So! I was quoted in an article in today’s Straits Times.

This is a snippet from the article, including my quote:

Education Minister Heng Swee Keat was a guest at the Pre-University Seminar last June but chose to sit unnoticed at the back of a hall for more than an hour, to listen to students’ presentations.

He said he prefers not to disrupt proceedings or affect the candour of discussions.

He also stressed that it is his belief in working together with educators at the front line and with the community that “shapes my interaction, rather than a reaction after the [General Election]“.

Mr Heng also does not believe in making unannounced visits to schools to try and catch educators out.

That is not helpful in generating trust between educators and those at the ministry’s headquarters, and trust is what matters in the long run, he said.

Project manager and parent of two, Mr Tan Gin Tat, 40, gave a thumbs up to Mr Heng’s school visits.

However, he added: “If Mr Heng is walking down the school corridors, I hope he doesn’t just talk to the top people but chats with teachers on the problems they are facing on imparting knowledge to kids.”

Teacher Laremy Lee, 28, however, wants more unannounced visits to be made. Schools and teachers sometimes “stage a show” for office-holders on planned visits, he said.

– Andrea Ong and Cai Haoxiang, Do-it-yourself ministers gaining notice, The Straits Times, 3 Jan 2012, p. A8 (my emphasis).

I realise that I may sound as though I want Heng Swee Keat to catch educators out, so I thought I’d share the actual quote I gave in its entirety:

Question: Heng Swee Keat has been making it a point to visit schools of all levels and strengths to find out more about what’s going on the ground and to gauge the prevalence of parents’ feedback. A few of these visits were unannounced. How do you feel about this move by Mr Heng? Are you in favour of it or do you feel it’s just “wayang”?

Answer: Unfortunately, I don’t have a bird’s eye view of things, so it’d be difficult for me to correlate the visits with efforts such as the recent Character and Citizenship Education initiative. If the visits have led to the understanding that parents are as responsible as teachers for instilling values in the youth of today, for example, then yes, I am in favour of more visits like these.

With specific regard to unannounced visits, I think it’s great. When announced visits are made, what happens is that schools and teachers will stage a show for the visiting office-holders. So office-holders end up going off with the impression that everything is fine and dandy, when in actual fact, there are many problems that have been swept under the carpet, only to resurface after the visiting office-holders leave. So there should be more unannounced visits.

The point I was trying to make was that there should be more unannounced visits so that office-holders get a good sense of the realities of the situation as opposed to an artificial view of what is going on.

A long time ago, a friend asked why we write ‘Absent with Apologies’ on minutes.

“If it were me, I’d write it as ‘Absent with Glee’ instead,” she said, “because I’d much rather be absent from a meeting than in it!”

Thenceforth, I decided that if I were to ever run a company or an organisation, my first mandate would be to instruct my minute-taking minions to only ever write ‘Absent with Glee’ instead of ‘Absent with Apologies’.

Otherwise, they’d find themselves the next ones listed under the ‘Absent with Apologies’ column at the next meeting.

*

‘Absent with Apologies’ makes sense, because it’s much more polite than just being plain ‘Absent’.

But I’ve been absent from this space with both apologies and some degree of glee, because I’ve been busy, mainly with work.

On that note, I thought I’d share with everyone something that transpired in the classroom today – this is one of those things that has resulted in my absence.

If I can refer you to the picture above again, you can see I’ve listed out some principles for good idea design, especially ideas involving getting human beings to carry out things you want them to do.

I decided to write this down today because:

• I found myself repeating stuff I had said before yet again because the kids hadn’t really understood what I was telling them. Or perhaps what I was telling wasn’t making sense.
• This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while, and I think this is one of the easiest ways to understand what makes ideas work.

For those of you without image suppork, what is written on the board in the pig-ture is as follows:

Mr Laremy’s Principles for GI = EE.

1. Human beings are animals (piglets) – regulations/processes are needed (DON’T ASSUME THEY WILL DO IT).
2. Human beings are like currents – they follow the path of least resistance (MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM TO DO IT).

From (1) and (2): [Create] INCENTIVE [for them to do what you want them to do].

If you [yourself] won’t carry out the idea, don’t suggest it!

I hope there’s some kind of ‘meta’ element to this i.e. I hope what I wrote on the board fulfills those two principles.

In any case, the juxtaposition of the student and the ideas on the board is quite unfortunate, but you have it on good authority that this is her default look… LOL.

I’m not against the pruning of trees, because pruning does help at times in terms of improving the aesthetics or safety of a place.

What I’m against is the excessive pruning of trees all over Singapore that takes place on a regular basis.

(At the same time, I do wish more trees could be planted in Singapore, but that’s another battle for another time).

That tree gave some much-needed shade to Pooters – something I appreciate because I hate sitting on an over-heated seat and I hate knowing Pooters is exposed to the elements.

There are other benefits to trees in our urban environment too: carbon sequestration, reduction in ambient temperatures, etc. Read more here.

That’s why trees are especially important in a place like sunny Singapore and in a world stricken by global warming.

However, I’ve always felt that whoever makes decision like these – e.g. to prune trees excessively – do so in the right spirit: to neaten and hence beautify the place, to prevent tree branches from falling and killing people during a gale or a storm, etc.

Unfortunately, these decisions seem to always be made in a vacuum, without consideration of other important factors like the ones I mentioned above: shade, shelter, preventing global warming, etc.

Why?

I think this has to do with encouraging critical thinking and providing these people with an actual knowledge of circumstances in our world today.

And that’s why it has never been more important for us to move away from subjects taught in the traditional curriculum, to teaching slightly more multidisciplinary and ‘real-world’ subjects like biodiversity or environmental ethics now.

Thought I’d just take a basic/preliminary look at the rejected votes in this year’s General Elections because it’s something I’m curious about.

Based on data provided by ChannelNewsAsia:

• Total percentage of rejected votes as a proportion of votes cast: 2%
• Constituencies with lowest percentage of rejected votes:
  • Hougang: 1.13%
  • Aljunied: 1.34%
• Constituency with highest percentage of rejected votes: Ang Mo Kio (3.01%)
• Proportion of constituencies with rejected votes > national average of rejected votes: 16/26

What are some possible conclusions we can draw from this?

• Perhaps voters in Hougang and Aljunied took voting the most seriously because:
  • These constituencies were the most hotly contested,
  • These constituencies were contested by the Workers’ Party (reinforced by the fact that all except one of the constituencies contested by the Workers’ Party had <2% of votes rejected).
• Rejected votes in Ang Mo Kio: small proportion of voters who feel they don’t really have a choice, or perhaps are really clueless about how to vote.
• If it’s the latter, then we can tackle this problem in relation to the fourth statistic I found:
  • Perhaps we need to be teaching our fellow citizens how to vote over the course of five years, instead of only doing so during the elections.
  • There also needs to be instructions at polling booths, because the rejected votes make a mockery of the voting process.

This is a basic analysis of the data, so I welcome more scrutiny/thoughts on the subject.

TL;DR: Your spoilt vote can be counted if the Assistant Returning Officer (ARO) deems it possible that there was intent to vote for a certain party.

I don’t know if this post will have any relevance, since I’m posting it so late on Polling Day.

But I thought I’d put it up for now and for posterity, to clear any misconceptions that people might have about spoiling their votes.

In sum, don’t spoil your vote because a spoilt vote is not always a spoilt vote.

With reference to Section 7.5 of the Handbook for Parliamentary Election Candidates 2011:

…a ballot paper on which the vote is marked elsewhere than in the proper place, otherwise than by means of a cross or by more than one marking will not be treated as void if an intention that the vote should be for one candidate or group of candidate clearly appears, and the way the paper is marked does not of itself identify the voter.

How does the ARO do this? These images will make my explanation clearer (borrowed from 何思慧’s Facebook note):

Any mark you make in the box next to the insignia of a certain party = intent to vote for them.

If you draw a big cross over the whole piece of paper, the vote is counted at the point where the centre of the X falls.

The only way to make sure your vote counts is to place a nice ‘X’ in the centre of the empty box next to the insignia of the party you are voting for.

Today, before you open the newspaper, turn on the radio or switch on the television, I’d like you to take the time to plough through these two articles:

1. Critical Discourse Analysis
2. Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis

If you are of the TL;DR ilk, here is a quick primer:

• What is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)?
  From the first article, CDA is a way of looking at things to “stud[y] the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context”.
• Why is a knowledge of CDA necessary?
  Unbeknownst to many, language IS power. He or she who controls the words, controls the minds of they who read what is written, watch what is shown or hear what is said.

  CDA is thus necessary “to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality”.

• What are some examples of an application of CDA?
  • Looking at how pictures are used in, say, a newspaper. Are some pictures of certain people unflattering to them? Why is this so? Was there a larger intention in portraying them as such?
  • Comparing how words are used to describe people e.g. when comparing three people of the same standing, Person X is called “fresh-faced”, Person Y is called “innocent”, while Person Z is called “naive”. All three words are synonyms. However, has Person X been given a more positive image? Why?
  • Assessing coverage, or the quantity of information reporting done on a particular topic or subject. Is one topic or subject given more ‘air-time’ than another? Why?

For those of you who have the time, you may want to, say, practice analysing and evaluating information from articles, reports, etc. that have been published – in print or otherwise – over the last one week or so.

With this knowledge, I hope you are more equipped to deal with any new information that might come your way, today or in the future.

If we still have to spend time discussing fundamental things like these, then what actual progress have we Singaporeans made as human beings?

Hence, I’m doing my part as a concerned citizen by posting this guide on voting and ballot secrecy, adapted from The Workers’ Party post on the matter.

You may, if you wish, download a guide here: everything on one-page or optimised for easier reading.

–

Have you heard people say that your vote is not secret?

Well, they’re either lying, or they’re stupid, or both. In all cases, they’re wrong – your vote is secret!

Here are some answers to Frequently Asked Questions about the voting process:

1. Why does the election official call out my name and voter number at the polling station before giving me the ballot paper?
2. Why must ballot papers have serial numbers?
3. What happens after I cast my vote?
4. After the election, politicians are able to highlight how certain communities supported Y party or Z party. This shows that votes are not secret!
5. How else can you reassure me that my vote is secret?

Q: Why does the election official call out my name and voter number at the polling station before giving me the ballot paper?

A: This enables the representatives of political parties at the polling station to verify and cross out your name on their registers.

It is a transparent process to help all political parties:

1. Prevent double-voting by any voter, and
2. Ensure that the total number of ballot papers issued out and the total number of votes are the same.

BACK TO TOP

Q: Why must ballot papers have serial numbers?

A: This is to prevent instances of election fraud, such as:

• Bringing counterfeit ballot papers into the polling station,
• Vote impersonation,
• Exchanging ballot papers with those that have been marked by others, etc.

Places like the United Kingdom or New York State also maintain the practice of numbering their ballot papers for the above-mentioned reasons.

BACK TO TOP

Q: What happens after I cast my vote?

A: You can download a handy infographic from the Workers’ Party website, displayed here:

In sum, the following process will take place:

1. When polls close at 8 pm, voting boxes are sealed and moved to counting centres. Civil servants will count the votes in the presence of the candidates and agents from all parties contesting an area.
2. Once the votes are counted, the votes, together with all the relevant records – i.e. the stubs of the ballot papers as well as unused ballot papers – are sealed and transferred to the vault at the Supreme Court where they are kept for at least 6 months.NOTE:
   • The votes cannot be retrieved unless a court order is obtained on the grounds of election fraud.
   • According to the Elections Department website, no court order has been issued to retrieve votes to date.
3. At the end of 6 months, the sealed votes and records will be transferred to an incineration plant for destruction. The whole procedure is witnessed by candidates/agents from all parties. Seals on the votes and records have been found to be intact.

BACK TO TOP

Q: After the election, politicians are able to highlight how certain communities supported Y party or Z party. This shows that votes are not secret!

A: No. Your individual vote is secret. Nobody knows for sure how each individual votes, even if an individual states that she has voted for Y party or Z party.

Why, then, are politicians able to make the above-mentioned claim? There are two reasons:

1. First, the existence of polling stations:
   • Each polling station serves about 10 – 20 blocks of flats and/or a few landed housing estates e.g. XX01 Polling Station in XX Constituency serves Blk 1 – Blk 15 of XX Road.
   • Since the counting of votes is done by polling stations, it is possible to know the combined results of each polling station, which comprises a few thousand votes.
   • Voting results by polling stations are accessible to all political parties contesting in that constituency.
   • It is possible to estimate support by zones of residents e.g. The residents of XX Road in XX01 zone are more supportive of Y party, while the residents in XX02 zone are more supportive of Z party.
   • However, it is impossible to narrow down the level of support to a particular block or an individual.
2. Second, comments of politicians may be based on other estimates such as ground feel or verbal feedback.

BACK TO TOP

Q: How else can I be reassured that my vote is secret?

A: Tampering with the electoral process is illegal and tantamount to breaking the law.

Doing so is not in the interest of any political party elected to government – its power and legitimacy will be in question and its reputation tarnished locally and internationally.

BACK TO TOP

(Adapted from “Your Vote is Secret” by The Workers’ Party. More information on ballot secrecy can be found at the Singapore Elections Department website.

Download a guide here: everything on one-page or optimised for easier reading.

Happy learning!

–

Trawlers
By Alfian Sa’at

Come election time
we would see those vans
crowned with loudspeakers
like wind vanes-

with a supply of their own
hot air. Their mission:
to catapult slogans in four directions
and four official languages.

No child throws stones at it.
And old women chew their curses
like betel leaves, tangy, unspat.
Woe be the motorist

trapped behind the hearse-crawl
of the harbingers of “good years”.
Who says that lightning
never strikes twice at the same spot?

Here it comes again:
not so much a van as a trawler,
casting huge nets, not subtle hooks;
the only way one catches mouthless fish.

–

From: One Fierce Hour. Singapore: Landmark Books, 1998.

(Just to clarify that I’m neither a military nut nor a fanboy of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). I just have a keen interest in SAF-related issues for reasons I will not mention in public.)

I think the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) has produced a good advertisement that makes use of the principles of literary technique to effectively communicate its message to the viewer.

Take a look at the advertisement here:

(Watch the video in a separate window if you can’t see the embedded video.)

The voiceover text, if you want to read it while the video is being played:

I am the wind.
On land, no blade of grass moves without me.
At sea, every rising wave is touched by me.
Wherever you are, I am high enough to see you
and strong enough to reach out to you	5
and place strength in your hand.
You may not always see me
but you will always feel me
for I am here
for a higher purpose.	10

I won’t discuss the visual semiotics because that isn’t the point of my post.

However, I’ll carry out a bit of literary analysis on the first ‘two’ lines of the text to demonstrate some sense of its literary merit as well as articulate some of the ideas that the advertisement aims to convey to the viewer.

As the “I” in the text represents the entity that is the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF), the “wind” is used as a symbol of the RSAF’s ‘invisibility’ (i.e. how it can operate without being detected by the enemy), its speed, its power, and its versatility at being able to be both strong yet gentle in different times of need.

On one level, the line “no blade of grass moves without me” is an image which evokes ideas of the RSAF’s power – the RSAF has the ability to influence “move[ment]“, especially in inanimate objects that would otherwise not move on their own.

However, if we also imagine the “blade of grass” to be a metaphor for the infantry soldier, which is a symbol of the Army, then the line is also meant to convey an idea of the superiority of the RSAF in the SAF’s war-fighting capabilities: it is at the forefront of military operations in terms of intelligence gathering efforts and attack manoeuvers, to say the least. {This is reinforced in the “sea” imagery used in line 3, which I will not discuss now for want of time/space.) At the same time, the combined image of objects “on land” and “at sea” moving with the assistance of the “wind” also conveys ideas of the interconnectedness of the three arms in war-fighting operations.

Okay, I know this is somewhat wankerish and some people might think I am stretching the limits of plausibility with my analysis, but do me a favour: assume that I am right for the time being.

Now that we’re all on the same page i.e. my analysis is right, what’s the significance of this advertisement in the larger scheme of things?

A well-wrought out advertisement like this can achieve many aims. Besides its primary aim of enticing people to sign on with the RSAF, the advertisement:

• Instils a sense of national pride in the SAF, from the point of view of the citizenry, thereby increasing national confidence etc., and
• Acts as one form of deterrence (among other deterrence strategies that the SAF uses) to ward off would-be aggressors, from an external point of view.

So one doesn’t need to know literary devices or techniques in order to consciously or unconsciously receive the implied messages that are sent to the recipient i.e. the person watching the advertisement.

But one would need to have some sense of literary technique in order to be able to create an advertisement as good as this one to achieve said aims I mentioned earlier.

And that, my friends, is another reason why there’s a point in learning literature as a point of departure toward doing other things in life.

P.S. I know I said I wouldn’t discuss the visual semiotics of the ad. But seriously – jogging girl is pretty cute.

A koro epidemic struck Singapore in October 1967 for about ten days. Newspapers initially reported that some people developed koro after eating the meat of pigs inoculated with anti-swine-flu vaccine. Rumours relating eating pork and koro spread after a further report of an inoculated pig dying from penile retraction. The cases reported amounted to 97 in a single hospital unit within one day, at five days after the original news report. Government and medical officials alleviated the outbreak only by public announcements over television and in the newspapers.

(via)

FYI I chanced upon this gem while reading the Wikipedia entry on “running amok”.

You can read more about the koro epidemic here (downloadable PDF file).