Teacher in Raffles Institution (R.I.).
After a full week of holidaying, I returned to Singapore to prepare for work and cricket. The school year had four terms. At the beginning of the second term, I reported at Raffles Institution for work. Mr. McLeod assigned me Standard 6 A to teach all subjects, except General Science. He transferred a trained teacher to make way for me. I was surprised to get an ‘A’ class but I liked that assignment. It was a challenge and it gave me the opportunity to prove my attitudes and abilities. I had experienced a wide range of teaching, from pre-primary to the final primary and looked forward to the prospect of sharpening my teaching skills with experience in the lower secondary classes before taking on higher classes. The intelligent eyes and expectant faces of the pupils were straining at the leash, and they fired my enthusiasm.
The guiding hand of McLeod: R.I in 1932
Raffles Institution in 1932 was noticeably different from what it was in 1924. The atmosphere of the entire school had a sense of purpose and direction that was conducive to learning unlike the easygoing indiscipline of the school in 1924. No teacher left the school premises without permission. No class was ever without a teacher. McLeod kept close watch and assigned off- duty teachers to any class where a teacher was absent for the day. Thus, he ensured a constant atmosphere of learning and good discipline. All teachers recorded weekly and daily work plans for each subject and had to justify any changes they made. McLeod meticulously checked the records kept by each teacher and made helpful, critical or appreciative suggestions.
He took supervision seriously and did not think of lightening his own work by confining himself to the office. He aimed at getting the best he could out of everyone and adopted measures to achieve that end. The entry to my classroom was on the first floor of the annex, through the Standard 6B room. That did not deter Mr. McLeod from stepping in at least once on his daily two rounds. On some occasions, he took over my class for a few minutes. Unlike a few teachers who grumbled at such interference, I appreciated his guidance. On one occasion, he corrected me during a History lesson. He heard me tell the class that the Black Hole of Calcutta could not have happened, because the dungeon, in which 146 British prisoners were reportedly incarcerated, was only 18 feet by 14, too small to take in 146, unless several of them had stood on the shoulders of the others. (Present-day historians claim that new research indicates the number imprisoned was 64, thus implying that there was a Black Hole but someone was careless in making the head count!) McLeod stopped me and told the class that historians would not be so foolish as to record a lie. When he ceased talking, I showed him my source, a book from the Raffles Library by a British writer. McLeod read it and graciously acknowledged to the class that he was incorrect. McLeod’s readiness to confess a mistake stamped on my mind his greatness.
After the grilling he had given me at the interview, I expected him to load me with heavy extramural duties. However, he made me only a House Master! Obviously, he had been testing me. He monitored the extramural activities through the reports that each teacher was expected to make and pulled up those whose records were insufficient in detail. When he found someone had no enthusiasm for his duties, he relieved that teacher of his extramural duties and transferred his duties to a willing workhorse. Unenthusiastic teachers received remarks in their annual reports that affected their subsequent promotions. A magnetic warmth radiated from him to those who were fully dedicated. Smiling eyes and a tiny lifting of his bushy eyebrows indicated approval; icy eyes and a tiny lowering of his eyebrows indicated the opposite.
My life at Raffles Institution
In the Asian staff room,[1] I enjoyed instant acceptance. I knew some colleagues through cricket, and many of them gave me credit for having sacrificed three years of comfortable living on a teacher’s salary to get a College degree. All of them appreciated that I had accepted teaching the youngest class without complaining. Two months later, when McLeod moved me up to teach English and Literature to two Junior classes, they congratulated me.
Three fellow Raffles College graduates Wee Seong Kang, Ismail bin Aziz and Chua Leong Hean obtained postings to R.I, June ’31. They had done only the first year of Normal Class before going to the College, so they had not undergone any teacher training. They gave the impression that they lacked confidence and had not quite fitted in. I felt confident; my training and experience enabled me to enjoy teaching any class. I received a good response from my students and adjusted the level and method of my teaching to suit them.
Two months later, another teacher resigned. McLeod reduced my teaching load in Standard 6, and gave me English Language and Literature in Junior class ‘G’. This class had bright, enthusiastic students who had earned a double promotion. My work became varied. I gave them guidelines to prepare chapters from their textbooks for discussion. By asking questions, I could extract their critical understanding of what they had read. The exchanges between us became a joint effort in the learning process. It stimulated the less-bright students to accept the challenge to be equal partners with the others. The end-of-year results of my class compared favourably with those of the top class.
I had also Junior ‘F’, the weakest of the Junior classes. The teaching methods with the ‘G’ class did not work with ‘F’. To the latter, I gave in advance a digest of the chapters they had to read and explained the difficult sections. Finding that some of them did not attempt to read their assignments, I set them some simple questions to answer at home. This compelled them to respond. In the early stages, a few of them did not respond even to that compulsion; I detained them at school to do their assignments.
After one term, McLeod stopped coming into my classroom and only passed by on his rounds. Gradually I understood that a head master could estimate the quality of a teacher in various ways without entering his classroom. Active participation from students indicated the teacher was holding the attention of every student. If a teacher did one-way communication, many pupils would not pay attention. The headmaster could assess whether a teacher set too much written work, remained seated and did his personal reading or marked written work. Was a teacher getting good discipline through his teaching or by intimidating his pupils? Was he dictating copious notes that the students copied from the blackboard? I realised McLeod assessed each teacher using such methods. After a while, by watching McLeod’s behavior during staff meetings I could sense what he thought of them. Furthermore, by listening to my colleagues’ comments about him, I was able to judge how they stood with him.
Contrary to the warning by friendly colleagues, I spoke freely at staff meetings and McLeod willingly exchanged ideas with me. Some of my fellow Asian teachers, (although not my three fellow RC graduates!), also joined in discussing points raised by McLeod.
One topic I did not raise was the system of automatic promotion for students regardless of whether or not they passed the end-of-year examination. I did not think it was a good practice, but I knew McLeod firmly believed in it.
I had no confidence in raising the issue for fear he would consider me presumptuous. I believed in being deferential towards superiors when presenting a contrary point of view, but I was capable of retaliation if a superior did not maintain the dignity of his position when disagreeing with me. If it were a situation, in which my superior had absolute authority to harm me with impunity, I would hold my horses, quit from the situation, and refrain from giving in retaliation.
[1] During the Colonial era, Asian teachers had separate staff rooms from the Caucasian teachers. More about this colonial practice in later chapters.
CHORUS (The Teachers’ Journal)
The Chorus was an annual journal published by the Singapore Teachers’ Association. It became the mouthpiece for almost all teachers’ associations from Singapore to Penang. I contributed articles for many years, later joined the Editorial Committee, and finally, became the Editor. Chorus was voluminous. I viewed it as an appropriate vehicle for graduate teachers to prove that tertiary education had made them competent educators, not merely to teach subjects, but to create future citizens. I encouraged contributors to submit suitable articles to demonstrate how they were doing this.
Expatriate and Hong Kong graduates readily contributed poems and articles. The response from trained teachers came from those who were of high calibre and creative. Such teachers participated in plays, orchestras, debates and discussions. They showed themselves to be the backbone of the teaching profession. The contributions from the early Raffles College graduates was disappointing, although we had notable exceptions in each cohort of graduates. Lim Wah Aun, with AC Rajah assisting him, became the Editor in 1941. It was very sad that both of them passed away during the Japanese occupation period.
Meanwhile, McLeod, who had taken me to task over my advocating the use of the cane in one of my articles, not only supported Chorus with articles but made me the master in charge of the school magazine, thus showing that he preferred dissenting thinkers to mere yes-men who showed little initiative or originality.
Teaching History, I began by giving notes but soon felt that it was not effective. I changed to assigning pages of the History text book, to be read before the session, and followed it up by asking pupils to respond orally to questions and prodded them to expand their answers. I dictated the headlines of the day’s lesson and requested pupils to write their own notes. I also suggested supplementary reading for additional information. Ambitious pupils enjoyed doing that. A few took the initiative to read on their own before a lesson, thus saving me having to expand their answers.
In summary, I tried to inspire the bright students to pursue knowledge on their own and motivated them to prepare answers to questions. I guided and assisted the mediocre ones and exercised discipline on the backward (more challenged) ones to pay attention in class and do their homework. In the classroom, I kept an eye on every pupil, and directed questions at anyone who was not attentive. If he could not answer, I returned to the point I was making to ensure that he and others who were not following the discussion could catch up. If a pupil had not done an assignment I held him back after school to complete it.