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

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...