Education is defined as any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character, or physical ability of an individual. In its technical sense, education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to another. However, many people have brought up the issue of an ineffective education system in Singapore, whereby students rely on memorising facts and information instead of applying knowledge and skills learned on real-life based problems. Hence, I will be discussing my views on what Janelle Lee, a student who has brought up the issue of an unflattering education system in Singapore.
Whatever Janelle Lee had mentioned in her open letter is truly what is wrong with the Singapore Education System, in terms of the teaching methods. I totally agree with her that Singapore's education system mainly rely on memorising facts, information and formulas. Here are some ways students have to memorise for examinations. For Literature, students have to memorise information such as Shakespeare's way of portraying plays and the context and content of the literature books such as To Kill A Mocking Bird. For Mathematics, students have to memorise many formulas such as Symmetrical Properties of Circles. For Chinese, students have to memorise letter writing format. For Science, students have to memorise many theories and laws of Science. The list goes on and on, but have we ever wondered why are we doing all of this? This would be the flaw of the education system.
With modern technology, have we ever wondered why is it necessary to memorise so much information/theories/Science laws/formulas? An example would the letter writing format. How many people in the world still use the letter writing format for Chinese? With reference to a statistics report in 2009, the number of people using sending emails in Chinese as compared to writing letters in Chinese are 58:3, and this ratio is expected to increase. As such, is it really necessary to memorise the format of letter writing? This would be an example of rote learning. Rote learning, in the eyes of the Singapore education system, is where students are expected to memorise facts from the textbook and be able to regurgitate or relay all these information during tests, in the hope that they can understand and apply them. However, how many students actually went on and apply them in real life after they graduate from schools with fantastic results from memorising?
However, to the best of my knowledge, the above mentioned does not exist in schools with Integrated Program (IP). Ever since I entered this school, I am quite amazed with the new curriculum being someone who hates memorising. An example would be in Language Arts. Instead of being taught to memorising facts and events from the book To Kill A Mocking Bird, instead, we have a new component called Reading & Reasoning. This new component trains the student's mind to think carefully and analyse the text given rather than memorising information from some guide book and pouring it all in, hoping to get an A1. There are also many other added features to the new education system for Integrated Program, as such schools can edit and control their own curriculum. Hence, I think that Janelle Lee is not being fair in judging Singapore's Education mainly based on a mainstream school. If she had the chance to be exposed to IP school's curriculum, I am pretty sure that she would change her point of view.
In addtition, I think that the best education system Singapore should adopt would be one which, besides imparting facts and formulas, will train the mind to apply whatever it learnt on real-life based problems such as the Future Problem Solving Program. This will then equip students with cognitive thinking and adequate reasoning skills to survive in the 21st century.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Term 3 Week 2 (Blogging Assignment)
According to the World Health Organization, 1.2 billion people worldwide do not have access to clean drinking water, and a further 2.6 billion lack adequate sanitation services, and these numbers are expected to rise. The UN has estimated that 2.8 billion people in 48 countries will be living in conditions of water stress or scarcity by 2025. In my opinion, water should be treated as a human right.
Firstly, access to water, especially clean ones can ultimately reduce world-wide infections of diseases, otherwise known as water-borne diseases. Millions of people are affected each year by a range of water-borne diseases including diarrhea, which is responsible for 1.8 million potentially preventable deaths per year.
Secondly, the privatisation of waterhas not effectively served the poor, who suffer the most from lack of access to clean water. This can be seen from Bolivia, Ghana and other countries whereby the poor do not have enough water of their own as water is privatised.
Thirdly, the world is rapidly industrialising with a growing population. Clean, drinkable water is naturally scarce and with the effects of global warming, some countries would not have enough clean water to feed her people. The United States is facing the greatest water shortages of its history, and in Australia severe drought has caused dangerous water shortages in the Murray-Darling river basin, which provides the bulk of its food supply. As of now, the World Health Organization estimates that inadequate water is responsible for nearly one-tenth of the world’s disease burden, and that six percent of all deaths could be prevented by universal access to safe drinking water and better sanitation.
Water as a human right or commodity has 2 very different meanings. Water as a human right means that every human has the right to attain water, regardless of their backgrounds. Commodities are items which can be bought of the shelves of supermarkets with money. They can also sometimes be defined as goods or stock. A man cannot survive without water for 3 days. In fact, all living organisms including micro-organisms need water to survive. If water is to be considered a materialistic item which has to be bought in order to survive, god knows how many people in the world would die because they have no money at all to buy clean drinking water!
Hence, in conclusion, be it political or economic reasons, water has to be made a human right at all times. It is immoral to suggest that the poor have to be sacrificed in order for the rich to live. So what if one is poor? We all are still humans. Water belongs to Mother Earth and her children - us.
Firstly, access to water, especially clean ones can ultimately reduce world-wide infections of diseases, otherwise known as water-borne diseases. Millions of people are affected each year by a range of water-borne diseases including diarrhea, which is responsible for 1.8 million potentially preventable deaths per year.
Secondly, the privatisation of waterhas not effectively served the poor, who suffer the most from lack of access to clean water. This can be seen from Bolivia, Ghana and other countries whereby the poor do not have enough water of their own as water is privatised.
Thirdly, the world is rapidly industrialising with a growing population. Clean, drinkable water is naturally scarce and with the effects of global warming, some countries would not have enough clean water to feed her people. The United States is facing the greatest water shortages of its history, and in Australia severe drought has caused dangerous water shortages in the Murray-Darling river basin, which provides the bulk of its food supply. As of now, the World Health Organization estimates that inadequate water is responsible for nearly one-tenth of the world’s disease burden, and that six percent of all deaths could be prevented by universal access to safe drinking water and better sanitation.
Water as a human right or commodity has 2 very different meanings. Water as a human right means that every human has the right to attain water, regardless of their backgrounds. Commodities are items which can be bought of the shelves of supermarkets with money. They can also sometimes be defined as goods or stock. A man cannot survive without water for 3 days. In fact, all living organisms including micro-organisms need water to survive. If water is to be considered a materialistic item which has to be bought in order to survive, god knows how many people in the world would die because they have no money at all to buy clean drinking water!
Hence, in conclusion, be it political or economic reasons, water has to be made a human right at all times. It is immoral to suggest that the poor have to be sacrificed in order for the rich to live. So what if one is poor? We all are still humans. Water belongs to Mother Earth and her children - us.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Term 3 Week 1 (Blogging Assignment)
Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports and veteran labour leader Ms Halimah Yacob called for the legislation of weekly days off for maids on June 19, speaking at a community sports festival at Singapore Polytechnic. She suggested that in the event that a rest day a week is not possible, maids should at least be compensated in cash. This has sparked heated debate amongst Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans feel that giving these domestic workers weekly days off might cause them to behave inappropriately such as being haughty or having boyfriends. However, there are also some who feel that having days off might result in positive effects such as them being able to work more efficiently due to the fact that they have a rest day. In my opinion, the giving of weekly days off for foreign domestic workers should be made compulsory in Singapore.
Maids are humans too, they are not robots. Which human does not need to rest after a long day of hard work. Yes, the maids are paid to do this hard work. But does it really mean that they cannot even have a single rest day? Even police watch dogs are given "off days" where they can rest in comfort. Furthermore, a rest might also motivate them to work harder. By giving these domestic workers off days, they would be able to rest well and retain a high level of efficiency. Hence, I feel that maids, as they are humans too, should have rights in resting after a week of hard work and hopefully, this act will motivate them to work harder.
On the contrary, some employers are scared that maids will turn for the worse and begin to corrupt their freedom allocated to them. In a Yahoo! poll pertaining to this topic, 46% expressed that they were against weekly day off for maids. These are mainly due to the negative thoughts. Such thoughts include that the employers are answerable for the maids' mannerisms and actions during their days off. This means that if a maid causes mischief or trouble outside the household, the employers are responsible. Furthermore, nowadays, maids have boyfriends and even 'husbands' in Singapore, resulting them in pregnancy. Hence, work efficiency is lost. Too much rest will also result in complacency which also poses problems such as slack in work.
In conclusion, I do not think that maids should be given weekly days off. Though they do need rest and freedom, too frequent of these privileges is not a good thing. I feel that Mdm Halimah should learn to view situations from the points of view of other parties instead of only just a few, so that she can make decisions where most can benefit. Maybe she can suggest a compulsory leave every once a month so that maids wont get complacent.
Maids are humans too, they are not robots. Which human does not need to rest after a long day of hard work. Yes, the maids are paid to do this hard work. But does it really mean that they cannot even have a single rest day? Even police watch dogs are given "off days" where they can rest in comfort. Furthermore, a rest might also motivate them to work harder. By giving these domestic workers off days, they would be able to rest well and retain a high level of efficiency. Hence, I feel that maids, as they are humans too, should have rights in resting after a week of hard work and hopefully, this act will motivate them to work harder.
On the contrary, some employers are scared that maids will turn for the worse and begin to corrupt their freedom allocated to them. In a Yahoo! poll pertaining to this topic, 46% expressed that they were against weekly day off for maids. These are mainly due to the negative thoughts. Such thoughts include that the employers are answerable for the maids' mannerisms and actions during their days off. This means that if a maid causes mischief or trouble outside the household, the employers are responsible. Furthermore, nowadays, maids have boyfriends and even 'husbands' in Singapore, resulting them in pregnancy. Hence, work efficiency is lost. Too much rest will also result in complacency which also poses problems such as slack in work.
In conclusion, I do not think that maids should be given weekly days off. Though they do need rest and freedom, too frequent of these privileges is not a good thing. I feel that Mdm Halimah should learn to view situations from the points of view of other parties instead of only just a few, so that she can make decisions where most can benefit. Maybe she can suggest a compulsory leave every once a month so that maids wont get complacent.
Monday, May 23, 2011
HBL Learning
Task 1
Background Information:
This poem is about the Vietnam War which happened between 1962 and 1971. The main conflict in this war would be the use of "Agent Orange". Agent Orange is the code name for a herbicide and defoliant—contaminated with TCDD—used by the U.S. military in its Herbicidal Warfare program during the Vietnam War.
According to Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 4.8 million Vietnamese people were exposed to Agent Orange, resulting in 400,000 deaths and disabilities, and 500,000 children born with birth defects
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange
http://www.warpoetry.co.uk/2010warpoetry.html#Rainbow
Task 2
1) Point Of View
This poem is both written in the third's person view point and the intellectual viewpoint. This intellectual point of view sees the entire war and shows how the Americans had caused vast devastation and pain caused to the innocent Vietnamese. This could be seen from "America did not foresee" and "Nefariously America led astray" whereby the poet tries to show America's mistakes and the lessons which could be learnt from using herbicide wars again.
This could be written in the third person's view point as the country America is being used as the comparison tool with Vietnam. Hence, the poet here is trying to judge the rights and wrongs of America from the person's own viewpoints.
2) Setting and Situation
The situation at which Agent Orange is being used is very dire, due to the impact of this virus on the Vietnamese. According to Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 4.8 million Vietnamese people were exposed to herbicides, resulting in 400,000 people being killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects. Hence, the situation in Vietnam is dire
The setting would be how the Vietnamese civilians die a 'colourful death'. The different colours (not only Agent Orange) of herbicides were also used which created a deathly and inescapable setting. "Green, pink, purple and other colors death potpourri!" shows that the overall combination of the colours is deadly, and that also explains why the poem is named "Rainbow Death"
3) Language and Diction
Personification was used, whereby America here was personified as a person used for comparing. Diction was used whereby the phrases were seen to possess some sense of sarcasm. From " Now thinking twice" and "America did not foresee", the poet is trying to mock America.
The poet is trying to convey that casualties in war is large-scale. The use of diction in "potpourri" suggests the meaning of combination or a mixture of subjects. In this case, "potpourri" would mean the combination of many deaths due to war.
Another good use of diction would be in the word"deceit" meaning the act or practice of deceiving or concealment or distortion of the truth for the purpose of misleading. The speaker is telling his readers that the government misleads the people when countries go to war to conceal the government's true purpose of going to war which is mostly negative. This will encourage people to take part unknowingly and even manipulated into fighting.
Background Information:
This poem is about the Vietnam War which happened between 1962 and 1971. The main conflict in this war would be the use of "Agent Orange". Agent Orange is the code name for a herbicide and defoliant—contaminated with TCDD—used by the U.S. military in its Herbicidal Warfare program during the Vietnam War.
According to Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 4.8 million Vietnamese people were exposed to Agent Orange, resulting in 400,000 deaths and disabilities, and 500,000 children born with birth defects
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange
http://www.warpoetry.co.uk/2010warpoetry.html#Rainbow
Task 2
1) Point Of View
This poem is both written in the third's person view point and the intellectual viewpoint. This intellectual point of view sees the entire war and shows how the Americans had caused vast devastation and pain caused to the innocent Vietnamese. This could be seen from "America did not foresee" and "Nefariously America led astray" whereby the poet tries to show America's mistakes and the lessons which could be learnt from using herbicide wars again.
This could be written in the third person's view point as the country America is being used as the comparison tool with Vietnam. Hence, the poet here is trying to judge the rights and wrongs of America from the person's own viewpoints.
2) Setting and Situation
The situation at which Agent Orange is being used is very dire, due to the impact of this virus on the Vietnamese. According to Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 4.8 million Vietnamese people were exposed to herbicides, resulting in 400,000 people being killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects. Hence, the situation in Vietnam is dire
The setting would be how the Vietnamese civilians die a 'colourful death'. The different colours (not only Agent Orange) of herbicides were also used which created a deathly and inescapable setting. "Green, pink, purple and other colors death potpourri!" shows that the overall combination of the colours is deadly, and that also explains why the poem is named "Rainbow Death"
3) Language and Diction
Personification was used, whereby America here was personified as a person used for comparing. Diction was used whereby the phrases were seen to possess some sense of sarcasm. From " Now thinking twice" and "America did not foresee", the poet is trying to mock America.
The poet is trying to convey that casualties in war is large-scale. The use of diction in "potpourri" suggests the meaning of combination or a mixture of subjects. In this case, "potpourri" would mean the combination of many deaths due to war.
Another good use of diction would be in the word"deceit" meaning the act or practice of deceiving or concealment or distortion of the truth for the purpose of misleading. The speaker is telling his readers that the government misleads the people when countries go to war to conceal the government's true purpose of going to war which is mostly negative. This will encourage people to take part unknowingly and even manipulated into fighting.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Sino-Japanese War Diary
Dear Diary,
Today, the Japanese Forces entered Nanjing. The previous night, I heard loud bombs being dropped from invading Japanese Planes and I read from the village paper that the Chinese Army was retreating. This morning, the first Japanese troops came in bicycles and tanks. Many of them had a bayonet in their hands. They looked hostile and they immediately rounded up all the civilians living in the area including me. A Japanese soldier punched a man in his stomach and questioned him if there were any soldiers hiding in the vicinity. A man took my husband away and put him into a truck filled with other men as well. I thought the Japanese were just taking them away for interrogation but my neighbor revealed that they were all going to be killed. I never saw him again.
The Japanese soldiers then proceeded to wreak havoc in the small village I was living in. Women could be heard crying for help as the Japanese soldiers brutally raped and murdered them. I was afraid. I could not do anything. I managed to hide in one of the 'safety zones' where a kind family hid me in an underground conceal space. I was one of the lucky ones who were not raped. Right now, I am in the underground room writing this. I hope that help can come and the Chinese Army can fight the Japanese instead of fighting amongst themselves.
Today, the Japanese Forces entered Nanjing. The previous night, I heard loud bombs being dropped from invading Japanese Planes and I read from the village paper that the Chinese Army was retreating. This morning, the first Japanese troops came in bicycles and tanks. Many of them had a bayonet in their hands. They looked hostile and they immediately rounded up all the civilians living in the area including me. A Japanese soldier punched a man in his stomach and questioned him if there were any soldiers hiding in the vicinity. A man took my husband away and put him into a truck filled with other men as well. I thought the Japanese were just taking them away for interrogation but my neighbor revealed that they were all going to be killed. I never saw him again.
The Japanese soldiers then proceeded to wreak havoc in the small village I was living in. Women could be heard crying for help as the Japanese soldiers brutally raped and murdered them. I was afraid. I could not do anything. I managed to hide in one of the 'safety zones' where a kind family hid me in an underground conceal space. I was one of the lucky ones who were not raped. Right now, I am in the underground room writing this. I hope that help can come and the Chinese Army can fight the Japanese instead of fighting amongst themselves.
The Sino-Japanese War
There were 2 occurrences of the Sino-Japanese War. The first one was fought by China and Japan over the control of Korea. After more than six months of continuous successes by Japanese army and naval forces and the loss of the Chinese port of Weihaiwei, the Qing leadership sued for peace in February 1895. As a newly-emergent power Japan turned its attention toward Korea. In order to protect its own interests and security, Japan wanted to either annex Korea before it was seized by another power, or at least ensure Korea's effective independence by developing its resources and reforming its administration. As Prussian advisor Major Klemens Meckel put it to the Meiji army, Korea was "a dagger pointed at the heart of Japan". Japan felt that another power having a military presence on the Korean peninsula would have been detrimental to Japanese national security, and so Japan resolved to end the centuries-old Chinese suzerainty over Korea. Moreover, Japan realized that having access to Korea’s coal and iron ore deposits would benefit Japan's growing industrial base.
In 1945, China emerged from the war nominally a great military power but economically weak and on the verge of all-out civil war. The economy was sapped by the military demands of a long costly war and internal strife, by spiraling inflation, and by corruption in the Nationalist government that included profiteering, speculation and hoarding. What Japan learnt was to not to be greedy and target countries which are currently weaker than them in terms of warfare. China has also learnt to unite against foreign invading forces rather than fight amongst themselves such as the division of China into Nationalist and Communist parties.
The Japanese success during the war was the result of the modernization and industrialization embarked upon two decades earlier. The war demonstrated the superiority of Japanese tactics and training as a result of the adoption of a Western-style military. The Imperial Japanese Army and navy were able to inflict a string of defeats on the Chinese through foresight, endurance, strategy and power of organization. Japanese prestige rose in the eyes of the world. The victory established Japan as a regional power on equal terms with the West and as the dominant power in Asia.
The war for China revealed the ineffectiveness of its government, its policies, the corruption of the administration system and the decaying state of the Qing dynasty (something that had been recognized for decades). Throughout the 19th century the Qing dynasty was unable to prevent foreign encroachment. This, together with calls for reform and the Boxer Rebellion, would be the key factors that would lead to the 1911 revolution and the downfall of the Qing dynasty in 1912.
The second Sino-Japanese War was a military conflict fought primarily between the Republic of China and Empire of Japan. After the Japanese Attack on Pearl Habor (1941), the war merged into the greater conflict of World War II as a major front of what is broadly known as the Pacific War. The Second Sino-Japanese War was the largest Asian war in the 20th century.It also made up more than 50% of the casualties in the Pacific War if the 1937–1941 period is taken into account.In 1945, China emerged from the war nominally a great military power but economically weak and on the verge of all-out civil war. The economy was sapped by the military demands of a long costly war and internal strife, by spiraling inflation, and by corruption in the Nationalist government that included profiteering, speculation and hoarding. What Japan learnt was to not to be greedy and target countries which are currently weaker than them in terms of warfare. China has also learnt to unite against foreign invading forces rather than fight amongst themselves such as the division of China into Nationalist and Communist parties.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Term 2 Week 5 (Weekend Assignment)
'Students should be given more freedom in deciding school rules.' What are your views?
_________________________________________________________________
School Rules are implemented to for the safety and better welfare for the students in school. Most of the time, these school rules promote good behaviour in order to maintain the good image of the school. Parents, too, send their children to school to not only learn academic values but also moral values which can be taught from school rules. School rules will help students mold their character and values. Letting students decide the rules will only have detrimental effect as they all want rules for their personal gain. They have not reached a certain level of maturity to distinguish what is beneficial for them and what is not in the long run. Hence, I do not encourage such practices and I would rather sacrifice students; freedom of choice for their interests. However, I do agree that there should be a little compromise between rule makers and students.
In every school, there is always the one that breaks the school rules. Should the freedom be passed on to these people, I am afraid the students will take advantage of this situation and alter the school rules to their benefits (e.g wearing of ankle socks for fad sense). As the saying goes on, "with power comes corruption' and 'all man will have greed at times of power', I think that if students have the power to decide school rules, they will misuse this power and moral values (usually implemented through school rules) will not reach the minds of these students anymore. Hence, it is not advisable to let students decide rules totally.
However, the principle of "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" applies to this aspect of freedom too. If all the students have to follow these "dull and boring" rules as deemed by them all the time, they will feel even more compelled to break these rules. Hence, I think there should be some exceptions to some rules. An example would be the tucking out of shirts be it intentionally or unintentionally. In the case of unintentionally, there is nothing to say as the student does not purposely mean it. However, some students tuck out their shirts because they feel "too hot" within their uniform. I suggest that during days when there are P.E lessons, students are allowed to tuck out of their shirts during those days only as it is going to be too warm such that they cannot concentrate on lessons.
However, when students still break this school rule, the school would stop this compromise and everything would resume back to the utilitarian regime before this. Hence, in conclusion, I do agree that students can be given some freedom to make their own school rules but schools still reserve the rights to alter these "compromised" school rules when they deem it as inappropriate.
_________________________________________________________________
School Rules are implemented to for the safety and better welfare for the students in school. Most of the time, these school rules promote good behaviour in order to maintain the good image of the school. Parents, too, send their children to school to not only learn academic values but also moral values which can be taught from school rules. School rules will help students mold their character and values. Letting students decide the rules will only have detrimental effect as they all want rules for their personal gain. They have not reached a certain level of maturity to distinguish what is beneficial for them and what is not in the long run. Hence, I do not encourage such practices and I would rather sacrifice students; freedom of choice for their interests. However, I do agree that there should be a little compromise between rule makers and students.
In every school, there is always the one that breaks the school rules. Should the freedom be passed on to these people, I am afraid the students will take advantage of this situation and alter the school rules to their benefits (e.g wearing of ankle socks for fad sense). As the saying goes on, "with power comes corruption' and 'all man will have greed at times of power', I think that if students have the power to decide school rules, they will misuse this power and moral values (usually implemented through school rules) will not reach the minds of these students anymore. Hence, it is not advisable to let students decide rules totally.
However, the principle of "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" applies to this aspect of freedom too. If all the students have to follow these "dull and boring" rules as deemed by them all the time, they will feel even more compelled to break these rules. Hence, I think there should be some exceptions to some rules. An example would be the tucking out of shirts be it intentionally or unintentionally. In the case of unintentionally, there is nothing to say as the student does not purposely mean it. However, some students tuck out their shirts because they feel "too hot" within their uniform. I suggest that during days when there are P.E lessons, students are allowed to tuck out of their shirts during those days only as it is going to be too warm such that they cannot concentrate on lessons.
However, when students still break this school rule, the school would stop this compromise and everything would resume back to the utilitarian regime before this. Hence, in conclusion, I do agree that students can be given some freedom to make their own school rules but schools still reserve the rights to alter these "compromised" school rules when they deem it as inappropriate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)