Singapore ministry of education plaque from Shutterstock.com

Following a viral outburst on social media by adjunct teacher Lenny Rahman that led to her leaving her post, the Ministry of Education (MOE) said that educators should be mindful of their behaviour on social media platforms.

Responding to queries from Straits Times, MOE divisional director of HR solutions and capabilities said, “MOE has a code of professional conduct that all educators, including flexi-adjunct teachers, are expected to adhere to. Educators should conduct themselves in a proper manner which upholds the honour and integrity of the teaching profession.”

In a post on Facebook dated 15 January which has been shared over 1,000 times and received 590 reactions, Ms Lenny lashed out at parents who do not teach their children basic language or read with them.

She called out parents who are too busy working to spend time with their children and questioned why they even had children in the first place.

She also stressed that reading is a basic necessity in every child’s life, just like food, clothes, and shelter and accused parents who do not teach their children of depriving them of education.

The post sparked a heated debate about who is responsible for teaching children how to read: teachers or parents.

A week later, Ms Lenney made a new Facebook apologising for the harshness of her initial rant. She said she was merely raising awareness of the issue and she stands by what she said.

Ms Lenny also said that she was asked to restrict the original post, which she did. But she chose not to delete it because she stands by her comments. Ms Lenny noted that she has since left the school she was working with.

Speaking to ST, Ms Lenny said she left the school voluntarily as she was concerned over her own safety after being threatened by members of the public for her statement. On top of that, she didn’t want to affect the school’s reputation.

Even so, Ms Lenny reiterated her stance, clarifying that her post was not directed at parents who are already trying to help their children. Rather, it was a ‘wake-up call’ to parents who ‘do not even want to try to get involved with their kids’ education’.

Some netizens agreed with the Ms Lenny’s stance about how parents should take more responsibility in teaching their children at home while one person in particular called for her to be reinstated:

 

Others were of the opinion that her departure was welcome, noting that her outburst was too harsh especially for an educator:

TOC has reached out to MOE for comment.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

一夜四千元 陪宏茂桥市镇会前总经理花天酒地 手抄账簿揭不当贿款和假账

在宏茂桥市镇会前总理涉贿案的法庭审讯,涉嫌行贿的建筑承包商谢信南(译音)被揭,为讨好被告黄志明,一夜就花掉4千元在娱乐活动上。 这笔在2015年10月8日,总数为4千280元的花费,包括卡拉OK包间的费用、陪酒小费、晚餐和廉价酒店住宿开销。 控方昨日在仔细盘问谢信南的生意伙伴郑荣传,有关他为谢信南属下公司 – 19-NS2 Enterprise 所记录的手抄账簿。 郑荣传称,有收到谢信南一些酒店住宿的收据报销,通常介于30-35元不等,都是在81酒店或飞龙酒店的花费。 谢信南和黄志明,也有不同的数项娱乐开销,例如2015年9月24日的2200元,和5月30日的3800元。至于11月2日的消费仅为400元,郑荣传称,可能是谢黄两人在同样酒廊消费,还有先前剩余未开瓶的酒。 在早前对贪污调查局的供证,谢信南曾指出通常一晚开销不会超过4千元,但自己也不实很确定。此外,他还一同与黄志明在芽笼购买了价值1080元的按摩配套。 掩人耳目,手账以英文字母缩写代表黄志明 郑荣传称,在账目上有关黄志明的娱乐开销也刻意以英文字母缩写–“V”或“Owen”来代表黄志明(Victor),意图掩人耳目,避免政府官员查出有关娱乐开销。 另一些谢信南为黄志明取的代称还包括“Michael”和“Wei…

李绳武被控藐视法庭获准上诉 撤销总检察署海外庭令

李绳武父亲李显扬,于今早在脸书贴文表示,新加坡上诉庭在昨日驳回高庭决定,允许李绳武上诉,以撤销总检察署的境外传召庭令。 他在贴文补充,“上诉庭的裁决,也印证了我们的信念,即绳武提出的严肃课题,值得认真探讨。“ 他相信,这是有史以来,上诉庭有机会在公开法庭探讨,在李绳武个案的情境下,我国法庭在国外是否具备司法权。 探讨是否具备海外司法权 新加坡总检察署指控,建国总理李光耀的孙子李绳武涉藐视法庭,并采取法律行动。 李绳武是在去年7月15日,在脸书贴文批评我国政府“好诉讼”,法庭制度“温顺”,被总检察署指控藐视法庭。 李绳武也拒绝撤下有关贴文。他曾指出,有关贴文只是设定为只供朋友圈浏览,不公开大众阅读,却还是引来三大媒体和总检察署的注意,令他对新加坡政府琐事必究的程度感到惊讶。“难道我在私人脸书上发布“煽动性”炫耀休假的照片,也会被对付?” 李绳武的代表律师在去年12月22日,提出申请以撤销有关在美国递交法律文件给当事人的庭令,但在今年3月26日,被高庭驳回。 李绳武代表律师提出理据,总检察署有必要证明,藐视法庭程序必须根据“成文法”提诉,或是基于成文法来执法。然而,在李绳武发布有关贴文期间,藐视法庭罪并没有成文法律可依据。 其二,即便能以成文法提出藐视法庭诉讼,总检察署错误援引高庭法(Supreme Court of…

How much of the Reserves has been really used?

by: Leong Sze Hian/ I refer to the article “Past reserves tapped…

被断保 截肢老人上诉成功后离世 林瑞莲:“严重伤残”标准何在?

工人党主席林瑞莲,在国会辩论终身护保议题时,揭露一名符合资格的截肢老人,乐龄健保赔付中途被终止,辗转上诉成功后成功续保。可惜这名老人无法继续享有这份福利,在续保不到一月,就与世长辞。 林瑞莲分享,不久前她的选民K先生去世,生前饱受后期肾衰竭折磨,也因糖尿病截肢。然而保险单位以K先生仍有“部分”能力自理六项起居活动,取消了他的乐龄健保赔付。 “K先生后来被转移到临终关怀,保险机构要求他,要重新索赔,仍要填表格上诉。K先生曾在临终关怀中心托我协助,惟他女儿后来填了表格,在医生协助下,让K先生重新领取乐龄健保赔付。可惜不到一个月后,他离开了人世。” 林瑞莲对于如何衡量“伤残”的标准,来决定保户是否符合健保索偿资格感到困惑,特别是政府收了上亿元的保费,但是K先生这样的个案却无法享有保障,如果相同情况也发生在即将落实的终身护保,令人难以接受。 无法自理其中一项,生活就已够困难 方荣發议员也声援林瑞莲,呼吁检讨“严重伤残”定义,特别是降低门槛,让无法自理两项生活起居的保户,也能索赔。 “不要说六项,障友无法自理其中一项,生活都已经面对很大挑战。2018年检讨乐龄健保,倡议扩大保障范围,制定更具包容性的重度伤残定义,岂非合情合理?“ 根据“独立新闻网”报导,K先生的兄弟在社交媒体留言,他们来自低收入家庭,其兄嫂为了哥哥拜访了很多单位,但都以不符合资格为由,拒绝了K先生的援助申请。 乐龄健保计划,已收取33亿元保费,但是只有1亿3千300万元被索偿。至于终身护保将在2020年落实,凡是30岁以上公民都强制性参与,一直付保费到67岁。