The Child and his Streaming Exam

Many years ago, a nondescript classroom of cardboard walls and scaled-down furniture tried to contain the antics of a loud, hyperactive child. The child would not keep his mouth shut and had a habit of always querying the teacher. Even his classmates grew exasperated. The child did not know any better.

Come his third year in Opera Estate Primary School. A streaming exam was to be conducted to slot students into streams that most suited their learning abilities. The teacher lined the class up and ushered them to the hall.

Streaming? or Screaming Exam? Sure pass one what.. The child decided to practise his vocal abilities and promptly got a knock on his head for his efforts.

Teacher, why got exam today? The child asked.

Aiyah just do lah. Doesn't effect your final marks

So the child, as all children would do, spent as little time on the exam as possible so that he could go down to the canteen to buy the chocolate cake for 30cents and a plastic container so that he could catch tadpoles in the drain. The child also copied his friend during the IQ test later just so that he'll be done first or rather second.

Was the child correctly tested on his learning abilities?

In theory the streaming system appears to be a godsend. Allowing students to channel into their preferred learning curves. Defined by their "learning abilities". On the ground we know that it's not learning abilities that mark the difference between the special and the express and the normal. It's the motivation to study. It's the individual's psychosociological make-up. It's the child's environment and influence. The child does not know any better and labelling him even before he knows any better does not help. The less labels you give the child, the more he can define himself.

Singapore Forum on Politics 2005

Speakers:
Mohd Nizam Bin Ismail, President, Young AMP
Alfian Bin Sa'at, poet and playwright
Alex Au, gay activist
Eleanor Wong, Associate Professor, NUS Law Faculty
Asad Latif, Senior Correspondent, The Straits Times

Chaired By:
Kenneth Paul Tan, Assistant Head, Political Science Department

While I have to admit that I have been enlightened on some points raised by the speakers as well as the crowd, I felt that the forum was something like a bad debate. The terms open and inclusive were not defined. The domain of discussion kept jumping all over the place. People spoke on different sides of the coin when it suited them.

Granted, the more controversial areas like political plays/movies and writing/talking about the opposition have always been clamped down and choked by the Gahmen. The Gahmen is still an iron-fisted prude when it comes to allowing anybody to speak about them in derogatory terms. Michael Moore style politics in Singapore? Might as well just surrender yourself to the ISD if you chose to make a personal attack.. less leceh.

Still, one of the audience raised the issue that the plays made the arts groups on the fringe tend to be reactionary to or does things that only reaffirms the political boundaries that the Gahmen sets.

The Gahmen offers the reasoning that the silent conservative majority will find the upstart minority offensive and thus, in the name of public good, clamps them down.

The problem about being a rebel or fighting on the fringe is that any compromise on their part to be accepted into the mainstream is seen as a cowardly loss of ground. And as the Gahmen continually turns them down, they gain the right to be openly cynical and uncompromising. Both sides don't compromise, no one wins, everybody loses.

But there is a need to say that yes, there have been cases of compromises by both parties and that the art/movie was made available to the public. But too little, too few.

The question is, are our arts groups taking the right approach? What is the best strategy for turning Singapore into a more open and inclusive society?

From the little I know, my conclusions are that the Gahmen still derides any attempt to question its moral/political authority and how it does things, especially on the more controversial parts. This conclusion will stay until the next time a play or a movie comes up and the Gahmen allows it to go on, untouched. Only by doing so will the Gahmen send out a strong enough signal that "yes, we are more accepting now." Mere words at a speech or rally just doesn't cut it. There were some very reasonable requests by the arts groups and cutting them out only made the Gahmen look ridiculous. But being affected by these and being cynical and disillusioned will serve no purpose.


The theme of the forum, "Towards an Open and Inclusive Society", allowed the range of discussion to go from fringe arts groups to talking about the sick, poor, old, handicapped and even to the Malay-Muslim community. Too wide a range to comment on.

The people who talk at these forums are, necessarily, the elite. Asad Latif talked about the necessity of taking into account the views and perspectives of the subalterns. An audience member noted that if you spoke for the subalterns, you are acknowledging the fact that these people are subalterns. subordinate, inferior, marginalized. I think we have to acknowledge this fact no matter how controversial it might sound. Throughout history, society has been led by its elite. The only forward is for the elite to rightly reflect and voice out the needs of the rest of society. Sensitive subject this, probably wanna leave it as it is first.


At the end of everything, we all made our way out to a steaming slipper lobster lunch (which I felt so inappropriate after talks of elitism) and I wonder what progress we have made in that lecture theatre the last 4 hours. There were times when I felt that the speakers were not presenting to us, the audience, but rather using the forum as an indirect challenge to the Gahmen. Such a forum seems to only serve out disillusionment.

It is too easy for us to slip into cynicism and disillusionment and if we do, nothing will progress. I think there is a social responsibility that we, as the "elite", have to carry out. To do whatever it takes possible to make the country a better place. We must believe we can make a difference no matter what the rules of the game are.

This post suddenly feels like the forum. Too many aspects to talk about till it becomes a little incoherent. Or maybe its just me.

Singaporerebel.blogspot.com

Ex ISA suspect Tharman assures nothing will happen if one oversteps OB markers; Mediacorp MD encourages Michael Moore's style of politics

Students, taking up the theme of youth, media and political involvement, grilled Mr Tharman and the three other panellists about overstepping the out-of-bounds markers around sensitive issues.

Mr Tharman assured the more than 1,000 youths present that nothing will happen even if one breaches an OB marker. One simply learns to steel oneself and be more adroit.

Straits Times editor Han Fook Kwang said that fears of repercussions should they say something the Government did not like were exaggerated and might stem from past incidents such as the Government's rebuttal of novelist Catherine Lim and opposition politicians.

Mr Tharman noted that Ms Lim is now more famous than ever and still speaks out with relish.

Nanyang Technological University's Associate Professor Ang Peng Hwa gave more encouragement, saying they can plead the ignorance of youth if any flak ensues.

--

Pardon my ignorance and allow me to steel myself and try to be more adroit for nothing.

--

You break the rules, we break your heads, says MM Lee
"I can assure you that in Singapore, when we decide that they are breaking the rules of the game, the unspoken rules as to how we survive, how we have prospered, then either their head is broken or our bones are broken."

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew issuing warning to SIA pilots at the World Brand Forum, CNA, Dec 2, 2003

--

A little-known law called the Films Act bans the making, distribution and showing of films containing "wholly or partly either partisan or biased references to or comments on any political matter."

DOCUMENTARY about Singapore opposition politician J.B. Jeyaretnam was withdrawn from a film festival here last year on fears it could have violated a law banning political films, a report said Friday (Jan 4).

The makers of the 15-minute documentary had submitted written apologies and withdrew it from being screened at the Singapore International Film Festival in April after they were told they could be charged in court, the Straits Times said.

The film-makers, all lecturers at the Ngee Ann Polytechnic, had said they just chanced upon a man selling books on a street and decided to make a documentary on him, unaware at first that he was an opposition figure.

Jeyaretnam, a lawyer, entered parliament in 1981, becoming the first opposition politician to break the stranglehold of the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) on local politics since statehood in 1965.

He has championed issues such as the abolition of the Internal Security Act, which allows detention without trial, and the promotion of human rights and democracy.

Campus on NewsRadio 93.8 hits SMU

If you were late for work today and happened to be listening in to 93.8FM between 9 am to 10 am, you might have heard some interesting stuff. There was a discussion between SMU students and a panel of guests on the motion, "How Technology Impacts Social Life"

Pretty mundane GP stuff if you ask me.

But it turned out fun. We had

A/P Kirpal Singh, Associate Professor of Literature, SMU
Mr Francis Kan, Deputy Business Editor, TODAY
Mr Lee Kwok Cheong, CEO, National Computer Systems & President, Singapore Computer Society
Mr Ted Skewes, Trainer/Consultant/CEO of WritingPlus, Australia

Quite a nice mix. The chat ranged from setting up a business to make technology more human-friendly to the issue of contraceptives and how new technologies may degrade morals.

Oh yeah and Eddie said he was a virgin on air. Sorry dude, that was too hilarious for me.

Obviously I had to add in my 2 cents.

"Hi my name is Firdaus and
i would like to comment on blogs, the point that francis kan raised.

i think the blog is the new arena for unabated, unrestrained political discussions. however i think its less that the we do not trust the current media but that the blog offers us the easiest means of publishing our views and opinions, unedited.

i think this phenomenon is a positive one as it acts as a vent for writers, individuals who hold passionate views about things. the view, opinion then matures through discussion and through the internet creates awareness among the rest of the blogosphere.

and that point on layers of identity, just to say that most blog owners do state their identities. they don't state their views and then hide behind a nick or persona. i dont think this is kind of alienation but rather a kind of growth, a kind of coming together but just in a different form."

My 2 cents.. must angkat the local blogosphere abit also la.. heh heh..

I blame the next post on the heat

The weather has been scorching. This is not news.

There has been bushfires in Lim Chu Kang. This is not news.

But did you know that the pigeons and swans in the Botanical Gardens have lodged a complaint against the National Parks Board?

Excerpt:

Swans: "This is an outrage! The lake's hardly a puddle of mud now! As owners of the park, we demand that you maintain a certain standard in the park's facilities and features which obviously includes the lake! Wouldn't you be embarrassed to be seen standing around in murky waters that don't go past your ankles? "

Pigeons: "*Qoo*"

End of Excerpt.



Okay lame but it really is sad. The lake has hardly enough depth even for tadpoles. All the water gone into the atmosphere. Meanwhile in a cool, shaded, humidified part of the country, HyFlux profits goes up by 37%.

Smart right these people.. real smart.

Speak! or Type.. whichever kills less braincells

Damn me but I have just discovered a plethora of amazing reads. Local blogs have got me hooked. Amazing writers out there and they pretty much link to each other so if you get on one, you find yourself getting on all, immersing in their humour, satire, their deep perspectives, their grouses, and suddenly three hours of sleeping time is gone.

One of my favourites is Cheekbynature.blogspot.com Read on his disguised version of the now famous encounter between Jamie Han and our esteemed MM Lee during the Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum. (I was in the third row, had a pretty nice view on the actual exchange)

Anyway, going to the Singapore Forum on Politics this Saturday. Alfian will be there, speaking, though he did say in a poem that he will never go near a podium. We have quite the acute bunch of writers in Singapore, milling just beyond the OB markets. Occasionally, one or two will stray too far and get a warning shot from the Gahmen but all's good.

I wonder if the ISD is keeping an eye on Blogs. Maybe they have some special program to track words like BOMB SINGAPORE, COMMUNISM, #$@ PAP, MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALISTS, SMUGGLE PORN/GUM, I HEART ALQAEDA. This is pretty fun. Can you think of other things we shouldn't be saying?

It's all good to be on the ISD List, I think. It'll mean that my son will end up in the Police Force rather than the Army. It'll be a neat 18th birthday gift for him, don't you think?

Unless of course things go according to plan, I learn to speak all the dialects, marry a Chinese wife, join the PAP and end up Speaker of Parliament. Damn cool lah become Speaker of Parliament. Everyone has to bow to you during session and all you get this cool Mace thing and you do perceivably nothing and get premium minister pay! Ambition ambition..

Don't get me wrong. I love Abdullah Tarmugi. His wife was my Vice-Principal once. She made me Head of Academic Progress for my Sec 2 Level. Yes, really, not kidding.

But I think the award for most favourite minister goes to Dr Vivian Balakrishnan. Respect to him. He really wins over his constituents. (A cleaner in my school is so enamored to him, kept repeating the fact that he can speak Hokkien) Heard him speak at the Annual Conference of Feedback Units. He made sense there. At the Youth Forum at the NTUC Building, made sense there too. But a little disappointing when we invited him to SMU for a Ministerial Forum but it's okay, he's still the crowd favourite. I wonder what he drives.

Straits Times Interactive - No Free Speech. No Free Read.

We thank you for your interest in the website and would like to inform you about a major change coming to STI in March: After 10 years of giving ST news reports out for free online, STI will begin charging readers to access it.

A subscription will cost S$72 for six months (S$12 a month), or S$120 for a year (S$10 a month). A one-month subscription will cost S$15.

Why are we doing this?

We believe that we have a good and valuable product that users will want to pay for. It's also not a tenable business model to charge for the print edition of the newspaper and not for its online edition.

You will want to know whether you will get anything more, now that you have to pay.

The answer is yes.

You will notice that up till now, you get only three reports from Life! and Sunday Life through the week. If you subscribe, all the showbiz gossip and lifestyle features you see in the print edition of Life will be available online.

The weekly tech magazine Digital Life is available online now but a day after its print edition goes out with the newspaper. If you subscribe, Digital Life and the health magazine Mind Your Body -- now not online -- will become available from 6am on the same day they are distributed with the newspaper. The fashion magazine Urban will also go online, but later this year.

All news reports in the Money section will be available from 6am daily, instead of 6pm.

The last perk is that the archive will grow from the current three-days to seven-days. This means you can search back a week's worth of STI editions.


--

Why does it seem that everybody is using the same justification these days?

We believe we have a premium product and a premium product rightly commands a premium price
Mr Ho Kwon Peng, Chairman SMU Board of Directors

Premium schools. pay. Premium Cars. pay. Premium Property. pay. Premium Government. pay.

After 10 years of giving ST news reports out for free online, STI will begin charging readers to access it.

My COMM101 lecturer, dear Prof Glenda Singh, taught me to always put the bad news in the subordinate clause. I remember because I got a D for an assignment for not doing so. (Anyway, just FYI.. I got an A- for COMM101)

So the phrase should go something like this..
Regrettably we have to rip you off for this, but please know that we've been giving this out for free for 10 years you cheap bastards and it's time to make MONEY.

Come to think of it.. I wonder who reads the newspaper online ten years ago? Internet access was expensive.. phone line charges. Hmm.. reading the paper for 60cents or spending $$ to read it on my computer? Oh the dilemma..

I'm just grousing but I think one sign of a welfare-oriented country might probably be free news. Just my opinion.

SMU Students and 850 Dollars

I have mulled over writing about my own views and perspectives of the whole SMU Fee Hike issue. Being personally involved with the whole thing, talking about it seems to bring out dirty linen that probably should be kept under wraps. However, a big part of me, the part of me keeping me up at night, tells me to nip it right in the bud and not let it slink away under the pretense of being unnoticed.

The 15% fee hike was a slap in our faces. Simply because not a single student knew about it till the press did and that it was almost always poorly justified during discussions. Sure, a hike is necessary but a sudden 15%? At all levels?

While it is old news that there was obvious disgruntlement, it is not old news that there were some students that took out their disgruntlement at the student council, students themselves. I received emails about how the fee hike doesn't make sense and it is not fair for students to have to work extra hours giving tuition just to make up for it and that it is all the student council's fault.

Excuse me? Student Council's fault?

When we try to point out the Student Association (SA) Council is not the management, we got back a bucketload of "you think we stupid is it?"

Eh no... of course not. Just misinformed.

I had an incredulous look on my face for a week as I received emails and feedback complaining that the SA doesn't care about the students and that when we told them not to go all hot-headed to the press and instead join us in more constructive efforts, we pretty much got the verbal/literal middle finger.

Good thing this was the minority. There was the majority of students that supported us through the surveys we conducted, the ribbon campaign that we held and the proposal that we gave to the Board of Trustees. Thought there were still some that were afraid to get their ribbons and sign their name.. Later Gahmen Scold...

There also seems to be a proportion of students in SMU who believe they have the ability to become invisible when spoken to.

Minority or majority aside, almost everyone said.. "Nahbeh, Staggered Fee Hike? Impossible lah.. I'll support you but you're just wasting time. Gahmen say pay must pay what.." Which you can't deny considering that almost every single act of student activism in the history of the country has been pounded on and condemned.

So now after we've won the staggered fee hike scheme for all current students, my mailbox is not surprisingly empty. (I should say emptier, there's always incoming work) No "Thank You"s. No "You Were Right". No "Yes You Guys Really Do Care". At least there's some congratulations and thank yous from my friends. Personally, I didn't feel I've won anything. I didn't campaign for this because I wanted to pay less. I wanted students to know that there can be results from taking constructive measures to things rather than just complaining about them. And that the Gahmen won't scold if you let it known that you disagree with the administration on certain things and act on them.

I know at least a friend of mine has been won over. I hope the rest of you guys will switch camps too and I hope the next time the SA champions for your rights, you'll be with us rather than against us because apathy is a far worst creature than the system.

Here I would also like to add in that yes, Veena, you were right. We should have trusted you in reporting accurately. We were afraid to take any chances with the press. You wrote the article exactly as it should. Thank you.