Share This

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

To teach or to manage?


The Education Ministry should come up with guidelines that strictly define the role of teachers who are assigned to carry out administrative tasks and those who teach.

HAVE teachers not enough to teach that they are crying out to be “allowed to teach”? Or, have teachers been so drawn away from their teaching duty that they are pleading hard to “get (back) to teach”? Sadly, it is the latter that is of concern.

Teachers lament that they are not able to concentrate on their teaching because too many non-teaching activities and responsibilities are thrust upon them. There are the numerous analyses to do, reports to write, data to enter online, meetings, functions, seminars and workshops to attend. They also complain that they have co-curricular activities and games to manage and students to counsel.

Granted that some of these activities do have educational value that may indirectly contribute to classroom teaching effectiveness, teachers are not happy at the seemingly uncoordinated and inordinate manner by which they are called upon to be involved.

The contention is that much of the “paper work” teachers are required to do serve only the purposes of officials higher up. Teachers do not see any benefits to their charges at all.

With all these distractions, the committed teachers are worried sick that they may labour in vain in their classroom teaching; or they may themselves be burnt out. Others may already have thrown in the towel.

On the other hand, the less-than-responsible ones are enjoying the “outings” and “deviations” and unashamedly claiming that teaching is after all an “easy” life.

For the newly recruited teachers, this is indeed a confusing scenario!

There is indeed a case for the Ministry and education authorities to better coordinate and reassess the true needs of the paper work given to schools and expecting their feedback to be uploaded usually within short notice.

On the other hand, teachers must also recognise that some extracurricular activities are essential and therefore rightly become part of their duties.

Yet, with consent, approval and support from the authorities higher up, schools can do better. Here are my thoughts and suggestions.

A normal secondary day school with a student population of around 2,000 and running two sessions will have a principal, three senior assistants, an afternoon supervisor, four heads of academic departments, five student counsellors and a teaching staff of about 120.

This means that the school has 14 administrator-teachers, that is 12% of the staff.

Premier and other schools of acclaim may even have more academic and administrative staff. Smaller schools need no afternoon supervisors, have a proportionate number of counsellors whilst other positions are all intact.

These school administrators are called administrator-teachers because besides administering and managing their respective “office”, they are required to also teach some (10 to 14) periods a week. This may seem minimal as compared to a normal teacher’s load of 24 to 28 periods.

But, consider the minds of these administrator-teachers. Their first concern must be that they administer well the “office” they have been promoted and assigned to. They must also realise that what they do and decide now affect more than their own classes. They are helping to administer the whole school.

Their teaching periods may average two per day. But the timetable could be such that it is one period in the early half and the other period in the latter half of the day. Being conscientious and committed, they are teachers who want to perform well in their given tasks.

So, it is not just about going into classes for 40 minutes per period. There must also be necessary preparations to ensure that each lesson is enriching and benefiting to their charges.

Usually, they are torn between the demands of their administrative offices and the teaching needs of their classes. More often than not, our school structures and expectations being such, their administrative duties take precedence.

To accommodate, the more experienced administrator-teachers opt to teach “less important” subjects and classes.

This has resulted in their teaching becoming, much to their own chagrin, less than exemplary to their colleagues. Worse, there are some teachers who use the situation to justify their own lackadaisical demeanour.

This sad scenario begets the question: Why not allow administrator-teachers to be full-time administrators? They can then focus on the administrative tasks, take over the paper work now being assigned to teachers, “represent” teachers in many out-of-school activities and most importantly reduce the burden from teachers who are not “teaching-centric”.

After all, these administrator-teachers have to prove their administrative prowess rather than teaching for their next career move.

And, may I point out that former teachers who have taken on administrative positions in the ministry or the various education departments are not required to teach at all?

So why should teachers carrying out adminstrative work be expected to teach even if its just a few periods a week?

We really need a transformational change here. Would the Education Ministry allow schools to be administered by full-time administrators who were teachers before?

By LIONG KAM CHONG

Related posts

 Angry with the Malaysian education system in a mess

Education Doesn't Increase Support for Affirmative ... 

Who owns the South China Sea islets in the eyes of the world?



Hilary Clinton, US Secretary of State, made a very important statement on South China Sea area.


She stated on July 23, 2010 at the ASEAN meeting in Hanoi: "Legitimate claims to maritime space in the South China Sea should be derived SOLELY from legitimate claims to land features." Translation: Why China has claim over some islands/islets so far away from its homeland? Although Mrs. Clinton is a lawyer, she is wrong… based on international convention. There are many other important key considerations (historic claim, administration, etc). If “distance” is the ONLY measure of sovereignty, then US needs to give up Guam; UK needs to give up Falkland Island (to Argentina). And, many islets in the world need to find new owners.

Many people, including many journalists, in the world do not realize that historically, China’s claim on South China Sea islands started in the Ming Dynasty (1368), followed by Qing Dynasty (1644), followed by Republic of China (1911). Some people argue that it started even before Ming Dynasty. The current Beijing government just inherited the national map from Republic of China (in 1949). So this old claim started some 700 years ago and way before USA was born.

I hope people can live in peace as we become more civilized… in cooperation and prosperity. So it is a good thing the countries are proceeding to clearly settle on a “new” national boundary/interests arrangement (ownership, benefit sharing, etc) that the neighboring countries can accept… with or without USA help. In my view, the faster the better… so less feeling and fishermen will get hurt.

I understand, as the sole global power, USA has the responsibility to maintain peace and order where it concerns our interests. But we need to be an “honest broker” (to gain goodwill and other benefits), otherwise whatever we do is not sustainable. By starting the discussion on the South China Sea islands with such a BADLY ADVISED statement, Secretary Clinton is SOWING THE SEED of another big problem for America and the Sino-American relationship. 

“The earliest discovery by the Chinese people of the Nansha Islands can be traced back to as early as the Han Dynasty. Yang Fu of the East Han Dynasty (23-220 A.D.) made reference to the Nansha Islands in his book entitled Yiwu Zhi (Records of Rarities) , which reads: "Zhanghai qitou, shui qian er duo cishi"("There are islets, sand cays, reefs and banks in the South China Sea, the water there is shallow and filled with magnetic rocks or stones"). Chinese people then called the South China Sea Zhanghai and all the islands, reefs, shoals and isles in the South China Sea, including the Nansha and Xisha Islands, Qitou.”

There had been NO dispute over the sovereignty rights of China to the South China Sea and the numerous islands in it, by any other countries, for all those periods.


But, when the Western colonialists started invading and squatting all over Asia in the last 300 years, taking advantage of the declining power of the Qing Dynasty, they intentionally carved out various regions of land and sea as their “protected territories”. Then they forced the Manchu Court to sign many bogus “treaties” in which they claimed the Western “sovereignty rights” over these Chinese territories!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%E1%BA%A1ch_Long_V%C4%A9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands


Excerpt from the above link:


“In 1933,
France reasserted its claims from 1887 to the Spratly and Paracel Islands on behalf of its then-colony Vietnam. It occupied a number of the Spratly Islands, including Itu Aba, built weather stations on two, and administered them as part of French Indochina. This occupation was protested by the Republic of China government because France admitted finding Chinese fishermen there when French war ships visited the nine islands. In 1935, the ROC government also announced a sovereignty claim on the Spratly Islands.”

On September 4th, 1958, the Government of the People’s Republic of China issued a declaration of the Chinese sea territories.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%E1%BA%A1ch_Long_V%C4%A9


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands


Excerpt from the above link:


“In 1933,
France reasserted its claims from 1887 to the Spratly and Paracel Islands on behalf of its then-colony Vietnam. It occupied a number of the Spratly Islands, including Itu Aba, built weather stations on two, and administered them as part of French Indochina. This occupation was protested by the Republic of China government because France admitted finding Chinese fishermen there when French war ships visited the nine islands. In 1935, the ROC government also announced a sovereignty claim on the Spratly Islands.”

On September 4th, 1958, the Government of the People’s Republic of China issued a declaration of the Chinese sea territories.


http://news3.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/20...ent_705061.htm


Excerpt from the above link (that are translated to English):


“(1) This width of the territorial sea of the
People's Republic of China is twelve national miles. This provision applies to all Territories of the People's Republic of China, including the mainland China and offshore islands, Taiwan (separated from the mainland and offshore islands by high seas) and its surrounding islands, the Penghu Archipelago, the Dongsha Islands, the Xisha islands (Paracells), the Zhongsha Islands, the Nansha Islands (Spratlys) and other islands belonging to China.”

(The Declaration by PRC, as clear from the above excerpt, specifically spells out the Xisha and Nansha islands, among other islands and sea boundaries.)


On September 14, 1958, ONLY 10 DAYS LATER, Vietnam Prime Minister at the time, Pham Van Dong, sent a cable to the Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai, on behalf of the Vietnam government, expressing complete acknowledgment and support for China’s claims.


http://conghambannuoc.tripod.com/


Excerpt from the above link (that are translated to English):


“The Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam acknowledges and supports the Declaration on September 4th, 1958 by the Government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), on the PRC’s decision concerning China’s sea territories.”


The International community has been overwhelmingly supporting China’s legitimate and inviolable sovereign on the sea territories claimed by China.


http://www.southchinasea.org/docs/In...20the%20Na.htm


“2. The International Civil Aviation Organization held its first conference on Asia-Pacific regional aviation in Manila of the Philippines on 27 October 1955. Sixteen countries or regions were represented at the conference, including South Viet Nam and the Taiwan authorities, apart from Australia, Canada, Chile, Dominica, Japan, the Laos, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand and France. The Chief Representative of the Philippines served as Chairman of the conference and the Chief Representative of France its first Vice Chairman. It was agreed at the conference that the Dongsha, Xisha and Nansha Islands on the South China Sea were located at the communication hub of the Pacific and therefore the meteorological reports of these islands were vital to world civil aviation service. In this context, the conference adopted Resolution No. 24, asking China's Taiwan authorities to improve meteorological observation on the Nansha Islands, four times a day. When this resolution was put for voting, all the representatives, including those of the Philippines and the South Viet Nam, were for it. No representative at the conference made any objection to or reservation about it.”


It is evident from all above historic records, international treaties, and acknowledgment by ALL regional neighbor-countries, that China has the INDISPUTABLE lawful and legitimate sovereignty over the South China Sea and all the offshore islands on it.


US won't take sides in South China Sea dispute

Updated: 2012-05-02 12:24 By Zhao Shengnan (China Daily)

The United States said on Monday that it would not take sides in the Huangyan Island standoff between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea and reiterated support for a diplomatic resolution to the territorial dispute.

Washington does not take sides on competing sovereignty claims there, but has a national interest in maintaining freedom of navigation as well as peace and stability, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, after meeting top diplomatic and defense officials from the Philippines.

Philippine Foreign Secretary Alberto del Rosario and Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin attended the 2+2 dialogue with their US counterparts, Clinton and Leon Panetta, in Washington.

"The United States supports a collaborative diplomatic process by all those involved for resolving the various disputes that they encounter," Clinton said. "We oppose the threat or use of force by any party to advance its claims."

Gazmin alluded to tension with China over islands in the South China Sea as he called for the need to "intensify our mutual trust to uphold maritime security and the freedom of navigation".

"We should be able to work together to build a minimum, credible defense posture for the Philippines, especially in upholding maritime security," Gazmin said.

The Philippines and China have been embroiled in the Huangyan Island dispute, with both nations stationing vessels there for nearly three weeks to assert their sovereignty.

China on Monday highlighted remarks made by the Philippine president about de-escalating the tension over the island, urging the Philippines to "match its words with deeds" and return to the proper pathway of diplomatic solutions.

Speaking of the tension, Philippine President Benigno Simeon Cojuangco Aquino III said he had issued instructions to his military, telling them not to intensify the issue.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin stressed that there is no change in China's stance of using diplomatic channels to peacefully resolve the issue, which was triggered when a Philippine warship harassed Chinese fishermen and raised concerns over China's sovereignty of the island.

The Philippine officials also stressed diplomacy when asked what aid they had requested from Washington, saying that Manila sought to bring the South China Sea issue to international legal bodies.

Clinton reaffirmed the US commitment to the 60-year-old Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines, calling the Philippines a country "at the heart" of the new US strategy toward the Asia-Pacific.

Washington would help improve the Philippines' "maritime presence and capabilities" with the transfer of a second high-endurance (coast guard) cutter this year, Panetta said.

The US emphasis on neutrality and a diplomatic resolution would encourage Manila to be more restrained on the Huangyan Island issue, said Fan Jishe, a US studies expert at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

"Washington doesn't want territorial disputes between its Asian allies and China to be obstacles to China-US relations," he said.

Xinhua and Reuters contributed to this story.

Related posts:
Tensions in South China Sea: US and Philippines Naval ... 
China's warns US of Confrontation over South China Sea 
Philippine Group Protests US-Filipino War Games! 
Thailand-China upgrades ties while Philippines spat ...   
China, ASEAN and the South China Sea
South China Sea Islands Dispute

International Recognition Of China's Sovereignty over the Nansha ..



Monday, 23 April 2012

Quantum Rainbow Photon Gun Unveiled

Technology Review  Published by MIT

A photon gun capable of reliably producing single photons of different colours could become an important building block of a quantum internet

We've heard much about the possibility of a quantum internet which uses single photons to encode and send information protected by the emerging technology of quantum cryptography.

The main advantage is of such a system is perfect security, the kind of thing that governments, the military, banks and assorted other groups would pay handsomely to achieve.

One of the enabling technologies for a quantum internet is a reliable photon gun that can fire single photons on demand. That's not easy.

One of the significant weaknesses of current quantum cryptographic systems is the finite possibility that today's lasers emit photons in bunches rather than one at a time. When this happens, an eavesdropper can use these extra photons to extract information about the data being transmitted.

So there's no shortage of interest in developing photon guns that emit single photons and indeed various groups have made significant progress towards this.

Against this background, Michael Fortsch at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Light in Erlangen, Germany, and a few pals today say they've made a significant breakthrough. These guys reckon they've built a photon emitter with a range of properties that make it far more flexible, efficient and useful than any before--a kind of photon supergun.

The gun is a disc-shaped crystal of lithium niobate zapped with 582nm light from a neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Nd:YAG) laser. Lithium niobate is a nonlinear material that causes single photons to spontaneously convert into photon pairs.

So the 582nm photons ricochet around inside the disc and eventually emerge either as unchanged 582nm photons or as a pair of entangled photons with about twice the wavelength (about 1060nm). This entangled pair don't have quite the same wavelength and so all three types of photon can be easily separated.

The 582 nm photons are ignored. Of the other pair, one is used to transmit information and the other is picked up by a detector to confirm that the other photon is ready form transmission.

So what's so special about this photon gun? First and most important is that the gun emits photons in pairs. That's significant because the detection of one photon is an unambiguous sign that another has also been emitted. It's like a time stamp that says a photon is on its way.

This so-called photon herald means that there can be no confusion over whether the gun is secretly leaking information to a potential eavesdropper.

This gun is also fast, emitting some 10 million pairs of photons per second per mW and also two orders of magnitude more efficient than other photon guns.

These guys can also change the wavelength of the photons the gun emits by heating or cooling the crystal and thereby changing its size. This rainbow of colours stretches over 100nm (OK, not quite a rainbow but you get the picture).

That's important because it means the gun can be tuned to various different atomic transitions allowing physicists and engineers to play with a variety of different atoms for quantum information storage.

All in all, an impressive feat and clearly an enabling step along the way to more powerful quantum information processing tools.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1204.3056: A Versatile Source of Single Photons for Quantum Information Processing

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Related posts:

MIA, Malaysian Institute of Accountants needs to change

World Bank report says it should improve its governance structure


PETALING JAYA: After a recent assessment of the accounting and auditing environment in Malaysia, the World Bank has concluded that there ought to be changes in how the Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) is governed.

The report on the observance of standards and codes, released in February, noted among other things, that the institute's governance structure and lack of resources were “posing some challenges”.

The report focused on accounting and auditing standards and practices in corporate Malaysia, as well as the institutional framework that underpins the corporate financial reporting system.

“An independent review of the governance structure of the MIA should be conducted to provide recommendations for improving its structure and operations,” said the World Bank.

“In particular, these actions should address the structure and membership of the MIA council, and the streamlining of the investigation and disciplinary process.

“These changes should also facilitate the process of approving any increases in membership fees, as it appears that a lack of resources is impacting the MIA's ability to discharge effectively all its obligations.”

The report noted that the institute's governing body, its council, had 30 members, 10 of whom are elected. The rest are appointed by the Government.

“All the members of the investigation, disciplinary, and disciplinary appeals committees are required to be members of the council, which limits the volume of cases these committees are able to process,” said the World Bank.

The institute has already taken steps to address this. In an interview with StarBiz earlier this month, MIA president Datuk Mohamed Nasir Ahmad said the institute had submitted to the Government a draft of proposed amendments to the Accountants Act 1967.

Among the changes sought was that the MIA be allowed to create multiple sub-committees to deal with investigations, with the subcommittee members possibly coming from outside the council.

However, the World Bank report did not mention any dissatisfaction over the council's composition, although this has been a longstanding complaint among some MIA members.

In a statement sent to StarBiz, the Malaysian Accounting Firms Association (previously known as the Association Of Small & Medium Accounting Firms of Kuala Lumpur and Selangor) pointed out that although the MIA was “wholly supported by members subscriptions”, 20 of the council members were appointed by the Finance Minister on the advice of the Accountant-General, as provided under the Accountants Act.

“The MIA is probably the only members-only professional body in Malaysia, and possibly in any country, with such a majority of unelected members in council,” said the association.

“If at all any amendment to the Act is to be proposed, it should start with reinstating the rights of the members to govern themselves as professionals should.”

The association issued the statement in response to the StarBiz article on April 16 on the proposed amendments to the Act.

Mohamed Nasir said the MIA was also proposing that its council be given the authority to make or amend certain rules, instead of having to wait for a general meeting to approve new rules.

The association frets that this may enable the MIA to unilaterally increase its membership subscription rates.

It said: “To put that in context, members have rejected subscription increases sought in the last two AGMs due to unhappiness with the institute.”

The World Bank report alluded to the institute's previous attempts to seek a subscription hike.

“The MIA derives almost twice as much income from its professional development programmes than it collects from annual membership fees. The annual membership fees stand at RM250, and two recent attempts to increase annual fees were voted down,” said the bank.

By ERROL OH
errol@thestar.com.my

Malaysisia changes over the last 42 years; quanity yes, quality?

The ascend to the throne of our new King, 42 years after he was last installed, is a time to reflect on our achievements.

I WAS at the installation of our new King the other day. Twice as King, he has seen Malaysia change from what it was then and now. He also mentioned in his speech that he witnessed the efforts of the Prime Minister at that time, Tun Abdul Razak, the father of our current Prime Minister.

I sat in the audience, reflecting on some of the positives that have taken place in our country and took some notes on my Blackberry.

The key thought that ran through my mind was how much things have changed over the last 42 years. Here’s how much:

·We moved from a low-income, high-poverty country to a high-middle-income economy. Our next transformation is to become a high-income, developed country with quality of life for everyone.

·Our infrastructure has increased by leaps and bounds. Roads and highways have been built and traverse all parts of the country. We are putting in a mass rapid transit system in Kuala Lumpur to take us to the next level.


·We have modern retail outlets – supermarkets, hypermarkets, shopping complexes, malls and entertainment outlets and we are helping mom-and-pop stores to modernise too.

·We are moving towards greater freedom in all spheres with the repeal of the Internal Security Act, establishing clear rights for peaceful assembly and affirming the rights of online expression and social media liberties, amongst others. The Government has also made amendments to Printing Presses and Publications Act, while the Prime Minister is also talking about changes to the Sedition Act.

·Religious freedom has actually taken strides forward. There is now explicit statement of freedom to import (instead of implicitly before) and publish the Alkitab (the Bible). Indeed, since the 10 points resolution, many Alkitab have been imported and printed locally, without any difficulties with the authorities.

·We have moved to an extensive “social welfare” system e.g free primary and secondary schools, virtually free public health system, and one of the lowest consumer prices for fuel, LPG cooking gas, sugar, electricity, flour, gas, and so on with high subsidies from the Government.

·We have moved to greater focus on rural poor. Under the transformation initiatives, for low-income groups, three million lives were positively impacted in 2010 and 2011.

·We have put up an explicit and substantive roadmap to transform Malaysia further. We will build upon the great achievements we have made between the times of the rules of our current King and work towards our vision 2020 - to make our country a developed one with its people earning high incomes.

Considerable achievement

Just to show the extent our achievements over the last 42 years, I have constructed a table of some key indicators. You can see for yourself how much things have changed, even if you accounted for the fact that a ringgit went a much longer way then.

Our income as a nation – gross national income at the prevailing prices then - increased 64 times over the last 42 years, which is fantastic considering that the population growth over the same period was just 1.6 times.

It’s not surprising therefore that per capita income went up 25 times over the period, a considerable achievement even after taking into account inflation and the drop in value of money.

‘We are putting in a mass rapid transit system in Kuala Lumpur to take us to the next level.’
 
One of the most telling effects of this is that the incidence of poverty has been brought down from nearly half of the population to less than four for every 100 people in the country. That’s tremendous.

The number of schools increased but the impact here would have been understated because while additional schools were built, existing schools would have increased their enrolment considerably.

There was a massive explosion in universities. In 1970, the universities were all public and there were only three. The latest figures indicate that private universities now outnumber government ones almost two to one with 20 public universities and 39 private ones.

A similar situation was seen for hospitals with private hospitals increasing from 46 to 239 while government hospitals rose more moderately from less than 80 to 137.

Average life expectancy, assuming equal numbers of males and female, increased by 17% to 74.1 years, reflecting vast improvement in health levels, which is reinforced by the sharp over 80% drop in the infant mortality rate to seven per 1,000 live births.

World confidence in the Malaysian economy too increased over the 42-year period and this is well-supported by foreign direct investment flows in 2011 of an excellent RM33bil which was 150 times more than that in 1970.

Who would have believed 42 years ago, that Malaysia would make such major achievements in an extremely challenging environment of uncertainty posed by the 1969 racial riots and the drastic and controversial steps that the Government took then to redress racial imbalances and eliminate poverty?

But despite the scepticism and the lack of confidence then, we succeeded and succeeded well. Yes, we could have done better, but then we can always do better and anyone could have done better. What counted was that we met our major targets.

We find similar scepticism now to our efforts to make yet another great transformation, a giant stride to become a developed nation with its citizens earning high incomes and enjoying a better quality of life than ever before.

Promising figures

We aim to do this in a bit more than eight years in a rather challenging and competitive environment. And I dare say we know how to do it. We have it pretty much mapped out in quite some detail.

The initial figures are promising, despite all the nay-saying which continues to give me the transformation blues. But yes, we will rise above the blues as we did before and make this a better nation for each and everyone of us.

The results for 2010 and 2011 are great with most of our targets not just met but exceeded, often by a lot. See the comprehensive annual report on economic and government transformation in the Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu) website for details.

Rome wasn’t built overnight, likewise Malaysia too. We are blessed as a country. Whilst we know there are shortcomings, we also need to count our blessings even as we overcome the shortcomings and other obstacles.

And we shall overcome – of that I am very sure.

Transformation Blues - By Idris Jala