Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Thin tagliatelle in puréed tomatoes with peas: "US schools ban iPods at exams"
This article was taken from Weekend Today in the Voices section on Saturday, April 28th 2007.
Savoy cabbage and cannellini beans in beef stock: "Response to article 5"
Using iPods to cheat in exams? To be honest, I initially thought that using an iPod was a rather Creative™ way to cheat.* However, I soon realised that the abuse of technology to cheat is definitely not something new. Cell phones were banned from examination halls when schools found out that these communication devices led to the spreading of answers. Students could save notes in their inbox and refer to them during tests. In the same way, this harmless music player is also capable of becoming a storage device for answers.
Objectively, I find cheating something that is impossible to prevent. As quoted from a 17 year old student from the article, “People who are going to cheat are still going to cheat, with or without [them].” People with the intent of cheating will cheat no matter the circumstance. With or without their iPods, they will find ways and means to sneak answers into the examination hall. Short of making it a rule to enter examination halls stark naked with only the bare necessities, schools will definitely be unable to clamp down on each and every individual case of cheating. However, even with such a rule in place, I still believe that some desperate students may scribble down answers on body parts or on their stationery. Thus, to completely eradicate cheating, confiscating the external cheating devices will not suffice. The solution lies with the removal of the main internal cheating device- the mentality to cheat.
People cheat for fear of doing badly because they lack confidence in their own mental capabilities. Often, students who cheat are not prepared for the tests or are just, if I may dare say in Singlish, “kiasu”. They are afraid to lose out to their fellow peers and think that having the answers with them will secure them with a definite advantage over the rest. Since all the reasons for cheating originate from the mind, the only way to prevent cheating is to tackle the source of the problems- the mind itself. I would like to quote our very own Rafflesian Principle of Honour. “In intellectual pursuit, I shall reflect discipline and passion for learning and in personal conduct, I shall live in integrity and regard individuals, groups and the community with kindness and respect, and in so doing, uphold the Rafflesian Principle of Honour.” This principle sums it all. By enforcing strict discipline and emphasizing on the fact that we should live in integrity, students will soon realise that cheating is something not worth committing. They are not only cheating the school but also cheating themselves because they will never be able to realise their true potential. By taking the test with an advantage over the rest, they are not only downgrading themselves but also losing the respect of their peers by cheating. Using technology is but only one method of cheating.
It is ironic that the apple, an educational symbol of good grades, now marks the new generation of cheating devices. **
* Creative™ is a strong competitor of Apple in Digital Entertainment products (especially in the area of MP3 players), with its Zen being comparable to Apple’s iPod.
** Apple™ is the creator of iPods
Word count: 498
Objectively, I find cheating something that is impossible to prevent. As quoted from a 17 year old student from the article, “People who are going to cheat are still going to cheat, with or without [them].” People with the intent of cheating will cheat no matter the circumstance. With or without their iPods, they will find ways and means to sneak answers into the examination hall. Short of making it a rule to enter examination halls stark naked with only the bare necessities, schools will definitely be unable to clamp down on each and every individual case of cheating. However, even with such a rule in place, I still believe that some desperate students may scribble down answers on body parts or on their stationery. Thus, to completely eradicate cheating, confiscating the external cheating devices will not suffice. The solution lies with the removal of the main internal cheating device- the mentality to cheat.
People cheat for fear of doing badly because they lack confidence in their own mental capabilities. Often, students who cheat are not prepared for the tests or are just, if I may dare say in Singlish, “kiasu”. They are afraid to lose out to their fellow peers and think that having the answers with them will secure them with a definite advantage over the rest. Since all the reasons for cheating originate from the mind, the only way to prevent cheating is to tackle the source of the problems- the mind itself. I would like to quote our very own Rafflesian Principle of Honour. “In intellectual pursuit, I shall reflect discipline and passion for learning and in personal conduct, I shall live in integrity and regard individuals, groups and the community with kindness and respect, and in so doing, uphold the Rafflesian Principle of Honour.” This principle sums it all. By enforcing strict discipline and emphasizing on the fact that we should live in integrity, students will soon realise that cheating is something not worth committing. They are not only cheating the school but also cheating themselves because they will never be able to realise their true potential. By taking the test with an advantage over the rest, they are not only downgrading themselves but also losing the respect of their peers by cheating. Using technology is but only one method of cheating.
It is ironic that the apple, an educational symbol of good grades, now marks the new generation of cheating devices. **
* Creative™ is a strong competitor of Apple in Digital Entertainment products (especially in the area of MP3 players), with its Zen being comparable to Apple’s iPod.
** Apple™ is the creator of iPods
Word count: 498
Chicken noodle cream with celery: "Response to article 4"
I found the title of this article rather disturbing. I mean how would you react when you read ‘Public transport system not quite ‘first class’’? Haven’t we always been praised for our efficient and well-planned public transport system?
However harsh this statement may be, I could not help but agree with the many points brought up; the points about the inefficiency of buses, the long waiting times, the filthy or non-working air conditioners, the crowdedness and the low level of cleanliness in many of the buses. Yes, I continued nodding my head in agreement as I recalled all the many times I had to wait close to an hour for a bus, the numerous times I had to squeeze onto a bus carrying my heavy softball bag and still trying to keep my balance on the steps and the countless times I could not sit down because the seats were mouldy all over. I was in complete agreement with the article when it suddenly dawned on me that all this while the writer was only criticizing the bus transport system. As I scanned through the article, I found very few non-bus examples of a poor public transport system. The writer had written out of point by narrowing his view and only focusing on our poor bus system alone. As his main focus was on the hygiene level, he lacked elaboration on factors such as efficiency, accessibility or cost, thus making his criticism on the entire public transport system as a whole very weak. I find the title very inappropriate and should be changed to ‘Public transport hygiene level not quite ‘first class’’ instead.
However, even though the writer’s stand is rather harsh, we cannot deny the fact that much improvement can be made to raise the hygiene level. The writer accurately points out that the problem lies with “high touch” surfaces (pull handles) and dirty air-con filters. Though these problems may sound minor, my father told me about a friend of his who contracted Herpes Simplex Eye Disease just by rubbing his eyes after touching an infected blood stain on a pull handle. Shocking but true. Thus, I find his suggestions for the implementation of stringent operational maintenance standards for buses and trains to be cleaned and disinfected every day very relevant.
In conclusion, even though the article was quite well written, I found the title lacking in terms of precision. The title suggested that the main issue would address the poor public transport on a whole inclusive of factors such as efficiency or comfort but the article only seemed to focus on the poor hygiene level rather than on the big picture. However, it redeemed itself by identifying the health hazards and providing useful suggestions to raise the hygiene level. With more precision, I feel that this article would be effective in putting the message across to LTA that much improvement can still be made to raise the hygiene level in our public transport system.
Word count: 496
However harsh this statement may be, I could not help but agree with the many points brought up; the points about the inefficiency of buses, the long waiting times, the filthy or non-working air conditioners, the crowdedness and the low level of cleanliness in many of the buses. Yes, I continued nodding my head in agreement as I recalled all the many times I had to wait close to an hour for a bus, the numerous times I had to squeeze onto a bus carrying my heavy softball bag and still trying to keep my balance on the steps and the countless times I could not sit down because the seats were mouldy all over. I was in complete agreement with the article when it suddenly dawned on me that all this while the writer was only criticizing the bus transport system. As I scanned through the article, I found very few non-bus examples of a poor public transport system. The writer had written out of point by narrowing his view and only focusing on our poor bus system alone. As his main focus was on the hygiene level, he lacked elaboration on factors such as efficiency, accessibility or cost, thus making his criticism on the entire public transport system as a whole very weak. I find the title very inappropriate and should be changed to ‘Public transport hygiene level not quite ‘first class’’ instead.
However, even though the writer’s stand is rather harsh, we cannot deny the fact that much improvement can be made to raise the hygiene level. The writer accurately points out that the problem lies with “high touch” surfaces (pull handles) and dirty air-con filters. Though these problems may sound minor, my father told me about a friend of his who contracted Herpes Simplex Eye Disease just by rubbing his eyes after touching an infected blood stain on a pull handle. Shocking but true. Thus, I find his suggestions for the implementation of stringent operational maintenance standards for buses and trains to be cleaned and disinfected every day very relevant.
In conclusion, even though the article was quite well written, I found the title lacking in terms of precision. The title suggested that the main issue would address the poor public transport on a whole inclusive of factors such as efficiency or comfort but the article only seemed to focus on the poor hygiene level rather than on the big picture. However, it redeemed itself by identifying the health hazards and providing useful suggestions to raise the hygiene level. With more precision, I feel that this article would be effective in putting the message across to LTA that much improvement can still be made to raise the hygiene level in our public transport system.
Word count: 496
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
