Reflective Journal 5

Reflective Journal 5: Reflect on education. You may choose reflect on the necessary priorities of education, how far the ideals and realities of education converge, how the problems discussed about education in US and China can be resolved. You should explicitly explain how class discussion on education in US and China have influenced/shaped your views.

Three weeks of stimulating discussion about education has certainly opened up my mind on the broad topic of education. It has brought me to realise the vastly different education systems of China and USA, with their merits and demerits. While neither education system is perfect, both have their intrinsic characteristics which make them unique.

We discussed the skills for success in the global arena, which encompass creativity, flexibility and critical thinking. I have always believed that innovation is crucial for success. As the world is continually changing, we need creativity to adapt accordingly.

Both education systems prioritise preparing the young for the workforce by nurturing students to become globally competitive, though by different means. China, influenced by traditional Chinese values and Confucian ideologies, places much emphasis on tests and regurgitation, while focusing less on individual talents. It emphasises hard work and persistence, while focusing primarily on academics and knowledge. The system churns out skilled workers and degree holders to meet the demands of the economy, in order for China to sustain its economic boom, as it diversifies its economy away from manufacturing to a more knowledge-based economy.

However, as discussed, the rigid test-based system is a major problem, as it stems out creativity, promoting rote-memorization and regurgitation instead. Students are known to lose their inquisitiveness and imagination, burning themselves out studying for tests and examinations. Such a test-structured curriculum certainly stifles creativity, neglecting innovation, which is undeniably critical for success in the 21^st century. This has enforced my viewpoint that China’s education system is indeed too rigid. It may produce talented and knowledgeable individuals, but they would not stand out in the international arena without innovation and ingenuity.

On the other hand, while retaining the primary priority of preparing students for the workforce, seeking out talents in various aspects unrestricted to academics and cultivating youth’s special talents or interests in a particular aspect, are the trademarks of America’s education system. Its liberal system stands out, as it aims to cultivate creative and innovative individuals, while developing individual talents and interests.

However, the system has fallen short of equipping its students with skills necessary to succeed in the global arena. The discussion of the No Child Left Behind Act in class has since changed my views that America’s education system is ideal due to its liberal nature. For one thing, America has adopted standardized testing. Nonetheless, it was supported at the time of implementation. The NCLB act aimed to improve math and reading skills across the board. However, the results have yet to show its success. This “one size fits all” system has promoted the unhealthy “teaching for the test” mindset, with school funding now determined by test scores.

Also, it was discussed in class that the simple lack of education culture in the states can be detrimental to the system as a whole. Classmates have brought up the point that US youths are not as hardworking as their Chinese counterparts, preferring to devote more time to recreation than to academics, while enjoying longer holidays. As a result, they are losing their competitive edge in the global arena. While I feel that having less academic time allows for other activities, which helps nurture individuals to become more all-rounded, I think that a balance has to be struck between the recreation and academics.

More surprisingly, the USA fared poorly in the PISA test, which assessed critical thinking. While I have always thought otherwise, the tests results show that the US education system is unable to inculcate its students with critical thinking skills, which I feel is caused by the introduction of standardised testing. As critical thinking is a vital skill in the globalised world, with increasing amounts of information readily available, the lack of critical thinking disadvantages students on the global arena.

The inherent flaws of both education systems have to be resolved in order its students to strive in the globalised world. For a start, the Chinese could cut their obsessions with test scores and adopt a broader mindset on education. They should come to realise that a more holistic education system is required for the country to cultivate innovators and all-rounded individuals for success the future world.

On the other hand, America should continue to encourage and nurture creativity in its students to produce a new generation of innovators. However, aspects such as cultivating critical thinking cannot be neglected, as such skills are vital for success in the 21^st century. Also, America needs to focus on developing knowledge core subjects, such as Math and Science, as the world economy becomes more knowledge-based. I believe that there exists a need for standardised testing, as it promotes diligence and self-discipline among students, in order to start an education culture. Hence, the NCBA could be reassessed and modified accordingly to meet these aims.

800 words

Reflective Journal 4

With 2012 being a year of elections for many countries, governments the world over are trying to tap into the potential of apathetic youths to win popular support. However, youth participation in politics has been minimal, as most prefer to remain nonchalant and apathetic. It is not hard to see why. After all, most youths view politics as complicated and boring, preferring to indulge in their own material benefits instead. Youths often view politicians as not easily approachable nor understood, or are simply self-interested, following societal norms of political apathy.

For instance, Singapore, being an Asian society, is more work-orientated and its people are more individualistic. “Go to school, get good grades, get a good degree and find a stable and secure job” has perhaps been the national obsession since independence. With manpower being the only resource available since independence, it had to be utilised fully to ensure the survival of the country. While our forefathers were struggling to make a living for a better future, they had little time for or interest in politics. Most entrusted their future in the ruling party’s hands, with their promise of stability in governance and economic growth. This attitude of apathy toward politics has probably cumulated to the present day, where youths nowadays are told by their parents to “work hard for your future” rather than “vote for your future”.

On top of that, intense competition is ever-prevailing in our tiny nation of 5 million, which has given rise to the “kiasu” spirit, the fear of losing out. Nowadays, self-interested Singapore teens care not for political parties, but for their electronic gadgets to show off to their peers, or to achieve outstanding results to get a university scholarship. Working adults ambition the 5Cs (cash, credit card, car, condominium, country club) in the rat race to supposed “success in life”, more than they picture Singapore’s future in the political arena. Generally, Singaporeans bear an attitude of nonchalance toward politics, placing their focus on individualistic interests instead.

Not to mention to cold political scene in Singapore. With majority of the parliament seats dominated by the ruling party, heated (and exciting) debates between different parties are hard to come by. While media in other countries may show heated, sometimes even violent, arguments in parliament on national TV, local media portray parliament sessions as men in suits giving speeches at the microphone. This may well intrigue the higher educated adults, but it bores teenagers and young adults alike, who probably cannot fully comprehend the long speeches and prefer some excitement in political debates.

Perhaps the general attitude toward politics in Singapore in conformity to the norm, “as long as we are obedient, we focus on our studies, our job or our lives; the ruling party will continue to plan for our future and we do not have to bother”, as it is expressed in an article on The Online Citizen.

Personally, I think my attitude toward politics oscillates between nonchalance and short-lived interest. For one thing, I am not yet eligible to vote. Just like the mindsets of most youths living in democratic countries, politics is an arena which does not concern me, at least not directly. Whether I choose to be politically active or not, it makes not the slightest difference in the outcome of any election. Because I have no political affinity and the ballot box is still years away, I deem myself as politically apathetic most of the time.

Just like most Singaporean youths, I would rather take convention than break it. No point busying myself finding out the new policies of whichever party, be it the ruling party or the opposition, when there is still a pile of homework waiting to be completed. Not entitled to the voting slip, be it whether a new policy would affect me, I am in no position to change the current state of things. I would so much rather take time to pursue my hobbies or seek some form of entertainment in my free time, rather than spend my precious few hours reading political articles. Just like youths in China, the latest tech gadgets and material wealth capture my attention more than political slogans.

Therefore, I deem myself as apathetic toward politics, that is until the General Elections arrive, which pique my interest slightly, as I would catch on the campaign fever. Only then, I may go online to watch a few campaign rallies and read the papers covering the elections. As the election passes and the exciting atmosphere dies down, so does my short-lived interest.

“The more things change, the more they stay the same”, as said by a French philosopher. No matter how much the political arena changes, I believe the nonchalance of youth toward politics would prevail for a long time to come.

799 words

Reflective Journal 3

Reflective Journal 3: Reflect on the changing roles of women. You may choose to consider how the changing roles of women in society made an impact on you by drawing on examples from China, the United States and/or Singapore.

The roles of women, the world over, have changed drastically since the turn of the twentieth century. The role of the feminine has evolved from its most primitive form of a mother and child-bearer, a household caretaker, to that of being part of the workforce and being held in equal regard to men in society. Now, women are able to pursue their own careers and life passions/goals, enabling them to find individual fulfilment, something which has been denied from them in a male-dominated society.

I think that the single biggest step that changed the role of women forever was entitling women to vote. The campaigns and progress for feminism freed women from the chains of societal norms and expectations, while bringing women a step closer to the ballot box each time. By empowering women with the voting slip, women now officially commanded political power and owned a stake in the future of the nation. It established women a new social presence, paving the way for the liberty and rights of women.

The 19^th amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America enabled women to break free of the social barriers and stand firmly on their feet from then on, shattering the traditional roles of women, such as performing domestic duties and being the caring matriarch of the family. It empowered the women of America with the right to vote, giving them a stake in the political arena, a voice in society, while bringing them freedom from conventions. It paved the way for their advancement in society, to take on careers and pursue their individual dreams. All these were a stark contrast to women in the earlier days of America. Political activism was the defining factor that changed women’s roles. Gone was the apathy and the exemption of women when it came to politics. Women now constitute half of Americans at the polls. Courageous women also joined politics, by taking on political roles, a prime example of which would be current US secretary Hillary Clinton, who was a presidential candidate in the 2008 elections.

For instance, throughout the Roaring Twenties, the boom of the American economy reverberated through society, shattering yet more social barriers and signalling the rise of a new generation of brave, young women who dared to venture out. Women joined the workforce and did things which were taboo formerly. Lengths of skirts shortened from the ankles to the knees, the number of women smokers doubled, and women speculators joined the crowd of frenzied men at the stock exchange. This new generation of women broke convention and did certain things which even the faint-hearted man would shun from undertaking.

More recently, women in China have begun to catch up with their counterparts in the West. Ever since the economic reforms in the 80s, women in China have become more ambitious and more powerful than before. Equipped with a good education, many women in cities now choose to prioritise their personal careers over motherhood. Rather than becoming a mother and providing for her children, a growing number of women in China are becoming individualistic choosing to satisfy personal desires over performing traditional duties. Now, many married women in China also adopt the role of breadwinner for the family. By maintaining a work-life balance, they are able to have a family, but at the same time not at the complete compromise of their individual pursuits. These capable women have carved out a new role in Chinese society, a role which has been gaining prominence among women in China.

The changing roles of women in societies worldwide have deeply impacted and changed society’s perceptions. From the primitive role of a housewife, women have joined the workforce becoming a force to be reckoned with in the economic sphere, where they compete with men for jobs. Becoming more financially independent, their purchasing power increased. They formed part of the work force, and were a force to be reckoned with in the economic sphere. Aspiring and talented women have given men a run for their money in corporations. Numerous talented females have replaced men in the top-jobs such as CEOs, positions which men had so comfortably sat on in the past. This is becoming a common phenomenon in cities such as Singapore. As women in Singapore now command a higher education than in the past, many choose to pursue their aspirations and careers, while not neglecting having a family in the process. This new role played by women in Singaporean society clearly reflects how the roles of women have changed. Personally, I support this new role of women. Besides giving women equal chances to be successful in life by having a career, it does not neglect the prevailing role of the women, which is to be a caring mother for her children.

799 words

Reflective Journal 1

Mention the progress in American and Chinese societies and I would gauge the notion of progress in terms of the improvement in the standard of living. Standard of living, which is closely related to the quality of life, is a gauge of wealth and material goods available to a group of people.

We often have a stereotypical mindset when the topic of standard of living in America is brought up. People often perceive life in America as a comfortable life from cradle to coffin, the promise of wealth and riches. The people lead happy lives in big, modern cities, enriched with new consumer goods which further better their lives. Talk about China and their viewpoint changes drastically. The Chinese are perceived to be not as well to do. They live in smaller apartment homes and most do blue-collar work in factories. Many cannot afford consumer goods as they live from hand to mouth and have to save for them. Also, only a narrow range of products are available, with most of them being counterfeit goods. As with all stereotypes, they do not give a full picture. Contrary to the stereotypical mindset, I think that both countries have achieved great progress in society, as the standard of living in both countries have improved considerably.
Let me begin with progress in American society. After the boom years of the Roaring Twenties ended with the Great Depression, the progress made in improving the standard of living started in the post-war boom years. The statistics speak for themselves. The economy grew by an average of 3.8% from 1946 to 1973, while the consumption of goods and services increased, gaining this era the name The Golden Age of Capitalism. In China, much of this progress came after the 1978 economic reforms. Per capita consumption grew at 5.5% from 1975 to 1986. People could afford more consumer goods and services. Life expectancy also increased throughout this period, reflecting an improvement in standard of living.

Statistics aside, the improvement in the standard of living boils down to its impact on the people. One might say that American society has progressed further than China to improve its standard of living. True enough, as the USA has the largest GDP in the world and its standard of living is among the top twenty in the world. Even if China does not have such numbers to show for, the progress made in Chinese society, in the years after its economic reforms are comparable to that of the USA. What took the USA a long period of development to achieve, the past 30 years in China have rapidly improved the standard of living.

Both countries have a long history and vastly different cultures. Rooted in capitalism and democracy, the USA has come a long way to achieve the standard of living its citizens enjoy today. Its developments over the past century were the foundations which the high standards of living today were built on. On the other hand, in China, true progress was only made after the economic reforms in 1978, when China embraced capitalism.

Personally, I think China is more progressive than the USA. My first hand experience in Beijing gave insight to its rapid development and economic progress. The streets are jammed with cars, neon signs flash from buildings and the latest electronic gadgets displayed at shopping centers. Consumer goods are aplenty: people chatting on mobile phones as they walk down the street, listening to their MP3 players on public transport or shopping for the latest fashion at the mall. Cuisines from the world over can be found in various restaurants and the supermarkets are well-stocked. All these are a stark comparison to the Beijing just three decades ago, with bicycles replacing cars on the streets, a much narrower spectrum of consumer goods available and fashion clothing virtually non-existent. Of course, my personal experiences are only limited to a certain part of China’s society, while other parts of China still remain in poverty. However, it is nonetheless still incredible how swift the rate of progress is in urban China.

Within this same thirty years, however, the USA has progressed little. Not that its standard of living has fallen, but rather that it has not improved at the same rate as during the boom years. Consumers in America continue to enjoy the wide variety of consumer goods, access to good healthcare and welfare benefits. However, economic slowdowns have bogged down the improvement in standard of living, with rising national debt and unemployment levels. The most recent recession has hit Americans hard in their standard of living. I constantly see articles which express the frustration of youths in America, of how they cannot find a job after graduating and also how Americans who were hit by the financial crisis are struggling to cope.

In my opinion, while American society has progressed greatly overall, I still think that the Chinese society has been more progressive. The last thirty years have seen a rapid development in its standard of living. A look at the current state of both nations would shatter the social stereotypes of both societies. Although the stereotypes are still true to a certain extent, I think that people have to adopt a broader mindset when perceiving different cultures. Because of rapid societal progress, what is seen to be true of society in the past might not necessarily apply today. Living in a globalised world, not only must the different societies progress and develop, but the mindsets of people towards them must progress and change as well. An open-minded approach is crucial when we look at and compare different societies.