Skip to main content

People learn best when there are fewer or no mental and physical restrictions

[Reproduced from pijitailaiX] Do Internet and social media create social division as claimed by PM Lee? Nevertheless, learning and sharing do need diversification. Perhaps, he is still in the mode of hierarchical  learning and sharing. 


People learn best when there are fewer or no mental and physical restrictions, especially in country like Singapore.


My mode of learning shows that I am at the Distributed Individual Quadrant#0. When I first enroll in this course, I just want to learn to be a good learner not leader. I am a motivated learner and have never thought of a leadership role in learning.

What can I share and initiate changes in learning? This is in particular that I am not living in a western environment that 'political right' plays less influencing role in sharing and learning.

Singapore is a country that practices market economy and capitalist system. However, when we come to learning, political right and wrong will make a huge difference. If you are at the wrong side, it is hard to share your knowledge not to mention becoming the promoter of your knowledge.

Even in institutions of higher learning, free sharing and learning is not a right and privilege. Political discussions and debates are restricted in Singapore universities as shown in the following headline:

[Yale-NUS slammed for ban on political protests, groups]#1


Even Yale University has to adjust her academic freedom in Singapore.

Human factors
Hence, the human factors of physical, cognitive, social, cultural and emotional experiences are very different from the standard GSE2x Leaders of Learning.

How can I design a learning environment in Singapore where restrictions and limitations are the fact of life?

My Quadrant is a digital world. The ideal environment is of course an environment of free expression. Without this pre-condition, sharing and learning will not reach their full potential. There is no restriction on MOOC learning in Singapore. Facebook and other internet uses are also free. But one will have to be careful about his or her comments as there is a culture of defamation suits#2 in Singapore.

Nevertheless, if I were to engage in Leaders of Learning activities in Singapore, the ideal environment is to expand the horizon to other quadrants.

Physical: To encourage face to face sharing and learning, ideally, we can expand and share the digital experience and knowledge to physical environment. Some publics places, for example, museums, libraries or community clubs are suitable environments. However, to overcome the obstacles, the leaders of learning will need to solve the political right and wrong issues first. The government will not allow citizens to promote ideas, thoughts, learning experience and knowledge different from their standard mode of learning and national agenda.

Physical expansion to Hierarchical Individual and Collective environment is very difficult. It is an ideal expansion but not feasible in Singapore. Alternatively, the expansion to Distributive Collective is much easier and can be achieved by joining a network or digital community.

Cognitive: We learned above the university offers no independent thinking, hence, cognitive dissonance is highly possible in Singapore. As political right or wrong is predetermined by the government, we may end up learning (or sharing) some things that we don't like or don't enjoy. How to right the cognitive interactive issue between people and experience is very challenging. It will have to come back to the basic question of right of freedom and free expression. Again, it is a difficult question. GSE2x Leaders of Learning provides an ideal western environment for learning. However, adjustments have to be made to
match the local situation, like the case of Yale-NUS College or we have to improve the political environment to create more free spaces for sharing and learning.

Social: How do people interact? Due to the restrictions on public space uses, learning and sharing is a one way traffic. Public facilities, schools and communities are out of bounds to people who hold alternative views and experience. There are few exchanges and interaction between the so-called 'political right' and 'political wrong'. However, as the digital world is a free world, we see more interactions in the social media rather than in the rigid mainstream media of broadcasting and printed media. If social media, digital education is the future trend, then the political development will have to follow this evolution of learning experience.   

Cultural: The social factor affect the cultural factor and behaviours. We are now experience a low public trust#3 and divided Singapore. The rapid economic (high growth, rich-poor gap) and social changes (big inflow of foreigners) have made the once (or developing) shared norms, habits and values unsustainable. One example is fewer public flats are flying Singapore flags during national day#4. How can learning play a role in promoting a social norm? The government is engaging in a national SG Conversation#5 but more people in the social media and digital world see it as a propaganda.

Emotional: The social divide and cultural divide have created different emotional experience for Singaporeans. If you are in the so-called 'political right', your feelings and thoughts of the future Singapore will be very different from those of 'political wrong'. The current state of learning and sharing environment is not conducive in Singapore.

We have seen more protests either legally held at the Speakers' Corner or illegal vandalism like graffiti.

Without political changes, the ideal environment for learning and sharing of knowledge will not take place in Singapore. In fact, in the longer term, a restricted and control environment presenting only one-side learning experience will do more harm to Singapore, economic growth and competitiveness included.


Notes

#0
INTRODUCTION/CONCLUSION MOLA RESULTS
In the Hierarchical Individual Quadrant you scored 15.87%/1.59%
In the Hierarchical Collective Quadrant you scored 22.22%/23.81%
In the Distributed Individual Quadrant you scored 85.71%/100%
In the Distributed Collective Quadrant you scored 31.75%/30.16%

#1
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/sdp-criticises-yale-nus-college-ban-on-partisan-politics.html

#2


#3
http://catherinelim.sg/2014/06/07/an-open-letter-to-the-prime-minster/
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/tharman-three-things-will-retain-public-trust

#4

#5
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/themes-identified-spore-conversation-could-continue

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

有识之士拒绝发声,新加坡何去何从?

新加坡的精英、有识之士、知识分子、中产阶级拒绝对国家的发展做出积极的评论,分享,分析他们对国家前途的看法。这种情形在李显龙出任总理后,每况愈下,越来越严重,已经成为新加坡目前面对的最大挑战,国家继续前进的绊脚石。
最近,李显龙和他的一群高级顾问,不约而同的呼吁有识之士出来,提供意见,对国家各方面建设,提供不同版本的建议。
李显龙说,他尝试不让身边只有只说“对”的人。如果,整天被唯命是从的人围着,那将是一种灾难。言外之意,就是说领袖必须接受批评,承认错误。#1

李显龙的高级顾问更进一步。他们说新加坡需要说“不对”的人。他们要更多不同的意见,反对的声音,甚至悲观的声音。他们认为新加坡需要更多(公务员)人出来挑战当局。最重要的,他们认为有识之士对政策的发声,能够让新加坡未来50年更加美好。



这种呼吁,呼应要求有识之士出来发声,提供反对意见似乎是一种哀求。有识之士的反对意见有助国家未来更加美好?为何立国以来,从来就没有如此哀求过?可见,事情已经失控,有识之士已经意兴阑珊,提不起兴趣。他们翻看历史,提供反对意见的人,尤其是反对党的有识之士,下场如何?
【不出声的历史背景】
有识之士不提供意见,不改进、不改良政府的政策,不是行动党政府一直以来的国策吗?为何现在,李显龙和高级顾问,接二连三如此低声下气哀求有识之士发声呢?难怪,有识之士并不相信行动党的诚意,前车之鉴,他们害怕步上前人的后尘。
人民行动党在李光耀领导下,对于反对他的知识分子、有识之士、学术精英、专业人士,从来就没有给予尊重,不用内安法来对付已经是客气了。到了吴作栋出任总理,原本以为比较开明,也不是闹出林宝音事件。到了李显龙任总理,人民也没有给予厚望。林宝音在林宝音事件20年后,还给李显龙写公开信。她的建议,李显龙听进去了吗?
原本以为2011年大选,新加坡选民开始觉醒,明白手中选票的重要性。新加坡人愿意接受不同的声音,但是2015年的大选,却似乎极为容易被行动党的民粹所误导。有识之士看在眼里,能够不意兴阑珊吗?不仅有识之士意兴阑珊,连一些反对党人士,也意兴阑珊起来。
2015年大选后发生的事情,更加让有识之士提不起劲来。除了压制网络言论外,看看在国会通过的立法和修法,总统选举制度的变更等等,行动党政府是否真的有诚意,接受不同的意见,反对的声音?
这是行动党的困境,新加坡的悲哀。
新加坡的有识之士,怎么有可能出现儒家的所谓的”以天下为己任…

接管市镇理事会的政治考量、政治代价?

人民行动党政府已经做好司法程序,可以在模棱两可‘莫须有’的理由下,接管市镇理事会。国会已经通过市镇理事会修正案,一旦市镇理事会的管理出现所谓的状况,国家发展部长便可以顺理成章的、名而言顺的把民选市镇理事会的管理工作接管过来。
这里的市镇理事会,当然是指工人党管理的阿裕尼-后港市镇理事会。行动党没有傻到接管自己的市镇理事会。修改后的司法程序能够让行动党政府,合法合理的在符合新加坡法律的条文下,明目张胆的把一个民选的市镇理事会收归到自己的管理之下。就像民选总统那样,明目张胆的修改选举制度,否定一些人的参选资格。
新加坡人又能说些什么?又敢做些什么?就像陈清木昨天的记者会,他除了对总统选举制度的变更表示不满外,他还能说什么?就是这么简单,轻描淡写的回答:
行动党和李显龙总理,就是看准了,看透了新加坡人的心理,表明这是司法程序,在法庭、在法律上,行动党政府都不会被打败。那些敢于挑战法律的人,在新加坡的短短50多年的建国历史中,下场都是以悲剧结束。最近的一个例子, 就是新加坡最年轻的政治犯余澎杉在美国的遭遇。同样一个人,不同的国情,命运也不一样。
行动党已经做好接管的准备。现在,只是考虑政治上的得失和评估政治代价。当然,也会考虑时间点,什么时候切入最适合、最划算、最能够获得最多的选票。
【下届大选的变数】
今年的总统选举,基本上已经是没戏看了。大家大约都可以估算到结局。反而是三、四年后的大选,存在变数。 行动党也了解,要重获2015大选的佳绩,在没有造神运动的条件下,似乎是不可能。因此,要维持一个高得票率,就必须出一些怪招。把非选区议员人数增加到12位,就是给人民一个小甜头。如果真的上当,新加坡就清一色没有非行动党的市镇理事会了。
没有工人党的市镇会,这个机会似乎不高。因此,最好能够把工人党困在阿裕尼和后港。而通过合法接管,又通过媒体,社交媒体,一系列的‘转型正义’活动,说不定死马当活马医,动摇阿裕尼选民的心,从接管变成收复,那就是美事一桩。
事实上,市镇理事会修正案通过后,行动党和工人党表面上没有说出口。但是,大家都在盘算国家发展部长,会通过什么理由,什么时候,进行接管工作的法律和司法程序的准备。2017年是总统选举年,大概不会在这个时候出手。
但是,出手的时间,也不可以太过接近下届大选。最少要让行动党的所谓‘转型正义’(你做错,我有责任保护纳税人利益)的宣传活动进行到底,主流媒体和社交媒…

李显龙的幻象:新加坡人对他的 dishonorable 行为无动于衷。

李显龙的焦虑,最近特别的明显。焦虑后的行动决策,如,总统选举,李光耀孙子李绳武事件,议长人选,都显示他的幻象。他认为,新加坡人对他的所作所为,无动于衷。国人心里虽然不满,但是,在高压和照顾既得利益者的背景下,新加坡依然可以保持稳定,经济继续成长,政治上没有改变。
李显龙当然有焦虑,正如他的妹妹和弟弟对他的指责:Dishonorable son。李显龙害怕人们对他的诚信起疑心,因此,在国会搞了一个自辩。既然国会没有提出相关资料证明他的诚信有问题,那李显龙就是清白了。
同时,李显龙也明白,自己的清白,只是国会里才站住脚。在国会外,当然有不同的解读。李显龙还不至于把英国广播公司BBC给关掉,因此,英美的广播和新闻,还是,可以对新加坡政治发展做出评论。李绳武在脸书上对纽约时报对新加坡司法的评论文章,就让李显龙焦虑不已。通过私人管道,进入李绳武的私人脸书部分,焦虑的把私人空间,公开化并且告上法庭。李显龙不顾个人隐私,既然为了个人的焦虑,不惜进入别人的个人空间,这简直就是内安法恐吓手段的升级版。
新加坡人真的如李显龙幻象中的,无动于衷吗?原本上个星期六,在演说者角落,有一场抗议总统选举的活动,由于当局的种种限制,最后不得不叫停,从室外的公开活动,改成日后的室内活动。这不也是李显龙的焦虑吗?
李显龙的确有焦虑,但是,他却认为新加坡人很乖,很听话: 给你们什么总统候选人,你们就会认命接受; 想提告什么人,就提告,法律面前人人平等,没有人有意见; 给什么议长人选,国会就认命接受; 地铁误点误事,任何解释,人民都会接受; 无现金就是无限金,跟不上是你的错; 糖尿病就少吃白饭,多吃糙米饭;。。。。
这是一种李显龙独特的焦虑幻象。他很焦虑,自己无法做得比老爸好,甚至连吴作栋都不如。他也焦虑在后工业时代,新加坡无法创造高薪职位给年轻人;新加坡无法照顾贫穷老弱,无法为他们提供医药服务; 接班人无法胜任挑战; 新加坡人在无限金时代,成了乡下佬; 地铁和教育服务提不上来; 。。。
陈川仁自愿减薪出任国会议长,不论是升职还是降职,已经充分说明,他在国会外,在行动党的职业保护伞外,无法找到一份比国会议长,还要高薪水的工作。 这点显示他不如海军出身的吕德耀。吕德耀即使找不到高薪职位,也毅然离开内阁和国会。 陈川仁,为李显龙成川成仁,却也凸显接班人的素质问题和骨气问题。他们离开了行动党的大树,如何面对现实生活?李显龙能…