Index

Mark Baildon

Authors List

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Mark Baildon

Authors List

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Author/s:

Baildon, Mark (National Institute of Education (Singapore) Keywords Social Studies Junior College Secondary School inquiry base Why inquiry-based learning? Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is now considered the gold standard in curriculum and classroom practice. If we consider inquiry to be the methodical building of evidence-based claims and arguments, it is central to authentic intellectual work, disciplinary reasoning, […]

Baildon, Mark (National Institute of Education (Singapore)

Keywords
Social Studies
Junior College
Secondary School
inquiry base

Why inquiry-based learning?
Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is now considered the gold standard in curriculum and classroom practice. If we consider inquiry to be the methodical building of evidence-based claims and arguments, it is central to authentic intellectual work, disciplinary reasoning, developing an informed and participative citizenry and 21st century skills, such as critical and creative thinking, problem-solving and even empathy. Inquiry is a method for building knowledge and is fundamental to learning. However, despite calls for everyone to jump on the inquiry bandwagon, and it is difficult to find anyone not in favor of the inquiry approach in education, it does seem that IBL is challenging to enact in classrooms.  Research focusing on IBL in Singapore indicates that inquiry instruction remains teacher-centric and teachers are unsure about how to use inquiry as a core pedagogical approach (Costes-Onishi, Baildon, & Aghazadeh, in press). What might account for some of these challenges?

First of all, perhaps educators have set the bar too high for what inquiry should look like in classrooms. Maybe we need a more charitable and age-appropriate view of IBL. Inquiry actually is quite fundamental to being human. Even as infants we begin to inquire about the world; we use our senses to experience both the physical and social world around us, and with the help of knowledgeable others (e.g. our parents or other family members) we begin to make sense of our experience and ourselves. Eventually we learn to ask questions, to wonder, to experiment and to make meaning from experience. As we go through life, we might even engage in fairly significant inquiries about who we are, what kind of person we want to be, how we might contribute to society and what will make our lives meaningful and purposeful. To get good at something in work or play, likely requires some degree of inquiry into the field of interest in order to develop the necessary knowledge, skills and dispositions to perform well in that field. As citizens, we inquire into societal concerns by reading about a public issue, talking with others about it and getting enough information to be able to develop an informed position. The point is, inquiry might be considered part and parcel of so many facets of our lives that we tend to forget that inquiry is what we are doing in varying degrees when we learn something new, think carefully about what we are doing, who we want to be and what is good for our lives and society.

However, whether we call it inquiry or not likely depends on the extent to which these efforts might be considered active, persistent and careful, the degree to which one reflects upon experience and actually learns, grows and develops through that process of making meaning of experience. As Parker (2011) argues, as humans we experience things and we reflect on or theorise what these things mean. We then test our theories – in new experiences or by hearing others’ views and feedback, for example – and revise them in accordance with new experiences, new ways of looking at or thinking about things (i.e., theories) and in light of newfound or more compelling reasons and evidence. According to Stanley (2010), this makes inquiry a “method of intelligence.” While we might be predisposed to these dispositions, these more methodical and intelligent ways of thinking most certainly have to be cultivated, developed and practiced. So, to answer why IBL, we might say that inquiry is core to learners constructing knowledge, that it is fundamental to lifelong learning, and that it provides a “method of intelligence” that is vital to living and working in society.

Download Full Article

Author/s:
, , , , ,

Suny Matt Gaydos (South Korea) Tharuka Prematillake Thibbotuwawa (National Institute of Education, Singapore) Neo Wei Leng (National Institute of Education, Singapore) Connie Tan Keni (National Institute of Education, Singapore) Suhaimi Afandi (National Institute of Education, Singapore) Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore)) Keywords History Junior College Secondary School Surrender of Singapore Game Design Serious Fun: Game Design to Support Learning […]

Suny Matt Gaydos (South Korea)
Tharuka Prematillake Thibbotuwawa (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Neo Wei Leng (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Connie Tan Keni (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Suhaimi Afandi (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore))

Keywords
History
Junior College
Secondary School
Surrender of Singapore
Game Design

Serious Fun: Game Design to Support Learning about the Surrender of Singapore
Chronology, or putting past events in temporal order, is a starting point for making sense of the past (Seixas & Morton, 2013). However, sequencing the past into chronological order requires more than the memorization of events and their dates. Chronological thinking is central to historical reasoning because it enables us to organize our thinking about the past, consider relationships between events, determine cause and effect, and identify the structure or “plotline” of stories told about the past (i.e., those contained in accounts or historical narratives). It entails more than simply filling out a timeline, although timelines are essential tools for helping students understand chronological order and cause and effect relationships, and other patterns in history.

In this article, we highlight the development of a game, Singapore Surrenders!, collaboratively designed by a group of historians, history education specialists, and game designers to help students develop their chronological reasoning skills and to learn about events leading to Singapore’s surrender during World War II. We outline our conceptualization of the game, the process of designing the game, and its implementation in an undergraduate course on Singapore history.

The Thinking behind the Design
The Singapore Surrenders! game was conceptualized as a part of The Historian’s Lab, an effort initiated by the Humanities and Social Studies Education (HSSE) Academic Group at the National Institute of Education.  The theoretical framework which defines The Historian’s Lab has been generally influenced by the work of Vygotsky (1978) and Bruner (1977), especially with regard to their views on the child as an active problem-solver, having his or her own ways of making sense of the world, and whose level of psychological development can be potentially improved under proper adult guidance or collaboration with more capable peers. In these classrooms, the teacher designs and facilitates dynamic learning experiences and supports the child’s construction of knowledge by encouraging active participation and collaboration (Mercer, 1991). Notions of constructivism, situated learning (Lave, 1988; Lave & Wenger, 1991) and cognitive social learning (Rogoff & Lave, 1984; Rogoff, Matusov, & White, 1996) have guided the Lab’s design of curriculum materials and rich tasks to support student learning. These ideas may be summarized by the four principles that undergird the project’s approach to learning and knowledge construction, namely: a) that learning is interactional and collaborative in nature; b) that learning occurs through participation in a community; c) that knowledge is socially constructed within specific contexts and social engagements; and d) that learner competency can be progressively developed through the co-sharing of knowledge and the design of appropriate scaffolding and guidance.

Download Full Article

Author/s:
, ,

Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore)) Michelle Lin (Pei Hwa Secondary School, Singapore) Gean Chia (National Institute of Education, Singapore) Keywords Social Studies Junior College Secondary School Conceptual Understanding in Social Studies Using Technology Introduction Social studies concepts are tools for understanding our experience, the past, and the social world. They are broad, organizing ideas that can […]

Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore))
Michelle Lin (Pei Hwa Secondary School, Singapore)
Gean Chia (National Institute of Education, Singapore)

Keywords
Social Studies
Junior College
Secondary School
Conceptual Understanding in Social Studies
Using Technology

Introduction
Social studies concepts are tools for understanding our experience, the past, and the social world. They are broad, organizing ideas that can be expressed in one or two words and they are defined by key characteristics or attributes. They help us think about groups of objects, actions, people, issues, or relationships in the social world and can be applied to make sense of new situations and information that we encounter in our experience. Concepts help us learn by organizing new information and experience into mental constructs or schema. In social studies, concepts like trade-offs, identity, integration, and interdependence serve these purposes.

Important concepts that structure Issue One in Singapore’s new Social Studies syllabus include citizenship, trade-offs and governance. For example, to understand the concept of governance students are expected to understand the functions of governments, such as rule-making (i.e., laws) and the role of government in working for the good of society by maintaining order and ensuring justice (with each – the social good, order, and governance – also core social studies concepts necessary for students to understand). By understanding that governance consists of these common attributes – rule making, maintaining order and ensuring justice – no matter which society or government they are examining, students will be better positioned to think about governance, how different governments function, and analyze the role of government in making laws, maintaining order, and ensuring justice. They will be better able to think about the role that government plays in their own experience, the laws that affect them as young people, and what various levels of government do to help provide order and fairness in their community and even at school.

In this article, we share the experience of one Secondary Social Studies teacher, Michelle, in having her students investigate the question of whether or not the Singapore government has done enough to ensure progress in Singapore. Although initially taught prior to the introduction of the new syllabus, we believe it serves as an example of a Social Studies lesson focused on conceptual understanding. To understand the concept of governance and the role of the government in society, she asked them to consider another core social studies concept – progress. The concept of progress is central to the discipline of sociology. It is essential for understanding contemporary society and in developmentally-minded Singapore, the notion of progress is central to thinking about governance and the effects of government policy to support personal well-being, social improvement and economic growth. As the sociologist Robert Nisbet (1980) argued, “no single idea has been more important than…the idea of progress” (p. 4). The Social Progress Index provides several attributes that might help teachers and students consider different facets of social progress, such as well-being (e.g., healthcare, housing, social connection, etc.), whether or not basic human needs are met in society (e.g., clean air and water, safety and security, etc.), and opportunity (e.g., social mobility, inclusion, economic opportunity, etc.). In determining whether government policies had “done enough,” students might consider the extent to which they think policy adequately promoted these aspects of social progress.

We outline Michelle’s lesson in having students consider different attributes of progress by examining different perspectives through source work, class discussion, and the use of technology. After providing this short lesson vignette, we conclude by highlighting Michelle’s takeaways from the lesson and the shift in her thinking about teaching Social Studies.

Download Full Article

Author/s:
,

Suhaimi Afandi (National Institute of Education, Singapore) Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore)) Keywords History Junior College Secondary School Approaches to teaching history Understanding history can be an intellectually challenging task for many students in schools. It requires students to contemplate issues, events and people who had lived in the distant past and who are often […]

Suhaimi Afandi (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore))

Keywords
History
Junior College
Secondary School
Approaches to teaching history

Understanding history can be an intellectually challenging task for many students in schools. It requires students to contemplate issues, events and people who had lived in the distant past and who are often far removed (from them) in time and familiarity. Such challenges, however, have seldom been satisfactorily addressed in many history classrooms in Singapore. Where historical instruction in schools takes on a heavily content-transmission approach, students are more likely to conceive history learning as the uncritical absorption and memorisation of knowledge that has little bearing to their everyday lives. This is especially so when the existence of a prescribed textbook and a pre-selected content is viewed as sufficient learning materials for direct historical instruction. Additionally, the attention spent on developing methods to train and prepare students to answer examination questions has reduced historical thinking and reasoning to sets of somewhat rigid, algorithmically-devised skills-related procedures (Afandi & Baildon, 2010). While these may help build students’ capacity to deal with the requisite assessment objectives tested in the examinations, they do little to build student’s knowledge of history. Amidst a schooling context that places emphasis on rigid procedures to produce “the right answers” and driven by a strong purpose to meet assessment requirements and accountability in the examination, it is unsurprising if many believe that history teaching need not go beyond simply the transfer of (historical) knowledge or content. This, however, should not be confused with learning history. As Lee (1991: pp. 48-49) maintained, [it is] absurd … to say that schoolchildren know any history if they have no understanding of how historical knowledge is attained, its relationship to evidence, and the way in which historians arbitrate between competing or contradictory claims. The ability to recall accounts without any understanding of the problems involved in constructing them or the criteria involved in evaluating them has nothing historical about it. Without an understanding of what makes an account historical, there is nothing to distinguish such an ability from the ability to recite sagas, legends, myths or poems.

Implicit in Lee’s assertion is the suggestion that acquiring the kind of knowledge that is deemed historical goes beyond information acquisition and rote memorisation of facts; it must equip students with “more powerful” ways of understanding history and the historical past (Lee & Ashby, 2000, p. 216). Among other things, this would involve getting students to come to grips with the disciplinary basis of the subject and having them understand how knowledge about the past is constructed, adjudicated and arbitrated.

Download Full Article

Author/s:
,

Ron Starker (Singapore American School) Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore)) Keywords Geography History Social Studies Junior College Secondary School Primary School Learning Environments Classroom Design In this article we showcase the work of three teachers in redesigning classroom learning environments to enhance student learning. Through short interview excerpts, a video, and classroom photos we feature […]

Ron Starker (Singapore American School)
Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore))

Keywords
Geography
History
Social Studies
Junior College
Secondary School
Primary School
Learning Environments
Classroom Design

In this article we showcase the work of three teachers in redesigning classroom learning environments to enhance student learning. Through short interview excerpts, a video, and classroom photos we feature ten design ideas they used to redesign their classrooms. In the article we also argue that despite lofty rhetoric espousing pedagogical innovation and 21st century learning, classroom design provides the most visible sign of what schools and educational leaders actually believe and value. We call for greater attention to the ways classroom spaces constrain and enable teaching and learning that can better support important 21st century educational outcomes.

Introduction
Every year, thousands of educational studies seek to find the best methods and conditions under which students learn. As educators we are constantly looking for ways to adapt new approaches to teaching and learning and improve our teaching methods and curriculum. Many educational leaders call for classroom practice that is more student-centered, innovative, collaborative, inquiry-based or project-based, and for teachers who are empowered to help students develop 21st century competencies (e.g., see MOE, 2014).

However, school culture can often constrain or inhibit new and innovative classroom practice. Cornbleth (2001) has described different school cultures that often interfere with educational innovation or make teachers reluctant to use innovative instructional strategies. She has described these school cultures as often highly bureaucratic (emphasizing order and control), conservative (to maintain the status quo), and excessively competitive with a great deal of attention given to student testing, accountability, and school rankings. This puts teachers in a sort of double bind in which they receive conflicting messages about the need for innovation while school culture and classroom environments remain quite conservative or place an emphasis on order, accountability, and stasis (Baildon & Sim, 2009).

Download Full Article

Author/s:

Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore)) Keywords History Junior College Book Review Singapore History Loh Kah Seng’s new book, Squatters into Citizens: The 1961 Bukit Ho Swee Fire and the Making of Modern Singapore (NUS & NIAS Presses, 2013) provides a highly interesting social history of urban kampongs in Singapore and the modernist public housing scheme that […]

Mark Baildon (National Institute of Education (Singapore))

Keywords
History
Junior College
Book Review
Singapore History

Loh Kah Seng’s new book, Squatters into Citizens: The 1961 Bukit Ho Swee Fire and the Making of Modern Singapore (NUS & NIAS Presses, 2013) provides a highly interesting social history of urban kampongs in Singapore and the modernist public housing scheme that transformed Singapore. Loh, currently an Assistant Professor at the Institute for East Asian Studies at Sogang University in South Korea, is also the author of Making and Unmaking the Asylum: Leprosy and Modernity in Singapore and Malaysia (2009).

Loh’s book is a well-written and accessible narrative that blends the author’s personal history (his early years in a one-room rental flat and interviews of his parents) with oral history methods, ethnography, and disaster studies. He also analyzes different “mythologies” and the ways they operate in Singapore. In his chapter on memory, myth, and identity, for instance, Loh examines the ways the Bukit Ho Swee fire is treated: from the celebratory official narrative promoted by the People’s Action Party (PAP) in various public texts to the nostalgic view of the kampong and kampong spirit, as well as the “counter-myth” of rumors and “wild talk” that circulated in Singapore about the fire. Each of these “myths” and how they work in shaping views of the past is highly relevant to history educators and anyone interested in the ways different discourses about the past, public policy, and public space work in Singapore. The book also highlights the challenges historians of Singapore often face when they are unable to gain access to public records (e.g., classified government records held by the Housing and Development Board (HDB) and the Ministry of Home Affairs).

The book also provides an alternative account and conceptual frame through which Singapore’s past and public spaces can be viewed. Noting that linear and mostly celebratory views of Singapore’s housing policy obscure the resistance and social contestation that took place, Loh demonstrates the ways  policy-makers used a language of crisis (i.e., disease, crime, disorder, social danger, communism, etc.) with scientific-rationalist visions of order and development that didn’t recognize the  agency, self-reliance, and autonomy of local communities. Loh argues that national developmental goals do not necessarily cripple local communities, even though the transitions required by new policies are often painful. Singapore’s kampong culture exhibited high aspirations, social autonomy, a blending of traditional and modern views, and a desire for development that is respectful of traditional values and cultures. Like Pankaj Mishra, in his excellent book, From the Ruins of Empire: The Intellectuals Who Remade Asia (2012), Loh points to the way traditional or more communal values and capacities can serve as a buffer against social dislocations caused by government interventions.

Download Full Article

Scroll to Top