Assignment 4 Ri Zhao and Zheng Qian 4C
Wang Ri Zhao (23) Chua Zheng Qian (18) 4c
Wang Ri Zhao (23) Chua Zheng Qian (18) 4c
Summarise from Paragraphs 6-9 why education might not be the best solution to poverty in about 100 to 150 words.
A research done presents a new look that contradicts traditional views of education enabling social mobility. Students believed that diligence is the main factor in deciding academic and career achievements. It is obvious however the opportunities, options and future of each pupil depend on the social class they are born into and their affluence. Education put up clearer border between each level of the social hierarchy. Students are categorized according to their abilities the day they arrived at schools. This is so even in top schools, whereby less affluent students are more likely to get lower GCSE grades than their compatriots. The level of education parents have and the careers they are in have a great impact on the options taken up by their children. They welcome the idea of taking up jobs their parents once did instead of preferring to become much more affluent.
145 words
Do you think the author’s views on why education might not be the best solution is applicable to Singapore? Provide your reasons in 1 paragraph of no more than 200 words.
The author’s view on education is applicable to Singapore. Singapore’s education system is shaped to endorse the brighter minds. Higher ability students are sent to better schools with more resources and better learning environment to enable them to achieve their fullest potential. Students are separated according to their abilities since the start of secondary school after their PSLEs. This creates a social gap due to the fact that the higher ability students in top schools generally come a more affluent social class. These students inherited their richer parents’ “better” genes and have more opportunities for expensive tuition classes to be better academically than their poorer peers. With a better education received and more interaction with fellow bright minds in their elite schools presenting them better working opportunities in the future, students belonging to this exclusive group grows up be like their parents becoming richer than the average. The less affluent students stay in their social class as their families are unable to provide them with enrichment classes and also because poorer families generally care less about academics and advancing up the social class as they can be happy living in their social class given the high standard of living experienced by all Singaporeans regardless of their social status. This poorer group of students also have less opportunities in the future as their fellow schoolmates also belong to these less ambitious groups due to the segregation at the start of their secondary school lives. Hence education is not a tool to solve the problem of social immobility in Singapore and in fact may even encourage it to further develop. The author’s view on education might not be the best solution enable social mobility is thus true in the Singapore context.
198 words
Assgn4 The impact of poverty on educational outcomesTravis and Yongliang
Summary
Children who come from poverty-stricken households are usually less ready for school due to difficulties faced in health, home life, neighbourhoods and schooling. This is primarily because of the duration of poverty, timing of poverty, community characteristics and also the impact that poverty has on the child's network. When these children who come from lower-income families attend school, the majority score significantly lower in vocabulary and communication skills compared to children who come from higher-income families. From this, it is evident that children from low-income families arrive at school at a cognitive and behavioural disadvantage because of the poor living environment that they were brought up in.
Reader response:What do you think should be the key intervention strategy to help children in poverty to excel in their studies.
I feel that having parental involvement and a good parenting style should be the key intervention strategy to help children in poverty to excel in their studies. With good parenting since young, the values that help in their pursuit of knowledge like being hardworking can be instilled into them, allowing them to grow up to strive towards doing better in their studies through hardwork and perseverance. The article mentions about the Chicago Child Parent Center programme, where a research found out that children whose parents were more involved with their studies had greater academic achievement in reading and mathematics, teacher ratings of the school adjustment, grade retention and special education placement. After these children grew up they also generally had higher rates of school completion and attained more years of education. I also feel that the demands that parents have on children's academic progress serve as a motivation for children to work hard in order to achieve the desirable results that parents expect from them in order to appease their parents. Thus it can be said that parental involvement in the form of setting demands for their children can prove effective as it serves as a driving force for them to do well in studies.
Children who come from poverty-stricken households are usually less ready for school due to difficulties faced in health, home life, neighbourhoods and schooling. This is primarily because of the duration of poverty, timing of poverty, community characteristics and also the impact that poverty has on the child's network. When these children who come from lower-income families attend school, the majority score significantly lower in vocabulary and communication skills compared to children who come from higher-income families. From this, it is evident that children from low-income families arrive at school at a cognitive and behavioural disadvantage because of the poor living environment that they were brought up in.
Reader response:What do you think should be the key intervention strategy to help children in poverty to excel in their studies.
I feel that having parental involvement and a good parenting style should be the key intervention strategy to help children in poverty to excel in their studies. With good parenting since young, the values that help in their pursuit of knowledge like being hardworking can be instilled into them, allowing them to grow up to strive towards doing better in their studies through hardwork and perseverance. The article mentions about the Chicago Child Parent Center programme, where a research found out that children whose parents were more involved with their studies had greater academic achievement in reading and mathematics, teacher ratings of the school adjustment, grade retention and special education placement. After these children grew up they also generally had higher rates of school completion and attained more years of education. I also feel that the demands that parents have on children's academic progress serve as a motivation for children to work hard in order to achieve the desirable results that parents expect from them in order to appease their parents. Thus it can be said that parental involvement in the form of setting demands for their children can prove effective as it serves as a driving force for them to do well in studies.
Reader response:What do you think should be the key intervention strategy to help children in poverty to excel in their studies.
I feel that having parental involvement and a good parenting style should be the key intervention strategy to help children in poverty to excel in their studies. With good parenting since young, the values that help in their pursuit of knowledge like being hardworking can be instilled into them, allowing them to grow up to strive towards doing better in their studies through hardwork and perseverance. The article mentions about the Chicago Child Parent Center programme, where a research found out that children whose parents were more involved with their studies had greater academic achievement in reading and mathematics, teacher ratings of the school adjustment, grade retention and special education placement. After these children grew up they also generally had higher rates of school completion and attained more years of education. I also feel that the demands that parents have on children's academic progress serve as a motivation for children to work hard in order to achieve the desirable results that parents expect from them in order to appease their parents. Thus it can be said that parental involvement in the form of setting demands for their children can prove effective as it serves as a driving force for them to do well in studies.
WEDNESDAY, 10 SEPTEMBER 2014
Assignment 4 : Felicia Yee (4B) and Leandra Nair (4B)
Summarise from Paragraphs 2-4 why ecological modernism believes that technology is the solution to environmental problems in about 100 words.
Ecological modernization believes that harnessing innovation and entrepreneurship can save the planet, and while modernists are still all for being environmentally friendly, they are all for making use of nuclear energy, genetically modified crops, urbanisation and geoengineering to help solve the problem of climate change. They state that they embrace these technologies to give nature room, to allow nature to rest while we are able to narrow our human activity through more efficient technology. With technology, more land can be freed up, and modernists want to cut the links between mankind and nature, and restore large spaces of habitats and reintroduce species that once lived in those habitats.
Summarise from Paragraphs 2-4 why ecological modernism believes that technology is the solution to environmental problems in about 100 words.
Ecological modernization believes that harnessing innovation and entrepreneurship can save the planet, and while modernists are still all for being environmentally friendly, they are all for making use of nuclear energy, genetically modified crops, urbanisation and geoengineering to help solve the problem of climate change. They state that they embrace these technologies to give nature room, to allow nature to rest while we are able to narrow our human activity through more efficient technology. With technology, more land can be freed up, and modernists want to cut the links between mankind and nature, and restore large spaces of habitats and reintroduce species that once lived in those habitats.
READER RESPONSE QN: Do you think technology is going to help Mankind solve all environmental problems? Your response should be between 200 and 250 words.
I do not think that technology is going to help Mankind solve all environmental problems as it might lead to other problems, and might cause the sustainability of the industry to decrease. For example, one of the biggest technological innovations in aquaculture and fishing in the last half century has led to a near total breakdown of all saltwater fisheries worldwide. Instead of increasing the stocks and providing greater resource management, it has done the exact opposite. In this case, technology has not made life easier for the fish, but has made life easier for the fishermen. With mile long nets, city-sized drag lines, sonar fish-finders and huge commercial harvesting boats, the stocks have been reduced to the point where they could be reaching total collapse. This shows that even though technology can indeed solve some environmental problems, it could lead to more problems in the same industry. With technology, there is decreased sustainability as well, when there is an increased rate at which the fishermen catch the types of fish they catch, what will happen to the other organisms that feed on the fish or the organisms that the fishes feed on? There will be an imbalance in the ecosystem and the ecosystem might not be able to sustain itself any longer. Therefore, I do not think that technology can solve all environmental problems as it will inevitably lead to other problems, and affect the sustainability of the industry as well.FRIDAY, 25 JULY 2014
Assignment 3: The Flight from Conversation (Ng Wei Qing, Tiffany Tsui, Cherri Chan)
Summary:
Technology has definitely decreased human interaction significantly. People have sacrificed conversation for mere connection and accustomed to a new way of being “alone together.” We do not want to be interrupted and we prefer working alone, fearing the start of endless conversations. We have learned the habit of cleaning messy and demanding human relationships with technology, tempted to think that our little “sips” of online connection add up to a big gulp of real conversation, but they do not. They are unlike face-to-face conversation, they diminish chances to learn skills of self-reflection and do not instill patience in us. As we get used to being shortchanged on conversation and to getting by with less, we seem almost willing to dispense with people altogether. As Siri, the popular digital assistant on Apple’s iPhone, becomes more advanced, “she” will be more and more like a best friend — one who will listen when others won’t. This habit of seeking comfort from technology may be caused by the sentiment that "no one is listening to me", hence people tend to have an illusion of companionship and that machines are better than face-to-face conversation, avoiding conversations with others around them, and as a result increasing the distance of relationship between people.
Reader's Response:Do you agree with the author and is this happening in your society? If so, how can we improve
This is definitely true in our society. We see handheld devices everywhere, including at restaurants, when customers are waiting for their food to arrive. One may think that food would be the only thing that would make them raise their heads from their own devices. Face-to-face conversations are every bit as important as having a device. They reveal things about the other party that would not be revealed easily through a device. They build up bonds between friends, strengthening them. They let you confront your enemies, frightening them. Thus, to promote face-to-face conversations, a family could have a rule where there would be a no-device day per week; employers could suggest a Conversational Day, and lastly, friends could discourage each other from using phones when in others' presence. Although we could come up with the excuse of having no time or "there's a really important message I have to to get to", we have to keep in mind that human conversation is good for our mental health. There are days when we feel particularly depressing and we need someone's shoulder to cry on, I'm pretty sure that the handheld devices that we all have won't be great to cry on. We cannot deny the benefits they bring to us but sometimes it is good to note that it is okay to take a break from them once in a while.
Summary:
Technology has definitely decreased human interaction significantly. People have sacrificed conversation for mere connection and accustomed to a new way of being “alone together.” We do not want to be interrupted and we prefer working alone, fearing the start of endless conversations. We have learned the habit of cleaning messy and demanding human relationships with technology, tempted to think that our little “sips” of online connection add up to a big gulp of real conversation, but they do not. They are unlike face-to-face conversation, they diminish chances to learn skills of self-reflection and do not instill patience in us. As we get used to being shortchanged on conversation and to getting by with less, we seem almost willing to dispense with people altogether. As Siri, the popular digital assistant on Apple’s iPhone, becomes more advanced, “she” will be more and more like a best friend — one who will listen when others won’t. This habit of seeking comfort from technology may be caused by the sentiment that "no one is listening to me", hence people tend to have an illusion of companionship and that machines are better than face-to-face conversation, avoiding conversations with others around them, and as a result increasing the distance of relationship between people.
Reader's Response:Do you agree with the author and is this happening in your society? If so, how can we improve
This is definitely true in our society. We see handheld devices everywhere, including at restaurants, when customers are waiting for their food to arrive. One may think that food would be the only thing that would make them raise their heads from their own devices. Face-to-face conversations are every bit as important as having a device. They reveal things about the other party that would not be revealed easily through a device. They build up bonds between friends, strengthening them. They let you confront your enemies, frightening them. Thus, to promote face-to-face conversations, a family could have a rule where there would be a no-device day per week; employers could suggest a Conversational Day, and lastly, friends could discourage each other from using phones when in others' presence. Although we could come up with the excuse of having no time or "there's a really important message I have to to get to", we have to keep in mind that human conversation is good for our mental health. There are days when we feel particularly depressing and we need someone's shoulder to cry on, I'm pretty sure that the handheld devices that we all have won't be great to cry on. We cannot deny the benefits they bring to us but sometimes it is good to note that it is okay to take a break from them once in a while.
Technology has definitely decreased human interaction significantly. People have sacrificed conversation for mere connection and accustomed to a new way of being “alone together.” We do not want to be interrupted and we prefer working alone, fearing the start of endless conversations. We have learned the habit of cleaning messy and demanding human relationships with technology, tempted to think that our little “sips” of online connection add up to a big gulp of real conversation, but they do not. They are unlike face-to-face conversation, they diminish chances to learn skills of self-reflection and do not instill patience in us. As we get used to being shortchanged on conversation and to getting by with less, we seem almost willing to dispense with people altogether. As Siri, the popular digital assistant on Apple’s iPhone, becomes more advanced, “she” will be more and more like a best friend — one who will listen when others won’t. This habit of seeking comfort from technology may be caused by the sentiment that "no one is listening to me", hence people tend to have an illusion of companionship and that machines are better than face-to-face conversation, avoiding conversations with others around them, and as a result increasing the distance of relationship between people.
Reader's Response:Do you agree with the author and is this happening in your society? If so, how can we improve
This is definitely true in our society. We see handheld devices everywhere, including at restaurants, when customers are waiting for their food to arrive. One may think that food would be the only thing that would make them raise their heads from their own devices. Face-to-face conversations are every bit as important as having a device. They reveal things about the other party that would not be revealed easily through a device. They build up bonds between friends, strengthening them. They let you confront your enemies, frightening them. Thus, to promote face-to-face conversations, a family could have a rule where there would be a no-device day per week; employers could suggest a Conversational Day, and lastly, friends could discourage each other from using phones when in others' presence. Although we could come up with the excuse of having no time or "there's a really important message I have to to get to", we have to keep in mind that human conversation is good for our mental health. There are days when we feel particularly depressing and we need someone's shoulder to cry on, I'm pretty sure that the handheld devices that we all have won't be great to cry on. We cannot deny the benefits they bring to us but sometimes it is good to note that it is okay to take a break from them once in a while.
MONDAY, 21 JULY 2014
Assignment 3: artificial intelligence Cheryl and Kaiting
Summary
Artificial-Intelligence (AI) brings about many possible benefits to the society. Currently, we are already surrounded by AI systems in the technology that we own. Recent breakthroughs include self-driving cars, digital personal assistants Siri and robots that function like humans. A huge benefit would be the magnification of human intelligence through the many tools that AI could provide. However, other than the many benefits AI has, in near the term, world militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets although the UN and Human Rights Watch have advocated a treaty banning such weapons. In the new upcoming age of AI, the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. AI may transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation.
Readers Response
Stephen Hawking's fears are refutable. I acknowledge the potential risks he has raised, however, in order to attain success for anything, be it in education or science or life, one cannot avoid taking risks, and the same applies to artificial intelligence. In the future, with the aid of artificial intelligence, many manual work can be replaced by artificial intelligence systems. Although this would bring about much convenience and raise efficiency and productivity in industries, many will become jobless as a result as well. This is just one of the many prominent problems advancements in artificial intelligence could bring about. However, we cannot overlook the fact that artificial intelligence has created many things which we rely on heavily today, from providing services to aid in healthcare to reducing labour in household chores. Therefore, as long as we can effectively cope with these potential risks, we can still take venture and advance more in artificial intelligence and come up with more creations to benefit mankind. Laws and policies can be strongly enforced to ensure that creations of artificial intelligence are not misused. Thus, I take the stand of Adam Gibson because he feels that although such technology has many drawbacks to it, without it, we cannot possibly face and resolve many of the complex problems today. Even if artificial intelligence is dangerous to venture into, we have already gone too far into this field and there's no more turning back, we can only go further and try to avoid the dangers lurking along the way.
Summary
Artificial-Intelligence (AI) brings about many possible benefits to the society. Currently, we are already surrounded by AI systems in the technology that we own. Recent breakthroughs include self-driving cars, digital personal assistants Siri and robots that function like humans. A huge benefit would be the magnification of human intelligence through the many tools that AI could provide. However, other than the many benefits AI has, in near the term, world militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets although the UN and Human Rights Watch have advocated a treaty banning such weapons. In the new upcoming age of AI, the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. AI may transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation.
Readers Response
Stephen Hawking's fears are refutable. I acknowledge the potential risks he has raised, however, in order to attain success for anything, be it in education or science or life, one cannot avoid taking risks, and the same applies to artificial intelligence. In the future, with the aid of artificial intelligence, many manual work can be replaced by artificial intelligence systems. Although this would bring about much convenience and raise efficiency and productivity in industries, many will become jobless as a result as well. This is just one of the many prominent problems advancements in artificial intelligence could bring about. However, we cannot overlook the fact that artificial intelligence has created many things which we rely on heavily today, from providing services to aid in healthcare to reducing labour in household chores. Therefore, as long as we can effectively cope with these potential risks, we can still take venture and advance more in artificial intelligence and come up with more creations to benefit mankind. Laws and policies can be strongly enforced to ensure that creations of artificial intelligence are not misused. Thus, I take the stand of Adam Gibson because he feels that although such technology has many drawbacks to it, without it, we cannot possibly face and resolve many of the complex problems today. Even if artificial intelligence is dangerous to venture into, we have already gone too far into this field and there's no more turning back, we can only go further and try to avoid the dangers lurking along the way.
Artificial-Intelligence (AI) brings about many possible benefits to the society. Currently, we are already surrounded by AI systems in the technology that we own. Recent breakthroughs include self-driving cars, digital personal assistants Siri and robots that function like humans. A huge benefit would be the magnification of human intelligence through the many tools that AI could provide. However, other than the many benefits AI has, in near the term, world militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets although the UN and Human Rights Watch have advocated a treaty banning such weapons. In the new upcoming age of AI, the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. AI may transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation.
Readers Response
Stephen Hawking's fears are refutable. I acknowledge the potential risks he has raised, however, in order to attain success for anything, be it in education or science or life, one cannot avoid taking risks, and the same applies to artificial intelligence. In the future, with the aid of artificial intelligence, many manual work can be replaced by artificial intelligence systems. Although this would bring about much convenience and raise efficiency and productivity in industries, many will become jobless as a result as well. This is just one of the many prominent problems advancements in artificial intelligence could bring about. However, we cannot overlook the fact that artificial intelligence has created many things which we rely on heavily today, from providing services to aid in healthcare to reducing labour in household chores. Therefore, as long as we can effectively cope with these potential risks, we can still take venture and advance more in artificial intelligence and come up with more creations to benefit mankind. Laws and policies can be strongly enforced to ensure that creations of artificial intelligence are not misused. Thus, I take the stand of Adam Gibson because he feels that although such technology has many drawbacks to it, without it, we cannot possibly face and resolve many of the complex problems today. Even if artificial intelligence is dangerous to venture into, we have already gone too far into this field and there's no more turning back, we can only go further and try to avoid the dangers lurking along the way.
Assignment 3: artificial intelligence – but are we taking AI seriously enough?’ - ShiQing and Renise
Summary:
Potential benefits include eradication of war, disease, poverty, and improvement of design of arrangements of particles for performance of more advanced computations than the human brain. Unfortunately, there are risks. World militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets; AI may also transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation. AI can outsmart financial markets, out-invent human researchers, out-manipulate human leaders, and develop weapons we cannot understand. Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. Little serious research is devoted, in order to ensure the best outcome, to these issues outside non-profit institutes. We have to improve the chances of reaping the benefits and avoiding the risks.
Reader's Response:
Personally, I believe that Stephen Hawking's fears are unfounded and I take the stand of Adam Gibson. Recently, there can be no question that mankind has taken tremendous strides into the field of robotics, developing inventions with the use of artificial intelligence (AI). As Stephen Hawking has feared, AI has potential in causing an immense amount of harm to mankind in the future. However, AI is still considered to be only in its developing stages, and despite having potential to harm us in the future, those are only mere predictions. Presently, AI has provided us more benefits than harm. One such example of a benefit can include the accurate predictions of weather using AI. Meteorologists analyze large volumes of data in order to predict the weather, and even the most experienced weatherman may not always be accurate. With an AI software, scientists can sift through complex data and spot patterns missed by the human eye. When this software sees a big storm coming, it will automatically issue alerts to warn residents and the media, and this may help save lives. Not only, a rise in accuracy of weather predictions may also offer crucial benefits regarding agriculture and crop development. That said, yes, I can say with no qualms, that AI is powerful indeed. But when used in the right way, we are able to produce inventions which can definitely be used to bring mankind more benefits than harm, therefore I agree with Adam Gibson's stand.
Summary:
Potential benefits include eradication of war, disease, poverty, and improvement of design of arrangements of particles for performance of more advanced computations than the human brain. Unfortunately, there are risks. World militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets; AI may also transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation. AI can outsmart financial markets, out-invent human researchers, out-manipulate human leaders, and develop weapons we cannot understand. Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. Little serious research is devoted, in order to ensure the best outcome, to these issues outside non-profit institutes. We have to improve the chances of reaping the benefits and avoiding the risks.
Reader's Response:
Personally, I believe that Stephen Hawking's fears are unfounded and I take the stand of Adam Gibson. Recently, there can be no question that mankind has taken tremendous strides into the field of robotics, developing inventions with the use of artificial intelligence (AI). As Stephen Hawking has feared, AI has potential in causing an immense amount of harm to mankind in the future. However, AI is still considered to be only in its developing stages, and despite having potential to harm us in the future, those are only mere predictions. Presently, AI has provided us more benefits than harm. One such example of a benefit can include the accurate predictions of weather using AI. Meteorologists analyze large volumes of data in order to predict the weather, and even the most experienced weatherman may not always be accurate. With an AI software, scientists can sift through complex data and spot patterns missed by the human eye. When this software sees a big storm coming, it will automatically issue alerts to warn residents and the media, and this may help save lives. Not only, a rise in accuracy of weather predictions may also offer crucial benefits regarding agriculture and crop development. That said, yes, I can say with no qualms, that AI is powerful indeed. But when used in the right way, we are able to produce inventions which can definitely be used to bring mankind more benefits than harm, therefore I agree with Adam Gibson's stand.
Potential benefits include eradication of war, disease, poverty, and improvement of design of arrangements of particles for performance of more advanced computations than the human brain. Unfortunately, there are risks. World militaries are considering autonomous-weapon systems that can choose and eliminate targets; AI may also transform our economy to bring both great wealth and great dislocation. AI can outsmart financial markets, out-invent human researchers, out-manipulate human leaders, and develop weapons we cannot understand. Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. Little serious research is devoted, in order to ensure the best outcome, to these issues outside non-profit institutes. We have to improve the chances of reaping the benefits and avoiding the risks.
Reader's Response:
Personally, I believe that Stephen Hawking's fears are unfounded and I take the stand of Adam Gibson. Recently, there can be no question that mankind has taken tremendous strides into the field of robotics, developing inventions with the use of artificial intelligence (AI). As Stephen Hawking has feared, AI has potential in causing an immense amount of harm to mankind in the future. However, AI is still considered to be only in its developing stages, and despite having potential to harm us in the future, those are only mere predictions. Presently, AI has provided us more benefits than harm. One such example of a benefit can include the accurate predictions of weather using AI. Meteorologists analyze large volumes of data in order to predict the weather, and even the most experienced weatherman may not always be accurate. With an AI software, scientists can sift through complex data and spot patterns missed by the human eye. When this software sees a big storm coming, it will automatically issue alerts to warn residents and the media, and this may help save lives. Not only, a rise in accuracy of weather predictions may also offer crucial benefits regarding agriculture and crop development. That said, yes, I can say with no qualms, that AI is powerful indeed. But when used in the right way, we are able to produce inventions which can definitely be used to bring mankind more benefits than harm, therefore I agree with Adam Gibson's stand.
SUNDAY, 20 JULY 2014
Assignment 3 : What's so scary about smart girls? By Alicia & Qi En
In about 100-120 words, summarise the impact of educating girls.
Educating girls changes the demography. Social unrest increases when there is a large amount of youths that exist in a society. By educating both girls and boys, it curbs the birthrate much more effectively and this can help to maintain social stability. Also, by attaining education, it doubles the labor force. This in turn boosts the economy, raises living standards and helps to promote development. Asia's economic boom was due to educating girls and moving them to the cities to do more productive work. Also, if girls were empowered while receiving education, a country can unleash these women and they can become force multipliers for good.
Do you agree with the author that an effective weapon to counter the extremist groups in those countries is to educate the girls
I agree with the author that educating girls is an effective strategy for opposing extremist groups. Since one of the greatest threats to extremism in transforming a society is education, fanatics will definitely be wary and afraid of how large an impact education of girls can do for the future. Girls with an educational background changes demography, such as a youth bulge, and also double the formal labour force, boost the economy, raise living standards, as well as promote an upstanding cycle of development. Such examples of the benefits of girls' education can be seen in countries like Bangladesh and Oman. These countries are able to step out of their backwardness after emphasising education for not only boys, but also girls. Consequently, those educated women have become the pillars for certain organisations, and has helped their country advance tremendously. However, educating girls is not enough for a country to progress. Even though countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia have educated girls, they are unwilling to authorise them. So both countries are unable to progress and remain mired in the past. In the case of Oman, which is once a severely underdeveloped country back in the 1960s, educating and empowering women brought about stability and by far better off than its neighbour Yemen. Hence, I agree that education for girls, together with the empowerment of women can help counter extremist groups.
In about 100-120 words, summarise the impact of educating girls.
Educating girls changes the demography. Social unrest increases when there is a large amount of youths that exist in a society. By educating both girls and boys, it curbs the birthrate much more effectively and this can help to maintain social stability. Also, by attaining education, it doubles the labor force. This in turn boosts the economy, raises living standards and helps to promote development. Asia's economic boom was due to educating girls and moving them to the cities to do more productive work. Also, if girls were empowered while receiving education, a country can unleash these women and they can become force multipliers for good.
Do you agree with the author that an effective weapon to counter the extremist groups in those countries is to educate the girls
I agree with the author that educating girls is an effective strategy for opposing extremist groups. Since one of the greatest threats to extremism in transforming a society is education, fanatics will definitely be wary and afraid of how large an impact education of girls can do for the future. Girls with an educational background changes demography, such as a youth bulge, and also double the formal labour force, boost the economy, raise living standards, as well as promote an upstanding cycle of development. Such examples of the benefits of girls' education can be seen in countries like Bangladesh and Oman. These countries are able to step out of their backwardness after emphasising education for not only boys, but also girls. Consequently, those educated women have become the pillars for certain organisations, and has helped their country advance tremendously. However, educating girls is not enough for a country to progress. Even though countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia have educated girls, they are unwilling to authorise them. So both countries are unable to progress and remain mired in the past. In the case of Oman, which is once a severely underdeveloped country back in the 1960s, educating and empowering women brought about stability and by far better off than its neighbour Yemen. Hence, I agree that education for girls, together with the empowerment of women can help counter extremist groups.
Educating girls changes the demography. Social unrest increases when there is a large amount of youths that exist in a society. By educating both girls and boys, it curbs the birthrate much more effectively and this can help to maintain social stability. Also, by attaining education, it doubles the labor force. This in turn boosts the economy, raises living standards and helps to promote development. Asia's economic boom was due to educating girls and moving them to the cities to do more productive work. Also, if girls were empowered while receiving education, a country can unleash these women and they can become force multipliers for good.
Do you agree with the author that an effective weapon to counter the extremist groups in those countries is to educate the girls
I agree with the author that educating girls is an effective strategy for opposing extremist groups. Since one of the greatest threats to extremism in transforming a society is education, fanatics will definitely be wary and afraid of how large an impact education of girls can do for the future. Girls with an educational background changes demography, such as a youth bulge, and also double the formal labour force, boost the economy, raise living standards, as well as promote an upstanding cycle of development. Such examples of the benefits of girls' education can be seen in countries like Bangladesh and Oman. These countries are able to step out of their backwardness after emphasising education for not only boys, but also girls. Consequently, those educated women have become the pillars for certain organisations, and has helped their country advance tremendously. However, educating girls is not enough for a country to progress. Even though countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia have educated girls, they are unwilling to authorise them. So both countries are unable to progress and remain mired in the past. In the case of Oman, which is once a severely underdeveloped country back in the 1960s, educating and empowering women brought about stability and by far better off than its neighbour Yemen. Hence, I agree that education for girls, together with the empowerment of women can help counter extremist groups.
SUNDAY, 6 JULY 2014
Assignment 3 Why kids care more about achievement than others (ZhengQian and Rizhao)
Summarise in 100 to 150 words, the reasons why children value achievement more
Summary: A new study conducted in the name of The Making Caring Common Project at Harvard's Graduate School of Education has shown results indicating that, out of 10,000 surveyed middle and high school students, almost 80 percent had ranked achievement or happiness over the caring of others. The prevalence of such a trend can be traced back to the rhetoric gap between the values that parents attempt to inculcate into their children, and the behaviour of parents themselves. However, studies have proven that empathy is the key to a child's increased levels of happiness and success, as it activates the moral reasoning and characteristics which the child needs to maintain satisfactory relationships with others. Also, as discerning and perspective creatures, children can easily identify the meaning that parents wish to convey through their behaviour. Therefore, parents should make the extra effort to help their children, be it through encouraging them to view the world from multiple perspectives, or making them pitch in to household chores, or doing meaningful deeds for others on a consistent basis.
Do young people in your society care more about achievement than helping others? If so, why do you think that is happening in your society and how do you think we can inculcate in them the importance of helping others?
Reader Response: The young people in my society seems to care more about achievement than helping others.Singapore is a meritocratic society. With the increasing acceptance of skilled foreign talents into our society, Singapore is becoming more competitive than ever in terms of jobs, social standing, salaries and work environment. Everybody aims for a high paying white collar job capable of promosing them a life of comfort, and the main criteria for such jobs is based upon one's achievements in life, as the notion that achievement is equivalent to one's capabilities is a widely regarded one. As such, despite claims made by parents that development of moral character is an essential part of their children's growth, when faced with the social pressures of our meritocratic society, it eventually boils down to the primary concept of one's achievement in life being of utmost importance. This is a result of the belief that one's achievement is reflective of one's capability, happiness, social standing, and it is merely the nature of parents to react in favour of achievement over empathy, as achievement being equivalent to one's success and comfort in life is the general consensus. But as the studies in the articles have stated, empathy, and in general one's moral character, defines who you are and determines your standing and image in the eyes of the public. Generally, empathetic, morally upright individuals will receive the acceptance and respect of peers and those whom they have extended a helping hand to. Not only will they be welcomed with open arms in society, they will receive the feelings of gratitude from those whom they have helped, and feel a sense of joy and meaning, resulting in increased levels of happiness with life. Therefore, the development of empathy and character in children should be piroritised over pure achievement, as no amount of achievement can ever cover up for one's lack of principles and morals, and trouble is inevitable. Parents and teachers alike should encourage children to participate in more community involvement projects, as these provide learning opportunities for children regarding the plight others may faced, and in the process of helping them, they will gain a meaningful insight into lthe many woes of life and understand how they can contribute to other's life, and as a result understand the need to be more empathetic.
Summarise in 100 to 150 words, the reasons why children value achievement more
Summary: A new study conducted in the name of The Making Caring Common Project at Harvard's Graduate School of Education has shown results indicating that, out of 10,000 surveyed middle and high school students, almost 80 percent had ranked achievement or happiness over the caring of others. The prevalence of such a trend can be traced back to the rhetoric gap between the values that parents attempt to inculcate into their children, and the behaviour of parents themselves. However, studies have proven that empathy is the key to a child's increased levels of happiness and success, as it activates the moral reasoning and characteristics which the child needs to maintain satisfactory relationships with others. Also, as discerning and perspective creatures, children can easily identify the meaning that parents wish to convey through their behaviour. Therefore, parents should make the extra effort to help their children, be it through encouraging them to view the world from multiple perspectives, or making them pitch in to household chores, or doing meaningful deeds for others on a consistent basis.
Do young people in your society care more about achievement than helping others? If so, why do you think that is happening in your society and how do you think we can inculcate in them the importance of helping others?
Reader Response: The young people in my society seems to care more about achievement than helping others.Singapore is a meritocratic society. With the increasing acceptance of skilled foreign talents into our society, Singapore is becoming more competitive than ever in terms of jobs, social standing, salaries and work environment. Everybody aims for a high paying white collar job capable of promosing them a life of comfort, and the main criteria for such jobs is based upon one's achievements in life, as the notion that achievement is equivalent to one's capabilities is a widely regarded one. As such, despite claims made by parents that development of moral character is an essential part of their children's growth, when faced with the social pressures of our meritocratic society, it eventually boils down to the primary concept of one's achievement in life being of utmost importance. This is a result of the belief that one's achievement is reflective of one's capability, happiness, social standing, and it is merely the nature of parents to react in favour of achievement over empathy, as achievement being equivalent to one's success and comfort in life is the general consensus. But as the studies in the articles have stated, empathy, and in general one's moral character, defines who you are and determines your standing and image in the eyes of the public. Generally, empathetic, morally upright individuals will receive the acceptance and respect of peers and those whom they have extended a helping hand to. Not only will they be welcomed with open arms in society, they will receive the feelings of gratitude from those whom they have helped, and feel a sense of joy and meaning, resulting in increased levels of happiness with life. Therefore, the development of empathy and character in children should be piroritised over pure achievement, as no amount of achievement can ever cover up for one's lack of principles and morals, and trouble is inevitable. Parents and teachers alike should encourage children to participate in more community involvement projects, as these provide learning opportunities for children regarding the plight others may faced, and in the process of helping them, they will gain a meaningful insight into lthe many woes of life and understand how they can contribute to other's life, and as a result understand the need to be more empathetic.
Summary: A new study conducted in the name of The Making Caring Common Project at Harvard's Graduate School of Education has shown results indicating that, out of 10,000 surveyed middle and high school students, almost 80 percent had ranked achievement or happiness over the caring of others. The prevalence of such a trend can be traced back to the rhetoric gap between the values that parents attempt to inculcate into their children, and the behaviour of parents themselves. However, studies have proven that empathy is the key to a child's increased levels of happiness and success, as it activates the moral reasoning and characteristics which the child needs to maintain satisfactory relationships with others. Also, as discerning and perspective creatures, children can easily identify the meaning that parents wish to convey through their behaviour. Therefore, parents should make the extra effort to help their children, be it through encouraging them to view the world from multiple perspectives, or making them pitch in to household chores, or doing meaningful deeds for others on a consistent basis.
Do young people in your society care more about achievement than helping others? If so, why do you think that is happening in your society and how do you think we can inculcate in them the importance of helping others?
Reader Response: The young people in my society seems to care more about achievement than helping others.Singapore is a meritocratic society. With the increasing acceptance of skilled foreign talents into our society, Singapore is becoming more competitive than ever in terms of jobs, social standing, salaries and work environment. Everybody aims for a high paying white collar job capable of promosing them a life of comfort, and the main criteria for such jobs is based upon one's achievements in life, as the notion that achievement is equivalent to one's capabilities is a widely regarded one. As such, despite claims made by parents that development of moral character is an essential part of their children's growth, when faced with the social pressures of our meritocratic society, it eventually boils down to the primary concept of one's achievement in life being of utmost importance. This is a result of the belief that one's achievement is reflective of one's capability, happiness, social standing, and it is merely the nature of parents to react in favour of achievement over empathy, as achievement being equivalent to one's success and comfort in life is the general consensus. But as the studies in the articles have stated, empathy, and in general one's moral character, defines who you are and determines your standing and image in the eyes of the public. Generally, empathetic, morally upright individuals will receive the acceptance and respect of peers and those whom they have extended a helping hand to. Not only will they be welcomed with open arms in society, they will receive the feelings of gratitude from those whom they have helped, and feel a sense of joy and meaning, resulting in increased levels of happiness with life. Therefore, the development of empathy and character in children should be piroritised over pure achievement, as no amount of achievement can ever cover up for one's lack of principles and morals, and trouble is inevitable. Parents and teachers alike should encourage children to participate in more community involvement projects, as these provide learning opportunities for children regarding the plight others may faced, and in the process of helping them, they will gain a meaningful insight into lthe many woes of life and understand how they can contribute to other's life, and as a result understand the need to be more empathetic.
MONDAY, 23 JUNE 2014
Assignment 2: School league tables 'encourage the selling of souls' by Xin Ni (09) and He Ying (13) 4C
Summarise some of the arguments the author raises against School league tables.
120 educationalists from around the world have signed a letter attacking the OECD's Pisa rankings and their undue influence on education systems worldwide. Pisa compared the data without any caveats or explanation, making tests the driving force in teaching and learning and inhibiting learning. Schools are turned from centres of learning into marketing enterprises seeking instant results; students often have nothing to fall back on but a good examination technique which has limited value except for passing tests. The league tables encourages student to focus on learning a prescribed body of knowledge, to accept that education is all about passing exams. It is a disgraceful yet significant factor in the marketing of many selective and independent schools. Even the 100 global schools questioned the OECD'S Pisa so as to remove the naming or shaming for themselves.
Do you agree with the author that schools should not be ranked? How are these ideas reflected in your society?
Without a doubt, I agree with the author that schools should not be ranked. Ranking of schools can have immediate detrimental effect on the society or in a long run as well. As schools will become results driven, and start encouraging teachers to adhere to a prescribed body of knowledge, usually only what will be tested, often without hesitation or deviation. Students’ curiosity will be smothered; tangential questions are avoided, just as to maximize the marks attained by the student body. Education will then be just about passing exams, and nothing else. Students are often left with nothing to fall back on, other than a good examination technique which has absolutely no value in the in the workforce, despite receiving education since the age of three or four. Important life skills are neglected for schools are only interested in their academic performance on the league table. However, realizing the harmful effects of ranking of schools, the Singapore government had decided to abolish the ranking system in our education."These include abolishing the nearly decade-old system of banding secondary schools based on their academic results, which has led to keen and sometimes unhealthy competition among schools. Some awards which schools currently get from the ministry for academic achievements will also be scrapped." This was quoted from an article by the Ministry of Education (MOE). Thus, top scorers of the Primary School Leaving Examinations (PSLE) as well as ‘O’ Levels were no longer being announced since 2012. Thus, I agree with that author that schools should not be ranked as it comes along with extremely harmful effects.
Summarise some of the arguments the author raises against School league tables.
120 educationalists from around the world have signed a letter attacking the OECD's Pisa rankings and their undue influence on education systems worldwide. Pisa compared the data without any caveats or explanation, making tests the driving force in teaching and learning and inhibiting learning. Schools are turned from centres of learning into marketing enterprises seeking instant results; students often have nothing to fall back on but a good examination technique which has limited value except for passing tests. The league tables encourages student to focus on learning a prescribed body of knowledge, to accept that education is all about passing exams. It is a disgraceful yet significant factor in the marketing of many selective and independent schools. Even the 100 global schools questioned the OECD'S Pisa so as to remove the naming or shaming for themselves.
Do you agree with the author that schools should not be ranked? How are these ideas reflected in your society?
Without a doubt, I agree with the author that schools should not be ranked. Ranking of schools can have immediate detrimental effect on the society or in a long run as well. As schools will become results driven, and start encouraging teachers to adhere to a prescribed body of knowledge, usually only what will be tested, often without hesitation or deviation. Students’ curiosity will be smothered; tangential questions are avoided, just as to maximize the marks attained by the student body. Education will then be just about passing exams, and nothing else. Students are often left with nothing to fall back on, other than a good examination technique which has absolutely no value in the in the workforce, despite receiving education since the age of three or four. Important life skills are neglected for schools are only interested in their academic performance on the league table. However, realizing the harmful effects of ranking of schools, the Singapore government had decided to abolish the ranking system in our education."These include abolishing the nearly decade-old system of banding secondary schools based on their academic results, which has led to keen and sometimes unhealthy competition among schools. Some awards which schools currently get from the ministry for academic achievements will also be scrapped." This was quoted from an article by the Ministry of Education (MOE). Thus, top scorers of the Primary School Leaving Examinations (PSLE) as well as ‘O’ Levels were no longer being announced since 2012. Thus, I agree with that author that schools should not be ranked as it comes along with extremely harmful effects.
MONDAY, 16 JUNE 2014
Assignment 2: "Barbie, Sexualisation and Body Image: The Debates Rage On" - Cheryl Chua Xin Ting & Hum Kai Ting (4B)
Summarise the criticisms made against Barbie by the author or from the links provided in the article.
The author feels that issues such as barbie's proportions creating unrealistic body standards, her whiteness, her role in the fight against the pink aisle, against gendered toys, have always been surfacing. She also feels that the live action film starring Barbie would definitely inspire debate, between feminists for this sexualised image of impossible beauty and others about empowerment and feminism. The author also feels that the feminist debate about Barbie might gradually be the factor in keeping her iconic if sales continue to plummet and the mother's attitude that has the most impact on their children's health, not the toy. The author also feels that Barbie is symbolic to all, symbolizing a vessel to contain our stories and she is just a doll not feminist or role model unless we choose her to be one.
If the author is correct, what can people do to resolve the issues raised in the article about the sexualisation of dolls, like Barbie?
Like the author's opinion, I feel that ultimately, Barbie is nothing but a doll. The way adults and children view things differently, causing adults to be paranoid over things that should not exist- until it has been brought under public attention. Children, being pure-minded and innocent, see Barbie as a playmate and nothing more, occasionally wanting to "dress up" their dolls or give them a "new look". There are no thoughts of feminism in their minds. However, with the adults' view on the clothes and jobs "given" to Barbie considered feminist, these innocent children are constantly exposed to the side of their toys they would have never thought of. Hence, I feel that before condemning Barbie as a symbol of feminism, adults should first view toys as just toys, not symbols. The author stated that mothers are using Barbie the way their daughters do, as a symbol, a vessel to contain their stories. I feel that the author is implying that the way Barbie is actually used is different, as mothers use them as a symbol of feminism, or a vessel keeping their past memories filled with feminist ideas, while their daughters use them as a symbol of their pure childhood filled with increasing ideas of women independence. Therefore, I feel that instead of harping on the past ideas, mothers should acknowledge that now Barbie is just a doll, and nothing more.
Summarise the criticisms made against Barbie by the author or from the links provided in the article.
Like the author's opinion, I feel that ultimately, Barbie is nothing but a doll. The way adults and children view things differently, causing adults to be paranoid over things that should not exist- until it has been brought under public attention. Children, being pure-minded and innocent, see Barbie as a playmate and nothing more, occasionally wanting to "dress up" their dolls or give them a "new look". There are no thoughts of feminism in their minds. However, with the adults' view on the clothes and jobs "given" to Barbie considered feminist, these innocent children are constantly exposed to the side of their toys they would have never thought of. Hence, I feel that before condemning Barbie as a symbol of feminism, adults should first view toys as just toys, not symbols. The author stated that mothers are using Barbie the way their daughters do, as a symbol, a vessel to contain their stories. I feel that the author is implying that the way Barbie is actually used is different, as mothers use them as a symbol of feminism, or a vessel keeping their past memories filled with feminist ideas, while their daughters use them as a symbol of their pure childhood filled with increasing ideas of women independence. Therefore, I feel that instead of harping on the past ideas, mothers should acknowledge that now Barbie is just a doll, and nothing more.
The author feels that issues such as barbie's proportions creating unrealistic body standards, her whiteness, her role in the fight against the pink aisle, against gendered toys, have always been surfacing. She also feels that the live action film starring Barbie would definitely inspire debate, between feminists for this sexualised image of impossible beauty and others about empowerment and feminism. The author also feels that the feminist debate about Barbie might gradually be the factor in keeping her iconic if sales continue to plummet and the mother's attitude that has the most impact on their children's health, not the toy. The author also feels that Barbie is symbolic to all, symbolizing a vessel to contain our stories and she is just a doll not feminist or role model unless we choose her to be one.
If the author is correct, what can people do to resolve the issues raised in the article about the sexualisation of dolls, like Barbie?Like the author's opinion, I feel that ultimately, Barbie is nothing but a doll. The way adults and children view things differently, causing adults to be paranoid over things that should not exist- until it has been brought under public attention. Children, being pure-minded and innocent, see Barbie as a playmate and nothing more, occasionally wanting to "dress up" their dolls or give them a "new look". There are no thoughts of feminism in their minds. However, with the adults' view on the clothes and jobs "given" to Barbie considered feminist, these innocent children are constantly exposed to the side of their toys they would have never thought of. Hence, I feel that before condemning Barbie as a symbol of feminism, adults should first view toys as just toys, not symbols. The author stated that mothers are using Barbie the way their daughters do, as a symbol, a vessel to contain their stories. I feel that the author is implying that the way Barbie is actually used is different, as mothers use them as a symbol of feminism, or a vessel keeping their past memories filled with feminist ideas, while their daughters use them as a symbol of their pure childhood filled with increasing ideas of women independence. Therefore, I feel that instead of harping on the past ideas, mothers should acknowledge that now Barbie is just a doll, and nothing more.
FRIDAY, 30 MAY 2014
Assignment 1: It's Time to Shed "Innate" - Shernice Puah(4B) & Cheryl Goh(4C)
SUMMARY QUESTION:
Under old wisdom, a person either has talent or does not. Child prodigies exist as
their abilities appear so early in their life, the first instinct from everyone is normally 'in-born gift'. Conclusions have been made that intensive training is necessary for the acquisition of expertise, but we do not rule out the role of innate ability. Studies have now shown conclusively that mindset, nutrition, parenting, peers, media culture, time, focus, and motivation all profoundly effect the development of abilities. Ellen Winner calls innateness "atypical brain organization" in talented children. This can occur "as a result of genetics, the in-utero environment, or after-birth trauma." People have extraordinary abilities due to physiological differences in their brains. However, such brain differences do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop.
READER RESPONSE QUESTION:
I agree to a large extent that achievement depends on attitude, resources and practice. For every achievement, hard work is put in to ensure that one is able to perform their best and accomplish their task to the best of their ability. Even though talent may play a part in one's achievements, it is still largely dependable on the effort put in and one's attitude towards their work. It is not only talent that is responsible one's achievements, how one optimize their resources to bring out the best of their work is also a huge factor. If one was to only depend on their talent, they would not be able to bring out their full potential, and are likely to always be at a lower standard than those who try their best and their hardest in accomplishing the task. For example, Leonardo Da Vinci who was mentioned in the article. He was not born a prodigy, and was not labelled 'talented' as a child, but in his adult years, he managed to paint beautiful paintings, and his work is still very appreciated and studied up till date. It is no doubt Leonardo had talent, but his passion for art and the effort he put in throughout his life to achieve his fame today is far more important and significant than the talent that only appeared in his later years. Talent is not the basic of an achievement, attitude, resources and practice are.
SUMMARY QUESTION:
Under old wisdom, a person either has talent or does not. Child prodigies exist as
their abilities appear so early in their life, the first instinct from everyone is normally 'in-born gift'. Conclusions have been made that intensive training is necessary for the acquisition of expertise, but we do not rule out the role of innate ability. Studies have now shown conclusively that mindset, nutrition, parenting, peers, media culture, time, focus, and motivation all profoundly effect the development of abilities. Ellen Winner calls innateness "atypical brain organization" in talented children. This can occur "as a result of genetics, the in-utero environment, or after-birth trauma." People have extraordinary abilities due to physiological differences in their brains. However, such brain differences do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop.
READER RESPONSE QUESTION:
I agree to a large extent that achievement depends on attitude, resources and practice. For every achievement, hard work is put in to ensure that one is able to perform their best and accomplish their task to the best of their ability. Even though talent may play a part in one's achievements, it is still largely dependable on the effort put in and one's attitude towards their work. It is not only talent that is responsible one's achievements, how one optimize their resources to bring out the best of their work is also a huge factor. If one was to only depend on their talent, they would not be able to bring out their full potential, and are likely to always be at a lower standard than those who try their best and their hardest in accomplishing the task. For example, Leonardo Da Vinci who was mentioned in the article. He was not born a prodigy, and was not labelled 'talented' as a child, but in his adult years, he managed to paint beautiful paintings, and his work is still very appreciated and studied up till date. It is no doubt Leonardo had talent, but his passion for art and the effort he put in throughout his life to achieve his fame today is far more important and significant than the talent that only appeared in his later years. Talent is not the basic of an achievement, attitude, resources and practice are.
Under old wisdom, a person either has talent or does not. Child prodigies exist as
their abilities appear so early in their life, the first instinct from everyone is normally 'in-born gift'. Conclusions have been made that intensive training is necessary for the acquisition of expertise, but we do not rule out the role of innate ability. Studies have now shown conclusively that mindset, nutrition, parenting, peers, media culture, time, focus, and motivation all profoundly effect the development of abilities. Ellen Winner calls innateness "atypical brain organization" in talented children. This can occur "as a result of genetics, the in-utero environment, or after-birth trauma." People have extraordinary abilities due to physiological differences in their brains. However, such brain differences do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop.
READER RESPONSE QUESTION:
I agree to a large extent that achievement depends on attitude, resources and practice. For every achievement, hard work is put in to ensure that one is able to perform their best and accomplish their task to the best of their ability. Even though talent may play a part in one's achievements, it is still largely dependable on the effort put in and one's attitude towards their work. It is not only talent that is responsible one's achievements, how one optimize their resources to bring out the best of their work is also a huge factor. If one was to only depend on their talent, they would not be able to bring out their full potential, and are likely to always be at a lower standard than those who try their best and their hardest in accomplishing the task. For example, Leonardo Da Vinci who was mentioned in the article. He was not born a prodigy, and was not labelled 'talented' as a child, but in his adult years, he managed to paint beautiful paintings, and his work is still very appreciated and studied up till date. It is no doubt Leonardo had talent, but his passion for art and the effort he put in throughout his life to achieve his fame today is far more important and significant than the talent that only appeared in his later years. Talent is not the basic of an achievement, attitude, resources and practice are.
TUESDAY, 20 MAY 2014
Assignment 1 - article 4: much ado about bitcoins - Cherith Lim (7) & Roxanne Yew (12) 4B
Summarise the main points of the current fascination with bitcoin
Many are fascinated with the idea of bitcoin. Senate hearings held to discuss regulating bitcoin earlier this month were “lovefests,” according to The Washington Post. Abroad, Chinese investors are flocking. Bitcoin seems on the brink of respectability. Some of bitcoin’s appeal comes from the fact that it does not physically exist. Each bitcoin is just a string of numbers. Instead of a bank, a decentralized network of computers ensures the authenticity of bitcoin and issues new ones by doing complex calculations. This allows bitcoin to be traded peer to peer, bypassing credit card companies and payment processors. It’s digital cash, offering the same relative anonymity and freedom as a paper sack of bills. WikiLeaks began accepting bitcoin donations in 2011 in order to bypass PayPal and credit card companies, which had frozen payments to the organization. Everything would be for sale to anyone all the time, 100 percent tax-free. Many of bitcoin’s hard-core fans see the currency as a revolutionary step toward this anarchocapitalist wonderland and is mainly innovative in the way of credit default swaps: new ways to gamble with money.
Reader Response To what extent would you agree with the writer that bitcoin will not last as a form of currency?
I agree with the author to a large extent that bitcoin will not last as a form of currency. "Bitcoin is built on a weird mix of the most old-fashioned kind of speculative greed, bolstered by a contemporary utopian cyberlibertarian ideology." Apart from dealing with otherwise illegal substances on Silk Road, there seems to be hardly any daily value in bitcoin, in terms of buying daily commodities. In my opinion, bitcoin is at best a trading currency, like a fluctuating stock market; everyone is cashing in because the value of bitcoin is continually rising, but how many of them actually spend these bitcoins? "So many have bought in because the Internet is very good at stoking the fear of missing out. There’s even a trendy acronym, FOMO, to describe the anxiety inspired by scrolling through the social media accounts of people having more fun than you. Bitcoin fosters a particularly potent brand of FOMO. " By seeing people gaining small riches, others are afraid of missing out on the cash; hence this line says it all - "Bitcoin is too dependent on speculative mania to be of practical use as a currency." I watched the value for bitcoin increase by more than USD$100 in a day; this shows that the value of bitcoin is so uncertain that it is impossible to pin down as a proper currency to be used. If one day someone decides to sell tons of bitcoins and send the price crashing down, everyone is just going to lose a lot of money, and public interest will fizzle out really, really quickly.
Summarise the main points of the current fascination with bitcoin
Many are fascinated with the idea of bitcoin. Senate hearings held to discuss regulating bitcoin earlier this month were “lovefests,” according to The Washington Post. Abroad, Chinese investors are flocking. Bitcoin seems on the brink of respectability. Some of bitcoin’s appeal comes from the fact that it does not physically exist. Each bitcoin is just a string of numbers. Instead of a bank, a decentralized network of computers ensures the authenticity of bitcoin and issues new ones by doing complex calculations. This allows bitcoin to be traded peer to peer, bypassing credit card companies and payment processors. It’s digital cash, offering the same relative anonymity and freedom as a paper sack of bills. WikiLeaks began accepting bitcoin donations in 2011 in order to bypass PayPal and credit card companies, which had frozen payments to the organization. Everything would be for sale to anyone all the time, 100 percent tax-free. Many of bitcoin’s hard-core fans see the currency as a revolutionary step toward this anarchocapitalist wonderland and is mainly innovative in the way of credit default swaps: new ways to gamble with money.
Many are fascinated with the idea of bitcoin. Senate hearings held to discuss regulating bitcoin earlier this month were “lovefests,” according to The Washington Post. Abroad, Chinese investors are flocking. Bitcoin seems on the brink of respectability. Some of bitcoin’s appeal comes from the fact that it does not physically exist. Each bitcoin is just a string of numbers. Instead of a bank, a decentralized network of computers ensures the authenticity of bitcoin and issues new ones by doing complex calculations. This allows bitcoin to be traded peer to peer, bypassing credit card companies and payment processors. It’s digital cash, offering the same relative anonymity and freedom as a paper sack of bills. WikiLeaks began accepting bitcoin donations in 2011 in order to bypass PayPal and credit card companies, which had frozen payments to the organization. Everything would be for sale to anyone all the time, 100 percent tax-free. Many of bitcoin’s hard-core fans see the currency as a revolutionary step toward this anarchocapitalist wonderland and is mainly innovative in the way of credit default swaps: new ways to gamble with money.
Reader Response To what extent would you agree with the writer that bitcoin will not last as a form of currency?
I agree with the author to a large extent that bitcoin will not last as a form of currency. "Bitcoin is built on a weird mix of the most old-fashioned kind of speculative greed, bolstered by a contemporary utopian cyberlibertarian ideology." Apart from dealing with otherwise illegal substances on Silk Road, there seems to be hardly any daily value in bitcoin, in terms of buying daily commodities. In my opinion, bitcoin is at best a trading currency, like a fluctuating stock market; everyone is cashing in because the value of bitcoin is continually rising, but how many of them actually spend these bitcoins? "So many have bought in because the Internet is very good at stoking the fear of missing out. There’s even a trendy acronym, FOMO, to describe the anxiety inspired by scrolling through the social media accounts of people having more fun than you. Bitcoin fosters a particularly potent brand of FOMO. " By seeing people gaining small riches, others are afraid of missing out on the cash; hence this line says it all - "Bitcoin is too dependent on speculative mania to be of practical use as a currency." I watched the value for bitcoin increase by more than USD$100 in a day; this shows that the value of bitcoin is so uncertain that it is impossible to pin down as a proper currency to be used. If one day someone decides to sell tons of bitcoins and send the price crashing down, everyone is just going to lose a lot of money, and public interest will fizzle out really, really quickly.
Assignment 1: Human Rights Council (Lucia and Yuling)
Title: Assignment 1: ‘Mind your own business’, North Korea says of U.N. demand for justice
Summary of Article
A vote has been passed by the U.N. Human Rights Council to demand justice for the crimes like systematic torture, starvation and killings in North Korea. North Korean Ambassador So Se Pyong criticized the records of other countries but did not answer the allegations. Human Rights activists who have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program welcomed the vote. Roseann Rife, of Amnesty International said that human rights must take center stage at the U.N. Security Council when it considers peace and security in the Korean Peninsula. However, both Western and Asian powers admit that the chances of holding North Korea liable for their crimes against humanity are slim. North Korea will be referred to the International Criminal Court by the U.N. Security Council since the resolution was adopted with strong support.
In the article, human rights activists have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program. To what extent do you agree that they have the right to do this?
I strongly disagree that human rights activists have the right to do this. Firstly, these human rights activists are not from North Korea and lack a clear picture of the situation in North Korea. They are looking at the issue from a foreigner’s perspective and lack the insight and true understanding a citizen of North Korea has. What they deem as an act against humanity may not be what the North Korea defines as a crime against human rights. These human rights activists only gain information about North Korea from leaks, or from the media. Reports from the media might not be a true representation of the human rights situation in North Korea. Also, in North Korea, there is a Public Distribution System (PDS) that requires farmers in agricultural regions to hand over a portion of their production to the government. The government then reallocates the surplus to urban regions, which cannot grow their own foods. About 70% of the North Korean population, including the entire urban population, receives food through this government-run system. This shows that North Korea is already trying to improve the standard of living. In the world, human right issue is still a very prominent problem. In many countries, not everyone is entitled to equal human rights and acts against humanity are still largely carried out in most countries. I strongly agree with North Korea's words of 'Mind your own business'. Countries which have voted for the resolution that North Korea's security chiefs and possibly Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un himself should be tried for ordering systematic torture, starvation and killings, may not even have provided their people with total equal rights and is still allowing acts against humanity to take place in their countries.
Title: Assignment 1: ‘Mind your own business’, North Korea says of U.N. demand for justice
Summary of Article
A vote has been passed by the U.N. Human Rights Council to demand justice for the crimes like systematic torture, starvation and killings in North Korea. North Korean Ambassador So Se Pyong criticized the records of other countries but did not answer the allegations. Human Rights activists who have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program welcomed the vote. Roseann Rife, of Amnesty International said that human rights must take center stage at the U.N. Security Council when it considers peace and security in the Korean Peninsula. However, both Western and Asian powers admit that the chances of holding North Korea liable for their crimes against humanity are slim. North Korea will be referred to the International Criminal Court by the U.N. Security Council since the resolution was adopted with strong support.
In the article, human rights activists have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program. To what extent do you agree that they have the right to do this?
I strongly disagree that human rights activists have the right to do this. Firstly, these human rights activists are not from North Korea and lack a clear picture of the situation in North Korea. They are looking at the issue from a foreigner’s perspective and lack the insight and true understanding a citizen of North Korea has. What they deem as an act against humanity may not be what the North Korea defines as a crime against human rights. These human rights activists only gain information about North Korea from leaks, or from the media. Reports from the media might not be a true representation of the human rights situation in North Korea. Also, in North Korea, there is a Public Distribution System (PDS) that requires farmers in agricultural regions to hand over a portion of their production to the government. The government then reallocates the surplus to urban regions, which cannot grow their own foods. About 70% of the North Korean population, including the entire urban population, receives food through this government-run system. This shows that North Korea is already trying to improve the standard of living. In the world, human right issue is still a very prominent problem. In many countries, not everyone is entitled to equal human rights and acts against humanity are still largely carried out in most countries. I strongly agree with North Korea's words of 'Mind your own business'. Countries which have voted for the resolution that North Korea's security chiefs and possibly Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un himself should be tried for ordering systematic torture, starvation and killings, may not even have provided their people with total equal rights and is still allowing acts against humanity to take place in their countries.
Summary of Article
A vote has been passed by the U.N. Human Rights Council to demand justice for the crimes like systematic torture, starvation and killings in North Korea. North Korean Ambassador So Se Pyong criticized the records of other countries but did not answer the allegations. Human Rights activists who have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program welcomed the vote. Roseann Rife, of Amnesty International said that human rights must take center stage at the U.N. Security Council when it considers peace and security in the Korean Peninsula. However, both Western and Asian powers admit that the chances of holding North Korea liable for their crimes against humanity are slim. North Korea will be referred to the International Criminal Court by the U.N. Security Council since the resolution was adopted with strong support.
In the article, human rights activists have lobbied for scrutiny of North Korea to be widened beyond its disputed nuclear program. To what extent do you agree that they have the right to do this?
I strongly disagree that human rights activists have the right to do this. Firstly, these human rights activists are not from North Korea and lack a clear picture of the situation in North Korea. They are looking at the issue from a foreigner’s perspective and lack the insight and true understanding a citizen of North Korea has. What they deem as an act against humanity may not be what the North Korea defines as a crime against human rights. These human rights activists only gain information about North Korea from leaks, or from the media. Reports from the media might not be a true representation of the human rights situation in North Korea. Also, in North Korea, there is a Public Distribution System (PDS) that requires farmers in agricultural regions to hand over a portion of their production to the government. The government then reallocates the surplus to urban regions, which cannot grow their own foods. About 70% of the North Korean population, including the entire urban population, receives food through this government-run system. This shows that North Korea is already trying to improve the standard of living. In the world, human right issue is still a very prominent problem. In many countries, not everyone is entitled to equal human rights and acts against humanity are still largely carried out in most countries. I strongly agree with North Korea's words of 'Mind your own business'. Countries which have voted for the resolution that North Korea's security chiefs and possibly Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un himself should be tried for ordering systematic torture, starvation and killings, may not even have provided their people with total equal rights and is still allowing acts against humanity to take place in their countries.
MONDAY, 19 MAY 2014
Assignment 1: Innate Talent article by Xin Ni (09) and He Ying (13) 4C
SUMMARY:Summarise the main arguments for and against the concept of ‘innate talent
Science is dissolving the myth of innateness, and that talent is a set of developed and acquired skills. Genes are also a part of the developmental dynamic as the new science of gene expression shows that every individual is built with the capacity, to develop in a number of distinctly different ways. Studies
have now shown conclusively that mindset, time, focus, motivation and other factors all profoundly effect the development of abilities, from the very moment of conception. Distinct physiological brain differences do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop. Such as when the brain's left hemisphere is severely damaged, it invites the right hemisphere to heavily compensate for the loss. Achievement depends on attitude, resources, and lots of practice. The essential genius of all human beings is that we are designed to adapt.
READER RESPONSE:To what extent do you agree with the writer’s argument that achievement depends on attitude, resources and practice.
I agree to a large extent with the writer's argument. It is widely believed that the possibility of obtaining high achievements depends upon the presence or absence of inborn attributes variously labelled "talents" or "gifts". However, it is insufficient to only be an innate in order to be successful. Brain difference do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop. Motivational and personality influences as well as previous learning experiences that equip a person with knowledge, attitudes, skills, and self-confidence. Take for example, one might expect musicians who have absolute pitch to be more successful than those who do not, but that is not always true. Hayes found that that all major composers had needed long periods of training at least ten years of preparation are necessary. High levels of accomplishment invariably require lengthy and intensive training, and even people who are not believed to have any special talent can reach. The differences in quality of instruction, effectiveness of practice strategy, and degree of enthusiasm greatly determine the level of achievement one can obtain. Great achievers such asCopernicus,Rembrandt, Bach, Newton, Kant, Da Vinci and even Einstein were not inborn with the talent to achieve great things. Their abilities are developed through the contributions of some factors such as preparatory experiences, encouragement, support, motivation, self-confidence, perseverance and single- minded concentration. Humans are designed to adapt, talent is a bonus to the individual. The role of innate ability assist one on the path to achieving great things but the essential factors are attitude, resources and practice.
SUMMARY:Summarise the main arguments for and against the concept of ‘innate talent
Science is dissolving the myth of innateness, and that talent is a set of developed and acquired skills. Genes are also a part of the developmental dynamic as the new science of gene expression shows that every individual is built with the capacity, to develop in a number of distinctly different ways. Studies
have now shown conclusively that mindset, time, focus, motivation and other factors all profoundly effect the development of abilities, from the very moment of conception. Distinct physiological brain differences do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop. Such as when the brain's left hemisphere is severely damaged, it invites the right hemisphere to heavily compensate for the loss. Achievement depends on attitude, resources, and lots of practice. The essential genius of all human beings is that we are designed to adapt.
READER RESPONSE:To what extent do you agree with the writer’s argument that achievement depends on attitude, resources and practice.
I agree to a large extent with the writer's argument. It is widely believed that the possibility of obtaining high achievements depends upon the presence or absence of inborn attributes variously labelled "talents" or "gifts". However, it is insufficient to only be an innate in order to be successful. Brain difference do not create the ability but the opportunity for the ability to develop. Motivational and personality influences as well as previous learning experiences that equip a person with knowledge, attitudes, skills, and self-confidence. Take for example, one might expect musicians who have absolute pitch to be more successful than those who do not, but that is not always true. Hayes found that that all major composers had needed long periods of training at least ten years of preparation are necessary. High levels of accomplishment invariably require lengthy and intensive training, and even people who are not believed to have any special talent can reach. The differences in quality of instruction, effectiveness of practice strategy, and degree of enthusiasm greatly determine the level of achievement one can obtain. Great achievers such asCopernicus,Rembrandt, Bach, Newton, Kant, Da Vinci and even Einstein were not inborn with the talent to achieve great things. Their abilities are developed through the contributions of some factors such as preparatory experiences, encouragement, support, motivation, self-confidence, perseverance and single- minded concentration. Humans are designed to adapt, talent is a bonus to the individual. The role of innate ability assist one on the path to achieving great things but the essential factors are attitude, resources and practice.
SUNDAY, 18 MAY 2014
Sample Assignment 1: Iraq Child Bill Article by AliasHuxley & M.Mond
Sample Summary of Iraq Child Bill Article
Sample Reader’s Response :
I do not agree with this law. Firstly, the cultural perspective must be taken into account to consider why this law is discriminatory. In many cultures, men are perceived to be the guardian and protectors of women and children. Hence, men are socially constructed to have the responsibility of taking good care of the perceived weak. However, in this case, the news report seems to suggest that this role might be abused by men. Perhaps, it is assumed that men will take good care of women, a belief that is something taken for granted. Take for example, the infamous rape case in India. It is important to ensure women are protected, not by men, but the mechanism that will enforce it-the law. The Woman’s Charter in Singapore is a clear example to ensure those who discriminate or abuse women are dealt with. Secondly, what makes this law uncomfortable for some would be allowing girls to marry at aged nine. In the eyes of many, nine is not an age where girls should be married as there can be no way that they understand what marriage is really about. Without such autonomy of knowledge, it can be seen that girls are merely objects of possession, not as equals in a marriage. If girls are always seen as objects of possession, they will be discriminated perpetually. Hence, this law does not view girls and women as equals, but definitely lower than men.
Sample Summary of Iraq Child Bill Article
A draft law before Iraq's parliament that would legalise the marriage of girls as young as nine and restrict women's rights in matters of parenting, divorce and inheritance has generated widespread debate. Officials say that the law is a political move to define the identity of the country's majority Shias before next month's election. This is an attempt by Fadila to show Iraqis that they represent the Shia and want to make their identity clear before the election. They defended the draft law in the name of democracy, and religion. However, International human rights groups have described it as a disastrous regression in the status of women and a discriminatory step backward for Iraq's women and girls.
Sample Reader’s Response :
I do not agree with this law. Firstly, the cultural perspective must be taken into account to consider why this law is discriminatory. In many cultures, men are perceived to be the guardian and protectors of women and children. Hence, men are socially constructed to have the responsibility of taking good care of the perceived weak. However, in this case, the news report seems to suggest that this role might be abused by men. Perhaps, it is assumed that men will take good care of women, a belief that is something taken for granted. Take for example, the infamous rape case in India. It is important to ensure women are protected, not by men, but the mechanism that will enforce it-the law. The Woman’s Charter in Singapore is a clear example to ensure those who discriminate or abuse women are dealt with. Secondly, what makes this law uncomfortable for some would be allowing girls to marry at aged nine. In the eyes of many, nine is not an age where girls should be married as there can be no way that they understand what marriage is really about. Without such autonomy of knowledge, it can be seen that girls are merely objects of possession, not as equals in a marriage. If girls are always seen as objects of possession, they will be discriminated perpetually. Hence, this law does not view girls and women as equals, but definitely lower than men.
Yong Yin Yi (13) Lee Qiu Wen (04) 4P BESTBLOG 1
Does science solve all mankind's problems today?
Whilst we agree that science plays a vital role in solving mankind's problems, we do not agree that science solve all of our problems as everything has a limit and science is no exception. It may minimise damages brought along by our problems and stabilises the chaotic situation, but it definitely does not solve the problem completely. One example is science has allowed us to predict impending doom like natural disasters (tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions etc.). By knowing the dates, we can efficiently evacuate the population. However, structures will still be destroyed by such disasters and it may bring along more problems like homelessness, food shortages and mental trauma etc, that science cannot relieve us of. Natural disasters are a huge problem all over the globe today because it causes a lot of damage and even though science has helped to keep the damage to a minimal, it does not completely prevent the damage from happening. This has proven to us that science is no match to mother's nature and against the problems she brings, science cannot solve it, at least not completely.
Whilst we agree that science plays a vital role in solving mankind's problems, we do not agree that science solve all of our problems as everything has a limit and science is no exception. It may minimise damages brought along by our problems and stabilises the chaotic situation, but it definitely does not solve the problem completely. One example is science has allowed us to predict impending doom like natural disasters (tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions etc.). By knowing the dates, we can efficiently evacuate the population. However, structures will still be destroyed by such disasters and it may bring along more problems like homelessness, food shortages and mental trauma etc, that science cannot relieve us of. Natural disasters are a huge problem all over the globe today because it causes a lot of damage and even though science has helped to keep the damage to a minimal, it does not completely prevent the damage from happening. This has proven to us that science is no match to mother's nature and against the problems she brings, science cannot solve it, at least not completely.
Yi Shen & Li Shuo 4P BESTBLOG 2
Does science solve all of mankind's problems? NO it doesn't. Like a double-edged sword, recent advancements in the many areas of science today have both greatly increased human comfort and safety while at the same time brought us many downsides as well. Science is used to solve the needs of man, but on completion of the need, another will arise. For example, before the car, humans either travel on foot or horse, which is slow and tiring. But when the car was invented, many more problems arose, such as global warming due to increased emissions, or limited resources which resulted in the price of the car being too high for the ordinary to afford.(such as COE prices in Singapore)These problems will result in needs for the solutions, and thus the cycle continues. This is because humans have unlimited wants but limited resources, and although science seems to bring solutions, there is simply not enough resources to satisfy everyone. Thus science does not solve all problems, but a mere fraction of them because more problems arise when you solve another.
MYO HEIN & YSABEL BESTBLOG 2 (4S)
It is true to a certain extent that science can help to solve problems such as diseases, hunger and famine. Thanks to the work of scientists, many plants and organisms have been found to be able to help cure diseases increase yield. For example, extracts of the periwinkle plant have two of the most active tumour fighting agents and is used widely and very successfully in treating leukaemia and Hodgkin's Disease. Because of biomedical science, we now have heart by-pass and other life-saving surgeries, organ transplantation and vaccines to prevent childhood diseases. Also, because of science, scientists have invented fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides which can help increase yield. However problems such as values and ethics can never be solved by science. For example, social issues. Science cannot help someone who has no interest in studying to graduate miraculously. Science cannot give a person with no job, money to support a family. Science cannot help you maintain a good relationship between your loved ones. All these are things we have to achieve on our own, by putting in much effort.Therefore I feel that,yes, science can solve some of our problems but definitely never, all.
