Welcome back 404 and 410! It's the start of a new school term and the beginning of another phase in your learning journey! This term we will be doing the following to prepare you for the Block Tests:
- attempt an SRQ based on the Serangoon Gardens foreign workers' domitory incident (2 lessons)
- redraft your SRQ timed-trial "Why Chinese Mothers are Superior" (1 lesson)
- error analyze SRQ timed-trial (1 lesson)
- reflect on SRQ skills - with 2010 Block Test Paper (1 lesson)
For today, we'll engage in a Learning Lab session. You will be divided into 3 large groups and you will attempt to THINK about the materials and questions below. I have 3 groundrules for you to abide by for this activity, and for the rest of this term:
- SPEAK good english (try to minimize Singlish)
- THINK critically in multiple perspectives (don't be lazy and comfortable with your beliefs and assumptions; ask yourself, "do I have good grounds to believe what I believe?")
- EXPLAIN why you believe what you believe as clearly and coherently as possible (minimize one-sentence claims and pronouncements)
Group 1
Read and think about the incident where a UCLA student posted a racist rant on YouTube.
Scroll down to view the video first, then read the newspaper article from Associated Press.
Think about the following questions:
- Does the UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, have good grounds to believe what she believes? Are her stereotypical views on Asians fair and grounded in legitimate and good evidence?
- If they are, what are the implications? If they aren't, why and how do you think Westerners (and people in general) acquire prejudices and assumptions about Asians and persons of different races?
- What does the incident tell you about online social responsibility? What does it tell you freedom of expression online?
- Do you think that in some way, the aftermath of the video posting (save for the death threats) was more constructive than destructive? (Think in terms of the democratic processes of public, rational discussion of issues and ideas and the notion of freedom of expression leading to more enlightened opinions)
Group 2
Due to video copyright, the video to be viewed can only be accessed from my Facebook wall. Watch and think about what Workers' Party member and NCMP Sylvia Lim has to say about ministerial wages in Singapore. Do you agree with her point of view? Think in terms of issues of equity and fairness, and the concept of being a public servant - serving the nation and people. Or do you think there is merit in the argument that ministers' pays should be comparable to private sector wages?
Larger Thinking Point: What is public service, fairness and equity?
Group 3
A mum forced her son to stand on the streets to impress upon him the importance of education. Undeniably, her method was unconventional, but her message is one that we can understand. Education -- in all its aspects and forms -- is undeniably important. Have a look at the " New York Times' recent article - "Let Kids Rule the School", and tell me whether you endorse and like what the school in Massachusetts allowed its students to do. Do you think that the same can obtain in Singapore?
If you have time, have a look at Apple co-founder, Steve Job's commencement speech delivered at Stanford University. Re-think your beliefs and concept of education.
Larger Thinking Point: What is education and what does it mean to educated?
(Group 3 article) The writer believes that as compared to adhering to school systems, students should take full responsibilities of their learning by planning their own education route. The writer used the example of eight students in the United States to support her views. While I agree that these students have been very successful in managing their own studies, this scenario does not apply to every student. Nowadays, the number of ‘problem students’ who have unhealthy habits like drug addiction are on the rise. These students are generally uninterested in their studies. So, the idea of allowing students to manage their own studies will aggravate the situation of students committing bad acts rather than helping students achieve better results. This is because students are now left to study on their own with the help of a counselor. However, even with the presence of counselors, counselors are ultimately different from teachers in schools as counselors only provide advices and not transmitting knowledge to students like what school teachers do. The idea of allowing students to manage their own studies requires students who are really passionate and committed into studying. It is doubtful whether all students are truly responsible and willing to dedicate time and efforts in pursuing academic success when they can engage in leisure activities other than studying easily without being noticed. So, allowing students to manage their own learning is not a method of learning that I agree with. While students need to become independent, teachers are still needed to transmit correct information to students and supervise students’ development. This will be more beneficial for students.
ReplyDeleteGroup 1
ReplyDeleteI feel that Alexandra Wallace does not have good grounds to believe what she believes and that her point of view is very biased. She assumes that all Asians will have their whole family and friends coming to the UCLA campus over the weekends to do laundry and buy groceries. She even says that even their uncles and aunties, grandfathers and grandmothers and everyone they know from Asia comes along. I feel that this statement is extremely problematic and is clearly a sweeping statement. While it is true that some Asian parents do come and visit their children, it does not mean that every Asian student will have visitors coming to visit them every week. By saying so, she commits the fallacy of a hasty generalization by assuming that all Asians will have their family coming to visit them. On the contrary many Asians who come to UCLA from overseas are living solitarily in the UCLA boarding school, away from their home family and relatives, and they seldom have the chance to see their families. Furthermore, to say that their whole family and friends tag along is an exaggeration. More often than not, it may only be their parents coming to visit them in UCLA, not their “mums, brothers, grandmas, grandpas, cousins and everybody they know that they brought along from Asia with them” coming to visit them. It is highly unlikely that for every Asian student in UCLA, “everyone they know that they brought from Asia with them” would come to visit every week, if that was the case there would be unbelievably packed with people. What Alexandra Wallace might have seen is many Asian visitors coming over to UCLA, which does not represent that all the Asians are at fault of bringing all the people they know to UCLA. This statement and assumption is unjustified and shows that she has not really thought it through before ranting on YouTube.
Firstly, I believe that the ULCA student does not have good grounds to believe her stereotypes. In the video, she says “So we know that I'm not the most politically correct person, so don't take this offensively..." which immediately proves that she is going on a emotional rant about Asians that would most likely be biased and offensive to the receiving party.
ReplyDelete Secondly, I feel that the ULCA student is simply overreacting to her situation about an asian using the phone in the library. Although it is true that all public should follow library rules, I feel that she is simply blowing the issue out of context and is only using a solitary example to blast her prejudices about Asians. The fact that the ULCA student over generalizes a single example to insult a race immediately shows that her stands are unbelievable, ungrounded and racist.
Also, the fact that the ULCA student carelessly drags in the Japan tsunami issue and slams the Asian who was calling in to check on her family is extremely insensitive and hurtful to Asians. She says “I swear they're going through their whole families, just checking on everybody from the tsunami thing. ... Like, you seriously should go outside if you're going to do that.” This shows that her grounds about complaining about Asians are not about Asians being noisy in the library, but about Asians being irritating in general hence she does not have good grounds to believe in her stereotypes.
I think the reason why the ULCA student acquired these stereotypes is because she is unhappy or unfamiliar with the culture of Asians and how they do things.
This has taught me to be more careful about what you post online as they may be extremely offensive and hurtful to others. Also what is posted on cyberspace is irremovable and saved for eternity!
However, I feel that the viewers also should not carelessly slam this ULCA Student but rather hold a rational discussion about it. The fact that people of other races would insult and threaten the students actually also proves that they themselves are racist and does not serve to solve this issue but instead spread more fire and anger to the student.
Firstly, I believe that the ULCA student does not have good grounds to believe her stereotypes. In the video, she says “So we know that I'm not the most politically correct person, so don't take this offensively..." which immediately proves that she is going on a emotional rant about Asians that would most likely be biased and offensive to the receiving party.
ReplyDelete Secondly, I feel that the ULCA student is simply overreacting to her situation about an asian using the phone in the library. Although it is true that all public should follow library rules, I feel that she is simply blowing the issue out of context and is only using a solitary example to blast her prejudices about Asians. The fact that the ULCA student over generalizes a single example to insult a race immediately shows that her stands are unbelievable, ungrounded and racist.
Also, the fact that the ULCA student carelessly drags in the Japan tsunami issue and slams the Asian who was calling in to check on her family is extremely insensitive and hurtful to Asians. She says “I swear they're going through their whole families, just checking on everybody from the tsunami thing. ... Like, you seriously should go outside if you're going to do that.” This shows that her grounds about complaining about Asians are not about Asians being noisy in the library, but about Asians being irritating in general hence she does not have good grounds to believe in her stereotypes.
I think the reason why the ULCA student acquired these stereotypes is because she is unhappy or unfamiliar with the culture of Asians and how they do things.
This has taught me to be more careful about what you post online as they may be extremely offensive and hurtful to others. Also what is posted on cyberspace is irremovable and saved for eternity!
However, I feel that the viewers also should not carelessly slam this ULCA Student but rather hold a rational discussion about it. The fact that people of other races would insult and threaten the students actually also proves that they themselves are racist and does not serve to solve this issue but instead spread more fire and anger to the student.
I feel that the UCLA student has no right to be rasist against Asians just because they had disturbed her studying in the library. She said that Asians should have "American manners" showing that she has the assumption that all Asians have no manners and even if they do, it is not polite enough for American standards. It is also a clear generalisation when she said that the Asians bring all their family members to do laundry at UCLA. It is not supported by clear evidence and hence is obvious that she is only referring to a few Asians who do such things and is generalising by saying that all of them do. She also claimed that she is the "polite nice American girl". However, posting racist rants on Youtube definitely proves her to be not polite or sensitive at all. She also tries to cover her wrong-doings by saying she pities the people in Japan who had suffered from the tsunami. However, she immediately said that "If you are calling your whole address book, you might as well go outside." This shows that she was only concerned about her personal gain and does not care about the tsumnami victims or their families. She was unjustified in her stands and makes assumptions and over generalises Asians.
ReplyDeleteMs. Wallace perceives that all Asian students studying at ULCA have non-“American” manners which she finds uncomfortable with and believes that they should not be upholding these values. I disagree to her argument and find her reasoning problematic. It is probable that indeed, some Asians have strong family ties and too have unacceptable behavior to the inconvenience of many. However, it is problematic to generalize all Asians to behave as such, as well as to expect Asians who live or study in America to uphold American values. She provides examples to prove her stand, where isolated personal examples are given. They would be the behavior of the Asian families living around her district where they share family bonding times, personal gatherings weekly and for Asian families to be more concerned about their child’s well-being in college as well as cases where she is being disturbed by Asian students speaking loudly on their cell phone while she is studying in the library. She even associates the strong family ties to that of these families to be as disastrous as the recent Japanese tsunami which affected many.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, not all Asians behave inconsiderately like the isolated experiences she has mentioned. Well then, if they do, wouldn’t there be no quiet libraries in Asian countries where the majority of population are Asians? It is incorrect to say that no one behaves inconsiderately, but it is problematic to say that they all do. Nevertheless, some Americans do conduct impolite behavior as well. A fine example would be that of a woman spotted digging her nose and consuming it in front of the cameras when news reporter, Dorothy Tucker was broadcasting news live on American TV Channel CBS last year in September. As such, it is faulty for Ms. Wallace to associate all Americans to conduct fine behavior while Asians do not. Her isolated personal experiences are unable to represent the entire Asian population as well.
Secondly, there is no wrong for Asian families to enjoy personal time together when they are free over the weekends. Unlike the Western culture where Western parents believe the notion of allowing their children to be independent, Chinese believe in a long lasting parent-taking-care-of-child relationship. While it is debatable to whether which belief would be more beneficial to the child, it is questionable to why Asian families are not allowed to continue in their beliefs and practices despite moving to a foreign land. Does Ms. Wallace then mean that once someone moves to a foreign land, it is compulsory for them to adopt their practices, behaviors and ideals by dropping their original ones back at home? An example would be for Englishmen who come to work in Singapore to speak Singlish like fellow Singaporeans and enjoy durian just as much as Singaporeans do. Thus, despite a fact that there has indeed been a culture clash amongst the students, it is incorrect for Ms. Wallace to expect them to fit into their society by doing everything she perceives to be an “American” way of life.
(ARGH! I DIDN'T REALISE I TYPED SO MUCH ON MICROSOFT WORD DOC! o.O")
UCLA student, Alexander Wallace, posted a video on youtube, rating about Asians having bad manners and that they should learn to have "American manners".
ReplyDeleteI understand that she is in the midst of her final exams, and that it is probably a very stressful time for her, which is why she needs to focus and study, and that the students talking in the library might be very distracting and frustrating for her.
However, I feel that firstly, she is making too much of a genaralisation as not necessarily all Asians behave that way. It could very well have been the case that only a few Asians have such "bad habits" and in the midst of her studying and frustration, she felt that all Asians were doing such things.
Also, she brings up the fact that Asians should lean "American manners". However, I do not really feel that there different races practice different manners. It really is about the individual self and how he or she has been brought up by the family.
I also feel that what she says and does is rather ironic. She says that she is a nice, polite girl, well brought up by her parents. However, through her video posting and her insensitive, racist remarks, we can see that that is not the case at all, and on the other hand, she is rather insensitive and rude. She fails to think of other's feelings and how others might feel.
For example, she criticises the Japanese students for talking on the phone in the library to ask about how their family members are. She does so out of self-interest, because she wants to have a clearer head to study and think. Finals are the most important things on her mind at that time but she fails to see that the Japanese students face even greater worries, about their family members back home. Her worry about the finals seem to pale in comparison as compared to the Japanese students, who are anxious to find out about the situation back in their hometown. Therefore, she should exercise tolerance and understanding towards her peers, and should even offer words of comfort, instead of criticising them for being noisy or inconsiderate, when it is clearly her who is inconsiderate.
However, we do have to acknowledge that she is still a young adult and perhaps, acted in the heat of the moment and on impulse. It can be seen that she is now clearly remorseful, and regretting what she has done. I believe that she deserves a second chance, and that the public is over-reacting on this issue, as what she has done definitely does not call for a death penalty. Threatening the girl with death threats is too harsh and too exaggerated or dramatic a measure.
Even though this video has offended many Asians due to its racist remarks, it has also allowed the Asian students to learn more about how they have been annoying or irritating their peers and how they can improve themselves from now on to get along better with their peers.
Let this incident be a lesson to Alexander Wallace, and to everyone else, to think clearly what the consequences of an action might bring, before acting on impulse.
I feel that the UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. She over-generalizes the fact that all Asians cause a lot of unnecessary noise in a public place such as a library and their “Asian” manners are not what that seems to be well-mannered in the American point of view. The people, whom Alexandra has come into contact to, are just examples of Asians. Some Asians do not possess good manners, but it does not mean all Asians are ill-mannered. In fact, any one from anywhere could be ill-mannered, not just simply the Asians. However, Alexandra has her individual stereotype of Asians, which causes the prejudices against them. She mentioned in her video that she, being a well-mannered American girl that her mother taught her to be, kindly asked the Asians making phone calls in the library to be quiet as many are trying to concentrate on the readings and activities they are doing. Yet, on the contrary, she did not exercise her good manners in the video which she has complained about the Asians. The web is a place where everyone has the freedom of speech to express their own thoughts and views, but it is also a platform which anyone can access and insensitive remarks could have invoked feelings of dissatisfaction among people. By uploading a video that has racist and insensitive content, Alexandra is not thinking of what consequence she might cause and whether it would hurt the feelings of the Asians. Also, I feel that she has exaggerated the lifestyle of the Asians being noisy and making a commotion, which is biased against the Asians. Living in America, Alexandra has a lifestyle different from the Asians since they come from a different background. However, she has no right to determine whether her lifestyle or the Asians’ lifestyle is a more suitable one. I believe that everyone is different and staying in a place where you come into contact with people of different walks of life and background, what is necessary is to tolerate and put oneself into the shoes of others in order to live together harmoniously.
ReplyDeleteThe student does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. The evidence she raises are isolated events that happened to her personally, yet she generalizes her own experiences with Asians. Though it may be true that some Asians are inconsiderate, it does not mean that all Asians are the same.
ReplyDeleteShe raises the point that Asian students have their entire families coming over to visit them every weekend. She uses the phrase “hordes of Asians”, which suggests possible jealousy of these students perhaps because so many of them are intelligent enough to enter the same university as her. She generalizes and exaggerates as well, saying that all the Asians have all their families over for the weekends. Even if that were true, she does not explain what is wrong with that; it seems to simply show that Asians are more family-orientated. She claims t Asian parents do not teach their children to fend for themselves; it is true that independence is a valuable skill, but that is beside the point as well. She is criticizing their manners; this has nothing to do with manners. Furthermore, it does not affect her in any way, so why is she complaining?
Secondly, she says that Asian students talk loudly in the library. Admittedly, talking loudly in libraries is rude. If what she says is true, then her complaint about that group of Asians is valid, but she generalizes and says all Asians do that. She says he has never seen students other than Asians speak loudly in the library, but that is improbable, and it is an unreasonable on her part to single out Asians. Furthermore, we see that she has strong personal interest in the matter. She complains that Asian students are affecting her ‘epiphanies’, which suggest a motive. She also speaks of the Japan disaster as the “tsunami thing”, and we get a sense that she is treating the issue more lightly than she should, showing more concern for her benefits than for Asian lives. The way that the student phrases her argument shows that she has a motive. She says in the video “you can call your whole address book, but please get out of the library. If something is wrong and you’re gonna freak out, you’re gonna make a lot of noise.” There is a condescending attitude here, and her focus is wrong. She asks Asian students to get out of the library so as not to disturb others; it is not because of empathy that she agrees to ‘allow’ Asian students to call, but to reduce inconvenience to herself. We should not disturb others, but it is hardly possible for a distraught Asian student worrying about family members to be conscious of the fact that he is in a library and she could exercise more tolerance in this particular situation.
I think online social responsibility is extremely important, and it is not true that freedom of expression online is unlimited. It is true that we can say anything we want online but ultimately, we have to be responsible for what we say, and there will be repercussions. It is immature to think that we can say anything we want online, because others have the same freedom of speech as we have online, which allows them to in turn criticize us. Furthermore, what begins online will not necessarily stay online, and though we might not realise the implications of what we are saying, others will, and the issue may be blown out of proportion.
I do not deny that having a platform to discuss these issues is a good thing. However, I feel that the aftermath is more destructive than constructive. Firstly, even though the student in question has apologized, the deed has been done, and there is no way of taking it back. Though some of the public may feel that what she did was wrong, there will still be a small group whose views of these other races may be affected by her posting. Secondly, this is an inopportune time for such a posting. Right now, events such as the middle-eastern uprising and Japan earthquakes are happening, and the world is focused on these events. For her racially discriminatory remarks to surface at such a time only adds to the mounting worries the world faces now.
Group 1
ReplyDeleteThis UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, made several points about Asians that have annoyed her, positing that Asians have no manners. However, I do not agree with her viewpoints and find them unjustifiable.
Alexandra commented that "if you're going to come to UCLA, then use American manners". This statement has already presented an underlying premise that either Asians do not have manners, or their manners are inferior to the so-called "American manners", clearly a baseless assumption.
This is a conclusion that she has come to after the incident where she encountered 2 Asians talking on their cell phones in the library while she was trying to study for her finals. While I agree that this incident do illustrate that these 2 Asians have caused somewhat a disturbance to her, Alexandra should not have make a sweeping statement that all Asians are not taught their manners. This incident is purely a one-off event and is not substantial enough to represent the whole of Asians.
Furtheremore, as she indicated that these Asians are troubled by the tsunami situation, it is plausible that the 2 Asians may be too anxious and worried to find how their family members are affected by the tsunami to be rational enough to remind himself that they are situated in a library. shouldn't she, as a "polite nice American girl" she claimed to be, show some form of compassion and empathy to the asian instead of rambling off in her youtube video? She has been proved to be a self-centred person instead by circulating unpleasant comments on the web publicly.
Lastly, she purports that "all the Asian people that live in all the apartments around her, their moms and their brothers and sisters and grandma and grandpa and cousins come to help them do their laundry, buy their groceries and cook for them". This is a hasty generalization because it is sourced from her personal andecote, hence in no form reflecting the whole Asian society. Moreover, it is also blatantly exagerrated how their whole family, even inclusive of extended relatives, can help out at their house everyday.
As such, the writer protrayed biasness and discrimination against Asians as her arguments are not logically supported with evidence but rather stereotypes that she possesses. Therefore, I am not in favor of her argument.
group 3
ReplyDeleteThe independent project will most probably not work in Singapore. The independent project is a system whereby students are free to do anything they like, they do not have a fixed timetable like what Singaporean students have. Instead, they “design their own curriculum”, they are solely responsible for their studies. This project works under the assumption that every student that participates in this project is self-drive and will take their learning seriously, as quoted "All it takes are serious, committed students and a supportive faculty ". However, this may not be the case in Singapore. It is not fair to assume that every student in Singapore will be self motivated and will commit themselves to this project, what works in America may not work in Singapore, because of cultural differences and the difference in the education system. In Singapore, there are compulsory national examinations that students have to take at a certain age. These are highly important examinations that usually determine your future. Exams are implemented in schools to test and keep track of the students’ performance and students study a given syllabus in order to pass the school examinations and national examinations. This is why The Independent Project will probably not work in Singapore. For The Independent Project, “there were no grades, but at the end of the semester, the students wrote evaluations of their classmates”. However, this does not apply to the Singapore education system. If students are allowed to learn freely and opt for any subject to study in, it will be disadvantageous for the students whose chosen subjects or topics are not included in the nation examinations. Furthermore, run a quick survey and one would see that doing well in exams are what drives and pushes majority of the students to study. Hence, The Independent Project, which has no exams, may result in the students being too relaxed and the drive to learn may deteriorate. Moreover, in The Independent Project, “each of them focused on specific mathematical topics, from quadratic equations to the numbers behind poker.” However, students in Singapore are expected to know a wider range of math topics, for example quadratic equations, differentiation and algebra, and not just specific topics. If such a system is to be implemented in Singapore, majority of the education system in Singapore would be to have changed, or else having examinations defeat the purpose of being able to learn freely. As such, I believe that a project that ‘lets kids rule the school’ will not work in Singapore.
Group 1
ReplyDeleteJudging from the video, I think that Alexandra Wallace does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. She is generalizing 'Asians' as a race that do not know how to fend for themselves, and has no proper manners. While she may be right about some points, I do not think that all asians behave the way she says they do. Is she implying that every time somebody talks on the phone in the library, that person is definitely an Asian?
I believe that different people have different points of view on certain events. Thus, I think that although it is not wrong for people to have their own set of thinking, it is not acceptable for them to publicly display their thoughts which would obviously affect others negatively. Stereotypes are formed from what we think of certain events and how the environment causes us to think in that way. I think that stereotypes are unfair as usually it only applies to a certain number of people. In other words, people might think a certain way just because of a single event that involves a lot of people. In this case, Alexandra Wallace observes that the Asians at her school has bad mannerisms, which then give rise to the warped idea that since Asians at her school are like that, Asians generally are all like that.
I think that the Alexandra Wallace has no grounds to believe what she believes. Based on 2 encounters that she had at the library, she immediately generalizes that all Asians are inconsiderate and are people who talk loudly in the library disregarding the rest of the students studying there. It could be that she was unlucky to encounter them but these cannot speak for all other Asians. Also, she mentioned that all Asians will have their whole family and friends coming to her school campus over the weekends to do laundry and buy groceries and cook their food for the week. She also includes that even their uncles and aunties, grandfathers and grandmothers and everybody they know from Asia comes along. I think that she is making assumptions and committing the fallacy of hasty generalization. Is it possible that “everybody they know” come along every week? Clearly, it cannot be true that everyone they know from Asia comes along. This is clearly an exaggeration on her part and at the same time displaying her personal prejudices against Asians. Also, she adds that “old Asian people”, presumably their parents, do not teach their children manners. Furthermore, she adds that she is “a polite nice American girl” which contradicts with whatever she is saying in her video about Asians. She is acquiring prejudices based on a few examples in her at UCLA. I think she may have acquired them because she feels that Asians are of a different nationality than her and the vast majority there too. Hence, she starts to feel biased against them. From this incident, I learn a lot about online social responsibility. Since, I am an Asian, being the receiving end of her rants, I feel more strongly and hurt by comments. I think that it is very important to exercise online social responsibility because one’s comments can go a long way. The online network is very vast and anyone can view what you pose hence, it is very important to think before you post anything and be responsible for what you say and do. Alexandra Wallace’s comments were insensitive and rude. I think that from this incident, I also realize that although one has the freedom to express oneself online, one still has to think before posting something and remember that one has to be responsible for it.
ReplyDeleteI think that she should think before she post such comments in the future.
Every nine seconds, an American student drops out of high school. This shows that USA has a very severe problem in their education system and I think that “letting the kids rule the school” may be the solution to this problem. I believe, that letting students run their own school system, under the guidance of adults, will help rekindle the flame of learning in students. Ask any student about their thoughts on school and the first word that pops to their mind would be “boring” and “rigid”. The students feel too restricted in the current school system where all they are learning is directed towards a major examination at the end of the year. Hence, students are merely studying by the syllabus and are not learning about the topics that pique their interest. This hinders the students learning process, causing students to not look forward to school and in the long run, may cause some to choose to drop out of school. Having students run their own school system, with guidelines set by teachers, would allow students to have the freedom to explore the topics that were meant to be taught in any way they want. In my opinion, not only will this help students to regain their interest in learning, but it will also help students retain the information faster and more effectively. There are reports that show that teaching a topic to another will help retain up to 70% of the information as compared to 10% from listening to someone narrate the information). Will this method work in Singapore? I doubt so. Singaporeans are known to be scared of losing, better known as “kiasu”. As such, I believe that many in Singapore will object to letting students run their own school system as they will be afraid that the students may not go through topics as thoroughly as teachers, hence their children will “lose out” when it comes to major examinations such as PSLE and the O Levels.
ReplyDeleteGroup 3.
ReplyDeleteI think that this Independent Project is a very innovative way of learning and it can be adopted in Singapore as maybe holiday enrichment classes. However, I think that it can only remain as a short term project and should not be adopted as formal system of education. Under the Independent Project the students are allowed to craft their own curriculum and decide on what they want to learn, but what i am concerned is that the students choice of topics and subjects is based more on their interest instead of need. Hence, there is a risk that the student may neglect a certain area, causing a lack of knowledge in that particular area. If the Independent Project is adopted as a formal education system and the students determine what they learn, each and every student will have a completely different education, this will cause chaos in the nation's system as the people do not have standardized education. All the national exams will be rendered useless as each person is following a different syllabus. There is a difference between learning what you like and learning what is required by the MOE. The syllables designed by MOE is the compulsory education and we being under the system must follow it regardless we like it or not. On the other hand learning what we like is enrichment, it may be beyond the curriculum. Because we are restraint by the education system, we cannot just learn what we prefer, we have to follow a certain syllables. Thus i think that the Independent Project can only be used as a tool outside conventional curriculum to motivate students and it is also a good enrichment class. Secondly, i think that this Independent Project can only be carried out under certain conditions, that is the students must have finished or almost finished their foundamental studies and have acquired basic knowledge. Because without basic knowledge, the students' choice of topics to learn may not be an informed decision, basic knowledge should allow students to make better choices when choosing what they want to learn. As said the independent Project is a good enrichment class so it should be built on foundamental education and not replace foundamental education. So i recommend Independent Project to Upper sec students and beyond as they are the ones who have completed or almost completed their compulsory education.
Group One~
ReplyDeletePart I:
Alexandra Wallace, a student at UCLA, complains and criticises Asians through her three-minute video. First off, she complains that Asians living near her have their relatives over at their homes every weekend, and that they “do their laundry, buy their groceries, and cook their food for the week” there. She then argues that the older generation of Asians do not allow the younger generation to fend for themselves, citing the fact that she only sees the older people in Asian families living around her home buying groceries for the family in the supermarket. After that, she moves on to ranting that Asians have no manners because they talk on their cell phones in the library, and that Asians should adopt “American manners” when they study at UCLA. Her argument is full of fallacies and takes on a rather biased viewpoint, hence I do not agree with her point of view.
First of all, Wallace commits the fallacy of hasty generalisation when she assumes that Asians have no manners. In her video she refers to all Asians when she criticises their manners. However, it was only a number of Asians speaking on their cell phones in the library that caused her to form the conclusion that Asians have a lack of manners. Just because she has seen some Asians do it, it does not mean all Asians are inconsiderate in this way. By basing her conclusion on the small number of inconsiderate people, Wallace makes an invalid conclusion that all Asians have no manners.
Secondly, Wallace also makes an unsupported assumption that Americans are polite. She says that she has never witnessed Americans speaking on their cell phones in the library and declares that Asians should learn to have “American manners”. However, the fact that she has never seen this incident happen among Americans does not mean that there are absolutely no Americans who speak on their cell phones in libraries. Also, her assumption that all Americans have proper manners is shown through her self-coined phrase “American manners” and her statement “the nice, polite girl my [mother] raised me to be”. However, even if all Americans do not speak on their cell phones in libraries, it does not show that they have manners as they may be inconsiderate in other ways, such as hogging traffic, not being punctual for events and so on. Wallace also does not appear nice or polite in any way as she criticises Asians simply because some of them caused her inconvenience, thus in itself proving that not all Americans are well-mannered and polite. Wallace’s conclusion that all Americans have good manners is invalid.
(continued...)
Group One~
ReplyDeletePart II:
Thirdly, because she frequently sees the older members of the Asian families living near her buy groceries in the supermarket, Wallace infers that the younger Asians, their children, cannot fend for themselves. She seems to be implying that the elders of these Asian people are not allowing their children to be independent. However, as these Asians gather together on weekends to cook and do household chores, it may simply be that the younger ones are doing some other chores which may be more exhausting for the older generation, such as cleaning and dusting the house. Her inference does not stand, therefore I disagree with Wallace.
Fourthly, Wallace has made clear from the start that she does not have a good impression of Asians. Even at the beginning of the video, she complains that Asians living near her have their relatives over at their homes every weekend, and that they “do their laundry, buy their groceries, and cook their food for the week” there. She sees this as highly nonsensical behaviour, not to mention inconvenient for her as she is their neighbour and is bound to be annoyed by the noise produced or lack of privacy, even though these Asians have probably not done anything wrong. Though most people may feel that cohesion between people of the same race is commendable, Wallace takes a negative view of it. When she includes this in her video, Wallace makes clear her bad impression of Asians. Besides, Wallace appears superficial when she says “I feel bad for all people affected by the tsunami” as she immediately continues criticising the manners of Asians after expressing her “concern”. Wallace’s words seem, then, extremely unconvincing. We can see that Wallace is biased and her perspective is then unlikely to be reliable. She may even have exaggerated their behaviour when she mimicked Asians speaking over the phone in the library. Her conclusion that Asians have no manners is likely to be irrational.
Thus, due to her numerous fallacies and logically unsound interpretations, Wallace does not make much sense at all. I cannot agree with her and therefore find no reason to back up her view that all Asians have no manners.
Valerie
ReplyDeleteGroup 1
I think that it is not right of Alexandra Wallace to assume that it is stereotypical of Asians to have their parents, as well as extended family members to come and visit them in UCLA at a regular basis. It may be true that some asian families do come and visit the UCLA campus, and it may be true that she had seen some of these families on campus, however just by seeing a them a few times does not mean that she can assume and make a generalization that there is such a custom among all asians. Unlike Alexandra Wallace whose an American and can meet her family whenever she can. These asians that she may have seen with their families could be those who come from overseas and are studying in the campus. Hence, these families may have came to the campus because they rarely get to meet them, thus they come to the campus to have a feel of what their children are going through, what kind of environment there is. Furthermore it is rare that extended family members would come and visit, it is usually the parents only. Thus, she cannot assume that extended family members would also almost always tag along. Moreover, she mentioned that she grew up being taught on having good manners. However, if she had good manners she would not have made the video in the first place and and uploaded it on YouTube because it is highly offending towards another race. Furthermore, if she had the right manners she should have look at the situation first before reacting towards it. It may have been the library, and it may have been wrong for these people to talk on the phone, however these people were worried about the whereabouts of their relatives or friends living in Japan, to know whether they are safe from the natural disaster. Nevertheless, if the conversation is not urgent, then I do agree with Alexandra Wallace, that this person should step out of the library before hand. All in all, I think that the statements made by Alexandra Wallace in the video is unjustifiable as its reasonings are biased.
I feel that Alexandra Wallace, does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. Firstly, she is extremely prejudiced and biased against Asians, though she constantly denies she is being racist. Her stereotypical views of Asians are based on those around her, and she over-generalises their behaviour as to that of all Asians. She talks about American manners, which does not exist, manners are manners. Her acts of posting racist comments online, reflect how she does not think and act responsibly. Freedom of expression online is abused by such acts, as she assumes all Asians are barbaric just by judging their inappropriate behaviour in the library. However, it is true that we all have prejudices. It is just a matter of how we display it, and in this case, Alexandra Wallace has been very wrongful in her ways. The video, though reflecting her adolescent and immature thinking, does serve good purpose in enlightening the public on how online social irresponsibility is essential as insensitive personal remarks may spark off social conflict. I feel that she has been overly dramatic in the way she portrays the Asians, especially by mimicking the way Asians speak. Hence, I think that Alexandra Wallace’s online post is an immature way of showing what she feels against Asians, and that she does not have good grounds to believe that all Asians are like that.
ReplyDeleteGroup 3 - Mum forces son to stand on street for bad grade
ReplyDeleteAlthough I feel with the mother that good grades are extremely important and that her worry (for her son to follow in her footsteps) is understandable, I think that she has gone overboard. By making her son stand on the street with such a sign is not only humiliating for him, it also creates a sense of resentment in the child. A 15 year old made to do that with the intention of letting him realise the importance of education is a rather drastic and ineffective measure. Most teenagers are sensitive and don't like to be embarrassed at such an age, and this experience will only continue to taunt him as time goes by. He will start to feel resentful towards studying instead. I feel that the mother is too extreme and even if her child takes little or no interest in studying, such a method to make him realise the importance of education is not feasible. I think she should speak to him calmly and not carry out such a rash decision, and even if that does not work, studying may not be the child's cup of tea. She should make some effort to realise other strengths her child possesses and perhaps work towards excellence in that area.
The Independent Project does seem like a very interesting idea. However, the idea of it being implemented everywhere appears problematic. Students in other places may not have students with the will to work hard to achieve their own goals. In the case of the school in Massachusetts, perhaps it was just coincidental that the group of dropout students was driven to succeed and was able to look past their previous failures. One cannot say the same for all the other dropout students in the world. Furthermore, wouldn’t the quality of learning also be compromised by allowing students to venture into their own method of learning? Those that take education lightly may choose to take the easy way out, and they do not stand to benefit in such a case. In the case of Singapore, the difference of cultures may become a hindrance to students instead. Western and Asian views differ, and the idea of the Independent Project may not achieve the same effect in a society with a distinct culture difference from American schools.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, countries will constantly have the future generation take the reins and run the country. While it may be a unique and innovative form of schooling, one should bear in mind that education serves to cultivate a civilised society. If that is the case, students may be prone to choosing subjects and electives catering to their wants and not their needs. For example, even if a child has a great dislike for say, Social Studies, they still have to take it under conventional education because they “need” it, even if there doesn’t appear to have any relevance. So, while this may be an enriching side activity, I feel that one shouldn’t stray from the conventional route of education. After all, it builds a solid foundation of learning that will be able to cater to society’s needs when the time comes.
Group 1
ReplyDeleteI feel that the UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, does not have good grounds to believe what she believes, because she is making her assumptions based on what she sees going on in her own school, and not anywhere else. The fact that she sees “old Asian people” in the school helping their children does not imply that Asians are not taught how to fend for themselves, as it is possible that the parents or grandparents may simply be showing their concern for their children. Wallace also stated that her rants are toward “random people she does not know in the library”, but I feel that if she does not know these people, she does not have a right to judge them.
Also, I feel that Wallace does not truly feel sorry for the tsunami victims in Japan as she claims, because from her sentence “if something is wrong, you might really freak out if you’re in the library and everybody is quiet”, it is apparent that she cares more about the quiet that will be disturbed in the library as compared to the disaster that has happened to the people in Japan. I feel that she has no sense of empathy for the people whose families might have been affected by the tsunami in Japan.
I think that people in general acquire prejudices and assumptions about people of other races based on the environment that they were raised in. It might have been inculcated into their minds that people of a certain race act a certain way, and thus they make assumptions once they see the people of that race acting the way they thought they would.
The incident told me that we should always think twice before posting things on the internet, because the internet is a public place where anybody anywhere on the globe can view what you have posted. What you have posted represents the way you think and write, and contributes greatly to what people think of you. Everyone has the freedom to post what they want online, but it is their responsibility to decided whether what they are going to post is reasonable and justified.
I feel that the aftermath of the video posting was more constructive as it has led many people to think about the freedom of expression online. It also served to warn them to think about everything they post online, as posting without thinking can lead to bigger consequences than they imagined.
Alexandra Wallace does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. She generalizes all Asians based on only her personal experiences, and also has a stong motive behind her arguments.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, she raises the point about Asian students have their entire families visiting them over the weekends to cook for them, buy groceries for them etc. That may be true, but she does not state what is wrong with that. Many Asian students who come to UCLA live in the UCLA boarding school, away from their home, family and relatives, and seldom have the chance to see their families. It is perfectly fine for parents, grandparents, uncles and aunts to visit them regularly, care for them, and give them the sense of comfort and home that they might rarely experience while studying abroad. Moreover, this just shows how Asians are much more family oriented. Anyway, how do the families of Asian students affect her? If this does not affect her in any way, she has no right to complain, except maybe out of jealousy.
Secondly, she says that Asian students talk loudly in the library. Of course, talking loudly in the library is rude and inconsiderate. However, she generalizes and says all Asians do that. She says how she has never seen students other than Asians speak loudly in the library, and how every 5 to 15 minutes there will be an Asian student speaking loudly. But that is too exaggerated, and it is unreasonable to single out Asians. Moreover, she has strong personal interest in the matter. She complains that Asian students are affecting her "epiphanies", especially when it is during “final term”, which suggest a personal motive. She also speaks of the Japan disaster as the “tsunami thing”, seeming to treat the issue too lightly. She says in the video how the Asian students “can call (their) whole address book, but please get out of the library. If something is wrong and (they are) gonna freak out, (they are) gonna make a lot of noise.” Her focus is obviously wrong here, as Asian students call home to express their concern for their relatives, and when they do “freak out” over an unfortunate incident, it is hardly possible for a distraught Asian student worrying about family members to be conscious of the fact that he is making a lot of noise in the library. Thus, she should express empathy to their plight, and not complain about them disrupting her studies, and she could definitely exercise more tolerance in this situation. Her attitude also seems to show that human lives are less important than her personal interests and exam grades. Thus, there is a strong personal motive behind her arguments, and she has no right to complain, especially since her family was not affected by the tsunami.
I feel that online social responsibility is very important, and we should be aware of the possible consequences of our words. Thus, we should be responsible for what we say, and exercise caution when we express our opinions online, as our words can never be taken back once we said it, and this couls lead to serious backlashes and implications.
The UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. She raises evidence of isolated events that she has experienced involving some inconsiderate Asians in UCLA. She then generalizes all Asians in her school to be inconsiderate and according to her, lacking “American manners”. Hence, I find her stereotypical views on Asians fair and grounded in legitimate and good evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe first point she raised is about “hordes of [Asian students]” inviting their extended families to the UCLA hostel every weekend, “like seriously without fail”. While this situation may occur quite frequently, it is highly improbable that this happens every weekend “without fail”. She is making a blatant exaggeration here, and is thus making an unfair statement. Also, she comments that the Asian parents do not teach their children to fend for themselves. While I do acknowledge that independence is a valuable skill, I do not think that the parents of Asian students coming every weekend to do their laundry, buy their groceries and cook their meals for the next week can justify her point that the Asian students in UCLA are dependent on their parents or do not know how to fend for themselves. Their parents may well be simply trying to help them out so that they do not have to spend so much time on chores like doing the laundry, buying groceries or cooking meals for themselves. Hence, I do not think that it is fair and justifiable for the UCLA student in question to make such a relation between Asian parents visiting their children and helping them to do their laundry, buying their groceries and cook their meals and Asian students in UCLA not being able to fend for themselves.
She goes on to raise another point about Asians speaking loudly on cell phones in the library. Based on her own experience of Asians speaking loudly on cell phones in the library, she hastily generalizes that all Asians are inconsiderate and have no manners. This is an unjust statement: she cannot conclude that that all Asians are inconsiderate and have no manners simply because some Asians happen to speak loudly on their cell phones in the library and affect her “epiphanies”. Isolated cases cannot be used to illustrate and prove her point about Asians being inconsiderate and having no manners. Also, she says that Asians are inconsiderate and have no manners by speaking loudly on cell phones in the library just because she had not seen any Americans doing so before. Even if she had not seen any Americans speaking loudly on cell phones in the library before, which is highly improbable, it does not mean that all Americans never speak loudly on cell phones before. In every country and race, there are bound to be inconsiderate people. She is not being fair when she says that all Asians are inconsiderate and have no manners and all Americans are considerate, have manners and behave in an acceptable way (as implied in her phrase “American manners”). Therefore, I find her argument extremely flawed and discriminatory, and hence, I am unable to agree with her point of view.
In my opinion, Alexandra Wallace statements have weak grounds. She makes sweeping and derogatory statements tainted with ill feelings of racism. Firstly, she labels Asians are ill-mannered, solely based on her unfortunate incidents of studying in the library and hearing Asian students conversing loudly on their cellphones. In is highly improbable that only Asian students talk on their cellphones in the campus library. Moreover,she makes a slew of statements that show exactly how judgmental she is. For one, she believes that Asians studying in UCLA should " use American manners" and Asian parents do not teach their children manners. It seems odd that manners should be classified according to racial backgrounds. By her statement, she seems to be saying that "American manners" are more superior than "Asian manners". This generalization shows her disrespect to another culture. Also, the trifling manner in which she brought up the recent Japan tsunami devastation shows how judgmental she is. It is unfair for her to establish a casual relationship between the frantic address-book dialing as a result of the tsunami and a handful of Asian students on their cellphones in the library.
ReplyDeleteGiven the wide outreach of the internet, users should practise cyber responsibility. Postings on internet are viral. No amount of apology on her part can remove the hurt afflicted onto others with this (possibly offensive)video. ):
Group 3: Do you endorse and like what the school in Massachusetts allowed its students to do. Do you think that the same can obtain in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteThe school in Massachusetts allowed its students to initiate an Independent Project, where students designed their own curriculum, taking ownership of their education. Besides studying, they also took on an individual endeavour and a collective endeavour. The project was extremely beneficial as students demonstrated different kinds of learning and personal growth, only possible by giving them ownership of their own learning. I agree that this school environment and learning format does encourage a better learning environment and attitude; however, I do not think that the same result can be obtained in Singapore.
Students in Singapore have generally been exposed to a more controlled way of education, from kindergarten to junior college. Students hardly have any opportunity to control what they are learning as they usually have strict syllabuses to follow and have very little space to be creative about what they learn. With such rigorous methods of testing, students also cultivate a type of outlook that prioritizes exam results before anything else. Hence, students have been quite dependent on schools and teachers to spoon-feed them information for exams. Therefore, with this kind of mindset and attitude, it is difficult to expect that students will immediately be able and know what they even want to study if we allow them to initiate their own Independent Project. Giving them free rein of their education is simply not the way to go because students will definitely be lost in trying to find their way.
This Independent Project helps those who are self-initiated and can take charge of their own learning, they also must understand their own learning styles very well. Students who lack self-discipline and are not driven will not flourish under this system, as they will not know how to conduct their own learning. However, education should cater to everyone, and their different learning styles. It is unfair as it disadvantages some students with different learning styles and abilities in this aspect. Instead, I think that a better result can be obtained if schools and teachers give students some freedom and choice in choosing some viable choices regarding their syllabus and curriculum. With enough guidance and help, students still can get the best out of independent learning.
Group 3:
ReplyDeleteBased on the achievements of students in the Independent Project, the writer encourages schools to allow students to design their own curriculums. He claims that participants will eventually emerge “more accomplished, more engaged and more knowledgeable than they would have been taking regular courses”. I feel he does not have good grounds to conclude so. Firstly, as students, their scopes of the world are limited and sometimes their perceptions may be wrong. Without regular courses facilitated by qualified teachers, students may understand less about a topic if they learn solely from their peers. Secondly, based on the activities of the students in the Independent Project, they spent the first half of the semester formulating and answering questions about the natural and social world, critiquing one another’s queries and answers. However, I believe that more time could have been allotted to field trips or hands-on activities. Thinking up and answering questions on their own hardly engages the students with the workings of the real world.
The writer advocates that students need to be “the authors of their own education” and encourages schools to take the initiative to start an Independent Project. However, he is contradictory in his claims.
On one hand, he opines that “schools everywhere could initiate an Independent Project”. He implies that such a project is relatively simple to carry out by saying that it didn’t take more than a supportive faculty and “serious, committed students”. The writer neglects the fact that most teenagers are neither serious about nor committed to their studies in the first place. In fact, the lack of dedication to their studies is likely the root cause of why so many students fare badly. The writer later contradicts himself by saying that allowing the students to carry out their own Independent Projects would “capitalize on rather than [thwart] the intensity and engagement that teenagers usually reserve for sports, protest of friendship”. In making the above statement, it is evident that he believes most teenagers reserve most of their drive and enthusiasm for areas other than academia.
Furthermore, the writer contends that the students in the Independent project were remarkable because they “demonstrate[d] the kinds of learning and personal growth that [were] possible when teenagers feel ownership of their high school experience”. In making this statement, he is implying that the demonstration of learning and growth in students, particularly when they are passionate about what they are studying, is something special and uncommon and thus not something that many students can do.
In conclusion, his stance that such a learning method can be applied to the bulk of students with ease is thus questionable. The writer is making an unrepresentative observation and generalizing solely based on the results of the Independent Project alone.
Personally, I do not believe that such a method would fare well in Singapore. I am of the opinion that students should follow a set pace and curriculum. Different Independent Projects will have a diverse range of topics and learning methods. The implications of this may be difficulty in grading the students based on how much they have learnt. Students may also have different levels of knowledge and in differing areas. However, I feel that such a project can be undertaken as enrichment, possibly after the exams.
Group 2:
ReplyDeleteFirstly, the role of a public servant is to serve the public and the nation. This goes without saying, and it should apply even more so to ministers, who are leaders of the nation. I believe that Ministers should sincerely want to make sacrifices for the good of the nation and its people, and serve willingly without any monetary incentive. Thus I agree with Sylvia Lim’s point that if the government thinks offering people high wages will encourage them to hold public office, perhaps it is corrupting the spirit of servant leadership with material terms. It is indeed sad if Singapore has to rely on material terms to attract people to join the parliament, even after all the “billions of tax dollars” spent on educating our youths about national pride and community service. Those who see political office as a high-paying career choice would not really suited to serve the needs of the community as they have self-vested interests, and Singapore would certainly be in trouble if all our ministers care more about themselves than the nation’s interests. I feel it is also not unreasonable if the parliament were to benchmark their ministerial salaries to those of other countries. After all the responsibilities and job scope seem to be more comparable, and like what was said above, if the rational for high ministerial wages is to retain local talent to join the parliament, it is corrupting the public spirit with material terms.
Secondly, I do agree with Sylvia Lim that it seems unfair that the ministers are paid so highly that it takes them a few hours to earn what an average worker earns in a month. Although I concede that Ministers are not average workers, and it is reasonable for their pays to be higher than what average workers earn, it seems unreasonable to benchmark the ministerial pay to the top few percent of the private sector. As Sylvia Lim aptly puts it, wouldn’t ministers, who are serving the nation and should put the interests of the people first, “feel a tinge of discomfort” knowing that the taxes that the hardworking public pays goes into their own pockets, and that there are many people who struggle to make ends meet with the increasing costs of living, while they themselves are cashing in an average of 1.2 million a year? It seems almost ironic that these leaders of our nation who claim to want to serve the people are having a significant portion of the taxpayers’ money in their own salaries, instead of putting the money into good use in sectors like education and healthcare. This also raises questions as to whether there is equity in this policy of ministerial wages, or is it, as Sylvia Lim says, “whoever has the gold, makes the rules”.
Group 3: Do you endorse and like what the school in Massachusetts allowed its students to do. Do you think that the same can obtain in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteThe school in Massachusetts allowed its students to initiate an Independent Project, where students designed their own curriculum, taking ownership of their education. Besides studying, they also took on an individual endeavour and a collective endeavour. The project was extremely beneficial as students demonstrated different kinds of learning and personal growth, only possible by giving them ownership of their own learning. I agree that this school environment and learning format does encourage a better learning environment and attitude; however, I do not think that the same result can be obtained in Singapore.
Students in Singapore have generally been exposed to a more controlled way of education, from kindergarten to junior college. Students hardly have any opportunity to control what they are learning as they usually have strict syllabuses to follow and have very little space to be creative about what they learn. With such rigorous methods of testing, students also cultivate a type of outlook that prioritizes exam results before anything else. Hence, students have been quite dependent on schools and teachers to spoon-feed them information for exams. Therefore, with this kind of mindset and attitude, it is difficult to expect that students will immediately be able and know what they even want to study if we allow them to initiate their own Independent Project. Giving them free rein of their education is simply not the way to go because students will definitely be lost in trying to find their way.
This Independent Project helps those who are self-initiated and can take charge of their own learning, they also must understand their own learning styles very well. Students who lack self-discipline and are not driven will not flourish under this system, as they will not know how to conduct their own learning. However, education should cater to everyone, and their different learning styles. It is unfair as it disadvantages some students with different learning styles and abilities in this aspect. Instead, I think that a better result can be obtained if schools and teachers give students some freedom and choice in choosing some viable choices regarding their syllabus and curriculum. With enough guidance and help, students still can get the best out of independent learning.
Do you endorse and like what the school in Massachusetts allowed its students to do. Do you think that the same can obtain in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteThe school in Massachusetts allowed its students to initiate an Independent Project, where students designed their own curriculum, taking ownership of their education. Besides studying, they also took on an individual endeavour and a collective endeavour. The project was extremely beneficial as students demonstrated different kinds of learning and personal growth, only possible by giving them ownership of their own learning. I agree that this school environment and learning format does encourage a better learning environment and attitude; however, I do not think that the same result can be obtained in Singapore.
Students in Singapore have generally been exposed to a more controlled way of education, from kindergarten to junior college. Students hardly have any opportunity to control what they are learning as they usually have strict syllabuses to follow and have very little space to be creative about what they learn. With such rigorous methods of testing, students also cultivate a type of outlook that prioritizes exam results before anything else. Hence, students have been quite dependent on schools and teachers to spoon-feed them information for exams. Therefore, with this kind of mindset and attitude, it is difficult to expect that students will immediately be able and know what they even want to study if we allow them to initiate their own Independent Project. Giving them free rein of their education is simply not the way to go because students will definitely be lost in trying to find their way.
This Independent Project helps those who are self-initiated and can take charge of their own learning, they also must understand their own learning styles very well. Students who lack self-discipline and are not driven will not flourish under this system, as they will not know how to conduct their own learning. However, education should cater to everyone, and their different learning styles. It is unfair as it disadvantages some students with different learning styles and abilities in this aspect. Instead, I think that a better result can be obtained if schools and teachers give students some freedom and choice in choosing some viable choices regarding their syllabus and curriculum. With enough guidance and help, students still can get the best out of independent learning.
I feel that the Independant project is a rather creative way of learning in school. I endorse this way of learning and I feel that it can be adopted in Singapore. However, the Independant project should not be made permanent. It should only be organised for the benefit of the student’s freedom and to develop self-driven learning in students. The Independant project allows students to craft their own curriculum and choose their own subjects that they would like to study. There is an issue that a small number of students may not have the discipline to design their own learning. They may end up not learning anything at all, thus defeating the purpose of the project. Also, students may end up choosing the subject that interest them and may neglect the subjects that do not interest them but are yet important in an education. This will lead to the students having a lack of knowledge in certain areas important for life in future. If the independant project became part of the formal education of Singapore students, then the students would not be able to be fairly accessed. If each and every one learns something different, there would not be a standardised way of grading. It would be very chaotic and teachers would need to be well verse in all subjects under the sun. Alternatively the school would have to hire at least one teacher specialised in each subject. This would prove rather unrealistic and unpractical. It would also waste manpower resources. The very reason why Singapore has a Ministry of Education (MOE) is to ensure that each and every Singapore student is provided with a standardised amount of resources and grading. MOE ensures that each student is treated fairly according to their standard and also equipping them with the necessary skills in future. However, adopting the Independant project as and enrichment sabbatical for the students would benefit students greatly and also avoid the complex problems if the project were to be part of the formal education. Students would be able to take a break from studying what they are made to study and pursue subjects that they are interested in. This would allow them to rediscover their love and the beauty of learning and gaining knowledge. Students would also learn to be more self-reliant and self-driven to find out more for themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe Independent Project is a very interesting way of getting the students to be more proactive and involved in their own learning. I feel that the right group of students, given this opportunity, will indeed be able to benefit from the project, as they will have the space to develop their own areas of interest as well as be motivated to expand their knowledge on topics that they are studying, seeing as how the curriculum is self-planned. However, I think that it will be difficult to attain the same result in Singapore. Most students in Singapore, though motivated to study on their own, may not be as open to the idea of planning their own curriculum as those in the USA. Singaporeans are generally very mindful of the grades they get, and asking the students to plan their own curriculum and peer-teach will only result in great unrest. It would be a concern as to whether the topics were taught well enough to get them through all examinable questions, as to Singaporeans, the final grade is what reflects one’s ability to understand and apply everything learnt. Furthermore, the Independent Project would prove to be problematic if applied in places where students are not motivated to work. These students may then choose to plan their curriculum in a way that will not promote independent learning, contrary to what the project aims to do.
ReplyDeleteI feel that schools should try to integrate both learning methods into their curriculum, as this will give students the structure and the freedom that their education should have.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlexandra Wallace, a student from UCLA posts a rant video on Youtube complaining about Asians who has disturbed her studying in the library. I strongly feel that her arguments are problematic and invalid. Firstly, she complains about all the Asian families around her apartment “always do their laundry, buy their groceries and cook their food for the week”. It is invalid for her to complain about them as it is clearly seen that these Asians are not a big disturbance to anyone based on their actions. There is nothing wrong about what these Asian families are doing. In fact, the Asian families are just showing good family relationships through these activities and there is nothing wrong with that. This clearly shows that Alexandra Wallace is prejudiced against Asians and finds fault in what Asians do. Secondly, she talks about “American manners”. There are no different types of manners for different countries. By saying so, she also claims that all Asians do not have manners. Just by using two of her personal bad experience with Asians disturbing her studying, it is not justifiable to claim that all Asians do not have manners. Besides, in every society, there is bound to have people who lack good manners. Therefore, it is not wrong to say that there is also a high possibility that there are Americans who do not have the best manners too. In conclusion, Alexandra Wallace makes hasty generalizations and weak arguments about Asians to justify her prejudice towards them. Therefore, her argument is flawed and problematic in logic.
ReplyDeleteI feel that Alexandra Wallace does not have good grounds to believe what she believes. I feel that she is abusing the freedom of expression of the internet with racist views that bears personal grudges. Her stereotypical views on Asians are not fair because firstly, it is based on her personal experiences and secondly she is overgeneralising using her personal experiences. Just because the few occurrences of events that displease her were all commited by Asians doesn't mean all Asians are people without manners. It is unfair too because racism should not even happen in the first place because everyone should be equal in the modern world. No particular race should be superior of the other like what it is 100 over years ago. She should not have asked the Asians in UCLA to use "American manners" because firstly how is "American manners" defined and secondly she is the one representing "American manners" too by doing this on Youtube and her "American manners" does not seem like something people would want to follow. Especially when she was talking about the Japan Tsunami, instead of sympathy, she is presenting a self-centered image that only cares about whether the victims' families' phone calls will affect her "epiphany". This is also disrespectful to the Asians.
ReplyDeleteI think people acquire prejudices and assumptions about people of different races because of three points. Firstly, people of different races are different, they behave differently, they speak a totally different language and these differences makes them appear weird and wrong to what people usually believe. Since they deem these differences as wrong and they themselves right, they are likely to prejudice against people of different races. Secondly, few occurrences of events by people of different races that displease them will encourage the forming of overgeneralised views. Especially if the person does not usually contact people of other races, they depend solely on these events to form impressions of people of other races, hence forming prejudice. Thirdly, the majority will usually feel superior to the minority. For example there are definitely more Westerners in America compared to Asians therefore the Westerners will naturally want the Asians to adapt to their culture and do things that please them.
Online social responsibility is something that is not taught to many teens. Teens tend to act on impulse and reject things that restrict them. All they see about the internet is the freedom of expression and they automatically ignored the responsibility part, which is why we are seeing this kind of videos on Youtube. Sometimes teens also do drastic things online to appear different and they hope people will recognise them and agree with them but usually they go overboard and their way of representing their uniqueness is sometimes ethically incorrect.
I feel that the aftermath of the video posting was definitely more constructive and will probably bring sense to many people.
I feel that UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, does not have good and legitimate evidence to support her views. She first states that she doesn't mean to offend anyone or be racist about it, but her following comments obviously contradicts her previous statements on her not 'being racist about it'.
ReplyDeleteNext, she implies that Asians do not have manners, by using the example of Asian students talking loudly on phones in the library. I feel that her personal experiences of Asians talking on phones in libraries are not enough to conclude that the entire Asian community do not have manners. She claims that every 15 minutes, an Asian student will start talking on his/her phone in the library, which i feel might be her exaggeration.
Even though there is freedom of expression online, i feel that people should still be be sensitive of what they are about to post about online. Such irresponsible remarks might result in victims getting hurt or arguments between both races to arise, which is the situation that no one will desire to have. Therefore i feel that before one posts any comments or remarks online, he/she should consider the different kind of consequences that the comments will bring.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the UCLA student's views are highly biased which is understandable as she had already pointed out that she was posting a rant and thus cannot be taken seriously. Furthermore, it was 'finals week' and she might have been under too much pressure and thus when her studying was disturbed, it triggered off an uncontrollable emotional reaction. It proves that she was merely in a state of anger, was acting rashly and therefore not thinking logically.
ReplyDeleteHowever, just by listening to a portion of what she said during her rant can will prove to be enough to deem her entire rant unjustifiable and illogical.
Wallace claims that "Seriously, without fail, you will always see old Asian people running around this apartment complex every weekend. That's what they do -- they don't teach their kids to fend for themselves." Is visiting their kids on weekends wrong? How does visiting their kids make them unable to fend for themselves? It genuinely sounds as though Wallace is jealous that these 'Asians' have such close ties with their family members. It does not mean that by being close with their parents and family members they are unable to fend for themselves.
Secondly, she goes on ranting that "You know what they don't also teach them? Is their manners.". For someone who's posted a rant like this online, Wallace is one to speak of manners. Yet, she generalizes that all Asians do not have manners and that only Asians speak loudly on their cell phones in libraries. Seriously? Is that even possible? "Only Asians"?
I feel that this is enough to prove that Alexandra Wallace isn't making a sound argument.
Triciaaa
Yixing
ReplyDeleteThe school in Massachusetts has no doubt attempted something very innovative and intriguing. By allowing the students to design their own curriculum, the students were not only able to thoroughly enjoy the learning process, but also discover their own potential and talents. The project also gave the students a chance to generate their own ideas, so that they can mature in their thinking abilities.
It is hard to say whether the same can be obtained in Singapore. In my opinion, Singaporean students are largely “spoon-fed” in primary and secondary schools, although the situation does vary from school to school and from subject to subject. The curriculum has been carefully designed for the students, who can normally just follow instructions and do well. Such a system has its benefits, but it also limits the students’ innovation and ability of self-discovery. If given the opportunity to design their own entire curriculum, the students may feel uncertain or lost, as they have usually been too used to being taught everything to think about their real interests.
I disagree with the student that all Asians are ill-mannered. The student’s arguments are problematic as she bases her generalisation on her encounters with the Asian students who use the phone in the library. However, these Asian students make up a very small percentage of all Asians, and are unable to represent the whole Asian population. Thus, it is unfair to say that because these Asian students use their phone in the library and are ill-mannered, all other Asians must also be like this.
ReplyDeleteShe claims that she has only seen Asians use their phones in the library, and has never seen Americans do the same. This claim may be true, but the student must also acknowledge that good mannerism encompasses more than just good etiquette in the library. It is unreasonable to infer that since she has never seen Americans use the phone in the library, they are all well mannered; there are many aspects of good manners. A person who does not use her phone in the library but does not respect other races is not well mannered as well. Therefore, her statement is invalid.
Aside from this, she openly shows that she does not have a very good impression of Asians. This weakens her following arguments as she is evaluating all the events with tainted lenses. Her biasness against Asians will affect her objectivity towards the actions of the Asian students. It is also clear that she is exaggerating her case as she mentioned earlier that she would be interrupted by a call every 5 minutes, but yet changes it to 15 minutes to make it sound more probable.
I also find it strange when she mentions that the problem of Asian students having their family members over the weekend “used to bother her but does not bother her anymore”. If she was truly indifferent about this matter, she would not be expressing her irritation and frustration over it. Saying that she is not really bothered by this allows her to mask her prejudices, and make her seem very objective towards the matter. However, it is apparent that she is disapproving of her fellow schoolmate’s actions, thus making her claims baseless.
Read and think about the incident where a UCLA student posted a racist rant on YouTube.
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious, from the way the student speaks and her tone and attitude that she has a stereotype of all Asians. Besides, she has also chosen to base her assumptions and stereotypes of all Asians on her own experiences, which unfortunately happens to be one unlucky incident of an Asian speaking on the cell phone in the library. Just because she heard a few Asians speaking on the cell phone in the library while she was deep in studying for her finals, she claims that all Asians do not have manners. That, i feel is a case of over-generalization, for i believe that Asians are not the only people who talk on their cell phone in the library, and it just happens to be an Asian when she was studying in the library.
She also speaks about how Asian families are always seen at the apartments during weekends, helping their own child with some household chores, and she is of the view that because of such behavior, they don't teach their kids to fend of for themselves. I completely disagree with her point of view and line of reasoning, for she does not seem to make sense, i do not the root of the problem with Asian families coming to help their kids out. They are in a foreign country, of course the parents would try to meet their kids as much as possible. To say that this causes the kids to be unable to fend for themselves, is simply unreasonable and illogical. She also does not make sense when she says " If you're going to come to UCLA, use America manners" What are America manners? Do manners actually differ by country, i do not think so, manners are universal, and if you are polite as a person, you will be polite everywhere. The student from UCLA also does not seem to explain what she means by using America manners, and why the Asians have not done so. Instead she just rants on about the unfortunate incidents during her encounters with Asians. She is also extremely insensitive to others, especially when she says " I swear they're going through their whole families, just checking on everybody from the tsunami thing. ... Like, you seriously should go outside if you're going to do that." In this sentence, she sounds extremely self-centered, like the whole world consists of her, and her only, and as long as she benefits, she does not care what happens to others.
I feel that this UCLA student is extremely rude and disrespectful to others, and she also makes illogical and extremely unreasonable arguments.
I feel that Alexandra Wallace's views are rather biased. She generalizes and forms stereotypes about Asians based on her own experiences which may not be true for the majority of the Asians.
ReplyDeleteHer main point in the video seems to be that Asian students have no manners as they are always the ones who talk on their phones and disturb the rest in the UCLA library who are trying to study for their finals. By saying this, she generalizes that all Asian students are ill-mannered. This can hardly be considered true solely based on her own unfortunate experiences. Also, it is not highly possible that only Asian students talk on their cell phones in the UCLA library out of so many students. Hence she has overgeneralized and formed the stereotype that all Asians have no manners, which is not true.
Alexandra Wallace also mentions about "the tsunami thing" and if these students are going to "call their whole address book then they might as well go outside because if something is wrong,you might really freak out". I feel that she treats the tsunami and the devastation caused by it too lightly to say this. It is natural that the Japanese students will be very worried about their family and will want to call to make sure they are fine. However, it should be understandable that they will not be as conscious of their surroundings as to remember that they are in a library. So for her to want them to leave the library to call, it only shows that she is self-centered and not understanding at all. It is also rather ironic that even though through her reference to the tsunami,she refers to the Japanese students, and use them as an example of Asian students being ill-mannered as they talk on their phones in the library, the Japanese are often thought to be very polite and well-mannered people by many people all over the world.
I feel that Alexandra Wallace has showed insensitiveness to people who may be grieving due to the devastation caused by the tsunami and also stereotypes Asians with her personal experiences through the video. America may be a country with freedom of speech, but I feel that people should use their freedom wisely. Everyone will have made mistakes at some point in their lives. The video she posted was a mistake that was more serious but it is still rather harsh for people to send death threats to her and caused her to quit college just because of a single 3 minute video.
AHHHHHHHHHHH I AM SO SAD I JUST LOST MY ENTIRE COMMENT BECAUSE I PRESSED 'BACK' BY ACCIDENT. D:
ReplyDeleteAnyway. This is the (much shorter because my dad's forcing me to get off) retyped comment.
Group 1
1. No, and no. Her examples are overgeneralisations and sweeping statements. For example, she assumes that all Asians are rude just because of her own bad experience with a select few in the UCLA library. There are people like that from all cultures, including American culture. Just because she claims to not have seen any Americans behave like that (which is a suspicious statement in itself) does not mean that Americans have never behaved badly in public.
2. I think that people (in general) tend to form impressions based on what little they see of other cultures. This leads to a biased opinion. Also, because Western culture is more open than Asian culture, and because Asians do not voice out their opinions, Westerners tend to assume Asians have nothing to say.
I read somewhere that the girl who made this video originally meant for it to be humorous. (Evidently it came out all wrong.) In view of all the popular "troll" videos on youtube, just a thought: Perhaps online culture, where people "bash" others for fun, played a role in this too?
3. Online social responsibility is extremely important! Firstly, information on the Internet can be accessed by almost anyone, and is almost equivalent to speaking to a huge crowd of people (just that people don't realise it). Secondly, it's hard to tell when someone is joking on the Internet, so comments made in jest might spark unwanted fires even if the author did not mean to insult anyone.
Freedom of expression online is misleading sometimes. Although everyone is free to voice out their opinions, anything "politically incorrect" is likely to be judged by the masses due to the sheer outreach of the Internet, and the consequences might be very serious.
4. Frankly, judging by the comments on the video and article, I do not think that anyone has been enlightened by the posting of video. If anything, greater anger has been kindled against Westerners because the video has only served to "prove" to some Asians that Westerners are racists (however, this is an overgeneralisation by them as well.)
(However, it has made students like us think a lot more :P hee hee okay just joking.)
Group 1:
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the speaker that all Asians are not well-mannered. I feel that speaker, Alexandra Wallace, has no good grounds for her beliefs and prejudices. As the saying goes “when in Rome, do what the Romans do”, it is understandable that she felt that these Asian students have to “use American manners” when in America. However, she assumes that not talking on cell phones in the library is a manner only practiced by the Americans, showing her prejudice against foreigners, specifically Asians, such that she believes that Asians do not actually practice these manners. She bases her statements that Asians do not teach their children manners through one or two incidents that she had witnessed, over-generalizing her beliefs that Asians are ill-mannered. It is understandable that she takes a stand from a point of view that no matter what reasons they had for the phone calls, it is still rather inconsiderate of them to continuously talk on the cell phone in the library as it may disturb the other people in the library. However, this can only prove to say that some people are inconsiderate, yet Ms Wallace pinpoints Asians along with her personal prejudices against Asians, that all Asians are not morally well taught by their parents.
Also, I think that she is rather insulting and insensitive in her tone. She laments and also makes many exaggerations out of certain things such as “all Asians bring their families over every weekend to do their laundry, buy their groceries, cook their food for the week…mother, father, sister, brother, grandmother, cousins…without fail”. It shows her personal prejudices against Asians, as out of all the things she laments about them doing every weekend, they are things that people all over the world do and there is nothing wrong about doing your laundry or cooking, thus her prejudice against Asians is again baseless and illogical. Thus, I disagree with her prejudiced beliefs against Asians.
Group 1:
ReplyDeleteAlexandra Wallace does not have good grounds to believe what she believes and she has a very bias view on Asians. She said she was just ranting and is not trying to offend anyone but what she said after that obviously contradicts with her previous statement of not being a racist. “American manners" is one of the phrases that proved that she is racist despite her denying it. There is no difference in manners between countries. Manners are the same around the world, and by using that, she is inferring that Asians’ manners are not the same as the manners they have in America. She is also saying that Asians’ manners are not that of Americans’ manners, which might not be true at all as she is only looking from what she can see, which are Asians distracting her from concentrating in the library and talking loudly during calls.
Her views were also only based on her own personal experiences, and then jumping to conclusions and stereotypes she has for Asians. I find it really unreasonable that she can say such things like "these hordes of Asian people that UCLA accepts into our school every year" and "Seriously, without fail, you will always see old Asian people running around this apartment complex every weekend. That's what they do -- they don't teach their kids to fend for themselves." just because she saw Asians doing things that she does not approve on. She does not have the right to say such things about Asians who “always do their laundry, buy their groceries and cook their food for the week”. Do Americans not do that as well? This shows the bias she has towards Asians.
In conclusion, she has weak arguments and her views are without grounds.
In my opinion, the Independent Project is beneficial in some way as it does help the students to be more interested in studying and enjoy the process of learning. However, it is just a program that is suitable for the students to try on, not the kind of way that school should work. Students in Massachusetts develop their leadership and become more considerate through making decisions about the things they learn and design their own curriculum. The things the students learn are mostly based on their own interest and their needs, but this also makes the learning process more unorganized. For the kind of students, who owns good learning and thinking skills, will cope with it well and has more space to develop their own interests on study. This may not work effective on the students that are weak in their academic and lack of a sustain basement of their study.
ReplyDeleteI do not think the project will be able to obtain the same result as it gained in Massachusetts if it takes place in Singapore. Students in Singapore are used to the way that the teachers tell them what to learn and how to learn. Some of the students may not able to tell what they should learn about and lose their aim in the end without the guidance of the teachers. Even those students who are so self-initiated and feel comfortable with self-study; they may not know the learning method which suits them most when they are study a subject is new to them. Time is wasted when they are keeping on trying. I would suggest the teachers give students more opportunity to study on their own, especially for those students who have the time and energy and willing to learn more.
It is understandable why Alexandra Wallace expressed her displeasure at a group of Asians in the library. It is indeed true that the library is a public place, and everyone using it should abide to its rules for the sake of others. In this aspect, I agree that the group of Asians mentioned in her case could have probably exercised better manners.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I cannot concur with Wallace using her own unfortunate experience as ammunition to chastise the whole Asian American population in UCLA. I find her arguments bigoted and highly flawed—firstly, she criticized the Asian students for having their families visit regularly which, in my opinion, is perfectly normal. Asians are known to be more family-oriented and I feel that Wallace is not being considerate towards the customs of another race. Unless the visits of these people cause great inconvenience and disturbance among residents, which is not the case, her argument only suggests that she holds racist and possibly xenophobic views. Secondly, she, addressing Asian students, said that “If you're gonna come to UCLA, then use American manners.” Her statement itself is problematic, as she is suggesting that there is a gap between the quality of manners practiced by Americans and those by Asians. She did not consider the possibility that the calls might indeed be urgent, such as being about the death of a family member. Her remark "I swear they're going through their whole families, just checking on everybody from the tsunami thing” suggests, that she, in fact, do not empathize with those affected by the tsunami, even when she did apologize after having said that. If she truly did take into account their feelings, she would have considered moving to another workstation or even finding a place apart from the library to study in, and refrained from making such a derogatory video in the first place.
Overall, I think Wallace did not have good grounds for her arguments; she could have communicated her criticism in a more sensitive and less stereotypical manner such that it that would not offend the Asian population.
The Independent project is a very good way to develop a sense of responsibility in students, especially where their studies are concerned. In regular courses, students sit in class and listen to their teachers, occasionally having assignment questions which are often not done on their own. In this environment, some students do not learn consistently, choosing instead to copy the work of others and evade the teachers' inspection when they check on the progress on their students. This is worse as it would not only cultivate the attitude that it is alright to just rely on others to get the work done but also defeats the purpose of an education system-to inspire learning in students. Instead, the Independent project motivates the students by not giving an option of 'a way out'. They were able to choose the topics they were interested in and further their skills and knowledge based on that interest. This helps to foster a stronger sense of curiosity and the urge to find out more in the student, encouraging the student to understand the topic more fully. However, i do recognise that some students are less inclined to work diligently when left alone to study. Thus, I feel that while the students should be able to design their own learning modules, there should be more supervision provided. While peer supervision is good as it is constantly there when students are working together, there should be some external pressure to motivate the students who get distracted from their work easily. On the other hand, being left alone to fulfil their study modules would give students a stronger sense of responsibility as the only one at the losing end would be themselves. This would give some pressure to the students as they would have to motivate themselves and get the work done. This would then be the motivation that would inspire their learning, career and goals in life. Thus, I think that an Independent project with more constant guidance would be good for students. This would not only cultivate a sense of responsibility for their own studies and future, it would also inspire a stronger interest in the topics that the students wish to pursue, allowing them to further their knowledge in that particular field which may have great help in their career in the near future.
ReplyDeleteAn UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace feels that Asians are “noisy” based on her personal unhappy experience in the library. She points out that the Asian student who has called home to check on the well-being of families in the tsunami in the library has disrupted her studies and has no “American manners”. While I may agree with her that making phone calls in the library may cause disturbance to other library users, I disagree with her point of view that Asians are noisy because her personal encounter does not reflects the manners and behaviour of the Asian community. It is a hasty generalization and her rants about the phone call made by Asian show the immaturity in her thought and that she did not even make an effort to stand in that Asian shoes. Furthermore, the
ReplyDeleteAsian student was probably too concerned about his or her family that he did not realize he was talking in the library. Thus, Alexandra Wallace’s point of view that Asians are “noisy” is biased and unjustified.
Group 3
ReplyDeleteI find the independent project very interesting personally. It encourages self-initiated learning. Students learn the knowledge and develop the passion for learning at the same time. However, this method of learning may not be as efficient and beneficial as the way we learn now in Singapore. In the independent project, students are the overall in charges of their learning journeys. They are assumed to be self-disciplined. Trust is given to them that they still work hard when no assessment will be conducted. When they encounter obstacles in learning, they will seek help and work out the solutions with assistance from peers and teachers. If on the contrary, students are not initiative in learning, they may not learn much and just waste their time. In addition, it is hard to design a curriculum for something that we have almost no knowledge about. Knowledge is infinite and how do we define the depth and width of learning for a limited period of time when we do not have any experience of ding so? Although, teachers guide students along the process, students may not be able to catch the basic theories and main applications. When teachers are in control of our curriculum, lessons conducted are more coherent and step-by-step.
Here are a few comments that apply generally:
ReplyDeleteLook at Joy's response - "She assumes that all Asians will have their whole family and friends coming to the UCLA campus over the weekends to do laundry and buy groceries. She even says that even their uncles and aunties, grandfathers and grandmothers and everyone they know from Asia comes along. I feel that this statement is extremely problematic and is clearly a sweeping statement. While it is true that some Asian parents do come and visit their children, it does not mean that every Asian student will have visitors coming to visit them every week."
My two cents worth:
You need to make your response more terse and tight. You are pointing out problems well, but you should be going for the big picture problems and use those to subsume the smaller ideas? Get it? See me if you don't :)
"She assumes that all Asians will have their whole family and friends coming to the UCLA campus over the weekends to do laundry and buy groceries."
==> I don't think she assumes all Asians do so. I think her grouse is that many do. She uses the word "hordes". Yes she is making a sweeping statement but you should make a larger, more hard-hitting point about what sentiments this sweeping statement is rooted in. She is clearly annoyed by what she perceives to be throngs of Asians causing disturbance to her. Perhaps her issue is with noise. If it is indeed true that such is happening, such is unfortunate, but the manner in which Wallace expresses her irritation is clearly laced with anti-Asian sentiment and prejudice against Asians. This makes us wonder if she is exaggerating.
Leanne, your problem, which is common to many, is in expression. The way you express your thoughts comes across as a series of tautological statements and assertions of truth - which are also sometimes phrased in terms of logical, causal relationships. Don't get what I mean? Look at the following and notice your words that I've highlighted in caps:
ReplyDelete"Every nine seconds, an American student drops out of high school. THIS SHOWS THAT USA has a very severe problem in their education system and I think that “letting the kids rule the school” may be the solution to this problem."
==> Do you think that you should hedge your argument better by using the words "This seems to indicate that". What is the worth of using the word "seems"?
"I believe, that letting students run their own school system, under the guidance of adults, will help rekindle the flame of learning in students. ASK ANY STUDENT ABOUT THEIR THOUGHTS ON SCHOOL AND THE FIRST WORD THAT POPS TO THEIR MIND WOULD BE “boring” and “rigid”. THE STUDENTS FEEL TOO RESTRICTED IN THE CURRENT SCHOOL SYSTEM WHERE ALL THEY ARE LEARNING is directed towards a major examination at the end of the year. Hence, students are merely studying by the syllabus and are not learning about the topics that pique their interest. This hinders the students learning process, causing students to not look forward to school and in the long run, may cause some to choose to drop out of school."
==> Leanne, you are making so many generalizing statements. "Ask any student ..." Are you sure and willing to commit yourself to the position that ANY student would say this? Please don't generalize. It may be the norm (but I also think it is unlikely), but it being the norm is not sufficient grounds for you to make this statement.
"The students feel..." You are making a tautological statement that all students feel like that.
To improve, consider hedging devices. E.g.
I believe, that letting students run their own school system, under the guidance of adults, MIGHT help rekindle the flame of learning in students. MANY SINGAPOREAN STUDENTS DO EXPRESS THE SENTIMENT THAT SCHOOL IS "BORING" AND "RIGID". SUCH STUDENTS USUALLY FEEL THIS WAY BECAUSE THEY PERCEIVCE SINGAPORE'S EDUCATION SYSTEM AS RESTRICTIVE IN TERMS OF WHAT IS LEARNT AND HOW IT IS LEARNT. GENERALLY, FOR MOST O-LEVEL BOUND SCHOOLS, LEARNING IS GEARED towards a major examination at the end of the year.
Yingyi, please note the ammedments made in capital letters:
ReplyDeleteI feel that THE UCLA student, Alexandra Wallace, does not have good and legitimate evidence to support her views. [NOTE THAT THESE TWO SENTENCES DO NOT CONNECT AND LINK UP - YOUR FIRST SENTENCE IS ABOUT EVIDENCE, YOUR SECOND SENTENCE IS ABOUT HER BEING DISINGENUOUS] She first states that she doesn't mean to offend anyone or be racist IN WHAT SHE FEELS, but her comments obviously contradict (NO 'S') her previous CLAIMS THAT SHE IS not 'being racist about it'.
Next, she implies that Asians do not have manners [NO COMMA] by using the example of Asian students talking loudly on phones in the library. I feel that her personal experiences WITH Asians talking on phones in libraries ARE UNFORTUNATE IF THEY ARE INDEED HAPPENING SO FREQUENTLY, BUT I FEEL THAT SHE CANNOT CONCLUDE SO HASTILY THAT ALL ASIANS do not have manners. She claims that every 15 minutes, an Asian student will start talking on his/her phone in the library, which i feel IS HIGHLY IMPLAUSIBLE AND SEEMS TO BE AN exaggeration. IF IT IS INDEED TRUE THAT SUCH INCONSIDERATE BEHAVIOR HAPPENS SO FREQUENTLY AS SHE CLAIMS IT DOES, THEN SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THE PART OF THE LIBRARY MANAGEMENT TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM. HER RANT DOES NOTHING TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM AND IT IS IN NO WAY CONSTRUCTIVE OR CONSIDERATE FOR THAT MATTER--WHICH IS IRONIC, SINCE HER GRIPE IS ABOUT INCONSIDERATE BEHAVIOR.
Jermaine, you say:
ReplyDeleteSecondly, she talks about “American manners” [EXPLAIN] AS IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC TYPES OF MANNERS, AMERICAN AND OTHER SORTS OF MANNERS. FROM HER RANT, IT IS APPARENT THAT SHE THINKS THAT THERE ARE ASIAN MANNERS, AND SHE CLEARLY DEEMS THEM AS DEFICIENT. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT there IS NO SUCH THING AS different types of manners for different countries, MANNERS ARE MANNERS AND THEY ARE NOT COUNTRY OR CULTURALLY-SPECIFIC. [CONCEDE POINT] GRANTED, THERE MIGHT BE UNIQUE PRACTICES TO DIFFERENT CULTURES' EXPRESSIONS OF MANNERS, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING MANNERS IN AMERICA AND ASIA ARE ANY DIFFERENT. By saying WHAT SHE HAS SAID, she HAS MADE THE claim that all Asians do not have manners SHE DEEMS WORTHY BECAUSE SHE SAYS "WHEN YOU ARE IN AMERICA, LEARN AMERICAN MANNERS".
Just by using two [IS IT ONLY TWO?] of her personal bad experienceS with Asians disturbing her DURING HER studIES, SHE CANNOT JUSTIFIABLY CLAIM THAT all Asians do not have manners.
Wenjia:) Group 3
ReplyDeleteIn this article, the writer is advocating for "schools everywhere (to) initiate an Independent Project" where students can plan their own curriculum instead of following after the rigid curriculum set by the school. She used the success of eight high school students in Massachusetts to prove that such a method make students "more accomplished, more engaged and more knowledgeable than they would have been taking regular courses".
While I do agree that such a system allow students to take "ownership" of their own learning and learn things at their own pace, i disagree that it is effective for schools everywhere. Firstly as stated in the article, "all (the project) takes are serious, committed students". The writer is assuming that all students in schools everywhere are reponsible and willing to dedicate their time and effort in their studeies. However this is not usually the case as there are also those who hate sudying and are not committed to their studies. Without the supervision of teachers, these students may spend the time meant for studying on leisure activites auch as watching television and playing computer and be able to get away with it. This provides a wrong impression to the other students that there is no need to spend so much time and effort in pursuing academics success, aggrevating the situation on students dropping out of school.
Also without a fixed curriculum, students may focus their attention on subjects they are interested in and neglect those that are considered boring to them but of equal importance. The students in the article studied on the natural and social world and literary and mathematical arts, clearly missing out on important subjects such as history. A fixed curriculum by the school places equal emphasis on every subjects and ensure that students acquire the required amount of knowledge for college or the working society.
Hello!
ReplyDeleteInglorious nutter is Miss Chia by the way!
Take note of my comments above :)
Alexandra Wallace, an UCLA student posted a video on YouTube, ranting about how she feels that the Asian students can't fend for themselves because they need their relatives to come every weekend. Also, she feels that the Asian students disrupted her revision when they called back to check on their relatives' well being after the tsunami in Japan.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, she is making an assumption that all Asian students in her school make phone calls in the library, or being ill-mannered in general. The students she saw calling in the library are probably just a minority in the school and do not represent all the Asian students in her school. Especially when your relatives could have been a victim of the tsunami, wouldn't anyone call home immediately to ensure that they are safe, and putting her so-called "American manners" aside?
Secondly, she could not stand the fact that the Asian students have to get their family into the school during the weekends to help them do their laundry or to cook their dinner. However, she failed to put herself in the Asian students' shoes and understand why they would have brought their parents in, perhaps because they miss them? Or perhaps to discuss important issues with them? Moreover, she is probably exaggerating on the fact that the students will without fail, bring their relatives every week. In fact, she mentioned that this issue doesn't bother her anymore and hence it doesn't give her any good ground to rant about the Asian students getting their relatives to visit them during the weekends.
Lastly, although what she posted was entirely wrong and racist, she was merely "ranting" and probably didn't mean what she said (especially when she said it in a fit of anger). Hence, I feel that she doesn't deserve what she had gotten - harassment of her family, death threats and being ostracized from an entire community, according to the article on yahoo.
Shuning
I feel that Alexandra Wallace doesn’t have good grounds to believe what she believes. She generalizes the point that all Asians are ill mannered just by seeing examples of few Asians in the UCLA library that used cell phones in the library. Her stereotypical views on the Asians are definitely not fair and not grounded in legitimate and good evidence. She based her opinion on the whole Asian based on only a few Asians she saw in the library – this is definitely not the case that applies to all Asians. It is definitely unfair to judge the whole race with just the example of a few people that she saw. There are undoubtedly a lot of Asians that are actually well mannered in the society as doesn’t mean if a few people of a group are ill mannered, the whole group of Asians are. She also didn't consider the fact that a large number of people will get offended with her comments. With her mocking Asian language and saying that they should have the “Western Manner”, implying that Westerner is superior compared to the Eastern in the term of their manners, she is not only hurting and offending people from different parts of the world, especially Asians, she has also put herself in danger - she received death threat and even dropped out of school in the middle of her third year.
ReplyDeleteAlso, she criticised Asians for having families that visit them every weekends. It is definitely unfair to criticise Asians and she failed to realise that family is an important part of the Eastern Culture. Moreover, with the fact that they are away from their family most of the time while studying away from their hometown, why does a visit to their children’s dorm need to be criticized? Does it have anything to do with her in the first place? She is also over exaggerating the fact that every relative of all the Asian population in UCLA visits every weekend. This proves that she is being insensitive and just simply making a racist prejudices on the Asians.
However, I do agree about her argument about disturbance that the group of Asians bring in the library. It is indeed true that there are rules and regulations that need to be followed in the library. Talking in the phone in the library is indeed an example of an ill-mannered behaviour that can disturb other people. However, I do think she should not be too racist in criticizing and do it in a more sensitive manner, which could serve as a reminder to people instead of offending the whole Asian society with her stereotypical views.
ahh ignore the previous post that I posted. Sorry ><
ReplyDeleteThis is the correction D:
I feel that Alexandra Wallace doesn’t have good grounds to believe what she believes. She generalizes the point that all Asians are ill mannered just by seeing examples of few Asians in the UCLA library that used cell phones in the library. Her stereotypical views on the Asians are definitely not fair and not grounded in legitimate and good evidence. She based her opinion on the whole Asian based on only a few Asians she saw in the library – this is definitely not the case that applies to all Asians. It is definitely unfair to judge the whole race with just the example of a few people that she saw. There are undoubtedly a lot of Asians that are actually well mannered in the society as if a few people of a group are ill mannered, it doesn't imply that the whole group of Asians are. She also didn't consider the fact that a large number of people will get offended by her comments. With her mocking Asian language and saying that they should have the “Western Manner”, implying that Westerners are superior compared to the Easterners in terms of their manners. By saying this, she is not only offending people from different parts of the world, especially the Asians, she has also put herself in danger - she received death threats and even dropped out of school in the middle of her third year.
Also, she criticised Asians for having families that visit them every weekend. It is definitely unfair to criticise Asians and she failed to realise that family is an important part of the Eastern Culture. Moreover, with the fact that they are away from their family most of the time while studying away from their hometown, why does a visit to their children’s dorm need to be criticized? Does it have anything to do with her in the first place? She is also over exaggerating the fact that every relative of all the Asian population in UCLA visits every weekend. This proves that she is being insensitive and just simply making a racist prejudices on the Asians.
However, I do agree with her argument about disturbance that the group of Asians bring in the library. It is indeed true that there are rules and regulations that need to be followed in the library. Talking in the phone in the library is definitely an example of an ill-mannered behaviour that can disturb other people. However, I do think she should not be too racist in criticizing and do it in a more sensitive manner, which could serve as a reminder to people instead of offending the whole Asian society with her stereotypical views.