesson. Why is Clementi called Clementi, for example? It is the name of Singapore's 14th governor. This could lead to discussions on the 15 pre-war governors whom Singapore enjoyed - or suffered, depending on one's perspective - as a colony.
Variations of this theme could be played ad infinitum, making history alive and relevant to young minds which may as much enjoy knowing how the street they live on got its name, as getting a taste of World War II through sweet potato porridge.
For myself, I like pondering that condominium called Yong An Park, next door but one to Times House. How many who live in it, or pass it, know that it was once the site of Panglima Perang, a grand house which belonged to Tan Jiak Kim, the son of Tan Kim Seng?
I wouldn't have known that either, but for an ex-colleague who, if he cut in and out of traffic along Kim Seng Road, would reply "Yes", when scolded for driving as if he was on his grandfather's road.
Indeed, Tan Kim Seng was his great-great grandfather. Before Panglima Perang was made dust by the wrecker's ball, he was invited back, along with other family members, to pick out a momento or two.
With what poignancy did he do that, picking out some reminder of his ancestry for keepsake? And with what poignancy will Singaporeans pick over our collective ancestry, as we learn to delve a little more into our past? Teachers with the right elan can show Singaporeans the way.
First published in The Straits Times, June 13, 1997
Next: When people went bananas over money
Copyright © 1998 Singapore Press Holdings. All Rights Reserved.
