Interesting day in class, watched an unfolding episode of a tiff between lecturer and students.
What class was it? Not English 101 but A levels' Law class.
What started the tiff?

Nothing life changing, just an innocent question from one male student - "Teacher, in the context of this sentence, what does 'attract' mean?" Lecturer asked whether the student has looked up the dictionary. Well, student answered: "I know the meaning, but in the context of the sentence I don't get what the sentence says". Fine, lecturer explained the word and asked other students to chip in too. Clear.

Then some whisperings in Mandarin between the male student and a female student.
Next question that was shot from the male student: "How about this word 'necessitate'? Is it really 'necessitate' or should it be some other word?"
At this juncture, the lecturer was rather irritated, again, the same student asking about English word, not a legal term even. Hence, it triggered a whole long lecture from the lecturer about how students don't even bother to read up before class and expect to be spoon fed in class, and even after being fed, students expect the lecturers to chew the food for them.

"Does anyone actually read the textbook at all and try to find out the meaning of the word in context with the aid of a dictionary? Or does everyone expect to come to class to get explanation for the teeniest English word?" Blah blah blah, so went the lecturer.

At the end of the 'lecture' not on law, but on students' attitude, some black faces were evident in class, especially on the part of the male and female students concerned. Trying to break the ice or the dead silence, the lecturer asked whether the students would want to quit sulking and get on with class. The female student (admire her bravo!) actually voiced out that the comments were unfair, she did read up before class and tried to figure out what those words mean. Ok, since the 'lecture' does not apply to her, the lecturer asked whether she could accept an apology for the blanket criticism that was aimed at all and sundry without discriminating between those who did some work and those who didn't. Reluctantly, she conceded and really got on with the lecture, participating in class like usual.


What happened to the male student?
Well, well, well, his EGO was bruised. He refused to talk or even look at the lecturer the whole time, his neck must be hurting by now just looking down and writing his notes. Wonder how would this student react later in life when his boss corrects him? Throw in his resignation letter because his feelings are hurt? We'll see.

Between the three - lecturer, male student, female student - which one is the immature one? which one is the mature one and which one lashed out without justification? You be the arbiter.

I read from the best teacher in town's blog that ' "Sincerity" is the key that gives one a "die-die" attitude, i.e. no matter what the obstacles are, one would "die-die" make sure that the desired objective is being achieved.'

I wonder if the students were sincere in wanting to know the meaning of the words or just wanted to know whether they got down the right words so that they can memorise those words for their exams' answer? One of the warning the lecturer gave to the class in the long winded 'lecture' was that one is not to just memorise for exams but to understand the subject matter. If understood, one can use the word in any manner and in whatever form it appears. The lecturer shared her own experience of having done all the memorising in school without understanding until she gets to university and had to sit for open book exams which means there is nothing to memorise, but everything is about application.

Is the lecturer unfair making comments about students these days being less diligent and expect to be fed in every conceivable form? Is it fair to conclude that students have nothing better to do than to study, as there is no need to worry about unpaid bills, loans, how many kids to feed and school?

The truth is even money for petrol for one's car does not have to come from one's pocket, but from pocket money that parents supply. Food is cooked and served on the table, and sometimes dishes need not even be washed. Clothes are washed and ironed, even beds are made by the maid(s) at home. Really, what are the other concerns students have that distract them from studies? Could it be the following:
How many futsal games to go for this week?
How come the most popular guy in college did not invite me to his booze party?
Why does that girl keep looking at my pimple and nose hair?
Why can't I wear an Armani t-shirt and don on a Tag to college like the rest?
How come my family doesn't have an address in Damansara Heights or Bangsar?
Why am I only driving a Proton Saga not a BMW sports? Oh man, this is so embarrassing!


Of course, this is again a very gross and broad generalisation of the student specie. Many out there are working part time and studying part time to support themselves in getting through ACCA, LCCI, LLB. Money does not grow on tree, these students even give tuition to younger students to earn enough to pay for their examinations fees. I salute this minority who is learning to live the real life even at a young age, they will go far, at least in grasping the meaning of sincerity and endurance.