Why Insist on English?

     It is a common sense that Korean parents today are investing millions of wons into teaching their own children English. No wonder, just take a look around us and the first thing to come up from any place in this very KMLA is EOP. Now while I'm not trying to say that English education is meaningless or that we have to reject the fact that English is the no. 1 international language, I do think that we sometimes have to look back on our own language; we have to realize how ignorant we have been to our own language.

     Compared to English, how indifferent have we been to our own language Hangeul? Think of Hangeulnal. About two decades ago, the Korean government drew down the day from the long list of annual holidays since the government believed there were "too many" anniversaries to celebrate. Now, what I'd like to question is this: why Hangeulnal, not other days like Christmas? Strictly, Christmas is something Christians would celebrate by their own; Hangeulnal, however, is something very original to us Koreans only, and it simply doesn't make sense not to celebrate the day our very own language is born. This is only a small fraction of our ignorance toward our own mother tongue; there are hundreds of signs all written in English (most of them are so poorly spelled out that even I am hard to recognize, by the way) if you walk out on Seoul streets. Also, institutions which teach English outnumbers any other kind of private education institutions in Korea as far as I know. Seems like everyone is trying to convert their mother tongue into a totally disparate one. This is not even our own case, by the way, since there have always been criticisms that English is encroaching on sphere of influences of other language groups. Linguistic imperialism, we should say: partly to blame the invasion of Mcdonald's, but equally to blame ourselves.

     To emphasize again, I'm not saying that we should abolish EOP. I'm not even trying to claim that we should close down every one of English institutions currently present in Korea. Studying English does have a point, considering that English is one of the most frequently used languages nowadays all around the globe. However, there is a huge difference between thoughtlessly abusing English and wisely using English while keeping the importance of our own language in our mind. English education is important as it has always been, but again, we should remember where we are and who we are, at least.

30 Days of...

     The idea might sound at first pretty confusing, what I'd like to propose for a 30-day program is to switch the night and daytime for 30 days. This means a person would have to sleep during the daytime and lead his major life cycle during the nighttime: he or she could play video games whenever bored, and he or she could take a part-time job in fast food chains, bars or restaurants that open for 24 hours. One could also meet his or her own friends, only if they are still awake.

     Why am I proposing this? Because the topic was always something fascinating to me: at least a day of living the nightlife instead of the busy life during daytime. Any kids would have experiences of trying to stay awake during all night with their might, even though there's really no practical good in it. The silent, furtive nighttime can offer people some rest from the mundane daytime lives, could provide them some time to reminisce over themselves, and make them to give more attention to places or people they would not have noticed ordinarily, such as salesmen working from early dawn or taxi drivers who stay awake during the nighttime.

     I also want to know that if people could sustain their ordinary lives still pretty normally if they change their life cycle so radically. As a proud student of the KMLA, I'm pretty sure that anyone suffers a lot from a sudden breakoff of their daily life cycle. Also, I'm pretty curious if 30 days are enough period for a person to again completely change into a nighthawk; I don't know if someone's daily life cycle built up for several years could change so dramatically in just a month of period.

     If I was given a chance, I would love to take the opportunity to lead a month of nightlife. Of course it might be a bit more lonley than before, since anyone I'd like to have a friendly talk would be sleeping, but I think it would be very "romantic" to be a nighthawk around quiet midnight.

CR: Does education kill creativity?

     The TED speech about how the current education system kills the students' creativity was one of the most compelling and persuasive speeches I have ever heard. Though there might be some different opinions about the topic, I think the speaker had a critical point. I do agree that there should be something done on the current education system in order to foster a more creative and productive atmosphere among the students.

     Why is creativity so important for us? It is because creativity is one of the most important factors that motivate the capitalist society. Creative people change the society, make a progress, and benefit the whole society eventually. Then why do I argue that current education system is harmful to fostering creativity? This is because the current education system only focuses on teaching certain 'practical' subjects, e.g. calculus, language arts, etc. Why do art classes have to be taught less frequently than such subjects? This is simply because the majority of people on the world lead 'ordinary lives', and getting into companies is a crucial factor for such lives. Companies seek for someone who is intelligent enough to do certain assigned tasks, not for someone who can dance, paint, or sing. The problem here is that although many children have infinite possibilities and so diverse interests, such education system pushes those different children into one stereotype and eventually kills possibilities of kids becoming a Picasso or a Beethoven. Lack of creativeness does not only plague the fields of art; already in Korea right now, companies are complaining that the employees are nothing more than machines only pouring efforts on assigned tasks. People should stop seeking for someone who can prove a higher IQ, but start searching for the ones who think of something nobody else can ever imagine; otherwise the Google or the Apple would remain only as a dream workplace for us.

     So, let's make the point simple and plain here: current education system needs to be changed. Otherwise, people should not expect their own children or employees to be creative.

My Debate Motions

THBT violence in military interrogation could be justified.
THS sports club activities in school.
THBT cigarette prices should be raised.
Sorry for posting so late. I slept before actually posting it, though I've already came of the three most easily debatable motions.

Opinions on Michael Moore's "Join My High School Newspaper"

Michael Moore's argument about suppressed freedom of speech of high school students had a strong appeal to me. What made me interested in the issue is that through my own experience, I am pretty sure that Korean high school students' freedom of expressing their own political viewpoint is almost completely objected. I do not know whether American high school students experience the same kind of prejudices and objections as us Korean students do, but as Michael Moore presents political assembly of students as something "unusual experience," I do not think there is much difference.

Some arguments against high school students expressing "too much" opinions of theirs are that some regulations on students' freedom of speech, because growing students are more prone to dangerous perspectives. Is that really so? For example, let's say there is a high school student who has some voice to speak out against the problems of his school, such as that teachers do not respect the students enough or that the school facility is too old and inconvenient. If he or she wants to publish his opinions on the school newspaper in order to inform everyone, however, his or her opinions will be censored because the teachers would consider those to be too radical. Of course, some can also argue that there are other means of expressing students' own voice, such as many online community sites. However, due to the fact there are tons of facts floating out there on the Internet, I doubt that many people would consider those voices anything more than whimsical complaints toward grown-ups.

For such a reason, I regard Michael Moore's idea of creating an uncensored, liberal press containing high school students' political viewpoints is a great idea. Adults might say that students' duty is to study, but we also are human beings with their own perspectives; the fact that we are young does not justify the ignorance of our voice.

3 motions I derived from Michael Moore's arguments:

1. THB that students should be able to speak out their own perspectives toward social issues more clearly.

2. THS high school students making their own press.

3. THB that censoring teenagers' opinions should be banned.

Opinions on the "Story of Stuff"

I have read or watched many materials covering environmental protection and imminent danger of resource exhaustion, but this one, a video clip named "the Story of Stuff", is obviously the most provoking one I have ever encountered. In fact, the speaker in the video was so firmly into her belief that it seemed as if it was pretty plausible, and at some points I was persuaded to the claim of this video too. However, there are obviously some dubious points about the claim of the speaker in this video, and I slowly recognized how biased the video is in various sides.

There is no doubt that the speaker is speaking the truth at least in some points. For example, we all know how many trees are cut down and how many innocent animals to die in order to provide us food, clothing or other necessities. However, is that really all? What I'd like to say is that the video addressed only one part of the issue and greatly exaggerates it sometimes that it becomes a biased propaganda rather than a source of correct information. Let's take an example of the speaker explaining the corrupt relationship between corporations and government. She claims that such a connection exhausts natural resources more quickly and makes other weaker countries to suffer as a result. What she does not mention is that there are many efforts of companies to protect the environment, such as that eco-friendly products made by technologies with less pollution. Else, take an example of her mentioning the 'resolution' to such a problem. She suggests that current method such as recycling is ineffective, and instead asserts that a whole production system to be changed from linear to circulatory. While at first this might sound fancy, in fact she is not providing any tangible alternatives; all she do is to blame the larger companies for the crises on Earth with logics so prejudiced and radical, as if the problem will be resolved if we get rid of the companies anyhow.

I was pretty surprised to figure out the fact that "the Story of Stuff" is in fact used in many schools as an appropriate material to educate the consequences of environmental crises. As I mentioned above, this video is biased in many ways, and therefore other materials must be integrated in order to make students judge environmental problems on their own upon an unbiased, logical ground. Thoughtful educators should not rely solely on this video to teach students, but should provide an information that this is not the whole story.

3 Motions I derived from this video:

1. THB teachers have their own rights to choose materials being used in class.

2. THB politically sensitive issues should not be allowed to be taught in class.

3. THS the shift of current manufacturing system.