杜甫的诗，最难以忘怀的，要属《茅屋为秋风所破歌》。
一个人的力量有限，于是总是做着自己能力所及的事。但同时，心中却始终在找寻某个寄托，把不得变成千手千眼观世音。虽然像个畸形儿，却能普度众生。
想着想着，开始发觉，信仰其实根植于每个人的心中，包括孩子。而观音，说到底也只有一个。
那么，有什么办法，可以凭着一个人的力量，化解千万孩子心中的失落、空虚、惆怅、乃至愤恨？
也许，与其注视一些除了经济体制改革之外无法彻底得到解决的问题，我们应该想办法把梦想和希望，传达给每个孩子，滋润他们的心灵。
这种时候，我们需要文字。还有两种人——一种是儿童与青少年文学家，另一种是能抽空长期与一两个农村孩子进行信件来往的哥哥姐姐叔叔阿姨们。
在故事的过度里，在充满关怀的信纸世界中，也许，不论是留守儿童，或是农民工子女，都能发觉一个为他们挡（市场化之）风遮（庸俗化之）雨的天地——直到中国成就“和谐社会”。
安得书、信千万件，大庇天下孩童俱欢颜……
2009年3月29日星期日
让我动容的读者来信（1）
在《联合早报》上发了《中国农村的孩子们》后，一天内收到十几位内地读者的来信，令我感动。如果说80年代的热点是潘晓来信时的“人生的路怎么越走越窄”，那么，估计21世纪的中国，经济发展中的农村情况，特别是孩子与年轻人的心灵成长，将是不容回避的时代课题。
这里转载部分读者来信，分享内地读者的心声：
在2009-03-29的联合早报网上读了你写的《中国农村的孩子们》，写得非常好，我也是一名“来自大陆乡下的孩子”，“放大到全中国的农村，有多少孩子是被逼着成长的，又有多少是心灵有裂痕乃至创伤的，难以估计”这句话真是让我感慨，我想这些你帮助过的孩子，也是幸运的，至少在这世界上，还有你这样知心的热心朋友。
最惨的是这些在城里打工的农民工子女, 他们在城市里面上的民工子弟学校简直破烂不堪, 北京的冬天这么冷,那些农民工学校连暖气都没有, 房子也是临时建筑,不保暖. 教学和师资情况就更别谈了. 政府现在强调民生问题,为什么不能解决农民工子女就学问题?
陈老弟：
看了你在《联合早报》上的文章《中国农村的孩子们》，有些感触。我就是从农村来到城里的，上大学后也与你一样属于心智不太成熟的，也给家乡农村的孩子们上过课，开展过扶贫。现在农村问题很多，但总体来说，发展很大，与我们大学毕业之前变化很大，希望你有机会到我家乡（黄山市休宁县）去看看、侃侃。
兄弟：
你好！
为你的所作所为感到骄傲！现世的中国确实有许多这样那样的问题，这也是为什么我们需要不断的改革的主要原因，社会的进步也是一这些矛盾和问题的解决为基点，聚少成多，由量变发展到质变！让我们值得高兴的是，现世的中国像你这样有个性的甘于奉献的人越来越多。去年的地震救援是一次集中体现。而且这股力量正在不断成长！我对我们国家和民族的未来是充满信心的！
好样的！ 继续深入、长期的关注农村的孩子们！
炜雄先生：
你好！我是工作在中国大别山腹地的一名农村初中老师。我们学校距离县城90公里。看到你写在《联合早报》上的文章《中国农村的孩子们》，很感动.为你的社会责任感而感动！我也想代表所有你牵挂的那些孩子们对你说一声，谢谢！
我熟悉农村，更熟悉这些孩子们，深知他们的需要和现状，所以就想着和你聊聊。现今中国的农村孩子的生活你无法想象有多艰难。我们学校是一所乡镇初中，在当地学校中规模最大，集中了全乡的初中生在这里生活学习。学校现有419个同学，26个老师。学生们全部在学校寄宿。每周日下午，其中的一部分，要徒步20公里左右来到学校，你想不到的是，有的孩子身上还要背着两样东西，一袋大米4公斤左右，还有两盆咸菜。他们在学校里一周的生活靠这两样东西维持。学校各有10间男女生宿舍，每间生活着20多个同学，你猜不到的是每间宿舍的面积，一间房子长5.5米，宽，3.2米。每个同学摊不上一个平方。孩子们睡觉的地方是用横木搭建的“通铺”，还分上下层。即使有木床，一张一米宽的木床也要睡下两个初生。
尽管这样，孩子们没怨过学校，没怨过老师，他们在学校起早贪黑的为着理想而努力，每到冬天，没有一个孩子的手皮是完整的，都生了冻疮。我上课最怕看到学生的双手，因为让我揪心。
不瞒你说，我鼓励孩子们时说的最多的就是要好好努力，长大了最好在城市里能找份工作。我知道我不应该如此直率的去告诉他们长大了要远离家乡，而应该从实现人生价值这方面去激励他们，可从现实来看，我最大的愿望就是他们以后大了别再这么苦。因为同在蓝天下的他们真的不该这样可怜的。
好了，以后咱们再聊！盼回音，祝快乐！
今天在《联合早报》看到你发表的《中国农村的孩子们》一文，非常感动！因为我曾是其中的一份子，只不过我已经熬过那段童年时光，已于2006年从大学毕业，现已走上工作岗位。非常感谢你给大陆留守儿童所给予的帮助！非常感谢！
唐突致信于你，我还是做个自我介绍吧。我家乡是湖北省一个典型的农村。家乡因地理位置较好，家乡人民又“下海”的比较早，所以家乡经济条件还过的去，不过毕竟处于内陆，也好不到哪里去，你文章中提到的现象在我们村也很常见。我06年毕业于中南财经政法大学，算是跳出了农门，不过至今仍处水深火热之中——革命尚未成功，同志仍需努力！我2007年跳槽来到深圳，后又跳到深圳的另一家公司，今年3月被公司外派到河南，现身处郑州，常驻河南省，与你所处之香港应有千里之遥吧。看了你的文章，非常感动！不仅因为我曾是留守儿童，更因为你为留守儿童所做的一切是我曾经梦想要做的事，只是至今没有那个精力和实力，以后条件允许了肯定会为农村的孩子们做点什么。再次感谢你为内地留守儿童所做的一切！希望以后能够保持联系，多多交流，也希望我尽早具备能为农村儿童做些事情的实力，那时我可能会向你请教这方面的经验。
你对农村孩子的关心让我很自然地把你当作国人了。很赞同你的一些看法，但目前中国对于“软性”的心灵与精神需要的问题，确实还不够重视，或许她的发展还没有精力顾及到。如果鼓励更多的非政府组织参与进来，会对工作起很好的推动作用，中国确实应该在社会服务与公民社会方面，借鉴西方的一些好做法。
这里转载部分读者来信，分享内地读者的心声：
在2009-03-29的联合早报网上读了你写的《中国农村的孩子们》，写得非常好，我也是一名“来自大陆乡下的孩子”，“放大到全中国的农村，有多少孩子是被逼着成长的，又有多少是心灵有裂痕乃至创伤的，难以估计”这句话真是让我感慨，我想这些你帮助过的孩子，也是幸运的，至少在这世界上，还有你这样知心的热心朋友。
炜雄先生：
您好！我是在联合早报看到的这个邮箱，给您写信不知您是否收到。
不多写了，还不知你能否收到。很敬佩你有仁者的情怀。
顺颂
大安！
陈兄钧鉴:
初次通信，不知称为兄长是否合适，
其实这也与我的经历有关，我来自湖北的一个产粮大县，
我说这么多，不是我消极的态度，我的性格告诉我，
此致
敬礼！
读了你的文章，感觉你是一个有社会责人感的人。
在联合早报上看了你《中国农村的孩子们》一文，思潮起伏。带给我强烈的思想共鸣。
非常赞赏你对这个普遍社会现象的忧虑和见解。若中国教育改革继续流于形式，在可预期的十年二十年间，这必将衍生演绎成关乎中国前途命运的严重社会问题。
非常希望看到你对这个课题的持续关注。
阅读了你的文章让我有更深一成的体会。几个月前，我在图书馆看了一本关于贫穷大学生的求学过程，他们的经历实在叫人感动。我认为只要社会上能出现更多愿意帮助他们的人，至少能做到雪中送炭，极少成多的成绩。 因此，有心人士要继续加油了：—) 帮助这些学生的当儿，我以为我们要鼓励他们永远保持着一颗赤子之心。在他们事业有成的一天，鼓励他们能以过来人的身份资助其他贫苦学生。这样，拯救孩子就学的团队就会更强大，问题也会尽快解决。
我看你的文章，只是冰山一角，但我深深的感受下一代的悲痛，我无语，我们无法去面对我们的下一代，我心中很酸，因为我深有体会!
你好：
我是一个陌生人，如有打扰还请见谅。
在联合早报网上看到了你的那篇文章——《中国农村的孩子们》，便决定写这封信。
在我的生活经历中有这样的事情，它之于我有什么样的意义我一直都不敢正视。我家的邻居有个很求上进的姐姐，成绩在她的同学中也是一等一的。初中毕业后她很想继续念书，可是家坚决不支持。那是时我还在小学，我的父母也为她说情。
最后，她还是没能达成她的心愿。她的父母内心也有深深地愧意。可是，这愧意因为那位姐姐一直以来的抱怨而转嫁到我这来了。他们说是我“把家都念穷了”。我家境还不如她家，可是一直念着书......在我高中的时光中，父母含辛茹苦，弟弟也因我的缘故放弃了学业。我考上一所不错的大学之后，他们都沉默了 ，甚至见到我在路边站着他们都要绕道走。有时候，我也会怨恨他们那时的嘲笑，可是现在成熟起来，竟为他们感到难过。
这个故事与你写的那篇关于留守孩子的不一样，但是，那些孩子内心的辛酸我是能体会到的。让我欣慰的是，我家乡现在的境况已经好多了。孩子很少忍受离别之痛。学习的条件也很好。
感激这一切！
祝好运常在！
感谢你的善举,中国农村的唯一出路就是在教育,我也是想做一些自己力所能及的事,去帮助一些需要帮助的人,有什么需要,多联系我
阅读了你的文章让我有更深一成的体会。几个月前，
我看你的文章，只是冰山一角，但我深深的感受下一代的悲痛，
你好：
我是一个陌生人，如有打扰还请见谅。
在联合早报网上看到了你的那篇文章——《中国农村的孩子们》，便决定写这封信。
在我的生活经历中有这样的事情，它之于我有什么样的意义我一直都不敢正视。我家的邻居有个很求上进的姐姐，成绩在她的同学中也是一等一的。初中毕业后她很想继续念书，可是家坚决不支持。那是时我还在小学，我的父母也为她说情。
最后，她还是没能达成她的心愿。她的父母内心也有深深地愧意。可是，这愧意因为那位姐姐一直以来的抱怨而转嫁到我这来了。他们说是我“把家都念穷了”。我家境还不如她家，可是一直念着书......在我高中的时光中，父母含辛茹苦，弟弟也因我的缘故放弃了学业。我考上一所不错的大学之后，他们都沉默了 ，甚至见到我在路边站着他们都要绕道走。有时候，我也会怨恨他们那时的嘲笑，可是现在成熟起来，竟为他们感到难过。
这个故事与你写的那篇关于留守孩子的不一样，但是，那些孩子内心的辛酸我是能体会到的。让我欣慰的是，我家乡现在的境况已经好多了。孩子很少忍受离别之痛。学习的条件也很好。
感激这一切！
祝好运常在！
最惨的是这些在城里打工的农民工子女, 他们在城市里面上的民工子弟学校简直破烂不堪, 北京的冬天这么冷,那些农民工学校连暖气都没有, 房子也是临时建筑,不保暖. 教学和师资情况就更别谈了. 政府现在强调民生问题,为什么不能解决农民工子女就学问题?
陈老弟：
看了你在《联合早报》上的文章《中国农村的孩子们》，有些感触。我就是从农村来到城里的，上大学后也与你一样属于心智不太成熟的，也给家乡农村的孩子们上过课，开展过扶贫。现在农村问题很多，但总体来说，发展很大，与我们大学毕业之前变化很大，希望你有机会到我家乡（黄山市休宁县）去看看、侃侃。
兄弟：
你好！
为你的所作所为感到骄傲！现世的中国确实有许多这样那样的问题，这也是为什么我们需要不断的改革的主要原因，社会的进步也是一这些矛盾和问题的解决为基点，聚少成多，由量变发展到质变！让我们值得高兴的是，现世的中国像你这样有个性的甘于奉献的人越来越多。去年的地震救援是一次集中体现。而且这股力量正在不断成长！我对我们国家和民族的未来是充满信心的！
好样的！ 继续深入、长期的关注农村的孩子们！
炜雄先生：
你好！我是工作在中国大别山腹地的一名农村初中老师。我们学校距离县城90公里。看到你写在《联合早报》上的文章《中国农村的孩子们》，很感动.为你的社会责任感而感动！我也想代表所有你牵挂的那些孩子们对你说一声，谢谢！
我熟悉农村，更熟悉这些孩子们，深知他们的需要和现状，所以就想着和你聊聊。现今中国的农村孩子的生活你无法想象有多艰难。我们学校是一所乡镇初中，在当地学校中规模最大，集中了全乡的初中生在这里生活学习。学校现有419个同学，26个老师。学生们全部在学校寄宿。每周日下午，其中的一部分，要徒步20公里左右来到学校，你想不到的是，有的孩子身上还要背着两样东西，一袋大米4公斤左右，还有两盆咸菜。他们在学校里一周的生活靠这两样东西维持。学校各有10间男女生宿舍，每间生活着20多个同学，你猜不到的是每间宿舍的面积，一间房子长5.5米，宽，3.2米。每个同学摊不上一个平方。孩子们睡觉的地方是用横木搭建的“通铺”，还分上下层。即使有木床，一张一米宽的木床也要睡下两个初生。
尽管这样，孩子们没怨过学校，没怨过老师，他们在学校起早贪黑的为着理想而努力，每到冬天，没有一个孩子的手皮是完整的，都生了冻疮。我上课最怕看到学生的双手，因为让我揪心。
不瞒你说，我鼓励孩子们时说的最多的就是要好好努力，长大了最好在城市里能找份工作。我知道我不应该如此直率的去告诉他们长大了要远离家乡，而应该从实现人生价值这方面去激励他们，可从现实来看，我最大的愿望就是他们以后大了别再这么苦。因为同在蓝天下的他们真的不该这样可怜的。
好了，以后咱们再聊！盼回音，祝快乐！
今天在《联合早报》看到你发表的《中国农村的孩子们》一文，非常感动！因为我曾是其中的一份子，只不过我已经熬过那段童年时光，已于2006年从大学毕业，现已走上工作岗位。非常感谢你给大陆留守儿童所给予的帮助！非常感谢！
唐突致信于你，我还是做个自我介绍吧。我家乡是湖北省一个典型的农村。家乡因地理位置较好，家乡人民又“下海”的比较早，所以家乡经济条件还过的去，不过毕竟处于内陆，也好不到哪里去，你文章中提到的现象在我们村也很常见。我06年毕业于中南财经政法大学，算是跳出了农门，不过至今仍处水深火热之中——革命尚未成功，同志仍需努力！我2007年跳槽来到深圳，后又跳到深圳的另一家公司，今年3月被公司外派到河南，现身处郑州，常驻河南省，与你所处之香港应有千里之遥吧。看了你的文章，非常感动！不仅因为我曾是留守儿童，更因为你为留守儿童所做的一切是我曾经梦想要做的事，只是至今没有那个精力和实力，以后条件允许了肯定会为农村的孩子们做点什么。再次感谢你为内地留守儿童所做的一切！希望以后能够保持联系，多多交流，也希望我尽早具备能为农村儿童做些事情的实力，那时我可能会向你请教这方面的经验。
你对农村孩子的关心让我很自然地把你当作国人了。
我本人也长期关注农村，关注农村孩子，我是做新闻的，我们节目这几年策划了“映山红行动”，为安徽10所农村学校募捐了10万册图书，10万元现金，帮助他们建立了图书室；为20所农村学校募捐了价值10万元的体育器材，10万元现金；在10所学校建立了“留守儿童工作站”，为它们添置了电话和7万元的电话卡，以及价值两万多元的图书、玩具等。4月份，我们新的一期活动又要开展。
农村的事情太多，除了教育的，还有环保等等。我的家乡很偏远，在新安江源头，山青水绿，可现在都面临垃圾污染，让人非常痛心，我希望能在农村，特别是水源地农村的环境保护方面做些探索和试验，这是非常重要的，可政府似乎也没有顾及到这些。期待与你进行深入交流！
有机会上我为家乡做的网站：www.liugujian.com 多提宝贵意见和建议！
有机会上我为家乡做的网站：www.liugujian.com
2009年3月27日星期五
Email exchange stemming from ZB report on《中国不高兴》
Mail from a friend:
I wonder which is the lesser of two evils with regards to the mentality of the masses : Apathy (which the writer of this article seems to suggest is a reassurance for the world and China) or this raging nationalism. Coming from a cultural criticism perspective, I do find some comfort in the unapologetic honesty of nationalism (haven't read the book but i can sort of guess what its overall tone is like). As cultural critics carefully and definitely politically-correctly tread around issues of orientalism (then self-orientalism), eurocentricism, occidentalism and globalization , it seems there will be no ready solution for the ideological dilemna China is facing. Post-colonialism or post-revolution discourse is a fun read for intellectuals who love to second-guess, but somehow it seems like masturbation more than anything else. I speculate : China wittingly or unwittingly breeds all these different players to form her global stance - The peace-loving intellectuals, the apathetic masses, the pseudo-nationalists that do not practise what they preach, the true nationalists (minority) who guards her national pride violently and the pragmatic economic Chinese who is almost coolly level-headed and works towards their interests. Each player has its role to play and its all about balance.
Just a random thought.
My response:
Hello,
Well seriously anything that appears as a set of binaries is always deceiving to the mind, since usually a spectrum exists for any social issues. You are right in the presence of "different players", though I wouldn't dare say if they were truly 'bred' by China. But I think such dynamism is enjoyable, at least from an intellectual and socio-cultural perspective. In fact, with 'social activists with real agendas to propagate' added to the diversity you described, it is the make-up of Hong Kong society in my eyes. China is too large for such an issue to be within grasp by the mind, but certainly I think Zheng Yong Nian from our East Asian Institute is right in that this is time to spark debates once again. But this time, it will be different from arguments among intellectuals in early 20C or CCP-directed politically-charged "kou hao" of btw 1949 to 1978. In fact, my impression is that this is a big debate that has its beginnings in the early 1980s, which was eventually side-tracked and put off till today by the Tiananmen incident. And I would think the mode of discussion should also be different this time round.
As for cultural criticism you mentioned, I love your analogy of masturbation. Cultural criticism has been borrowing too much concepts from political science and sociology and turning them into monsters that neither fully describe the cultural dilemmas we face in the East, nor liberate researchers from their own intellectual cages. The paradox that is surfacing, in my opinion, is that on the one hand, many sociological and political issues (which are more 'tangible' as they truly involve how people live as individuals and in groups) end up being 'ideologicized' to the extent they become too metaphysical; but on the other hand that is how the creation of ideology is how you end up having cultural norms and identities - and such 'intangible' understanding of the Self is still important in knowing who we are and for informing policies. Back to Singapore, that is the dilemma I face when I try to conceptualize the "Chineseness" of Singaporeans and how we can eventually continue to enrich ethno-culturalism within the borders of national identity and economic pre-requisites. My opinion is that we need to recognize these issues for informing curriculum (esp post-primary CL) and other social movements like the existence of clans & associations, speak Mandarin campaigns, and ultimately the whole move towards forming a learning culture that truly involves parents and their children.
In addition, one note about "orientalism (then self-orientalism), eurocentricism, occidentalism and globalization" is that these theories are still relevant. We have NOT reached the stage when we can eliminate East-West differences, other than on the economic front (and perhaps even not totally homogeneous in this arena). Some may say that the problem now lies in that the rise of China is going to move the scale from orientalism to occidentalism, or that globalization is helping to bridge understanding. My own take is that there is still a long way to go, especially for literary and cultural theorists, because eventually the exchanges and flow of ideas are still on philosophy i.e. the 'thoughts' itself, but what we need is to increase the vocabulary for describing Chinese epistemology i.e. HOW the thoughts came about, aka the logic of Chinese thought. 张隆溪 has an impressive book known as 《道与逻各斯》, and the discussions about 'laws' and logos (movement between ideas or ideos) are insightful, but we need to extend this beyond Literature. Cultural critics, in particular, need to borrow from Zhang's and re-examine the whole basis of their discipline. Otherwise, the East-West strife can never be crossed because at any one time at least one party is still feeling 'disadvantaged' psychologically. My view is that the nationalism issue in China can partly be attributed to the lack of ability of Chinese intellectuals to produce academic fruit for export and to influence or speak to their Western counterparts on equal footing in, I emphasize, a Western setting. That is why those in China who can speak rationally cannot talk Reason either to the masses or to people beyond their cultural boundaries. All I ask for is an Immanuel Kant of the East, but I wonder if we can produce that in the age of post-modernism where all over the world we are to different extents subject to the Foucaultian nightmare of discourse and power in 'civilized' societies, including China that is trying to walk its own 'Chinese characteristics' path politically and ideologically.
Bear
I wonder which is the lesser of two evils with regards to the mentality of the masses : Apathy (which the writer of this article seems to suggest is a reassurance for the world and China) or this raging nationalism. Coming from a cultural criticism perspective, I do find some comfort in the unapologetic honesty of nationalism (haven't read the book but i can sort of guess what its overall tone is like). As cultural critics carefully and definitely politically-correctly tread around issues of orientalism (then self-orientalism), eurocentricism, occidentalism and globalization , it seems there will be no ready solution for the ideological dilemna China is facing. Post-colonialism or post-revolution discourse is a fun read for intellectuals who love to second-guess, but somehow it seems like masturbation more than anything else. I speculate : China wittingly or unwittingly breeds all these different players to form her global stance - The peace-loving intellectuals, the apathetic masses, the pseudo-nationalists that do not practise what they preach, the true nationalists (minority) who guards her national pride violently and the pragmatic economic Chinese who is almost coolly level-headed and works towards their interests. Each player has its role to play and its all about balance.
Just a random thought.
My response:
Hello,
Well seriously anything that appears as a set of binaries is always deceiving to the mind, since usually a spectrum exists for any social issues. You are right in the presence of "different players", though I wouldn't dare say if they were truly 'bred' by China. But I think such dynamism is enjoyable, at least from an intellectual and socio-cultural perspective. In fact, with 'social activists with real agendas to propagate' added to the diversity you described, it is the make-up of Hong Kong society in my eyes. China is too large for such an issue to be within grasp by the mind, but certainly I think Zheng Yong Nian from our East Asian Institute is right in that this is time to spark debates once again. But this time, it will be different from arguments among intellectuals in early 20C or CCP-directed politically-charged "kou hao" of btw 1949 to 1978. In fact, my impression is that this is a big debate that has its beginnings in the early 1980s, which was eventually side-tracked and put off till today by the Tiananmen incident. And I would think the mode of discussion should also be different this time round.
As for cultural criticism you mentioned, I love your analogy of masturbation. Cultural criticism has been borrowing too much concepts from political science and sociology and turning them into monsters that neither fully describe the cultural dilemmas we face in the East, nor liberate researchers from their own intellectual cages. The paradox that is surfacing, in my opinion, is that on the one hand, many sociological and political issues (which are more 'tangible' as they truly involve how people live as individuals and in groups) end up being 'ideologicized' to the extent they become too metaphysical; but on the other hand that is how the creation of ideology is how you end up having cultural norms and identities - and such 'intangible' understanding of the Self is still important in knowing who we are and for informing policies. Back to Singapore, that is the dilemma I face when I try to conceptualize the "Chineseness" of Singaporeans and how we can eventually continue to enrich ethno-culturalism within the borders of national identity and economic pre-requisites. My opinion is that we need to recognize these issues for informing curriculum (esp post-primary CL) and other social movements like the existence of clans & associations, speak Mandarin campaigns, and ultimately the whole move towards forming a learning culture that truly involves parents and their children.
In addition, one note about "orientalism (then self-orientalism), eurocentricism, occidentalism and globalization" is that these theories are still relevant. We have NOT reached the stage when we can eliminate East-West differences, other than on the economic front (and perhaps even not totally homogeneous in this arena). Some may say that the problem now lies in that the rise of China is going to move the scale from orientalism to occidentalism, or that globalization is helping to bridge understanding. My own take is that there is still a long way to go, especially for literary and cultural theorists, because eventually the exchanges and flow of ideas are still on philosophy i.e. the 'thoughts' itself, but what we need is to increase the vocabulary for describing Chinese epistemology i.e. HOW the thoughts came about, aka the logic of Chinese thought. 张隆溪 has an impressive book known as 《道与逻各斯》, and the discussions about 'laws' and logos (movement between ideas or ideos) are insightful, but we need to extend this beyond Literature. Cultural critics, in particular, need to borrow from Zhang's and re-examine the whole basis of their discipline. Otherwise, the East-West strife can never be crossed because at any one time at least one party is still feeling 'disadvantaged' psychologically. My view is that the nationalism issue in China can partly be attributed to the lack of ability of Chinese intellectuals to produce academic fruit for export and to influence or speak to their Western counterparts on equal footing in, I emphasize, a Western setting. That is why those in China who can speak rationally cannot talk Reason either to the masses or to people beyond their cultural boundaries. All I ask for is an Immanuel Kant of the East, but I wonder if we can produce that in the age of post-modernism where all over the world we are to different extents subject to the Foucaultian nightmare of discourse and power in 'civilized' societies, including China that is trying to walk its own 'Chinese characteristics' path politically and ideologically.
Bear
2009年3月26日星期四
时代的转舵：从“群体”到“群体中的我”
内地最近出了本《中国不高兴》的新书，《联合早报》报道说，有些读者认为是“敢为今世开太平”，而很大一部份的中国人，包括社科院的学者，则对它嗤之以鼻。
我不知道，究竟大部分的中国人不买这本书，是因为真的认为自己的国家已经走出了《中国可以说不》的时代，或是纯粹对该书从以意识形态和”中西对立”的姿态出发感到厌烦（就如普遍上对中共“思想工作”的自觉疏远与排斥）。如果问我，我估计不会花血汗钱去买，但闲暇时我倒不介意去图书馆借来翻阅。只因为，我觉得那本书中涉及到的问题，如中国在世界上的地位、西方世界对中国的芥蒂、国内民族主义等，都是有讨论价值的。问题往往在于讨论的方式。
我眼中的中国人，不再稀罕那些从“群体”层面出发来宏观讨论社会问题的言论，除非作者能够提供一些惊为天人的原始史料或研究数据作为佐证（如在内地被禁、在香港狂销、在网上广传、谈“三年自然灾害”的《墓碑》）。估计，他们更容易被柏杨《丑陋的中国人》或是王小波一类的文章吸引。这是现代思想的路数：每个人都在“个体化”，但由于东方社会强调人与人之间的关系（犹如基督教中与神之间那份无法割舍的联系），因此大家都是彼此相连的一个个的“自己”。周作人一百年前那“个人主义的人间本位”，估计放到当下，仍有“名名”的价值。
两年前读马塞尔-毛斯（Marcel Mauss）的《社会学与人类学》，对“完整社会事实”、“象征实体”等概念大多一知半解。但思考之神常牵引我在人生之梦与梦之人生中，借由理性与艺术的力量，从感知的现象中去领悟抽象概念的意义。于是，越来越明白，在这种思想转型的格局下，评论写作的角度，应走微观社会学的路，相信每个人自身都是一个宇宙。谈任何的社会问题，不再只能停留在“群体”，而需要迈向“群体中的我”。作者与读者之间，是一对一的“交谈”。社会课题，不能存在于“作者之外”，更不能让读者觉得，怎么“我”就包括在你谈到问题之中，而身为作者的“你”反而如同处于天国的宙斯（Zeus），置身事外而不断对“我”抛掷神圣的闪电。
也许，越是“后现代”的社会，就越需要这种同理心。奥巴马（竞选时）散发的领袖气质，不也是因为这个吗？
我不知道，究竟大部分的中国人不买这本书，是因为真的认为自己的国家已经走出了《中国可以说不》的时代，或是纯粹对该书从以意识形态和”中西对立”的姿态出发感到厌烦（就如普遍上对中共“思想工作”的自觉疏远与排斥）。如果问我，我估计不会花血汗钱去买，但闲暇时我倒不介意去图书馆借来翻阅。只因为，我觉得那本书中涉及到的问题，如中国在世界上的地位、西方世界对中国的芥蒂、国内民族主义等，都是有讨论价值的。问题往往在于讨论的方式。
我眼中的中国人，不再稀罕那些从“群体”层面出发来宏观讨论社会问题的言论，除非作者能够提供一些惊为天人的原始史料或研究数据作为佐证（如在内地被禁、在香港狂销、在网上广传、谈“三年自然灾害”的《墓碑》）。估计，他们更容易被柏杨《丑陋的中国人》或是王小波一类的文章吸引。这是现代思想的路数：每个人都在“个体化”，但由于东方社会强调人与人之间的关系（犹如基督教中与神之间那份无法割舍的联系），因此大家都是彼此相连的一个个的“自己”。周作人一百年前那“个人主义的人间本位”，估计放到当下，仍有“名名”的价值。
两年前读马塞尔-毛斯（Marcel Mauss）的《社会学与人类学》，对“完整社会事实”、“象征实体”等概念大多一知半解。但思考之神常牵引我在人生之梦与梦之人生中，借由理性与艺术的力量，从感知的现象中去领悟抽象概念的意义。于是，越来越明白，在这种思想转型的格局下，评论写作的角度，应走微观社会学的路，相信每个人自身都是一个宇宙。谈任何的社会问题，不再只能停留在“群体”，而需要迈向“群体中的我”。作者与读者之间，是一对一的“交谈”。社会课题，不能存在于“作者之外”，更不能让读者觉得，怎么“我”就包括在你谈到问题之中，而身为作者的“你”反而如同处于天国的宙斯（Zeus），置身事外而不断对“我”抛掷神圣的闪电。
也许，越是“后现代”的社会，就越需要这种同理心。奥巴马（竞选时）散发的领袖气质，不也是因为这个吗？
2009年3月23日星期一
自信、权力、后现代迷茫
在知识的象牙塔里，本人是极度谦卑的。因为，越是相信自己的一套，就越容易发觉原来自己视野狭隘。
说到底，我只不过是想当个“穿新衣的国王”罢了。王子病，是克服傲气与跋扈，迈向谦虚而不自卑，自信而不固执的方法。毕竟，我已经被自己思想的矛盾与经常碰见的死角一次次摔得渐渐失去自信。我能自信的，应该只是自知自己无知吧。但同时，我却也不能不对诸事形成自己的看法和观点。要为人民服务的人，不得不逼着自己成长。
真正令人钦佩的，到底还是知识与智慧。权力，不外只是把难以被辩论折服的知识，化为现实的具体手段罢了。有时，我情愿不去拥有权力，却发觉那是因为要逃避某种我无法辞去的责任。也许，即使没有成为scholar，我也始终希望做点什么，而既然我必将对自己关注的问题有所反思，我必将寻求把思想化为行动的power。而如今背负了纳税人给的“米”在外国呆了这一阵子，还“人情”更是理所当然、顺理成章的。
至于那些由理性推理而说我被政治权力洗脑，折服于执政党所设下的“陷阱”的人，或是那些认为“个人自由”重要过一切的有志之士，我也只能说，也许他们正处于一个自己都看不见的后现代“理性陷阱”里。也许，这也正是这个时代可怕的地方：它让原本合理、服务于社会运作的一切价值与规则，露出它们或多或少将我们“定式化”的本质，而名之为“枷锁”。
于是，我们总要挣脱，便开始对历史以及在时间的河流中堆积起的一切，化为“古板”的“化石”，奢望河水再次清浊无比。殊不知，恒河的颗颗沙粒都是珍贵的，无边无际的大海反而容易令人畏惧。
在某种程度上，我们大部分人，或许都已经成为了不折不扣的free-thinker：相信一切的宗教，却否定一切宗教的教规戒律。于是，我们下不了地狱，亦上不了天堂；而人世间，尽是些游离的飘魂……
说到底，我只不过是想当个“穿新衣的国王”罢了。王子病，是克服傲气与跋扈，迈向谦虚而不自卑，自信而不固执的方法。毕竟，我已经被自己思想的矛盾与经常碰见的死角一次次摔得渐渐失去自信。我能自信的，应该只是自知自己无知吧。但同时，我却也不能不对诸事形成自己的看法和观点。要为人民服务的人，不得不逼着自己成长。
真正令人钦佩的，到底还是知识与智慧。权力，不外只是把难以被辩论折服的知识，化为现实的具体手段罢了。有时，我情愿不去拥有权力，却发觉那是因为要逃避某种我无法辞去的责任。也许，即使没有成为scholar，我也始终希望做点什么，而既然我必将对自己关注的问题有所反思，我必将寻求把思想化为行动的power。而如今背负了纳税人给的“米”在外国呆了这一阵子，还“人情”更是理所当然、顺理成章的。
至于那些由理性推理而说我被政治权力洗脑，折服于执政党所设下的“陷阱”的人，或是那些认为“个人自由”重要过一切的有志之士，我也只能说，也许他们正处于一个自己都看不见的后现代“理性陷阱”里。也许，这也正是这个时代可怕的地方：它让原本合理、服务于社会运作的一切价值与规则，露出它们或多或少将我们“定式化”的本质，而名之为“枷锁”。
于是，我们总要挣脱，便开始对历史以及在时间的河流中堆积起的一切，化为“古板”的“化石”，奢望河水再次清浊无比。殊不知，恒河的颗颗沙粒都是珍贵的，无边无际的大海反而容易令人畏惧。
在某种程度上，我们大部分人，或许都已经成为了不折不扣的free-thinker：相信一切的宗教，却否定一切宗教的教规戒律。于是，我们下不了地狱，亦上不了天堂；而人世间，尽是些游离的飘魂……
Conceptualizing the sociology of Singapore CL education
A conceptual proposition (assumed framework) about the ‘fields of struggle’
1. Chinese communalism versus nationhood
· The need to balance multi-racism with local needs
· Commodification of EL v.s. morals of CL
· ‘Privatization of ethnicity responsibilities’ to different racial groups (contribution to nation-building)
· SAP schools despite switch to English as first language in schools
· Historical formation of two ‘factions’ among Chinese Singaporeans
· Sociobiology and politics of race: De-emphasizing dialects through speak mandarin campaign effectively diminishes the roles of communal clans based on dialect groups, though government still appears to be ‘supportive’. Decline of the attraction of Chinese communal societies also reduces their abilities to uphold the ‘ethnic responsibilities’ they were supposed to uphold. Possible mindset: Such clans that are seen to be out-of-step with times may also lead to less attention to ‘ethnicity’ and relegates related values, customs, practices and culture to outdated or obsolete notions in the minds of young parents and children. Chinese language as ‘given’ to a gradual detachment of language competency with ethnicity.
· Talk of Chinese communal spirit but no concrete policies aimed at this, in fact watering down. Strengthening business-related organizations like Chinese Chamber of Commerce
· Apart from values that help businesses, the rest of ethno-cultural heritage is essentially shredded, attenuated or ‘conspicuously hidden or unknown’.
2. Rhetoric about CL: Transferring between forms of capital
· As a cultural capital (though still within the purview of nation-building) to economic rhetoric
· Economic prosperity as the commonplace for overcoming group interests (packaged in terms such as ‘pragmatism’ and ‘meritocracy’, which are subsequently imbibed by Singaporeans into their ‘ways of life’) + Rise of
· Refer to CDA essay on LKY’s parliamentary speech.
3. Mother-tongue language policy and curriculum
*Demarcating the discipline: central content knowledge, foci of learning, connection of ideas, processes to establish new knowledge, validity of claims; connection with students’ thinking; instructional practices
· Compulsory bilingual policy: rhetoric shifting from social harmony to economic globalization
· National curricular materials
§ Retention of ‘national’ agenda e.g. racial harmony (theme & illustration)
· 1991 shared values à ‘5 main themes’ in textbook development; 2004 ‘shared values’ as curriculum framework relaxed
· Curriculum, pedagogy, evaluation
§ Change from first language to second language pedagogy
§ Shift in focus from vocabulary à language skills and thinking skills
§ No emphasis on ‘cultural or ethnic identity’
§ Chinese culture as a ‘static’ pool of resources to be acquired, but often seen as lacking in context and hence relegated or water-downed to inculcation of morals based on Confucianism (dominant learning objectives of anecdotes as ‘acquisitive’ Confucian moral values rather than ‘cultural literacy’)
§ ‘Mainstream’ instead of transformative: Acquisition instead of inquisition;
Apple, M: Hegemony and resistance in curriculum (‘technicality’)
· Stratification and differentiation:
§ Elitism and CL ‘B’-zero sum game
§ Building on the declining and increasingly diverse state of CL competencies, there is greater incorporation of stratification in the form of emphasis on different ‘language skills’. At primary level, weaker students need to only know how to listen and speak, average students to read, better students to write (LKY’s logic). At the secondary level, various forms of streaming, with the freeing up of Higher CL criteria gradually seen as an ‘escapade’ from learning the language at AO level
§ Chinese elites taking curriculum with ambiguity in definition of ‘culture’, who are learning about contemporary
“The tendency of most state curriculum documents is to attempt a set of ‘overlays,’, or grids, that can verify or guide supra-KLA coverage of various ‘core skills,’ ‘values,’ or ‘orientations.’ Hence, we find teachers and schools grappling to grid issues of ‘identity,’ ‘futures,’ and ‘literacy across the curriculum’ across their already atomized syllabi and work programs. What this means is that the soft, less-rationalized skills or knowledge outcomes, becomes part of a subordinate grid of curriculum specification.” (Luke, 2005, p. 22) This eventually leads to dilemmas about educated and formed identities.
4. Educated and formed identities
· A spectrum of concerns:
§ Teachers: Dilemma how to posit their roles in CL education, but generally agreeing that students lack inner motivation and genuine interest
§ Parents: Spectrum from ‘getting out’ mentality (request for abolition of exams) to concerns about declining moral standards that accompany decline in language
§ Students: Rejection of Chinese identity (rare); Hate CL from P1, language competency not seen as an essential part of ethnicity; learning CL as a natural thing but not much room left for possible means of ‘identity-seeking’ and ‘cultural feedback’; no comparison of what it means to be a descendant of a Chinese immigrant, Singaporean Chinese and PRC Chinese that focuses on common roots and substantial differences in thinking modes
· Concerns of the transitory phase
§ Morals and language: Reverse impact of a failed CL planning policy on the beliefs and morals of Chinese Singaporean citizens
§ Difficulties of an integrated code for CL and EL (recognizing ‘language transfer’ but hurdles in mindsets)
§ Effectively diminishing the communal notion in favour of an ‘international perspective’ – even for good students, ethnic identity may not be easily feedbacked
§ Leading to possible other concerns and effects with individualization, immigration (shallow notions of citizenship; ‘us’ v.s. ‘them’ for new immigrants from PRC)
§ Language education policies of tracking that lead to school-mediated forms of privileges (Bourdieu cultural capital)
∴ What does it mean to be Chinese – are there differences culturally and ethnically？Will the complexities of being part of the ‘Chinese Diaspora’ return to haunt Singapore-born Chinese? Is there a fundamental strife between nationhood and communal interests? Are race and ethnicity going to become negligible, if not then how should CL education position itself such that it serves national interests of unity without attenuating cultural knowledge to serve political ends or turned into unpalatable forms of acquired, static, unquestioning propaganda or indoctrination of values? Lastly, and most importantly, what are the identities future Chinese children in
© Tan Wei Xiong, 2009
2009年3月21日星期六
3·21 International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
2009年3月21日。披着白纱的香港，婀娜中带点冷冷的清高。
思绪还在沉淀，照片还在整理。过些时日，再po肤色各异的学生在尖沙咀钟楼前尽情玩乐的场景记录。
虽然冥火亦可照亮人间，孩子们却有权利在天堂中欢乐。做大人的，有时也不知能做些什么，甚至不知该做些什么。
所以，只好做他们的一匹旋转木马。
《旋木》
作词:杨明学
作曲:袁惟仁
编曲:黄中岳
拥有华丽的外表和绚烂的灯光
我是匹旋转木马身在这天堂
只为了满足孩子的梦想
爬到我背上就带你去翱翔
我忘了只能原地奔跑的那忧伤
我也忘了自己是永远被锁上
不管我能够陪你有多长
至少能让你幻想与我飞翔
奔驰的木马让你忘了伤
在这一个供应欢笑的天堂
看着他们的羡慕眼光
不需放我在心上
旋转的木马没有翅膀
但却能够带着你到处飞翔
音乐停下来你将离场
我也只能这样
思绪还在沉淀，照片还在整理。过些时日，再po肤色各异的学生在尖沙咀钟楼前尽情玩乐的场景记录。
虽然冥火亦可照亮人间，孩子们却有权利在天堂中欢乐。做大人的，有时也不知能做些什么，甚至不知该做些什么。
所以，只好做他们的一匹旋转木马。
《旋木》
作词:杨明学
作曲:袁惟仁
编曲:黄中岳
拥有华丽的外表和绚烂的灯光
我是匹旋转木马身在这天堂
只为了满足孩子的梦想
爬到我背上就带你去翱翔
我忘了只能原地奔跑的那忧伤
我也忘了自己是永远被锁上
不管我能够陪你有多长
至少能让你幻想与我飞翔
奔驰的木马让你忘了伤
在这一个供应欢笑的天堂
看着他们的羡慕眼光
不需放我在心上
旋转的木马没有翅膀
但却能够带着你到处飞翔
音乐停下来你将离场
我也只能这样
2009年3月20日星期五
上海的石库门
在上海四年，总觉得这是一座“浮在空中”
不过，大学四年的最后一个学期， 提起“石库门”，来过上海的人，
想到酒吧林立的新天地。其实，
而在“大历史”之外，我想，
我印象很深，初次进行调查时，我们访问的老人，
在教会学校受教育，
朋友称这些老人为“老上海的最后一批精神贵族”，
生活形态方面，我们会发现，
上海啊……现在可以理解，为什么它能够勾起“历史浪漫主义”了。
（文章曾刊登于新加坡《联合早报》“新声带”。照片由复旦兄弟姐妹们提供，在此感谢。）
2009年3月19日星期四
2009年3月17日星期二
“三生教育”
我一向不反对、甚至主张教育（特别是中学至大学教育）里，融入哲学性质的内容。有些想法，也有些困惑，在此坦诚布公：
1）无需把苏格拉底这些人带进来，却必须在适当时采用苏格拉底对话式的教学法。开始有自我意识到年轻人，虽然不能说可以完全摆脱“灌输”，但同时也是需要激发他们发自内在的疑问与思考的。
2）中学阶段的内容不一定要深奥，却可以像罗素的《幸福之路》（The Conquest of Happiness）那样，深入浅出，又发人深省。
3）但因为我们脑子里有一个“种族”的划分模式，而确实不同宗教与种族之间对待生命的方法亦不尽相同，加上越来越多元化的外来移民群体，课程的内容设置应该如何，将会是个需要斟酌的大问题。新加坡政府总习惯性地把儒家视为一种“中性”、“非宗教”（况且还有“和而不同”的精神）的普世价值，于是请了余英时、杜维明等学者于80年代末，为我们精心设计一套国家的“共同价值观”。而那些虽然印在了学生的作业本后的封面，却很少有人会再去提起。而确确实实，尽管、在中国政治思想史上具有正统地位，儒家哲学并不能是“生命的全部”。何况，儒家内部多少掺杂了道家与释家的思想因子，这对哲学体系内部所必然具有的理性矛盾与局限，有所帮助，却不是新加坡所说的“儒家”。于是，我们的“儒家”难免容易带有意识形态的影子；但如果把于中国历史上形成的儒家带进课堂，便是硬生生地表明这是属于“华人”的，于是必将带来其他群体更大的反应。
4）再者，与第三点有所联系的是，生命教育要归入哪一个科目的问题。我们有“公民与道德”课，却因不必考试而容易被忽略；而且常常是一些灌输性质的内容，大多采用单向教学以获取”知识”的方式进行。因此，生命教育归入这个科目，未必妥当。归入中文科，一则教师负担变重，二则华社依旧对中文教育有自身的价值立场，三则受众有所局限（生命教育本不应是有人种区分的）。融入各种科目里，又容易是其被各学科的内容掩盖。作为学校自身的课程或是一种氛围来塑造学生思想，是一条可能的出路，但校长与老师们必然得回到第三点所提出的矛盾中进行探索与尝试。
5）当然，最后的方法，就是不去把问题“体制化”，通过师者的身教、言教以及他们与学生之间的互动，来进行生命教育。但是，姑且不论不“体制化”所可能有的局限，问题是，教师与学生之间的关系，也逐渐地被框起来。教师被投诉“宣教”或是“非礼学生”的报道，时有所闻；社会与舆论更是要求教师与学生保持若即若离的关系。于是，教师如何去解决内在的个人地位，是一个必须先面对的问题。其次，师资是否具有那种教授生命教育与反思的能力，也是值得质疑的。只要是人，必将不断在生命中遇到新困难、新事物。教师比起学生，本只是“吃盐比你吃米多”，却也有学生碰到教师从未遇见过的人生问题的情况。而且，教师个人反思的程度也有所不同，于是并不一定就能提供全面性的帮助。
而如果想着把一切问题都归于“心理辅导”，那是一种不恰当的做法，在我看来。
于是，要“推展”任何与生命有关的教学，必得正面迎接这以上种种难点。哲学可以是纯知识的，但因必须化为个人价值，而在成年之前，孩子经常是必须受制于他所属于的群体文化、思想、道德立场的束缚。我们首先要解决的问题也许是，某些族群的文化开始在孩子那里被视为不cool，而孩子越来越早在思想上产生对自身被灌输的文化的质疑。或许，这句话高估了我们孩子的能力，但无法否认的是，在台面上我们可以以“不说”、“不想”、“不辩论”、“不反思”的姿态前进，但21世纪的新加坡孩子，不可能不去想（我们不是还教他们要“创意思维”吗）；而且，即使不想，全球化的时代，只要一踏出新加坡，随之而来的必将是个人多重身份的危机意识。这是经验之谈，其普遍性固然能够商榷，但相信我，问题是存在的。
【联合早报】积极推展“三生教育”
（2009-03-17）
● 王永炳
最近，三名年轻人的轻生事件，令人痛心与惋惜。他们都是奖学金得主的高材生，但却为了不同原因而断然结束前途不可限量的可贵生命。
这让笔者想及青少年的情商教育，而个人认为应该积极推展“三生教育”，才能提高个人的情商质量。
所谓“三生教育”是道德教育中的生命教育、生存教育与生活教育的简称。
生命教育旨在了解生命，进而尊重、珍惜和发展生命。南戏《琵琶记》有一段曲文，形象地描述小生命的诞生及其成长过程：“凡人养子，最是十月怀耽苦，更三 年劳役抱负。休言他受湿推干，万千劳事。真个千般爱惜，千般爱护。儿有些不安，父母忧惶无措。直待他可了，可了欢忻似初。”
养子过程古今一样，这也是父母的天职。他们珍惜生命的可贵，无私地付出全部心力维护生命的成长。
道德教育须让学生了解生命成长的意义，使他们懂得尊重和珍惜自己的生命。首要让学生对自己的生命负责，有如婴儿时期父母对子女的负责。
一个对生命负责的学生肯定会体会“身体发肤，受之父母，不敢毁伤”（《孝经》）是对自己和对父母负责的孝敬行为。他不会做出“好勇斗狠，以危父母”（《孟子》），也不会因“一朝之忿，忘其身，以及其亲”。
发展至尊重别人的生命时，他的德行不会停留在低水平而做出“爱之欲其生，恶之欲其死”（以上《论语》）同归于尽的糊涂事。
脱离电玩的“魔”掌
要尊重、珍惜生命得学会生存。在今日竞争激烈时代，学习并掌握生存之道显得非常重要。从小训练学生自己的事自己做，碰到难题设法解决，使他们自动学习和掌握生存知识和技能，逐个儿克服难关。
父母与师长最多只能从旁协助指导他们克服难关，而非代劳。从小凡事依赖父母，一旦离开父母身边，他可能无法很好地生存下去。
想办法让青少年学会了解自我，接受自我，把握自我，不做盲目的攀比。在自我定位上敢于面对现实，学会穷变自强。
因为他会明白一个道理，客观环境难于调控，但只要有信心地进行主观的努力，问题最终可以迎刃而解。有了这种思想心理准备，以后遇到任何困境，他都不会畏缩不前，也不轻言放弃。
但是，要学会生存必须学会生活。换言之，生活是生存的基础。健康的生活能使生存变得坚强而有意义。
一名亚细安奖学金得主原来学业成绩优异，后因沉迷电玩“魔兽世界”而成绩下降而丢失奖学金，最后连命也丢了。《尚书》所谓“玩物丧志”就是这个意思。
《新明日报》记者叶伟强亲述他如何挣脱魔兽世界的经历（3月9日），令人不寒而栗，我们为他的脱离魔掌而庆幸。
学习生活讲求规律，认真于读书学习，尽情于休闲运动，二者要取得平衡。有了平衡的学习生活，学习上可能变得应付自如，游刃有余，身心上也健康顺适，乐观进取。
尊重生命，学会生存，懂得生活的“三生教育”，各有重点，但密不可分，三者融合为一，才算得上成功。
“三生教育”必须从家庭教育开始，进一步在学校教育中加强，同时配合社会舆论力量使之巩固。
作者是本地资深教育工作者
2009年3月15日星期日
中国农村的孩子
记得毕业之前的某一个晚上，跟鑫兄一起在光华楼的咖啡厅闲聊，从摄影、谈到教育、再论及梦想，说着说着就扯到了城乡发展、农民工子女、留守儿童、发展中的文化与道德流失、基层师资素质等一系列与“社会正义”有关的课题上。
大学四年，在中国看到的当然很多，滋润着灵魂的却是地广物博的农村，以及农村来的人。不说别的，最好的兄弟们都来自村落，尽管发展程度不尽相同。而从大一就与之结下缘分的云南，从04至08年，我更是每年至少造访一次，每次都是在昆明市逗留一天，隔天一早朋友租车，开几个小时到县城，吃了午餐后就出发前往不同的乡。有时抵达后，太阳已下山，于是不得不留宿，在寂静的夜里，望着满天星斗，遥想着各种各样与人道主义有关的问题与矛盾，时而激起心海的浪涛，时而感觉如同眼前漆黑一片的迷茫，时而体验凉风中某种莫言的荒芜。但挥之不去的，却是对见过的孩子的思念，以及对即将遇见的孩子的期盼。
在中国助养孩子上学，从来就不只是钱的问题。频繁的书信来往，偶尔让我惊喜的长途电话，让我这个心智未必成熟的大学生，得以透析这些高中生的人生取向、思想矛盾、以及心灵深处的压抑与孤单：独自在离家十几公里的县城上课，因被寄予厚望而对课业成绩的起伏战战兢兢；强忍着同学的耻笑，有时忍无可忍而爆发，到了夜里却觉得自己鲁莽的行为是可耻的，流着泪写忏悔信给在千里之外的“大哥哥”，向我倾诉内心的罪恶感；为了存钱给家里，有时一天就吃一顿饭，把我给他们的零用钱存起来，假期带回家，却遭到父母的一顿斥骂，乃至拷打，责备他们为何不好好念书，在气头上甚至说出“你看不起爸妈我们是不是”的话，或是质疑那笔钱的来历。
总觉得，我接触过的中国孩子们，小小年纪必须承受的痛与苦，是我始料未及的。于是，每一次到农村去，找个地方与他们私下聊，不论他们或是我，最后总是眼泛泪光。但身为“哥哥”，怎样也得保持微笑，就如信中不论如何都说着鼓励的话。离别的拥抱，总感觉他们紧紧地钻入自己的怀里，在无言里却传达了很多很多。
孩子们都有我的照片，我却从来没与他们合照。或许，在我的心灵深处，不愿拍下他们眼神里的失落，而始终盼望他们长大，期待他们在各自的岗位上出人头地，带着微笑回来找他们的“炜雄哥哥”的一天。也许，到了那个时候，我才能毫无顾忌地跟他们合照留念吧。
大学四年，在中国看到的当然很多，滋润着灵魂的却是地广物博的农村，以及农村来的人。不说别的，最好的兄弟们都来自村落，尽管发展程度不尽相同。而从大一就与之结下缘分的云南，从04至08年，我更是每年至少造访一次，每次都是在昆明市逗留一天，隔天一早朋友租车，开几个小时到县城，吃了午餐后就出发前往不同的乡。有时抵达后，太阳已下山，于是不得不留宿，在寂静的夜里，望着满天星斗，遥想着各种各样与人道主义有关的问题与矛盾，时而激起心海的浪涛，时而感觉如同眼前漆黑一片的迷茫，时而体验凉风中某种莫言的荒芜。但挥之不去的，却是对见过的孩子的思念，以及对即将遇见的孩子的期盼。
在中国助养孩子上学，从来就不只是钱的问题。频繁的书信来往，偶尔让我惊喜的长途电话，让我这个心智未必成熟的大学生，得以透析这些高中生的人生取向、思想矛盾、以及心灵深处的压抑与孤单：独自在离家十几公里的县城上课，因被寄予厚望而对课业成绩的起伏战战兢兢；强忍着同学的耻笑，有时忍无可忍而爆发，到了夜里却觉得自己鲁莽的行为是可耻的，流着泪写忏悔信给在千里之外的“大哥哥”，向我倾诉内心的罪恶感；为了存钱给家里，有时一天就吃一顿饭，把我给他们的零用钱存起来，假期带回家，却遭到父母的一顿斥骂，乃至拷打，责备他们为何不好好念书，在气头上甚至说出“你看不起爸妈我们是不是”的话，或是质疑那笔钱的来历。
总觉得，我接触过的中国孩子们，小小年纪必须承受的痛与苦，是我始料未及的。于是，每一次到农村去，找个地方与他们私下聊，不论他们或是我，最后总是眼泛泪光。但身为“哥哥”，怎样也得保持微笑，就如信中不论如何都说着鼓励的话。离别的拥抱，总感觉他们紧紧地钻入自己的怀里，在无言里却传达了很多很多。
孩子们都有我的照片，我却从来没与他们合照。或许，在我的心灵深处，不愿拍下他们眼神里的失落，而始终盼望他们长大，期待他们在各自的岗位上出人头地，带着微笑回来找他们的“炜雄哥哥”的一天。也许，到了那个时候，我才能毫无顾忌地跟他们合照留念吧。
留守儿童留出问题
（2009-03-15）
● 张晓中
屈维微（女，11岁）
在浙江玉环县出生长大的她，一直跟随打工的父母在外地上学。
日前，在她就读的英利育才小学，屈维微细声告诉记者：“
今年春节前，伴随2200万农民工返乡的，还有上百万名子女，
农村学生
留守儿童占70%
英利育才小学校长徐光兵表示，70%以上的农村学生是留守儿童，
留守儿童一般上由祖父母看管。年迈祖父母文化水平很低，
记者在教室看到屈维微时，她一个人静静地坐在坐位上，望向窗外。
自从去年12月随妈妈回乡，她就在适应新的环境和生活。
她说：“爷爷家在偏僻的乡村，开始非常不习惯，觉得到处都很脏。
换了学习环境，她也需要适应。幸好，学校是地震后重建的，
她说：“我在浙江上的学校是给农民工子弟开的，条件很差；
“现在我不太开心，但不会埋怨父母。
想爸爸妈妈时，怎么办？她答：“爷爷家里安装了电话，
户籍政策规定
在户口所在地上中学
与屈维微相比，于云涛（男，12岁）则很高兴回乡上学。去年，
如今，他回到原来的小学，与以前的同学一起学习，是件开心的事。
过几天，他妈妈又要回东莞找工作。问他想不想跟妈妈一起去，
受访的小学五年级、六年级返乡生回故乡上学的原因不同，
记者从学校方面了解到，因为外省与重庆使用的教材不同，
种田兼照顾孙子
农村老人非常辛苦
记者来到于云涛的家，这里离学校大约10公里，每天早上5点钟，
在一座破旧的房屋门口，于云涛的外祖父李培德（67岁）
李培德说，农村老人命苦，孩子大了原本可以享福了，
农民工妈妈打工赚钱
将来供孩子上大学
于云涛的母亲李善美（36岁）在深圳打工多年，
她说：“看到孩子冬天拿着手电筒在黑漆漆的外面步行上学，
她生了于云涛一年后就到深圳打工，去年回来生了第二个儿子，
中国推行独生子女制度，但在农村，人们普遍还是生两个孩子。
李善美说，再过几天，她就要再回到东莞找工。
留守儿童性格有缺陷
重庆市梁平县文化镇英利育才小学校长徐光兵说，
他说，目前农村小学70%以上的学生是留守儿童，
留守儿童一般上由祖父母看管，徐校长说：“每次开家长会，
他认为，在父母身边长大的孩子和留守儿童的区别非常明显。“
造成留守儿童性格缺陷的另一个因素就是：
徐光兵表示，政府意识到这个问题的严重性，
英利育才小学前身是文化镇中心小学，在去年四川大地震中被震垮，
徐光兵说：“我们很想利用现有的宿舍，让留守儿童住校，
他希望出外打工的家长，最好留一个人在家照顾孩子。“
梁平县教委基教科欧阳科长表示，现在除了留守儿童令人担心，
2009年3月14日星期六
我也想搞音乐剧
师门里有一位博士生，曾是香港考评局中文组的组长，目前是一所中学的副校长。校庆四十周年，学校自编自导自演了一出英语音乐剧 “The Wondrous Taste of Life”。刚到理工大学观赏了回到家，突然好想好想也召集一批孩子一起来搞一次大型的音乐剧。
想想，我最后一次搞戏剧，也已是快10年前的事了。13岁时第一次参加中学校庆的舞台剧，不想出现在幕前，所以最后当上了stage manager。15岁时，学校组团去澳洲表演，老师们临时把我也拉了进去，就这样再一次糊里糊涂地当上stage manager，随团到Adelaide交流，还跟资深的幕后工作者学了点灯光、音响的处理。
音乐剧，比起舞台剧也许困难得多。不单要演，还要唱，不是容易的事。看着香港的孩子们在舞台上演着、舞着、唱着，自己的嘴角一直是向上轻微杨着的。学生们的英语咬字，或许有时并不清楚，或是过于努力地想把每一个字都念好，难免就有点不自然，但要有今天这样的水准，绝对是下了很大一番努力的。特别是几名主角唱起歌时，明显都有歌唱功底。印象最深的，一名个子估计1米6不到的中二演员，唱起歌却是后劲十足，那丹田的力道，绝不是盖的。可塑之材啊～
演出结束，大人们总喜欢说许许多多“很用心”、“很感动”的话。但也许，这一切都比不上校长和一些小演员们的泪。估计，那比什么都珍贵。校园演出，从来就不追求完美；看的，是孩子们付出的那些时间和精力，以及在一切结束之后的释怀，加上因一些小瑕疵而产生的微弱遗憾。毕竟，成就感的时效是很短暂的，付出的努力和承受的不完美，才是日后记忆里影响最深的。努力过了，就有所成长——对我自己是这样，相信对这些付出了半年时间的孩子，亦是如此。
期待什么时候有机会，再次重温自己少年时期的美好，并带着更多的孩子，在音乐、肢体、语言交会的艺术世界里，共同成长，一起翱翔。
想想，我最后一次搞戏剧，也已是快10年前的事了。13岁时第一次参加中学校庆的舞台剧，不想出现在幕前，所以最后当上了stage manager。15岁时，学校组团去澳洲表演，老师们临时把我也拉了进去，就这样再一次糊里糊涂地当上stage manager，随团到Adelaide交流，还跟资深的幕后工作者学了点灯光、音响的处理。
音乐剧，比起舞台剧也许困难得多。不单要演，还要唱，不是容易的事。看着香港的孩子们在舞台上演着、舞着、唱着，自己的嘴角一直是向上轻微杨着的。学生们的英语咬字，或许有时并不清楚，或是过于努力地想把每一个字都念好，难免就有点不自然，但要有今天这样的水准，绝对是下了很大一番努力的。特别是几名主角唱起歌时，明显都有歌唱功底。印象最深的，一名个子估计1米6不到的中二演员，唱起歌却是后劲十足，那丹田的力道，绝不是盖的。可塑之材啊～
演出结束，大人们总喜欢说许许多多“很用心”、“很感动”的话。但也许，这一切都比不上校长和一些小演员们的泪。估计，那比什么都珍贵。校园演出，从来就不追求完美；看的，是孩子们付出的那些时间和精力，以及在一切结束之后的释怀，加上因一些小瑕疵而产生的微弱遗憾。毕竟，成就感的时效是很短暂的，付出的努力和承受的不完美，才是日后记忆里影响最深的。努力过了，就有所成长——对我自己是这样，相信对这些付出了半年时间的孩子，亦是如此。
期待什么时候有机会，再次重温自己少年时期的美好，并带着更多的孩子，在音乐、肢体、语言交会的艺术世界里，共同成长，一起翱翔。
2009年3月13日星期五
如果有来世
作为一个相信佛教的人，就如释迦牟尼主张的那样，除了普世伦理与“法身”的延续之外，我已不再相信有“灵魂再循环”的那种来世。
然而，那种来世却是浪漫的。就算是光幻想，也是纯美的，让人能轻易意识自己究竟珍惜的是什么。
所以，总想着，如果下一刻在死亡线上徘徊，我会对谁说“来世我们还要……”的话。
也许，有很多很多吧。但第一个窜进脑海的，总是那令人又爱又怜的弟弟。
都说“血浓于水”，但血缘与骨肉，也有亲近疏远之分。所以，要问我的话，我想，至少到现在，除了那有些半吊在空中的“博爱梦想”之外，应该说就是为了弟弟而活的。
是的，我们也会吵架。最后的一次，竟是为了一点微不足道的事，却是让我伤心得边写博客边流泪的。不单是弟弟的错，我也有不对的地方。但是，却真的感到，兄弟之间的感情，即使有小小的裂缝，都是撕心裂肺的伤。
是的，我应该不再那么自私的。是时候尊重弟弟的一切选择了，毕竟你也已成年了。该放手了，虽然灵魂里始终视你为那穿着尿布趴在床上张着嘴嬉笑向我爬来的幼婴。
要爱就爱吧，哥不再反对什么了。什么时候带她出来一起吃饭，让我跟她道歉，顺便了解她多一点。
说到最后，也就这样一句了：翰，来世我们还要做兄弟。
这一次，你来当那八面威风的哥哥，让我甘之如饴地依偎于你的身影之中，慢慢学会坚强。
然而，那种来世却是浪漫的。就算是光幻想，也是纯美的，让人能轻易意识自己究竟珍惜的是什么。
所以，总想着，如果下一刻在死亡线上徘徊，我会对谁说“来世我们还要……”的话。
也许，有很多很多吧。但第一个窜进脑海的，总是那令人又爱又怜的弟弟。
都说“血浓于水”，但血缘与骨肉，也有亲近疏远之分。所以，要问我的话，我想，至少到现在，除了那有些半吊在空中的“博爱梦想”之外，应该说就是为了弟弟而活的。
是的，我们也会吵架。最后的一次，竟是为了一点微不足道的事，却是让我伤心得边写博客边流泪的。不单是弟弟的错，我也有不对的地方。但是，却真的感到，兄弟之间的感情，即使有小小的裂缝，都是撕心裂肺的伤。
是的，我应该不再那么自私的。是时候尊重弟弟的一切选择了，毕竟你也已成年了。该放手了，虽然灵魂里始终视你为那穿着尿布趴在床上张着嘴嬉笑向我爬来的幼婴。
要爱就爱吧，哥不再反对什么了。什么时候带她出来一起吃饭，让我跟她道歉，顺便了解她多一点。
说到最后，也就这样一句了：翰，来世我们还要做兄弟。
这一次，你来当那八面威风的哥哥，让我甘之如饴地依偎于你的身影之中，慢慢学会坚强。
2009年3月11日星期三
"Managing" critical and creative thinking
Very often, we hear about the need to infuse "critical thinking" and "creativity" among our students. Yet research has always been on whether these can be taught, and if researchers believe so, how to incorporate them into pedagogy.
What we have seemed to forget, however, is that when one thinks, one needs to be situated in a context. Not necessarily a task or problem to be resolved (so don't bring "task-based learning" or "problem-based learning" into the equation too loosely), but in a context.
Teachers seem to lack a background belief in the ultimate aims of such forms of education (now I'm doing some hedging here because assertions need to be backed by empirical or qualitative evidence).
We have somehow forgotten to teach our children how to use such thinking appropriately. As such, they begin to launch attacks against traditions and regulations that bind their wandering souls. The quest for a voice starts to tickle their hearts but one wonders if deep down they are really passionate about issues, never mind if their opinions may still be tender or their considerations partial. In areas where we need such criticality or creativity, such as R&D, entrepreneurship, social activism etc, many (I wouldn't say all, since there are bound to be - fortunately- exceptions) children instead grow up into adults who learn to avoid and evade.
Risks, that's what we are afraid of. The same applies for our children.
Critical and creative thinking thus need a more holistic, comprehensive and long-term programme to develop children into real 'owners' of the 21st century. The scale is still skewed towards 'people for nation's growth', and it is time we begin to look from societal consensus that overpowers public participation, to first focusing on the identities and internal dilemmas of every individual. Only with this is then 'positive conflict' a possibility, and then hopefully communities of people come together in a showing of collective activism. The key here is to tolerate some mild imperfections and conflicts, instead of trying to stick with old ways because they have proven effective in the past. Even viruses mutate, what more people and societies.
What this requires, however, is a government that is even stronger and more shrewd, so that it is able to manage tensions (again, manage not suppress or avoid) and still play a leading role amongst the people and such groups. For the moment we lack such a government, we risk becoming the next Hong Kong where the Chief Executive ends up having bananas thrown at him in Parliament while the whole society is just like a big marketplace where you hear a whole mass of noises but never really know who's saying what, except if they are close enough.
As a disclaimer, let me add that this is a long-term projection, an ideal that can be classed as 'Utopian' if you would like. But this seems like an inevitable direction to head towards, for even if the government can maintain status quo and keep the country in a harmonious ambience, global forces will jerk it out of its beautiful dreams. In this age of the Internet, this age of internationalisation and global economic demands, we cannot avoid the evolution of thoughts since that is how society progresses - or for that matter, without fast-enough response to changing circumstances, falters.
What we have seemed to forget, however, is that when one thinks, one needs to be situated in a context. Not necessarily a task or problem to be resolved (so don't bring "task-based learning" or "problem-based learning" into the equation too loosely), but in a context.
Teachers seem to lack a background belief in the ultimate aims of such forms of education (now I'm doing some hedging here because assertions need to be backed by empirical or qualitative evidence).
We have somehow forgotten to teach our children how to use such thinking appropriately. As such, they begin to launch attacks against traditions and regulations that bind their wandering souls. The quest for a voice starts to tickle their hearts but one wonders if deep down they are really passionate about issues, never mind if their opinions may still be tender or their considerations partial. In areas where we need such criticality or creativity, such as R&D, entrepreneurship, social activism etc, many (I wouldn't say all, since there are bound to be - fortunately- exceptions) children instead grow up into adults who learn to avoid and evade.
Risks, that's what we are afraid of. The same applies for our children.
Critical and creative thinking thus need a more holistic, comprehensive and long-term programme to develop children into real 'owners' of the 21st century. The scale is still skewed towards 'people for nation's growth', and it is time we begin to look from societal consensus that overpowers public participation, to first focusing on the identities and internal dilemmas of every individual. Only with this is then 'positive conflict' a possibility, and then hopefully communities of people come together in a showing of collective activism. The key here is to tolerate some mild imperfections and conflicts, instead of trying to stick with old ways because they have proven effective in the past. Even viruses mutate, what more people and societies.
What this requires, however, is a government that is even stronger and more shrewd, so that it is able to manage tensions (again, manage not suppress or avoid) and still play a leading role amongst the people and such groups. For the moment we lack such a government, we risk becoming the next Hong Kong where the Chief Executive ends up having bananas thrown at him in Parliament while the whole society is just like a big marketplace where you hear a whole mass of noises but never really know who's saying what, except if they are close enough.
As a disclaimer, let me add that this is a long-term projection, an ideal that can be classed as 'Utopian' if you would like. But this seems like an inevitable direction to head towards, for even if the government can maintain status quo and keep the country in a harmonious ambience, global forces will jerk it out of its beautiful dreams. In this age of the Internet, this age of internationalisation and global economic demands, we cannot avoid the evolution of thoughts since that is how society progresses - or for that matter, without fast-enough response to changing circumstances, falters.
2009年3月10日星期二
Education and the Marketplace II
Received this letter from a friend I've known for almost a decade:
Allow me to add salt onto wounds: Do you know how I see schools, or rather, education system? It is merely a 'factory' of some sort, transforming raw materials (young children) into finished goods (marketable, or rather, employable adults for today's marketplace). The more the school systems fails to meet market demand, the free market forces of supply and demand will ultimately win and displaces the original inflexible education system. And by then, the harder the backlash onto that education system.
Let me ask you, if a certain type of raw materials is not that suitable in making a particular finished goods, do you just grade them into EM1/2/3, just to conform to your original inflexible production line? No! You find out what that certain type of raw material is good in making, modify/change your production line and make them into good finished goods. However, what is sad is many production lines are too standardised (maybe in an effort to achieve maximum efficiency). Maybe that is still ok during the early days of Singapore's independence where the focus is in producing engineers to transform us from a 3rd world country to a 1st world country. However, in this 21st century, that 'business' model may no longer be meeting today's globalised market demand.
Hence, what I propose is this 'factory' takes into account the type of raw materials they are dealing with and putting them into correct use. That will generate greater economic benefits on the long-term. Of course, I don't believe in allowing complete free market forces to choose their wishes either. In this sense, a suitable amount of governmental regulation would be needed. Total free market forces tends to generate either excessive or inadequate supply and demand at times. For instance, back in 2007, banking and finance course was at the top of the wish list, where every student dreamt of landing that five figure investment job upon graduation. But now, you know that bubble has just burst. And in 2009, civil service jobs like teaching (and along with it, NIE courses) is nearing the top of the list soon..
My point is this: Our school education system must always anticipates tomorrow's (future) needs of the market and serves it dutifully. However, the system must not caters to each and every insatiable desires and wants of the market blindly. In this process of ongoing adjustment, not every student will be happy but it surely does maximises the potential on the whole. This is what we must aim for.
To emphasize what I might have said in the past, there are two forms of education that must be strengthened (and not fool around with) in schools. 1. Physical education. It should be broadened to include life-long heath management education and physical health crisis management like CPR. You won't want to wait for the population and public health budget time bomb to balloon dangerously like those of Americans before you take action. 2. Financial education. Like it or not, everyone is born to play the game of money. And you don't pretend the financial problems of your people are all solved with something called "CPF". Enough bullshiting in this paragraph, I know those people at M*E HQ never listens.
And long live those entrepreneurs who gave back to society. They are finally making themselves heard by some. They want to be change agents of the society and are letting money do the walking (for unless you are at the HQ, who ever pays attention to you?) So far, I am glad by the way their money have positively uplifted the lifes of many.
My reply:
Well at a policy level, all that you've said makes a lot of sense. In fact, this is the trend everywhere under globalization. That's how we have 'knowledge economies', and that's why education is moving towards 'skills-based education' and 'lifelong learning'. What I do not agree, however, is that we are too 'standardized'. Things have changed in the past few years, and certainly polys and even ITEs are producing students with good skills. Streaming may still be in place, but it is paradoxically not obsolete because in order to 'make the best use' of all the raw materials, you have to make sure they are the most suitable materials for the products they will become. The only problem is when we really stigmatize them and see them as inferior all the way. That will eventually lead to social classes and social imobility. For that reason, teachers and the whole education system cannot afford to see children as goods or materials. Hence the 'shaping the future' metaphor. Moreover, I think 2009 really showed that the world is changing, and we really don't know what can happen in the future, eg jobs creation. Singapore has come to a stage where we try to anticipate future demands but cannot be sure our projections will be right beyond 5 yrs. But education is a long-term investment, and we cannot change things abruptly because the whole system will screw up. I am a critique of the system myself, but compared to HK, compared to China, I think we are going in the right direction of diversification, and I believe MOE will continue moving forward.
Your opinions about health education and financial education are valid. But I have my reservations about the latter, at least the stage at which we push out financial education. If you ask me, high school (JC or poly) or even university is better. Because, as you should know, when you introduce such 'high-level' stuff in the public school system, it can be watered down to very dry knowledge. In this new day and age, I would say that economics is one subject we can try having more kids do. But as I found out recently, exposing children to money knowledge too early may have its adverse effects too. Children, being children, have a right to enjoy their childhood and teenage-hood. We've never learnt financial modules, but we are not unhappy. At the end of the day, I don't foresee the system introducing the technicalities of finance - at least not before university. Instead, I would rather focus on the roots of human nature and behaviour, which I'm sure you also know is fundamentally what determines market dynamics. The challenge here as an educator is to prepare children for the marketplace, but at the same time to allow them more reflxivity into their own beliefs and identities. That may be my stand as someone who did a degree in the Arts and now doing a Masters in social sciences, but I believe that in this new era, making money is not the real problem for children born in the 21st century. Finding out who they are, what they believe, their value systems - all of which ultimately feedback into how the society will be like and how political forces work in tandem with the folks, are where the tensions will arise. The stint in HK made me accept the influence of market forces on the education system, but at the same time, it also all the more strengthened my beliefs that education is ultimately about humans and how we perceive ourselves as individuals and our place in society (and the world). Right now, I do see that Singaporeans of our generation have got relevant skills to meet the challenges of the global market - at least for the top 30% or so. But what we lack is really the ability to deal with our changing thoughts and beliefs which may or may not be different from our parents' generation (now here's a dual paradox: If they are different, we have to learn to accept and then look back to try and ascertain who we are; if they are the same we also have to worry whether those values and beliefs are obsolete and if they can be integrated into the whole societal fabric).
So if you ask me, I will strengthen social studies, introduce basic philosophy and revamp moral and national education. Put in tandem with knowledge about the market and physical education, that's how we 'create' a post-modern version of ancient Greek society - of sorts.
Yes, long live the entrepreneurs who give back the wealth they created so ppl like me can deliver value. At least for 华社, I believe the business community still has an important role to play in education. In fact, I have been thinking these days what a new model of ’新‘ 华社 will look like in a few decades to come (Haha.. nice name right.. New Chinese community + Singapore chinese community).
In Singapore, we have many many people who can give ideas and suggestions to the education system from the perspective of the market's needs, but not enough people who think about what the new global economy will do to the 'soft' aspects of our society. A key question I have been pondering and will continue to bear in mind is this: How is society possible in Singapore under the challenges of economic and cultural globalization？The way I see it, this question incorporates all that we have discussed, but focuses on the person, not the market - which I still believe is fundamentally a product of human behaviour, as have been shown by the financial upheaval this time round. Our government prides itself for being pragmatic and non-ideological, but in my opinion, this is the rhetoric most detrimental to our society if we over-interpret it and place too much focus on just economic and financial forces. Singapore IS at a cross-roads, not because of the current recession, but because we need deeper roots. The same issue goes for the new immigrants: The marketplace, which once was a neutral arena free from race and cultural differences and that could make all equal, is now working in the disadvantages of the new entrants into our society. That is because new immigrants are perceived to be here for the gold. And you do realize that most of the time problems arise because of job opportunities isn't it？What we really need now is a re-balance of social forces, something which is beyond the market. The national integration council is thus also a move in the right direction, except I seriously doubt its effectiveness. If you ask me, we need more civil societies. But that's a whole big separate issue altogether, so let's leave the discussion till our next meetup.
Allow me to add salt onto wounds: Do you know how I see schools, or rather, education system? It is merely a 'factory' of some sort, transforming raw materials (young children) into finished goods (marketable, or rather, employable adults for today's marketplace). The more the school systems fails to meet market demand, the free market forces of supply and demand will ultimately win and displaces the original inflexible education system. And by then, the harder the backlash onto that education system.
Let me ask you, if a certain type of raw materials is not that suitable in making a particular finished goods, do you just grade them into EM1/2/3, just to conform to your original inflexible production line? No! You find out what that certain type of raw material is good in making, modify/change your production line and make them into good finished goods. However, what is sad is many production lines are too standardised (maybe in an effort to achieve maximum efficiency). Maybe that is still ok during the early days of Singapore's independence where the focus is in producing engineers to transform us from a 3rd world country to a 1st world country. However, in this 21st century, that 'business' model may no longer be meeting today's globalised market demand.
Hence, what I propose is this 'factory' takes into account the type of raw materials they are dealing with and putting them into correct use. That will generate greater economic benefits on the long-term. Of course, I don't believe in allowing complete free market forces to choose their wishes either. In this sense, a suitable amount of governmental regulation would be needed. Total free market forces tends to generate either excessive or inadequate supply and demand at times. For instance, back in 2007, banking and finance course was at the top of the wish list, where every student dreamt of landing that five figure investment job upon graduation. But now, you know that bubble has just burst. And in 2009, civil service jobs like teaching (and along with it, NIE courses) is nearing the top of the list soon..
My point is this: Our school education system must always anticipates tomorrow's (future) needs of the market and serves it dutifully. However, the system must not caters to each and every insatiable desires and wants of the market blindly. In this process of ongoing adjustment, not every student will be happy but it surely does maximises the potential on the whole. This is what we must aim for.
To emphasize what I might have said in the past, there are two forms of education that must be strengthened (and not fool around with) in schools. 1. Physical education. It should be broadened to include life-long heath management education and physical health crisis management like CPR. You won't want to wait for the population and public health budget time bomb to balloon dangerously like those of Americans before you take action. 2. Financial education. Like it or not, everyone is born to play the game of money. And you don't pretend the financial problems of your people are all solved with something called "CPF". Enough bullshiting in this paragraph, I know those people at M*E HQ never listens.
And long live those entrepreneurs who gave back to society. They are finally making themselves heard by some. They want to be change agents of the society and are letting money do the walking (for unless you are at the HQ, who ever pays attention to you?) So far, I am glad by the way their money have positively uplifted the lifes of many.
My reply:
Well at a policy level, all that you've said makes a lot of sense. In fact, this is the trend everywhere under globalization. That's how we have 'knowledge economies', and that's why education is moving towards 'skills-based education' and 'lifelong learning'. What I do not agree, however, is that we are too 'standardized'. Things have changed in the past few years, and certainly polys and even ITEs are producing students with good skills. Streaming may still be in place, but it is paradoxically not obsolete because in order to 'make the best use' of all the raw materials, you have to make sure they are the most suitable materials for the products they will become. The only problem is when we really stigmatize them and see them as inferior all the way. That will eventually lead to social classes and social imobility. For that reason, teachers and the whole education system cannot afford to see children as goods or materials. Hence the 'shaping the future' metaphor. Moreover, I think 2009 really showed that the world is changing, and we really don't know what can happen in the future, eg jobs creation. Singapore has come to a stage where we try to anticipate future demands but cannot be sure our projections will be right beyond 5 yrs. But education is a long-term investment, and we cannot change things abruptly because the whole system will screw up. I am a critique of the system myself, but compared to HK, compared to China, I think we are going in the right direction of diversification, and I believe MOE will continue moving forward.
Your opinions about health education and financial education are valid. But I have my reservations about the latter, at least the stage at which we push out financial education. If you ask me, high school (JC or poly) or even university is better. Because, as you should know, when you introduce such 'high-level' stuff in the public school system, it can be watered down to very dry knowledge. In this new day and age, I would say that economics is one subject we can try having more kids do. But as I found out recently, exposing children to money knowledge too early may have its adverse effects too. Children, being children, have a right to enjoy their childhood and teenage-hood. We've never learnt financial modules, but we are not unhappy. At the end of the day, I don't foresee the system introducing the technicalities of finance - at least not before university. Instead, I would rather focus on the roots of human nature and behaviour, which I'm sure you also know is fundamentally what determines market dynamics. The challenge here as an educator is to prepare children for the marketplace, but at the same time to allow them more reflxivity into their own beliefs and identities. That may be my stand as someone who did a degree in the Arts and now doing a Masters in social sciences, but I believe that in this new era, making money is not the real problem for children born in the 21st century. Finding out who they are, what they believe, their value systems - all of which ultimately feedback into how the society will be like and how political forces work in tandem with the folks, are where the tensions will arise. The stint in HK made me accept the influence of market forces on the education system, but at the same time, it also all the more strengthened my beliefs that education is ultimately about humans and how we perceive ourselves as individuals and our place in society (and the world). Right now, I do see that Singaporeans of our generation have got relevant skills to meet the challenges of the global market - at least for the top 30% or so. But what we lack is really the ability to deal with our changing thoughts and beliefs which may or may not be different from our parents' generation (now here's a dual paradox: If they are different, we have to learn to accept and then look back to try and ascertain who we are; if they are the same we also have to worry whether those values and beliefs are obsolete and if they can be integrated into the whole societal fabric).
So if you ask me, I will strengthen social studies, introduce basic philosophy and revamp moral and national education. Put in tandem with knowledge about the market and physical education, that's how we 'create' a post-modern version of ancient Greek society - of sorts.
Yes, long live the entrepreneurs who give back the wealth they created so ppl like me can deliver value. At least for 华社, I believe the business community still has an important role to play in education. In fact, I have been thinking these days what a new model of ’新‘ 华社 will look like in a few decades to come (Haha.. nice name right.. New Chinese community + Singapore chinese community).
In Singapore, we have many many people who can give ideas and suggestions to the education system from the perspective of the market's needs, but not enough people who think about what the new global economy will do to the 'soft' aspects of our society. A key question I have been pondering and will continue to bear in mind is this: How is society possible in Singapore under the challenges of economic and cultural globalization？The way I see it, this question incorporates all that we have discussed, but focuses on the person, not the market - which I still believe is fundamentally a product of human behaviour, as have been shown by the financial upheaval this time round. Our government prides itself for being pragmatic and non-ideological, but in my opinion, this is the rhetoric most detrimental to our society if we over-interpret it and place too much focus on just economic and financial forces. Singapore IS at a cross-roads, not because of the current recession, but because we need deeper roots. The same issue goes for the new immigrants: The marketplace, which once was a neutral arena free from race and cultural differences and that could make all equal, is now working in the disadvantages of the new entrants into our society. That is because new immigrants are perceived to be here for the gold. And you do realize that most of the time problems arise because of job opportunities isn't it？What we really need now is a re-balance of social forces, something which is beyond the market. The national integration council is thus also a move in the right direction, except I seriously doubt its effectiveness. If you ask me, we need more civil societies. But that's a whole big separate issue altogether, so let's leave the discussion till our next meetup.
订阅：
博文 (Atom)
