Snuffing out underage smokers!

In the article “Being creative to snuff out youth smoking”, the social issue regarding the rising trend of underage smoking was raised. The 2007 National Health Surveillance Survey showed those aged between 18 and 29 years had the highest daily smoking rate, 17.2 per cent, up from 12.3 per cent in 2004. Thus, the article called for the implementation of tougher and more creative measures to arrest this trend.

In comparison to our neighbouring countries, it is clear that Singapore has a relatively low smoking rate. Currently, the general smoking rate of Singapore stands at 13.6 per cent, a stark contrast from the percentage of smokers in Asian countries such as Japan and China, where almost half of the population are smokers. This proves the effectiveness of measures that our government has imposed to curb smoking. These measures include high tax rates on cigarettes, harsh fines for smoking in prohibited areas, packaging restrictions on cigarette boxes and public education on the health effects of smoking. However, the fact remains that 6671 underage smokers were detained by the Health Sciences Authority last year. Living in such a smoker-unfriendly environment, why do well educated teenagers of our modern society choose to damage their health by developing the frowned upon habit of smoking?

I believe that this is due to the following factors, namely peer pressure, ineffectiveness of education in schools, parental negligence, curiosity and the influence of the media. A common misconception that teenagers have about smoking is that smoking is “cool”. Some teenagers have their curiosity piqued after observing celebrities puffing contentedly on cigarettes, leading them to emulate these people whom they have respect for. Other teenagers who are more reserved about smoking can also succumb to the influence of their peers, especially when they observe a large group of their peers smoking together, as they will view smoking as a means of improving their friendship. Lastly, smoking parents contribute to the increase in underage smokers, as their children are convinced that there can be nothing wrong with their parents’ daily habit of smoking. This first cigarette that a teenager takes soon leads to many more cigarettes, and addiction to smoking soon gets out of control.

This rising trend of youth smokers is very worrying, as it brings about several negative impacts on Singapore. In addition to damaging their own health, smokers also cause negative health effects to the people who breathe in second-hand smoke from their cigarettes. This ultimately leads to a waste in our country’s resources, as money is unnecessarily spent in treating smoking related illnesses. More importantly, the presence of young smokers creates a poor image for our country. Tourists and foreign investors will be disappointed when they learn about the prevalence of underage smokers in our garden city.

Hence, I strongly agree with the article that tough measures need to be put in place to curb the serious problem of underage smoking. Underage smokers should be slapped with a composition fine of $100 for the first to the fourth offences, up from $30. Thereafter, it will be $500, up from $300. Shops that are found guilty of selling cigarettes should have their licenses permanently revoked after they are fined so as to deter unethical shop owners from exacerbating the problem of underage smoking. However, some youths may dare to take the risk even after these measures are imposed. Thus, measures that are creative and focused on the young should be implemented. Since prevention is better than cure, these measures should not only be focused on convincing underage smokers to stop their habit, but should focus on discouraging teenagers from smoking their first cigarette. These measures have to be unique, as the problem they are addressing is highly challenging. For example, schools and void decks with a high occurrence of underage smokers should be frequently visited by social workers and cancer patients, to deter students from taking up the habit of smoking.

In conclusion, the societal problem of underage smoking is very real and growing rapidly. If this trend is not arrested as soon as possible, the situation may exacerbate into one which Singapore cannot recover from. This will lead to serious impacts for Singapore’s citizens and image. Thus, tough and creative measures should be implemented by the government to effectively address this unique issue, so as to rid Singapore of underage smokers.

Deaf to the World

1) Summary of article: Deaf to the world - Youngsters absorbed in their cellphones or music players face greater risk of accidents on the road

The article raises the issue that many youngsters are often engrossed in their cellphones and absorbed in music from earphones when they are walking on the street or crossing the road. This is worrying as it causes a great risk for road accidents to occur. A study showed that many youngsters who were engrossed in their phones and music were unaware of pedestrians around them and most youngsters feel that this behaviour is justifiable.

2) Commentary

Is it OK to live in Phones and Music?

When one walks along the busy roads of the shopping district nowadays, he can never fail to notice the large crowd of youngsters, dressed in the newest fashion and sporting unique hairstyles. Also, one will notice that the ears and eyes of most of these youngsters are deaf and blind to the outside world - earphones are blasting music in their ears and their eyes are glued to the handphones in their palms.

Is this behaviour justfiable?

I am a fifteen year-old, no stranger to this world of electronic gadgets. When I board the bus or the MRT, my ears are almost always plugged with my noise-cancelling head phones and my eyes will always be staring at the screen on my handphone. I do this because of the boredom I experience on the train, and because music and handphone games effectively reduce my stress level after a long day in school. Thus, I naturally feel that there are reasons to support the constant use of electronic devices in youngsters.

However, I feel that continuing the use of devices when one is crossing the road or walking on a busy street is going overboard. My reason is simple - electronic devices distract the user. This distraction caused does not allow youngsters to concentrate on what they are doing, which can pose serious dangers to both the users and people around them. In the case of crossing the road, this problem is even more significant, as there is a posibility of fatality resulting from this ignorance to one's surroundings. The Automible Association of Singapore has found that using handheld electronic devices is a major cause of road accidents and the RAC Foundation has found that sending messages reduced reaction time by 35 percent.

In a study conducted by The Straits Times, a student who was listening to headphones felt that cars should take the responsibility of looking out for pedestrains who were engrossed in electronic devices and there was nothing wrong with listening to music while crossing the road. I disagree with this student, as I feel that he must understand that roads are for cars to travel on and pedestrains are the ones who should be looking out for cars when crossing the road. This disregard to safety poses a serious concern.

When one is walking on the street, the danger of accidents occuring is also very real. Of 30 pedestrians listening to music, 12 people failed to notice a bicycle behind them even though a bell was sounded. It was also observed that 24 people had their music players at a very high volume which did not allow them to hear sounds in their environment. Some youngsters interviewed said that they have almost been knocked down by bicycles before, but are undeterred because "music sets the mood" and what they do is already a habit. This lack of concern for their own safety cannot be justified. This behaviour is also inconsiderate, as other pedestrians can be hurt by the accidents caused by these youngsters.

In conclusion, this trend of youngsters being absorbed in their electronic devices is very worrying and this behaviour cannot be justified, as their actions pose considerable danger to themselves and the people around them. However, many youngsters still remain undeterred, which clearly shows their ignorance and immaturity. Being deaf to the world should definitely be discouraged.

School promotes "correctness" over "creativity"

In our modern day education system, schools provide their students with opportunities to learn about various subjects. This equips students with skills which are required to get employment and eventually contribute to society. Unfortunately, I feel that schools promote correctness over creativity. In this essay, correctness refers to conformity to recognised standards, while creativity refers to the ability to be unconventional and original.

I take this stand because of three reasons, namely the teaching methods used in schools, methods of examination employed in schools and the disciplinary systems enforced in schools.

Firstly, the teaching method used in schools is one of low creativity. Learning is largely classroom based, with teachers conducting lessons where students are mainly taught content knowledge based on a standard syllabus designed by the school and the government. Great emphasis is placed on rote learning, as seen from teachers requesting students to memorise hard facts found in Powerpoint slides, notes and handouts. This results in very little time to conduct interactive activities such as class discussions. Thus, students seldom get the chance to showcase their creativity in school. However, this is not entirely the fault of the school and its teachers, as teachers are given a limited period of time to cover the whole syllabus, so it is inevitable that most lessons need to be spent on feeding students information before students sit for examinations.

Subjects such as literature, art and music offer much opportunity for creativity to be exercised, but some teachers require students to interpret sources in a conventional way and essays and drawings have to be done in fixed structures and forms, with marking schemes designed to recognise such structures. Language compositions supposedly require students to come up with creative storylines, but teachers request students to memorise model compositions and write about topics observed in everyday life. Math problems need to be solved by methods which are recognised by the education system, and methods which allow the student to get the answer in a creative way are often deemed unacceptable, just because the teacher does not understand the method. In essays on the humanities, students can only write about non-controversial and socially accepted topics if they want to get a decent mark. Few students would dare to criticise the government or write about racial issues in their essays even though they feel strongly about certain issues. This clearly shows that "correctness" is regarded more highly than creativity.

Some may argue that novel methods of learning such as "problem-based learning" and "creative problem solving" have been recently introduced in schools, with the intention of stimulating the minds of young students and facilitate creative learning. There is no doubt that these forms of learning are more effective in encouraging creativity in students than memorisation of content. However, these forms of learning are often conducted with restrictions placed on students. For example, creative assignments are given marks based on rubrics containing rigid guidelines. Students have to follow these guidelines to ensure that they get a decent mark, so the process they go through to complete the assignment is not truly creative. Furthermore, students are given rigid deadlines to complete many assignments at one go, which does not give students the chance to come up with original ideas and causes many students to use ideas found off the Internet to complete their work, which is obviously not creative. However, rubrics are necessary for a clear and fair marking system and deadlines are required for students to develop their time management skills.

Now, my next point. Students need to sit for examinations at the end of every term and smaller tests are given every month. Thus, students spend most of their time memorising facts from a wide range of topics in order to keep up with the constant presence of tests. Before major examinations, students are provided with many practice papers which train students in learning standard solutions to common examination questions. In a "kiasu" Singaporean society, where most students are concerned with getting good results and high rankings in school, memorising answers is naturally treated as an efficient way of studying for tests, as students can easily regurgitate the answers during examinations to get their marks. Furthermore, the nature of most examinations is based on theory, which does not allow much creativity to be exercised.

Lastly, the school environment does not foster creativity. Students are required to wear a standard uniform to wear to school, have similar hairstyles, wear similar shoes and wear minimal accessories. Every morning, the whole school participates in a morning assembly, where students go through the same procedure everyday. This standard protocol obviously does not promote creativity. In classes and lectures, students need to remain silent. When students break certain rules, harsh disciplinary action is meted out. Thus, students often have a fear of standing out from the crowd and eventually give up trying to be creative. However, this spirit of correctness instilled in students can be beneficial, as they will need to follow the rules of the society when they grow up and being overly creative can lead to a chaotic school environment.

On the contrary, one must recognise the fact that the main role of the school is not to foster creativity, as the school mainly needs to make sure that students can gain necessary knowledge to get qualifications which will secure them a job and impart moral values which will ensure that students grow up to be responsible members of the society. In fact, creativity cannot be taught in a classroom setting. Students can stimulate their creative skills through daily activities in life, such as sports and learning about topics of interest.

In conclusion, school promotes correctness over creativity, as seen from the fact that teachers teach students in an uncreative manner, examinations cause students to be more concerned about correctness rather than creativity and the conformist school environment does not encourage creativity in students. This correctness can actually be justified, as the main role of the school is not to "teach" creativity and the school faces many constraints regarding the fostering of creativity in the school environment.

What is an exposition?

In the "Exposition" handout we received, the word "exposition" is defined as "a rhetorical discourse that provides information about or an explanation of difficult material".

Well, I didn't quite understand the meaning of the word "exposition" until Mrs D'Cruz told us during her lesson that expositions "expose". After that, the word "exposition" made much more sense to me.

Simply put, expositions inform, explain, argue, analyse or define. In my opinion, most expositions are persuasive essays which serve to put across the author's opinion regarding a certain issue. A good exposition should successfully encourage the reader to adopt the author's stand.

We see expositions everywhere. In our school life, literature and history essays that we write make use of our expository writing skills. The Straits Times is filled with expositions, especially the Think and Forum pages. Even this blog post that you're reading is an exposition.

That's all I can think of about expositions for now. :)