NEED ADVISE - financial issue
- Thread starter hubbylubby998
- Start date
tomasulu
Member
Ok let me try this one more time. It's about the hair and not about the hair. Its about the hair because having longer hair has no more or little negative connotation (irrelevance) and doesn't affect people around you (unnecessary). It's different from having a tattoo (there's still a link to gangs) or wearing revealing or provocative clothes to school (history can't compete with hottie). it's not about the hair in the sense that if we regulate even such triviality and worse name and shame the offender we create an environment where rigid adherence to rule is the norm. Now here is where I make the leap - you may choose to disagree - I feel that under such an environment people become less creative less able to be a maverick and less inclined to stand out from the crowd.
tomasulu, u said you wouldn't try to engage me because I am unthinking and illogical. But Milo asked the same question as me...and that is, is creativity linked to freedom in wearing any hairstyle? Funny how you preferred to respond to him and not me. Is this gender bias or your assumption that I'm just generally unthinking and illogical?
Anyway, you don't need to relax on the rules to nurture students with creativity. It's more with the teaching styles in the classroom. All these questions about whether schools should have rules etc are even discussed in school. Are you all aware of that? Students even got into groups to debate on the rationale for school rules/uniforms and the pros and cons of having them. And among the discussions are some extreme examples I've cited about what if there isn't any rule at all. Students also discussed what Powder had put forward about individualistic expression. Anyway, it's also about equity. We don't want students to flaunt their wealth at such tender age or to distract one another from their studies. When I think about the gals in Uni, when they dress in revealing clothes or bright clothes, they do distract the male students no matter what. All these are important considerations. How are they unthinking and illogical, Mr. Tomasulu? Maybe your point is the school shouldn't have imposed too stringent rules but your reactions were strong, to the extent that I took it as you didn't want any rules at all. True, you didn't state that but what is your stand on hairstyles then? No colouring but okay on the length or what? You see, the whole problem arises (functional/operational one here) also because if you have rules, you need to be clear about the criteria or they wouldn't be fair to everyone. Is it easy to be in this line? I would say no due to the need to explain to not just students but the parents. I'm giving my views generally and not relating to the news on Stomp. I do think both parties could have a better way of handling the case tho, whether the teacher or the parent.
Anyway, you don't need to relax on the rules to nurture students with creativity. It's more with the teaching styles in the classroom. All these questions about whether schools should have rules etc are even discussed in school. Are you all aware of that? Students even got into groups to debate on the rationale for school rules/uniforms and the pros and cons of having them. And among the discussions are some extreme examples I've cited about what if there isn't any rule at all. Students also discussed what Powder had put forward about individualistic expression. Anyway, it's also about equity. We don't want students to flaunt their wealth at such tender age or to distract one another from their studies. When I think about the gals in Uni, when they dress in revealing clothes or bright clothes, they do distract the male students no matter what. All these are important considerations. How are they unthinking and illogical, Mr. Tomasulu? Maybe your point is the school shouldn't have imposed too stringent rules but your reactions were strong, to the extent that I took it as you didn't want any rules at all. True, you didn't state that but what is your stand on hairstyles then? No colouring but okay on the length or what? You see, the whole problem arises (functional/operational one here) also because if you have rules, you need to be clear about the criteria or they wouldn't be fair to everyone. Is it easy to be in this line? I would say no due to the need to explain to not just students but the parents. I'm giving my views generally and not relating to the news on Stomp. I do think both parties could have a better way of handling the case tho, whether the teacher or the parent.
toma,
this the part where i will have to pull my kids aside and tell them abt giving before taking, sacrificing before rewards, and why we sometimes must do things we dun like for a higher bigger purpose... like receiving an education. or wearing the restrictive safety gears for skating, etc etc...
yeah agree on the maverick part. we did learn a lesson there too actually... when maverick was too much of a maverick and sorta resulted in goose' death... BUT i know where u're coming from, it's what i hope comes from inside my kids when time comes... well as long as my girl dun go deciding making me a granddad in another 10yrs' time, i'm fine. i can't imagine going thru the parent phase so soon again becos my daughter wouldn't even have been in tertiary yet!
this the part where i will have to pull my kids aside and tell them abt giving before taking, sacrificing before rewards, and why we sometimes must do things we dun like for a higher bigger purpose... like receiving an education. or wearing the restrictive safety gears for skating, etc etc...
yeah agree on the maverick part. we did learn a lesson there too actually... when maverick was too much of a maverick and sorta resulted in goose' death... BUT i know where u're coming from, it's what i hope comes from inside my kids when time comes... well as long as my girl dun go deciding making me a granddad in another 10yrs' time, i'm fine. i can't imagine going thru the parent phase so soon again becos my daughter wouldn't even have been in tertiary yet!
The challenge in schools regarding creativity is not about making the rules less stringent and thus leading to more individualistic expression. The challenge is how can the teachers born in the 70s or 80s nurture creativity in pupils when they themselves were not taught or brought up in such an environment? Another challenge is how can we nurture students who are creative and at the same time sit for their national exam papers that require them to conform to writing a beautiful essay in an hour's time? These are the real challenges and the latter concern does cause some dissonance in teachers. Well, we're given a lot of training, lesson observations, overseas learning journeys to learn from other school systems etc...we're trying though we may not have got there yet.
tomasulu
Member
Denise its quite obvious to me that milo and you raised different issues. He questioned the link between rules and creativity while you presented a false dichotomy to booster your argument.
You and I come from a different place when it comes to rules and how they affect creativity. (I believe in removing impediments and giving space for children to flourish. Guidance should be light handed and not directive.) What is generally accepted is that Singaporeans are not the most creative bunch and are fairly rigid and fearful when it comes to deviating from established rules and norms. I think it is largely because of our heavy handed schools and educational system what's your hypothesis?
Hair. No rule at all. Unless and until you have lice and they are planning a migration of the colony to my kids hair.
You and I come from a different place when it comes to rules and how they affect creativity. (I believe in removing impediments and giving space for children to flourish. Guidance should be light handed and not directive.) What is generally accepted is that Singaporeans are not the most creative bunch and are fairly rigid and fearful when it comes to deviating from established rules and norms. I think it is largely because of our heavy handed schools and educational system what's your hypothesis?
Hair. No rule at all. Unless and until you have lice and they are planning a migration of the colony to my kids hair.
miloice
Well-Known Member
the challenge isn't so straight forward. Some rules do need to be questioned for its relevance, they have to be reviewed and adapted to aligned with its objectives.
The problem is when people are so accustomed staying within boundaries set by others that they do not even bother to understand, let alone challenge them.
we see the difference between Apple and its competitors. Or how Samsung innovation becomes the trend setter in the industry. The game changing mentality are not trained in a classroom. You don't become innovative after going for some theory lesson.
The problem is when people are so accustomed staying within boundaries set by others that they do not even bother to understand, let alone challenge them.
we see the difference between Apple and its competitors. Or how Samsung innovation becomes the trend setter in the industry. The game changing mentality are not trained in a classroom. You don't become innovative after going for some theory lesson.
yesno333
Member
I really dun get it..if u are so against the skool policy on the hair issue...why dun just find a skool that allows ur kids to grow, dye and do watever they like with their hair....wat do u hope to achieve by attacking ppl in this forum...the skool is still going to cut ur kid's hair if it dun conform to the skool standards....
I mean we are toking abt cutting of hair rite for skool kids or are we toking abt attacking the postings of diff forum users here....*confused
Beside everyone have their takes on this particular issue...aren't it better to just hear them out...if u dun accept their view on it...so be it....name calling and watsoever....aren't going to change anything...peace man peace....
I mean we are toking abt cutting of hair rite for skool kids or are we toking abt attacking the postings of diff forum users here....*confused
Beside everyone have their takes on this particular issue...aren't it better to just hear them out...if u dun accept their view on it...so be it....name calling and watsoever....aren't going to change anything...peace man peace....
tomasulu
Member
Oh and one more thing - worry about folks flaunting their wealth if we do away with uniforms... Its just retarded. Trust me, uniforms or not we all know who are the rich kids in the school. And it's good for kids to learn very early on that some people are born with a lot. And some kids struggle because they've so little. These are facts of life the more you hide them the more of an issue you make them out to be.
infojunkie
Active Member
this is what i called the collective idiocy of sinkies...
to quote lisa simpson - it's hopeless. utterly utterly HOPELESS.
to quote lisa simpson - it's hopeless. utterly utterly HOPELESS.
actually it reminds me of my schoolmate whose hair turned brownish after daily swimming... the discipline master insisted he dyed his hair and warned him to dye it 'back to' black. another teacher stepped in to point out the obvious when it got abit outta whack...
now, i hope my children dun turn out like that discipline master, who seems to think all chinese kids Must have black hair... any other colour means they dyed their hair...
dumb.
now, i hope my children dun turn out like that discipline master, who seems to think all chinese kids Must have black hair... any other colour means they dyed their hair...
dumb.
miloice
Well-Known Member
Toma, I agree your point about uniforms, however, some guideline on appropriate dress code needs to be instilled. Do you think primary school students turning up in school in tubes would be appropriate... and not necessarily gals.
Hard to pin point on a single incident of obvious over reactions and bring relevance to your own idea of development an conducive environment for creativity and innovation.
Hard to pin point on a single incident of obvious over reactions and bring relevance to your own idea of development an conducive environment for creativity and innovation.
Toma, u sound so dissatisfied with the education system here that u think my idea on y they shld wear uniforms is retarded. There are many other reasons on y they shld wear uniforms including safety and security factors. That retarded idea u shot down on flaunting wealth is just one of many. Ur intolerance to hear other views explain y our jobs r so difficult these days. U could always migrate and bring ur kids and grandchildren with u to one where home clothes and dyed hair are allowed?
tomasulu
Member
Dress code yes. Especially if it comes in the form of broad guidance (no provocative dressing instead of minimium 3" below knees). Allow people to exercise their good judgement; no naming and shaming offenders please. It's kinda like in the corporate world. Very few would wanna stand out in a bad way. What most people (parents) end up doing is to dress up in the beginning and tune it to the acceptable level over time. There will be those odd ones who will be good for a few good laughs during lunch gossip. What's the big deal?
miloice
Well-Known Member
End of the day, there is a need to see beyond rules. Line is hard to draw... some folks are lost without rules. In the asian context... students need to copy notes in lectures, parents insist ranking of schools by results etc. The need these data spoonfed. Vicious cycle to chase a endless race... no time to see beyond defined scope.
Actually I support Denise80 in this issue. It's still better to observe the dress code in schools though I personally really wish I can just wear anything and lessen the hassle. But in the management of things, having uniforms helps.
And it's best that the 'trend' and 'fashion' privy to students should remain a private concern. We can't just have 'bengs' style, the hippi style, the grandiose style... and all sorts of rojak fashion in students when they are too young.
Overseas, we can do it because the society is big enough to support communities. But in Singapore, the society is small, and differences are huge and sharp. Especially styles defined by races and religion. You can't have that or the muslims will start a mosque out of the school. So basically, the social situation in Singapore is still best that when a kid is little, you got to have a uniform cutting through race and religion and even personal preference.
Am I not hitting at the clux of the matter here?
I know you guys persue liberty and freedom, but... situation isn't the same everywhere.
And it's best that the 'trend' and 'fashion' privy to students should remain a private concern. We can't just have 'bengs' style, the hippi style, the grandiose style... and all sorts of rojak fashion in students when they are too young.
Overseas, we can do it because the society is big enough to support communities. But in Singapore, the society is small, and differences are huge and sharp. Especially styles defined by races and religion. You can't have that or the muslims will start a mosque out of the school. So basically, the social situation in Singapore is still best that when a kid is little, you got to have a uniform cutting through race and religion and even personal preference.
Am I not hitting at the clux of the matter here?
I know you guys persue liberty and freedom, but... situation isn't the same everywhere.
"You don't become innovative after going for some theory lesson."
Milo, it is true to a certain extent. When I discussed about training teachers of the 70s and 80s to nurture creative students, I don't really mean mastering the theories only. Gone are the days we would teach moral values using 'hao gong ming' (good citizen) textbook/workbook. These days we give them case studies and scenarios, most of which are pretty much open-ended for them to discuss and there isn't really an absolutely right or wrong answer. I particularly like one lesson on the 'Heinz dilemma'. Can check it out here http://www.psychinaction.com/uimages//84.pdf
One challenge to teach creatively so as to get the pupils to think is time constraint too. In the past we used to learn deductively. These days, we try to get the pupils to learn inductively and form their own reasonings and theories. All these take a longer time to facilitate as compared to the 'lecture-style' of teaching but certainly teaching inductively yields better returns. All these to me have a higher leverage in nurturing more creative students as compared to making the school rules less stringent.
It is true that the line regarding school rules is extremely difficult to draw, particularly even among teachers. Some are more relaxed, some are stricter and hence it's either you state clearly and exactly what each rule means and why these are important or do not have any rules at all. Schools also no longer are so regimental that they just impose school rules without rationale. Schools these days would explain the need for school rules to both parents and teachers but of course, this isn't a perfect world where everyone can accept the rules but people do have a choice and they really should go for their preferences if they really can't take these school rules. Instead of wanting to change the system (which they know is not possible unless they join the system and beat the system by becoming the director of education), they could perhaps change their mindsets or change their lives (simply by changing schools or getting out of sg).
Milo, it is true to a certain extent. When I discussed about training teachers of the 70s and 80s to nurture creative students, I don't really mean mastering the theories only. Gone are the days we would teach moral values using 'hao gong ming' (good citizen) textbook/workbook. These days we give them case studies and scenarios, most of which are pretty much open-ended for them to discuss and there isn't really an absolutely right or wrong answer. I particularly like one lesson on the 'Heinz dilemma'. Can check it out here http://www.psychinaction.com/uimages//84.pdf
One challenge to teach creatively so as to get the pupils to think is time constraint too. In the past we used to learn deductively. These days, we try to get the pupils to learn inductively and form their own reasonings and theories. All these take a longer time to facilitate as compared to the 'lecture-style' of teaching but certainly teaching inductively yields better returns. All these to me have a higher leverage in nurturing more creative students as compared to making the school rules less stringent.
It is true that the line regarding school rules is extremely difficult to draw, particularly even among teachers. Some are more relaxed, some are stricter and hence it's either you state clearly and exactly what each rule means and why these are important or do not have any rules at all. Schools also no longer are so regimental that they just impose school rules without rationale. Schools these days would explain the need for school rules to both parents and teachers but of course, this isn't a perfect world where everyone can accept the rules but people do have a choice and they really should go for their preferences if they really can't take these school rules. Instead of wanting to change the system (which they know is not possible unless they join the system and beat the system by becoming the director of education), they could perhaps change their mindsets or change their lives (simply by changing schools or getting out of sg).
Here's the theory inductively...
Mdm Denise80 sex life getting boring when she is 30yo, Mdm Denise80 sex life will be doomed by age 50yo---> (if and only if Man needs sex) Mdm Denise80 will divorce because a sweet young thing comes in to spice up her man's sex life...
LOL!!!
Mdm Denise80 sex life getting boring when she is 30yo, Mdm Denise80 sex life will be doomed by age 50yo---> (if and only if Man needs sex) Mdm Denise80 will divorce because a sweet young thing comes in to spice up her man's sex life...
LOL!!!
Scope, frankly, I didn't think I'll have a wonderful sex life at 50 years old. I'll be thankful if I have a happy family and my hubby to grow old with me. Great to know that you have such high sex drive that can last you past 50 years of age. Your theory is flawed because sex and marriage factors do not have a direct causal relationship. It just has a correlation. Anyway you don't have to digress to bring in this in this thread since it's nothing to do with the topic discussed. You suddenly just sounded like a small boy who loves to make fun of girls. I'm not a girl so don't behave like a small boy.
Dear Denise,
This thread is going too fast...... wait for me !
"NEVER stupidly claim that 'is' is not a verb hahahahahahah"
- "is" isn't THE verb that violates the subject-verb agreement. I never said 'is' isn´t A verb. Thanks for not willing to differentiate. Got to love the use of apostrophes in your analysis to Matka. Thanks for kicking my ass.....no...seriously, I appreciate the lesson on sub-clauses.
"I don't read ALL comments and analyze ALL before I give my inputs.
- I wish advice seekers good luck ! Conjuring up something is quite allright, since it's not your (Denise's) life.
"I'm not even a professional counselor or something...which was why Watching had made funny comments about me not responding to Milo's posts and just responding to Powder's".
- Gaping holes..... No link not being a professional counselor to not responding to Milo's posts.
- To reaffirm not reading everything, do another concoction: not responding to Milo's posts.
"When I wrongly addressed you as 'watchful', I also admitted...."
-"admitting" is cow dung because you knew I wasn't offended. I addressed myself with a so called self-denigrating label in my reply there. It was nothing but good-humor ridicule. Yes, I like laughing at people especially the "kitty who sees a roaring lion when she looks in the mirror" because she´s "visually impaired".
"despite knowing so much myself". -okay, okay, you are omniscient
"I KNOW a lot MORE than you" -yes you do
"my analysis above is too profound" -indeed profound
- Exercise some restraint in your pursuit of paying homage to yourself please. Love your supercilious comments, not !
I mentioned lesbian sex the first time some time ago, without the need to be belligerent to you in a non-related lesbian subject thread. You were eager to tell about your lesbian past and your bedroom behavior. Of course I don't think you are fond of fondling peoples' genitals. I just think you need to put up a front to appear as a free spirited woman.
Mentioning or talking to some people is not a side effect, it´s deliberate. I´ll make sure to vote for you on the next presidential election. By the way, appreciate your effort to want to dedicate several posts to me when engaging with others.
While disparaging other characters, you allow yourself to become uncritical of your own actions-labeling people. I "like" this forum's proverb, "look in the mirror".
On language mistakes: "accusation" (negative) becomes "highlighting" (neutral) - Any more revisions ?
Aiyah....now you are going to ask me to contribute to the topic of creativity/education.....oh shucks, I got myself into trouble again.
This thread is going too fast...... wait for me !
"NEVER stupidly claim that 'is' is not a verb hahahahahahah"
- "is" isn't THE verb that violates the subject-verb agreement. I never said 'is' isn´t A verb. Thanks for not willing to differentiate. Got to love the use of apostrophes in your analysis to Matka. Thanks for kicking my ass.....no...seriously, I appreciate the lesson on sub-clauses.
"I don't read ALL comments and analyze ALL before I give my inputs.
- I wish advice seekers good luck ! Conjuring up something is quite allright, since it's not your (Denise's) life.
"I'm not even a professional counselor or something...which was why Watching had made funny comments about me not responding to Milo's posts and just responding to Powder's".
- Gaping holes..... No link not being a professional counselor to not responding to Milo's posts.
- To reaffirm not reading everything, do another concoction: not responding to Milo's posts.
"When I wrongly addressed you as 'watchful', I also admitted...."
-"admitting" is cow dung because you knew I wasn't offended. I addressed myself with a so called self-denigrating label in my reply there. It was nothing but good-humor ridicule. Yes, I like laughing at people especially the "kitty who sees a roaring lion when she looks in the mirror" because she´s "visually impaired".
"despite knowing so much myself". -okay, okay, you are omniscient
"I KNOW a lot MORE than you" -yes you do
"my analysis above is too profound" -indeed profound
- Exercise some restraint in your pursuit of paying homage to yourself please. Love your supercilious comments, not !
I mentioned lesbian sex the first time some time ago, without the need to be belligerent to you in a non-related lesbian subject thread. You were eager to tell about your lesbian past and your bedroom behavior. Of course I don't think you are fond of fondling peoples' genitals. I just think you need to put up a front to appear as a free spirited woman.
Mentioning or talking to some people is not a side effect, it´s deliberate. I´ll make sure to vote for you on the next presidential election. By the way, appreciate your effort to want to dedicate several posts to me when engaging with others.
While disparaging other characters, you allow yourself to become uncritical of your own actions-labeling people. I "like" this forum's proverb, "look in the mirror".
On language mistakes: "accusation" (negative) becomes "highlighting" (neutral) - Any more revisions ?
Aiyah....now you are going to ask me to contribute to the topic of creativity/education.....oh shucks, I got myself into trouble again.
watching, indeed, I'm not even going to read this latest post of yours. We've already moved on. If you're slow, it's not my problem. Let's not disrupt the current 'education discussion'.
I'll stop engaging you here regarding all previous posts on language errors or name-calling etc. If you feel wrongly accused or anything, can pm me privately but whether I respond or not depends on my mood. Thanks.
I'll stop engaging you here regarding all previous posts on language errors or name-calling etc. If you feel wrongly accused or anything, can pm me privately but whether I respond or not depends on my mood. Thanks.
Scope, I don't choose to be the target of entertainment but you volunteered myself to become your subject of entertainment. I continue to stand by my own beliefs and how I lead my life because I'm confident of myself and my life. If you like to continue to treat me as the subject of your entertainment, by all means.
miloice
Well-Known Member
Denise, imho, the issue isn't just with the schools... if we look at the expectations of the majority of the parents... its hard to change the mindset. Just ask parents that are trying so hard to enroll their children to 'good schools'. Majority are focused in getting ahead, having that 'advantage'. The minority are looking at the other virtures that are unique to the school. i.e. the traditions, spirit and values that it imparts.
So, a solution that only attempts from one aspect isn't going to be as effective. My 2 cents.
I'm never a big supporter of rules... I understand the need for it and no issue to have rules in place. However, it is often enforced by people have no idea on its objectives and frequently instill uncertainties and fear for the 'lack of control'. These are the control freaks.
So, a solution that only attempts from one aspect isn't going to be as effective. My 2 cents.
I'm never a big supporter of rules... I understand the need for it and no issue to have rules in place. However, it is often enforced by people have no idea on its objectives and frequently instill uncertainties and fear for the 'lack of control'. These are the control freaks.
Milo, agree that the issue is not just with schools but as an educator, I'll only focus on what I can do for the school, students and parents and strike a balance to achieve the school mission, vision and values. This attempt to solve the problem is at least within my sphere of control/influence.
School leaders (good ones I mean) often reinforce the rationale for rules etc and indeed, only those who can't see past the rules that tend to perceive rules as simply rigid or as tools to help 'control' students/teachers.
School leaders (good ones I mean) often reinforce the rationale for rules etc and indeed, only those who can't see past the rules that tend to perceive rules as simply rigid or as tools to help 'control' students/teachers.
tomasulu
Member
It's a worrying mentality that says if you disagree with some existing rules or policies you should get the hell out, eh emigrate to a better place. More than rules loving it's this intolerance of dissent that annoys me no end.
Well newsflash for you - it's my country too. And if I want your opinion as to whether I should uproot and go, I'd ask you for it. And until then you will just have to learn to deal with my irksome existence. Boohoo.
Well newsflash for you - it's my country too. And if I want your opinion as to whether I should uproot and go, I'd ask you for it. And until then you will just have to learn to deal with my irksome existence. Boohoo.
tomasulu
Member
People will invent all sort of reasons to justify having a rule. Take school uniform for example - safety, security, equity, etc. - they all sound like sensible reasons. But if u think deeper do they really make sense or are they just some waste-of-time committee's attempt to give credence to a rule they never intended to repeal?
Oh btw I actually like school uniforms. It's logistically easier for busy parents. I just dont buy the crap rationale that moe/school administrators come up with. They won't allow it simply because they fear change. And in Singapore change don't come until someone up there decide we should change. Then that same committee will reverse engineer another set of reasons to support why the old is no longer relevant.
Oh btw I actually like school uniforms. It's logistically easier for busy parents. I just dont buy the crap rationale that moe/school administrators come up with. They won't allow it simply because they fear change. And in Singapore change don't come until someone up there decide we should change. Then that same committee will reverse engineer another set of reasons to support why the old is no longer relevant.
'irksome existence'? 'Boohoo'?
You do sound childish for someone your age. Anyway, disregarding a person's opinion by calling it 'retarded' tells a lot about your character. Does this show your great intolerance of dissent too? As someone more mature, older and supposedly wiser, I would expect more.
You do sound childish for someone your age. Anyway, disregarding a person's opinion by calling it 'retarded' tells a lot about your character. Does this show your great intolerance of dissent too? As someone more mature, older and supposedly wiser, I would expect more.
toma,
yeah, tell me abt the intolerance of dissent...
i got grilled for using the 4-letter word to emphasize my sentences and the word can no longer be typed. some of these ladies were just obsessed with the word & went on and on just fighting a war over the word i used.... totally oblivious to the bigger message behind. it's like they picked the most insignificant point and made it the reason for a war, rather than something of a higher reason. it has taught me the mentality of some which u seriously cannot hope to bring to our level.
what's amazing is Me getting a warning for the use of the word in like less than 5% of my posts for Good purpose.... and pple with 95% of their posts without any meaningful purpose, tellng lies and being an Ass, get to stay in existence for so long...
i may wear my uniform n cut my hair, but doesn't mean i'll follow rules. if i did, i'll lose half of who i am.
so anyway, when it comes to a point u know the other party chooses to stay on the ground, u just gotta blank that part out.
these are the same pple who will chase u out for being a smoker, a prc citizen, a foreigner and totally disregard all things else, cos they're already stuck at who u are... not what u do.
yeah, tell me abt the intolerance of dissent...
i got grilled for using the 4-letter word to emphasize my sentences and the word can no longer be typed. some of these ladies were just obsessed with the word & went on and on just fighting a war over the word i used.... totally oblivious to the bigger message behind. it's like they picked the most insignificant point and made it the reason for a war, rather than something of a higher reason. it has taught me the mentality of some which u seriously cannot hope to bring to our level.
what's amazing is Me getting a warning for the use of the word in like less than 5% of my posts for Good purpose.... and pple with 95% of their posts without any meaningful purpose, tellng lies and being an Ass, get to stay in existence for so long...
i may wear my uniform n cut my hair, but doesn't mean i'll follow rules. if i did, i'll lose half of who i am.
so anyway, when it comes to a point u know the other party chooses to stay on the ground, u just gotta blank that part out.
these are the same pple who will chase u out for being a smoker, a prc citizen, a foreigner and totally disregard all things else, cos they're already stuck at who u are... not what u do.
these are the same pple who will chase u out for being a smoker, a prc citizen, a foreigner and totally disregard all things else, cos they're already stuck at who u are... not what u do.
Disagree that people who abide by rules and who feel that rules are there for a good reason are the same ppl who'll ostracise smokers, prc citizens and foreigners. That's a poor assumption I think. Agreeing to having rules in school doesn't mean we need to whole world (prcs, smokers or foreigners) to conform to other societal norms or what. That's totally different contexts here.
Disagree that people who abide by rules and who feel that rules are there for a good reason are the same ppl who'll ostracise smokers, prc citizens and foreigners. That's a poor assumption I think. Agreeing to having rules in school doesn't mean we need to whole world (prcs, smokers or foreigners) to conform to other societal norms or what. That's totally different contexts here.
tomasulu
Member
Ya it's always about picking at some choice of words as a launch pad for ad hominem attacks. They have to; otherwise they have nothing to stand on.
Denise what is retarded is not your view points but the ridiculous reasons you based them on. Pretending you've given serious thought to an issue when all you did was to try and polish some turd and regurgitate whats on the rule book. Typical mindless civil servant. Intellectual dishonesty is when you've decided on a course of action before commencing on a farce of a so called discussion. Let me ask you this - all the group discussions you had with your students wrt school rules, weren't they just academic? That is no matter the outcome of the discussions, the rules will stay where they are no?
Denise what is retarded is not your view points but the ridiculous reasons you based them on. Pretending you've given serious thought to an issue when all you did was to try and polish some turd and regurgitate whats on the rule book. Typical mindless civil servant. Intellectual dishonesty is when you've decided on a course of action before commencing on a farce of a so called discussion. Let me ask you this - all the group discussions you had with your students wrt school rules, weren't they just academic? That is no matter the outcome of the discussions, the rules will stay where they are no?
The discussions with pupils on 'rules' were my illustration to you on teaching them about 'creativity' and 'critical thinking', not about changing the outcome of rules. If they are thinkers, when they grow up, they can lead the world and change the way schools function based on rules.
Whether viewpoints or reasons to support viewpoints are lousy to you, there is certainly no need to use the word 'retarded' because they seem to suggest the person offering his/her opinions to be retarded - great show of disrespect and most importantly your great intolerance for dissent. No matter how you disagreed with my reasoning, there isn't a need to react to this extreme.
Have you wondered, keyboard warrior, you feel strongly that schools should not have rules that stifle creativity..but what can do you about it and how can you bring about a change to it? All talk but no action or ability to bring about change is still naught. If you're just sharing your views then so be it. You've made your points already. I personally would not like to talk and talk and do nothing about it. What I believe in, I'll lead the school the way I believe my students would benefit. No one school can please all parents after all and pleasing all parents is never its priority.
Whether viewpoints or reasons to support viewpoints are lousy to you, there is certainly no need to use the word 'retarded' because they seem to suggest the person offering his/her opinions to be retarded - great show of disrespect and most importantly your great intolerance for dissent. No matter how you disagreed with my reasoning, there isn't a need to react to this extreme.
Have you wondered, keyboard warrior, you feel strongly that schools should not have rules that stifle creativity..but what can do you about it and how can you bring about a change to it? All talk but no action or ability to bring about change is still naught. If you're just sharing your views then so be it. You've made your points already. I personally would not like to talk and talk and do nothing about it. What I believe in, I'll lead the school the way I believe my students would benefit. No one school can please all parents after all and pleasing all parents is never its priority.
Denise, I wasn't being sensitive about the word 'layperson'. The italics were used purely for my emphasis. I'm a layperson in many sense. It didn't have anything to do with you wanting to teach/correct grammar. My feedback to you was on your tone of condescension. That's why I said "occupational hazard". You speak like you're a level above (ie. we akin to your students/children). I think you don't even realise it. Just sayin'.
If having rationale for rules is considered regurgitation on what's on the rule book, I have nothing to say. If this indicates that I'm a mindless civil servant in your eyes, so be it because I'm not here to change your mind or win popular votes. I stand by what I truly believe in and that is without any school rule, a school definitely cannot function its best. Behind each school rule is an important value the school hopes to inculcate in pupils. If parents disagree with certain school rules strongly, they really should seek out another school that suits them rather than expecting the entire school rules to be changed when 99% of the parents like the school rules. I hope this is clearer to you now. If it's still mindless, then sorry for my lack of intellectual capacity. Welcome you to join the profession and improve the teaching profession for the good of all mankind.
matka, I spoke as if I'm a level above specifically to 'her' and not you. I hope you understand.
Oh well, talking about occupational hazards, many of the ppl here spoke also as if they're of higher intellect than others here...perhaps they're scholars, CEOs or something? So I'll appreciate you to read clearly before you cite 'occupational hazard' simply because my occupation is accessible to all. I am above board in my words and actions and perhaps this makes me vulnerable for 'attack' but I'm fine. It's for a good discussion as long as there's basic respect for each other.
Oh well, talking about occupational hazards, many of the ppl here spoke also as if they're of higher intellect than others here...perhaps they're scholars, CEOs or something? So I'll appreciate you to read clearly before you cite 'occupational hazard' simply because my occupation is accessible to all. I am above board in my words and actions and perhaps this makes me vulnerable for 'attack' but I'm fine. It's for a good discussion as long as there's basic respect for each other.
matka, you seriously don't think words like 'retarded' or 'typically mindless civil servant' used by Toma to be condescending? Or someone who used the word 'level' - simply cannot bring to our level...isn't this an indication too that this person thinks he's of higher level than us in terms of 'higher reasoning'? How is this? Condescending as well? C'mon, why me and not others? Funny.
tomasulu
Member
If you don't like retarded you're not gonna like unthinking or illogical or slow or intellectually challenged. How about this I'll make you a deal - when you stop being stupid i wont have reason to call a spade a spade. A dull spade. Not the sharpest tool in the shed.
Contrary to what it may seem I don't like to engage in fruitless pursuit. So no I'm not gonna attempt to change any school rules unless they are egregiously offensive. I do intend to come to an understanding with the school on how I'd like my kids to be disciplined in the event of misbehavior or transgression. Believe me no teacher will get away with giving my children a bad haircut without first informing me.
Contrary to what it may seem I don't like to engage in fruitless pursuit. So no I'm not gonna attempt to change any school rules unless they are egregiously offensive. I do intend to come to an understanding with the school on how I'd like my kids to be disciplined in the event of misbehavior or transgression. Believe me no teacher will get away with giving my children a bad haircut without first informing me.
yesno333
Member
As usual make peace ppl....eh..how abt i start by migrating to north korea and cut a square top or watever....><"
like i say...personal attacks only breed hatred...life is short...why create all tis ruckus...peace ppl peace.....
just concentrate on the thread...less personal attack would make this a more peaceful world....><"
like i say...personal attacks only breed hatred...life is short...why create all tis ruckus...peace ppl peace.....
just concentrate on the thread...less personal attack would make this a more peaceful world....><"
Wow, more terrible words from you that show even greater intolerance for dissent. Now I'm called stupid and slow and intellectually challenged?
If it's just a haircut, why should you be concerned if it's a bad haircut? No teacher will get away from giving your children a bad haircut? Do you even know usually the parents would have been informed on this and if the parents do not personally see to the haircut, the school will just take over the job by engaging barbers? You really sound like a very difficult parent. Spare the rod and spoil the child. I hope your children are able to grow up well under your overly protective wings.
Anyway I've finally read something in your last post that's clearer and that is you not going to change any school rule (actually you can't anyway) unless they are egregiously offensive - this sounds more reasonable and if you have stated this stand from the start and not with that strong tone and disdain for school rules, I wouldn't even have disagreed strongly with you on this topic. Who is being slow now? Or perhaps, you're not consistent in expressing your thoughts here. One moment you're so against school rules and another moment, you conclude with this 'unless they are offensive,...' Okay, point finally taken.
If it's just a haircut, why should you be concerned if it's a bad haircut? No teacher will get away from giving your children a bad haircut? Do you even know usually the parents would have been informed on this and if the parents do not personally see to the haircut, the school will just take over the job by engaging barbers? You really sound like a very difficult parent. Spare the rod and spoil the child. I hope your children are able to grow up well under your overly protective wings.
Anyway I've finally read something in your last post that's clearer and that is you not going to change any school rule (actually you can't anyway) unless they are egregiously offensive - this sounds more reasonable and if you have stated this stand from the start and not with that strong tone and disdain for school rules, I wouldn't even have disagreed strongly with you on this topic. Who is being slow now? Or perhaps, you're not consistent in expressing your thoughts here. One moment you're so against school rules and another moment, you conclude with this 'unless they are offensive,...' Okay, point finally taken.
yesno333, no use actually.
Some of them feel that the choice of words are really apt in describing some ppl (like me?) - call spade a spade.
Some feel that because they have superior ideas and could think at a higher level, they have the right to use all the unpleasant words and that we should look past them and accept them because it's really a great advice fr them.
With self-indulgent ppl around, such personal attacks are only likely to continue.
Some of them feel that the choice of words are really apt in describing some ppl (like me?) - call spade a spade.
Some feel that because they have superior ideas and could think at a higher level, they have the right to use all the unpleasant words and that we should look past them and accept them because it's really a great advice fr them.
With self-indulgent ppl around, such personal attacks are only likely to continue.