local or international school? which is better?
of course, this is in response to some article some days back and my school's shocking defeat to UWC in the finals of "The Arena"
now there is a rise in the number of international schools in Singapore. and to a certain extent, many feel that these international schools are a notch above the our local schools. i mean, the example is clear in the Arena, where RI got thrashed 94 points to 6 by UWC. my school lost the finals.
but yet when we see their arguements, i seriously think that RI should have won. and all the more my school should have won. simply put, UWC did not have solid arguements.
so is there a bias towards international schools? i'm not pointing fingers and saying that it's their fault. so let me rephrase. maybe now, it's not about the arguements, but how you put it across. maybe now in our world, EQ is more important that IQ.
so are international schools better than local schools? is it the difference in education system?
from what i know, international schools definitely have a more relaxed curriculum, promoting holistic learning, independent learning and stuff like that. local schools promote a more, well, rigid system, with criterias, promotional exams, stuff like that.
but it is unfair to say which institution is the better of the two. local and international schools do have each of their own plus points. each one suits one target audience.
but we see international school students enjoying more success i think. so maybe we shouldn't be focusing on our degrees, certs and stuff like that. maybe now, EQ is more important that IQ, and holistic education may be the way to go.
a thing to ponder about.
posted @ 10:33 PM |