Basket.

Going to school getting to be like checking into a resort (ST Forum, 29 June)

I REFER to last Monday's report, 'Every student is a customer at this school'.

I find this headline disturbing, and the text makes me wonder about institutions of higher learning today. Going to school is like checking into a holiday resort.

When I was at polytechnic some 30 years ago, academic lessons and social conduct were of paramount importance. Niceties like personal convenience and comfort took a back seat. We were not allowed long hair, singlets, shorts or slippers.

Attendance was strictly enforced and students could be barred from taking examinations if they did not meet a certain percentage. Assignments and projects had to be completed on time or we would have failed, even before the start of the exams. Disciplinary actions ranged from suspension from classes to termination of study. Most lecturers and administrators were strict and serious. The diplomas we received were of substance.

All of this will have to go or be acutely compromised if and when polytechnics are run like a holiday resort. Is this progress? What kind of graduates will we produce in future?

Will we go the way of some other countries - where everyone who can afford it has a degree or diploma; but in practice does not know much and, worse still, thinks he is the 'most-wanted customer' wherever he goes?


As far as bad forum letters go, I think this is one of the worst I've seen in terms of faulty reasoning. It also helps that it is written in an astonishingly haughty, moralistic tone. For fuck's sake why waste so many words? One sentence is enough: "Kids these days... are inferior to the disciplined, flawless specimen I was at their age, and they can but aspire (if only the incomparably lax system of the present could teach them to have aspirations!) to reach the pinnacle I did."

I mean there are stupid letters, and there are stupid and offensive letters. This falls squarely into the latter category. The writer's sense of smug superiority is palpable throughout; unfortunately for him, so is his skill at defective reasoning. Let's take his leaps of logic together.

When I was at polytechnic some 30 years ago, academic lessons and social conduct were of paramount importance. Niceties like personal convenience and comfort took a back seat. We were not allowed long hair, singlets, shorts or slippers.

Okay. So...

1) Academic lessons were of paramount importance at polytechnics 30 years ago... but it is implied that they aren't now because students have a greater degree of personal choice consistent with their growth and development into mature adults.

2) "Social conduct" (what a stupidly vague term) was emphasized then but it isn't now because students can exercise their personal freedom to keep long hair and wear comfortable clothes of their own choosing to polytechnic classes.

3) Students should not be allowed to be comfortable at school for some reason. I mean people learn best when they are strapped into cold metal chairs and whipped with spiked whips at regular intervals.

It's bad enough, but then he continues:

Attendance was strictly enforced and students could be barred from taking examinations if they did not meet a certain percentage. Assignments and projects had to be completed on time or we would have failed, even before the start of the exams. Disciplinary actions ranged from suspension from classes to termination of study. Most lecturers and administrators were strict and serious. The diplomas we received were of substance.

1) Attendance is vital. If you get a good result without a certain arbitrary percentage of attendance, your diploma lacks substance.

2) Deadlines are no longer assigned in polytechnics these days? News to me.

3) Lecturers and administrators must always be strict and serious, otherwise your diploma lacks substance. What they teach does not even matter, what matters is that they are strict and serious.

Enough unreasonable leaps of logic yet? Well, he isn't done.

Will we go the way of some other countries - where everyone who can afford it has a degree or diploma; but in practice does not know much and, worse still, thinks he is the 'most-wanted customer' wherever he goes?

Apparently, if a tertiary institution allows its students personal choice in how to dress, does not tightly control them with outdated disciplinary measures and arbitrary attendance numbers, and most importantly does not possess lecturers who are eternally strict and serious, the students will leave said institution lacking knowledge. And their diplomas will lack substance.

What, exactly, is the primary purpose of education? Is it to impart knowledge and skills, or to discipline the fuck out of students? Obviously we need a bit of discipline in any given educational institution, but to insist that discipline must play an overarching role in education - at a tertiary institution, no less - is ridiculous. Why bother about attendance percentages? These are completely arbitrary. If a student turns up only on the day of the exam and does well, it means he has understood and is able to properly apply the source material. Isn't that what matters?

Why insist on a strict dress code? Does it torment your soul to know that students are attending classes in the attire they find most comfortable? Will it blind you to confront such a sight? What matters is that they are there, and they are learning. Don't tell me people can't learn in a t-shirt and shorts. But I've dealt with this particular one multiple times, I think.

Why the insistence on lecturers being strict and serious? This has got to be the silliest one, especially as it directly precedes the line implying that diplomas have no substance unless acquired in this way. The best lecturers I've had, I daresay, are those who aren't strict and serious. In fact I haven't met one who really is. I will say that if I run into one that is strict to the point of treating tertiary students like children, I will walk out of the lecture hall. Because if you want to be a tinpot tyrant like that, go teach in the secondary school. I'm there to learn, not to see your clenched fist of a face.

If our polytechnic students are not learning, then we have to be concerned. If our polytechnic students are being allowed a greater degree of personal freedom and choice, it does not follow that they are not learning. It's the same judging a book by its cover attitude that a lot of moralistic snobs like to adopt with student attire. They don't look to you like they are ready to learn - but they are (most of them anyway), so what exactly is the issue here? Don't deride others just because they don't fit your own perceptions of the ideal.