I don't know about the experience of anyone else, but I find it ridiculously difficult to try and think of something as a present for a teacher. What exactly do you give to say, a Mathematics teacher? An English teacher? Perhaps something in their field would be nice, but I think giving them something in their field is more or less stereotypical and it would be nice for them to take their minds off what they teach, temporarily.
I am stuck and out of creativity in terms of getting something for teachers. Perhaps I could make something by myself, but that just makes things worse. What do I make? It leads to more complex questions to answer than the first time round.
Hope everything turns out good in the end.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Blind Lead Blind.
I find it vastly intriguing how the elder or older generations always compare their lives to the generations of today. They have this prejudice against us, how we are more rebellious and more technologically advanced and therefore more imbecilic and less mannered and more disrespectful. I find this majorly disturbing. Why do they always compare our generation to theirs? It is always "back in my days/times" or "when I was your age".
Just because Generation Y is more technologically advanced means that our minds are more developed and more capable of understanding complex ideas. There is no need for the older generations to say that technology is blinding us. Secondly, why do they never compare themselves to say, the Jews of the Holocaust or the people in Ethiopia or even the people living in fear in the Arab countries? Compared to them, you are in paradise. Why not compare with the cavemen who had to hunt to survive. Killing lions and tigers and deers with spears, hand crafted. You didn't have to hunt, you had clean water, you had food, and you didn't live in the traumatic state that an explosive may land over the top of you any minute of any day. Paradise.
I am getting annoyed at the fact how Generation Y are being compared to the older generations. I am not saying that everyone does that, but I have had one too many "back in my times" that I needed to blog and rant. I get that while you were in your country, you were poor and ate the very basic foods, but really, some people didn't have anything to eat.
I certainly do hope that I am not a person who will ever use the phrase "back in my times" or "when I was your age" because the idea of comparing yourself to the better to emphasize how bad one is highly disturbs me.
Thank you.
Just because Generation Y is more technologically advanced means that our minds are more developed and more capable of understanding complex ideas. There is no need for the older generations to say that technology is blinding us. Secondly, why do they never compare themselves to say, the Jews of the Holocaust or the people in Ethiopia or even the people living in fear in the Arab countries? Compared to them, you are in paradise. Why not compare with the cavemen who had to hunt to survive. Killing lions and tigers and deers with spears, hand crafted. You didn't have to hunt, you had clean water, you had food, and you didn't live in the traumatic state that an explosive may land over the top of you any minute of any day. Paradise.
I am getting annoyed at the fact how Generation Y are being compared to the older generations. I am not saying that everyone does that, but I have had one too many "back in my times" that I needed to blog and rant. I get that while you were in your country, you were poor and ate the very basic foods, but really, some people didn't have anything to eat.
I certainly do hope that I am not a person who will ever use the phrase "back in my times" or "when I was your age" because the idea of comparing yourself to the better to emphasize how bad one is highly disturbs me.
Thank you.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
My Shopping List.
I have decided to make a list of my idols, only the top 10 whom I find most inspiring and who I wish to aspire to become. Hopefully. I may be a bit naive but here goes (in no order of preference):
1) Lu Chen
2) Richard Dawkins
3) Gary Kasparov
4) Warren Buffett
5) Derren Brown
6) Stephen Hawking
7) Andrew Lloyd Webber
8) Randy Pausch
9) Richard Clayderman
10) Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
This is not my official list but from the current list of people I know by name, these people are my idols and the people I greatly admire for what they do and are capable of doing.
Note: The need to write this list developed from a conversation with a friend. Enjoy.
1) Lu Chen
2) Richard Dawkins
3) Gary Kasparov
4) Warren Buffett
5) Derren Brown
6) Stephen Hawking
7) Andrew Lloyd Webber
8) Randy Pausch
9) Richard Clayderman
10) Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
This is not my official list but from the current list of people I know by name, these people are my idols and the people I greatly admire for what they do and are capable of doing.
Note: The need to write this list developed from a conversation with a friend. Enjoy.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
A Glass of Wine.
Those that are wise, are old and those that are young, are fools. Those that are old have experience and know what they are talking about and those that are young have not a clue.
I think this is a great misconception how we as humans, automatically attach and assign age and experience together. We always think that the older the person is, the more experienced they are at a certain thing than the young one. This is a wrong assumption because we fail to comprehend with the personal abilities of each individual and instead, assign our prejudices on them. The young person may in fact be much better than the old person.
For example, look at Magnus Carlsen. The fifth player to crack the magical 2800 ELO barrier for chess at 18. He is young, and better than most players, but still with less experience in terms of playing chess than some of the other Grand Masters and even International Masters.
We can also see that just because he is young and inexperienced in relation to other chess players, it does not mean he is bad. We can adopt the same mentality into society. We simply are suppressing the abilities of the youth because we think that because they are young, they are inexperienced and therefore, they can't be good at a particular thing.
I think we need to stop automatically attaching age, experience and our prejudices together on a person simply based on how old they are. We fail to recognize the history of that person to see whether they really are inexperienced. It is the same case in almost any occupational sector, from teaching to programming and from fishing to painting.
Just because someone is old does not necessary imply the fact that they are experienced and better when comparing a youth to a mature person in the same field. We need to take into account the history of both individuals and weight them accordingly.
If this happens, we can flourish the talents of the youth who possess them instead of stigmatizing them by not giving them any opportunities, which will create a more prospective world to live in.
I think this is a great misconception how we as humans, automatically attach and assign age and experience together. We always think that the older the person is, the more experienced they are at a certain thing than the young one. This is a wrong assumption because we fail to comprehend with the personal abilities of each individual and instead, assign our prejudices on them. The young person may in fact be much better than the old person.
For example, look at Magnus Carlsen. The fifth player to crack the magical 2800 ELO barrier for chess at 18. He is young, and better than most players, but still with less experience in terms of playing chess than some of the other Grand Masters and even International Masters.
We can also see that just because he is young and inexperienced in relation to other chess players, it does not mean he is bad. We can adopt the same mentality into society. We simply are suppressing the abilities of the youth because we think that because they are young, they are inexperienced and therefore, they can't be good at a particular thing.
I think we need to stop automatically attaching age, experience and our prejudices together on a person simply based on how old they are. We fail to recognize the history of that person to see whether they really are inexperienced. It is the same case in almost any occupational sector, from teaching to programming and from fishing to painting.
Just because someone is old does not necessary imply the fact that they are experienced and better when comparing a youth to a mature person in the same field. We need to take into account the history of both individuals and weight them accordingly.
If this happens, we can flourish the talents of the youth who possess them instead of stigmatizing them by not giving them any opportunities, which will create a more prospective world to live in.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Black and White Checkered Flag.
Well. The HSC has drawn its curtains on me as I make my exeunt from the stage, leaving it clear for others. It has been a wonderful journey and a remarkable process. I would like to comment on the wonderful teachers I have had, providing me with the education that I will use, treasure and value in the future years to come.
Study on!
Study on!
Sunday, November 1, 2009
The Thoughts of Minority.
I would like to take some time and speak about my transition into Atheism. I have witnessed that by declaring myself as Atheist, it has caused some problems and tensions in my household, primarily my mother who transferred to Christianity.
Note: This is going to be a VERY LONG post so if you do not wish to read all of it, you can turn back now. This is mainly stuff relating to myself so it may bore many of you. I apologize in advance.
I was not born Atheist. Nobody is. Nobody is born Christian either. Simply being baptized as a baby at birth does not make one Christian. I think this forced process of baptizing a child limits the freedom of the child. Back on topic. Everyone is born as a non-theist, a person who has no understanding about religion or science or the world in which they have just entered into.
Same case with me. As a child, my parents believed in Buddhism. I was not educated enough to understand the processes so I only took part because I had no idea what else to do. All my parents and relatives show and express great amounts of faith to religion. When I was nearing 9 years old, my mother transferred into Christianity, where she claimed she had found her divine purpose. She dragged me along and I sat in the lessons, learning about God. At first it seemed interesting, so I paid attention. I learned the origin of the universe and Earth, all the plants, animals and most importantly, humans. Us. I also learned about the wild stories which were told and found them fascinating. I learned the 10 commandments and so forth. I was a pompous, obnoxious and naive little prick.
In school, we learned about HSIE (which most of you will recall). Human Society and Its Environment. I learned about how things evolve, how things change. I learned about how plants and animals came into existence, the origin of humans and dinosaurs and the evolution of technology. This is where I first hit my wall. I immediately began to notice contradictions between the Bible, which I was taught from in church, and what HSIE taught. Since I didn't have any complex textbooks back then, the Bible was my source for answers.
You might remember Scripture classes. I loved them. Learning about human values, faith and morals were great and my mother was happy.
It wasn't until the story of Noah that really started to question my faith and belief in a supreme deity. I was told that God is perfect in every element. God told Noah to build an ark, and take two animals of each kind aboard the ark and then set sail. God caused a great flood which wiped out a large population of civilians, save Noah, his wife and two of each animal aboard an ark which landed on a mountain. Okay, fair deal. What about "Thou shalt not kill"?
I pointed this fact out to the pastors and preachers at my church. I said that how can God justify his actions of killing people with a flood when he gives the commandment of telling others to not kill? This was a sign of a flawed God. An imperfect God who has no concrete establishments of his own words. One who breaks his own code. My question was met with discernment and anger. I was only seeking questions. I was about 12 by this stage.
I started asking others around me for answers to this question. Nobody had the answer to that. Some claimed that God does not need to justify his actions and that his supremacy allows him to do so. I didn't someone to tell me that was a ridiculous answer. One cannot make rules for others to abide if you are going to break them yourself and let alone, provide no justification for your purpose or incentive to do so. This was an imperfect God, which was met by the answer that God was spiritual. This led to even more contradictions. If God is spiritual, then that means God does not exist physically, so that means, he cannot physically hear or understand my prayers, only in the spiritual world, so how does a physical being communicate with the spirits? It finally made sense all of a sudden that why I am still being bullied. Still the loner in class. the one without many friends. The socially awkward and inept. The one with restrictive parents. The one who grew up by corporal punishment. The one with divorced parents. The reason why the preachers were so defensive about any questions against the belief of God. There is no God. There is no supreme deity.
I wasn't Atheist yet. I started by reading over the bible. Starting the the Old Testament and going over what it taught. I started with the Old Testament was because the churches focused primarily on the New Testament and the Old was at times neglected. I realized why. Contradictions. The more I read, the more I lost my faith in a God. I started to realize that everything that has happened to me was due to my own actions and lack of actions to change the moment and circumstances for myself. There was no God to direct me. It made sense now that I was hurt at school, threatened by bullies and too afraid to speak up was not because God would make it all better or God had plans for me. Why did God want me to get hurt so badly? Mentally traumatized. There is no God and that is why God did not attend to my prayers of making sure I was not bullied.
By age 14, I declared that I was not going to attend church any longer, but instead stay home or go to the library and read the bible. Which is what I did. I read the bible in the library and started to look for answers to what made sense. The reality. Science was the answer. It provided visual evidence, empirical evidence which you can actually witness before you. After several months, I declared myself Atheist. My mother had a bit of a tantrum saying that it's wrong and so forth. But my decision has now been made. I started to research more and more on Science and Atheism.
From then to today, I am Atheist and will continue to be Atheist and spread the word and my beliefs on Atheism. I believe it should deserve more attention and that religion sometimes is the cause of problems.
I want to point out a few things before ending. I don't have a problem with other people believing in a religion, but I don't like it when you try and suppress me with the psychological impact of going to hell and suffering eternal torture if I didn't. I have an argument for that too. I said I'm going to try and spread Atheism, but I will do it so that I leave the options open. I am not going to use force or anything other than the power of speech and language and inspiration.
I also do not mean to make an attack on religion. If I have done so, I apologize. I was only trying to communicate my process of transitioning to Atheism with questions and examples.
I have noticed that the Bible contradicted reality, and itself, which ultimately led to my choice of becoming Atheist.
If you have any questions regarding my thoughts on Atheism or would like to know more about my arguments and reasons of switching out of religion. Leave a comment and I'll hopefully get back to you or drop me an email.
Thank You.
Note: This is going to be a VERY LONG post so if you do not wish to read all of it, you can turn back now. This is mainly stuff relating to myself so it may bore many of you. I apologize in advance.
I was not born Atheist. Nobody is. Nobody is born Christian either. Simply being baptized as a baby at birth does not make one Christian. I think this forced process of baptizing a child limits the freedom of the child. Back on topic. Everyone is born as a non-theist, a person who has no understanding about religion or science or the world in which they have just entered into.
Same case with me. As a child, my parents believed in Buddhism. I was not educated enough to understand the processes so I only took part because I had no idea what else to do. All my parents and relatives show and express great amounts of faith to religion. When I was nearing 9 years old, my mother transferred into Christianity, where she claimed she had found her divine purpose. She dragged me along and I sat in the lessons, learning about God. At first it seemed interesting, so I paid attention. I learned the origin of the universe and Earth, all the plants, animals and most importantly, humans. Us. I also learned about the wild stories which were told and found them fascinating. I learned the 10 commandments and so forth. I was a pompous, obnoxious and naive little prick.
In school, we learned about HSIE (which most of you will recall). Human Society and Its Environment. I learned about how things evolve, how things change. I learned about how plants and animals came into existence, the origin of humans and dinosaurs and the evolution of technology. This is where I first hit my wall. I immediately began to notice contradictions between the Bible, which I was taught from in church, and what HSIE taught. Since I didn't have any complex textbooks back then, the Bible was my source for answers.
You might remember Scripture classes. I loved them. Learning about human values, faith and morals were great and my mother was happy.
It wasn't until the story of Noah that really started to question my faith and belief in a supreme deity. I was told that God is perfect in every element. God told Noah to build an ark, and take two animals of each kind aboard the ark and then set sail. God caused a great flood which wiped out a large population of civilians, save Noah, his wife and two of each animal aboard an ark which landed on a mountain. Okay, fair deal. What about "Thou shalt not kill"?
I pointed this fact out to the pastors and preachers at my church. I said that how can God justify his actions of killing people with a flood when he gives the commandment of telling others to not kill? This was a sign of a flawed God. An imperfect God who has no concrete establishments of his own words. One who breaks his own code. My question was met with discernment and anger. I was only seeking questions. I was about 12 by this stage.
I started asking others around me for answers to this question. Nobody had the answer to that. Some claimed that God does not need to justify his actions and that his supremacy allows him to do so. I didn't someone to tell me that was a ridiculous answer. One cannot make rules for others to abide if you are going to break them yourself and let alone, provide no justification for your purpose or incentive to do so. This was an imperfect God, which was met by the answer that God was spiritual. This led to even more contradictions. If God is spiritual, then that means God does not exist physically, so that means, he cannot physically hear or understand my prayers, only in the spiritual world, so how does a physical being communicate with the spirits? It finally made sense all of a sudden that why I am still being bullied. Still the loner in class. the one without many friends. The socially awkward and inept. The one with restrictive parents. The one who grew up by corporal punishment. The one with divorced parents. The reason why the preachers were so defensive about any questions against the belief of God. There is no God. There is no supreme deity.
I wasn't Atheist yet. I started by reading over the bible. Starting the the Old Testament and going over what it taught. I started with the Old Testament was because the churches focused primarily on the New Testament and the Old was at times neglected. I realized why. Contradictions. The more I read, the more I lost my faith in a God. I started to realize that everything that has happened to me was due to my own actions and lack of actions to change the moment and circumstances for myself. There was no God to direct me. It made sense now that I was hurt at school, threatened by bullies and too afraid to speak up was not because God would make it all better or God had plans for me. Why did God want me to get hurt so badly? Mentally traumatized. There is no God and that is why God did not attend to my prayers of making sure I was not bullied.
By age 14, I declared that I was not going to attend church any longer, but instead stay home or go to the library and read the bible. Which is what I did. I read the bible in the library and started to look for answers to what made sense. The reality. Science was the answer. It provided visual evidence, empirical evidence which you can actually witness before you. After several months, I declared myself Atheist. My mother had a bit of a tantrum saying that it's wrong and so forth. But my decision has now been made. I started to research more and more on Science and Atheism.
From then to today, I am Atheist and will continue to be Atheist and spread the word and my beliefs on Atheism. I believe it should deserve more attention and that religion sometimes is the cause of problems.
I want to point out a few things before ending. I don't have a problem with other people believing in a religion, but I don't like it when you try and suppress me with the psychological impact of going to hell and suffering eternal torture if I didn't. I have an argument for that too. I said I'm going to try and spread Atheism, but I will do it so that I leave the options open. I am not going to use force or anything other than the power of speech and language and inspiration.
I also do not mean to make an attack on religion. If I have done so, I apologize. I was only trying to communicate my process of transitioning to Atheism with questions and examples.
I have noticed that the Bible contradicted reality, and itself, which ultimately led to my choice of becoming Atheist.
If you have any questions regarding my thoughts on Atheism or would like to know more about my arguments and reasons of switching out of religion. Leave a comment and I'll hopefully get back to you or drop me an email.
Thank You.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
The Undefined Problem.
It is a fact that women in society are given "tags" by society. You know who comes up with those tags? Males. Us males.
I am not claiming that all males tag females and give them horrible names, but it is very evident that they are not gaining the same reputable quality and status as males.
Take a case of reminding someone to do something constantly. When a male does it, it's called reminding, but being very annoying. In the case of a female, it's called nagging. Okay, if a male goes out on a night and scores women and gets laid, it's called having fun. Why can't a woman or girl also have fun without being called a whore or slut? I find this tagging a nuisance. We as a society are clearly setting up a barrier between women and their intentions. We are the ones not giving them the same status of equality.
A man who betrays is called a backstabber. Women who do the same is called a bitch, alongside backstabber. Now I see no need to label another person and give them another name based on gender. Women are human. They are in fact, better than men in many areas.
Name labeling and tagging of women I find remarkably insane and disturbing. I think as a society, we do not treat women with the respect, dignity and love that they deserve and need. If it wasn't without women, question how you are here and reading this. The root of the problem is males. Us males. We need to abolish our sense of the need to classify women differently simply based on gender. We need to understand that males are not the superior.
I call this the "Undefined Problem" because society, us, have not identified this or recognized this as a significant problem. Some have acknowledged the fact it is a problem, but this has not yet achieved its status as very significant and requires attention. This problem cannot be corrected by law due its inability for enforcement, but I believe that with the correct education, we can help women achieve equality of status as men, and not being classified as something worse for the same actions.
I am not claiming that all males tag females and give them horrible names, but it is very evident that they are not gaining the same reputable quality and status as males.
Take a case of reminding someone to do something constantly. When a male does it, it's called reminding, but being very annoying. In the case of a female, it's called nagging. Okay, if a male goes out on a night and scores women and gets laid, it's called having fun. Why can't a woman or girl also have fun without being called a whore or slut? I find this tagging a nuisance. We as a society are clearly setting up a barrier between women and their intentions. We are the ones not giving them the same status of equality.
A man who betrays is called a backstabber. Women who do the same is called a bitch, alongside backstabber. Now I see no need to label another person and give them another name based on gender. Women are human. They are in fact, better than men in many areas.
Name labeling and tagging of women I find remarkably insane and disturbing. I think as a society, we do not treat women with the respect, dignity and love that they deserve and need. If it wasn't without women, question how you are here and reading this. The root of the problem is males. Us males. We need to abolish our sense of the need to classify women differently simply based on gender. We need to understand that males are not the superior.
I call this the "Undefined Problem" because society, us, have not identified this or recognized this as a significant problem. Some have acknowledged the fact it is a problem, but this has not yet achieved its status as very significant and requires attention. This problem cannot be corrected by law due its inability for enforcement, but I believe that with the correct education, we can help women achieve equality of status as men, and not being classified as something worse for the same actions.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Psychological Taboo of Society and the Ironic Nature of Humans.
Okay, first of all let me lead you to the link of an article shown to me by a friend.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/876012/school-principal-in-love-with-student
Read it? Okay, let's start.
I firstly want to speak about the relationships between teachers and students. I understand it is, strictly speaking, morally wrong for any teacher to engage in a sexual relationship with a student, especially underage. But let's change a few elements. What if that person was NOT a teacher and only at the age of say...18? Most I would assume would say that relationship is normal. But what difference does a person's occupation or status make in a relationship? People fall in love with your personality (with the exception of wealth), not by what you do for a living. Why is age also a factor? There are people getting married to other people almost double their age.
I think this entire psychological impact the society has made on humans only increases paranoia and fear and the taboo of the topic. They are only human. I think it is completely normal for students to develop close relationships with their teachers, because of how they influence your life, since you spend so much time with them. Let's go back to the case and change another element. What if the girl dropped out of school and didn't attend school? How would that change the impact and psychological decision people judge on the case? I think one reason is because we treat the situation as if the girl was engaged in sexual activity AT school. The notion of the girl still attending school adds to the way we interpret things. If the sexual activity started AFTER the student finished or dropped out of school, then we would see the situation in a completely different light, even if all the other factors remained the same.
I mean, they like us, are human. I think having a connection with someone else older or younger is normal. Perhaps the sexual relationship took things too far, which is unacceptable behaviour, but to develop such intimacy is normal. I have a crush on a teacher. I don't tell her. But some of us choose to not reveal that information, while others do. For those who do, I must applaud you for bravery and courage. I think we should give some of these people a break. I think the topic of student/teachers is becoming too taboo as we take interpretations to new dimensions.
And secondly, when I first read the article I saw "Christian School". This person may not be Christian and I am not making fun of religion in general but I had a little chuckle over the irony. I just want to make the point that religion is about faith and individuality.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/876012/school-principal-in-love-with-student
Read it? Okay, let's start.
I firstly want to speak about the relationships between teachers and students. I understand it is, strictly speaking, morally wrong for any teacher to engage in a sexual relationship with a student, especially underage. But let's change a few elements. What if that person was NOT a teacher and only at the age of say...18? Most I would assume would say that relationship is normal. But what difference does a person's occupation or status make in a relationship? People fall in love with your personality (with the exception of wealth), not by what you do for a living. Why is age also a factor? There are people getting married to other people almost double their age.
I think this entire psychological impact the society has made on humans only increases paranoia and fear and the taboo of the topic. They are only human. I think it is completely normal for students to develop close relationships with their teachers, because of how they influence your life, since you spend so much time with them. Let's go back to the case and change another element. What if the girl dropped out of school and didn't attend school? How would that change the impact and psychological decision people judge on the case? I think one reason is because we treat the situation as if the girl was engaged in sexual activity AT school. The notion of the girl still attending school adds to the way we interpret things. If the sexual activity started AFTER the student finished or dropped out of school, then we would see the situation in a completely different light, even if all the other factors remained the same.
I mean, they like us, are human. I think having a connection with someone else older or younger is normal. Perhaps the sexual relationship took things too far, which is unacceptable behaviour, but to develop such intimacy is normal. I have a crush on a teacher. I don't tell her. But some of us choose to not reveal that information, while others do. For those who do, I must applaud you for bravery and courage. I think we should give some of these people a break. I think the topic of student/teachers is becoming too taboo as we take interpretations to new dimensions.
And secondly, when I first read the article I saw "Christian School". This person may not be Christian and I am not making fun of religion in general but I had a little chuckle over the irony. I just want to make the point that religion is about faith and individuality.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Abstract Education.
It puzzles me, it really does about why I have an education. I find myself questioning myself on the purpose of my education and consequently the purpose of education as an entire entity.
Why do I choose to go to school? Why do we all have to go to school when most of us dislike it, when there are school drop-outs? Why and when did the act of "jigging" school come into society? What was the purpose of that? What was it about the system of education that triggered people to "jig" school?
If school was interesting, fun, and entertaining, we wouldn't have people skipping classes to go down to the shops or go home. They would stay in school.
I believe that the current system of education provides no direction nor purpose to the amount of study we must go through.
I currently wish to be a secondary mathematics teacher. I wonder if I spent 13 years of my life at school to build up all the necessary knowledge and skills required to be a maths teacher. If so, then I didn't need science, didn't need to study history or geography. It seems a perfect waste of time and resource to be spending all that time on things that provide no useful outlet if I became a maths teacher. If not, then what is my direction in life? Why did I spend 13 years at school for?
The answer is to breed educated people in society. The more educated, literate and civilized people there are in society, the faster the world can expand and grow. We attempt to raise university professors and scientists and mechanics and mathematicians and physicists and chemists and lawyers and doctors and all those high paying jobs. From businessmen to congressmen. But this raises a problem. If all we are doing is attempting to raise educated people, the society will not function, unless some dramatic change could be implemented to account for the abolition of certain services, one in particular is the garbage system.
Most people I would assume just take out the trash once every week for the garbage truck to drive around and dump it elsewhere. If there were only educated people in educated professions, then the garbage system of society would collapse. So not only would you have to account for another method of towing away garbage, you also need to rethink what the education system is doing. I would agree that most people are not inclined to take their own garbage to the dump once a week. The stench is intolerable. Not only do you need people in educated professions, the people in other professions which do not require the same extent of education and degrees, are just as important.
This brings me back to my point about the purpose of education. Why is it implemented the way it is? And why is there a hierarchy of courses? It's universal. At the top are the Mathematics and Sciences, followed by English and the Social Sciences, with Information Technology next and lastly, we have the Arts, which includes dance, drama, visual arts, industrial arts and music. I think this is unfair. In society, we need cabbages AND roses. They are equally important. The cabbages will always exist in society because of natural human instincts and reactions, but we need to preserve the roses.
Because of the existence of a hierarchy, this i believe deters people from attending school. Not everyone is Albert Einstein. Not everyone is Gauss or Goldbach. Not everyone is William Shakespeare. Some people do not possess that "gene" or talent. There are only so many Rain Man's. The hierarchy system will put down a student's true abilities, it dampens their will or motivation to reveal to the world what talent they have. If you are not good at maths, so what? You may be a fantastic actor/actress or a prodigy in music, but the education system does not allow that growth to that extent. Maths is ALWAYS the dominant subject. You may argue as much as you wish, but it is true in all societies.
So if we change the education system so that it directs the student's wishes and goals in life, enhancing the abilities that the student DOES have, then school would be more fun and entertaining, rather than a strenuous place to cram and jam information into a brain. I think we should embellish the creativity in students by making the Arts more valuable to society, more roses. The cabbages will always take care of itself due to human instinct, the need to survive, but roses need to be embellished.
I don't have too much knowledge on any education system except Australia, so I will focus on Australia. I understand the scaling system is to encourage students to pick the harder subjects, otherwise, everyone will be going for easy subjects and achieving great results. But the scaling system has such as big disparity, a gap too wide that it creates inequality within the education system and school surroundings. Picking Maths means you're smart and intelligent, not picking it means you're not. This is the stereotypical psychology that almost everyone adopts. I think this is remarkably wrong. I think dance and drama are just as important as Maths and Chemistry. Scaling them down is undermining and restricting the growth of creativity within students. We need to create a system where Drama and Dance and Music is just as valued as Maths and English. To create equality, we first of all need to abolish the scaling system or make it more equal. As far as I'm concerned, 4 unit Maths scales the most, so much in fact that it makes subjects like Dance look dead.
I still have not found the purpose of me attending school. What would my purpose have been, my goal be if I did not attend school? A sport star? The next Bill Gates? Who would know. We need to restructure education to make it more entertaining, make subjects more equal, educate more people, decreasing drop-out rates and enhancing the overall utility of education. It needs to be enjoyable and supposed to direct the student for future needs.
Not only should we be teaching students how to write, read, speak, calculate and memorize large quantities of information, we must also learn social skills, skills that will help in the future, marketing skills, and life skills. I am very supportive of people studying Community and Family Studies. It actually teaches you skills that you CAN use everyday to support a family. I mean, Maths is not going to make a family more intimate, for functional. Maths cannot take care of a child, and it certainly does not help you through meetings. I believe that people who do drama are better at these things, as they are more relaxed about meeting people, more open, expressive and positive.
I think society is not always right. The education system needs to be greatly reformed to enhance and bring forth the natural talent that students have instead of stigmatizing them. That way, there will be more educated people, combining their specialties together to prod the society into a civilization of technology and opportunity supported by creativity.
Why do I choose to go to school? Why do we all have to go to school when most of us dislike it, when there are school drop-outs? Why and when did the act of "jigging" school come into society? What was the purpose of that? What was it about the system of education that triggered people to "jig" school?
If school was interesting, fun, and entertaining, we wouldn't have people skipping classes to go down to the shops or go home. They would stay in school.
I believe that the current system of education provides no direction nor purpose to the amount of study we must go through.
I currently wish to be a secondary mathematics teacher. I wonder if I spent 13 years of my life at school to build up all the necessary knowledge and skills required to be a maths teacher. If so, then I didn't need science, didn't need to study history or geography. It seems a perfect waste of time and resource to be spending all that time on things that provide no useful outlet if I became a maths teacher. If not, then what is my direction in life? Why did I spend 13 years at school for?
The answer is to breed educated people in society. The more educated, literate and civilized people there are in society, the faster the world can expand and grow. We attempt to raise university professors and scientists and mechanics and mathematicians and physicists and chemists and lawyers and doctors and all those high paying jobs. From businessmen to congressmen. But this raises a problem. If all we are doing is attempting to raise educated people, the society will not function, unless some dramatic change could be implemented to account for the abolition of certain services, one in particular is the garbage system.
Most people I would assume just take out the trash once every week for the garbage truck to drive around and dump it elsewhere. If there were only educated people in educated professions, then the garbage system of society would collapse. So not only would you have to account for another method of towing away garbage, you also need to rethink what the education system is doing. I would agree that most people are not inclined to take their own garbage to the dump once a week. The stench is intolerable. Not only do you need people in educated professions, the people in other professions which do not require the same extent of education and degrees, are just as important.
This brings me back to my point about the purpose of education. Why is it implemented the way it is? And why is there a hierarchy of courses? It's universal. At the top are the Mathematics and Sciences, followed by English and the Social Sciences, with Information Technology next and lastly, we have the Arts, which includes dance, drama, visual arts, industrial arts and music. I think this is unfair. In society, we need cabbages AND roses. They are equally important. The cabbages will always exist in society because of natural human instincts and reactions, but we need to preserve the roses.
Because of the existence of a hierarchy, this i believe deters people from attending school. Not everyone is Albert Einstein. Not everyone is Gauss or Goldbach. Not everyone is William Shakespeare. Some people do not possess that "gene" or talent. There are only so many Rain Man's. The hierarchy system will put down a student's true abilities, it dampens their will or motivation to reveal to the world what talent they have. If you are not good at maths, so what? You may be a fantastic actor/actress or a prodigy in music, but the education system does not allow that growth to that extent. Maths is ALWAYS the dominant subject. You may argue as much as you wish, but it is true in all societies.
So if we change the education system so that it directs the student's wishes and goals in life, enhancing the abilities that the student DOES have, then school would be more fun and entertaining, rather than a strenuous place to cram and jam information into a brain. I think we should embellish the creativity in students by making the Arts more valuable to society, more roses. The cabbages will always take care of itself due to human instinct, the need to survive, but roses need to be embellished.
I don't have too much knowledge on any education system except Australia, so I will focus on Australia. I understand the scaling system is to encourage students to pick the harder subjects, otherwise, everyone will be going for easy subjects and achieving great results. But the scaling system has such as big disparity, a gap too wide that it creates inequality within the education system and school surroundings. Picking Maths means you're smart and intelligent, not picking it means you're not. This is the stereotypical psychology that almost everyone adopts. I think this is remarkably wrong. I think dance and drama are just as important as Maths and Chemistry. Scaling them down is undermining and restricting the growth of creativity within students. We need to create a system where Drama and Dance and Music is just as valued as Maths and English. To create equality, we first of all need to abolish the scaling system or make it more equal. As far as I'm concerned, 4 unit Maths scales the most, so much in fact that it makes subjects like Dance look dead.
I still have not found the purpose of me attending school. What would my purpose have been, my goal be if I did not attend school? A sport star? The next Bill Gates? Who would know. We need to restructure education to make it more entertaining, make subjects more equal, educate more people, decreasing drop-out rates and enhancing the overall utility of education. It needs to be enjoyable and supposed to direct the student for future needs.
Not only should we be teaching students how to write, read, speak, calculate and memorize large quantities of information, we must also learn social skills, skills that will help in the future, marketing skills, and life skills. I am very supportive of people studying Community and Family Studies. It actually teaches you skills that you CAN use everyday to support a family. I mean, Maths is not going to make a family more intimate, for functional. Maths cannot take care of a child, and it certainly does not help you through meetings. I believe that people who do drama are better at these things, as they are more relaxed about meeting people, more open, expressive and positive.
I think society is not always right. The education system needs to be greatly reformed to enhance and bring forth the natural talent that students have instead of stigmatizing them. That way, there will be more educated people, combining their specialties together to prod the society into a civilization of technology and opportunity supported by creativity.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Once in a lifetime.
Yearbooks! Much better than I first expected. Great big thanks to Fifi, who created the cover page. It's absolutely amazing and gorgeous.
Well, it's almost muck-up week and soon after, the HSC. Wish me luck.
Well, it's almost muck-up week and soon after, the HSC. Wish me luck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)