Reciprocal Learning, Pedagogy and High-Performing Education Systems: Learnings from and for Singapore

ABSTRACT

Employing Connelly and Xu’s (this issue) conceptualisation of reciprocal learning, the article explores the potential for reciprocal learning about pedagogy provided by a body of PISA-inspired literature on high-performing education systems. I argue that the opportunities for reciprocal learning provided by that body of literature is rather limited and problematic because of its uncritical acceptance of the OECD’s basic premises about PISA and because of its employment of the ‘best practices’ approach to policy borrowing. Using Singapore as a case, I contend that reciprocal learning needs to be informed by the cultural historical narratives behind the development of an education system and a theory of pedagogy that locates the practice of teaching within a broad social, institutional, and instructional context of schooling. I discuss lessons from and for Singapore concerning the purposes of schooling, institutional norms and arrangements, and pedagogical practice.

KEYWORDS:

• Reciprocal learning
• PISA
• Pedagogy
• High-performing education systems
• Singapore

Acknowledgments

An earlier version of this paper was presented as a plenary speech at the 5^th Annual International Conference on East-West Reciprocal Learning, North East China Normal University, Changchun, China, May 18- 22, 2018. I am very grateful to the conference organisers, Shijing Xu and Michael Connelly, for the invitation and financial support. I am also very thankful to Cheryl Craig for her editorial comments and suggestions on this paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. In Normal Bilingual stream, students take English and one mother tongue, and take Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) at the end of Primary 6. In Extended Bilingual stream, students also take English and one mother tongue but sit for PSLE at the end of primary 8. In Monolingual stream, Students focus on learning English and basic numeracy; they are prepared for vocational training.

2. In Special stream, students learn English and Chinese at the first language level, and take ‘O’ level exams at the end of secondary 4. In Express stream, students learn English at the first language level and mother tongue at the second language level, and take ‘O’ level exams at the end of secondary 4. In Normal stream, students take a reduced curriculum and site for GCE ‘N’ level exams at the end of secondary 4.

3. According to Gopinathan and Mardiana (2013), The new NA curriculum planned for implementation in 2013 will provide two new ‘through-train’ pathways for students who do well in their Singapore-Cambridge General Certifi cate Examination (GCE) N-level examinations via direct admission into the polytechnics, and to the higher diploma courses in ITE. NA students may also take a maximum of any two GCE ‘O’ Level examination subjects at Secondary 4 from an expanded range of subjects (MOE n.d.). A similar revamp of the NT curriculum allows for a closer articulation of subject choices across the NA and the NT streams, thus enabling NT students to take on subjects of the NA curriculum. (p. 24).

4. While no information is available on how the sampling of students for PISA tests in Singapore was actually conducted, it is reasonable to believe that the procedure, developed by the OECD, takes into account of the social, economic, and ethnic backgrounds of students. The OECD is committed to ‘diversity data collection practices, focusing on racial, ethnic and indigenous identity’ (OECD, 2018, p. 6). A two-stage sampling procedure was implemented: ‘The first stage consisted of sampling individual schools in which 15-year-old students could be enrolled’. In the second stage, ‘Experts from the PISA Consortium performed the sample selection process for most participating countries and monitored it closely in those countries that selected their own samples’ (OECD, 2015, p. 155).

5. CRPP is a research centre that, established in 2003 and funded by the Ministry of Education, aims at providing a comprehensive empirical, interpretative, quantitative and qualitative picture of the Singapore school system.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Zongyi Deng

Zongyi Deng is professor of Curriculum and Pedagogy at UCL Institute of Education, University College London. He is also an executive editor of Journal of Curriculum Studies (JCS) and has held faculty positions at Nanyang Technological University and the University of Hong Kong. His interest areas include curriculum content or subject matter, curriculum theory, didactics (Didaktik), Chinese education, and comparative and international education. His publications appear in JCS, Curriculum Inquiry, Comparative Education, Teaching and Teacher Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, Science Education and other international journals. His forthcoming book is Content, Curriculum Theory and Didaktik: Beyond Social Realism (Routledge).