Term 3 Week 4 (Blogging Assignment)

Read the following Newsweek article, How to Raise a Global Kid, byLisa Miller (July 18, 2011)

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/07/17/american-kids-immersed-in-chinese-asian-education.print.html

What is the main argument Jim Rogers is trying to make in this article? Do you agree with his argument? Justify.

The main argument Jim Rogers wants to make is that America is not the best in the world in terms of education. Nowadays, more parents in America are sending their children to Asia to study, instead of sending them to local schools, for better education. One example is Happy Roger going to Nanyang Primary. These parents send their children to school in Asia to prepare them for the future.

In the life we are living now, education is one of the more important things. Parents would want the best for their children and want them to be all rounded thus having more job choices in the future. To achieve this, parents are sending their children to attend music classes or encourage them to take up multiple sports. Therefore, I agree that better education is the key to success to the 21th century to a certain extent.

In the case of Jim Rogers, he feels that bilingualism is the most important in the education. If u do business with China, you need to know Chinese, while if u do business with the Americans, u will have to know English. Therefore bilingualism is important.

Many Critics would have pointed that there are many different views on what is an ideal education. However I feel that this does not matter as different people have different aspirations in life. So we cannot say that everyone has the same view on ideal education as different jobs and country have different skills. Also, Jim Rogers said that, “The money is in the East, and the debtors are in the West” that’s why education in Asia is better. However this is not true as many Asian still feel that American education is better thus sending their children there.

Therefore, we can infer that education is important in the 21th century but there are different views on what is the ideal education.

Term 3 Week 3 (Blogging Assignment)

Read the following letter:

http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/07/12/an-open-letter-to-the-education-minister-from-a-secondary-4-student/

(1) Comment on the Janalle Lee's view on the education system in Singapore.

(2) Is an ideal education possible? Explain.

Post your 500 word response on your blog.

(1) Comment on the Janalle Lee's view on the education system in Singapore.

I feel that what Janelle Lee has stated on her letter is truly evident in Singapore. From the mentality of teachers not to teach why, but to memorise everything in the textbooks from cover to cover, to the teaching of civics and moral education, many things in the Singapore education system that I once overlooked seems flawed now. It seems quite amazing that a Secondary 4 student could pick up these flaws and present them to the minister.

I also agree on Janelle's point about asking question. Most of the time, we are given the answers straight to our face but we don't know what is the main reason behind it. For example, we know that sharks live in the sea and are carnivorous. However, we do not know why they are carnivorous and not herbivores. This show a flaw in the education. Many children are not told the true meaning of things, their curiosity will die out. This is bad! If our Curiosity run out, we will not be able to question ourselves and learn.

Another point made by Janalle was that “The problem is that Singaporean youths are often not taught as individuals with separate talents, but as a collective who are all the same”. This is an obvious inaccuracy in her letter. Students are streamed at an age of 9 during the GEP exam and later at 10 in whether he/she is to be under the foundational class. At the age of 12, the PSLE streams all students into the different schools and at 14, another exam is taken so as to re-examine your capabilities and see if you are eligible for a transfer into an IP school or Special Programme. Therefore, it is not true to say that Singaporean youths are taught as a collective due to the introduction of the School Based Gifted Education.

Therefore, I agree with most of what has been written and applaud Janalle’s find command of the English Language and courage for speaking up. Despite the fact that there has been a few inaccuracies, it must be said that this letter gives another perspective on the Singapore education system.

(2) Is an ideal education possible? Explain.

The ideal education system is an idea chased by many countries and schools around the globe in the pursuit of bringing the best to their country. The ideal education system would ensure the country’s prosperity and the people’s peace.

I feel that an ideal education will be one that can bring out the excellence in oneself and educate students such that they become all-rounded students. This can be done in different ways. Although this may be difficult, but it is still possible.

For this to happen, we need experience teachers who are capable to do it. Teachers are seen as a role model to students. If the teacher show some characteristics which are good, the students most likely follow too.

Although many people feel that having an ideal education is impossible, but i feel that anything is possible if u have a mind to do it.

Term 3 Week 2 (Blogging Assignment)

An article entitled 'The Religion of Water' was published in The Straits Times on 7 July 2011. In the article, it was mentioned that ' within countries, there is debate over whether water should be treated as a human right or as a commodity, access to which is determined by the market.' Please read the article.

Is there a difference between treating water as a human right and as a commodity? In your opinion, should water be treated as a human right or as a commodity?

Post your 300 word response on your blog.

Should water be treated as a human right or a commodity? The article states that the Universal Declaration on Human Rights does not mention water explicitly as the nurturing of water resources were not as pressing as it was back in 1948 as it is today. There is a stark difference between water as a human right and as a commodity because water as a human right means that water is free for all while water as a commodity means that water is exclusive for the rich. However in my opinion, water should be treated as a human right which everyone has access to.

If water was a commodity, those with money will survive while those who are poor will die. It is oblivious ridiculous as water is essential for human survival. If water is commodity, People will be dying every now and then. If that is the case, this means plants and animals have to buy water too? What do they pay with then? Their own parts? Therefore, water should be treated as a human right which everyone has access to.

Also, if water becomes a commodity, riots will erupt when there is a shortage of water. The cost of water will also rise at an alarming rate. In the worst scenario, countries may go to war just to get water. Will you want WWIII? Nobody wants it. Therefore, water should be treated as a human right which everyone has access to.

If water becomes a commodity, many people will think that we will treasure it more. However that is wrong. The rich people will not bother treasuring it as they can afford it. Only the poor and the less wealthy ones will find ways to conserve water. But once u develop a habit of wasting water, it is quite hard to change. Therefore, water should be treated as a human right which everyone has access to.

In conclusion, i feel that after what u have read, u will agree with me that water should be treated as a human right which everyone has access to and not commodity.