Letter from Chen Junyi
I DISAGREE with the points raised by Sarah Sum-Campbell "The cane is a bane" (March 26).
Firstly, her use of "well-documented research" to claim that children who witness violence suffer from psychological damage presumes to equate caning with violence and fails to distinguish between disciplinary caning and abusive violence.
The misuse of such research is clear — many children grow up without psychological damage after witnessing their peers caned for unacceptable conduct.
Please give children more credit — they can understand if it is explained to them what abuse is and what punishment for unacceptable conduct is, and if what they see is consistent with what they are taught.
There is nothing special in the writer's daughter being able to approach people with confidence. Many other children of the same age can do the same.
Despite what the writer might think, Western systems do not have a monopoly to define what is fair and open-minded for an education system. In addition, Singapore's invitation to foreign talent is not exclusive to Westerners.
It would be irresponsible for the Ministry of Education to impose one set of standards for foreign children and another for local children. Therefore, foreigners who choose to enrol their children in a local school should not expect different treatment for their children.
The writer should bear in mind that agreements and disagreements with the philosophy of caning is a personal issue and has no direct relevance with whether a Singaporean has spent any significant time overseas.
Singapore's education system is, I admit, not perfect. Even if caning were to stop, many Singaporean parents would still migrate for their children to undergo an education system elsewhere. There is no such thing as a perfect education system — people have to choose what they can live with and what they cannot live with. Some would find it is better to live where discipline is taken seriously.
From TODAY, Voices
Friday, 27-March-2009
No comments:
Post a Comment