Thanks to everyone for blogging regularly and keeping up with things. I'm happy with this system and have come across some KMLA worthy-results. What does that mean? As a teacher, sometimes results from students reflect those of typical high school students ("Meh.") and sometimes they inspire "wow" reactions of "they did much better than I expected. These students are amazing."
Reading your blogs I've come across some intriguing critical responses and interesting online debates.
HyunUk's essay, Snoring, blew me away earlier this week. It's creative, intriguing, and well written. It's not entirely debate-related, but as a college-essay or simply a well written creative essay, it's top notch and has cinematic qualities.
Over here at Gyutae's blog, also involving HyunUk (is there a pattern here?), we have some inter-class debating. It's great to see this, and it all relates back to the Michael Moore critical response in some way shape or form, which is great.
Regarding Moore, it's interesting to read the different motions generated from it, and you all have unique views that are well expressed. For the most part, most of you are liberal, but do seem to think Moore is fanning imaginary flames. Jiyeon, especially, had a lot to say in an entertaining way about his high school newspaper, while Jegugh took the opposite view and announced himself as a fan in a letter to Mr. Moore. Hyungseok and Seohyun think most teenagers are too emotionally immature to participate in political movements, and Youngil thinks it's time for a revolution. These are just some of the varying opinions I came across and all have been intriguing.
Below, there has been some discussion in the "Open Debate." There are no rules here, and it's okay to introduce a new topic. Perhaps you came across something above that might inspire you to rebut. It seems that the most popular debate to emerge from the Moore reading is:
THB: Students should participate in sociopolitical activity.
If you want to debate this in class, we can talk about it. Play with this in any way you see fit in the online debate below, which is well underway but still requiring new voices. This does count towards "Class Participation" which is a biggie.
I just want to suggest a motion kkk
ReplyDeleteTHB Students should be allowed to participate in sociopolitical activity.
Okay, can you define "sociopolitical activity"? I think this motion is too broad in that sense. Is this related to Moore?
ReplyDeleteI suggested this motion reminding Candlelight Vigil in 2008, Korea. At that time, many high school or middle school studetns joined the assembly. Many of them expressed their opinions on current issues in front of audiences!
ReplyDeleteSo, what I wanted to say through this "sociopolitical activity" is taking an "action" on social issues in forms of civil movements, joining assembly, or NGO activities.
Good clarification. Was there controversy? I'm not sure the OPP would have an easy time arguing against this.
ReplyDeleteHmm.... I remember that several right-wing newspapers criticized those students for participating in such activities by giving this reasons...
ReplyDeleteOne, they need to concentrate on studying. Though it is needed for them to be a proper citizen, it is time for them to learn things in school to fulfil the requirements of being "proper citizen". It is too hasty to already participate in social issues.
Two, they are not thinking by themselves. Because students do not have enough ability to judge events independantly, there is a danger of them being brain-washed by some "evil-purposed" teachers. (ex. KTU - Cheon Kyo Jo in Korea)
Though HyunUk presented possible arguments for the opposition, I believe he has a firm stance on the government; thus I'll argue in favor of the opposition.
ReplyDeleteBut before I do that, we need to clarify the meaning of 'students'. What do we mean by students? Are we talking about students who are in college, or those who are in high school? I believe those who caused controversy were students in middle school, so for now I'll stick to that.
Yes, I do think that students have the right to voice their opinion. However, not in the form of sociopolitical activities that we are talking about: form such as that of candlelight vigil in 2008. Think about it. Why did the candlelight vigil take place in the first place? Because the government decided to sign a certain contract in regards to the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement. People in Korea panicked at the thought of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, aka mad cow disease) that we all thought would be induced by the cows imported from US. So we all ran to the streets, including middle school students who didn't have a clue what FTA was. Maybe I am generalizing here a bit, but it is true that their logic was that cows imported from US would cause mad cow disease and kill us all. But did that really happen? Almost 3 years have passed, and here we are, all happy and alive; the government did agree to the FTA and we are in fact, all eating the meat we feared so much.
So here's my point: Students under-aged are too easily swayed by the public opinion. They do "political activities" without "political stance". And believe it or not, this can lead to students being used as political means. You think I'm going too far? Well, think about the Boston Tea Party in 1773. Were those who actually threw the teas into the sea the nobles who protested against the taxation? No. It was the people hired by those nobles.
So, as much as I love voicing my opinion and letting everyone be aware of it, I think under-aged students certainly should not be allowed to take part in sociopolitical activities: due to their lack of political stance and the high risk of them being used as political purpose.
Wow, Rachel. An appropriate response might be: "You go girl!"
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you about the 2008 vigils, and that's a strong case to support your stance. But your stance may only apply to those very cases where a bias is politically generated and ignorance willfully encouraged. Will we ever know the real causes of what occurred in 2008? It was a viral phenomena of message board mayhem, and in some ways an urban myth that almost brought down a government. Who benefited from it? Some say the Korean beef industry, most certainly the Australian beef industry, and anyone and everyone who opposes the 2MB administration. But let's look at other situations where youth have revolted. The "Hippy Movement" is an example, as many youth opposed the Vietnam draft. It's one thing for a government to force us to eat purportedly tainted meat that might cause us health problems, and quite another to force us to pick up guns, fly to another country we've never heard of, and shoot innocent people on their own land. We have to define "underage" as well. Age, in many cases, and especially this one, should not be a measure of whether or not we have a voice.
Take Michael Moore's newest post - a handpicked blog entry he feels we should all read:
One Day We Will All Be Adults
http://www.mikeshighschoolnews.com/blogs/stutter/03/01/2011/one-day-well-be-adults-what-then
I kind of laughed a bit. If any of my students showed up with "Free Libya" written on their arms and hands I'd think they had serious identity issues. Not that I'd think the message was wrong, but why not write it on a shirt instead? Anyways, in this case, I think the example would work more towards Rachel's view.
Nice debating from at least a couple of you.
I just checked this motion out, and I don't know if I am
ReplyDeletestill allowed to argue about this motion but I would like
to say some things anyways :) I think both the
perspectives introduced by Rachel and Hyun-Uk are valid
and reasonable; I think the best answer could possibly
exist in somewhere between the two viewpoints. I basically
agree with Hyun-Uk's idea that teenagers need to
participate more, or at least have some interest on
sociopolitical issues which would influence them sooner or
later, directly or indirectly. Teenagers nowadays around
the world, especially the ones in South Korea, are
unbelievably ignorant about major issues that are
happening around them! At least students in KMLA seem to
have a better grip on the current events compared to
others, but the people in the middle school I used to go
were unforgivably ignorant on significant and meaningful
issues. They would know everything about the latest
fashion style, the hottest new album, or the crazy sex
scandals related to their favorite celebrities, but they
would not even pay the half of the attention to events
like the Haiti earthquake or the recent turmoil in Egypt.
Forget about the world, they don't even have the least of
attention what's going on with their country, SOUTH KOREA!
Affirmative action, aggressive diplomacy towards North
Korea, presidential elections-for all these latest,
tangible topics that were taking place right before their
eyes, all they would do is make fun of the bald head of
2MB or claim that we should wipe out North Korea with
atomic weapons, and then return to their original
conversations about friends, girls, and academies. I
understand many teenagers are about the age to talk about
such stuff, and honestly, I wasn't much different. But,
hello-at least SOME ATTENTION HERE? I would be more than
delighted if the candle vigils in 2008 had at least
brought some serious conversations or the attention for
social issues through the classrooms to Korean Schools.
However, I also admit that teenagers are at an
impressionable age, and they are easily influenced by
propagandas and are susceptible to rumors and turmoils. On complicated issues that requires professional expertise and knowledge for making rational decisions, I think the people our age need to be a little more cautious before making their say; it might come out from the result of widespread rumors or prejudiced viewpoints, like many netizens reacted when the mad-cow-terror spread like an epidemic without much concrete basis or evidence. Many of those teenagers, were teenage students attending middle and high school ^^ ;;. So, here's my point: I think sociopolitical participation is necessary-definitely in South Korea-it should even be encouraged and recommended among many of the ignorant, academic-focused teenagers in our country. However, the issues they opinionate on should be matters that can be discussed and debated about with even the amount of knowledge or rationale a teenager has. Because? Let's admit-we are teenagers, and we are immature and impressionable compared to other people who have experienced life 10 or 20 more years. That's all I have to say. Thanks!
형석 - I understand your stance and clearly see a point in your logic. However, you are recognizing that students are "unforgivably ignorant' about social issues, and therefore the danger of them taking an active part in sociopolitical activities may have harms. Yet you seem to believe that students should be able to participate in sociopolitical activities despite the risks.
ReplyDeleteYour recognition of the problem with status quo is that students are ignorant. But following your argument, I don’t see how ‘allowing’ student to participate in these activities can actually solve that problem. If we were to make it ‘necessary’ for students to participate, discuss, and debate about current issues, maybe the problem can be solved. However, simply ‘allowing’ them does not solve anything.
Responses? :)
Good work guys. This is almost like a real debate now. I'll move this to the top of the blog and hopefully some other people dive in.
ReplyDeleteI think somebody should shoot this off in another direction and I'll pile some wood on the fire shortly.: )
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy suggestion is that students definitely need social participation, but they also need to be better informed and and well educated about the matters they are about to discuss.
ReplyDeleteAnd first off, to answer to Seohyun's question, I believe active education done in schools or private institutions could certainly trigger up some amount of interest in matters; part of the reason they are "unforgivably ignorant" about social events is because many adults are also "unforgivably ignorant" on bring on such issues to the table. Of course, even if such conditions are satisfied, the most important part of participation would be the will of individuals; without the desires of the student themselves for participation the motion cannot stand at all. However, I believe education, can ignite some interest among the teens, or at least provide an opportunity to some who weren't even aware of current events. I hope this has been a sufficient response.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBut since the original motion is about THBT students should participate in sociopolitical activities, let me just talk a little more about my concerns. My worries towards immature participation was based on the situations of the status quo. But if more active education is done to teenage students about controversies than I believe teenagers could be more than qualified for active debates. It's just that in the status quo-as previous debaters have mentioned-students are likely to be easily influenced by rumors or groundless propagandas since they only have accessibility to a limited amount of information, which is even more susceptible to personal prejudice of the provider(of the information). For example, how many students correctly new about the EXACT dangers and possibilities of tangible harms of the American Beef that they tried to reject from their borders? Were they sufficiently equipped with objective, proper information? Were they equally introduced to both the proposition and the opposition on the importation of "mad-cow" meat? I really don't think so. Rather they were influenced by sensational, demogogical, and inflammotory materials dominating the World Wide Web, and rather they were stimulated by their sense of emotion and the inherent abhorrence for the 2MB government which was formed by social influence and their rebellious nature. I admit; I too was stirred up by passionate, stimulating political web-toons which opposed American Beef drawn by the famous cartoonist Gang Pool or the radical language of some seemingly logical and confident bloggers. That caused thousands and millions of students to run along to the streets, refusing to attend school or occupying public areas. But hey, come on! How many of the "active" and "endeavored" teenagers actually knew the exact harms of the mad cow disease, or the potentials it could occur? Or the real possibility that it could be transferred to humans? I too was surprised myself when I did some research on my own, to find that there were no tangible or significant scientific research or basis to back up the extreme claims that humans will become extinct because of the mad-cows; a lot different from what I heard from the Educational Channel E which was responsible for producing impactful videos that portrayed the Mad Cow as some devastating epidemic. As Seohyun stated: are we all dead now? I'm not trying to make a judgement on the topic based on the results. And I'm not trying to rule out the potential dangers the consumed meat nowadays might possess. I'm just saying that the students are willing to make a voice should be more informed about the things they are about to talk about. If the education system is somehow innovated and unbiased, correct information are delivered to the students, I'm more than willing to push the student's backs to the agora and let them debate about issues as much as they like. However, with the teenagers in the status quo...? Well, let's think about it. I seriously doubt many teengaers, especially the ones in South Korea, excluding the ones who receive prestigious information as they do in KMLA, would be accurately and sufficiently informed enough about socially controversial subjects that would enable them to reach productive outcomes.
ReplyDeleteBut since the original motion is about THBT students should participate in sociopolitical activities, let me just talk a little more about my concerns. My worries towards immature participation was based on the situations of the status quo. But if more active education is done to teenage students about controversies than I believe teenagers could be more than qualified for active debates. It's just that in the status quo-as previous debaters have mentioned-students are likely to be easily influenced by rumors or groundless propagandas since they only have accessibility to a limited amount of information, which is even more susceptible to personal prejudice of the provider(of the information). For example, how many students correctly new about the EXACT dangers and possibilities of tangible harms of the American Beef that they tried to reject from their borders? Were they sufficiently equipped with objective, proper information? Were they equally introduced to both the proposition and the opposition on the importation of "mad-cow" meat? I really don't think so. Rather they were influenced by sensational, demogogical, and inflammotory materials dominating the World Wide Web, and rather they were stimulated by their sense of emotion and the inherent abhorrence for the 2MB government which was formed by social influence and their rebellious nature. I admit; I too was stirred up by passionate, stimulating political web-toons which opposed American Beef drawn by the famous cartoonist Gang Pool or the radical language of some seemingly logical and confident bloggers. That caused thousands and millions of students to run along to the streets, refusing to attend school or occupying public areas. But hey, come on! How many of the "active" and "endeavored" teenagers actually knew the exact harms of the mad cow disease, or the potentials it could occur? Or the real possibility that it could be transferred to humans? I too was surprised myself when I did some research on my own, to find that there were no tangible or significant scientific research or basis to back up the extreme claims that humans will become extinct because of the mad-cows; a lot different from what I heard from the Educational Channel E which was responsible for producing impactful videos that portrayed the Mad Cow as some devastating epidemic. As Seohyun stated: are we all dead now? I'm not trying to make a judgement on the topic based on the results. And I'm not trying to rule out the potential dangers the consumed meat nowadays might possess. I'm just saying that the students are willing to make a voice should be more informed about the things they are about to talk about. If the education system is somehow innovated and unbiased, correct information are delivered to the students, I'm more than willing to push the student's backs to the agora and let them debate about issues as much as they like. However, with the teenagers in the status quo...? Well, let's think about it. I seriously doubt many teengaers, especially the ones in South Korea, excluding the ones who receive prestigious information as they do in KMLA, would be accurately and sufficiently informed enough about socially controversial subjects that would enable them to reach productive outcomes.
ReplyDeleteBut since the original motion is about THBT students should participate in sociopolitical activities, let me just talk a little more about my concerns. My worries towards immature participation was based on the situations of the status quo. But if more active education is done to teenage students about controversies than I believe teenagers could be more than qualified for active debates. It's just that in the status quo-as previous debaters have mentioned-students are likely to be easily influenced by rumors or groundless propagandas since they only have accessibility to a limited amount of information, which is even more susceptible to personal prejudice of the provider(of the information). For example, how many students correctly new about the EXACT dangers and possibilities of tangible harms of the American Beef that they tried to reject from their borders? Were they sufficiently equipped with objective, proper information? Were they equally introduced to both the proposition and the opposition on the importation of "mad-cow" meat? I really don't think so.
ReplyDeleteRather they were influenced by sensational, demogogical, and inflammotory materials dominating the World Wide Web, and rather they were stimulated by their sense of emotion and the inherent abhorrence for the 2MB government which was formed by social influence and their rebellious nature. I admit; I too was stirred up by passionate, stimulating political web-toons which opposed American Beef drawn by the famous cartoonist Gang Pool or the radical language of some seemingly logical and confident bloggers. That caused thousands and millions of students to run along to the streets, refusing to attend school or occupying public areas. But hey, come on! How many of the "active" and "endeavored" teenagers actually knew the exact harms of the mad cow disease, or the potentials it could occur? Or the real possibility that it could be transferred to humans? I too was surprised myself when I did some research on my own, to find that there were no tangible or significant scientific research or basis to back up the extreme claims that humans will become extinct because of the mad-cows; a lot different from what I heard from the Educational Channel E which was responsible for producing impactful videos that portrayed the Mad Cow as some devastating epidemic. As Seohyun stated: are we all dead now? I'm not trying to make a judgement on the topic based on the results. And I'm not trying to rule out the potential dangers the consumed meat nowadays might possess. I'm just saying that the students are willing to make a voice should be more informed about the things they are about to talk about. If the education system is somehow innovated and unbiased, correct information are delivered to the students, I'm more than willing to push the student's backs to the agora and let them debate about issues as much as they like. However, with the teenagers in the status quo...? Well, let's think about it. I seriously doubt many teengaers, especially the ones in South Korea, excluding the ones who receive prestigious information as they do in KMLA, would be accurately and sufficiently informed enough about socially controversial subjects that would enable them to reach productive outcomes.
ReplyDeleteRather they were influenced by sensational, demogogical, and inflammotory materials dominating the World Wide Web, and rather they were stimulated by their sense of emotion and the inherent abhorrence for the 2MB government which was formed by social influence and their rebellious nature. I admit; I too was stirred up by passionate, stimulating political web-toons which opposed American Beef drawn by the famous cartoonist Gang Pool or the radical language of some seemingly logical and confident bloggers. That caused thousands and millions of students to run along to the streets, refusing to attend school or occupying public areas.
ReplyDeleteBut hey, come on! How many of the "active" and "endeavored" teenagers actually knew the exact harms of the mad cow disease, or the potentials it could occur? Or the real possibility that it could be transferred to humans? I too was surprised myself when I did some research on my own, to find that there were no tangible or significant scientific research or basis to back up the extreme claims that humans will become extinct because of the mad-cows; a lot different from what I heard from the Educational Channel E which was responsible for producing impactful videos that portrayed the Mad Cow as some devastating epidemic. As Seohyun stated: are we all dead now? I'm not trying to make a judgement on the topic based on the results. And I'm not trying to rule out the potential dangers the consumed meat nowadays might possess. I'm just saying that the students are willing to make a voice should be more informed about the things they are about to talk about. If the education system is somehow innovated and unbiased, correct information are delivered to the students, I'm more than willing to push the student's backs to the agora and let them debate about issues as much as they like. However, with the teenagers in the status quo...? Well, let's think about it. I seriously doubt many teengaers, especially the ones in South Korea, excluding the ones who receive prestigious information as they do in KMLA, would be accurately and sufficiently informed enough about socially controversial subjects that would enable them to reach productive outcomes.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I want to ask about the Mad Cow vigils. Thousands of students participated - and Mad Cow might have been the spark that lit the fire. But was it really what kept that fire alive? Maybe it was just symptomatic of larger issues - the general discontent among youth - who identified EMB as a source. Didn't he strong arm a few educational policies that greatly changed things? What they were I can't recall. My point is, though, is it fair to suggest that the Mad Cow Vigils weren't just about Mad Cow?
ReplyDeleteGreat to see your enthusiasm for this debate Hyung Seok.