Parents -- Are you willing to change your mentality?

I have sent in this article to The Straits Times Forum. AND GUESS WHAT? My article is posted on ST Forum online!!!!! This is the link: http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/OnlineStory/STIStory_555407.html

Here it is, with the comments:

Post:

Why Primary 1 exams are necessary

I AGREE with Mr Wee Hien Seng's letter last Saturday ("PSLE - the unfactored

elephant in the room...").

When I was a Primary 1 pupil, we had year-end exams and I was probably not

alone in experiencing the stress of having to go for tuition for a variety of

subjects such as maths, English and Chinese.

Although the Government plans to incorporate new forms of assessments like

"show and tell" and drama, these will not change parents' tuition mindset.

The Primary School Leaving Examination will still ensure that parents remain

exam-minded.

Exams are necessary to gauge a pupil's ability and grasp of knowledge for

that year. Primary 1 is an important foundation year, and it is necessary to

get a gauge of pupils' understanding of the basics before they progress to

Primary 2.

Parents, are you willing to change your exam mentality?

Ong Sean

Latest comments

For parents to be less kiasu, the government must rename all secondary schools to "Raffles Institution" and "Raffles Girls School". Posted by: munny123 at Tue Jul 20 15:39:04 SGT 2010 Yep let primary schools be play schools, Let the children learn thru play and interaction and bulid up more EQ skills. Posted by: orangemonster at Tue Jul 20 09:43:20 SGT 2010 Sean yes remove the exams and mindsets will change. Posted by: ganeshsharmak at Tue Jul 20 08:29:07 SGT 2010 In California, students in public school sit for the California standardized testing in spring every year. I am always amused when I hear many kiasu Asian parents have their kids prepare and study for these tests. Doesn't that defeats the purpose of testing? Posted by: carol_y_wong at Tue Jul 20 06:41:53 SGT 2010 My apology...it should be what was "taught", not "thought" for the school year. Posted by: carol_y_wong at Tue Jul 20 06:41:06 SGT 2010

____________________________________________________________________

This is the original email that I intended to send.

I refer to “PSLE – the unfactored elephant in the room…” on The Straits Times forum on the 17th of July, 2010.

While I welcome the Government’s decision to remove the Primary 1 exams entirely, and in place, “show and tell”, I strongly believe that this would not be effective.

Even though it would be welcomed by most of the parents and students, that it would be refreshing start to a student in Primary 1, I believe that it would not be helpful in the long run.

As a Secondary 2 student studying in a premier school in the Bukit Timah area, I have gone through and experienced fully what life in primary 1 is. At that time, it was just the start of nightmares. Many parents would also agree.

We had end of the year exams, and I believe that many like me had tuition all day round. Be it Mathematics, English, or Chinese, we all had the same amount of stress.

However, now the government would like to replace the exams with “show and tell”. In Primary 1, many of us just knew how to write the word “me” in Chinese, and easy vocabulary in English. I believe that most Primary 2 students would not even know how to present their ideas in primary 2 effectively, let alone a primary 1 student.

Secondly, although the government would like to incorporate into them a skill for presentation, I believe that their parents still would not be able to change their mindset of being stressed out and having tuitions. Although eye contact, confidence and oration skills are important, PSLE deters the parents from not being too exam-minded.

Being a “kiasu” society is the entire core of the issue.

Even if exams were removed, the students would still need to take the PSLE exams. As quoted from “PSLE – the unfactored elephant in the room…”, it is said that “They can learn about the measurements by baking a cake, but it will not help them in the PSLE”.

Now, teachers, parents and students are already born with the mentality of being afraid to lose out, and being competitive, would it be effective to just remove the Primary 1 exams? Why not remove the entire system of exams, all the way from Primary 1 to Junior College 2, removing the end of year exams and major exams like PSLE, O-Level and A-Level? Why is the government not doing so? That is because it is not feasible and because exams are needed to be able to gauge the students’ ability for that year. Therefore, why even remove the Primary 1 exams, and still include the Primary 2 exams?

In Primary 1, that is an important year for all students. It is their first year of officially being a student. They need to understand the basics that will be taught in Primary 1 to progress and improve, in order to be able to enter Primary 2. However, by removing the Primary 1 exams, wouldn’t that be equivalent to killing the students’ understanding to the basics?

In Primary 1, the basics are important. If exams are removed, their ability as to understanding the Primary 1 basics would not be essential. They would just think that “Oh, there is no exams, therefore, I need not understand the basics” and continuously, if this goes on, they would not even be able to understand Primary 2 work, let alone Primary 3 and onwards.

Although I totally agree with what Mrs Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education, that "These proposed changes seek to develop our children to be confident persons, self-directed learners and caring citizens, while equipping them with enduring knowledge and values and the necessary 21st century skills and dispositions”, I do not think that it should be implemented in Primary 1.

Parents’ mentality would not be easily changed, just like how stress can’t be easily removed. Stress can only be temporarily put away, and it will constantly come back. If the government would implement this idea of a heavier emphasis on “show and tell” and on other “bite-sized assessments’, it should have been implemented as soon as possible and it should start earlier, probably even K1 or K2.

I believe that although this idea is well thought-out and that it is a constructive idea that can be implemented, Primary 1 would be too late a time.

Parents, are you willing to change your mentality for your children’s future?

Dulce et Decorum Est

Dulce et Decorum Est

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.


GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And floundering like a man in fire or lime.--
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.


In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.


If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,--
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.

1) Title:

Once I saw this poem, I felt that it was a very interesting poem because of what I caught sight of. Firstly, the title is in Latin, which is an old language and is somehow going to be “extinct” in the world although some people still use it. It reads “Dulce et Decorum Est”. Well, I believe that you will be as amazed and puzzled as I was, which was to be not able to understand a single word that he is talking about. Anyway, this Latin phrase “Dulce et Decorum Est” is again repeated at the end of the poem, and instead of just saying that, it reads “ The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori”. I shall explain both phrases to you.

I had to do some background research on that in order to understand.

The title and the Latin exhortation of the final two lines are drawn from the phrase "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" written by the Ancient Roman poet -- Horace in:

Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori:
mors et fugacem persequitur virum
nec parcit inbellis iuventae
poplitibus timidove tergo.

"How sweet and fitting it is to die for one's country:
Death pursues the man who flees,
spares not the hamstrings or cowardly backs
Of battle-shy youths."

These words were well known and often quoted by supporters of the war near its inception and were, therefore, of particular relevance to soldiers of the era.

In 1913, the first line, “Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori”, was inscribed on the wall of the chapel of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst In the final stanza of his poem, Owen refers to this as "The old Lie."

(From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulce_et_Decorum_Est)

So in fact, what Owen meant was that “It was sweet and fitting to die for one’s country”, according to the title and the last line.

2) General poem:

In here, after having some background knowledge as to what Owen meant about the title and the last line, we know that what he is saying is that war is horrendously horrible, and therefore, we should avoid it. This stance is just like how other poets write their poems, except for the fact that The Soldier by Rupert Brooke was glorifying the war.

So, the general direction of the poem is gearing towards the harmful effects of war. Now, we shall analyse the poem to fit my stance that war sucks and that it has horrible effect on the people.

3) Paragraphs:

There are four different paragraphs. I shall now be talking about Stanza 1. In Stanza 1, the poet describes the surroundings of war with a bang, stating that the soldiers were “Bent double, like old beggars under sacks”. It is a form of simile, to show how haggard the soldiers are. Also, I would like to bring your attention to the words “Bent double”. What does that mean? You may just see it as a soldier bending, under the heavy weight. However read between the lines. It states that “Bent double”. It actually shows you that the soldiers are like doubling, it shows that the soldiers are like weird, monstrous creatures as they double. Onto the next 3 lines, what does it give an impression of? “Bent double”, “Knock-kneed”, “haunting flares”? It obviously gives a sense of creepiness, a sense of weirdness, as to why the soldiers are being tortured so cruelly. This is to build up the atmosphere of the poem showing the harmful effects of war it has on the soldiers. On the fourth line, it states that “Men marched asleep”. This is somewhat not possible in our daily lives, it shows that the soldiers are abnormal, like creatures, as they have no brain of their own to control themselves. It creates a sense of fear towards these men, as they start to turn into funny creatures. On the fifth line, it states that the soldiers who had lost their shoes “limped on, blood-shod”. Don’t the soldiers feel a sense of pain as they walk on the gravel, or shells, barefooted? They should be able to feel the pain as blood oozed out of the wounds. However, they are not able to feel a thing at all, emphasizing on my point that they are like creatures. “All went lame, all blind” also restates my point that they were monsters. It was also somehow shown that the misery and pain is a universal condition, and that no one escaped from the wrath.

The second stanza, and it starts off with a larger BANG! “GAS! Gas!” gives the reader a sense of surprise and make them feel worried. It sends the readers a signal of foreshadowing, that something is going to happen, and sends the readers into a state of panic, making them empathise with the soldiers who are facing the gas. Also, it makes the reader understand the situation at that time when the generals or people of higher authority are shouting to the soldiers to get a move on as they have an “ecstasy of fumbling”. This again shows that the use of poisonous gas in the war, to kill the soldiers are quite common, and that they know the necessary steps as to how to avoid being killed. Owen also makes use of many words that are related to being nervous and worried, such as the action of “floundering”, “stumbling”, “clumsy”, “fumbling”. All these adjectives show how nervous the soldiers were at that point of time. Owen also uses the colour green a lot of times, to describe the surroundings of the gas, such as “lime”, “green sea” and “thick green light”.

The third stanza, albeit being the shortest of the lot, having just two lines, however, it is the most descriptive stanza of the entire poem. It is the most vivid in terms of the description, because Owen says that “In all my dreams, before my helpless sight”. It causes audience and readers to probably misunderstand what he is referring to as “helpless”. This is because he is probably talking about the soldier inside being helpless, or himless, saying that his eyesight is failing and he has helpless eyesight, or that in his sight, he is helpless and does not know what he is able to do to save his compatriot. Also, it forms a constant horror to him as he continuously sees the same horrific scene when his friend dies in the poisonous gas, being that “He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning”.

The fourth stanza, it is the conclusion for the entire poem. The dead, who was killed by the poisonous gas, had “white eyes writhing in his face” and the use of simile comes into use here when Owen states that “His hanging face, like a devil’s such of sin”. It once again allows me to re-emphasize on my point that the soldiers were like monsters, and also, when a person enters the world, and dies, the eyes carry the same innocence of the world and the same numbness in terms of the feelings described. Therefore, the person that is dead, looks like a slayed dead monster. Also, I would like to emphasize on the last phrase: “The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori”. Compare the English translation of this to the title: How sweet and fitting it is to die for one’s country and Sweet and fitting it is respectively. Well, it is a complete irony and the meanings are of an opposite. Therefore, Owen uses it as a complete irony to his title.

4) Conclusion:

Therefore, after analysing the poem with whatever resources I have, I believe that this is the best poem in describing war from a perspective, stating that war is a bane, instead of glorifying war. It is the most vividly described poem ever.

So a general recap. Owen is great in writing poems that include horrible scenes, and is a great writer when depicting the war scene. This is also because he had a first-hand experience in war and was once a soldier before. The title also totally contradicts with the last line, which is the most important line as it is like Owen’s stance to the war as a whole. Remember “the old Lie: Dulce et Decorum Est Pro patria mori”!

Anthem For Doomed Youth

Anthem for Doomed Youth

What passing-bells for these who die as cattle?

Only the monstrous anger of the guns.

Only the stuttering rifles' rapid rattle

Can patter out their hasty orisons.

No mockeries now for them; no prayers nor bells;

Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs, –

The shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells;

And bugles calling for them from sad shires.

What candles may be held to speed them all?

Not in the hands of boys but in their eyes

Shall shine the holy glimmers of goodbyes.

The pallor of girls' brows shall be their pall;

Their flowers the tenderness of patient minds,

And each slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds.

Analysis

1) Title and poem

To help understand a poem in great detail, understanding the title is of utmost importance. It gives us a great clue as to what the poem might be. It is almost paradoxical and is ironical. The word "Anthem" refers to as joyous celebration or the respect for a country through the "National Anthem", however, the title is paradoxical because of the word "Doomed". It represents that the youths already know that they are going to die, and their fates are sealed. No matter what you do or what the family does, it is unable to change their destiny. It also shows that the entire war is already a forgone conclusion right from the start, which does not give the soldiers involved a much-needed boost of morale. The entire title reminds us of how the youths' future has been destined by others, and shows that the others have a much greater authority and position of power.

The poem also talks much about the entire situation. Instead of the prayers and the bells being the youths' last tribute, they talk about the “passing bells”, otherwise known as the toll-bell to inform others of one person’s death, and the “rifles’ rapid rattle” and the situation at war being the youths’ last tribute. It is their “present” for their efforts in the war.

2) Imagery

There are many forms of imagery that is represented in the poem, some are those like simile, personification and alliteration.

There are many different similes that can be seen in the poem, such as those like the youths, dying “as cattle”. As the people are seen as dying cattle, it also shows one thing. It re-emphasizes on my point that the youths’ destiny has long gone been fixed. Dying cattle walk as one large group, as they walk together to their deaths, and as the youths are represented as cattle, it shows that the youths are going to die as one whole bunch and also that their deaths are insignificant.

Alliteration is also largely emphasized within the poem. “rifles’ rapid rattle” is a form of alliteration, and it elaborates on the letter “r”, which shows the constant shooting of the gun and also the constant killing of the people. It creates a somber and a fatalistic atmosphere. “glimmers of goodbyes” is another alliteration. It shows how the families say goodbyes to their loved ones, as if they would never be seeing them again, which also shows a glum atmosphere.

Personification is also largely emphasized on within the poem. This is when the sounds of the “monstrous anger of the guns”. It compares the guns to the youths or rather people. This is because of the word “anger”. It is a feeling that only animals and people will possess, and therefore, the gun is personified as a human, being angry and ready to kill. Another personified thing is "the shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells”. This is personified because the grenades cannot be wailing, and it is only humans that can cry and wail, therefore, it shows how the grenade sounds like as it flies through the air.

3) Onomatopoeia

Onomatopoeia is shown throughout the entire poem. Examples include those of “rifles’ rapid rattle”, “demented choirs of wailing shells” and also “patter out”. It shows the entire surroundings during the war and what happens. All these are sounds that are created when the two oppositions attack each other, through guns, or through grenades. It shows the audience who were not there, who did not have a first hand experience of how it was like to be at a war, to be at the frontlines, to visualize the entire situation.

4) Conclusion

This poem is very renowned and it is known throughout the entire globe. It truly depicts the entire surroundings of the soldier and whatever that happens at the frontlines for those who did not go there. It talks about being pessimistic, and about how the destiny of the boys have already been fixed by a person of higher authority. This in turn creates the glum atmosphere and the entire fatalistic, somber surroundings.

Also, the last line “And each slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds”, it totally emphasizes on the relentless inevitability of the passing of time, from summer to winter. It in turn shows that death is inevitable and that everyone must face it, sooner or later. I can conclude that fate and destiny can never be changed, like time.