Expanded Direct Admission Scheme in Singapore- myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theExpanded Direct Admission Scheme in Singapore. Answer: Introduction One of the best systems that exist in Singapore is their education system. It is ranking as the best in the world. One of the recent changes the system is the introduction of Direct Admission Scheme which aims at admitting students gifted non-academically in areas of sports and arts. However, in recent times, there are debates on whether it is achieving its intended purpose or if it is time to call for a review on the same. Therefore, in this paper, I intend to take the position that there is need to examine the scheme so that it achieves its intended purpose which is to promote students gifted non-academically. Issues and Argument for or against DSA Firstly, the scheme by definition denotes a program put in place in Singapore to select students gifted in sports and arts for top schools which will make it possible for them to realize their full potential (Neihart, Teo, 2013). In this regard, the students may secure a place in the top secondary schools without sitting for academic entry examination. In its current state, the program faces criticism of being diluted by academically gifted students, parents and heads of schools to erode its initial purpose. Several issues surround the current expansion of the scheme. Firstly, the government believes that there is the need for the education system to have a different outlook in the sense that it does not focus only on the academic ability but also other talents like arts and sports. Secondly, some citizen of Singapore claims that allowing application from students gifted academically and those not gifted for the same does not make the scheme serve its initial goal which was to nurture talents that are not academically (Ponnusamy, Gopinathan, 2013). Thus, below are arguments that show why only those with arts and sports talents must pass through the expanded scheme. Firstly, the reason for a further revision is to conform to its initial goal which is to cater for students with art and sports talents. However, over the recent past, and because the avenue does not forbid those gifted academically to pass through, is being used for the academically gifted at the expense of the other group (Christensen, 2015). For instance, the Ministry of Education (MOE) 2012 research indicates that sixty percent of those admitted via the scheme would have done the same based on their academic score, and only forty percent represented students talented in either arts or sports (Tan, 2017). Therefore, it is evident that a program meant to enable one group to interact and use better resources is open to all parties in a competitive way. Thus, the emerging trend based on the research calls for a revision of the scheme to enable only those talented in sports and arts and not the academically gifted ones. Secondly, the existence of Primary School Leaving Examination gives an opportunity for the academically gifted students to prove themselves and join top schools. Therefore, there is no need at all to incorporate them or rather give them a second opportunity to compete in other settings (Jiayi, 2014). Direct School Admission School expanded scheme ought to solely be left for those with arts and sports talents to access top schools which will ultimately enable them to succeed in what they are best at and not academics (Wan, Liu-Loh, Cheng, Khim, Wong, Krishnan, Hwan, 2015). The top schools will, therefore, have students that are gifted in academic, arts and sports. On the other hand, there are arguments on whether the DSA is a back door for students to join top schools. For instance, the minister for Education categorically said that the DSAs aim is not to enable students to get into popular schools which they do not deserve. Thus, as much as it is a good idea to phase out students talented academically in this scheme, those passing through DSA has to undergo thorough interview and auditions. In addition to that, making the scheme to be purely for those with talents in arts and sports bring diversity into top schools (Tan, 2013). It is also emerging that top schools use this system to admit academically gifted students from elite schools. It is for this reason that the ministry ought to review the system to ensure that only non-academic talents apply for the same. On the other hand, it is not prudent to argue that a revision of the scheme must be done to lock out those gifted academically. Firstly, the process of DSA involves interview, auditions, and tests. Therefore, in as much as they possess academic talents, they will also be tested on non-academic talents. Therefore, to a larger extent, revising the scheme to lock them out is a bit illogical. Additionally, a good education system comprises of arts, sports, and academics. Therefore, it is worth noting that students with all these qualities are way too desirable and bring a lot of diversity in a school (Chua, 2016). Lastly, advocating for the interest of one group must not be by suppressing the other. Therefore, there ought not to be any revision to the current DSA scheme to make it purely for nonacademic talent, but rather, one that embraces all groups and selects students based on merits. Conclusion Expanded DSA is a program in Singapore that aims at increasing the intake of students in non-academic talents into top secondary schools. However, issues are emerging from the public as to whether the scheme must involve only those talented non-academically. Some of the arguments supporting the review argue that revising the scheme will make it possible to achieve its initial objective. Additionally, giving room for another party to join the program reduces the diversity for which the program aims to bring into top schools. On the other hand, not accepting an application for students gifted academically through DSA is illogical as they will undergo the same tests to determine their talents in arts and sports. But still, there is need for the scheme to reserve application for students gifted non-academically as the reasons for the same outweigh the other. References Christensen, S. (2015). Healthy competition and unsound comparison: reforming educational competition in Singapore. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 13(4), 553-573. Chua, J. (2016). Dance education in Singapore: Policy, discourse, and practice. Arts Education Policy Review, 1-19. Jiayi, Z. (2014). Debunking the Myth of the Lazy Malays. Mendaki Occasional Paper Series, 1. Neihart, M., Teo, C. T. (2013). Addressing the needs of the gifted in Singapore. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36(3), 290-306. Ponnusamy, L., Gopinathan, S. (2013). Singapore: Education in transition. Education in South-East Asia, 20, 233.Tan, C. (2017). Private Supplementary Tutoring and Parentocracy in Singapore. Interchange, 1- 15. Tan, J. (2013). Singapore: the Malay Ethnic MinorityPlaying Perennial Catch-up in Education?. Education in South-East Asia, 20, 255. Wan, M. T., Liu-Loh, M., Cheng, W., Khim, M. T. S., Wong, M. M., Krishnan, M., ... Hwan, C. (2015). OUR SCHOOL LEADERS.