Growing up in Singapore, you're taught to never ever challenge authority. I guess it's a reflection of S.M. Lee's benevolent dictator ways. I remember reading or seeing an interview (or was it a profile) about Lee Kuan Yew once, and it said that he believed a firm hand is necessary for a stable country. I even remember it saying that a firm control on the media is necessary. He would not allow any criticisms against the leadership.

Just recently over here, I got to evaluate my teachers. When I was in Singapore, I had heard about it before from a cousin who was visiting. Thinking back to the conversation, I remember being somewhat jealous about it. They got to challenge authority, in a sanctioned manner, but still it was a challenge to the authority of teachers. As a child, the main authority figures in your life were your parents and your teachers, so this was pretty big to me.

I guess I find it interesting that students here in the Philippines get to evaluate their teachers. To me, that indicates an underlying sense of value in the education system that inculcates awareness in students that yes, they can question the authority. That questioning the authority in your life is a good thing. Contrast it to Singapore. In Singapore, raise your voice against the authorities and you get a smack down.

Here's an interesting thought excercise. If you look at Hong Lim Park (a.k.a Speakers Corner), and these teacher evaluations, they may seem similar at first. They're ways you can voice out concerns. But with the teacher evaluations, you can pretty much say whatever. With speakers corner, you need to get police approval and they need to veto your speech. Kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it? Regulated free speech is such an oxymoron.

Okay, so I lied, it wasn't such an interesting thought excercise. You could see the conclusion miles away.