Category: Society & Education

  • Singapore’s TFR – is the Education System really the issue?

    This video is extremely on point. I am heartened to hear that the Minister is well aware of all the issues.

    It is important to distinguish between why people don’t want to have kids, versus why they don’t want to have MORE kids. I think the reasons we hear from parents about the education system is one of the key reasons why many stop at 1 or 2. Of course, housing size, general affordability, and access to private vehicle will also affect these decisions.

    People not wanting to have a child altogether is — as minister points out — often a lifestyle choice. Why give up a nice (and tidy) house just for two, a car (not a minivan), annual travels instead of tuition fees, being able to easily immigrate for job growth? These all are likely reasons some avoid having children entirely.

    I personally didn’t think that much, I just “went with the flow”. But I have to be very frank that if it wasn’t for my wife — and now my children — I would probably have left the country for career opportunities when younger. 

    That said, the points on the education system really hits home. Perhaps one thing many do not know is that the PSLE is a one-of-a-kind system in the world. No other country puts children at age 11-12 through a nationwide high stakes exam. Malaysia had something similar and also did away with it some years ago. In most parts of the world, students automatically progress to middle or secondary school without an exam. Typically, entrance exams only apply if you wanted to get into a prestigious or private school.

    PSLE was devised in early post independence Singapore because we didn’t have the capacity for every citizen to have secondary education, and also because the education standard of the nation was low, PSLE was necessary as a blunt filter.

    But today, after all the tweaks and adjustments to the system over decades, the system is probably due for overhaul. The idea that we should do away with it, or push it further, is starting to make more sense. Perhaps regular, smaller exams should be used more as a diagnostic exam, rather than a singular high-stakes selection/placement exam like PSLE. The subject-based banding subtly happens (as it does now at primary 4) at every stage — perhaps every year or two — all the way to JC.

    The video also mentions a few important points about the post-AI world, just like the post-Internet world where I grew up in: is rote memorisation and certain knowledge skills still desirable or practical? How do we teach our next generation about creativity, cross-domain synthesis, learning to learn, judgment, morals — all the “human” things that we shouldn’t be outsourcing to AI?

    Further reading: History of the Singapore Primary School Leaving Examination

  • AI is replacing us because we’re getting lazier

    There are articles all over the Internet suggesting that AI will likely overtake humans because of its superior intelligence. But as an Adjunct Lecturer teaching the next generation of our workforce, I see a very different, more troubling picture. In fact, I’m very, very concerned.

    AI is not replacing people because it’s too smart – it is replacing them because too many (young) people are getting (very) lazy.

    Struggles Cultivate Deep Thinking

    We’ve entered an era where students and professionals alike can summon AI to write essays, generate code, answer technical questions, and even prepare reports with minimal input. I’m not even gonna lie about myself using ChatGPT to assist in writing this article – these tools are undeniably useful.

    But instead of being used to deepen understanding or accelerate learning, AI tools are too often being used to bypass the thinking process altogether.

    In my classes, I’ve noticed a sharp decline in students’ ability to reason through a problem. When presented with a coding exercise or a systems design question, many instinctively turn to ChatGPT or similar tools not as a partner, but as a crutch. They copy, paste, submit, and move on.

    The troubling part isn’t the use of AI. I advocate for responsible use of tools. The problem is the mindset shift. Students no longer struggle with problems; they are outsourcing the struggle. And in doing so, they’re missing the critical phase where actual learning occurs.

    A Systemic Problem

    This habit of mental offloading isn’t just a student issue. It’s a consequence of how we design our assessments, our learning environments, and our expectations.

    Many computer science courses today rely heavily on coursework and take-home assignments, which were great in the past – but today are easily completed with AI assistance. If we’re assessing output without scrutinising the process, we’re inviting this behaviour. We’re telling students: “We care that it’s done, not how you did it.”

    So naturally, they’ll take the fastest (aheem, laziest) route!

    Rethinking Assessment in the Age of AI

    We need to rethink how we teach and assess in AI-enabled classrooms. Here are a few ideas that I believe must become mainstream, especially in coding and technical disciplines:

    1 – Reverting to Closed-Book Assessments

    We need to bring back exam-style assessments. Closed-book exams and practical coding tests can help differentiate between those who’ve genuinely understood material and those who’ve coasted on generated output.

    2 – Live Presentations and Walkthroughs

    More emphasis should be placed on students explaining their thought process aloud – through live code reviews, technical walkthroughs, or project demos. If they can’t articulate why they chose a certain algorithm or how they structured your app, they probably didn’t understand it.

    3 – Practice Testing and Distributed Practice

    Rather than one or two big assignments, we need more frequent, lower-stakes practice tests spread out over time. This supports long-term retention and builds foundational understanding. Students should be repeatedly exposed to problems in slightly varied forms to encourage generalisation of concepts.

    However, it is also important to bear in mind that this also places more workload on teachers.

    4 – Focus on Problem Formulation

    We should assess the ability to ask good questions, define the problem clearly, and justify trade-offs. These are skills AI tools are unable to do without human assistance, and are also skills that remain essential in professional engineering environments.

    Laziness is Human Nature

    AI encourages the human tendency to avoid the hard work of thinking. If we’re not careful, we’re going to raise a generation of engineers who can prompt tools but can’t think critically, debug effectively, or innovate independently.

    The most valuable engineers, designers, and analysts in the future will not be those who blindly use AI, but those who know when to trust it, when to doubt it, and how to surpass it.

  • Rethinking Technical Interviews: Lessons from My Experience

    Rethinking Technical Interviews: Lessons from My Experience

    Earlier this year, after being laid off, I went through several interviews for technical roles. These interviews often involved take-home tests, coding assignments, and live coding sessions. While I completed a few, I eventually started declining most of them, finding many to be time-consuming and, frankly, ineffective.

    The Limits of Coding Tests

    Coding tests can serve as a basic filter for entry-level positions, but their value diminishes when applied to senior-level roles. If you’re hiring a Senior Engineer with 10–20 years of experience, coding proficiency isn’t the primary skill to assess—especially in a world where AI tools like ChatGPT can handle many coding tasks faster and more efficiently.

    Instead, the focus should shift to evaluating Problem-Solving, Critical Thinking, Learning Aptitude, and Communication Skills—competencies that I find many interviews overlook. These are the skills that enable senior engineers to lead, adapt, and contribute meaningfully to a team.

    The Core Skills: Problem Solving, Critical Thinking, Learning, and Communication

    These skills apply to candidates across all experience levels. Over the years, I’ve hired many mid-career switchers, often with limited coding backgrounds. People ask how I gauge their suitability, and my approach is simple:

    • Assess their problem-solving ability.
    • Understand their interests and what excites them.
    • Observe the quality of their questions and how well they articulate their thoughts.

    While I do conduct technical screenings to ensure foundational competency, I avoid assigning time-wasting take-home tasks or algorithmic puzzles that don’t reflect real-world job demands.

    Navigating the Era of AI-Assisted Interviews

    The rise of AI tools this year has also transformed interviews. Candidates can now use AI dicatation off-screen to assist with technical questions, making traditional coding tests even less reliable indicators of ability.

    To counter this, I focus on questions AI can’t answer effectively:

    • What are your hobbies?
    • What are you learning now, and why?
    • If you could explore something new tomorrow, what would it be?
    • What’s the most challenging or interesting project you’ve worked on?
    • How would you approach solving this real-world problem based on a scenario?

    These questions help reveal a candidate’s genuine interests, adaptability, and approach to problem-solving.

    The Rapid Pace of Technology

    Over my 20-year career, technology has evolved very quickly. I’ve worked with Turbo Pascal, PERL, Java, PHP, C, C#/.NET, Swift, Python, JavaScript, and countless frameworks, libraries, tools and operating systems. Every shift required adaptability and a willingness to learn.

    A person who can learn and adapt will thrive as technologies, tools, and frameworks continue to change.

    Final Thoughts

    Hiring the right people isn’t about filtering for a specific tech stack or testing for algorithmic skills your team may never need. It’s about finding individuals who can solve problems, adapt quickly, and communicate effectively. Those are the qualities that matter—and they’re what will drive your team forward.

  • How AI will transform Learning and Hiring in Software Development

    How AI will transform Learning and Hiring in Software Development

    The era of Google

    I remember my time as a student back in 1999: a new search engine, Google, was starting to edge out AltaVista and Yahoo — both of which dominated the Internet search landscape throughout the 90s. It was an exciting time for Computer Engineering, as open-source software like Linux was gaining traction in Enterprises. Microsoft and the Java ecosystem were also equipping us with powerful IDEs like Visual Studio, JBuilder, and IntelliJ with features like code completion. Yet, despite these advancements, we still relied heavily on books as primary sources of information. Exams were still handwritten, even for coding: we memorised library functions and syntax, despite having access to the Internet and some fairly advanced tools.

    Our schools insisted on handwritten code and taught us programming using Notepad instead of IDEs. At the time, student laptops were underpowered, and IDEs were huge memory and CPU hogs, running painfully slow. Despite the inconvenience, students like me made every endeavour to set them up, knowing the efficiencies they offered.

    Today, this all sounds ridiculous. With modern IDEs, who would memorise hundreds of function calls or API structures? I actively work across multiple programming languages and frameworks and use countless DevOps tools and certainly can not memorise everything; perhaps it’s age, but it’s nearly impossible to keep all these details in my head.

    The rise of AI

    Twenty-five years on, the world is vastly different, but education systems still lag in adapting to technological shifts. Educators remain cautious about how AI impacts academic integrity and the assessment of written or coding assignments. While AI use isn’t necessarily discouraged, it’s also not fully encouraged; students are however already using AI, much as we once turned to Google and IDEs in place of traditional textbooks.

    For Software Development, AI coding assistants are here to stay, yet they’re unlikely to replace Software Developers soon — especially those who leverage AI-enabled tools. There are stories of startups built by non-technical founders using AI-generated code, but the actual efficacy of purely AI-driven development remains unproven. 

    So, what should we teach students, and how should we evaluate professionals?

    Educational institutions and hiring managers must rethink how they assess skills in this new landscape.

    Developing Strong Fundamentals

    AI models today, especially large language models (LLMs), are not infallible. They can produce erroneous or nonsensical responses. Strong foundational knowledge enables students and professionals to evaluate AI outputs critically and refine prompts to achieve the desired results. From my experience with students using AI-generated code, those lacking fundamentals struggle to interpret the code correctly and often can’t integrate it with existing codebases. For instance, AI models can generate verbose scaffolding or unnecessary details that may disrupt the intended functionality. Without solid fundamentals, these additional complexities create confusion instead of clarity.

    Cultivating Critical Thinking

    Critical thinking is crucial for discerning when and how to use AI solutions effectively. Humans bring valuable contextual knowledge to problem-solving — something not easily available to AI. Tackling complex real-world problems often involves navigating nuances such as geographical, cultural, and political factors. As a simple example, a form with “first and last name” fields may not be culturally appropriate in some countries, especially in parts of Asia where such naming conventions are uncommon. While an AI model might “know” this in theory, it often requires a user’s insight and critical thinking to specify it in an AI prompt when generating a form.

    Mastering Communication

    Although AI can generate well-structured text, effective communication remains a uniquely human skill. Communication goes beyond words to include emotional intelligence, empathy, and cultural sensitivity. AI may one day grow up with us and learn every little bit of detail of our lives (it is a scary thought, but absolutely possible future) but it won’t easily replicate the nuances of face-to-face interactions, emotional cues, or the subtleties involved in team dynamics. Communication skills, therefore, remain vital for collaborating with others and expressing complex ideas in ways that are both clear and motivating.

    Conclusion

    As we move forward, Software Developers will still need to synthesize large amounts of information before even engaging AI. We may no longer need to memorise every technical detail or write every bit of code, but we’ll still need a robust foundation to understand, prompt, and critically evaluate AI-generated responses. AI is reshaping learning and hiring, but the fundamentals of understanding, thinking critically, and communicating effectively will remain core competencies in software development for the foreseeable future.

    This article was also posted on Medium.com:
    https://medium.com/@detach8/how-ai-will-transform-learning-and-hiring-in-software-development-642e3d678cc5

  • Open Source Primary and Secondary Educational Resources

    Open Source Primary and Secondary Educational Resources

    Can Primary, or even Secondary education materials in Singapore be made Open Source so that educators or even members of the public contribute and consume freely? Can and should such education materials be made free and open for all?

    What triggered me was the need to sign up for an account before I could even browse the booklist at an appointed book store for my child’s Primary school. After glancing through the list of books, it’s clear that only a few handful of publishers monopolize this entire market.

    I recall having gone through much of my youth depending on many external/supplementary resources including the famous “10-year series” as well as various other exercise books, notes, etc.

    When I went to Polytechnic where I was given a choice of my own, I did not buy a single textbook after my first year and instead relied on lecture notes (which were annoyingly only for purchase at the school’s printer) and additional material either on the Internet or the library for most of my studies.

    I also recall books getting stolen, because people who didn’t bring them didn’t want to get punished, so the stole others’. I also recall ripping apart super thick books by chapter so we would carry less weight around to school, and then getting scolded for it because defacing a textbook was an offence. (For the youngsters who don’t understand: back in those days we carry every single book to school every day – there were no lockers and we can’t leave them under our desks. The idea was that if we left the books in school, we don’t study them at home.)

    Long story short, my personal experience with textbooks hasn’t been great; if textbooks were perfect, our teachers wouldn’t need to come up with additional materials and creative ways to teach.

    Imagine a world where we could opt for books in print or PDF. Imagine a world where we could just print only the chapters we wanted. Imagine a world where if your child saw a typo error could just submit an edit back, and maybe even get recognized for it. Imagine a world where if we needed to see a newer or older version of a book we could simply download a different PDF, or look at a specific git tag? Imagine a world where underprivileged families wouldn’t have to get sponsorship to buy textbooks, but instead go and print a chapter they need at a community center?

    I’m sure every year thousands of educators create content that would have made our materials much better and more up-to-date if it were contributed back to a central, open, textbook. Our education ministry MOE can then act as the maintainer of the project – to curate and validate content before accepting it mainstream.

    Question is, where and how to start? Can our education ministry drive this? Can we see in 5, 10 years that Singapore has built such a strong Open Source resource that we have other countries use and also contribute back?

    Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_educational_resources

  • Teachers – the unsung heroes

    Teachers – the unsung heroes

    Not his first “skool”

    My First Skool (MFS) isn’t Ethan’s first school; he had transferred from another private school which shall remain unnamed (although it is noteworthy that it was a well-known franchise.)

    Ethan joined MFS at Nursery level (age 4). At the time, Ethan had just gone through 4 main teachers, 2 principals and countless part-time “assistant” teachers, plus 2 hand-foot-mouth-disease (HFMD) episodes, and it was an incredibly difficult time trying to encourage his return to school. He was excited to go to a “new school” for the first week or two, but his excitement weaned quickly.

    Every parent probably thinks their kid is a genius, and I was no different. Some of his “achievements” include being able to name both primary and secondary colours by age 2, identify almost every single brand of car on the street by age 3, and even discern differences that sets almost similar car models apart (Lamborghini Huracan Performanté vs Evo – I can barely tell the difference!)

    As a kid, he was also incredibly observant, catching details of things we usually wouldn’t notice. I was led to believe he has a photographic memory.

    At 2-3 years, he was also able to remix words into the tunes of nursery rhymes:

    两只car car,两只car car,跑得快,跑得快。
    一只没有headlight,一只没有taillight,真奇怪,真奇怪。

    Ethan, ~3 years old

    However, Ethan had always seemed distracted and restless in class. Teachers from his previous school and also MFS had highlighted this, but over time, his behaviour seemed to have improved – especially in MFS. I would be lying if I said I hadn’t at some point thought he might be ADHD/ADD.

    The bad experience

    It is not until much later now at the age of 6 that Ethan had finally explained why he did not like going to school: his (previous) teachers were very fierce and always scolded him, and he hated that they simply “dragged” him to class. Thankfully, he had not expressed the same sentiments for his teachers at MFS.

    Given his incredible memory for things, it is likely that his early experiences left a scar in his mind that school is “not fun”. He might, at some point, have even been traumatised by the constant change of faces and treatment from different teachers when at the age of 2-3 children are mostly seeking security from familiar faces and battling separation anxiety.

    I am glad that Ethan’s attitude towards school has improved ever since he entered MFS – with much credits to teacher Stefanie, Zhou 老师 and teacher Celine. While most of Ethan’s previous teachers only complained of his inattentiveness and restlessness, there was only one other teacher from the previous school (who eventually resigned) who observed that Ethan was a little different – similarly, the teachers at MFS then expressed that while Ethan seems distracted, he is actually listening and capable of answering questions afterwards. Of course, I understand that his restless behaviour is, however, a distraction to both the teacher and classmates, and needs some work.

    Finding MFS, and the dedicated teachers was a matter of sheer luck during a time of desperation as I sought to get Ethan out of a disastrous pre-school experience, but should not be taken for granted. MFS (or at least the branch Ethan is in) had the operational scale and capability to provide a good support structure for the teachers, and that has helped the teachers remain dedicated and committed. With scale, it makes manpower planning easier. With scale, it is able to hire more teachers or assistants to relieve workload when required. With scale, teachers have a growth path in their career.

    The primary school rush

    Ethan will be enrolling for primary school in a few weeks’ time. I am more convinced than ever that it is not necessary to get into a name-brand school, and could never understand the kiasu-ism that surrounds P1 registration. I believe that in every school there will be good and bad teachers. As long as there isn’t terrible peer influence (which is more a function of the location/neighbourhood than the school’s reputation), any MOE school in Singapore is possibly a decent school.

    Not shown accurately in P1 registration data is the population of the applicants in the neighbourhood versus the capacity of nearby schools. The popular schools in each neighbourhood tend to have a disproportionally high oversubscription ratio which feeds on itself year after year, and has no direct correlation to the actual quality of the school’s teaching staff, management and curriculum delivery style. For example, Clementi is an incredibly dense neighbourhood, and no doubt Nan Hua Primary may be a good school, the high oversubscription ratio might be just a function of town population.

    I was paying almost 3 times more (before subsidy) in a private name-brand franchise school, which is clear that even “throwing money at the problem” could not guarantee my child’s early formative school experience. Fancy award-winning programmes, music and dance, arts, whatever it may be, had little actual effect on the child’s development if teachers are overwhelmed or have no passion in their work.

    It is my belief that a school that is not overwhelmed with students and demanding parents will likely function better, and hence, using a similar logic – an over-subscribed primary school may not always be better. Of course, there are arguments that lousier schools have other things to deal with – such as bad students – but what makes one think that good schools don’t have bad students?

    The role teachers play

    Teachers should not underestimate the impact or influence they have on every child. Children spend most of their waking hours in highly developed countries like Singapore in school. Pre-schoolers are in school for an average of 45-50 hours per week – more hours than average adults are at work.

    Teachers work even longer hours then – they have to prepare for materials, be in school before kids arrive, and leave only when the last child has left. Rain or shine, COVID or HFMD. Passionate, dedicated and committed teachers like Ethan’s teachers at MFS are the under-appreciated unsung heros of our modern, highly-educated society.

    I, too, hope that one day I can become a teacher and contribute back to society. Without our education system and teachers, Singapore wouldn’t have been what she is today.

    Wishing all teachers and those in the education profession an advanced Happy National Day and a Happy Teachers’ Day 2021 – thank you!