Googled around, but haven't seen an announcement yet.
Background here for future reference - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/29/nation/22195944&sec=nation. Also covered in Education in Malaysia blog here - http://educationmalaysia.blogspot.com/.
Extract below:
Friday August 29, 2008
UM and USM lead the way
By SIMRIT KAUR and KAREN CHAPMAN
PETALING JAYA: Both Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) and Universiti Malaya (UM) are frontrunners to receive apex university status.
Many believe that by virtue of its history and status UM would be the natural choice but USM may spring a surprise.
In last year’s Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings, UM was the highest ranked at 246, followed by USM at 307, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) at 309 and Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) at 364.
UM was the only public higher education institution to obtain a five-star rating in the Rating System for Malaysian Higher Education Institutions 2007.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is expected to announce the name of the university selected under the accelerated programme for excellence (apex) when he delivers Budget 2009 at the Dewan Rakyat today.
A selection committee headed by former Universiti Malaysia Sarawak vice-chancellor Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Mohamad Zawawi Ismail short-listed four universities – UM, USM, UKM and UPM.
...
He had said the country would select one or two apex universities, which would be granted more autonomy and resources to create an environment that would attract the best students and faculty.
Two comments:
1. Where is UiTM on the short list? *grin*
2. Whilst the concept of having one or two Apex Universities is extremely welcomed, my greatest fear is that politics have a way of screwing the implementation up. Like Tony, I prefer to see two (2) universities selected, to provide competition.
The goal must be unanimous and must be very clear to all. Is it to break into the Top 100 Universities in the world? It can be fine-tuned. But make no mistake - the global competition is intense. In the THES, UM is only ranked 246 currently.
The Apex University must be completely independent of politics.
Meritocracy must be the primary culture in the university. The VC and the entire management team positions must be staffed by the best and given complete backing and autonomy to do what they think is best to achieve the primary goal. The students must be screened for the best. You have plenty of other universities to pick up the rest. The Apex University concept must never be compromised for any reason whatsoever.
Reverse the brain drain. If necessary, head hunt for the best in the world and bring them into Malaysia. They will not be cheap, but they'll be worth it a million times over in the long run. There may also be a few potentially world-class lecturers hidden somewhere due to politics. Identify them, promote them, and allow them the freedom and the space to do what's necessary.
I believe we have the raw material to make it possible. Ironically, it requires strong political will in order to not interfere politically. The only question is will our political leaders share this goal? Or will they be merely paying lip service, as they have done for decades?
Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
UiTM on the news: A Personal Commentary
It seems like all the mass media ever talked about is race, race and race. Unfortunately, these are not F1 races, but the colour of one's skin variety. Recently, we have the Banting teacher who hurled racial abuses to her students. Then, we have the 300+ protestors who barged in the recent Bar Council forum which intended to resolve legal conflicts surrounding conversions to Islam. And now, we have this UiTM news which are sprawled all over in The Star, with at least 5 articles today. What's next?
Anyway, these 5 articles are:
Open up to non-bumis, MB tells UiTM - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22068198&sec=nation
'No need to open up UiTM to other races' - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/20080813121352&sec=nation
Ministry to discuss idea to allow non-bumis into UiTM - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22068417&sec=nation
UiTM slams MB’s proposal - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22071647&sec=nation
‘MB can’t open UiTM intake to non-bumis’ - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22070255&sec=nation
In case if you are not aware of the background of UiTM, UiTM do have a professional looking website here - http://www.uitm.edu.my/uitm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=138. This is how they promote themselves to the world:
UiTM is Malaysia's premier institution of higher learning that has experienced a phenomenal growth since its inception in 1956. The university has expanded nationwide with 3 satellite campuses, 12 branch campuses, 8 city campuses, 19 affiliated colleges and a smart campus for the future. Its formation is based on a vision of outstanding scholarship and academic excellence that is capable of providing leadership in all fields of internationally recognised professional study. This serves as catalyst for greater strides in the development of the university and the nation.
During these years of growth, UiTM has built on the educational infrastructure placed by its founders to a level comparable to many international universities. Today, it draws strength from the initiatives of these leaders to aspire to be world-class in all its endeavors- to explore the frontiers of knowledge, to master new technologies and harvest the abundant riches of diverse cultures, markets and new industries.
...
UiTM generates, disseminates and advances knowledge within the ever-changing multicultural and technological context of the world. It offers high quality education and vibrant and inclusive learning environment. Students enjoy a rich growth experience, the most influential as well as the most challenging , intellectually and personally. UiTM's education will prepare students that have now numbered about 100,000 to become tomorrow's leader.
...
UiTM's curriculum is distinctively interdisciplinary and international. Courses remain relevant, rigorous and responsive to our changing world. Our faculty members constantly redefine what they teach and how they teach it, ensuring that the best traditions of the academy are merged with the most current thinking and scholarship in all disciplines.
...
Wow! Impressive isn't it? For a while, I thought I was dreaming of a university like Oxford.
I've always maintained that it is alright - in fact even encouraged - for Malaysians to dream big. There's nothing wrong to dream big if its spurs ambition and right actions. If we don't aim high, we'll never improve ourselves. These are good and worthwhile aims - some of the phrases that I have highlighted in red for example.
So, what is incredibly puzzling to me is the intensely angry almost phobic reactions to Selangor MB Khalid's suggestion here, as reported in The Star:
TAN Sri Khalid Ibrahim had urged the Universiti Teknologi Mara to allocate at least a 10% quota for non-bumiputra undergraduates, Tamil Nesan reported.
The Selangor Mentri Besar said this would help generate interest among the youth to further their studies. Universities, he said, should not only generate good students but be reminded that the youngsters were also there to form links with those of other races.
To be honest, having been overseas for 2 decades, and just returned home the last 4 years, I was surprised at how big UiTM has grown to become well over 100,000 students, and even more surprised that over the last quarter of century, it is still 100% Bumiputera students.
In short, I'm surprised that such racial segregation has not only been retained, but is now made worse over the last quarter of century. Is this 52 years (since 1956) of continuous segregation healthy and beneficial to Malaysians in the long run? How will all these 100,000 students turn out after spending their entire key formative years in university mingling and interacting with only students of the same race?
The University claimed that they "aspire to become world class leaders in all its endeavors". "Explore the frontiers of knowledge". "Master new technologies". And the best part to me is "Harvest the abundant riches of diverse cultures".
Which seriously beg the question - in a university like UiTM currently, how does one "harvest the abundant riches of diverse cultures"? By doing the occasional "field study" once a year? Have UiTM decision makers forgotten that we live in Malaysia, a land of many races? Isn't diversity one of our Nation's greatest strength?
Now, don't get me wrong. Word on the street is that these are excellent marketing materials - except the substance may be lacking far behind. For example, one of the most often quoted university rankings is the Times Higher Education - QS World University Rankings 2007. They ranked international universities with a Top 400 ranking, which you can view it here: http://www.topuniversities.com/worlduniversityrankings/results/2007/overall_rankings/top_400_universities/
It appears that unfortunately for UiTM, they are not in the Top 400 universities in the world in 2007, despite their wonderful claim "to a level comparable to many international universities" in their website. To be fair, they never claimed that they aim to produce graduates to that level. The full sentence was "UiTM has built on the educational infrastructure placed by its founders to a level comparable to many international universities". But doesn't that still beg the question - if you have first world infrastructure, shouldn't you have first world graduates? Why aren't the university still in the Top 400 list?
Anyway, for completeness, the four local universities is inside the Top 400 list are:
#246 = University Malaya
#307 = University Sains Malaysia
#309 = University Kebangsaan Malaysia
#364 = University Putera Malaysia
Of course, one survey doesn't not prove anything conclusively. But at the very least, it would surely raise some questions for reflection and introspection isn't it?
Putting aside racial integration points, and viewing these purely from a global competitiveness perspective - could there be benefits from opening up UiTM to non-Bumiputeras including foreign students? What could these potential benefits be?
For example, can anyone aspire to be the best in the world, if they don't expose themselves to international competition? True, sometimes, even athletes need to be gradually built up, before they can compete in the international arena. But the trouble with continuing to use this reasoning for 52 years, is that once they graduated from UiTM they would then be thrusted into the real world, competing internationally - so, at what point in time should the government stop holding their hands?
Don't we want UiTM to create strong and internationally competitive graduates? Isn't this any university's ultimate goal, to create future country leaders who can compete with the best globally?
What is the fear from opening up the university to include a small proportion of the other students that would add to the diversity and collective strength of the entire university? This is very puzzling to me. Is this because "the university" isn't ready? Surely not, since according to the website ...
UiTM has forged linkages with a number of professional bodies, such as the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), UK, Chartered Institute of Transport (CIT), UK, Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (ICSA), UK, Institute of Marketing UK, Institute of Administrative Management, UK, Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB), UK, and many others around the world. Some of these ties go back a long way, such as with Ealing Technical College in the 60s and Ohio University in the 80s and they have become a benchmark for UiTM's academic programmes and research. Over the years, UiTM has started collaborating with international universities. To date, UiTM has more than 100 partner universities.
So, if the University itself is not the concern, then, is it the students? What and where exactly is the concern? This is extremely puzzling, and I'm sure it is to all Malaysian stakeholders and all Malaysian taxpayers who funds UiTM.
Notwitstanding my own initial thoughts of the possible pros and cons of following the Selangor MB's proposal, I think it is important that those who are in the position of being able to make that decision should carefully weigh the pros and cons of the MB's proposal. It is important to take into account the collective view of the stakeholders which in my mind, all right thinking Malaysians, not just the view of a select few.
However, this is not the main point of my article. My greatest shock is to read the response of our very own Prime Minister. This is what The Star has reported him to say (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22070255&sec=nation):
SERDANG: Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim has no power to propose that Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) be opened to non-bumiputras, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said.
What exactly does the Prime Minister mean when he says Khalid "has no power to propose"?
This is an extremely unusual phrase. In English, a reasonable person would think that "everybody has a right to propose". The right to propose is the right to express a view.
To say that Khalid does not have any power to propose is very disturbing. If the Selangor MB is not allowed to propose, then, does our PM expects everyone to always remain silent? Is this culture of "never proposing" a healthy one for our nation in the long term? How can Malaysia climb up the ladder of international and global competitiveness, if our culture is to never question or even propose ideas amongst ourselves and to our leaders?
Perhaps The Star has misinterpreted our PM, after all, The Star is known to have mispublished articles.
Or perhaps, The Star has misheard our PM, since I'm sure our PM knows that everyone has the right to propose. Perhaps the PM meant that Khalid has no jurisdiction or no power to "direct" or "order" UiTM to open the quota. But that must be made clear to the public, that that is an entirely different concept to "power to propose". If we believe in empowering our citizens, then, every Malaysian citizen technically have "the power to propose". Of course, the decision makers also have every right to turn down that proposal.
These sort of comical, yet tragic exchanges that occupies our MSM makes me wonder what progress our country has made since Mar 8 elections. It is certainly sad that our leaders do not seem to have good working relationships so far, even though it has been 5 months already.
Hmmnn .... "Power to propose?"
I must say this is the first time I've heard of this concept.
Unfortunately, I have a feeling that if my overseas relatives and friends were to read this article, they might think that Malaysia is a laughing stock in the eyes of the international world.
It seems we still have this Third World Mentality, despite our stated aim to be a First World Nation by 2020.
Anyway, these 5 articles are:
Open up to non-bumis, MB tells UiTM - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22068198&sec=nation
'No need to open up UiTM to other races' - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/20080813121352&sec=nation
Ministry to discuss idea to allow non-bumis into UiTM - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22068417&sec=nation
UiTM slams MB’s proposal - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22071647&sec=nation
‘MB can’t open UiTM intake to non-bumis’ - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22070255&sec=nation
In case if you are not aware of the background of UiTM, UiTM do have a professional looking website here - http://www.uitm.edu.my/uitm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=138. This is how they promote themselves to the world:
UiTM is Malaysia's premier institution of higher learning that has experienced a phenomenal growth since its inception in 1956. The university has expanded nationwide with 3 satellite campuses, 12 branch campuses, 8 city campuses, 19 affiliated colleges and a smart campus for the future. Its formation is based on a vision of outstanding scholarship and academic excellence that is capable of providing leadership in all fields of internationally recognised professional study. This serves as catalyst for greater strides in the development of the university and the nation.
During these years of growth, UiTM has built on the educational infrastructure placed by its founders to a level comparable to many international universities. Today, it draws strength from the initiatives of these leaders to aspire to be world-class in all its endeavors- to explore the frontiers of knowledge, to master new technologies and harvest the abundant riches of diverse cultures, markets and new industries.
...
UiTM generates, disseminates and advances knowledge within the ever-changing multicultural and technological context of the world. It offers high quality education and vibrant and inclusive learning environment. Students enjoy a rich growth experience, the most influential as well as the most challenging , intellectually and personally. UiTM's education will prepare students that have now numbered about 100,000 to become tomorrow's leader.
...
UiTM's curriculum is distinctively interdisciplinary and international. Courses remain relevant, rigorous and responsive to our changing world. Our faculty members constantly redefine what they teach and how they teach it, ensuring that the best traditions of the academy are merged with the most current thinking and scholarship in all disciplines.
...
Wow! Impressive isn't it? For a while, I thought I was dreaming of a university like Oxford.
I've always maintained that it is alright - in fact even encouraged - for Malaysians to dream big. There's nothing wrong to dream big if its spurs ambition and right actions. If we don't aim high, we'll never improve ourselves. These are good and worthwhile aims - some of the phrases that I have highlighted in red for example.
So, what is incredibly puzzling to me is the intensely angry almost phobic reactions to Selangor MB Khalid's suggestion here, as reported in The Star:
TAN Sri Khalid Ibrahim had urged the Universiti Teknologi Mara to allocate at least a 10% quota for non-bumiputra undergraduates, Tamil Nesan reported.
The Selangor Mentri Besar said this would help generate interest among the youth to further their studies. Universities, he said, should not only generate good students but be reminded that the youngsters were also there to form links with those of other races.
To be honest, having been overseas for 2 decades, and just returned home the last 4 years, I was surprised at how big UiTM has grown to become well over 100,000 students, and even more surprised that over the last quarter of century, it is still 100% Bumiputera students.
In short, I'm surprised that such racial segregation has not only been retained, but is now made worse over the last quarter of century. Is this 52 years (since 1956) of continuous segregation healthy and beneficial to Malaysians in the long run? How will all these 100,000 students turn out after spending their entire key formative years in university mingling and interacting with only students of the same race?
The University claimed that they "aspire to become world class leaders in all its endeavors". "Explore the frontiers of knowledge". "Master new technologies". And the best part to me is "Harvest the abundant riches of diverse cultures".
Which seriously beg the question - in a university like UiTM currently, how does one "harvest the abundant riches of diverse cultures"? By doing the occasional "field study" once a year? Have UiTM decision makers forgotten that we live in Malaysia, a land of many races? Isn't diversity one of our Nation's greatest strength?
Now, don't get me wrong. Word on the street is that these are excellent marketing materials - except the substance may be lacking far behind. For example, one of the most often quoted university rankings is the Times Higher Education - QS World University Rankings 2007. They ranked international universities with a Top 400 ranking, which you can view it here: http://www.topuniversities.com/worlduniversityrankings/results/2007/overall_rankings/top_400_universities/
It appears that unfortunately for UiTM, they are not in the Top 400 universities in the world in 2007, despite their wonderful claim "to a level comparable to many international universities" in their website. To be fair, they never claimed that they aim to produce graduates to that level. The full sentence was "UiTM has built on the educational infrastructure placed by its founders to a level comparable to many international universities". But doesn't that still beg the question - if you have first world infrastructure, shouldn't you have first world graduates? Why aren't the university still in the Top 400 list?
Anyway, for completeness, the four local universities is inside the Top 400 list are:
#246 = University Malaya
#307 = University Sains Malaysia
#309 = University Kebangsaan Malaysia
#364 = University Putera Malaysia
Of course, one survey doesn't not prove anything conclusively. But at the very least, it would surely raise some questions for reflection and introspection isn't it?
Putting aside racial integration points, and viewing these purely from a global competitiveness perspective - could there be benefits from opening up UiTM to non-Bumiputeras including foreign students? What could these potential benefits be?
For example, can anyone aspire to be the best in the world, if they don't expose themselves to international competition? True, sometimes, even athletes need to be gradually built up, before they can compete in the international arena. But the trouble with continuing to use this reasoning for 52 years, is that once they graduated from UiTM they would then be thrusted into the real world, competing internationally - so, at what point in time should the government stop holding their hands?
Don't we want UiTM to create strong and internationally competitive graduates? Isn't this any university's ultimate goal, to create future country leaders who can compete with the best globally?
What is the fear from opening up the university to include a small proportion of the other students that would add to the diversity and collective strength of the entire university? This is very puzzling to me. Is this because "the university" isn't ready? Surely not, since according to the website ...
UiTM has forged linkages with a number of professional bodies, such as the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), UK, Chartered Institute of Transport (CIT), UK, Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (ICSA), UK, Institute of Marketing UK, Institute of Administrative Management, UK, Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB), UK, and many others around the world. Some of these ties go back a long way, such as with Ealing Technical College in the 60s and Ohio University in the 80s and they have become a benchmark for UiTM's academic programmes and research. Over the years, UiTM has started collaborating with international universities. To date, UiTM has more than 100 partner universities.
So, if the University itself is not the concern, then, is it the students? What and where exactly is the concern? This is extremely puzzling, and I'm sure it is to all Malaysian stakeholders and all Malaysian taxpayers who funds UiTM.
Notwitstanding my own initial thoughts of the possible pros and cons of following the Selangor MB's proposal, I think it is important that those who are in the position of being able to make that decision should carefully weigh the pros and cons of the MB's proposal. It is important to take into account the collective view of the stakeholders which in my mind, all right thinking Malaysians, not just the view of a select few.
However, this is not the main point of my article. My greatest shock is to read the response of our very own Prime Minister. This is what The Star has reported him to say (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/nation/22070255&sec=nation):
SERDANG: Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim has no power to propose that Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) be opened to non-bumiputras, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said.
What exactly does the Prime Minister mean when he says Khalid "has no power to propose"?
This is an extremely unusual phrase. In English, a reasonable person would think that "everybody has a right to propose". The right to propose is the right to express a view.
To say that Khalid does not have any power to propose is very disturbing. If the Selangor MB is not allowed to propose, then, does our PM expects everyone to always remain silent? Is this culture of "never proposing" a healthy one for our nation in the long term? How can Malaysia climb up the ladder of international and global competitiveness, if our culture is to never question or even propose ideas amongst ourselves and to our leaders?
Perhaps The Star has misinterpreted our PM, after all, The Star is known to have mispublished articles.
Or perhaps, The Star has misheard our PM, since I'm sure our PM knows that everyone has the right to propose. Perhaps the PM meant that Khalid has no jurisdiction or no power to "direct" or "order" UiTM to open the quota. But that must be made clear to the public, that that is an entirely different concept to "power to propose". If we believe in empowering our citizens, then, every Malaysian citizen technically have "the power to propose". Of course, the decision makers also have every right to turn down that proposal.
These sort of comical, yet tragic exchanges that occupies our MSM makes me wonder what progress our country has made since Mar 8 elections. It is certainly sad that our leaders do not seem to have good working relationships so far, even though it has been 5 months already.
Hmmnn .... "Power to propose?"
I must say this is the first time I've heard of this concept.
Unfortunately, I have a feeling that if my overseas relatives and friends were to read this article, they might think that Malaysia is a laughing stock in the eyes of the international world.
It seems we still have this Third World Mentality, despite our stated aim to be a First World Nation by 2020.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Why can’t we accept teacher’s apology?
This article is prompted by a view reported in The Star yesterday here - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/11/focus/22052908&sec=focus.
_________
Why can’t we accept teacher’s apology?
THERE is inconsistency in the Malaysian way of responding and reacting to certain misdeeds and mistakes committed.
Presidents, prime ministers, ministers and politicians have often made remarks that intruded on the sensitivities of certain groups of people.
Very often the offended would demand the offender retract the uncalled for remarks and tender his apology.
The unpleasant issue is considered solved upon tendering the apology.
The history teacher of SMK Telok Panglima Garang in Banting is just a human being that similarly erred.
Even after she apologised, we want her to bleed to death.
There is no provision in the law to demand she be expelled from her job, just as there is nothing to compel a president, prime minister or politician to quit or be sacked.
She is not the first person to commit such a mistake, and she will not be the last.
Just forgive her as she has apologized.
BATMAN
Kluang, Johor
_____________
I am simply aghast at BATMAN's view. There are so many parts that I personally disagree, although for this article I will just focus on the apology part. The question that was asked is "Why can't we just accept the teacher's apology?"
Let's examine a general example first. Let's imagine that someone has made a mistake that has caused you hurt, harm or some other form of loss. He then says "Sorry". Is this the end of the story?
What if after he says he's sorry, you noticed that he didn't really believed that he was wrong. He just say "sorry" because he thinks that this is what you want to hear. But he still believed that what he did is right. Is this a sincere apology?
And what about your loss? The harm that has been inflicted on you? The hurt? Is this just a simple matter of saying "sorry", and that's the end of it? Who should be responsible to make amends for the loss? The harm? The hurt?
And what if the person after having said he is sorry, then, went back to his behaviour again? Do you think he will change his behaviour if he has not accepted in the first place that what he did was wrong?
To me, I've always felt that an apology - a sincere one - encompass more than just saying "I'm sorry", even though it is a good start.
To me, there are at least 4 elements to a sincere apology. If there is any 1 element missing, it is not a sincere apology, and I normally cannot accept such an apology. To me all 4 elements should be present for me to accept and to forgive in time.
1. Self-acceptance. The offender himself must first accept that he has committed a mistake, an error in judgement or the like. This self-acceptance must be present. If he doesn't accept it, you can know about it very quickly. E.g. you hear excuses. Or explanations that puts the blame on something or someone else. Common sense and your own heart will tell you whether this "self-acceptance" exists or not. If you can't sense it, it doesn't exist. If he doesn't accept that he is responsible for his mistakes, then, the "I'm sorry" that comes after that isn't usually worth much.
2. Apologize. Once the self-acceptance and self-realization is there, then, the next step is to clearly communicate to the victim "I'm sorry". It needs to be done in a timely, sincere and humble manner. The victim must be able to feel your remorse (the sense that you are "sorry"). If it's done person in person, don't avoid eye contact. Don't fidget. Be open and say "I'm sorry". Clearly specify the event, clearly acknowledge where and what you did was wrong, be specific. And instead of doing that, tell them what you should have done instead. It shows you accepted that you were wrong.
3. Take ownership. Be accountable, and be responsible for the mistake. Make amends. If there is a financial loss, offer to pay for that loss if the entire loss is caused by you. If a physical harm has been done, then, offer to pay for the hospitalization and medical bill and anything else that you can reasonably do. In other words, as part of the apology, be prepared to take responsibility for the consequences of your mistake.
4. The Commitment. Commit to learn from this experience, and commit to never repeat the mistake again. We all know "I'm sorry" is easy to say, but is shallow when the same mistake gets repeated. There is no short cut to apologies. You cannot say "I'm sorry" and then keep repeating this behaviour. It is simply not acceptable. The question is how does one demonstrate this behaviour? To me, it is part of 3. And part of 2. And part of 1. They are all interlinked. When you yourself has accepted deep inside you that you've made a mistake, when your apology is sincere, when you've shown that you are genuine to make amends and take what ever responsibility that is necessary, and you know what to do next time, then, it shows that you are committed to not repeat the same mistake again. It shows you have learnt from that experience, you know what must be done in future, and that is a very, very good thing.
In fact, I want to share with you also this link from Wiki - http://www.wikihow.com/Apologize. It has 10 steps on how to apologize. It is more detailed than my 4 Steps, but the contents appear similar.
So, going back to the article above - "Why Can't We Accept the Teacher's Apology".
Well, this article alone doesn't quite explained what happened. We need to understand what exactly was her offence in the first place. MT reported this here - http://us3.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/11225/84/
_______________
Gunaraj said some teachers in the school were blaming the affected students for lack of a history teacher.
...
"In the incident last month, the teacher allegedly told students of a certain ethnic group in a Form Four class that she "wanted to test their level of patience" and then began abusing them with derogatory words.
She even wrote the words on the blackboard.
Two students later lodged police reports against her.
Several days earlier, she had allegedly entered a Form Five class and called the students using a derogatory word.
She also accused them of being gangsters and thieves.
She was also alleged to have ordered the boys to do push-ups.
When some of them could not do so, she allegedly stomped on their backs."
_______________
So, what do you think?
Do you think that this teacher single apology is acceptable?
Even though I haven't followed the story in detail, there is more than enough information in the italics above that tells me loudly that this is an extremely serious problem in that school.
Firstly, did the teachers in the school accepted that what was done was very wrong? Did they demonstrated remorse? Or are they blaming the students for a lack of history teacher? Do you think there was true self-acceptance by the school?
What about the teacher? Did the teacher concerned accepted that what she did was wrong? Did she demonstrated remorse? Or did she apologize because her superiors told her to do so? Or did she apologized because she just want to keep her job?
What exactly did the teacher do that was wrong? I count at least 5 mistakes, not just 1. I expect the teacher to clearly acknowledge that:
1. It was wrong to hurl derogatory words to the specific individuals involved.
2. It was wrong to write those words on the blackboard.
3. It was wrong to accuse the specific individuals to be gangsters and thieves.
4. It was wrong to punish the boys with push ups.
5. It was wrong to further step on the boys on their back.
Those are just 5 mistakes reported, but it is possible there is more mistakes that went unpublished.
Did the teacher accepted that each of these 5 areas are a mistake? Did someone else has to specify it to her, or did she come to that realization herself?
If you are the guilty party (e.g. if you are a student that was victimized), I think it should be clear whether you can feel the "remorse". A genuine apology can be felt by the victims.
Second, how has the teacher concerned apologized? Was the apology done person-to-person to each individual student that was affected by her abuse and their parent if necessary? She abused specific persons in Form 4 class and specific persons in Form 5 class in public. What should be an appropriate manner to apologize? Would a "blanket apology" alone be sufficient without a one-on-one apology? Would an apology communicated by a "third person" on her behalf sufficient or even genuine? Do you think the parents and the students can ever trust her again, if her apology is not genuine?
Third, what has the teacher done to show that she is taking responsibility and making amends? Besides the individual students and their parents, did the teacher publicly apologize at the school assembly? Did she apologize at the school assembly? Her actions brought disrepute to the school's good name (or whatever good name it has left). Did the teacher voluntarily apologize to the Headmaster? PTA meeting? Or just the Press? Did she genuinely enquired about the health and well being of the students that she previously stepped on? These are grave and serious offences. What about the profession? It is obvious such a case would bring poor reputation to the teaching profession.
Fourth, has the teacher given the commitment to herself and to others, that this behaviour will never be repeated? In the same situation again next time, what could she has done differently? Has she made this personal commitment to her God, if she is a religious person?
You see, it is not easy to apologize for a mistake of this proportion. Just saying "I'm sorry" is personally not good enough for me. And a blanket apology by a third party cheapens the apology very much.
So, you can see why I think that BATMAN opinion - to use politicians as yardstick - is a poor example and in poor taste indeed. I have yet to see a politician apologize properly in public. Dr Chua Soi Lek comes very close, but I'm still unsure whether I still trust him or not. Something like that usually takes a long time to regain trust.
Personally, I expect teachers to teach politicians how to apologize, not the other way around.
In fact, teachers should be teaching their students how to apologize, by setting good examples themselves.
I think the present case would be a good start to show the world how to apologize properly.
Do you think our teachers know how to apologize?
_________
Why can’t we accept teacher’s apology?
THERE is inconsistency in the Malaysian way of responding and reacting to certain misdeeds and mistakes committed.
Presidents, prime ministers, ministers and politicians have often made remarks that intruded on the sensitivities of certain groups of people.
Very often the offended would demand the offender retract the uncalled for remarks and tender his apology.
The unpleasant issue is considered solved upon tendering the apology.
The history teacher of SMK Telok Panglima Garang in Banting is just a human being that similarly erred.
Even after she apologised, we want her to bleed to death.
There is no provision in the law to demand she be expelled from her job, just as there is nothing to compel a president, prime minister or politician to quit or be sacked.
She is not the first person to commit such a mistake, and she will not be the last.
Just forgive her as she has apologized.
BATMAN
Kluang, Johor
_____________
I am simply aghast at BATMAN's view. There are so many parts that I personally disagree, although for this article I will just focus on the apology part. The question that was asked is "Why can't we just accept the teacher's apology?"
Let's examine a general example first. Let's imagine that someone has made a mistake that has caused you hurt, harm or some other form of loss. He then says "Sorry". Is this the end of the story?
What if after he says he's sorry, you noticed that he didn't really believed that he was wrong. He just say "sorry" because he thinks that this is what you want to hear. But he still believed that what he did is right. Is this a sincere apology?
And what about your loss? The harm that has been inflicted on you? The hurt? Is this just a simple matter of saying "sorry", and that's the end of it? Who should be responsible to make amends for the loss? The harm? The hurt?
And what if the person after having said he is sorry, then, went back to his behaviour again? Do you think he will change his behaviour if he has not accepted in the first place that what he did was wrong?
To me, I've always felt that an apology - a sincere one - encompass more than just saying "I'm sorry", even though it is a good start.
To me, there are at least 4 elements to a sincere apology. If there is any 1 element missing, it is not a sincere apology, and I normally cannot accept such an apology. To me all 4 elements should be present for me to accept and to forgive in time.
1. Self-acceptance. The offender himself must first accept that he has committed a mistake, an error in judgement or the like. This self-acceptance must be present. If he doesn't accept it, you can know about it very quickly. E.g. you hear excuses. Or explanations that puts the blame on something or someone else. Common sense and your own heart will tell you whether this "self-acceptance" exists or not. If you can't sense it, it doesn't exist. If he doesn't accept that he is responsible for his mistakes, then, the "I'm sorry" that comes after that isn't usually worth much.
2. Apologize. Once the self-acceptance and self-realization is there, then, the next step is to clearly communicate to the victim "I'm sorry". It needs to be done in a timely, sincere and humble manner. The victim must be able to feel your remorse (the sense that you are "sorry"). If it's done person in person, don't avoid eye contact. Don't fidget. Be open and say "I'm sorry". Clearly specify the event, clearly acknowledge where and what you did was wrong, be specific. And instead of doing that, tell them what you should have done instead. It shows you accepted that you were wrong.
3. Take ownership. Be accountable, and be responsible for the mistake. Make amends. If there is a financial loss, offer to pay for that loss if the entire loss is caused by you. If a physical harm has been done, then, offer to pay for the hospitalization and medical bill and anything else that you can reasonably do. In other words, as part of the apology, be prepared to take responsibility for the consequences of your mistake.
4. The Commitment. Commit to learn from this experience, and commit to never repeat the mistake again. We all know "I'm sorry" is easy to say, but is shallow when the same mistake gets repeated. There is no short cut to apologies. You cannot say "I'm sorry" and then keep repeating this behaviour. It is simply not acceptable. The question is how does one demonstrate this behaviour? To me, it is part of 3. And part of 2. And part of 1. They are all interlinked. When you yourself has accepted deep inside you that you've made a mistake, when your apology is sincere, when you've shown that you are genuine to make amends and take what ever responsibility that is necessary, and you know what to do next time, then, it shows that you are committed to not repeat the same mistake again. It shows you have learnt from that experience, you know what must be done in future, and that is a very, very good thing.
In fact, I want to share with you also this link from Wiki - http://www.wikihow.com/Apologize. It has 10 steps on how to apologize. It is more detailed than my 4 Steps, but the contents appear similar.
So, going back to the article above - "Why Can't We Accept the Teacher's Apology".
Well, this article alone doesn't quite explained what happened. We need to understand what exactly was her offence in the first place. MT reported this here - http://us3.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/11225/84/
_______________
Gunaraj said some teachers in the school were blaming the affected students for lack of a history teacher.
...
"In the incident last month, the teacher allegedly told students of a certain ethnic group in a Form Four class that she "wanted to test their level of patience" and then began abusing them with derogatory words.
She even wrote the words on the blackboard.
Two students later lodged police reports against her.
Several days earlier, she had allegedly entered a Form Five class and called the students using a derogatory word.
She also accused them of being gangsters and thieves.
She was also alleged to have ordered the boys to do push-ups.
When some of them could not do so, she allegedly stomped on their backs."
_______________
So, what do you think?
Do you think that this teacher single apology is acceptable?
Even though I haven't followed the story in detail, there is more than enough information in the italics above that tells me loudly that this is an extremely serious problem in that school.
Firstly, did the teachers in the school accepted that what was done was very wrong? Did they demonstrated remorse? Or are they blaming the students for a lack of history teacher? Do you think there was true self-acceptance by the school?
What about the teacher? Did the teacher concerned accepted that what she did was wrong? Did she demonstrated remorse? Or did she apologize because her superiors told her to do so? Or did she apologized because she just want to keep her job?
What exactly did the teacher do that was wrong? I count at least 5 mistakes, not just 1. I expect the teacher to clearly acknowledge that:
1. It was wrong to hurl derogatory words to the specific individuals involved.
2. It was wrong to write those words on the blackboard.
3. It was wrong to accuse the specific individuals to be gangsters and thieves.
4. It was wrong to punish the boys with push ups.
5. It was wrong to further step on the boys on their back.
Those are just 5 mistakes reported, but it is possible there is more mistakes that went unpublished.
Did the teacher accepted that each of these 5 areas are a mistake? Did someone else has to specify it to her, or did she come to that realization herself?
If you are the guilty party (e.g. if you are a student that was victimized), I think it should be clear whether you can feel the "remorse". A genuine apology can be felt by the victims.
Second, how has the teacher concerned apologized? Was the apology done person-to-person to each individual student that was affected by her abuse and their parent if necessary? She abused specific persons in Form 4 class and specific persons in Form 5 class in public. What should be an appropriate manner to apologize? Would a "blanket apology" alone be sufficient without a one-on-one apology? Would an apology communicated by a "third person" on her behalf sufficient or even genuine? Do you think the parents and the students can ever trust her again, if her apology is not genuine?
Third, what has the teacher done to show that she is taking responsibility and making amends? Besides the individual students and their parents, did the teacher publicly apologize at the school assembly? Did she apologize at the school assembly? Her actions brought disrepute to the school's good name (or whatever good name it has left). Did the teacher voluntarily apologize to the Headmaster? PTA meeting? Or just the Press? Did she genuinely enquired about the health and well being of the students that she previously stepped on? These are grave and serious offences. What about the profession? It is obvious such a case would bring poor reputation to the teaching profession.
Fourth, has the teacher given the commitment to herself and to others, that this behaviour will never be repeated? In the same situation again next time, what could she has done differently? Has she made this personal commitment to her God, if she is a religious person?
You see, it is not easy to apologize for a mistake of this proportion. Just saying "I'm sorry" is personally not good enough for me. And a blanket apology by a third party cheapens the apology very much.
So, you can see why I think that BATMAN opinion - to use politicians as yardstick - is a poor example and in poor taste indeed. I have yet to see a politician apologize properly in public. Dr Chua Soi Lek comes very close, but I'm still unsure whether I still trust him or not. Something like that usually takes a long time to regain trust.
Personally, I expect teachers to teach politicians how to apologize, not the other way around.
In fact, teachers should be teaching their students how to apologize, by setting good examples themselves.
I think the present case would be a good start to show the world how to apologize properly.
Do you think our teachers know how to apologize?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
