June Holiday Homework ari shawn

  Some may argue that we should set aside more land for nature reserves as it creates a balance between natural and man made reserves. With rising amount of infrastructures being built it Singapore, we are seeing much less greenery as compared to the past. The United Nations Environment Program states that:" The negative impacts of tourism development can gradually destroy the environmental resources on which it depends." Therefore, this strengthens the need to set aside more land for nature reserves before it is too late to even do so. However, I feel that keeping the land for more infrastructure will benefit the country more as it will attract more tourist to Singapore and in turn result in more economic returns. If more land is saved for infrastructure, more places for tourists attraction can be built and these places would attract more tourists to come to Singapore. Singapore would also earn more money from the increased influx of tourist to Singapore. Minister for Trade and Industry S. Iswaran said," On the one hand, there is the promise of significant long-term opportunities. On the other hand, we must contend with periodic fluctuations caused by uncertainties in the global economy, adverse developments in key source markets, growing competition in the region and domestic resource constraints." This shows that tourism will have a positive effect on Singapore in the long run and if saving space for infrastructure would increase tourism in Singapore, it will help boost Singapore's economy and would definitely benefit our country. Therefore, I disagree that Singapore should set aside land for nature reserve.

Land for reserves, yile teckweng

I think Singapore should set aside land for nature reserves. It is important for our precious and unique flora and fauna to remain protected, so that our heritage is conserved and citizens can continue to appreciate our nature. According to the Straits Times, "going through a tract of primary and secondary forests would do irreparable damage to a pristine habitat nestling around our reservoirs". As a result of human disturbance to habitats, many animals and plants may be unable to adapt to the changes and may perish, therefore these species may decline in numbers. Critically endangered species unique to Singapore such as the Banded Leaf Monkey and the Sunda Pangolin face great risks of extinction, in which case Singapore would lose a portion of our natural heritage. Ultimately, cutting through the Central Catchment Nature Reserve has long-term impacts such as losing our natural heritage which results in the future generations unable to appreciate it, hence Singapore should set aside land for nature reserves. 

June Holiday Homework karwai yingjia

In our opinion, we agree with the statement that we should set aside land for natural reserves as it helps to protect the animals in the wild from being endangered. The nature reserves provide us with more fresh air and the homes for the animals. We could also go there for recreational purposes. However if LTA wants to build tracks using all the land that can be used for nature reserves, the impact to the nature is great. For example, by going through a tract of primary and secondary forests, the Land Transport Authority would not only do irreparable damage to a pristine habitat nestling around our reservoirs, but it will also be rendering up to 4km of the 50km rail project void of patronage and revenue. This shows the detrimental impact that LTA will create for the environment if they build the Mrt lines. Without nature reserves, there will be no shelter provided for the animals and may endanger them, therefore land should be set aside for nature reserves. 

Disability by Xiao Qing and Faith


  Some may argue that by integrating children with disabilities into mainstream education, they can not only have a chance to learn like any other normal child, but also have a good influence on other peers. It is inevitable for these disabled children to face difficulties in normal schools. However, this will allow them to cope and adapt to the people and environment, and at the same time they might learn better. As Mr Jaieden Shen, Minds' head of job placement and job support programme said, "Once you give them a structured routine, the quality of work is awesome...some might be a little slower, but they pay so much attention and are detailed in their work." This shows that the one's disabilities are not a big hindrance to his/her proficiency, so they should be given the chance to have the same education. It is true that they might be ostracized by peers because of their difference, but they will turn out to be a motivation to them when the peers see the great effort they put in to do well in class. Hence, children with disabilities should be integrated into mainstream education.

  However i believe that children with disabilities would have difficulty integrating into the mainstream education, and would only further hamper other students. Children with disabilities would require a longer time and more effort to fit in with others of their age. With their possible mental disabilities, they would struggle to catch up with lessons and would fall behind. This would require teachers to slow down the lesson and teach at a slower pace or go over the same content repeatedly for them to understand, which would inconvenient the other students as they would have to be taught at a slower pace as well. A normal student may require only 1/2 hr to understand a topic but children with mental disabilities would require up to more than twice the amount of time to understand it, slowing down the whole class. Hence, though children with disabilities should have the right to study mainstream education, they would only hamper and slow down the learning process of the other students in the process.

Disability by Kan Wu and Jia Xian

Some may argue that by letting the students with disabilities to be integrated into the mainstream education will allow them to live a normal life like all the other students. When these students are integrated into the mainstream education, they will be able to get to know and make friends with students whom do not suffer from the learning disabilities, hence mixing around with them and their friends may help them to overcome their disabilities and hence, they can get to learn like a normal student. As Mr Jaieden Shen, Minds’ head of job placement and job support programme said,"Once you give them a structured routine, the quality of work is awesome … some might be a little slower, but they pay so much attention and are detailed in their work.” This tells us that if the students with disabilities are being integrated into the mainstream, they will learn like all other normal students  and though they may learn slower, they are still learning like all normal students , and they may even be better then them, hence allowing the students with disabilities to lead a normal life when being integrated into the mainstream.

However, I feel that by doing so, these students with disabilities may be left out or looked down by the rest of the students. For example, as these students have a learning disability, they will tend to act differently from all the other students and they might get bullied. Hence with all these negative impacts on them, they will not be able to lead a normal life and hence will be ostracized instead.

Disabilities teckweng and yile

Some say that allowing students with disabilities to study in regular classrooms will bring about great benefits for the child. By exposing disabled children to many different of subjects taught in regular curriculums, the child would be able to bring out the best in him. Instead of restricting the disabled, by givinf them opportunities, they may be able to contribute to society in their own ways. John McDonnell, the chairman of the Department of Special Education in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Utah, stated that his data suggests that inclusion in general education classes, especially in vocational education courses, is associated with improved post-school outcomes.

However, I feel that they should not be integrated into our mainstream education system as they may be ostracized by their classmates and therefore affecting their education in school. The disabled may behave differently from other children and may get ridiculed for their disabilities. As the comments grow to be more harsh, they start being unable to focus on their studies and lose confidence in themselves. Therefore, they may feel more frustrated which can lead to the worsening of their condition. A study done by Dyslexia Help showed that dyslexic children may be physically and socially immature in comparison to their peers, this can lead to a poor self-image and less peer acceptance. Hence, students with disabilities should not be integrated in the mainstream school but be in a school of special needs, so that the students can focus on studying without feeling different from others.

Disability by Ari and Shawn

Some may argue that integrating children with disabilities into the main stream education system would let them live more like a normal person. By letting these children enter the mainstream education system, they would make friends with many children who do not have disabilities. Through this, they can learn and interact with normal kids and lead a more normal live. Children with disabilities should not be categorized as "different" and should have the right to live like a normal children.  Mr Jaieden Shen, Minds’ head of job placement and job support programme said,"Once you give them a structured routine, the quality of work is awesome … some might be a little slower, but they pay so much attention and are detailed in their work.” This shows that although children with disabilities may work slower, they might have more potential than the normal children and the quality of work they produce might be even better than theirs. We cannot look down on them just because they are disabled.

However, I feel that they should not be integrated into our mainstream education system as they may be ostracized by their classmates and therefore affecting their education in school. As children with mental or physical disability, they behave differently from average children and therefore their classmates may ridicule them for their disability they have. These children are unable to lead a normal school life for the nasty comments they receive daily from their friends. Therefore, they may feel more frustrated which can lead to the worsening of their condition. A study done by Dyslexia Help showed that dyslexic children may be physically and socially immature in comparison to their peers, this can lead to a poor self-image and less peer acceptance. Thus, as children with disabilities, it is better if these children go to special school where they can fit in better with their peers. Hence, i feel that they should not be integrated into our mainstream education system as they may be ostracized by their classmates and therefore affecting their education in school.

Disability by Kar Wai and Ying Jia

Some may think that if children with disabilities integrate into our mainstream education system, they are forced to adapt and thus they may be able to mix with the rest of the students. For instance, there are about 13,000 students, or about 2.7 per cent of the total student population, with learning difficulties or mild special educational needs at mainstream schools, said a Ministry of Education (MOE) spokesperson. This show that having them in mainstream school is possible and that when people are forced to adapt to certain lifestyles, they will change. Likewise, children with disabilities will need to adapt to school life as they have no choice. Therefore to make the children with disabilities mixed into the society, it is essential to send them into mainstream education system. However, being forced to adapt to the society may not change most of the children with disabilities, and instead create a negative effect as they may get look down and starts to distance themselves from the rest as they think that they are abnormal, thus avoiding others. For instance, a 45-year-old homemaker, who wished to be known as Ms Hui, spoke of the challenges she had faced since her son, now 14, was diagnosed with dyslexia seven years ago. He was labelled as “slow and stupid” by classmates and teachers, she said. For example, a parent, who wanted to be known as Mrs Tan, has a 12-year-old son who has auditory processing disorder. She recalled his struggles in primary school. “Some teachers try to be helpful, but don’t understand (his condition) ... They will complain he is not paying attention,” said Mrs Tan, 45, a graphic designer.  These comments of people cause children with disabilities to feel sad and think they are inferior from others, thus starts to avoid people. This may leave an impact on them and they will not socialize and become anti-social. When they need enter workforce, they will not like it and instead hates it. They will therefore have no social relationships as they are probably surrounded by people who they may think are more superior than them. Without social links, work life will be hard for them. If they are enroll into a special school, they will not get look down and will not create a fear for socializing. Thus, it is not essential to send them to mainstream education system. 

Disability by Yan Yang and Alvina

Some people may argue that disabled students should be integrated into mainstream schools, as they will do better there. Studies have shown that at the end of primary school, children on the autistic spectrum who attend mainstream schools are 23 times more likely to do well than children in special schools. Since the disabled students are able to do better in mainstream schools as compared to special schools, therefore, they should integrate into mainstream schools.

However, we believe that disabled students should not be integrated into mainstream schools as they may not be able to to cope and face difficulties. Studies have shown that disabled students do much better in a self-contained atmosphere. The traditional classroom setting is not conducive to meeting the needs of these disabled students. Hence it is highly stressful for them, as well as their teachers when put in mainstream schools as they require special attention to aid in their learning. The article also states that there is 2.7 per cent of the total student population with learning difficulties or mild special educational needs at mainstream schools, said a Ministry of Education (MOE) spokesperson. This shows that they are unable to keep up in mainstream schools and require special attention to enhance their learning. Hence, they should not be integrated into mainstream schools as it will only be more difficult for them to cope and even hinders their learning.

Disability by Jun Ren and Han Yu

 Some people state that it is not essential for children with disabilities to be integrated into our mainstream education system as these schools are unable to provide the resources needed to educate the students with special needs. Students with disabilities, such as dyslexia, are unable to learn at the same rate as those students with no disabilities. This might cause them to be ridiculed by their peers and lower their self esteem, and eventually, cause affect their studies. For instance, Ms Hui's Son, who is labelled as "slow and stupid" by students and Teachers. Studies have found that seeing negative words would release dozens of stress-producing hormones and neurotransmitters. These chemicals immediately interrupt the normal functioning of your brain, impairing logic, reason, language processing, and communication. All of that just by seeing words. Should the students, especially disabled students, be criticised, it might impede their education.
However, I feel that the disabled children should be given an equal chance like the majority to be allowed to attend mainstream schools for education. This is because it provides them a platform to learn efficiently and benefit more as compared to special schools. With more resources such as allied educators, these students will be able to learn more comfortably and quickly as before, especially since they will be able to have help from their peers. Having learnt the same content in school as the others, it also means that all students have an equal chance to bring out themselves in order to excel and succeed. Furthermore, the integration of these disabled children into mainstream schools allows them to overcome their learning barriers, such as communication skills or boosting of confidence. In the long run, it prepares them for the workforce as they will mostly be able to cope and work comfortably with the different people. For example, there are about 3,000 trained teachers to meet their special needs. They are trained to plan, adapt and differentiate the curriculum to meet the learning needs of students, thus enabling them to catch up to the pace of the other students. Another example would be Loh Jia Wei, who is a student with physical disability but had achieved a top score of 278 for PSLE and received bursary awards. This proves that students with disabilities are still able to succeed and therefore they should be included in the education system in mainstream schools.

Disability by Huiying and Wye Yee

Some have argued that integrating the disabled into mainstream education system helps them to prepare for a society not catered to the disabled. They are forced to adapt to an environment with the disabled as the minority. In mainstream schools, the child's special needs are not specially catered to and hence, it illustrates the current Singaporean society where the needs of the disabled are not often attended to. With their ability to these obstacles, these children with disabilities like autism and dyslexia will be stronger individuals whom are better prepared for the future Singaporean society. In Singapore, employers are beginning to appreciate what people with special needs or disabilities bring to the workplace. SPD executive director Abhimanyau Pal said the number of people with disabilities placed in jobs has the up over the past five years, from 27 to 394. This shows that people with special needs are better prepared to take up jobs in the future, and they can be prepared through mainstream education which trains them to overcome their disability to bring more to others.


However, we feel that the students with special needs might not be able to keep up. In mainstream schools, teachers will often teach according to how fast majority of the class progresses, seldom slowing down specially for those whom are lagging behind.  Hence, the needs of the disabled are rarely given extra attention in order to benefit the majority. In addition, teachers in mainstream schools are not specialized in teaching and caring for students with disabilities. This results in the disabled not receiving the required support they need in order to optimize their learning capabilities. A poll by the ENABLE Scotland charity found 70% of disabled children said they lacked support in the classrooms while 94% of parents felt schools were not getting enough resources to work with them. Another survey by Mencap stated that nearly 65% of 1000 parents are convinced that the for disabled children are receiving poorer education than those without special needs. These show that mainstream schools were unable to provide disabled students with adequate support that they needed to do well in schools. Therefore, without the additional support to cater to their learning needs as well as the need to benefit majority of the non-disabled students in the class, there is a higher chance of the disabled falling behind and not being able to catch up. Thus, it should not be essential for children with disabilities to be integrated into our mainstream education system.

Disability by Karen and Kye Loon

It is essential for children with disabilities to be integrated into our mainstream education system. DYA?

Some people may argue that mainstream schools provide disabled children with the same expectations to succeed as their peers. They can develop social skills needed to compete in a non-disabled world which special schools fail to do, and toughens disabled children up for the real world. In mainstream schools, disabled children are naturally forced to work harder in order to keep up with their peers and seeing their peers' accomplishments will force and motivate themselves to improve themselves so that they will be on the same level as them. This also helps these children get used to working around non-disabled people which will ultimately benefit them in the future when they leave school into the workforce. In mainstream schools, disabled children will inevitably be bullied and ostracized by their fellow schoolmates. Through studying in mainstream schools, students will learn how to cope with such instances and will be able to cope when they go out into the workforce. Therefore, children with disabilities should be integrated into our mainstream education system.

However, I feel that integrating children with disabilities into our mainstream education system will cause them to be unable to keep up. Children with learning disabilities tend to have difficulties grasping new topics and information and may require special teaching methods to help them learn. In mainstream schools, teachers tend to teach at a faster pace and as a whole, providing the weaker students with only remedial sessions after school. The teachers in mainstream schools may also lack the patience and experience to teach these disabled children and would thus be unable to provide them with a proper learning environment which will thus result in these students being unable to keep up with their peers. For example, people with Dyslexia think in pictures rather than words and are imaginative, creative, and solve problems by looking at the whole picture than working step by step. In mainstream schools, almost all subjects are taught through notes and long passages with hardly any pictures which makes it difficult for Dyslexic children to process and learn. Teachers also teach verbally and provide little diagrams. Even the PowerPoint slides used to guide lessons contain more words than pictures. Another example can be seen from children with muscles disorders. Although they can think and process information like normal students, they are unable to write and copy down notes fast enough. Teachers in mainstream schools usually teach at the pace of the majority of students. These children with muscle disorders will thus find it difficult to catch up with the rest. Hence, children with disabilities should not be integrated into our mainstream education system.

Disability by Ying Ru and Xuan Zheng


It is essential for children with disabilities to be integrated into our mainstream education system. DYA?

Some may argue that allowing children with disabilities to integrate into our mainstream education is not optimal as they might disrupt the class, affecting our students in their learning. Many teachers have felt upset over having a few students require special help in their learning as they are unable to have sufficient control of themselves like other students have. Hence, they tend to be noisier than others or learn at a slower pace, slowing other students in their learning. A primary-school teacher, who declined to be named, noted the spectrum of special needs, some of which can cause children to be disruptive in class. Teachers would have to cater for special needs children and customise their teaching methods, he said. “But if there are too many of such children in a class, it is unfair to expect (mainstream) teachers to be able to cope.”  Therefore, integrating children with disabilities into the mainstream education system is not essential as they might be  unable to cope with the learning pace of others and might slow the learning pace of other students. They might also cause teachers to feel stressed out from struggling to meet the needs of so many students. However, the inclusion of children with disabilities can bring about great benefits to the students too. By putting these disabled students into normal curriculum, they will be educated on the same topics and subjects which an ordinary students will be educated on, hence giving them an equal chance in the future workforce. Although the disabled students may tend to have slower learning but then I do believe that with same education structure, disabled students will also be able to excel just like ordinary students. Hence, by integrating the disabled students into our mainstream education system, we are actually providing them with an equal opportunity to excel and achieve great success in their future life, hence removing the social norm that disabled students are always inferior as compared to ordinary students. One example would be Nick Vujicic. He was born without arms or limbs, however he was provided the same education as everyone else, and he succeeded in life by becoming a world famous motivational speaker. This shows that putting disabled students into mainstream education system does benefit the disabled students thenselves.

Disability by Celest and Shinyoung

Many may argue that it is beneficial to a child with disability when they are included in mainstream education school. Being able to obtain mainstream education allows the disabled children to feel more included in the regular society. It acts as a platform where disabled children feel equalised with everyone. Education in mainstream schools helps in preparing students with disabilities for life outside of school, including college and work. In these areas, children and adults must interact with many different people, both with and without disabilities. Having disabled children spend time in regular classrooms provides the opportunity to interact with different children, not just those with disabilities. Some studies have shown that early inclusion can help children with autism improve both IQ scores and social skillsHowever, I believe that there is a larger risk that chidren with disabilities will be harmed in mainstream schools. Children with disabilities will need intensive and focused instruction, which is not available in regular education classes. They may not learn based on traditional teaching methods. They often received social skills training and teachers might have worked on these skills throughout the school day. In a regular classroom environment, this is not available as the teacher has a set curriculum and must teach the entire class. While many teachers will provide individual instruction on a nominal basis, there is no time for the intensive teaching that some students with disabilities may need. Some people believe that mainstreaming will cause children with disabilities to be rejected by their classmates. Because of their difficulty with social skills, there is concern that some will be made fun of or bullied. They feel that this could cause unneeded emotional pain. Therefore, I believe that mainstream schools are not suitable for students with disabilities.

Disability by Jun Na and Jie Ning

I agree that it is essential for children with disabilities to be integrated into our mainstream education system.

Some may argue that children with disabilities cannot adapt to our mainstream education as more time and attention is needed for them and most teachers are not trained for that. It takes up resources and precious time to train teachers and change their lesson plans just to accommodate to these "special children", hence most parents of these disabled children do not prefer to enrol their child in mainstream schools. According to the news last year, a parent who has a 12-year-old son has auditory processing disorder. When her child was in primary school, some teachers try to be helpful, but they do not understand his condition. They will complain that he is not paying attention but it can't be helped as they have so many children in class to look after. A primary-school teacher, also noted the spectrum of special needs, some of which can cause children to be disruptive in class. Teachers would have to cater for special needs children and customize their teaching methods, but if there are too many of such children in a class, it is unfair to expect mainstream teachers to be able to cope. Hence, when these disabled children are to be integrated into our mainstream education system, I’m afraid that they are unable to adapt as mainstream teachers are not trained to teach them. However, there are now an increasing number of allied educators which support children with special needs in mainstream schools, allowing these children to be able to adapt to our mainstream education system and benefit greatly from there.

However I believe that children with disabilities can adapt to our mainstream education if the government puts in more resources to make the education system a more inclusive one. Last November, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong stressed the need for Singapore society to value every individual. Speaking at the 50th anniversary gala dinner for SPD, a social service provider and advocate for the disability community, he said: “Are people with special needs just there to be helped or should they not be people who matter in our society, who are enabled to contribute to our society in full measure? Our society should value every person ... These are the basic principles that should guide us as we build a fair and just society.” Children with disabilities can be educated and become contributing members of the force, if they receive timely and effective early intervention. To do that, the government can reduce support given to the current bright and well-do students and instead, support the children with more severe special needs. As long as the government does more to provide help and financial support in pre-school education for families with special needs children, these children can fit in the workplace. Once you give these children a structured education, they may be a little slower, but they are able to produce the same results average children can. If the government does not give these children a platform to grow, they will not be able to find a place in society. Integrating children with disabilities in programmes and schools with mainstream children would be more resource-intensive, requiring dedicated teachers to guide those with special needs, but it is not impossible.

Disability by Damien and Ian

Some argue that inclusion of students with disabilities in regular classrooms will bring about great benefits for the child. By exposing children with disabilities to a myriad of subjects taught in regular curriculums, the child would be able to maximize his full potential and bring out the best in him. Given the opportunity to develop himself, the child would not only not become a burden to society, he would also have something to offer. John McDonnell, the chairman of the Department of Special Education in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Utah, stated that his data suggests that inclusion in general education classes, especially in vocational education courses, is associated with improved post-school outcomes. However, I believe that inclusion will bring more harm to the child rather than benefits. Students with disabilities like dyslexia tend to be intellectually slower and need more time to process information. Definitely, they would need much more time to learn the same amount of content than kids without disabilities. But due to increasing competition in classrooms, children with learning disabilities might not be able to cope with their academics due to the fast pace and will lack behind the rest. Being the straggler in class would only inflict unnecessary stress on the child. In fact, inclusion, in which students with disabilities go to school with their same-age peers rather than in separate schools, does not necessarily lead to the best outcomes for students with disabilities, according to a new study in the journal Pediatrics. Furthermore, Researchers E. Michael Foster and Erin Pearson of the University of Alabama at Birmingham and Johns Hopkins University conducted a research on the comparison between autistic children who were enrolled in general classrooms and those who are not; and concluded that there is “no systematic indication that the level of inclusivity improves key future outcomes.” These research datas question whether inclusion really provides the best outcome for students with disabilities and have proved that perhaps, inclusion is not the best option for these students. Hence, I feel that inclusion is not necessary as it might not necessarily reap any real benefits for the child.

Disability by Ying Han and Cheryl

The general public believes that it is not important for children with learning disabilities to be integrated into our mainstream education system. These people state this is as they feel that children with disabilities, such as dyslexia, are slow and stupid, and hence cannot cope in our competitive and challenging world-class education system. The case of actress Bella Thorne, diagnosed with dyslexia before she was in elementary school, could prove their stand true. In an interview, Bella mentioned that she herself felt afraid and self-conscious as she felt less intelligent than other kids, being unable to read as well as they did. She was also confused as to why she was learning much slower than they were. Indeed, children with such disabilities typically learn at a much slower pace than normal children, making them seem and feel foolish, possibly affecting their self-esteem in the process.  However, I do not see this as a viable reason as to why children with learning disabilities should not be integrated into our mainstream education. In fact, I believe that while these children may be slower and perceived as rather delinquent, they have just as much to offer to society as any normal child does. In a mainstream education system, children a taught a myriad of subjects, from English to Music. If a normal child can shine in any of these subjects, so can a student with disabilities. It is crucial that we embrace this, so that society will enthusiastically welcome the talents and skill sets of those often seen as inferior. This next example will be taken back to actress Bella Thorne. While Bella struggled learning, she had the determination and gusto to continue, coping with both school and her acting career at the same time. In her early teens, she had finally overcome dyslexia, and was well on her way to a successful acting career on both the small screen and silver screen. This demonstrates that children with disabilities have what it takes to shine, let alone survive, in society, and should thus be given a shot at mainstream education, the tool which could propel them to even greater heights. Another example which prove this point is that of Wee Care (Singapore). Wee Care is an organization which first educates special needs children, equipping them with functional and social skills, before allowing these children to try their hand at adapting and integrating into the mainstream kindergarten population. This shows that there are people in society that believe that children with disabilities can be on the same level as normal children, as long as they are given time and opportunities the mainstream education system offers. This belief definitely came with reasons, perhaps such as the past success stories of those with learning issues, and should therefore be taken seriously. Hence, in my opinion, it is of utmost importance that children with learning disabilities are integrated into our mainstream education system, as they have what it takes to offer something special to society, and should be given equal opportunities as normal children to do just that. 

The Benefits and Challenges of Student-Designed Learning

This article talks about the Science Leadership Academy (SLA) in America attempting a new way for students to learn: they were to try to "design their own learning". Students had freedom to pursue topics they were passionate about, but had to motivate themselves to complete their tasks without the firm deadlines and rubrics that had become standard to them. 

I think that this method would be beneficial to Singapore students as it can broaden our perspectives. Some SLA students researched on gender stereotyping while a few African-American students chose to work on "colorism". They needed to do field research like conducting surveys from their neighbourhood. To be able to come up with a research topic and present our findings, we would need to identify a problem or trend in society that interests us, mainly by reading up on current affairs or observing trends in our daily lives. Through the research, we need to put ourselves in others' shoes to understand their problems, developing a stronger sense of empathy, as well as social awareness. This learning experience would expose us beyond what we learn in school and allow us to gain insights into the society, broadening our perspectives. 

Changes to psle, what could be in store?

Link: Changes to psle, what could be in store?

Summary:
By this year, Psle aggregate scores may be scrapped and replaced by simple bands such as A, B, C, would this be beneficial?

Opinion:
I feel that this is system should not be implemented as it would mean serious competition for spaces in popular secondary schools. The grade 'A' has a range of 25 marks for those above 74 and we would than be unable to differentiate those of higher grades in the same band as all would receive the same grade, unlike with the aggregate scores, which provided a more specific score. This would also mean that many people would have to fight for spaces in popular secondary schools belonging in their grade and it would mean difficulty choosing places for students who more or less have the same grades. This would result in many popular schools either having to give our spaces at random to those of the same band or to give them out on a first come first serve basis, which may be unfair for those more worthy students and actual higher scores, who may lose out to those who chosen at random. However I do agree that aggregate scores put large amounts of pressure and stress on primary 6s, but I do not believe in simple grade bands being the best solution to this problem.

PSLE scores to be scrapped, students to be given grades

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/psle-scores-be-scrapped-students-be-given-grades

Summary:
The high-stakes nature of the PSLE has often been cited by parents and observers as a major contributing factor to the stress in the education system. Therefore, 12-year-olds will in future no longer be given aggregate scores for the national examination. Instead, students could be given letter grades and placed in “wider bands” like in the O- and A-Level examinations.
Opinion:
Personally, we support the decision made to remove aggregate score during the PSLE examination. PSLE examination has caused a lot of stress in students, and the student's future seems to depend heavily on that aggregate score. Parents have also been adding onto that stress, putting pressure on their child to do well and also comparing their child's score with their relatives. Thus, removing the aggregate score will serve to remove some stress from the students. Students will feel less discouraged even though they may not score as well as their peers, as they do not know their score. However, this will also mean that the students will not know how well they fair in this national exam, and some may think they scored very well and thus stop working hard.

Changes to PSLE grading: What could be in store?

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/changes-to-psle-grading-what-could-be-in-store

Summary:
Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) aggregate score will be scrapped and replaced with simple grade bands such as A, B and C some time this year.

Opinion:
I feel that this system should not be implemented. Even though I agree that this can cause less stress for students due to a decrease in pressure, I think this new system will not be beneficial to a student's learning. Students will not know their true standard and in fact stress is what cause a student to work harder to win over others. For example, a candidate who get borderline A in PSLE will think that her score is already very good, when in fact the top scorer might have gotten 50 more marks than her in total, but is still an grade A. If the candidate knows her actual score, she will be clearer of her actual standard and will put in more effort to be better in rankings. In a stress and pressure-free environment, there is nothing to 'push' us to constantly try harder. Only in a competitive society will we work harder to win.



Schools, stop the 'kiasu' practice of using DSA to 'chope' bright kids

Schools, stop the 'kiasu' practice of using DSA to 'chope' bright kids

Summary:

The Direct School Admission (DSA) was introduced in 2004 to let secondary schools broaden their admission criteria beyond PSLE scores and give those with other talents in sports and the arts, a chance to shine. However, some schools have been using the DSA scheme to admit students on the basis of academic strength. In the most competitive schools, like Raffles Institution, at least half the students they admit through DSA are academically talented. Many of these students would be from the GEP, and likely would have got into their choice schools based on PSLE scores. In 2012, MOE released figures showing that 60% of those admitted to these schools via DSA would have gotten in based on their PSLE scores. Thus, the DSA scheme has become another way for the academically bright pupils to secure places in the premier schools ahead of the PSLE, contradicting the core objective of the DSA scheme. Hence, MOE should relook at the DSA scheme and stop schools from using academic criteria to admit students under this scheme. 
Opinion:
 I disagree that schools should use DSA to "chope" bright students as it is unfair for other students who perform average in their studies. When secondary schools take in students based on their academic talent, other students who perform well enough to enter these schools will be deprived of the chance, as most of the slots have gone to these bright and smart students. Thus, these students will not have a chance to get into these good schools to further their studies, thus causing the "smart to become smarter" while the average students will not be able to progress. As mentioned in the article, one example would be the Raffles Institution. At least half of the students there that they admit through DSA are academically talented. This shows that only half of the school intake is left for students who study in normal school and not in the gifted educational programme. Hence, this shows that admitting students through academic talent is unfair to other students and deprived them of the chance to do well.

Could Teenager Wreck your life?

We agree that infatuation will bring detrimental effects to their life. In the article, it states that with infatuation, breakups will come too. Due to these breakups, more and more teenagers will fall into depression. This shows that teenagers who are involved in relationships at this point in time will most likely fall into depression. Furthermore, being in a relationship, teenagers will not be able cope with schoolwork as well as family relationships. When teenagers are in a relationship, they need more time to be spent with their partner. Hence, this will result in them having less time spent to do schoolwork or spend time with their family. In conclusion, we agree that infatuation and relationships will bring negative effects to teenagers' life.

Malaysia schools reopen after heatwave closure, but no outdoor activities

http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/malaysia-schools-reopen-after-heatwave-closure-but-no-outdoor-activities
Summary
This article is talking about the Schools in the northern Malaysian states of Perlis and Kedah, which were closed due to the heatwave, having their classes resumed on Thursday (March 24) but outdoor activities are still suspended.the education ministry talk about declared schools to be reopened the decision was made as the temperatures recorded over the preceding 72 hours were below 38 deg.
Opinion
It is saddening to hear that school closes when the heatwave strikes in some states Malaysia, the Earth's temperature has been increasing over the years due to human development and many harmful consequences have affected the Earth. I think that environment being affected negatively will also interfere us in our daily lives. The Earth is a place for us to live in and every single one of us should be responsible and be a part in saving the Earth. If global warming increases without doing anything to prevent it, our lives such as in the aspect of education, government or health or even more would be affected too. Hence, I believe that it is important that we save the earth through a,individual or a community event.

Changes to PSLE Grading: What Could Be In Store?

Changes To PSLE Grading: What Could Be In Store?

Summary:
PSLE aggregate scores may be scrapped and replaced with simple grades such as A, B and C. Most parents and educators agree that removing the aggregate score will reduce stress on pupils, and instead of chasing after that final few marks, they can focus more on a holistic development of their skills and interests. The new grading system will be more like the A levels, where the grades are fewer and bands are wider. This will reduce the risk that children are too finely sorted by academic ability at a young age.

Opinion:
I feel that this system should not be implemented although it helps to reduce stress as students will not be able to know exactly how well they have done in the PSLE. They may assume that they have already done very well when they see an A in their results when in actual fact, they may have just barely gotten the A grade. One student may also feel discouraged when their grades are lower than their classmates but their actual results may only differ one or two marks. It will also be harder to know which students are better and which secondary schools they should go to. This may result in students of all different standards put in the same school and it will affect their learning process as they would have different learning speeds. Even though it may be more stressful for the students, the PSLE aggregate scores will allow students to have a better idea of where they stand among their schoolmates and work harder to improve.
Summary:
This is an article where Australia introduced a programme a decade ago which is to ensure that every secondary school student in the country had a computer as part of so-called "digital education revolution" and evaluations of whether the method is effective and useful for students or a  distraction.
Opinion:
I agree with this article. I think that laptops are indeed a distraction for the students. Pupils at this age, especially secondary period, have little self-discipline. They could not refrain themselves from spending too much time on the laptops. They get distracted easily by non-educational websites, therefore laptops should not be allowed to used in school. According to the passage, it states that "Another school, St Paul's Catholic College in Sydney, said it has banned the use of laptops for one day a week to encourage students to play sport and to reduce reliance on the machines.". This shows that laptops are bringing detrimental effect to the students, therefore it should be banned in schools. Thus, with the evidence and explanation above, I can conclude that laptops are distraction to students and should be banned. 

http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/australianz/laptops-in-aussie-classrooms-learning-aid-or-distraction

Schools, stop the 'kiasu' practice of using DSA to 'chope' bright kids, by Jun Na&Jie Ning

Link: Schools, stop the 'kiasu' practice of using DSA to 'chope' bright kids

Summary: Direct School Admission Scheme (DSA) was introduced in 2004, where students with talents in sports and arts can enter 'top' schools that specailise in these areas. However, in recent years, more 'kiasu' parents use DSA to secure a place for their child in these IP schools even though their child might already be smart enough to get a high PSLE score to enter the school. This reduces the amount of spaces left for others who might not be smart enough but have talents in other areas which defeats the purpose of DSA. Thus, DSA should not be an avenue for parents to 'chope' a place for bright students first.

Opinion: In my opinion, I agree with the author of this article because DSA is meant for not so bright students but with talents in sports and arts can enter schools that specializes in these areas and therefore, can have more exposure and opportunities for them to excel in their talents. This allows students to be able to benefit better from these schools as they have better opportunities to groom themselves according to their talents and thus, wouldn't go to waste. Imagine if these students did not have a chance to enter these schools and went to a neighborhood school instead as their results were not high enough, they wouldn't be able to groom themselves as well as those in these specialized schools and wouldn't be able to discover and unleash their talents hiding in them. Also, MOE should re-look at the DSA scheme and not put results as the basis to admit students in their school through DSA. After all, these students are entering due to their talents in their talent in sports and arts.

Schools, stop the 'kiasu' practice of using DSA to 'chope' bright kids, by Alvina and Yan Yang

Link: Schools, stop the 'Kiasu' practice of using DSA to 'Chope' bright kids

Summary: DSA is a scheme that allows secondary schools, including the top ones, to admit students based on not just their academic ability, but also their talent in sport and the arts. It will draw a different group of students and inject more diversity into the student bodies in the top secondary schools.
But sadly, within a few years, both schools and parents started gaming the system.
Opinion: We agree with the writer that schools should stop this practice. By having DSA, students of different groups with other talents can attend certain schools, and do not have to be very academically inclined. By taking in all the bright kids, it defeats the purpose of DSA, as in the end, people with other talents still cannot join the school as they may not excel in studies. According to the passage, some schools have been using DSA scheme to admit students on the basis of academic strength including those from Gufted Education Programme. This shows that top schools are not making use of DSA to accept a diversity of students. Therefore, we agree with the writer that schools should stop this practice.

Experts laud move to have students clean schools

Link: Experts laud move to have students clean schools
Summary (50w): A move to make all schools include cleaning activities by the end of the year could bring long term benefits to students. It will help build character, cultivate a sense of ownership and spill over to the home environment. They will learn to take responsibility and have opportunities to work with others.

Opinion: We strongly agree with the Ministry of Education that students have to participate in cleaning activities. This is because such activities can teach the students to keep their environment clean and not litter, teaching them to be responsible for their environment. When they clean with their classmates, they also learn to work together in groups, having chances to communicate. Doing so also impart values and build character in them. Thus, we strongly agree that students have to participate in cleaning activities as it a platform for them to develop and benefit from.

What Do We Lose By Measuring ‘Average’ In Education?

summary
Through the example of pilots performing better if the cockpits fits their body, the author was able to bring out the idea that fit creates opportunity. If the environment is a bad match with our individuality, then our performance will always be artificially impaired. If we do get a good fit with our environment, we will then have the opportunity to show what we are truly capable of. This means that if we want equal opportunity for everyone, where we are able to live up to our full potential, then we must create educational institutions that is responsive to individuality.

opinion
I agree with the author that fit creates opportunity. The education system that we are under does not necessarily suit everybody. It only fit those who are fast learners and for those who are not as fast, they would be left behind and they will never be able to catch up. This is unfair to them as the system does not provide them with a suitable platform for them to reach their full potential. Every man is born different, hence the education system should provide different students with different kinds of teaching pace, so that it is responsive to different individuals. This is so as to allow all students to excel and to bring up a society of individual excellence.

Teachers' union calls for ballot on primary test boycott - BBC Education and Family

Teacher's union calls for ballot on primary test boycott - BBC Education and Family

SUMMARY:
The National Union of Teachers annual conference held in Brighton on Sunday accused the primary school testing system of being unreliable and extremely confusing, especially with the baseline tests being introduced. These test were created to provide a starting point to measure student's future progress through primary school, however, critics argue that "This is not what the first six weeks of school should be about." Additionally, these test are not providing students with an accurate gauge of their abilities, resulting in students leaving school incapable of performing up to the standard middle school students are supposed to perform at. This is largely as the content tested in tests are too high-leveled for students of 6-12 years of age.

OPINION:
Clearly, the topics being taught and tested in primary schools are unnecessary to the success of students at later parts of their lives. Primary schools should be focusing on teaching the basics of languages and mathematics to students, not giving them Math Olympiad level sums to solve. While some students may be intellectual enough to solve these problems without proper understanding of the basics, moving on to do well in middle school, others fall behind due to their inability to master the basics. This in turn results in them suffering when moving on to high levels of education, possibly causing them to be unable to catch up to their peers in middle and high schools. Middle and High Schools are the time when grades become a significant part of their lives, and may affect their chances of getting into their dream university of even pursuing their passion in their dream job. In addition, primary school should not be concentrated on testing students on their abilities, but instead allowing them to learn at their own pace and discover their passion. Although end-year assessments are encouraged, schools should refrain from conducting frequent tests as at the ages of 6-12, students have a lower level of maturity, hence making tests an inaccurate gauge of their abilities. Moreover, it can also be detrimental to a child's health if he experiences too much stress, caused by tests, at such a young age. Therefore, as we believe that primary school should strictly be for learning, not continuous assessment, primary test should be boycotted.

RR tourism by Teckweng

I agree with the writer that mass tourism results in environmental damage. As there is mass tourism in a country, the country needs to provide facilities such as hotels to accomodate to the needs of the tourists. These facilities will need a lot of land and so, as these facilities take up land, plants and wildlife lose their homes. Eco systems and diversity will be damaged and it will never be the same again.
The writer states that in Philippines, "when coastal areas are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed" The coastal areas contain homes for marine animals

RR Tourism by Celest Seah

I disagree with the author that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country’s culture and environment and affects the local people negatively. Tourism can bring great economic benefits to a country by raking in additional income from tourists' expenses. When more tourists spend money in the country, the country will benefit economically. According to the writer, “tourism has become an ubiquitous sector in the Philippine’s economy. In 2012, alone, it contributed 6.0% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP)”. This shows how important tourism is to a country economical growth. It brings in high revenues, allowing the prosperity of a country. Similarly, the total contribution of tourism to GDP was SGD39.7billionm which is 10.9% of GDP. Therefore, these datas shows the importance of tourism to a country's economy.

RR Tourism by Huiying

  Firstly, I agree with the writer on the point raised about how mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment. With tourism, a country is greatly benefitted economically. Hence, if a country would like to continue to prosper through tourism, there is a need for the country to provide facilities and services such as hotels, tourist attractions or they would need to further develop their transport infrastructure in order to cater to the needs of tourists. The provision of such facilities cause a depletion in natural resources as well as land degradation, where wildlife, forests and wetland are affected. The writer states that in Philippines, "when coastal areas are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed". Tourism also worsens the air quality as the writer also states that in the Philippines, "carbon emissions and air pollution also significantly increase, as more air and land-based vehicles are needed to transport tourists from one destination to another." In Singapore, tourism has also affected our environment as it worsened the depletion of our water resources. As of 2014, Singapore had 392 hotels and if each hotel uses an average of 21, 537 gallons of water per day, it is obvious that a lot of our water is pumped into these hotels and there is a possibility of Singapore facing water scarcity in the future. Therefore, with the problems that arise due to tourism, I believe that tourism brings about many harmful effects on a country's environment.

RR Tourism by Shawn

  Firstly, I agree with the writer that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment as mass tourism would lead to an increased number of vehicles. As stated in the passage," Carbon emissions and air pollution also significantly increase, as more air and land-based vehicles are needed to transport tourists from one destination to another." This shows that the number of people in a country would increase due to tourism. To cater to the tourists needs, there would be more transport vehicles to transport tourists around the country to different tourists attractions. This would result in an increase of carbon emissions released into the air as these vehicles release harmful gases such as carbon monoxide. This would definately affect the country's health quality. For Singapore, it has contributed 3% of its GDP which has generated a sum of US$ 9.4 billion in 2007 for tourism. Although tourism in Singapore is important, this shows that Singapore's environment would be affected as there would be more tourism infrastructures and this would lead to more air pollution. Therefore, I agree with the writer that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment as it would lead to an increase in the number of vehicles.

RR tourism by Chong Kar Wai

I agree with the writer that tourism causes environmental impact. Tourism increases traffic which leads to environmental destruction. According to the passage, colossal traffic jams are created by unchecked growth that congests many main roads especially junctions. This therefore leads to increase in air pollution due to the exhaust fumes produced by cars, affecting the environment. As tourism increases, number on cars grow and the roads are congested, causing the cars to waste more engine staying at one area. With a target of 17 million visitors, there is a high risk of more air pollution from carbon emissions from planes and land transport. Moreover,  there would be more littering as foreigners may think that they do not need to maintain Singapore cleanliness as it is not their country and will start littering. Therefore tourism leads to pollution in the air and on land.

RR Tourism by Faith Lim

I agree with the writer that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment. Tourism requires a lot of land space as it is necessary to expand successful businesses and commerce to attract more tourists. Thus, habitats for various animal species are cleared to make way for further land development, increasing the loss of biodiversity. The writer stated that "When coastal areas are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed." These animals are forced to be driven out of their homes to live in unsuitable environments. They might die due to them not being able to adjust to the new living environment. With these animals dying out, they will soon be endangered might even go extinct. Land reclamation contributed to 17% more land for development in Singapore. However, according to research, coast areas shrunk and mangrove areas have been reduced to only 0.5% of the total land area. This led to the loss of coastal ecosystems as habitats of animals are destroyed. Hence, I agree that tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment due to an increase in the loss of biodiversity. 

RR Tourism by Yi Le


I disagree that tourism threatens to destroy a country's culture, environment and affect the local people. Tourism contributes to a significant portion of economies in both contexts, Singapore and the Philippines. It boosts the economy and contributes to the overall growth of the country. In 2012, tourism contributed 6.0% to the Philippines' Gross Domestic Product (GDP), an ubiquitous sector in the Philippine economy. This is because tourists are attracted to the Philippines hence they travel to Philippines and spend money on various tourist amenities such as hotels, casinos and amusement parks, generating huge amounts of profit. More funds can be allocated to different departments such as healthcare, defense or housing, improving standards of living and contributing to the prosperity of the nation. Likewise, tourism contributed 10.9% of Singapore's GDP in 2012, contributing to the growth of the nation through money channeled to various ministries to improve the nation. Hence, I feel that tourism is not a threat, but is a benefit to countries' economies. 

RR Tourism by Lim Jun Ren

Firstly, I agree with the writer that tourism is a great threat to the local heritage sites and it definitely affects the culture of the local people. Their lifestyles are changed and affected such that they are often uncomfortable with the government's decision on tourism development. As such, locals are not used to these new changes. When heritage sites are being torn down for tourism purposes, the value and culture within it is lost too. There is no longer a form of knowledge of their culture to be passed down to the future generations. According to the passage, historic building sites are demolished to make way for hotels in Manila, and the aim was to provide accommodation to visitors of "Historic Manila". In Singapore, the Bidadari cemetery which served Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Sinhalese communities was cleared for development. The culture of these sites are gone and in the long term, locals do not follow the tradition of visiting an ancestor's tomb. As a result, the culture of locals in Singapore is lost and indirectly affects the future generation. Thus, I agree with the writer that mass tourism destroys the culture of local people.

RR Tourism by Karen Chong

I agree with the writer as mass tourism indeed threatens to destroy a country's environment. Due to mass tourism, the environment has been negatively impacted. In order to accommodate for all the tourists, hotels and resorts, land and forests have to be sacrificed and animals lose their natural habitat. When there are fewer animals and trees, there will be more air pollution and carbon emissions. Animals and plants going extinct as well. This will cause the residents living there will have to suffer as well since they have to breathe in polluted air and have less lands to build their own houses since land are all occupied by hotels and restaurants. From the passage, the writer stated that "coastal areas are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and coral that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged." From Singapore the harm mass tourism have caused can be seen as well. One example is that Singapore produces 141 million tonnes of carbon emission, 33rd highest emitter of greenhouse gases among 215 countries. This shows that mass tourism has caused harm to the environment. Hence, I agree with the writer.

RR Tourism by H'ng Ying Jia

I agree with the writer that tourism has a destructive impact on the environment. For tourism, there will be an increase number of people, especially visitors, in using different kinds of transportation. When there is more transportation used, more greenhouse gases are emitted. Cars emit greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. Cars also produce other harmful air pollutants which contribute to poor air quality such as smog. The passage also stated carbon emissions and air pollution also significantly increase, as more air and land-based vehicles are needed to transport tourists from one destination to another. There is also example in Singapore that show that tourism causes air pollution. For example, with a target of 17 million visitors coming to Singapore in 2015, there is a high chance of more air pollution from all the carbon emissions from planes and land transport. Thus, I think that tourism is destroying the environment by causing air pollution, even in a society like Singapore. Therefore, I agree with the writer that tourism brings detrimental effects to the environment.

RR Tourism by Cheryl Teo

I agree with the writer's view that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment. Mass tourism often leads to the destruction of the environment, as the government has to make more space for infrastructure development and modernization brought about by tourism. As mentioned in the article, when coastal areas are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed. Carbon emissions and air pollution also significantly increase, as more air and land-based vehicles are needed to transport tourists from one destination to another. Not only that, mass tourism also affects Singapore's environment. Singapore has lost 90 per cent of its forest, 67 per cent of its birds, 40 per cent of its mammals and 5 per cent of its amphibians and reptiles. Of the original mangroves, less than 5 per cent is left. 39 per cent of all native coastal plants are extinct. A large proportion of the remaining species are endangered and their habitats are threatened by urban development and land reclamation. Thus I agree with the author as this shows that urban development for mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment.

RR Tourism by Lu Yan Yang

I  disagree that tourism threatens a country as it contributes greatly to the economy. The writer said in the passage that there were economic benefits brought in by the hordes of visitors, for example, Philippine tourism's current “It’s More Fun in the Philippines” campaign—it has become an ubiquitous sector in the Philippine economy. In 2012 alone, it contributed 6.0% to the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This shows that tourism contributed greatly to Philippines' economy. It is not just so in Philippines. In Singapore, tourism's total contribution to the gross domestic product is 10.9%. This further proves that both countries are heavily reliant on tourism as it contributes a large portion to the countries' economy, and can bring about prosperity and the funds needed for development. Thus, I disagree with the writer that tourism threatens to destroy a country, because it contributes greatly to the economy, hence allowing faster development.

RR Tourism by Foo Kye Loon

I agree that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's environment as it causes a loss of biodiversity. The writer explains that when coastal areas in Philippines are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed. This causes the loss of natural habitats for the fishes and they are either forced to migrate of die off. When more coastal areas are cleared with the rising number of tourists, these fishes would have even fewer places to live and some of the species of fishes may become endangered or extinct. According to research, more than 95 percent of of the estimated 540 square kilometers of original vegetation in Singapore has been cleared since the British first established a presence here. With so much deforestation going on in Singapore, many natural habitats of the animals living here are destroyed, leaving the animals with nowhere to live, resulting in the death of these animals and possibly their entire species. If deforestation continues to go on to clear land for hotels and tourist attractions, more animal species would meet the same fate. Thus, mass tourism destroys a country's environment as it results in a loss of biodiversity.

RR Tourism by Park Shin Young

I agree with the author that masss tourism threatens to destroy a country’s culture and environment and affect the local people.
I think that tourism will bring enviromental harm to the country. Due to tourism, the country might have to change natural habitats and environment into recreational areas. This is a result of the country's attempt to attract more tourist to the country for economical benefits. This causes much harm to the country as if the country is only built for tourism, the locals living in the country will suffer. In addition to the fact that tourism destroys natural habitats, tourism also requires natural resources to be given up. In the passage, the author stated that when coastal areas were converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries were damaged or even completely removed. The clearing of natural habitat and resources caused harm to the living things living in these areas. These creatures living in the habitats may die as their habitats have been damaged or removed. A local example is Resort World Sentosa. When the recreational area, was built, 49 hectares of land was used, clearing 30% of rainforest existed, causing living organisms to die or migrate to other place. 
In conclusion, mass tourism causes harm to the country enviromentally as natural habitats and resource has to be converted to reacreational areas.

RR tourism by Song Jia Xian

I agree with the author as i feel that tourism destroys a country's environment. When there is increased tourism in a country, carbon emissions and air pollution significantly increase due to the construction of tourists attractions and the destruction to animal habitats. When coastal areas are converted into beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or completely removed. Thus, animals lose their natural habitats and die eventually as their source of food and shelter is destroyed. Singapore has lost 90% of its forest, 67 percent of its birds, about 40 percent of its mammals and 5 percent of its amphibians and reptiles of the original mangroves less than 5% is left. 39% of all native are extinct due to the harm to the environment. Animals species are already facing extinction or risks of being endangered due to harm to their habitats and homes. Carbon emissions and air pollution also significantly increase as more air and land based vehicles are needed to transport tourists from one destination to another. This contribute to more cars on the road and more results in the worsening of air quality in the environment. This shows that urban development for tourism results in harm and destruction to the environment, resulting in worsening of air quality and loss of biodiversity.

RR Tourism by Alvina Lim

I disagree with the author that mass tourism affects the local people negatively as it provides them with job opportunities. When tourists visit the country, they would visit tourist attractions and stay at hotels. Thus, people are needed to work in the hospitality and tourism industry to cater to the tourists. In the passage, the author states that “In 2011 alone, the tourism industry created more than four million- 11.1% of the country’s total employment.” This shows that tourism in the Philippines has played a significant role in creating many job opportunities. Additionally, in Singapore, tourism has provided around 110,600 to 112,300 jobs. Jobs in the hospitality and tourism industry include travel consultants, hotel housekeepers and casino dealers. This also shows tourism creating many job opportunities in Singapore. Hence, this is an advantage for the locals as mass tourism increases their chances of getting a job which allows them to earn a living. Therefore, I disagree with the author. 

RR Tourism by Tan Xuan Zheng

I do not agree that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's culture and environment but instead promotes the preservation of cultures. The writer mentioned that infrastructure development are brought about by tourism and I fully agree with this point. Some historic buildings are salvaged and refurnished due to the large number of tourists visiting them. Large amounts of money are even put into preserving these cultural places and hence, I do not agree that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country's culture. In Singapore, one example of the cultural areas that have been preserved would be the Chinatown and Kampong Glam. When tourist visit a country, they tend to visit a site where there is the most culture or history, hence, the government would want to spend large amount of money to preserve them so as to attract more tourists. When there is more tourists, there would be more profit for the country and hence, the government will also benefit from it. These two areas in Singapore are culturally rich and is a must-go location for tourist that visit Singapore, hence Singapore will not demolish it and will instead spend money on upkeeping the place so as to ensure they will look attractive without losing its cultural values. Thus, I feel that mass tourism helped to preserve the cultures of a country instead of destroying it.

RR Tourism by Lau Ying Ru


I disagree with the author that mass tourism threatens to destroy a country’s culture and environment and affects the local people negatively. I believe that tourism is beneficial to the country as it allows it to prosper economically. Tourism such as theme parks brings in larger revenues than any other industries and contributes greatly to the economy.  According to the writer, “tourism has become an ubiquitous sector in the Philippine’s economy. In 2012, alone, it contributed 6.0%the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP)”. This shows that tourism plays a vital role in a country’s economy. It allows the country to prosper as tourists are attracted to come here for a holiday, thus spending money in the process. Likewise, tourism has also contributed about 3% of Singapore’s GDP, generating a sum of US$9.4 billion in 2007 and has a high employment multiplier in Singapore. This highlights the importance of tourism to a country’s economy as it is able to bring in high revenues and create more jobs than any other industries. With more job opportunities, more people will be able to work and have money to spend, thus contributing to the prosperity of the county’s economy. Therefore, I feel that tourism allows the country’s economy to flourish rather than bring disastrous impacts.

RR Tourism by Yong Jie Ning

I agree that mass tourism threatens to destroy the environment and affect local people as they create more rubbish and interfere with the local's way of life. According to the writer, " The environment can suffer as well. When coastal areas are converted to beach resorts, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed." Thus, this shows that to accommodate the mass tousim, natural heritage sites are destroyed and an increase in air pollution, affecting the locals as well as their heritage begins to fade and their country deteriorate. As mass tourism occurs, tourists usually visit the iconic places in Singapore, namely the Sentosa, Marina Bay and Orchard Road. At these places, there will be an overcrowding of tourists, as well as increase of congestion, not only on roads for vehicles, but also on the pavement. Besides that, many tourist shops and accommodation cluster near such areas for convenience and make them even more congested. When there are many cars on the road, they consistently "start and stop", producing a lot of air pollution. Another impact is the creation of more rubbish which will be incinerated, producing lots of greenhouse gases, harming the environment. Therefore, this shows that mass tourism can destroy the environment and interfere with the local's way of life.

RR Tourism by Ian

Firstly tourism benefits the local people, as it brings about economic developments. When tourists starts visiting a country, it will start generating a need for tourism facilities and infrastructure, such as hotels and resorts. These facilities and infrastructures requires man power for maintenance, hence many of the local people will be hired, in order to keep it running smoothly. With a constant and stable wage, the locals will be able to improve their own standards of living. As stated by the writer, “in 2011 alone, the tourism industry created more than four million- 11.1% of the country’s total employment, which is more than the number of jobs created by the mining industry.” This is very significant as for every 10 person, one of which will be working in the tourism industry. Furthermore, the writer also stated that “in 2012 alone, tourism contributed 6% to the country’s gross domestic product.” This shows the significant amount of revenue tourism can solely bring about. For developing countries such as the Philippines, this amount will be significant, as it will allow the country to build more infrastructures, such as transportation, to further improve the country and the standards of living of the people. In Singapore, tourism contributed to 3% of Singapore’s GDP, which has generated a sum of US $9.4 billion in 2007. This substantial amount, proves explicitly how much tourism means to Singapore. Furthermore, this amount is likely going to be invested into infrastructures for transportation and education. Hence I conclude that tourism benefits the local people, since it brings about economic developments.

RR Tourism by Ng Ying Han

I disagree with the author that tourism threatens to destroy a country's culture.

With more tourists going to visit a country, its culture will in fact be enhanced, as more people will learn about their culture and hence have a greater respect for it. While the author argues that well-known tourists destinations are also hotspots for prostitution and human trafficking, I see otherwise. Most tourists visit countries like the Philippines to learn about their traditions or try their local delicacies, not to look for people who are being made used of. In Singapore's case, tourists from all over the globe who visit us are fascinated by our harmonious multi-racial society, the plethora of food we offer and, of course, our world-class infrastructure. This helps to promote our country's culture to the rest of the world, all while benefiting our country's economy. A similar situation is present in Philippine's case. The promotion of a country's culture has several advantages, including the improvement of the country's economy and increased patriotism and social cohesion. An improvement in economy and increased social cohesion will enable the salaries of the local people to rise and a more close-knit society to be created, therefore benefiting the local people positively. Ergo, I believe that tourism does not destroy a country's culture, but rather, makes it more appreciated by others from all corners of the world, in turn improving socio-economic conditions in the country.

RR Tourism by Chang Xiao Qing

I agree with the writer that mass tourism threatens to destroy the country's architectural heritage. In order to build more facilities and services for tourists to enjoy, many historic building and sites are destroyed or damaged in the process. This would result in the country losing much of its cultural identity and heritage as these old buildings and sites contain many memories and significance in the countries history and heritage. An example from the passage is of the demolishing of historic buildings in Manila, so as to make way for hotels to provide accommodation for tourists visiting "Historic Manila". In Singapore, the Bukit Brown Cemetery was cleared to make way for an eight-way highway in 2013 despite various petitions and complaints against it, resulting in nearly 4000 graves being dug up. This shows that the country is sacrificing their heritage and culture to enable mass tourism and this has severely affected the cultural practices of many local people, up to the fact that now, many people are unable to visit the tombs and graves of their ancestors to pay their respects during tomb sweeping day or to give them a peaceful resting place. Locals in Manila are now unable to enjoy or visit these historic buildings and sites that were torn down, and hence unable to pass down these memories and heritage to the next generation. Hence, I agree with the writer that mass tourism threatens to destroy the architectural heritage of the country as many memories, heritage and cultural were lost with the tearing down of historic and buildings and sites, affecting the cultural of the locals.

RR Tourism by Khong Wye Yee

I agree with the writer that tourism brings harm to the environment as it has an adverse impact on biodiversity. The writer states that in Philippines, mangrove areas and corals that serve as fish sanctuaries are damaged or even completely removed. Tourism endangers the homes of living organisms. Large areas of land like rainforests are cleared to make space for development of tourism. Animals will not be able to find another suitable environment to live in, and their population will start to decrease. A case study revealed that Singapore has lost 90% of its forest, 67% of its birds, about 40% of its mammals and 5% of its amphibians and reptiles. All of these are due to urban development and land reclamation. 70% of Sentosa island is covered by secondary island and is homed to many species of flora and fauna. When the construction of Resorts World Sentosa commenced, over 200 trees had to be replanted elsewhere. Nature had been replaced by tourist attractions, and greatly shows the damage that tourism has done to the biodiversity. Therefore, I agree with the the writer that tourism brings harm to the environment as it endangers biodiversity.