Tuesday, August 12, 2008
In his introduction to the course, the Prof highlights the allocation of grades for continuous assessment (which I’ve posted below):
Participation in tutorials - 20% (4% for attendance)
Assignment #1 - 15%
Assignment #2 - 25%
Examinations at end of Semester - 40%
And then he adds, ‘But of course, this is not fixed. You’re free to make suggestions…’
In other words, we are allowed to voice our opinions about the current allocation.
He proceeds to tell us, the last time this course was conducted, the students had protested that the participatory marks for tutorials were much too low, so they – or rather, the Prof – raised the bar to 20% (particularly since that class liked to talk a lot in tutorials). Hence the percentage stands at a fifth of continuous assessment, as you see above.
‘Since we have about five minutes more…’ he says, glancing at the clock, ‘why not we discuss about this?’
The marks for ‘participation in tutorial’ are the first under fire. 20% (as it is)? 15% (which the Prof tries to discourage because he is ‘poor in Maths’)? 10%?
Votes are cast. A number of people raise their hands for 20%. Twice that number of people stands up for 10% - I included (in case I suddenly lose my tongue on that particular day).
A fingerful of people vote for 15%.
Okay, so the vote goes to 10%. But… what about the remaining 10%?
Someone from the back: ‘I have a suggestion. Could we add the 10% to the first assignment so that it evens out with the second assignment?’
Right away I hear long-drawn mooing: ‘Noooooooo…’ The rationale being nobody is confident with the first assignment, not knowing how this Prof will mark us. We are like toddlers taking our first steps into the swimming pool.
Another person: ‘I find 6% very ridiculous for speaking up in tutorial… in this way why would anyone bother to come to tutorial?’
Murmurs all around.
‘I think we should keep it as it is.’
‘Hear, hear’. We’re back to square one.
The Prof looks a little shell-shocked – but I can’t really read what’s he making out of this bunch of people. ‘Okay, we’ll keep it as it is then… but if you have any suggestions or opinions please feel free to email me.’
Perhaps this explains why democracies fail as political system – when you give others a chance to take a stake, or to have a say in the way they want their country to be run, anarchy ensues; the instigator(s) is left at his/her wits’ end which is seen as indecisiveness and then some stronghold decides to contest and overthrow this weakness of leadership and establish some autocratic dictatorship, either to fulfill their own hidden agendas; partly a genuine outlook towards progress and stability for the country?
On review… perhaps it’s a good thing that we’re practicing guided democracy in Singapore?
So much for being democratic.
¶ 8/12/2008 04:35:00 pm Participation in tutorials - 20% (4% for attendance)
Assignment #1 - 15%
Assignment #2 - 25%
Examinations at end of Semester - 40%
And then he adds, ‘But of course, this is not fixed. You’re free to make suggestions…’
In other words, we are allowed to voice our opinions about the current allocation.
He proceeds to tell us, the last time this course was conducted, the students had protested that the participatory marks for tutorials were much too low, so they – or rather, the Prof – raised the bar to 20% (particularly since that class liked to talk a lot in tutorials). Hence the percentage stands at a fifth of continuous assessment, as you see above.
‘Since we have about five minutes more…’ he says, glancing at the clock, ‘why not we discuss about this?’
The marks for ‘participation in tutorial’ are the first under fire. 20% (as it is)? 15% (which the Prof tries to discourage because he is ‘poor in Maths’)? 10%?
Votes are cast. A number of people raise their hands for 20%. Twice that number of people stands up for 10% - I included (in case I suddenly lose my tongue on that particular day).
A fingerful of people vote for 15%.
Okay, so the vote goes to 10%. But… what about the remaining 10%?
Someone from the back: ‘I have a suggestion. Could we add the 10% to the first assignment so that it evens out with the second assignment?’
Right away I hear long-drawn mooing: ‘Noooooooo…’ The rationale being nobody is confident with the first assignment, not knowing how this Prof will mark us. We are like toddlers taking our first steps into the swimming pool.
Another person: ‘I find 6% very ridiculous for speaking up in tutorial… in this way why would anyone bother to come to tutorial?’
Murmurs all around.
‘I think we should keep it as it is.’
‘Hear, hear’. We’re back to square one.
The Prof looks a little shell-shocked – but I can’t really read what’s he making out of this bunch of people. ‘Okay, we’ll keep it as it is then… but if you have any suggestions or opinions please feel free to email me.’
Perhaps this explains why democracies fail as political system – when you give others a chance to take a stake, or to have a say in the way they want their country to be run, anarchy ensues; the instigator(s) is left at his/her wits’ end which is seen as indecisiveness and then some stronghold decides to contest and overthrow this weakness of leadership and establish some autocratic dictatorship, either to fulfill their own hidden agendas; partly a genuine outlook towards progress and stability for the country?
On review… perhaps it’s a good thing that we’re practicing guided democracy in Singapore?
So much for being democratic.
