Leong Sze Hian stands corrected? | The Online Citizen - 0 views
theonlinecitizen.com/...eong-sze-hian-stands-corrected
Statistics Interpretation Singapore Education
![](/images/link.gif)
-
In your article, you make the argument that “Straits Times Forum Editor, was merely amending his (my) letter to cite the correct statistics. “For example, the Education Minister said “How children from the bottom one-third by socio-economic background fare: One in two scores in the top two-thirds at PSLE” - But, Mr Samuel Wee wrote “His statement is backed up with the statistic that 50% of children from the bottom third of the socio-economic ladder score in the bottom third of the Primary School Leaving Examination”.” Kind sir, the statistics state that 1 in 2 are in the top 66.6% (Which, incidentally, includes the top fifth of the bottom 50%!) Does it not stand to reason, then, that if 50% are in the top 66.6%, the remaining 50% are in the bottom 33.3%, as I stated in my letter?
-
Also, perhaps you were not aware of the existence of this resource, but here is a graph from the Straits Times illustrating the fact that only 10% of children from one-to-three room flats make it to university–which is to say, 90% of them don’t. http://www.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/pdf/20110308/a10.pdf I look forward to your reply, Mr Leong. Thank you for taking the time to read this message.
-
we should, wherever possible, try to agree to disagree, as it is healthy to have and to encourage different viewpoints.
- ...4 more annotations...
-
If I say I think it is fair in Singapore, because half of the bottom one-third of the people make it to the top two-thirds, it does not mean that someone can quote me and say that I said what I said because half the bottom one-third of people did not make it. I think it is alright to say that I do not agree entirely with what was said, because does it also mean on the flip side that half of the bottom one-third of the people did not make it? This is what I mean by quoting one out of context, by using statistics that I did not say, and implying that I did, or by innuendo.
-
Moreover, depending on the methodology, definition, sampling, etc, half of the bottom one-third of the people making it, does not necessary mean that half did not make it, because some may not be in the population because of various reasons, like emigration, not turning up, transfer, whether adjustments are made for the mobility of people up or down the social strata over time, etc. If I did not use a particular statistic to state my case, for example, I don’t think it is appropriate to quote me and say that you agree with me by citing statistics from a third party source, like the MOE chart in the Straits Times article, instead of quoting the statistics that I said.
-
I cannot find anything in any of the media reports to say with certainty that the Minister backed up his remarks with direct reference to the MOE chart. There is also nothing in the narrative that only 10 per cent of children from one-to-three room flats make it to university – which is to say, 90 per cent of them don’t. The ’90 per cent’ cannot be attributed to what the minister said, as at best it is the writer’s interpretation of the MOE chart.
-
Interesting exchange of letters. Samuel’s interpretation of the statistics provided by Ng Eng Hen and ST is correct. There is little doubt about it. While I can see where Leong Sze Hian is coming from, I don’t totally agree with him. Specifically, Samuel’s first statement (only ~10% of students living in 1-3 room flat make it to university) is directed at ST’s report that education is a good social leveller but not at Ng. It is therefore a valid point to make.