- Studying literature develops critical analysis
- Brings about empathy
- Readers learn communication
- Organisation of ideas becomes easier
- Transferrable to employment (suggests intelligence, ability to organise/think deeply, skills to conduct presentations/seminars, skills to communicate)
- Understand a variety of reactions, personalities, attitudes and situations in everyday life
- To read and evaluate anything written
- Skills can be specialised needing to understand and use technical terms (identify figures of speech, symbolism, poetic techniques, the nuances and ambiguities of language etc.)
- Wider messages/value
- Appreciation of historical context
Category: Education
Education does not develop individuality but conformity. Discuss.
The conception of an education system came with the aim of equipping students with the necessary skills to fill the jobs in the economy to make the country more productive. This form of education is most efficacious when there is a fixed set of rules for those that comprise it – it guarantees an entire batch of workers able to work efficiently on the assembly line. As society develops, so has the system of education, which aims to meet society’s needs. In a world where societies are becoming increasingly meritocratic, education has become less about knowledge and more about students’ achievements and grades, compelling people to avert from “the road less taken”. As a result, education restricts one’s choices and ends up developing multiple individuals who are good at abiding by rules but lack personal voices and interests.
It is claimed by some that the education system has diversified, allowing a vast array of choices for students – we can now choose what school to attend, and what courses to take. The choices individuals make, they argue, would be reflective of the differing qualities and characteristics of each person. Theoretically, this argument may hold true, but education today is not just as simple as they suggest. Granted, it may be true that there is now a larger variety of choices for a student, but the overwhelming need to conform to expectations overcomes it. On the most basic level, students need to conform to the most basic school rules or risk punishment. For instance, a large number of schools mandate a uniform appearance – all students of the same school have to wear the clothes of the same design, and there are rules about every single part of one’s appearance. Not only is this inherently an expectation to conform, but it also conditions young minds to think that their actions will represent that of the school, so anything that catches others’ attention is deemed to be “bad”, and is frowned upon. This means that students are discouraged from taking up courses commonly associated with unsuccessful people. For example, Korean society expects its crème de la crème to study engineering or medicine in university, although that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. This is because they buy into the concept that people should practice what others before them had done because that is thought to be the “safe” route to success which guarantees a stable income.
Opponents of the thesis argue that effective teachers can instil a sense of interest in learning in their students. As a result, students will have a life-long thirst for knowledge. Despite the claim, the truth remains that the system of education today creates obstacles for teachers, which limits their ability rather than help them teach effectively. Most education systems around the world today have national exams because it is deemed necessary in order to determine the standard of the students. In the face of these inevitable examinations, teachers rush to prepare students for the multitude of questions to be tested. In such a circumstance, even a teacher who believes in developing the interests of students has no choice but to focus the bulk of his or her lesson on the curriculum to be tested. This is because the education ministry gauges the ability of teachers based on how much improvement students make in terms of grades, and focuses less on students’ holistic, all-rounded development, something that cannot be measured accurately. In Singapore’s case, parents that traditionally adopt the “kiasu” mindset fret over finding tuition classes for their children sitting for the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), GCSE “O” Levels or “A” Levels examinations, while teachers feel pressured to get as many “A”s in class as possible.
Effectively, the requirements of education as set out by the country’s government limits the ability of teachers, even good ones. Furthermore, it would be idealistic to argue that all teachers are as effective as opponents claim them to be – in many cases teachers are more focused on getting students to do well in order to get a raise in pay, as compared to trying diligently to help develop each individual student based on his or her needs and interests. Anything outside the declared curriculum is seen to be “unnecessary” or “irrelevant”. In addition to the fact that teachers are limited by the requirements of the system, the school also has to be accountable to society. Parents send their children to school with the expectation that the latter group will gain knowledge and learn some morals, and this expectation falls on the teachers and the school. Schools tend to err on the side of caution because they are paid to take care of the needs of students, so they are unwilling to take risks. However, creating a system actively promoting individual development hinges on not just the curriculum and the school rules – it comes with a large amount of risk. Encouraging individuals to find out more about themselves necessarily means that teachers do not advise students on what they should do – teachers let children develop without interference. When a system is lax, it cannot identify children who are acting abnormally and help them. As a result, if a child grows up in a poor living environment, he is likely to be negatively influenced, and this is where a hands-off system fails. It is exactly this that many schools are afraid of, compelling them to hold a tighter leash on students and forces them to conform to the rules, thereby limiting students’ ability to explore and develop their interests.
Critics would argue that individuals can spend time on their own outside of the school gates in order to develop their own passions because they are still able to choose what extracurricular activities to take up and what activities they should pick up in their free time. However, this is increasingly untrue in a world where the burden of students keeps increasing. Students of today recognise that their future choices hinge upon their grades – even with an outstanding co-curricular portfolio, it all comes to nought if they cannot manage their academic grades. This is because educational achievements are the determining factor of the nature of one’s future – when hiring employees, many corporations today look at the school the applicant attended his grades, the scholarships he received and so on. Hence, the students of today go to school not to gain new knowledge about topics they are interested in, but rather in a mad paper-chase to build up their portfolios. This generates an interest to focus more on academics, equating to a heavier workload. This results in individuals unwilling to spend time nurturing their own passions and interests – the time spent on learning a musical instrument is thought to be better spent on revising more past-year physics papers. Even if students pick up an activity that they are interested in, for example, a sport, it would take a backseat in students’ lists of priorities. When push comes to shove, most students would rather drop their sport when the national examinations approach, because the sport is unlikely to define their future lives, unlike good grades achieved in exams. Hence, even outside the school gates, students are compelled to conform to society’s expectations of them, instead of developing their own personal passions.
The idea of rules is central to all forms of education – people need rules to teach them the limits of what they can and cannot do. For instance, a person cannot be allowed to search up the steps needed to make a pipe bomb because the information can cause great harm if misused. However, as are most things in society, rules are double-edged swords. While it protects people from others, it also limits the areas of interest because people avert from testing boundaries, making them conform to what the government or society deems as “safe”. Ultimately, while some can still have that personal space to develop themselves, and indulge in their interests, education systems largely warn individuals against challenging social norms and force them to make decisions that may not be the best for every individual in society.
‘The most effective learning takes place away from school.’ How far do you agree?
- what do we learn outside school which is not generally available at/in school?
- definitions of what constitutes ‘learning’ – informal/formal learning, ‘academic learning’, general life skills, etc
- role of parents, grandparents, siblings, peer groups
- rites of passage
- importance of personal initiative – finding things out for oneself
- homework is done outside school
- how and what children might learn from the internet at home
- the social environment in the school is essential for the working world
Can education solve all problems?
While education empowers individuals and provides them with access to more opportunities, education cannot stand alone or solve all problems. We are now living in a world that is vulnerable, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. Unlike the past, the challenges of today prevent education from being the silver bullet that cuts through all problems.
Supporters of the prowess of education will opine that education can catalyse positive social change through enlightening and empowering individuals. Through formal education, individuals gain a better understanding of the world around them and their place in the world. Besides enlightening individuals, education can empower one to improve one’s community or to surmount one’s unique challenges. For instance, with respect to gender inequality, studies have revealed that women in developing countries who have been educated are unlikely to marry early or undergo harmful cultural practices such as female genital mutilation. Educated women are better able to understand healthcare, family planning and see the merit of education for their own children. It is evident in this small example that education is one of the most effective ways to help individuals adopt new mindsets and perspectives.
In addition, education levels the playing field of the disadvantaged by providing them access to opportunities to improve their standard of living and overcome the problems their communities might face. It does so by equipping people with the necessary knowledge and skills which are needed to seek employment. Notwithstanding the fact that education has been effective in solving problems like women’s rights and poverty, education should not be seen as a panacea to all problems. There are still many obstacles and aggravating factors which might limit the effectiveness of education. Education can only begin to tackle a problem if education is possible in the first place, for instance. The poor and impoverished cannot afford tuition fees, much less other learning tools and resources. The problem of education still persists in remote areas of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asian republics. While it is easy to pour millions into education to change mindsets and empower people, the lack of quality teachers, educational materials and infrastructure will continue to trap large swaths of people living in developing countries.
In addition, there are certain problems which education would be unable to resolve alone. Climate change is one such factor. While education can highlight the issues concerning climate change, the runaway pollution cannot be stopped by education alone. Political will and economic leadership would be more effective in mitigating climate change. Some of the problems which form a whirlwind of socioeconomic issues require a multidimensional and a multi-pronged approach. Education can only be one avenue to solve the issue.
Most significantly education has its own inherent limitations, which may render it ineffective and even counterproductive in solving social problems. On the surface, it may seem that education is a social leveller that empowers individuals and improves lives. This, however, does not seem to hold true in increasingly stratified developed countries, where the presence of generational wealth is a critical determinant of academic success. The wealthy are able to send their children to better schools and avail themselves to better resources. Those in better schools network with people of the same social background. Given that the education system ultimately feeds into the job market, the differences in access to educational opportunities from young inevitably result in severely hampered social mobility.
In short, while education can act as a catalyst to solve problems like poverty and discrimination, education is not the panacea to all the problems of the modern world because of the fact that there are people who cannot afford education. In addition, there are multi-dimensional and multi-faceted challenges that prevent education from being the magic lamp that solves all problems.
“The book has no place in modern society”. Discuss.
As the world continues to progress and develop at an ever-increasing speed, so have mediums pertaining to information. Nowadays, due to the widespread use of the Internet and new technologies such as portable iPhones, many have gone so far as to claim that the traditional medium, books, has lost its intrinsic value in modern society. Nevertheless, although I feel that factors such as inconveniences, high financial and social costs involved and lack of interactivity with regards to the book have all led to the diminishing value of the book in recent times, it still retains some place in society due in part to its credibility and accessibility as major reasons.
Ever since the Internet was created by the United States Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA) in 1958 to regain a technological lead over the USSR, and later spread to the masses, it has increased exponentially in popularity and usage in recent times. According to a study conducted by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the number of people connected to the internet worldwide has increased from 2 per 100 inhabitants in 1996 to 22 per 100 inhabitants in 2007. Plus, new technologies such as smartphones have been on the rise. On the other hand, revenue sale in the book industry have seen little rises in the previous years. Books had once been an integral part of mankind until a few decades ago, and its decline now has gained momentum over the years. Several factors have contributed substantially to this, in my opinion.
One is the convenience of the new mediums in contrast to books. Due to inconveniences associated with searching for information in books in the bookstore or library such as the time and effort involved, people are beginning to turn to faster and easier methods. The rise of Google, MSN and Microsoft’s bing.com have resulted in more effective and efficient online search engines, where any searches can come up with results pertaining to keywords in a matter of seconds. Just recently, Google released a revamped search engine, wanted to even 2 to 5 seconds of search time. Such continual optimizations have led to more people turning to online mediums to search for sources of information and entertainment rather than books. Furthermore, the development of portable digital devices like iPhones has allowed for easy searching of information or entertainment on the move, without worrying about the burden of lugging books around. One digital device, the size of a book but much slimmer, can contain more than 20 e-books, and only limited by its memory capacity. Therefore, as such, the book has lost its place in modern society, with other mediums
taking over, such as the Internet and new technologies due to the inconveniences that book pose.
Another factor is the financial and social cost of books as compared to the alternatives. Books require consumers to pay at the market price so that the firms operating in the book industry can maximise revenues and stay competitive. Thus, in some cases, books are much more expensive when contrasting with those online due to publishing costs, copyrights management, shipping, etc. In contrast, e-books have begun dominating the market at the turn of the century. Furthermore, they are cheaper substitutes, where studies conducted have shown that there are presently at least 2 million free e-books online. Although some online sources require nominal fees, citing reasons such as digital rights management, the overall costs are still lesser as compared to print materials. This is because searching, purchasing or shipping of the books require not only money but also time and effort whereas searching for online materials is much faster, possibly more efficient. Therefore, due to comparatively higher costs involved, other alternative mediums have gained more recognition and prominence, and books can thus be said to have lost its place in modern society.
In addition, the lack of interactivity of the book has also contributed to the declining book industry. Books are print materials which encompass only the author’s sole viewpoint or perspective pertaining to the issue at hand. More often than not, the comments in the book rarely look at other points of views or in different perspectives, thus causing many to feel a lack of immersion when reading a book as a source of information or entertainment. On the other hand, the expanding prominence of the Internet has given rise to new forms of communications like the development of discussion forums. These online platforms can then serve as effective places for the discussion of certain topics with different people so that everyone is able to understand viewpoints from across the world, say for example, what one Chinese feels about the policies in France. Such interactions can improve knowledge of global perspectives and also expand understanding regarding the issues, thereby allowing them to learn more from the online posts rather than from books. This is evident where discussion forums have come to become an integral part of countries such as Singapore with brightsparks and kiasuparent forums acting as widely popular platforms for discussing education issues within the community. Hence, the lack of interaction has resulted in the book losing its place in modern society.
But, the book still can be said to retain someplace in society today. This is because books are known for their credibility and accessibility. In most instances, books are written by credible writers and verified countless times by editors before being certified for publishing into the market. Such strict regulations with regards to the books show that books still form a significant part of society today by providing trusted information. However, online mediums do not have those regulations in place, instead, the internet is prided for being interactive and allowing anybody to change or modify content. One most notable example is Wikipedia.org, where anyone, regardless of who is capable of changing the information on any topic they desire. Therefore, the question of Wikipedia’s credibility has been raised by numerous sources, where Jorge Cauz, president of
Encyclopedia Britannica Inc commented on September 8, 2004, Washington Post article that Wikipedia’s information is rarely reliable. Therefore, books are able to retain some degree of place in society.
Plus books are also much more accessible as compared to online mediums. In most developing countries like some rural parts of China, India and Nepal, books are the only source of information. This is because those areas have not been connected to the World Wide Web and thus lack the online aspect. Thus, they are only capable of accessing books but not those that are on the Internet. Hence, books are still of much importance in many areas of society today.
Nevertheless, online mediums do not necessarily to suggest a lack of credibility. There is indeed a degree of unreliability, but such sources can be much more informative than that of books. This is mainly as these alternative forms of information are critiqued and modified frequently, sometimes by people who specialize in those fields. One significant example would be the Huffington Post, an American news website and content aggregating blog. In addition to columns by core contributors, The Huffington Post has over 9000 bloggers, ranging from politicians to celebrities to academics to policy experts, who contribute in real-time on a wide range of topics. Such learned and differing expert opinions on the issues at hand can prove to be an effective source of information and hence, also not necessarily very unreliable. Therefore, online mediums can also be
credible.
Furthermore, although many rural areas are subjected to the lack of connectivity to the Internet, extensive studies conducted have shown that many governments worldwide are taking steps to implement Internet services. In the developed countries alone, the number of connected people has risen from 0 per 100 inhabitants in 1997 to over 17 per 100 inhabitants in 2007. This is evidence that internet access has risen exponentially over the years, and thus books will not be the only accessible medium, and therefore, other alternatives are also able to hold someplace in modern society today.
In conclusion, the book has lost some ground in recent years not only due to its lack of interactivity but also the high costs and inconveniences associated with it. But although the book is still seen to be able to retain some place in society based on its credibility and accessibility, I feel that its hold on the people will continually be eroded by the increasing usage of the alternative mediums as sources of the information world.
Protected: To what extent does education meet the needs of your society?
To what extent is formal education effective?
A really really terrible essay.
Education can exist in many different forms and variation. A parent communicating to a child and be considered as an informal education where life skills and values are being instilled in the child. Education in Singapore, as we know it, is mainly formal education whereby it is a classroom-based style of teaching provided by trained teachers in various institutions.
Formal education is effective because it is caters to the large majority of the population. Formal education allows for the easy implementation of new educational materials to the student body by the government and various institutions because of the coherence of materials taught in schools to these students. Rather than coming up with different measures and other forms of informal education to fit different groups of students in a different education system, the government and educational bodies can save on the administrative costs which can then be channeled into other government needs and concerns. There is no denying that informal education can be beneficial also but formal education provides a systematic way of organizing education materials to a large majority of the population hence allowing educational institutions to address the education needs of the population as a whole rather than individually which may be time consuming. In Singapore, the ministry of education (MOE), has used formal education such as the compulsory primary school education to the population at large to ensure that each student can
In a highly competitive world in which there is a stark difference between the rich and the poor, education can be said to be a great ‘leveller’ in the world. Formal education can be effective because it is cheap and cost efficient allowing for even low income earners to allow their children to study. Formal education in schools is normally implemented through a state-owned company instead of a private enterprise. Hence, the cost of education would be comparatively cheaper than those given by private firms or educational institutions. This would give a greater opportunity for the whole community of students to be educated rather than specialized forms of education tailored only for the rich. In the long run, there is a higher probability that formal education, because of the inclusiveness of even low-income family students, can improve the lives of these low-income families as well as remain cheap and competitive. In Singapore, education is heavily subsidized because it is seen as an important tool to build a knowledge base economy in the future. It is also compulsory to attend primary school for all students so that they have at least a certain level of education.
Furthermore, formal education is mostly standardized. This brings about benefits to not only students but also the economy as a whole. The system of formal education can be geared towards skills required by economy. In the past, focus on calculus and arithmetic in Singapore was important because capital intensive style of the economy which required engineers. In this modern day, science and math are placed of importance as our economy enters into a technological advanced world so as to allow progress to take place. Formal education provides a platform for governments to implement the education system across the country, making it fast, efficient and fair to the society. As such, formal education can be effective because it is standardized which allows easy implementation of policies to deal the economic progress of the country.
Formal education certainly provides a systematic platform for the governments to education the vast majority of the population. However formal education may have its limitations hence it may not be as effective in certain aspects. For one, formal education limits creativity in students. The standardization of the education system to fit the majority of the population may restrict students who are not used to the specific type of learning formal education brings. Learning can take place in different forms. These include audio, visual, kinestatic and tactile learning. More often than not, formal education tends to neglect some of these aspects that may hinder some students in their learning which may be a downside in the near future. In addition, formal education tends not to focus on the arts as much as math and science. Students who are artistically inclined in dance and music may not be able to cope well with the formal education system. They may not excel in school as a result because of the lack of opportunities in other areas that formal education brings. Although Singapore has opened up new colleges such as SOTA (school of the arts) and laselle college of the arts, every other school focuses on formal education which comprises of mainly math and science to educate students so that they can work to allow the economy to progress. Hence when dealing with creativity of this form of education, formal education may not be as effective.
Formal education may not be as effective because in the long run, students may not appreciate what they have learnt in schools. Formal education, in a way, conforms students to adapt to the idea of learning which is chosen not by them but by the government. This may not allow the students to fully appreciate the subjects which are taught to them and in future, there might be a possibility of forgetting the knowledge causing formal education not to be as effective. Also, talent, which could have been nurtured, may as a result be undeveloped in formal education where the child does not have the exposure to further his talent. As result, formal education can be limited and not as effective as it could be.
In conclusion, formal education is effective in many different aspects even outside the scope of this essay however we have to recognize that formal education can be limited in certain areas such as creativity as well as the appreciation of studying in general.