Skip to main content

Is It A Cultural Ignorance Of NUS Or Chinese Patriotism Or Both?



This must be a shock to the National University of Singapore (NUS) over a test of general knowledge in China. A test of general knowledge, in return, is a test of our general knowledge and cultural understanding of China.

This cultural ignorance about China is much serious than the recent shortage of examination papers in NUS as cultural understanding can not be solved overnight. It seems the university or Singapore at large has a long way to go even though there are many Chinese experts and Chinese exchanged scholars in our campuses.  

Chinese, American and Singapore students

To NUS professors, asking Chinese students to write a short answer to “what have you learned from the Wenzhou train accident?" may be is similar to asking American students on “what have you learned from 911?”

Unfortunately, one cannot expect Chinese students to have the same reaction as the American students. Or, perhaps Chinese students are more patriot than the American students.  Or, NUS testers are treating Chinese students like Singapore students that they never voice out even they are unhappy, especially NUS is a recruiting agency and the Chinese students are applying for the scholarship.

Not to forget, these Chinese students are not ordinary people.  They are from one of the top Chinese universities, Fudan University. Once recruited, they are foreign talents to us.  Some may take up citizenship, stand for election and hold appointments one day.  

Not to surprise, Wenzhou high speed train incident can also be a high school examination topic next year in China. You may wonder why the Chinese can ask themselves the same question and being an outsider, we can’t. Why within China, this is a lesson and the same question from outsiders, it is an insult?   

Further surprise is if selected, the complained student will still come to Singapore.  Why? Perhaps, for his personal reason, he can do a Masters in NUS and continue to do a PhD in the USA. Or perhaps, it is for his friends, his family or even a business opportunity.  Chinese are more flexible in thinking and in action than us.

Chinese patriotism can begin from a small incident like a test paper because it touches on the recent setback in China’s high speed train project.  It can also arises from historical events, like Second World War (Nanjing Massacre), 918 (Japan invasion of Northeast China), 77 (incident of 卢沟Lugou bridge that led to Japan and China war), May 4 (against unfair treaty with Japan) etc.

Twitter is no match to weibo in China

An issue sometimes can become a big issue or a crisis if the matter is not handled properly.  Their weibo is more powerful than our twitter. Wenzhou train crash was first reported over weibo minutes after the accident. The Wenzhou accident quick becomes a national issue with suspected cover-ups and corrupt practices because the Chinese transport authority did not explain it properly (or openly).

Is the complained Fudan student representing all university students in China?  No. In the history of China, there are some groups of people who are willing to die for the country for whatever reasons but not all of them.  The Fudan student may belong to the former groups of people or in that particular moment, he is one of them.

A test of wisdom and Singapore

To outsiders, it is a test of wisdom on how to distinguish different groups of Chinese and their behaviours. Unfortunately, Singapore students are still struggling with the learning and teaching of Chinese.  In an interview with Zaobao, Minister Heng Swee Keat admitted MOE faced a challenge to teach Chinese to English speaking families.  
教育部长王瑞杰接受本报专访时说,教育部现在面临的挑战是如何在家庭用语倾向英语的趋势下,继续加强华文教学的研究,以协助教师有效和生动地教导华文. http://www.zaobao.com.sg/sp/sp111005_001.shtml

If our professors misread the Chinese, can our students, who have poor command of Chinese, have a better understanding of Chinese than our university professors?

At the end of the day, may be we should ask ourselves “what have we learned from the NUS incident in Shanghai?” And have we and the NUS learned some lessons about Chinese patriotism and cultures after this incident?  

Because of the importance of China, I am 100% sure NUS had no intention to belittle or disrespect the Wenzhou train tragedy. However, NUS did apology to those affected students (original omy Chinese report). 

Does the apology really mean anything to the Chinese?  Will they appreciate your efforts of educating their brightest students?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...