so, so that so that's why there's regardless of whether there is , uh whether how ethical the the side the let's say the someone the someone who is actually pushing for the boundary right is let's say the scientists


there will always be a public danger, so, so for us the public right who who's taxes fund much of scientific work is actually we are very keen and very interested in where the science is going and the integrity the integrity of those who are actually taking us there


alright so, so in fact the, the abilities of scientist right they they have, the abilities and capabilities to manipulate the building blocks of our life and and that's why it's so they they can they can alter so many biological processes from since


thousands of years ago and, they understand how to engineer this biological systems and, fundamentally how it works and how it changes how how it heals things or how how are they reproduce and


how it relates to the living world, so we are we are always very concerned on the integrity and the ethics the ethical practices of this , scientists and these people who are pushing the boundaries for for


ya for uh for for new for let's say even even in in the technological sense or maybe, be healthcare sense sense uh in terms of the scientific researchers that they are they are experts in


, so, why I would say that , the scientific research that is uh done by made by, this scientist right I don't think


it should be constrained by ethical concerns because for a fact that they are scientists they're not just like in in life everyone has their own, uh, they have their own strengths and weaknesses right so if this person's strength is in scientific research he can have both I agree he can have both but if he's so good in the scientific research and if let's say this person if let's say albert einstein uh


yeah whoever is uh isaac newton or whoever you name it if they are the ones who made who created the, the light bulbs and actually pushed the boundaries and if let's say they didn't have any ethical concerns I think it at the top of their head right they are not actually having ethical concerns they are just thinking about pushing the boundaries


and that is why each and and in that sense I feel that it shouldn't be constrained by the ethical concerns because at the top of your mind number one priority is to, to create to invent and to to make something happen that is that's my job and my role


so that's why I in my, opinion I think that it should not be constrained by ethical concerns, (mmhmm)


(mmhmm), ya


uh thank you for the question I would say in this just for this solely just for this topic itself right having when I'm the scientist I'm doing scientific research right I would say that, integrity, and ethical concerns isn't my top priority so it it can come into play but if let's say there comes a time where I am at the crossroad and I need to think of


pushing the boundary, to find out something new to invent something or, being concerned by this by something that's ethical I think that my job here is to push for what I believe for and my top priority


thank you Si , actually while you were, uh going on right I was thinking, uh scientific research right does it coexist and


actually overlapped with ethical concerns because you were saying about how ultimately scientific research is to bring greater good to mankind right so, so actually, so I would say that it should not be constrained, by ethical concerns may be largely because


there isn't there isn't ethical concerns because what I'm what the scientists what the the researcher is doing is to push boundaries is to find find out something that is better so, so what ethical concerns are there like


ya so and and that's why I feel, that, scientific research should not be constrained by I mean should not be constrained or will not be constrained by ethical concerns because ultimately what you are doing here is for the greater good so


, (mmhmm), (mmhmm), (mmhmm), (mmhmm)


(mmhmm), (mmhmm), (mmhmm)


(mmhmm) (mmhmm), (mmhmm)


(mmhmm)


I I believe that the answer is, yeah I think it's it's okay so I think the obvious answer is the latter and we probably wouldn't want to we don't want uh, risk the life of this hundred people even though it may seem to be a very good trade-off if it's hundred people's life for and it and doesn't mean that it I mean of course before you even test it on someone you make I mean the the scientists and researchers got to make sure that you know this thing the chances of it succeeding should be very high because there should


be like a procedure that before you even test it on someone you actually tested it in in every other you have you you did your testing in stages and probably towards the end you probably need to test it on people on COVID patients just so you know that you know it actually works on COVID patients and


yeah yes and after that you were talking about animals and stuff I think that's also an alternative which which that's why, I think that's an alternative that scientific uh the researchers they are also exploring in that sense testing on guinea pigs uh


animals or, ya so I think, this I don't think these are ethical concerns it's just weighing the pros and cons, and seeing if which which which decision is better if you can do it without a hundred people


sort of risking and sacrificing then do it that way if not, then you have to do you some way one way or another one way or another you make sure you get it done because, like you said COVID vaccine it's such a it's such a important thing that we uh the whole world is dying for now right now everyone is waiting for the day that the vaccine is up right it's release so so one way or another you need to do it if it now that hundred people that needs let's say the last the last this the last choice that we we can't


we don't have any other alternative anymore and we need to do it to the time we need to do it because we are like I said this is, this is the we're pushing boundaries this not some one plus one, easy math right this is research that


will will not potentially but will change our life in the future so that that's why I would say that this ethical concerns right we choose the best we choose the best no doubt but, , I mean at the end of the day, even


if you take a vote with everyone in the whole world I'd I believe that, who will who will rise up on top right is always to push the people will always push for, push for what's practical instead of


just that ethical concerns if we have already taken into account and consideration about or what's the best way to do this, ya so so that's why ya I I I would say ethical concerns is shouldn't be constrained


, (mmhmm) (mmhmm)


(mmhmm), , (mmhmm) (mmhmm),


(mmhmm) (mmhmm)


I think okay wait I think ya , okay so I'd say I think, ultimately it boils down to, uh as much as I agree with you right because my stand here is that it should not be constrained by ethical concerns and I think we need to look at the


, at which part of the line do we stand because you it as much as I have been agreed agreeing with you you have also been agreeing with me but it seems like you are pushing for the for the opposition to win in this debate but I don't think okay ultimately that is not my concern here I think what we need to find is the


the the sweet spot for, how much ethical concerns will affect, albeit how much our scientific research will be constrained by ethical concerns because I think both of us are are pretty balance in our arguments so


it it boils down to, uh, to what extent I'd I would say to what extent should, scientific research, be constrained by our ethical uh scientific research should be constrained by our ethical concerns so


and that and that's why I would say we always, uh like I I mean I I don't think I need to repeat myself but, we always , do it step by step and we see if we can if we can do it, with a better alternative yes so be it but ultimately ultimately to get it done to


get the vaccine out like like the example that you raised, at at the last crossroad, what, if we need to sacrifice or risk the life of that hundred people for the rest of the world I think


we would, and that's why I would say, and that's why as the proposition of this motion I would say that scientific research should not be constrained by ethical concerns


, part three debate topic three, okay


(ppc)


okay I'll be starting soon, , okay third motion for today marijuana should be legalised


and once again I'm the proposition silas wait uh will be the opposition, , okay so parents grandparents and other adults have told me that marijuana use could kill me since young and I believe that uh maybe like for the for the three of us here I think we have to agree with that since young the older people are always giving us the same advice that


so many other young people have heard marijuana is a drug and we don't abuse it okay, and my middle school health causes equated marijuana with crack and I appreciate that it is uh it was it was a scare tactic but if


caution was truly warranted I also deserved similar warnings we deserve similar warnings about the dangers of processed food soda, and prescription drugs even the the like simplest like paracetamol


so in college I did my own research and, quickly found the truth that marijuana is no more dangerous and in some cases less dangerous than most of the other things that we put in our bodies, despite this disparity marijuana remains illegal in so many states in for one in singapore for us it is still it is still illegal and its use is a is still a taboo


it's time that I believe we make a change towards legalising this drug and, there are, fundamentally three big reasons why I believe so, firstly if alcohol and cigarettes are legal marijuana should be too


because, legal consistency is important, so I can buy a huge, amount of uh before ten-thirty right I can buy a huge amount of vodka I can buy any alcohol, and or any cigarettes in nearly anywhere in singapore


and we can attribute thousands of of, loss of lives to those products alcohol and and cigarettes so I'll, but, if you want to purchase a joint of marijuana in singapore it is close to impossible or even impossible there's no way there's no way you are getting it


which is, based on reports, which is this is actually like is actually a far safer pleasure I mean marijuana comparing marijuana to alcohol and cigarettes so the strength of regulation that we apply to our actions has to be proportionate to their danger I think we we would agree with that


so according to a research done by NUS alcohol overdose uh last year alcohol overdose alone, cause nearly, twenty-five thousand deaths in


uh last year and contributed to nearly sixteen thousand death from liver disease and alcohol-related crimes resulted in two-point two, two, million arrests in, uh in twenty-nineteen just in


the united states alone, and, in the united states it's also cigarettes are just as bad causing nearly five hundred thousand deaths, per year with medical bills approaching one hundred and forty billion per year


unhealthy foods worst of all with the latest statistics demonstrating that obesity is related to the death of nearly twenty percent, of, the population in the world per year


and that healthcare costs associated with being overweight, I as much as, two hundred billion per year just in the united states alone, so try and regulate any of those and you'll face serious backlash


former , so the the New-York city mayor michael bloomberg, saw a storm of criticism when he attempted to institute measures to curb the consumption of this junk food


and also , Si do you mind if I just uh say finish my point so so I take the first half and you take the second half are you okay with that, okay go ahead okay go ahead


ya go ahead


uh okay anyway the the uh my first point was about legal consistency, okay ya, yes


(ppc), (ppc)


same for the other for alcohol and cigarettes too yeah, (mmhmm)


no I don't but I have friends who do, not all and I don't think all marijuana users , because I I believe if you have done your uh


your extensive research right I think you'd know that marijuana actually have, several health benefits too, , like you are talking about the health uh complications right so that's why we are on this topic


(mmhmm)


(mmhmm) (mmhmm), (mmhmm) but not as effective


(mmhmm), okay so okay but personally right okay uh it's good that you referred, to the articles by New-York times but for me personally so


after my third football related knee injury right my uh in high school the doctors diagnosed uh my, my specialist actually diagnosed me with, arthritis


and they treated my pain and swelling with toradol, in those scenes and in the years that followed right I learned that this prescription drugs that took a toll on my liver, not not not not alcohol or not


any other things but yes these drugs that were prescribed to to me took a toll on my liver and other organs and I should have avoided using them, so but this knowledge was even now it's too little and too late when I already had years of daily prescription used under my belt during this uh


my my my five because I'm I'm I'm a I'm I'm playing football with NFL so it's actually just one league below s league uh for five years so, when I use , but if I had use marijuana medically right


it actually shows promise in treating arthritis arthritis and also best minimal chance of organ damaged so, but I would have been jailed I would be I would have been fined and, I I would have faced prosecution and that's why I would say that


it should be legalised and of course use, appropriately responsibly with every other things like the past two debates that we've been talking about it boils down to, how, uh this this how do how we utilise these tools around us so and that's why it should it should be legalised


and , so beyond even beyond sports medicine right , that there's a report by uh once again because I I'm studying, in NUS and the medical students actually reported that marijuana has a host of health-related advantages like like what we said it stops pain mitigates multiple scoliosis scoliosis and


even tourette syndrome uh symptoms and, it reduces insomnia reduces dystonia and amongst other uh beneficial effects so and that's why


I feel once again that it should be legalised and it should be used responsibly , so you see in in the US alone right they arrested, over


twelve million people, for using marijuana irresponsibly like you talk about uh you say like things like drink driving why drink driving why why why is drinking legalised but drink driving is not legalised so and that's why we have all these laws enforcement to make sure that


in this particular case that marijuana should be used responsibly is not it it shouldn't be it shouldn't be illegal to to to use it for whether it's, medicine no use users or


, for for for the benefit of your own health, and that's why I would say that it should be legalised once again and I think you talk about , texas texas for on how how the how


the government is able to tax did you did you raise that point about how the government is able to tax alcohol and cigarettes but not marijuana it ya uh


(mmhmm), I don't think that is related to the motion today I mean I don't think we have much time left anyway is that important


ya, oh


it should be legalised and it should be very heavily and closely controlled, with with with laws enforcement, should it be legalised for recreational use I think


for recreational use I don't think so I don't think , it should be legalised for recreational use, because like what you said right it


it brings about some uh, detrimental, effects to our society so, that's why it it should be very very heavily controlled and, uh with a lot of uh relevant law enforcements


ya, (mmhmm)


ya and because I think maybe in terms of whether it should be legalised I think legal consistency once again my first point is uh is off, utmost important so if like there are other things out there which entails both


the benefits and also problems so so if they're thing if there are tools like what we have been saying out there that are that are legalized then why not marijuana that's that's my and that and that's why I I would say it should be legalised with a lot of


with a lot of relevant laws, to restrict this uh irresponsible, drug abusers ya and that's what I think at in that sense we are, , we we we totally


more or less we we agree with each other


part one debate topic one


yes loud and clear


okay so I would just like to start off by saying thank you for introducing this debate topic uh very well so basically you you did mention that technology is all around us and that is actually a very important point for today's debate because


I think we have to note here the key question is , the keyword in the question rather is more more problems or benefits for the society, and I think we all can agree that it has many benefits and no doubt yes like you mentioned there are problems and some of the problems that raised are like dry eyes headache shoulder pain neck pain and so on and I think a main uh first point of this debate is health problems so


to, summarise what you said they create problems uh health problems for the society but I think a little less was touched on, the keyword more over here so uh first and foremost I would have to agree with you that yes there are problems created with technology but at the same time I would like to raise this question to you the problems created the health problems created is it


does it outweigh the benefits that technology has brought forward to the society if let me just raise a few uh examples and points so for instance the, creation of vaccines like right now in this current uh pandemic they are using technology to create a vaccine that is the fastest vaccine ever yes it may have not been created but there are so many other technological advancements that has been


crucial in the health sector such as MRI scans uh X-ray scan you name it even in the admin sector of hospitals to transfer information, and so on so I would like to raise this question back to you about, whether technology creates more problems in the health sector for society or more benefits and before I want to end of this uh point I would just like to


note on your point where you say technologies surrounds us and if it creates more problems than benefits how would we go forward if we're not going to rely on technology so this being said uh what I want to emphasise is that


we can use technology responsibly such that it minimises the problems and we can maximise the potential it has and uh make our country and maybe the world go forward ya so thank you


okay so uh thank you for your points so at I would first like to start off that , me being the opposition uh I would have to go with the stand that technology does not create more problems than benefits in society whether it creates no problems or less problems it doesn't matter my stand here is it does not create more problems and


uh that is why I would like to uh point like refer back to your point you mentioned about the misinformation spread online and, this is exactly why they are actually rules in place let's take our local context for example in twenty-eighteen the government introduced the POFMA act which is actually to prevent the


transfer of misinformation uh using uh what technology like whatsapp and so on, so yes you even mentioned about cyberbullying and so on and so forth so uh this is where I would like to point out


this is not created by technology you uh you mentioned that it all boils down to the individual and that is exactly my point technology does not create problems based on the point you mentioned technology is not the one that creates problems it is the individuals that create problems technology is a mere tool and


we have to agree that technology is limitless it can go super well or it can go super bad it all depends, in on the individuals and how we utilise it whether there are the proper rules in place and how do the us every individual include including yourself and myself how do we utilise it uh to its maximum


so I would just like to reiterate that, technology does not create problems but it is the human or us as individuals who use these tool, be it our laptops or smartphones and so on to create such problems technology on its own is not going to cyberbully someone it is the human being that is cyberbullying someone through technology that being said I want to point out how technology has more benefit


for society so look at us today how are we having this call it is through an online platform called Webex without Webex in this current pandemic our it is safe to say that it is almost unlikely to have such a discussion with you because you probably have to wear mask and, have to quarantine ourselves in a certain place and so on and so forth so even in this current pandemic where the whole world is actually suffering


with to stay in their premise their own premises and uh within their own four walls how do they get to carry out their daily jobs and communications with their loved ones it's all thanks to technology so, like you said earlier technology is tool that has a lot of benefits and has a lot of problems but whether it creates more problems or not it is very dependent on


the individual itself and in my case I would like to argue on my my ultimate stand is technology does not create more problems than benefits for the society it is the individual who actually creates this kind of problems uh I would like to pass the time back to you


thank you, maybe while you reconnect I would just like to add on a few points so basically


uh besides this current pandemic we can look at all these big terms like artificial intelligence robots and so on and so forth so instead of us human beings doing this low-skilled uh wages jobs they are actually robots in the like uh


food court and stuff collecting our trays and uh so on and so forth so it helps to make our country our this entire world more productive with the use of technology, ya so I'll just pass the time over to you


summarise my point so uh essentially what I wanted to uh what I've been saying for the past three to four minutes is, technology does not create the problems it is us as individuals who create problems for one another using the tool technology which is a limitless tool it has so much potential and it has not been maximise yet and


that being said uh it, it uh it is on track with my stand where, uh technology does not create more problems than benefits for society but actually the opposite and I I also raised other points on how technology is very beneficial for a society and I read some examples about this pandemic how we are able to communicate with our uh loved ones and carry out our jobs as well as


the artificial intelligence and machine learning yes


and that's where I have to cut you for a bit because it's essentially my point it makes the whole world more productive you don't need to spend maybe an hour travelling to work and


back so it is how us as individuals perceived technology the fact that you can save an hour getting ready and another hour travelling to this discussion today I think it all stands for my point that technology is more beneficial for society thank you


part two debate topic two


thank you Eng-Ren for kicking off this debate very well so basically I would just like to ask you a small clarification before we continue you mentioned about integrity so I do


for integrity or against integrity because I guess your stand right now is it should not be constrained like ethical concerns and if you were to say that you are for integrity then you are just supporting my point it should be constrains by uh ethical concerns


okay so to summarise your points they , scientific research and ethical concerns concerns can coexist but if there needs to be a constraint you are you believe that ethical concerns should be uh let go of first primary primarily because


we should uh expand our go beyond our boundaries and make the most of what we can for the future and uh so with that being said I would have to agree with you that , scientific research is important because that's what it it shapes our future and so on and so forth but uh where I disagree and ultimately my stand for this uh topic today is that it should be constrained by ethical concerns and by ethical concerns I would like to refer the two main points humanity and honesty


and honesty essentially is like what you said integrity so to kick off this debate I would like to say that yes we are enjoying many results of scientific research which is essentially scientific studies done to improve our lives, all you have to do is to look at how long we are living versus how long our ancestors lived three hundred years ago so life expectancy has increased a lot of scientific research


has been geared towards fighting diseases and prolonging our lives and that is not the area where scientific research has impacted us though but then every now and again scientific research has done, uh every scientific research does not give us a good outcome


this usually occurs when scientists violate the ethics governing scientific research and ethics refers to the moral guidelines that distinguish what is right and what is wrong so ethical scientific uh research must be conducted in a manner


that makes it beneficial to us humans rather than harmful so my main point here is that, scientific research is being done to improve our society it, for our well being but then why do we allow this kind of ethical issues to bring harm when the ultimate purpose here is to make our society progress and to bring better good to our society ya so


let me just raised a few issues one ethical issue that scientists have to address when they are ready to begin a new research project is whether or not it's in the best interest of humanity so whatever they are going to research needs to be something beneficial and not harmful to us as a whole in order to address the ethical issue scientists


have to be in tune with what is going on with the people so like for example doing a research to pick out whether uh to whether, to find a way to prevent a disease that has never existed and is not expected to it's rather pointless but researching away to prevent a diseases such as Alzheimer's is beneficial that being said we have to


bear in mind the ethical concerns so like imagine you want to do a test for Alzheimer's right, we cannot randomly pick up a few people with Alzheimer's and uh just ignore their , their that they're living thing and they have to ultimately respect them and not bring them any more harm in the in the process of finding a greater good for society thank you


yes so uh I would like to pose a question to you uh I understand that it is for the greater good but essentially let's say if they are going to try to test out new vaccine right now given in this current pandemic about COVID patience and, how else to test for a COVID vaccine like what's the best way to test uh some scientists or researchers with no ethical concerns or rather little ethical concerns would say to


test on COVID patient itself and with that being done you might potentially harm this COVID patient you are testing and you may endanger their life so are you trying to tell me you do not mind sacrificing hundred of lives in the process of finding a vaccine for COVID patient


ultimately to benefit the entire world or are you uh or, or would you rather have a process that do not endanger these hundred people's lives but you can you can find in another alternative possibly through


I don't know uh and, uh animals and so on and so forth


yes so thank you for your point so uh so I would really like to say it warms the cockles of my heart because you actually said that, you would want the latter which is what I would go for and that's exactly my stand here today scientific research should be constrained by ethical concerns it is is


it is exactly why we chose the second option and not the first the first option might give you faster or greater results at a quicker pace but why are you choosing the second is merely ethical concerns you are caring about the hundred people and that is, nearly ethics humanity it is in the best interests of all of us best interest in the hundred people and their families and their loved ones so to round up this debate I would like to thank you for agreeing with me and is


it did actually shows that in society they upgrade people like you who would agree that people the hundred people's life do matter and ethical concerns should still be placed should still be, placed in our cut our like with the welfare of society yes thank you


so your point here about whether it it actually balls down to it being the last resort and that's a whole new debate for whole other day but right now what they're talking about is in every scientific research whether it should be constrained by ethical concerns or not is not whether in terms of a last resort or not and


essentially for every single scientific research be it for vaccines or any kind of machines and so on and so forth, our one of our concerns should be the ethics and the humanity and integrity of society and when it boils down to it being the last resort we can come and discuss about it another day so uh thank you


part part three debate topic three


uh can but I think would be better if you were to engage one another so are you done with your points ya okay so uh I would just like to summarise what you have said about , comparing it to processed foods obesity overweight and alcohol and cigarettes so uh basically your point here is it should be legalised and my stand it's it should not be legalised


uh however I'm not quite convinced with your argument that it should be legalised based on, other bad points in society that are legalised uh probably I'll be more convinced by you telling me about the benefits of marijuana of marijuana rather than the drawbacks of other similar


uh if you may say uh like alcohol and cigarettes and so on so that being said my point here today is that just because other, ya so legal consistency and I I don't think that's a good uh argument because just because something else is legal and


is~by you raising all the concerns that it, has drawbacks to society does not warrant us bring up something else that is harmful to society making it legal so back to my point now I would like to argue why marijuana should not be legalised based on


its drawbacks definitely as we all have known so there are many drawbacks like uh it creates steep cost for society so yes alcohol and cigarettes , you can tax them you can untaxed but there is an article that says that the annual societal costs from alcohol which is two hundred and twenty-three point five billion as far as tobacco one hundred and ninety-three billion this is the cost as in


the drawbacks brings society far exceeds the twenty-four billion than the recent tax and this is in US for two thousand and eighteen so when, you are talking about the cost of marijuana you can compare it to alcohol and cigarettes but it is a bit


very different because of the drawbacks that marijuana pose poses for instance marijuana-related traffic accidents or rather deaths uh to be specific rose by sixty-two percent when the legalisation of marijuana was legalised in colorado


this is quoted by the former chief of police of Newark jim liu california okay so my next point marijuana is addictive and the dependence on the drug will, increase with the legalisation so right now let's say you have x number of people who are addicted to marijuana


by us legalising it there's only gonna be more people who are going to be, addicted to it just because it's legal and no one was like if it's legal people would think what's wrong just like cigarette cigarette do have its drawbacks but because it's legal more and more people smoke then


when it's not legal heavy users of uh marijuana suffer withdrawal symptoms such as insomnia depression anxiety nausea chills stomach pain so on and so forth so according to the national institute of drug


but the extent is different I wouldn't uh like to associate alcohol and cigarettes with insomnia may I ask a personal question if you don't mind do you do you smoke or do you drink, oh okay and do they all have insomnia and depression or anxiety for uh for the least


okay so majority, yes uh but my argument here today is not that they do not have health benefits


yes ya no ya no as in so my argument here today is not that it does not have health benefits my argument here is that the health costs associated with using with the use of uh marijuana


far outweighs the medicinal benefits and furthermore if you were to bring up the topic about medicinal benefits there are alternatives out there in the market that is being used to treat all the current diseases that marijuana is being used to treat


that is not true you can refer to the article just in twenty-twenty january by New-York, times marijuana is not the most effective in any of the, diseases it's treating so back to you thank you


yes no as in I it's not that they are not able to tax but I'm just saying that the costs associated with the use of marijuana far outweighs what they can earn in taxes and uh it's a very detrimental to society, uh can I just pose a question to you are you supportive of the legalisation of the recreational use of marijuana


no as in because you are for the motion it should be legalised so if you are if your so I would want to clarify your stand about uh should it be legalised uh without any restriction or should it be legalised only for medicinal use or for everything that's my question


yes or no should it be legalised for recreational use


and my I understand why is that so


so uh with you answering that I'm glad to say that we are on the same page we do recognise that , marijuana is in fact very detrimental to individuals and ultimately our society because it does not only affect the individual but the people around the individual and we also recognise that it has its benefits like uh treating certain diseases like arthritis and so on so


here it really uh boils down to whether the, priorities like you mention drink driving if the authorities have a certain instrument or a capability put in place to be able to detect consumers driving when they're high on marijuana then it


it becomes a lot easier to regulate policies and to legalise medicinal use but without all these in place it is going to be very difficult because how are you going to note whether a certain individual who is driving


and especially when he's caught in accident or speeding endangering the life of others how would you know that it is not related to the use of marijuana and that's what the people in uh US are currently facing so uh I am I would agree with you that it


could be legalised specifically for medicinal use if they are proper, policies and uh implementations put in place to protect, our society and that is why we both do not agree but that is why we both do not want uh marijuana should be legalised for the recreational use and keep


thank you


debate topic one, school should consider subjective and non-academic factors for admission, this is very important subjective factors such as uh punctuality character is important and non-academic factors such as CCAs they are also important because in the future is not just about academic is not just about math science or languages


but also whether the child is resilient to to undertake other challenges or whether the child has the ups social or emotional ability to to undertake the jobs uh in the future


okay


while I agree that performance uh for academic subjects are important because it's a fair gauge of assessment, but the they uh the school should also consider a subjective uh factors for admission especially so that nowadays there a lower primary there is this show and tell they also have performance tasks and for the upper secondary school or even a higher institutions they have projects


uh they're all important and the uh actually very real to the world as well because in the real world itself for work uh we talked about projects and also uh cooperation group work so this should be also considered for admission


talking about fairness right uh in the first place in the workplace itself there is nothing called really fairness


uh and as moreover in the workplace itself in the reality soft skills are very important in fact networking is important so school should actually consider all these things and and actually let the children, experienced what is happening in the workplace otherwise they will be very uh did there will be a disassociation for them


uh or when it comes to going to the workplace and therefore there are some children who could not adapt so school should consider all these things so that the children know what they have to expect for when they go to uh to the workplace itself, ya so so schools should actually or in fact uh other than subjective and non-academic uh factors they also should uh invite people uh those who are really working as accountant doctor or lawyers to come and actually talk to the children


of what to expect for in work and also to to to said to actually tell them that it's aside while academic is important uh there are also other factors to consider when you want to be successful in certain work or certain role


there is this theory of multiple intelligences so different people are actually intelligent in different aspects, so I feel that there are people who are intelligent in math and science or people who are intelligent in languages or people who are intelligent in in socio


interpersonal skills so this will be very unfair for those who are good in interpersonal skills but they are not good in math and science or languages if we just focus solely on academic factors so by having uh considering by considering subjective academic and non-academic factors


uh this would be fair across all people and we will not actually miss out these people who are actually good with interpersonal skills or or or some other skills that they are good at but not so good in academic so I I find that we should consider subjective and non-academic factors


because we we are we actually want to uh get to to as many people who are who are good to to go abroad like for example university admission and in fact, I find that uh in university nowadays we don't just consider a-levels there is also a a factor of the project work which also considered somewhat some subjective and non-academic factors and this has has not been a dispute to all the parents or or students whatsoever


in fact uh it is actually a good gauge because uh back to university life are all the modules that they are taking uh uh comprise of project and group work


uh while I agree that objective assessment is important but we have to look back at the history of singapore back then uh since singapore gained independence in nineteen sixty five there was a need to have a lot of engineers and and the the those kind of hard sciences of


uh talents so therefore uh we we actually uh the schools consider objective assessments such as PSLE and and O levels and stuff like that, but nowadays it's not just uh the hard science talents uh we are also like looking into a a lot of soft science and and things like that so times have changed


so nowadays uh while it has been very effective in the past it doesn't mean that it will be effective in the future so there is a need to consider uh subjective and non-academic factors for admission because, uh the world is changing and singapore is also changing to to suit uh the the the changing trends and or moreover in other countries they are also considering this is not just singapore itself so uh we can actually try and and change a


~tle uh uh if not a lot yeah


I agree that having systematic uh uh assessment or or structure will make life very easy for the educators but uh as a student I don't think that I beg to differ, I don't think that it would be good actually in the long run especially when they go to the workplace is not just about uh uh assessment is not just about academic is about many other things


uh that they have to take into account of maybe like group work uh maybe the the the the need to actually uh listen to others and things like that, so by having by including more subjective and non-academic factors


these children are forced to actually learn yes, uh I don't know I can hear from here but from the computer


okay sorry, ah, yes yes okay, uh I I find that schools should consider uh this subjective and uh non-academic factors because uh in a real work~workplace the reality they have to undergo all these


as well especially uh when comes to group work and uh need to listen to others so having them to to to actually experience that in life will actually train them for life


in the first place right as mentioned uh in reality itself uh there are many subjective factors and to actually let children experience uh uh all this early in life will train them uh to be ready in the future


especially when it comes to non-academic uh factors actually in reality nowadays uh as you mentioned lasalle and NAFA they already take into these factors to to consider admission for the children, and also uh even like to enter SMU they go for interviews and they actually


pick candidates who are actually very vocal uh uh uh the ability to speak and and and do public speaking to as their students so already some schools already uh considering subjective and non-academic factor so is nothing new actually yeah


, while it is right that you know they they might keeping at have to gave more time but some children obviously are not into hard part sciences and and and languages and this really unfair for them to actually have to undergo ten years of education


uh to go through all this and then to at at the end of the day they actually have self low self esteem as a result when they are actually good in probably uh interpersonal skills or or any music and and and it as well, so actually nowadays uh schools right since at as we since independence we have already


a move to become uh uh more of a, accepting society with uh different kinds of individuals schools should actually give them a more path ways to of success for successes, so other than uh hard sciences and languages school should give them more choices because actually specialised schools is just one or two there are so many more students who are really good in music and art but they cannot at enter uh these specialised schools so it's really unfair for them so uh schools should actually consider subjective and non-academic factors


for for that for these people to actually uh uh become successful, and moreover uh to add on uh to enter LASALLE or even NAFA they have to actually be good in uh the academic factors as well, so it is really unfair because there are people who are really good in music but they are really not good in math


and as a result they did not manage to get the score of two hundred o-plus and they cannot enter uh uh LASALLE or NAFA then what happen to these poor kids yeah so actually schools should actually open more pathway for these people, so that uh they can experience success and eventually what is more important is not about whether this person can can uh be number one or this person can be number two but more of uh whether the children uh uh have actually different kinds of successes and we have different kinds of individuals to support the society


okay


debate topic two, chinese dialects should be offered as mother tongue language I believe that chinese dialects are important so chinese dialects could be mean uh Hokkien Teochew or cantonese Hakka


and these people should know their roots, so uh other than mother tongue or other other than chinese itself as a common language uh chinese dialect should be offered because uh it actually uh made the children realise that, uh did they they actually belong to a group a a Teochew or a Hokkien and this is important because not only can they relate to their grandparents the older folks they also realise that actually they they are different there a sub division different from the the other chinese and since we are learning chinese is from the Beijing mandarin uh it is is


very different so they should know their roots ya


while while I would I agree that uh having uh english is is used a useful language because everybody can communicate, uh but then uh having chinese dialects uh means that it can be we can actually know our roots not only that uh we can best be closer becauseuh to especially to certain groups of people and and to our family members or even to our grandparents because


we we can actually speak the language uh for for now for example the the children don't even know that which dialect group they are from and this is like uh quite detrimental because they they don't even know where they their roots is if you ask them that they will probably say that they are uh a chinese or or singaporean


uh uh so it's like it's important for them to know, uh uh where they are probably uh it should be offered as a mother tongue language not only that chinese dialects and chinese language itself because chinese language itself, uh means that you can communicate to all sorts of different people if different people learn only the chinese dialects then they cannot communicate among the different uh uh different group itself so it's important to have both it's uh


and and but not to forget they have to know their roots and also to feel closer, ya, I also sorry uh also ah I I find that a chinese dialect can be read as well is uh also a written written language is the same as chinese language itself is just that they they said in a in a di~different way different sound that's all yeah sorry


but studies have shown that actually uh students who learn uh both languages english and chinese they actually benefit and they're actually their brain also become a sort of like better uh it it there is no harm in learning more languages uh uh in fact it will be even better so I don't see any harm in learning chinese dialects uh to add on and some more


uh chinese language and chinese dialects are actually quite similar they actually is just another variation, uh even Hokkien and Teochew they if I know Teochew I will definitely understand Hokkien because it's just a variation it's just that the tone sounds different or certain words are different but a generally is a similar language


so I I find that there is no harm in offering that as a language especially when the children know where who and where or who they belong to, and some more if you look at the indians they learn about hindu they learn, about uh a what uh


uh all kinds of tamil and all these things hindu it uh what uh tamil lah, a a whatever it is uh there there are many variations of uh the language itself and they have no issue with with uh learning, and c~communicating between uh different kinds of indians have they have no issue about that why because they are just using english as a common language so I don't think we have any issue as well because we have a common language


and they also don't have any fight or whatever is there is no uh division between them so I th~I think that it is no harm trying why not we should offer chinese dialects and it's actually uh to to actually f~let the the students know that actually chinese is important


in fact probably more important than english because it uh china is becoming greater and also uh english is just a a language for us to actually work and communicate yeah but chinese is the one that is important and we should know our roots,


I think chinese itself right uh the mandarin itself is actually a chinese dialect


it's just that it it it it they they they happened to choose uh mandarin as the common language as the to to communicate uh they they they decide to <mandarin>统一:tong yi</mandarin> so it's like chinese dialect is just another variation different variation it just happened so that they are not as, uh well known and and in the end they choose <mandarin>普通话:pu tong hua</mandarin> they choose mandarin as that that common language so chinese dialects should not be forgotten otherwise all the roots of the different people especially the south of the southern china would would be forgotten


so uh children should actually uh know their the chinese dialect as well of course they also should know <mandarin>普通话:pu tong hua</mandarin> uh uh then they will be, good is there's no harm in doing three languages in the first place because as as mentioned it's good that to know as many languages as possible and in fact chinese dialects is not consider another language uh and it's easier to learn as well because they don't need to learn about the written language because the same thing as the <mandarin>普通话:pu tong hua</mandarin> itself it's just that a variation the the the sound the sound the tone is just different that's all


uh talking about communicate communicating with parents or grandparents uh many grandparents are unable to communicate with, their grandchildren simply because uh they are only able to communicate chinese dialects where as their grandchildren can only communicate in english or mandarin so there is this issue as well so having a chinese dialects


uh uh as a mother tongue language uh will actually mitigate this issue and then uh uh reduce the problem yeah, and also talking about the formality of chinese dialects uh I would say that uh, there are there is a taiwan who use #hokkien#s Hokkien songs Hokkien words uh Hokkien books and there is this uh hong kong who use cantonese songs cantonese uh uh uh language and and so they don't have any issue with that


then therefore is it does that mean that it's more important uh uh I don't think so it's it's quite unfair to uh actually miss displays uh chinese dialects and and place more importance of to to mandarin


uh while this is the most ideal situation but uh is as all not been the case all the time


uh because some chil~children might not ever ever have a chance to learn chinese dialect, so uh uh it's like and also just learning the chinese dialect is not important probably is also important to learn about the Teochew culture or the Hokkien culture so is uh having as a formal lang~like a lesson itself will will will get them to actually appreciate more of the


the the what dialect they are in what dialect group they are in and and this is something that the family cannot actually bring too because probably the grandparents would be able to tell them uh uh talk to them in the the dialect itself but they are not able to to share with them the culture like for example Teochew they they talk


about uh a #soon kueh# or or a #png kueh# or something like that or or about the, Teochew Hee lor something like that or the chinese opera, all these right the children will not be appreciate and it will be loss uh over time if that uh it's not brought to as a the com~normal like lesson as well and some more some families they just speak english and these children will actually not even know that there is is chinese dialect uh existing


so it will be good that that it is brought to to school formal setting uh of course uh not to forget uh the the the language that they are learning the english and the mother tongue but uh also to to actually get them exposed, to to what dialect group they are in so that they appreciate and will not forget and will not lose their ropes roots is


debate topic three, learning is best outside the classroom uh I find that learning is best outside the classroom because children remember best when they go out uh for excursions for learning journeys they they would remember for for instance talking about my own experience I remember fondly the time when I was P one


the teacher brought my malay teacher brought me to the zoo but I don't remember what happened in the lessons the formal or or what what is happening why is this is or that is or the grammar structure or whatever it's very difficult to remember so I I find that uh if possible that learning is best outside the classroom


what is so important about


so so I I find that learning is best outside the classroom because, uh the children remember uh for life what they have learnt and while while it is subjective in the first place in the classroom if the child is make is is made to sit down uh on and and that that scribble on the worksheet what makes you feel that


or think that the child remember what is what he or she is supposed to learn or what is on the worksheet the child may also forget and so what I guess most importantly is about whether uh the child remembers commits to short and long term memory uh the things that that are taught or learn


and and so I find that when it's outside the classroom is something new the children uh because uh we humans uh remember things when the the the experiences are new and unique, the child can remembered very well and talking about classroom experiences uh nowadays the shift has changed from a teacher centered uh classroom to a student centric classroom so it's all about the child


whether the child can can retain the information or whether the child or likes the learning or not, so it's not about the teacher saying the formula or the teacher talking about the worksheetuh uh uh that is important is whether the child uh uh can learn what is is meant what is


support what they're supposed to learn so I find that we we should, uh, I have more of this kind of learning journey, uh more of the excursions or or or more of the kind events to make learning interesting and therefore uh uh to make the school experiences unique and to to actually uh entice a child to come to school because uh when they liked coming when they like what is their their learning they will like coming to school and that's the most important thing


and obviously the child would do much better as compared to a child who is forced to remember formula, because uh what is so important about formula they are not going to use a formula to to to back to the web place workplace when they grow older yeah


that if they are stay in the classroom right no matter how funny is not lively


yeah so uh oh I I find that it's like uh, stay in the classroom itself is not lively because uh no matter what the teacher do uh be it white board or power point slides the child has to sit it on the chair and do worksheets or or or or read what is on the board


uh or on the power point slides is something that the child uh will not remembered as much as he or she can go out of the classroom and and do what he or she uh might like to see because after all when we talked about learning experiences there are some who are actually visual learner


there are some who are tactile learner and this tactile learner who likes to actually move their hands and legs, uh uh would actually benefit a lot when they start learning where is learning the out outside the classroom, so uh we we have to cater to the different learning styles and, this helps when uh some of the learning is inside the classroom and some of the learning is outside the classroom and when you talk about lesson plans uh well well uh there are lesson plans in a classroom but the teachers can also design lesson plans outside the classroom


so when they catch a fish they can actually learn what the fish body is a bit body structure is or or how the fish swim or what kind of fish it is it really depends on the teacher's creativity as mentioned uh uh uh to to teach a child, and also there is this called the aha moment for teachers


so teachers right when they see something that they can teach aha moment they can actually suddenly say eh children you see look at this this is what it should be uh this and and teach that that particular moment and this is how the children learn more more effectively than telling them okay this is like that you know you all must persevere you all must be resilient if


it is is not the way to work you see so uh for example if this teacher uh happen to see that uh this child uh falls down but actually get back on the feet then uh she praises this child for being a very uh, for being able to to do so and and being resilient it'll be much better and for the children to remember this than to say !hey! children please be resilient so I find that when you go outside the classroom and you happen to see some experiences and the teacher actually creative be it it become creative and and managed to capture the aha moment it


learning is really best outside the classroom


, in the first place right I find that learning should be fun otherwise uh why would the child spend their first three years of life


uh just do~doing nothing but playing, so uh uh playing right is a way of learning and and and through play they they actually learned a lot of skills it's the same as learning uh outside the classroom so if learning is fun they will retain the information and they would actually do better


then why is it that uh schools are not doing all the learning and and it's sometimes actually they actually confined them into the classroom structure and spaces, I think that's because ultimately as mentioned the the the teachers actually have, trouble uh managing so many kids so as as the the classroom size is very big and there are a lot of things uh to handle as well so therefore uh at different points in time that it's uh the learn excursion and learning journeys and and therefore


the educators see the importance and the necessity to have learning outside the classroom, so I find that it it they they they it's not that they disagree that learning is not best outside the classroom is more so like they we don't have that kind of uh the resources and support to have it everyday outside and it's not because uh learning in the classroom itself is e~e~e~effective or important is more so like


it's easier on their life and and the the and therefore we still have that so we actually have both now and I think uh it we have to recognise that its best outside the classroom but because of the resort limited resources that we have we have to make do with having in the classroom and outside the classroom


uh so is we we cannot deny the fact that it is best outside the classroom uh ya uh and you should ask the children uh whether they prefer uh learning outside the classroom or prefer learning in the classroom I'm sure they will answer that they prefer outside the classroom and in fact that the as the as the


as they grow uh I I mean as the new generation come in uh there are more and more of a this kind of uh learning outside the classroom for example other than the excursion and learning journey there exists a pal lessons uh like for example outdoor education that they are supposed to go out and and learn things


so since if it's learning not important outside the classroom is not important then why would we have this kind of new modules uh they actually emphasise on learning outside the classroom


after all uh when we talked about learning


uh we we want to train them to actually get ready to to to the the future uh to actually work so uh if you tell me that is like just a learning is very important and effective inside the classroom then uh uh as they know only how to memorise and remember what the teacher says facts for facts


but they do not know how to apply it in the future, so I find that when you talk about learning outside the classroom is important because it teach just them how to apply this what they have learnt in the classroom uh to to what is happening outside so for example if they learn maths right uh for example money then if you were to bring them to the supermarket then they'll learn about oh using money to buy the grocery stuff


and if you talked about aquarium for example if they learn about sea animals it'll be good that you know they go to the aquarium to visit and to reinforce what they have learnt so I find that learning outside the classroom is important and it it cannot be uh, it it cannot be a it's not it's not a second fact it's just that it happen so that is time consuming probably uh uh to have learning outside the classroom every day and if you talk about uh it not being important then why are the international schools


emphasising so much of learning outside the classroom is just our local schools that actually have less of this, uh because we have more students uh so it's like uh it's uh uh a thought provoking fact that uh the international schools or or for that matter the preschools especially the expensive preschools they actually emphasise a lot on learning outside the classroom so there is uh some effect important uh useful impact on on these children


talking about uh success right success in the past does not equate to success in the future


so what happened in the past that we have managed to train uh successful engineers and doctors does not mean that we would be able to train uh uh uh the successful uh uh engineers and doctors in the future especially so when, some of the jobs might become obsolete and and new jobs will actually uh uh be be actually there'll be a creation of new jobs


so uh things have changed the schools also must change and and the school see do see a necessity that's why they have included uh all the more and more excursions and learning journeys and even new modules as compared to the past so uh uh I I find that it's like we should actually accept that learning is best outside the classroom


just that uh due to resources yes we we we have less of that, thank you


debate topic one


okay yup, these are although they are valid points but schools should ultimately still have uh a very standardised or consistent way of measuring performance in terms of who you want to admit which students because otherwise it it's going it's going to be a very very subjective and the topic says for itself is subjective


so how are you going to gauge student a from student b if you have all these uh non-academic factors going to becoming in like so it's going be a very hard time for the schools, and even for the administrative I think it's also going to be a very huge challenge so definitely we should although this important but I think we should ultimately still based on results based on the fair assessment of the students


performance in in terms of examinations or assessments, to to see whether he's suitable for admissions


yup no doubt that that's true, but if you think about implementation and about the how do we actually usually on the ground uh first of all there's not going to be a very clear way of st~standardising who to admit and uh which student we should reject and ultimately some students who are rejected will feel that is biased because


they fear may have done a lot of ECAs or they may have done a lot of you may deem as you know, soft skill a good soft skills like communication but ultimately not due to other factors they they may not be reject uh may rejected or something else so there could be a there could arise some sort of uh imbalance between uh different students when they actually see


how come I get admitted but you don't get admitted and what base the criteria so I mean for parents and for for students likewise definitely uh uh having a clear a guideline of, a benchmark is definitely going to help solve the the problem admissions uh no doubt but uh you know is these are these are also important but you should actually focus more on the you know standardising and ensuring that we get a fair assessment of all students rather than just a group of them


yup I I this this is I mean this is valid but uh if you think about uh actually the thing like the the details, so let's say uh you know when I have students who are good in gauge on like communication or interpersonal skills this sort of skills they actually could be learnt during the when they get admitted during the course of few years of six years or four years in primary or secondary school


they can get this chance to build up their communication skills and and all that but to get admissions in the first place because it's competitive in nature uh no we have limited uh schools we have no or limited resources, we need to set a very clear guideline on who we can admit and who we cannot


and and to assess students based on on just you know this kind of soft skills which it uh is already very fuzzy to begin with it's not going to help ensure that we get the best uh resource or or the best pool of people or they're going to work with especially in schools when resource matter is very crucial


so definitely on top of I'm not refuting that it's not important but in terms of sending a clear guideline of uh in the first gate the gateway of to admit students in the first place we should at least have something that is fair amount and transparent across all the matrices and we can see


so that parents and students have no disputes over or whatsoever in terms of getting admissions then when students move on when they get admitted into the school system itself then they can hone they can sharpen their skills in terms of communication, know teamwork know social skills and all that during which will be learnt to during the


their school life and I'm sure they will actually get out more out of it in the first place


yeah I mean it for example if you also talk about A levels definitely with there's weightage so there's going to be a higher proportion of if you see uh I mean they take h-twos and h-ones, these subjects are really the core subjects that they actually have more emphasis and weightage on whereas although they do consider show uh this kind of uh you know projects you know and of community work


they actually I don't think they take a lot of percentage in terms of getting admission so in that aspect actually this uh is still heavily weighted upon uh the the scores of uh a consistent score or ranking in terms of, uh they have uh ability to do in examination I mean no doubt still people uh have different intelligence levels and and they could have social musical or artist kind artistic kind of intelligence but it's it's going to be very challenging when if we want to it impose it on a society like like in singapore for example


so because uh we have so many uh intelligence out there right so there's there's not going to be uh ample uh kind of consistency or upgrading to to to great uh, all these different levels and and they they also very subjective sometimes that musical how did you get this person is musically good enough you know to get into and we are not going to get an admission into musical school for example you are talking about gain admission to university as a whole as a general so a-levels and o-levels are still needed even though we are trying to uh you know have some of the


uh flexibility of having project work and all that but actually they are still constitute a smaller percentage compared to uh the core subjects previous spent two years in a-levels, four years in O levels and six years in PSLE just for that final examination so if you talk about young younger childs twelve years old they all they all prepared for their whole primary school life for their PSLE and that's the only thing they are looking for there's so fa there's none no others uh measures to get student


for secondary school other than PSLE and it has been effective implemented since a longer long time ago in when we started the system education system, so definitely there's some effectiveness in trying to uh know screen out or or try to d~uh, get students to be uh know access uh holistically and fairly of course there are also there will be some more improvement because anything else you can tweak it but what I'm trying to say is that the core


uh fundamentals of this education should be still based on uh very objective and academic factors to to assess students


yeah I mean true uh we started off with uh know just our people to definitely we need to have something to to measure the the success or admissions of of students for example in schools


so henceforth there's this PSLE and o-levels and it's not only been practised in singapore it has been practised in other countries as well UK u uh other countries you know different places so they've all adopted similar if not the same kind of approach to measuring, admissions of students in terms of academic factors and in terms of thing uh being objective because I think while they do scientists do agree that know children have different intelligent skills and all that


but that's up to them in the future to actually you know they, is shy and develop potential when they are in school maybe through ECAs uh through other activities in schools like scouts or or or know other or military unit uh military uh kind of group ECAs they can actually do they sharpen all these skills when they are inside the school but first in the first place to get admission into the school


it really depends on what type of school you're going for if it's a just a normal mainstream school then we should just look at the just the grades of these four these uh few subjects math science mother tongue and all that, because these are the these are these are actually the the the fundamentals of being assessed whether you are academically good enough or or or should you be ranked into a normal stream or special stream or things like that so it otherwise if you don't if you skip on this whole idea then it's going to be very messy end of the day


then uh there will be lot of uh arguments about know how am I going to access my child because right now even a-levels with a project work people are don't complaint because we still have the four called uh non-subjects that's could be tested on and they just inject uh some of the project work and this projects are also being uh systematically structured so that means they have a supervisor


they actually known have a go through a project topic they do some theses just like university kind of thing so so in a way is is already being structured in a way there's also confirmed to a certain, thinking because project work is only refined to a certain area you also not testing the student on all other areas so heed likewise for example he has a talents in music but their project work may not show it because he he's may assigned to other and he can the child cannot even choose which topic he wants to take for example in a in a project work so there's usually uh a assigned topics


and that also points on that we need we need to have a system or structure in place that we cannot let any child select any topic that he want and to in the first place to even begin with, the admissions process should be actually a systematic one so that we it in the first place we don't even have this kind of things that make it more confusing and complex


uh hello, can't hear you


hello can you hear us


yeah


ya I mean this is it is very true even for uh different times of uh you know period we are in but


the ultimate thing is when we talked about admissions, getting a students to be admitted in schools, we do need something that is standardised across so that there's no disparity or argument or whatsoever that will arise from it because the school is already a lot of administrative work to do and no they are not going to have add on this kind of subjectivity layer on it and and make everyone's life


too complicated and complex while that this is very true for every every child, but uh in terms of assessments uh gaining admission into the school per say let's say for example if you are in going to a music school definitely you need to have musically uh know certified to be good in that area or art school for example but if you are talking about mainstream school in singapore for example


then really assessing the child on whether he has incline is inclined music or inclined in in uh know football or things like that it's not going to help much in terms of decide letting the principal decide whether this child is good or not, because ultimately the school is still based or graded on PSLE and o-levels that's what they are uh uh the the ministry is looking at these these schools


uh they are being graded or in a way indirectly maybe on the performance of the schools based on the results based on it still have to base on results anyway so in that case you know uh if the child is really talented in other areas definitely yes when he grows up, there'll be schools like NAFA or lasalle or musical schools he can she or she can go to


and with that that need not necessitate him being admitted uh this kind of thing being included when he's still young as if uh primary school admission or secondary school admission because these are still uh didn't know the child is still developing he or she may not even have idea what he or she likes for example he may like art one one day but then maybe next year he like music for examples so so so kind of thing


in that case if this is being subjecting a person why do we need to inject this subjectivity into the system in the first place at all so I'm questioning this this uh premise of getting the this kind of non-subjectivity into the system


yeah it's nothing new but this don't don't forget these students are actually lasalle all these when these are when the child is already eighteen nineteen years old when he or she has developed a certain liking


uh or passion for the subject that he he wouldn't actually change it overnight but we're talking about mainstream schools like you know thousands of uh secondary school primary schools out there that this is are these are thing that you should be more concerned because, the what you mention are all specialised schools and rightfully they should have this kind of thing in place otherwise they why even have a art school and music school and don't access them uh in these areas


just like we don't assess art uh music mu~music students, based on whether how well they did in physics or or biology for example you assess them how they can do with music or art so but this this is more like when a child is actually you know when she actually is more uh mature he or she can think for himself what what is his passion in life what he want to subjects develop himself but I'm talking about not when he's in he uh he's in primary school or secondary school


these are still nurturing years and , uh know even even it uh intercommunication skills are also very subjective because children's age are very prone to they are very uh know they're prone to influences everything so it's not very clear how we can access them uh fairly based on these measures and who's going to give these measure also ya


okay


debate topic two


okay ya I mean this is a very idealistic statement but if you think about it it's just it's just a similar to what we discussed just now impractical because, how you going to measure the chinese dialect success or or the grading of chinese dialects as a mother tongue language and first of all chinese dialects


some of them the language is not very well formed and and and because they are very colloquial some are spoken and and do you have a proper written form or something that is clear as a mother tongue like chinese and or or malay or things like that so why introduce this subjectivity in the first place although although it's good to know our roots but


there are many ways to get to know this for example we have culture festival we can have things like celebrations you know people coming for talks and things like that that's where the children can learn, this kind of uh their own roots or even when they have grandparents at home they can speak to them in in as in chinese in dialects as well there's no need for chinese dialects to be introduced in mother tongue as it into this context whereby we are learning the mainstream subjects that's really needed for the success of the students next time


the english maths science mother tongue these are the main these are these are the main subjects, that will actually allow the child you know to be to be successful to have uh at least a a certain degree a certificate so to speak to that he can at least do some he can survive in society so to speak if you put mother tongue if you put a dialect inside it it's not going to help enhance any value at all in this modern society


where where things are digitalize things are moving so fast know uh we as no really no place for a dialect to be in in this except in our own living room we got talk with talking to our own grandparents so how is it to be used useful in society so in the first place so in that's the case then why do you need to even have this in schools that will actually


there's more burden and and complexity to the work


ya so you also bought


yeah I mean if you look if you use chinese as example in in china in PRC so they all use chinese as a main standard of communication all the history literature classical works are all written in chinese is a standardised formed that's a very clear


nah no grammar vocabulary syntax and everything no dispute, but if you talk about dialects there so many dialects out there and and know a a child can have parents' which is from Teochew and Hokkien and or cantonese you know or Hakka for example you know how is the child going to choose which dialect is he going to be in that you you you you can't ask the child to go for two dialects right cantonese on the or or Hakka for example


when he has all these so much work and and in school and want want more to to actually you know over burden him all these dialect classes and secondly who's going to teach the dialects to these students as you know dialect is a dwindling kind of language that we are experiencing we're no longer in a seventies whereby know they're re-diffusion everything talk in dialect


now we are in uh twenty twenty and the people are speaking dialect nowadays, are merely the elder generation and who else who is more confidents to to teach them all the the dialects other than the one who are older in, than us right so so the the thing is one thing is the teacher who's going to teach all the students in school in singapore so many of them how you going to teach them dialect


and secondly dialect although there are some written form but it's it's not a a form that is commonly recognised by many singaporeans for example if I'm a cantonese of course I will know like cantonese languages and words I can write essays with that, but if a if a Hokkien comes and read I don't understand a single word but we all have a in common which is something we which is the <mandarin>普通话:pu tong hua</mandarin> which the chinese


language that we all studied and there is a framework or channel that we can communicate with each other and if we're not going to acts sternly having this kind of dialect will also create some dialect, uh know a kind of cultural trapped whereby I'm Hokkien you are Teochew so I don't mix with you because I speak only Hokkien you speak Teochew in the first place we should be actually an all encompassing to all students


because of dialect it's not even not talk talking about race is talking about within our own chinese you know our own race there are so many dialect groups are like but we all speak chinese so that's fine that's comfortable why you want even to introduce so many, you know uh kind of complexity and in terms of uh asking the students to learn Hokkien on or Hakka when the first place is not going to be any value that come out of the society when he learnt all these things


ya you mentioned that china is is is becoming you know is going to be uh economy to be reckoned with , and what I look what about does what do they speak they speak chinese right they don't speak Hokkien or Teochew or dialect the the the state ministers and all that they all speak chinese and that's understood so in that case if you are going to follow the trend like that along the way then we should actually learn chinese and which is not we are doing uh for so many years and remember remember last time know we have dialects speaking uh people around


but then uh you know our our ministries our minister actually said no we cannot let dialects to be in a in schools, or not even a mainstream media because we are going to you know the the next generation or next decades going to be english and chinese or like I mean the mother tongue for example and this should focus all his energy onto learning these two rather than you know letting dialects don't make make the whole thing so so complicated and all that


and if you can talk about if you think about it india india has been colonised by the by the british for so many years the only common language english but india is also very big and in in in every uh, distinct uh provinces they speak their own languages or or it's not it I I don't think it's uh really a dialect but it's really more of a language like hindi tamil Urdu Bengali so all these are


are different uh languages because we can't and we cannot expect a a person in north india to speak, tamil or like vice versa they only can speak their own you know uh kind of a mother tongue and that is their also this actually their mother tongue but dialect is not a mother tongue dialect is just


the colloquial form of expression which is is you know uh chinese is still the our roots to uh learn about chinese history it will be more than sufficient to learn the chinese language and as you know many students out there the chinese actually know uh are not very good nowadays you know they they speak more english so we should actually focus more to teach them on chinese rather than


you know burden them and of all even adding on dialects on top of chinese which already are not coping well so be as so many things out there then how will how are they going to cope with all the so much schoolwork so that's one thing to be to be uh think about


ya you don't talk about chinese language so chinese language is spoken by the Han people the Han people has been in china for the longest time ever so even oracle times


no no the the Shang dynasty and Xia dynasty which is thousands of years people already using starting using chinese some could be you know other oracle form but now we have morphed into a chinese language you are looking at now , so so what so many five thousand over years chinese has always been uh what we have been speaking the han people and han people constitute the majority of


china and uh know people around of course we have other muslims and other minorities but they also speak chinese because we so what our our our ancestors are all from from the han people of course they are the mongolians and all that but when they come to us they all we all speak chinese because we want to standardised because we can't be speaking mongolian or we can't be speaking


the arabic to to to china people right because this is only the only way of be communicating with chinese is chinese uh uh language, so so that's why china even china right, recognises the need to standardise their own languages so chinese chinese language is in itself actually it it it has been there for so five thousand over years and it's it's a majority of well uh uh han people is so definitely it's only right


they re-pick this as the main language to speak with and dialect in a way arises from where you stay for example you, stay in uh Hokkien Fujian or you stay in the canton province you you you naturally over the years people know make shop, forms on the words they they make certain things about uh languages and they are actually not very formal if you think about it so in all the classical literatures are all written in the main chinese and everybody understands if you talk about translating uh know romance of the three kingdoms into Hokkien


how would you even sound like I couldn't I can't even imagine that if you can even talk to them in this and usually you, when talked about last time when it uh know know the <mandarin>王沙野峰:wang sha ye feng</mandarin> they talk in uh cantonese and Hokkien all that it's all spoken they never write it out ya it's only for the older generation more for them it's it's like a past time for them to communicate with they themselves and children nowadays


there's so many things to do math and science and tuition and why do you want to even include this topic in the first place where there's not going to any value, in terms of being tangible in terms uh uh uh society nowadays where all they have, is to maybe speak a bit more fluent Teochew to their grandparent end of the day if that's going to be end of the case


why not let a grandparent interact more with the grandchildren in a sense right or even when uh schools they also organise cultural festivals even occasionally invite, few speakers of the dialect to come in and maybe have some talks or some fun events over over these kind of thing I I'm sure the child will even get more rather than putting into a lesson because the moment you put into something into a lesson you are making it compulsory for them to learn and that learning actually diminishes when they have it


so it's going it's going to it's going to be a counter intuitive kind of thing it's not going to help them learn the dialect it's going to make them even detest the dialect even more, and that's uh achieving the negative of do you want to achieve


ya if you example if you talk about taiwan taiwan also has their, there there is a <mandarin>繁体字:fan ti zi</mandarin> which is actually the more the more traditional kind of chinese it in fact this has been their own written form for so many years the no no and Hokkien if you think about it is really colloquial people only speak


only in TV serials drama songs and all that you don't see them written being written out in any fashion is still based on the <mandarin>繁体字:fan ti zi</mandarin> which is still chinese after all, if you talk about hong kong yes hong kong does have the cantonese version of the words but you know this kind of text is only f~for academics people to understand if you and me I come across cantonese words I don't understand them at all but we we we we all learn about we all can learn we all study chinese that's a way of


~cating and and I I I this I feel that this dialects only uh uh more localised I would say it's only more specialised for this kind of uh purposes and not to us as a more general basis, so localized means that I only I learned dialects only for because I stay in this nearby region know I can communicate with my fellow uh people but when I go to outside internationally you know when I do


business with other trade partners they definitely got to not gone to understand what uh and talk uh cantonese or understand the word of it they are but they do understand chinese and if you ask all the westerners out there they all learn chinese who learns, dialects nowadays to to learn to do business in china nobody right you talk about this a kind of uh economic kind of uh efficiency and all that definitely learning chinese is much better than learning dialect when you can only communicate to localise people or groups of people


right it does it it does not translate across to other other regions when you want to do business with chinese people let's say for japanese they speak only japanese language know they don't they don't have they don't have people speaking their own dialects or something like that right so even sh~like shanghai and all that they have own dialect


but they don't use it in their in their word they still use chinese but to shanghainese they communicate uh verbally in shanghainese, but they don't really uh write it out in that because is even though written form they all speak in chinese so that that's what I'm trying to say uh chinese is still very important


and its importance it is never going to be diminished now we have growing err rising of china so in the first, place then why should you want to know make our child our children learn dialect you know uh as a as a lesson and and if you talk about the grandparents not cannot understand the the the the grandchildren then before that the then you should there should be a starting point whereby the the grandchildren just


pick up the dialect from their grandparent maybe from, some one two three four five know basic ones slowly and slowly if they talk to them more I I'm sure they will understand, from problem in my case I also communicate with my grandmother last time in Hokkien even that I don't even know Hokkien last time but when I visit her every week or or something like you know I talk to her in in dialect ah it's also forced me to learn the language uh dialect as well so I don't need a formal lesson to make me understand Hokkien or Teochew proper


I just need a setting that is conducive that know every time it's not being pushed by made by the school is something I learned freely, you know when I talk to my grandparent or whoever that will actually make them understand and enjoy the dialect more than putting as a lesson


debate topic three


ya of course no doubt learning it ha~learning outside the classroom helps but don't forget the purpose of why schools uh uh uh least exist essentially in classroom setting whereby the teacher


in uh in part formal education to the students in the class, is also in the class whereas the the teachers teach the students about moral values that talks about you know a grammars languages math and science and everything else and it's usually usually in this setting that will also uh allow the child to learn because there's a there's always a there's a structure


there is a proper system whereby you know how what's lesson plan going to be like what are you going to learn, and it's progressive so meaning that you know the child will learn over the the months and all that you know different topics overall the varying uh difficulty level and that's also and this kind of lectures already plan for them so that they can learn at their best uh because these are progressive so meaning that you know we're not going to


stuff them so much information at one time is going to have uh know we're going to be systematic kind of teaching, so that the student can actually uh know learn it at their pace but learning if you talk about learning outside the classroom it's going to be very uh varied and going to be very subjective so uh what what constitute uh outside the classroom it's a question mark


so uh you know and and, that is also very uh subjective because we don't know uh outside classroom can be meant a lot of thing you know it can be a fun a excursion it can be a a trip or can be just a event things like that, and whether how much the students can learn out of it it's also subjective they may just treat as a fun event and forget everything and they only remember the intangible things but they don't actually remember the actual learning from it for example the formulas


the the the concept and things like that is only through classrooms that the teacher formally teach them the systems through white board through power, points to different teaching aids that the student is able to learn the most uh in this setting


ya know formula is just example whereby uh , what the teachers going to teach the teacher is definitely going to teach the concept behind it and and all the things that is uh know all the things that necessary for them to learn and so what makes you think that the the students will also learn when they're outside the classroom is also very subjective because you know they can go for excursion but after that


the student may not even grasp uh anything out of it they may just think oh is a fun event but what did you learn I'm not very sure maybe I catcalls on fish or what so it it's also very being uh you know subjective in terms of know, what a student can actually learn at the end of the day in a non-subjective kind of framework so if that in mind then why even have these I'm not saying that we shouldn't even have uh you should totally ignore this but I'm saying is that the focus of the school should still be it's within the classroom because we have a fixed lesson plan we have uh


fixed uh you know schedule for the the the the modules and syllabus whereby the child is actually being optimised for the child's learning already it has been, plan by the teachers and principals and even from the ministries they have actually experienced in terms of teaching the students so many years and they able to guess that every stage of their life they're they're going to learn which topic and that's when they go to teach them and the teaching method can be varied


depends on the teacher's creativity for example he or she, can inject you know a lot of uh power point slides or animations or even classroom lab activities and things like that to as so many out there the student's teacher can do to make the lesson more interesting is no longer the last time whereby they just write on the whiteboard and the student just remembered it nowadays it's going to be a two-way a kind of


interaction between the student and the teacher, so the teacher is not the role the teacher is not going to just impart formulas and all that but it's actually more on going to ensure that, you know they can actually learn the concepts in a more lively manner and what more setting is more conducive than a school compared to the outside world in environment


yeah


yeah, the the the what question is uh learning is best to the classroom so we are not I'm not trying to state that learning outside classroom is not important it is important


but compare to learning within the classroom I'm proposing that within the classroom is more effective so the reason is because if you are in within a classroom the students are actually you know they are they are seated properly in a classroom whereby the teacher just, teaches them you know and usually that's that's the framework of teaching know as been practised for so many years in so many different societies and if


there's really a problem then why why is not why is uh other societies are not changing because this a tried and tested method know that's going to work on majority of the students of course there're some students that learn better, visually learn better and know experience visually and all that but we are we cannot cater for all these students with so many different intelligence and so many uh multiple kind of interest after all do don't forget the school the school is actually some something


it's not going to be it's not a tailored is not a special school it's not a one to one kind of coach if you want you can go to a home home schooling you know you the parent can just teach the child based on their interest but what I'm saying is the mainstream school when they have thousands of students in a whole in the know in a setting we're not going to en~ensure that you know we're going to have this


activity a event b name so many for them and in the first place this will also make the students think that it's all fun and nothing but uh there's no learning eh I'm just going to have fun I'm going to uh catch fish I'm going to uh uh Sentosa and all that but it a it it's it's it's the next a kind of a formality of discipline


in terms of learning learning this is this is to imbued some sort of a discipline in them you know you cannot expects students to learn uh uh casually you know of course they will learn but in a disciplined manner whereby in a classroom setting whereby the teacher teaches them with what ever methods they have, power point or whiteboard is definitely going even more effective than going outside know when the students already confuses or mixes up


fun and learning altogether and there's and it it could jolly well be the case that the the the child just ends up you know playing and all that with still with his friends and after that you know they are they are they don't really learn anything out of it, and that that's the saddest part because you know it's all going to waste but in school we are different in classroom you can track performance you can monitor results give them test exams


teach them uh make sure that they understand properly and all that so in to me I think this is a very uh a good way of know assessing the students' performance rather than outside the classroom


it if you ask the uh students whether he wants to prefers uh learning in classroom or outside definitely them a child I will say I want to go outside to to to learn right but the the, thing is whether it's effective to a child uh outside the classroom is very debatable because a child can can learn some child can learn better in classroom and some child don't but within a constraint of the administrative and all that it makes sense under it's practically also it make sense that we have this it all in classroom because we can


never have uh a a environment whereby is all nothing but play uh and learning journeys and all that and nothing and no classroom setting at all know that's going to be a mix of both and ultimately which is more going to be more important when they actually comes to grading, and comes to PSLE all the major exams they're going to tackle is their classroom setting how much are you going to teach the student when you go on a learning journey


you going to teach them when you go them when you go to them bring them to uh know uh Sentosa or aquarium or things like that you don't teach them on certain topics but what about the the syllabus that you're going to prepare them for the final the main hurdle that they're going to make is the the PSLE o-levels and surely they're going to not going to answer their PSLE question


by just going to Sentosa or going to the the museum to learn about sir stamford raffles and things like that no it's going to through still going through classroom setting whereby work for, what are the teachers going to teach them the syllabus I know it is dry but it's no choice learning has to be disciplined learning has to be in formal such that it's structured you cannot be know totally you know whack out of whack and everything you know you can just do as you what what you want then or not achieve the purpose of learning learning of course has to be have some uh elements of


fun creativity no doubt but it's not going to be the best in terms of preparing the our child for their main exams


yeah I mean we started off I I ever said just now know with only people as a resource, so to get to where we are now as a singapore we need people who can contribute to the economy who can actually deliver who can it be good you know uh professionals in their own areas so what more to add to this effect than the classroom setting whereby you know