fingers at you, as though the earth at a moment's notice is going to open up right beneath you and swallow you up into its' abysmal depth, rather than everyone expressing refreshing opinions understood, even though one is not too articulate. Above all, have opinions respected with no imposition whatsoever. Even if that opinion is not to the liking of another, it'd still be respected by all.
Having disrespect is gauged by the intensity of one's respect for the other. In other words there's no purpose to talk about disrespect when initially the respect, if at all appreciated, is negligible. Therefore to enhance the meaning of respect and thus having appropriate respect for another, is to adopt a non biased understanding of an issue, feel it, really go through its' motions, even when there were no liking or acceptance of that issue or opinion upfront. Only then can an opinion be expressed to the fullest of its intentions hence promoting unabridged creativity in performance of thought.
When I was teaching knowledge development sessions of scuba diving in two separate universities, on opposing polar-ended locations of the entire north-south length of this home country's peninsular, expressing an opinion or thought, was one of the criterial encouragements toward my students. The reciprocal feedback from them then would more likely be from foreign students. If it was from local students, it'd be from the Masters or PHD students. And more from the northern university compared to the southern one. On hindsight, now I know, that the southerly university (even its' name carried an affectionate translation meant for prudish elders and aunties attached), had administered 'sensitivity' misappropriated. It had gotten to such an extent that I knew this higher-than-high-ranking official (to not naming names) from Starbucks who told me, "If there's any event that we could contribute or be invited to participate, and if it involved said university, then sorry, but we'll have to decline", sounding as somber as one possibly could. How disappointing could it ever get?
When I asked other lecturers there about those local passivity, they told me that that's quite normal for their students too. Strange, I couldn't for the life of me find it normal when I was in college then. I remembered we had to express more than our lecturers did, which evidently gave me thoughts that lecturers had such an easy job. Most times they'd enter the classroom, dished out the chapter for the day with minimum elaboration, stated a few books of references for a library search, as compared to a web search (there were no computers then as you'd know, let alone the internet, wifi, bluetooth, what-have-you, heck, there were no cellular phones even), set an assignment and that's it. The rest was up to us, whilst datelines were like… yesterday!
Jump forward to the current era, it's the students who have an easy job. You'd see students entering class, sitting wherever and with whoever they choose (even with partners), armed with a smartphone (that'd be able to perform unimaginable wonders with a tap of their fingers) in their pockets or strapped around necks, or even held freely in the palms of their hands, or placed casually on desks, always ready for action.
Once settled, I'd start the lecture with a brief synopsis of the lesson's title. This was followed by an immensely comprehensive elaboration of the lesson, pausing every now and then with my jokes, accompanied by their chuckles, all to animate the subject, and if I sensed 'over-stressed' individuals dozing off, I'd spring out illustrations and still images, try as best to finish off with a near-brilliant summary complete with audio and video aids, not forgetting handouts of more graphics and citations. Where note taking was concerned, their tap-happy fingers on their smartphones were ever-ready, from recording audios to snapping photos.
Their assignments?
Just a few finger taps on their little wonder device, will open up a world of knowledge, through web search with Wikipedia or Google a million other sites. Some 'cut & paste' here and there, using latest apps easily available, makes that task of scrabbling an essay even easier, complete with materials needed.
To be fair, I can't leave out more 'studious-looking' students who are resourcefully eager for more though. You'll see them occupying benches outside the lecturer's individual office door, waiting in turn to ask that 'favorite' lecturer for that something extra to get them that so-called 'elusive' top notch grade, or even what they may have missed whilst the lecture was in session, frequently because they were ferociously tapping away the latest rumor or juicy gossip they'd have, to be first to post to a group chat in the ever growing number of social medias available.
Hence, with my trusty foot-and-a-half-long shiny stainless steel underwater pointer, I started the 'knock on the head' of students regime, for those who go astray (either in essence or in form) during their underwater sessions. How can I not? When so much was done during the knowledge development sessions, more so when it had dealt with the fundamentals and safety principles of life in the underwater environment. Regularly, I'm asked of my occupation. Rather than answering with my pet peeve answer of, 'I'm a lecturer, and lecturing at so and so', I'd prefer to answer, 'I guide students who're interested to learn, and my office is the ocean realm'.
Coming back to students in the 70's then and now in the 21st century, it'd be fair to wonder why such changes have occurred. My guess is that, that's what you'll get when you suppress freedom of speech or expression of thought, especially from impressionable youngsters during their early formative years. If at all they didn't get suppressed, then they'd be 'spoon-fed' with so-called 'gospel truth'.
I called it indoctrination and inception of misappropriated sensitivity.
Instead, they'd be better off being left to question everything they'd encounter in education. The answers they discover, should be synchronized with opinions borne out of unbiased discussions, and guided by various authoritative references. Only then could the power of knowledge be applied and sensitivity be appropriate.
The question then does arise. Does the 'fish really always rot from the head down?' Or should that phrase remain plausible? A former Prime Minister, envisioned many years ago that the year 2020 would be the year this country would join ranks with fully developed countries. The reigns of leadership have long been replaced by the current premier and now leaving only 5 years left for that vision to materialize, as of writing this article. It's being known that a developed country is not one, if the citizen's attitude and maturity of thought is not attuned to it. The way things are going now, I don't think the former Premier will live to see his vision materializing. In fact I'm sorry to say but I don't think even I would ever see it in my lifetime.
Unless, if it's acceptable for some to think that as long as only the infrastructure, services, technology and whatever else material, physical and commercial innuendos are met of a country, it is considered developed. Even when the development of maturity of thoughts and expressions are not achieved?
So is it acceptable then that what is within, may be overtaken by what is without?
Can we then say that a developed country may not necessarily be a developed nation?
Or is it an acceptable fact that the vision be superseded by the powers at will?
Ultimately, I'd start my class or even the confined water sessions with, 'if you have questions, please ask, because the only stupid question is a question not asked, and that's when it'll be you whose stupid enough to follow without thinking or questioning, thus deterring your own development'.
No comments:
Post a Comment