The Red Spot method and why we fail in debates

I think this blog article runs late but it comes during the aftermath of the elite Singapore schools' staggering defeat to United World College.

As someone who was brought up in Singapore's education system all the way from primary school to junior college, I became familiar with two words - Red Spot. The words "Red Spot" is a ubiquitous term within our Singapore education landscape. Students typically spend hours practising past year questions from their Red Spot assessment books, all the way from Primary School Leaving Examinations to their GCE "A" levels.

What are the benefits of the Red Spot method then? For one, it reinforces the tag of "exam meritocracy", which Singapore has been associated with. Typically, Singapore students score better than their foreign counterparts in exam-based science quizzes.

However, what are the disadvantages of the Red Spot method? For one, if a student is ingrained into following a rigid framework towards the end of doing well for his National Examinations, he will slowly develop mental inertia. Anything off the beaten track and outside the framework will be frowned upon. I vividly remembered in my college days, I only receive half a mark out of a possible many marks for one question in one of my science subjects. I approached the marker and asked her why I only obtained half a mark. I was told to follow a certain framework in answering questions.

In the thrust and counter-thrust world of debate, the participants can ill-afford to stay within a rigid framework. Any point can have its weakness, and a counter-thrust from the opponent is inevitable. Based on the opponent's counter-thrust, the debater has to develop his next arguement and fire the next salvo. In evolutionary terms, the organism must be able to adapt to changes in the environment to survive. Rigidity, or more accurately, failure to evolve would result in extinction.