The ST forum today carries a letter titled "Respect must be earned, no two ways about it". Stripped down to its essense, the author feels that a) teachers practice double standards and/ or do not set good examples (he uses queue-jumping in the canteen as a sole example) b) students do not respect them c) flaming teachers on blogs is understandable and perhaps even condonable (his stand is not immediately obvious). He suggests that a "conceptual line" of basic respect/ gratitude be drawn, while placing additional onus on teachers to correct their behaviour.

The author might have been thinking of Newton's Third Law when he penned the letter, with the failings of teachers as the action and flaming or disrepectful behaviour as the opposite and equal reaction. That the two could be involved (not are involved... more later) in a cause and effect relation doesn't necessarily make the reaction any more right or acceptable. Remember the case of the taxi driver who rammed a motorcyclist who cut into his lane? Well that's cause and effect, but surely the reaction of the taxi driver is non-condonable? In the same vein, a teacher who may not be able to teach well, get with the times, dress sharply etc, does not deserve to get flamed. Flaming is a deviant behaviour, no matter how one tries to justify it. It is not constructive criticism, and by definition, is often malicious. Any solution that ignores this aspect has already lost half the battle.

Furthermore, that all disrespectful behaviour has its cause in the failings of a teacher, be it poor role modeling or practising double standards, is also dubious. I've had experience tutoring before and to say that it wasn't pleasant is an understatement. I've had below-12s spew vulgarities at me with the ease of a seasoned SAF lieutenant. Even before a session. I've seen "F*** You" scrawled into my exercise book, in a squiggly hand that could have been used to trace ABCs not one year ago. A direct consequence of my failure as a teacher? Not that I overestimate myself, but I honestly do not think so.

It all boils down to a simple fact: kids and teenagers need to be taught to differentiate between proper and improper behaviour, despite the circumstances. Or are we so enamoured of our young that we have become a nation which has to make excuses even for pure rudeness?

Some quick rebuttals:

1) A snippet from a previous forum letter, captured by SingaporeAngle:

"I believe that it is good for students to learn that they can and should have an opinion. Some youngsters may have wrong or misguided opinions, but a wrong opinion is better than none at all."

Having an opinion is not the entire point here. How students express their opinions, whether invalid or valid, should also be considered. A wrong opinion expressed in a wrong manner or through a wrong channel can land one in major trouble, and students should also learn that.

Having wrong opinions may also not be necessarily better than having no opinions, not when one has wrong opinions all the time. I'd think that a person who consistently forms wrong opinions all the time is too lazy to examine his mental processes. Seriously, how can being wrong all the time ever be a good thing? Anyway, I digress.

2) Queue jumping as an illustration of double standards

I was trying to think of what other double standards exist, but could come up with none (Bigger desks? Air-conditioned staff rooms? Freedom from uniforms? Bigger lunch portions? I don't know.). So while I reread the letter, I somehow linked flaming teachers to queue jumping. Which is pretty juvenile really, especially since queue jumping behaviour is legion everywhere. Honestly though, teachers do not have more "free periods". Those empty periods, while not taken up by teaching duties, cannot even cover half the administrative and grading duties that a teacher has to perform. Plus, it's not as if the teachers jump the lunch queue so that they can run off to catch a movie. Further considering it's tax money at work, I think I can cut teachers some slack when they do not stand around idling in lunch queues. As far as I'm concerned, this is merely a smoke screen attempting to masquerade as an excuse for flaming.

3) "In times of old, students treated teachers with unwavering deference, absorbing uncritically whatever they were told. However, students today are taught to critically assess everything that is fed to them, and are exposed continuously to the dogma that 'respect has to be earned'".

I personally understand a dogma to be a set of beliefs traditionally held to be true. Logically speaking, since students nowadays are adept at critically assessing what they are told, then dogmas like "respect has to be earned" should also be called into question. In fact, I think this would make a decent GP question.

Everyone, not just teachers, is entitled to some form of respect. From a President to a death row prisoner, this basic respect should ideally be universal to humans. In my book, flaming people on the Internet behind their backs and not according them the opportunity to defend themselves reeks of dishonor and cowardice, and accordingly, falls outside this realm of basic respect.

4) "Teachers devote their lives to imparting essential knowledge to students, and in return we should treat them with a certain amount of gratitude."

Whether or not it was intended, this came across to me as a condescending statement. I'm not sure about others, but when I teach, I don't look for gratitude in return. Doubling as a TA this semester, I can say that the satisfaction of seeing something click in the eyes of a student is far more rewarding. Don't think that all teachers beggar themselves for gratitude, because I personally find that rather insulting.

Filed under: News, Singapore