Debate: Globalization, Education & "Sempit"

"Saya rasa, pihak Pembangkang berfikiran sempit, kerana mereka hanya memandang dari satu sudut saja, iaitu sejarah" 

-Nadiah bte Lamri, Tuesday, 4th October 2011.

Salaam. Pos ini bukan ini untuk memarakkan bara yang hampir padam, sekadar ingin merefleksi apa yang kelas kami sudah belajar dalam kelas Pengantar Pendidikan tadi. Buat pihak pembangkang:- sorry sebab kasar sangat tadi. Agresif bila jadi pihak Pencadang, apalagi topik dan sisi yang kau disuruh pertahankan memang kau sokong penuh.

Lets get back to business. Beforehand, I would also like to make a remark that this writing will be in English... DUH! I need to hone my linguistic skill as much as I could. MUET's around the corner now I shouldn't make any procrastination about the preparation (optimistic!)

Introduction: Globalization

Our debate was initiated by Ardie. He briefly explained what globalization is, using Rusdiansyah's words (??). He said that globalization is important in order for us to compete healthily with other developing country. If  am not mistaken, he also said something about globalization as mean in being a modern , and being ultra-conservative or as in Bahasa Melayu proverbs, "katak bawah tempurung".

Globalization is a noun that describes a process of making world a more efficient place to live in. Some also suggest that it refers to the effort or process of worldwide economical, political and social unification; a kind of novus ordo seclorum, I would say.

Globalization does not only happen in the materialistic point of view. In the light of education, globalization is very much a process of improvising or creating a more conducive, effective and efficient education scenarios/atmospheres via technology implementation into the said sector.

It is important to note here that globalization does not only occur in technical scope, it also happens in many other scopes such as mental, emotional, epistemology, strategical and spiritual point of views.

Secularism??

In response to our first general contention, the Opposition said that in order to fully executing globalization, we- the teachers- need to face a series of challenges which somehow do not worth the pay. Take Darwinism; if we are to educate our generation with this theory, sooner or later our nation will turn atheistic. They fear that we will re-turn to primates; not believing God, angels, et cetera. 

Or that is merely their conjecture.

Though they had diverged from the real SOD (subject of debate), I could not resist but to defend globalization by addressing that our country already has what it needs in protecting our society against this atheistic dogma. In our Country Commandments , the first commandment is to believe in God. In our educational syllabuses, we have Moral and Islamic Education slots. Even in our society, we are rich with multitudes of religious figures who can be as back-ups, should there be any dogmatic crisis happen.

Stating that Darwinism is an irrefutable challenge does not only smearing the dignity of our religious trust, it also causes one to think that our religious figures and laws as rather impotent. In essence, this is also proven to be more dangerous that Darwinism itself.

Personal understanding and consciousness

One of my friends- also a Proposer- stood up and presenting his own idea. He went back to the REAL responsibility of teacher, which is to educate, give realization and open ways to the truth. There is no harm in teaching Darwinism, if it is only to accomplish study and not to be taken as dogma/faith. Teachers who teach the Theory of Evolution can use their autonomic force upon the classes that they are taking by explaining the real fact. 

He further added that globalization has nothing to do with dogmatic poisoning- as the Opposition had proposed. In essence, I would say that my same-sided friend had explaining with very strange, yet vivid opinion.

Sadly...

Our lecturer thus mistress chairman decided to end the debate at its most intense moment. They momentum and vector of debate was nearly at its climax when she announced that both were right. Gosh... I felt so unjustified when she said that. GwaHaHaHaHaHa-- I am really an anarchist, aren't I?

This happened on 27th April 2010 in Ukraine. Gosh... how much I had hoped for our debate to end like this. Been a long time since I last punched a man (me, evil-minded).