It has been a long journey for the subject Social Economic Studies. Ever since I first came in touch with it in Term 1, I have to admit that this journey was not a particularly smooth one. During the first few tutorials, the lessons were probably manageable for my part because the topics of discussion were issues I was already quite familiar with. Cultural Intelligence and its importance was a concept that I had already grasped. However, the first tutorial of SES has introduced me to a way to classify cultural intelligence, namely that four aspects of CQ- Drive, Knowledge, Action and Strategy. Therefore, SES was very manageable at that point of time.
In the second tutorial regarding Google, I could manage as well because we were studying something concrete. In other words, I was able to narrow down my research by a lot. This made it easier for me to do research. However, in the later tutorials, ranging from Confucianism to Western Ideologies to Social-Economic policies of China by Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, the research scope was admittedly to wide for my ability. I was thus unable to cover every aspect of the issue and was only able to come to class half-prepared. This snowballed into me being in a loss most of the time during the presenters' speech. Fortunately, I was able to follow after hearing other's comments, and I was at least able to contribute in class discussions. (On a side note, my knowledge of Japanese history has surprisingly helped, especially in the area of the policies implemented in China. I cross-referenced to Japan, although apparently it was a digression)
This brings me to my next point : assessment. Frankly speaking, I am not at all comfortable with the current assessment system. Although this might be a break from taking exams, I think that it has actually added more stress to us, rather than removing that stress. I say this because we are required to prepare for every lessons, so that we are able to discuss. Discussion in turn will affect 20% of the term grade. This is like taking tests every lesson! It adds a considerable amount of work to our already dangerously packed workload. In the event I did not prepare, I always taking lessons in trepidation of the scolding I was going to receive during the SES lesson - there, added stress levels.
There was improvement though, after the compromise of allocating one question to everyone was implemented. This considerably reduced our workload, which helped us a lot in relieving our work levels. As SES is still in its first year, perhaps this could continue for the years to come.
The research paper and term paper is a good part of the assessment. This is because it makes sure that students are not smoking through the module. In addition, it is a good alternative to the end-of-year exams. The reflective journals also are beneficial in the sense that it allows us to look back at the previous lessons and consolidate our thoughts.
Some difficulties I faced during the module was mostly my lack of time management. Somehow, because of my large pile of work and commitments and being unable to plan time properly, I was almost never able to research thoroughly. This really hindered my learning of the module.
In time to come, SES will definitely be applicable to my life (I hope). I am planning to study overseas in the future, and it is important for me to be able to adapt and understand different cultures. Although I most probably will not be going to China or America, what I have learnt in SES will definitely help in letting me understand how to deal with other cultures and practices. Whenever I get in touch with other cultures, I would also try to relate back to whatever I have learnt in SES. This module could also allow me to make new friends, create stronger ties et cetera. I can probably avoid many misunderstandings with this module.
All in all, SES is a very useful and interesting subject, and should continue for years to come.
(691 words)
Monday, April 30, 2012
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Reflective Journal 4
For the past few lessons, we have been looking at how China or America can provide each other with lessons, based on their respective ideologies and philosophies, on managing societal problems. Frankly speaking, I was unaware of a few of the issues that were raised during class. For example, I did not know about the devaluation of Yuan. Luckily enough for me though, most of the other issues were quite familiar and I was able to catch on in class.
As we moved on through the lessons, I learnt many problems which Chinese or American societies face, and some of the solutions which can be adopted.
In China, one of the most well known problems is the media censorship. Twitter, Facebook, and many other social media have been blocked in China, only to be replaced with their own versions of the social networks. This is a problem because it gives very little freedom to people to interact with other people and voice their opinion freely. This gives a very controlled and oppressive atmosphere. China's education is also stressful. This can easily be seen by the unbelievably high suicide rates in China. Corruption is likewise prevalent in the Chinese society. This damages the people's image of the government.
As for America, a totally different set of problems can be observed. Perhaps due to the fact that America is very liberal, there have been many protests and social unrest in the society. The allowance to carry guns also might have increased the crime rate in America. America has a bipartite political system, which unfortunately caused a very low efficiency and rolling out policies, because the two parties (Republicans and Democrats having opposite ideas) debate so much on policies.
We see that the China and America have very different problems. Perhaps the two countries can build on each others' strengths and correct each others' weaknesses?
For example, the Chinese education system and censorship problem can be solved by the implementation of the Western ideologies of liberty. With a more liberal system in effect, the Chinese will be free to voice the opinions, thus improving the community as a whole.
Ideally, this can work. However, this is not practical. The fact is that Confucian values of strict hierarchy have already been ingrained into the mindsets of the Chinese. Thus, it will be very hard to change the system and change the mindset of the people in China. Likewise for America.
However, there is a solution to all the problems faced. One could change the way which the values are perceived. Ideologies are after all merely words, and one can choose to perceive it in anyway he wants. It is similar to how Osama Bin Laden and his team of terrorists twisted the words of the Islamic religion. I'm not implying something as extremist as the example above, but merely the extent into which one can perceive rules differently.
For example, Confucianism values education. This does not necessarily need to mean rote learning. A liberal form of learning is also a form of education! Introducing this idea could potential improve the education in China.
Western ideologies include freedom of speech. Thus the bipartite system in America. Why not choose to interpret the ideologies in such a way that it means to say "a majority of one party, with a minority of another". Constructive feedback can still be gathered. The effectiveness of this system has already been tested in Singapore, in fact. See for yourself how much Singapore has grown in the past 40 years! (propaganda unintended, but still, true.)
Thus, I believe that solutions to the problems of these countries lie not in other countries, but in how they themselves choose to perceive their set of values!
(622 words)
As we moved on through the lessons, I learnt many problems which Chinese or American societies face, and some of the solutions which can be adopted.
In China, one of the most well known problems is the media censorship. Twitter, Facebook, and many other social media have been blocked in China, only to be replaced with their own versions of the social networks. This is a problem because it gives very little freedom to people to interact with other people and voice their opinion freely. This gives a very controlled and oppressive atmosphere. China's education is also stressful. This can easily be seen by the unbelievably high suicide rates in China. Corruption is likewise prevalent in the Chinese society. This damages the people's image of the government.
As for America, a totally different set of problems can be observed. Perhaps due to the fact that America is very liberal, there have been many protests and social unrest in the society. The allowance to carry guns also might have increased the crime rate in America. America has a bipartite political system, which unfortunately caused a very low efficiency and rolling out policies, because the two parties (Republicans and Democrats having opposite ideas) debate so much on policies.
We see that the China and America have very different problems. Perhaps the two countries can build on each others' strengths and correct each others' weaknesses?
For example, the Chinese education system and censorship problem can be solved by the implementation of the Western ideologies of liberty. With a more liberal system in effect, the Chinese will be free to voice the opinions, thus improving the community as a whole.
Ideally, this can work. However, this is not practical. The fact is that Confucian values of strict hierarchy have already been ingrained into the mindsets of the Chinese. Thus, it will be very hard to change the system and change the mindset of the people in China. Likewise for America.
However, there is a solution to all the problems faced. One could change the way which the values are perceived. Ideologies are after all merely words, and one can choose to perceive it in anyway he wants. It is similar to how Osama Bin Laden and his team of terrorists twisted the words of the Islamic religion. I'm not implying something as extremist as the example above, but merely the extent into which one can perceive rules differently.
For example, Confucianism values education. This does not necessarily need to mean rote learning. A liberal form of learning is also a form of education! Introducing this idea could potential improve the education in China.
Western ideologies include freedom of speech. Thus the bipartite system in America. Why not choose to interpret the ideologies in such a way that it means to say "a majority of one party, with a minority of another". Constructive feedback can still be gathered. The effectiveness of this system has already been tested in Singapore, in fact. See for yourself how much Singapore has grown in the past 40 years! (propaganda unintended, but still, true.)
Thus, I believe that solutions to the problems of these countries lie not in other countries, but in how they themselves choose to perceive their set of values!
(622 words)
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Reflective Journal
Two weeks ago, we had lessons on Confucianism. Although there have been many talks on Confucian ideology during assemblies, I have to admit that I don't really understand it very well because the talks are in Chinese. My Chinese is not that good, so I cannot really get much out of the talks during assembly. Therefore, when I found out we were going to study this ideology in English, I was interested to some extent.
Of course, I already had some background knowledge on the Confucian ideology. However, my knowledge was only limited to the fact that it emphasizes respect. I do not think that is a lot, unfortunately. However, by the end of the lessons (even though I missed one due to Council Investiture), I managed to understand quite comprehensively the basic idea of the Confucian ideology.
This ideology didn't really appeal to me initially. This is because I didn't like the stifling atmosphere it created. I will not be allowed to question my elders, no matter how valid my point is. At that point of time, I sincerely preferred the free Western ideology.
Thus, I found that I was quite comfortable preparing for my term presentation the next week, about the Western consciousness of self. However, many problems faced me. Unfortunately, I was not very well informed about the American War of Independence, French Revolution and other events that shaped the ideology of liberty and equality. Thus, a lot of time was put into research. I found it quite tiring, but in the end I feel that my presentation was not that bad.
I like the Western ideology of freedom. This is because it allows me to express my opinions properly and allow my thoughts to be heard. I feel that this can help to benefit the community because all sides of the issue will be heard and understood. In most ways, freedom of speech can improve a society greatly.
However, after a few sessions of class discussions, I finally realised how hard it is to actually implement the full Western ideology in Singapore.
As of now, Hwa Chong is probably giving us students a lot of autonomy. This can be seen from the fact that many leadership opportunities are given to us students, and that we are also allowed to choose the course we would like to take. However, in some ways Hwa Chong restricts us as well! The existence of the Q classes serve to demonstrate that.
What would be of Hwa Chong then, if the school decides to give full autonomy of students? I foresee that many people would be coming to school late, and no one would actually take studying seriously. The Asian culture is vastly different from the Western culture, and one does not benefit from trying to mix the two together.
On the other hand, it is very possible that the restrains that we have are so ingrained into our minds that life would be no different even after an implementation of a fully autonomic system. "Self-discipline", this might be called.
Thus, this leads me to wonder, are we actually restrained by ourselves? Perhaps it is not the government who prevents the implementation of a fully autonomic system in Singapore, but the people of Singapore ourselves who prevents that.
After the two weeks of lessons, I am glad to say that I have changed my views about both Western and Easter culture, and that both have their advantages and disadvantages.
On a sidenote, I was absolutely horrified upon receiving my first reflective journal grades, which is why I am taking extra effort in making sure I complete my second reflective journal and term paper properly. I hope I put in enough effort...
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Reflective Journal 2
The last two sessions were quite interesting. These lessons alleviated my fears on SES, because the thought of Reflective Journals and Research Papers (this especially) was very intimidating. Having gone through these two lessons, I feel that the topics of discussions are quite easy to discuss and really can improve my thoughts.
I wasn't really prepared for these lessons though. For the first one, I didn't make notes. For the second one, my notes were minimal. Thus my participation in class was probably greatly compromised. I tried my best to participate though.
It was about Google, Apple and Lenovo. The work cultures in these three companies are ever so different. All of them have their pros and cons. I personally feel that The Google Way of management is very innovative. Who wouldn't want freedom during work! I mean, there's free lunch, free facilities, subsidized services.... It's great! How does this work though? You give them so much freedom, and provide for their welfare, how do you make sure that the company actually profits?
Google
I feel that there actually is no guarantee. Google is placing a large bet that the workers would actually do work. Perhaps it's because the workers feel indebted to the carefree lifestyle provided in work. But won't all the free food and such distract the workers. Well, maybe these 'distractions' become so common that workers don't get distracted at all! There are many pros and cons to the Google way, but one cannot deny that it is being implemented in Google, and it's working very well!
Is this system productive? Or is it counter-productive? I feel that it might potentially go both ways. The only thing that is keeping this system productive is the workers themselves. They seem to possess a work attitude that can accomodate the Google way. I think that this is because of the education system in America. Students are encouraged to ask and be curious about things.
The issue here is not whether the Google way is good or not, but rather whether it can be implemented worldwide. This is where Apple and Lenovo comes into play.
Apple and Lenovo
In Apple, it is very clear who's the boss - Steve Jobs. Work is very strict compared to Google, and there is a strict hierarchy. This is even more exaggerated in Lenovo. The workers do not ask questions, but only obey orders. Orders, orders and orders. That's what the Chinese want.
I think this is due to the fact that the Chinese are taught really differently. The cultural difference between China and the West is just too big. Perhaps it's all about the Confucian idealogy, where respect is really important. Perhaps to the Chinese, questioning and coming up with new ideas is just disrespect?
This causes a problem. It really stifles innovation and creativity. Alot of Chinese products are purely copies! Now there's nothing wrong with getting inspirations though. The iPhone was inspired by touchscreen phones. However, what China needs to do is to change their product somehow to make it better than the "copied products" ! This is severely stifled by the oppressive work conditions. China needs to be more enthusiastic in their work.
No matter how you think about it, the Google Way is a no-no in China. They are probably more comfortable with the strict hierarchy in China
However, the way this works might not be so bad after all. Although creativity might be stifled, Chinese generally get things done. You have to admit it, the Chinese copy very well. The thing is, since distractions are not allowed, work is finished very efficiently. Maybe something innovative will come in awhile, and when that happens, I suspect something great is on its way. This something could potentially boost China's economy and place it as the economic superpower.
This is evident by the fact that Lenovo is doing quite well. In my previous class 2i2, there were 3 out of 25 people who were using Lenovo computers. Not that bad, in my opinion, considering the fact that it is a Chinese company. However, I find it lacks a certain something. The design isn't particularly appealing. They all look the same - plain. This is what China needs to change. They have to innovate and think up of new ideas to please their customers.
To wrap this up, the most important thing China needs to do now is to be more culturally intelligent (linking back to the first lesson). It needs to be able to adapt to different systems so that it can really become the economic superpower of the world
I wasn't really prepared for these lessons though. For the first one, I didn't make notes. For the second one, my notes were minimal. Thus my participation in class was probably greatly compromised. I tried my best to participate though.
It was about Google, Apple and Lenovo. The work cultures in these three companies are ever so different. All of them have their pros and cons. I personally feel that The Google Way of management is very innovative. Who wouldn't want freedom during work! I mean, there's free lunch, free facilities, subsidized services.... It's great! How does this work though? You give them so much freedom, and provide for their welfare, how do you make sure that the company actually profits?
I feel that there actually is no guarantee. Google is placing a large bet that the workers would actually do work. Perhaps it's because the workers feel indebted to the carefree lifestyle provided in work. But won't all the free food and such distract the workers. Well, maybe these 'distractions' become so common that workers don't get distracted at all! There are many pros and cons to the Google way, but one cannot deny that it is being implemented in Google, and it's working very well!
Is this system productive? Or is it counter-productive? I feel that it might potentially go both ways. The only thing that is keeping this system productive is the workers themselves. They seem to possess a work attitude that can accomodate the Google way. I think that this is because of the education system in America. Students are encouraged to ask and be curious about things.
The issue here is not whether the Google way is good or not, but rather whether it can be implemented worldwide. This is where Apple and Lenovo comes into play.
Apple and Lenovo
In Apple, it is very clear who's the boss - Steve Jobs. Work is very strict compared to Google, and there is a strict hierarchy. This is even more exaggerated in Lenovo. The workers do not ask questions, but only obey orders. Orders, orders and orders. That's what the Chinese want.
I think this is due to the fact that the Chinese are taught really differently. The cultural difference between China and the West is just too big. Perhaps it's all about the Confucian idealogy, where respect is really important. Perhaps to the Chinese, questioning and coming up with new ideas is just disrespect?
This causes a problem. It really stifles innovation and creativity. Alot of Chinese products are purely copies! Now there's nothing wrong with getting inspirations though. The iPhone was inspired by touchscreen phones. However, what China needs to do is to change their product somehow to make it better than the "copied products" ! This is severely stifled by the oppressive work conditions. China needs to be more enthusiastic in their work.
No matter how you think about it, the Google Way is a no-no in China. They are probably more comfortable with the strict hierarchy in China
However, the way this works might not be so bad after all. Although creativity might be stifled, Chinese generally get things done. You have to admit it, the Chinese copy very well. The thing is, since distractions are not allowed, work is finished very efficiently. Maybe something innovative will come in awhile, and when that happens, I suspect something great is on its way. This something could potentially boost China's economy and place it as the economic superpower.
This is evident by the fact that Lenovo is doing quite well. In my previous class 2i2, there were 3 out of 25 people who were using Lenovo computers. Not that bad, in my opinion, considering the fact that it is a Chinese company. However, I find it lacks a certain something. The design isn't particularly appealing. They all look the same - plain. This is what China needs to change. They have to innovate and think up of new ideas to please their customers.
To wrap this up, the most important thing China needs to do now is to be more culturally intelligent (linking back to the first lesson). It needs to be able to adapt to different systems so that it can really become the economic superpower of the world
Monday, January 16, 2012
Cultural Intelligence
Today was the first actual lesson for SES. Unfortunately, my mood during the first part of the lesson was deeply affected because I forgot to read up on the two articles necessary to facilitate discussion. The lesson was interesting enough though, so I guess it's still quite all right.
What exactly is cultural intelligence? Cultural refers to the ability to "understand how to encounter new cultural situations, judge what goes on in them and make appropriate adjustments in order to act and behave effectively in those otherwise disorienting circumstances". Or at least, that's what was said in class. To me, cultural intelligence can be simply understood as "knowing how to act in front of different cultures", which is in essence exactly what the given definition is saying.
Do I have cultural intelligence? Well, if anyone had asked me that question before I attended today's lesson, I would have confidently said "Yes". Coming from a Japanese and Chinese background, I have had alot of insights to the Japanese culture and Chinese culture, and the differences and similarities between them.
For example, they are both similar in their attitude towards the number: 4. Yes, quite particular indeed. In fact, Japanese hospital wards never contain the number 4 (from what I have heard from my Japanese teacher). The reason behind this is that the number 4 has a close resemblance (in reading) to the word "death".
One thing that is different in Japan, and that I find very interesting, is that seniors (even if only 1 year older) are treated like god. When a junior happens to see a senior, he would politely give way to him, and bow as he passes along.
With that kind of background knowledge, coupled with my narrow mind, it was obvious that I thought I had CQ.
After today's lesson, I finally realised how wrong I was.
For one, the world isn't confined to just Japan, Singapore and China. What about America? What about India? Vietnam? Iran? Russia? All these are countries whose cultures are totally foreign to me. This is where I fail in the "Knowledge"-competency of CQ.
Further more, do I have the interest in knowing about the other cultures? Frankly speaking, no. Unless I am attending an immersion programme and my pride is at stake. This is where I fail in the "Drive"-competency of CQ.
Additionally, I have never experienced other cultures much before, and thus am unsure on how to switch and adapt to different situations. This is where I fail in "Strategy" and "Action".
I have just mentioned 4 things in the previous few paragraphs, that is "Knowledge", "Drive", "Strategy" and "Action". This is in essence the bulk of what we learnt today. Cultural intelligence, according to Mr David Livermore can be formulated into these 4 competencies. "Knowledge" being how much one knows, "Drive" being interest and confidence, "Strategy" being that ability to plan beforehand on how to behave and reflect, and "Action" being the capability to adapt to different situation. This seemed like the important part of the lesson.
This is where my belief of cultural intelligence starts to veer dangerously off course.
I do not believe that cultural intelligence can be formulated just like that. From what I intepret of the lesson, it seems as though Mr David Livermore is saying this:
"Knowledge" + "Drive" + "Strategy" + "Action" = "CQ"
This makes CQ look like some math equation, which is the totally wrong way of approaching CQ. Or at least that's what I think so. You may have "Knowledge", "Drive", "Strategy" and "Action" but it does NOT give you "CQ" by default. I would like to think of CQ as something to be learnt by experience. Something that one lacks at first, but one hones through the years through various exchange and immersion programmes.
What I am saying, in a nutshell, is that the only way CQ can every be gained, is through experiential learning.
After the lesson, another thing left in my mind unanswered was this: Is CQ useful? Well, since I plan to study abroad in the future, I guess it's useful for me... BUT. Is it useful for everyone? Even for that poor student in school? Even for that person who loves Singapore so much he doesn't want to step out of the country?
I think that although "cultural intelligence" is called "cultural" intelligence, I think that it can be applied similarly to not only different cultures, but different social status even within a country. In other words, the acceptance and tolerance needed for interaction between Chinese and Malays is one and the same as that between the poor and the rich, the privileged and the underprivileged. Thus, I strongly feel that CQ will be useful for every single Singaporean, and in fact every single Earthling!
Having attended this lesson and read the relevant article, I know feel confident about my knowledge on CQ. From now on, I will try to grasp any opportunity that allows me to expand my knowledge on the different cultures.
Oh, and now I know: I am not that culturally intelligent after all, but I am willing to learn.
Akira Makino
3S201
What exactly is cultural intelligence? Cultural refers to the ability to "understand how to encounter new cultural situations, judge what goes on in them and make appropriate adjustments in order to act and behave effectively in those otherwise disorienting circumstances". Or at least, that's what was said in class. To me, cultural intelligence can be simply understood as "knowing how to act in front of different cultures", which is in essence exactly what the given definition is saying.
Do I have cultural intelligence? Well, if anyone had asked me that question before I attended today's lesson, I would have confidently said "Yes". Coming from a Japanese and Chinese background, I have had alot of insights to the Japanese culture and Chinese culture, and the differences and similarities between them.
For example, they are both similar in their attitude towards the number: 4. Yes, quite particular indeed. In fact, Japanese hospital wards never contain the number 4 (from what I have heard from my Japanese teacher). The reason behind this is that the number 4 has a close resemblance (in reading) to the word "death".
One thing that is different in Japan, and that I find very interesting, is that seniors (even if only 1 year older) are treated like god. When a junior happens to see a senior, he would politely give way to him, and bow as he passes along.
With that kind of background knowledge, coupled with my narrow mind, it was obvious that I thought I had CQ.
After today's lesson, I finally realised how wrong I was.
For one, the world isn't confined to just Japan, Singapore and China. What about America? What about India? Vietnam? Iran? Russia? All these are countries whose cultures are totally foreign to me. This is where I fail in the "Knowledge"-competency of CQ.
Further more, do I have the interest in knowing about the other cultures? Frankly speaking, no. Unless I am attending an immersion programme and my pride is at stake. This is where I fail in the "Drive"-competency of CQ.
Additionally, I have never experienced other cultures much before, and thus am unsure on how to switch and adapt to different situations. This is where I fail in "Strategy" and "Action".
I have just mentioned 4 things in the previous few paragraphs, that is "Knowledge", "Drive", "Strategy" and "Action". This is in essence the bulk of what we learnt today. Cultural intelligence, according to Mr David Livermore can be formulated into these 4 competencies. "Knowledge" being how much one knows, "Drive" being interest and confidence, "Strategy" being that ability to plan beforehand on how to behave and reflect, and "Action" being the capability to adapt to different situation. This seemed like the important part of the lesson.
This is where my belief of cultural intelligence starts to veer dangerously off course.
I do not believe that cultural intelligence can be formulated just like that. From what I intepret of the lesson, it seems as though Mr David Livermore is saying this:
"Knowledge" + "Drive" + "Strategy" + "Action" = "CQ"
This makes CQ look like some math equation, which is the totally wrong way of approaching CQ. Or at least that's what I think so. You may have "Knowledge", "Drive", "Strategy" and "Action" but it does NOT give you "CQ" by default. I would like to think of CQ as something to be learnt by experience. Something that one lacks at first, but one hones through the years through various exchange and immersion programmes.
What I am saying, in a nutshell, is that the only way CQ can every be gained, is through experiential learning.
After the lesson, another thing left in my mind unanswered was this: Is CQ useful? Well, since I plan to study abroad in the future, I guess it's useful for me... BUT. Is it useful for everyone? Even for that poor student in school? Even for that person who loves Singapore so much he doesn't want to step out of the country?
I think that although "cultural intelligence" is called "cultural" intelligence, I think that it can be applied similarly to not only different cultures, but different social status even within a country. In other words, the acceptance and tolerance needed for interaction between Chinese and Malays is one and the same as that between the poor and the rich, the privileged and the underprivileged. Thus, I strongly feel that CQ will be useful for every single Singaporean, and in fact every single Earthling!
Having attended this lesson and read the relevant article, I know feel confident about my knowledge on CQ. From now on, I will try to grasp any opportunity that allows me to expand my knowledge on the different cultures.
Oh, and now I know: I am not that culturally intelligent after all, but I am willing to learn.
Akira Makino
3S201
Friday, January 13, 2012
Introductory Lesson
Today was the first lesson, or rather the introductory lesson for SES. The idea of SES did not seem particularly scary at first. I thought that it was some thing interesting for a change. Not something so dead like geography or history...
So, I awaited for the teacher to come into class, and I think I was actually looking forward to the lesson! However, within a few minutes I crashed back in to reality.
...TBC...
So, I awaited for the teacher to come into class, and I think I was actually looking forward to the lesson! However, within a few minutes I crashed back in to reality.
...TBC...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)