It was an intriguing perspective as what we in MOE and in schools do and why we do it is compared with what the public (including parents) see and how they view the educational process and our schools. It is quite startling how differently the two groups see the same things. Some are not even on the same continuum!

• We are concerned for holistic development for school and life; the public, especially parents, want their children to get a degree
• We would like to meet student needs against a backdrop of industry needs and national goals; parents especially want us to personalise our courses to the needs of their particular child.
• We would have it that all our schools are good schools; the public still perceives that some schools have better programmes, better teachers and better resources.
• Our concern is to support those who need support i.e. children from low SES background; parents are interested in our providing enrichment opportunities even while they see tuition as an unavoidable option.
• Our meritocracy is based on exam results; some members of the public think that exam results are not even relevant for 21st century work and living and that we should use a new base for meritocracy.
• We believe in connecting with the community; some members of the public want it taken further into social and civic activism.
• We see technology as a pedagogical tool; some members of the public see technology as the teacher.
• We know information literacy is critical; some other members of the public think technology is only for communication and games.
• We know there is an increased demand on teacher competencies; the public has made it clear that teachers are subject to its scrutiny and to comparisons.
• We see there are links between pre-school, primary school, secondary school and post-secondary education; the public feels there is not enough information and career guidance.
• We stress life-long learning with our staff and our students; the public feels that continual education should be provided at the workplace by employers.

Clearly there are gaps which we can bridge, either by improving our practice or by strengthening the communication process with the public. In both directions, it will be about continuing to learn and understand the changing landscape.

But above closing the gaps, or rather to be consistent while closing the gaps, must be our unwavering commitment to educate our students.