Taught by: Dr Amy Ramirez
Content (Structure/Organization): 4
I liked how the course was divided into three units, each covering a different area in education. It allowed me to easily know roughly what each reading was about. In this way, I think it's easy to identify what the learning outcomes of each reading are. The flexibility comes in the form of the classroom discussions where students are able to give their thoughts on the reading — here we get more diversity in knowledge as students apply the content of the readings to their own personal experiences. The prof also would mention relevant external readings to classroom discussions so I guess the content is also flexible in this way.
Manageability of Workload: 4
At the start I spent quite a lot of time on the readings but throughout the sem I found myself getting used to it and spending much less time reading. I do think the weekly workload in terms of course content is quite manageable. The part of the course which took up much more of my time is researching for each essay as I had to skim through many external readings and select which ones I wanted to use. The writing part was also relatively time consuming as you had to change phrasing often and read and rewrite over and over. I guess the latter two parts might not be very heavy workload if you have decided to just whack the course but if you want to do well then yes its quite high workload.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
I think an A is quite achievable if you take the professor’s advice especially after consultations with her. I think she provides quite valuable feedback which really helped my final essay a lot. Class participation points are also generally achievable as the topic education is something that all students are familiar with so its not too hard to contribute to discussions. Another portion of the grade (I think worth 15%) which are discussion posts where students have to write 8 short posts on each reading or complete writing assignments is also quite achievable, one just needs to be consistent and remins yourself to do it. Overall I think a decent grade is definitely possible if you put in effort.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
I think it was very useful as it really opened my eyes to the inequities in education and how privileged I have been thus far. I also think my academic writing skills have definitely improved thanks to this course.
About the Instructor:
The professor is very knowledgeable in this domain and can easily share her own real life experiences with the subject as well as other relevant readings. She usually can give applicable readings/media (eg films) that are related to a topic that comes out during classroom discussions which I find quite amazing. Her way of teaching how to write is also quite concise and I like that she gives short worksheets on each writing technique which makes it easier to refer to. She is also very approachable so its easy to ask her for feedback or help on our essays.
Content (Structure/Organization): 5
Clearly organised into 3 sections that somewhat build upon each other.
Accessibility and Assessment: 4
No background in philosophy or pedagogy is needed as long as you actually read the readings closely. Some readings are rather tough but none are too long, especially considering this is an NTW course.
Manageability of Workload: 3
Standard 3 essays and almost-weekly forum posts. Not difficult to write a decent essay for this course unless you've been sleeping through class or skipping readings. I put in more effort for assignments because this course can't be SUed, and I thought my efforts were rewarded despite not having prior exposure to the course content or being particularly creative. Depending on your creativity and understanding of the concepts in the reading, it might be easy or hard to come up with a great topic and analysis for your essays.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
Prof Amy is very helpful if you are active in seeking help and feedback. Her grading is generally very lenient though I think it depends on the general ability of the entire class. B+ is definitely very easy to achieve as long as you stay awake in class and skim through the readings. A- and above definitely requires more effort, especially if you aren't lucky enough to chance upon a great topic for your essays with a lot of room for exposition, especially your final essay, where you can choose your own education-related topic.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
Depending on your prior experience this course might be mind-blowing, but I would rather describe this course as helping to lay out in an orderly and linked fashion a bunch of scattered education-related concepts that everyone has probably heard a little bit of throughout their life.
About the Instructor:
Very good, very nice. Classes are always fun unless your class is a sleepy class. But even then Prof Amy does her very best to keep everyone engaged.
Content (Structure/Organization): 4
Syllabus is organised thematically with enough scaffolding. Topics covered included fundamentals regarding education, searching for knowledge and epistemology, and equity in education. The course is very structured but the way it is conducted in class is very flexible and dependent on how the discussions go.
Accessibility and Assessment: 3
I think it is not easy but not difficult either. The first part on fundamentals and the last part on equity in education is easy but the second part on epistemology is somewhat difficult. She does do a good job in introducing and clarifying which is great :D
Manageability of Workload: 4
Surprisingly not much given how it is the only NTW w 3 essays as the weekly readings are short and digestible (except the 2nd part). I spent maybe 2hrs worth of prep time each week. Forum posts are also not much to do so all is well.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
Very achievable; one just needs to understand the concepts and writing skills to do well. Prof is liberal w grades.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
Generally very useful and insightful.
About the Instructor:
She is mad knowledgeable, not just in terms of concepts but relating it to real life and personal experiences etc. She is very effective as I've mentioned.
Additional Comments/Word of Advice:
workload is actually very little, it only SEEMS a lot.
Name: Fang Yiyang (@fangyiyang)
Content (Structure/Organization): 5
The course covers issues of equity, fairness and justice in education, with a more social philosophy perspective. The course is divided into three parts - Unit 1 on the goals of education, Unit 2 on knowledge (echo chambers, epistemic injustice, gaslighting, etc.), Unit 3 on inequalities (meritocracy, privilege, affirmative action etc.). It is a wide spread of topics that allow you to explore different areas of interest. The sequencing of this course is helpful in that by the end you can start drawing links between many of the readings.
On the day-to-day, each class is mostly just a discussion of the readings (one text per session), sometimes in response to questions posted on Canvas. You need to make a total of 8 Canvas post/replies over the semester - which is quite useful because it helps you develop ideas for your response and research papers. The direction of the discussion therefore depends on what students raise and want to talk about - Prof Amy does not dictate the topic of discussion. This allows students to take charge of learning, but also requires you to put in active effort into the course - it is not advisable to just passively sit back. There are no slides or lecture anything - each class is just dedicated to discussing that one reading (although some time might be set aside to teach writing techniques and do peer feedback etc.).
By around the mid-semester mark, some time in class will be set aside to discuss more general writing techniques - these can be useful but a little more dry because it is mostly Prof Amy talking.
Before every written assignment, class is cancelled for a week and replaced with one-on-one consults - which are very useful to review the previous assignment and prepare for the next one. Feedback for papers are intentionally winded down as the semester progresses to encourage independence - the first assignments/drafts will have line edits (ie comments on the paper itself, almost line by line); by the last consult it is entirely student driven (ie you must ask specific questions to solicit feedback). This is quite useful in gradually increasing the level of difficulty across the semester.
Overall, the course is very well-structured, progressively working up its standards while remaining very welcoming and accessible. Organised but flexible, which is a very delicate balance which I feel Prof Amy achieved. It leans towards more student-led, especially by the end of the semester - ie a lot of the learning outcomes will be dependent on how much effort you put in. Don't let this sound intimidating - it prepares you very well for more advanced courses in the future.
Accessibility and Assessment: 4
Prof Amy's field is philosophy so most of the course readings have a social philosophy background, though the final paper need not be a philosophy paper - it is just her academic background and the course material reflects it. Therefore expect the readings somewhat conceptual and a bit harder to go through. But the readings are still reasonably manageable for someone without a background in philosophy - most tend to be somewhat grounded in real life issues, but they require some effort and thought to fully digest. If you are interested in the topic you'd definitely find it worth the effort.
In short - do expect to make some effort to read, but the course is by no means inaccessible to non-philosophy and non-humanities students. The readings are not something you can just skim through, but if you are interested in the topic you'd be able to manage.
Manageability of Workload: 3
You have to have done the readings to keep up in class - it is quite discussion-based and with only 10-12 students it is not possible to just sit back and hide. This does not mean needing to fully understand the readings, but a good faith effort to keep up is needed. Do not be intimidated by this though, Prof Amy creates a very friendly and welcoming environment so if you're confused or misunderstood something it is absolutely fine - you simply won't be able to learn anything (and will probably lose some participation points) if you didn't do the readings beforehand. All of the assignments require engaging with the readings anyway so it's a good way to force yourself to be prepared.
Since the readings tend to be more philosophical, on average you'd need about 1-2h per text, maybe a bit more if you really want to think through all the details. (each reading is about 20 pages long usually). There is one reading per class (with two classes per week, that means two readings per week, so set aside 4-5h per week just for reading and coming up with questions), but every few weeks there will be a class cancelled for consults and the last few weeks have no readings so that we can work on the final paper.
The assignments are, I think, on par with other NTW courses. There is one ungraded text summary early in the semester - very useful to get feedback on your strengths and weaknesses with no stakes to the grades. The graded written assignments are: text summary, response paper (where you summarise and respond to a reading), and the final research paper. On top of that there is one 5-7min solo presentation (summary of the day's reading) and class participation/forum posts (which are excellent platforms to try out ideas for the response and research papers). The assignments are very well spaced out, and the last few weeks of the class are dedicated to the research paper - no readings at all, just show up to class to discuss ideas and drafts of your research paper. This allows you to work towards the paper (~2500 words) at a good pace with reduced class workload.
In sum - manageable workload, but like all NTWs you'd obviously need to do a fair bit of reading and writing, but they're all well-paced to help you keep up. It is a course you definitely need to set aside time to prepare for, but if you're interested in the topic it's perfectly manageable.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
I do not know the spread of grades in this course - I never discussed grades with any student, but I scored A- for all my written assignments and an A for the final research paper. I feel all of the grades were fully deserved - I can understand why the A-s were not As, and I had to put in a decent amount of effort and make use of the consults to do well in the course. So I'd say the grading is fair. That being said I also had some background in academic writing and philosophy already so that might have helped a bit, and also I didn't check what other people received. But Prof Amy is always open to giving more feedback and consults, so as long as you try you should be able to get a good grade (even if not an A)!
Participation and forum discussion also counts for 20-30% of the total grade iirc so you always have something to pull you up.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
Overall, an excellent course and one of my favourite of the semester. Content-wise, takes some effort but still manageable and the topic is very interesting and pertinent - and will probably change your perspective on education (no kidding, someone said something like "omg this reading changed how I thought about education/school/teaching/learning entirely"). Prof Amy is very helpful and welcoming and offers very good feedback on your writing.
About the Instructor:
Prof Amy is incredibly friendly, welcoming and helpful. It was always enjoyable talking to her in class and in consults. You can express your ideas and doubts without fear of judgement, impatience or harsh criticism. Her enthusiasm for the course is also very motivating.
She is knowledgeable in the subject matter and can recommend good extra readings, though her expertise does lean towards philosophy and social theory.
Her feedback on assignments is also excellent. Detailed and clear on what you did poorly, did well, and how to improve. NTW is supposed to help you with academic writing and Prof Amy definitely accomplishes this well. That being said, a lot of the best feedback will come from you actively asking questions about your drafts and graded assignments - the more you ask, the better she can advice you.
Additional Comments/Word of Advice:
Don't be turned off by this course having philosophy or high workload. It's definitely manageable if you put in a good faith effort. Prof Amy is also incredibly helpful and welcoming. The subject matter is very relevant to our lives and I think many students, especially those who grew up in a traditional Singapore/Asian education systems, will find the ideas in the readings very refreshing and change your worldview. Most students I took the class with seemed to really enjoy the course and Prof Amy's teaching. From my understanding this course has historically been very popular so for CourseReg you'd have to place it as first choice - there were a few Year 2 students in my class who couldn't secure it in Year 1 and had to wait.
Also, Prof Amy is a morning person so her classes and consults are always early lol.
Content (Structure/Organization): -
The structure is present but i do not like it. Every normal seminar has a reading for discussion and some writing lessons but i would prefer if it was split.
Accessibility and Assessment: 4
Prof does a good job to make it accessible and props to her for that
Manageability of Workload: 2
Not much until the assignments come. Readings and forum posts are light but when the assignments come there is too much work, especially since there are 3.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
A- rather easy A is rather hard. Depends on whether one did debating in the past, if the answer is yes like me than my answer stands. Prof is liberal in handing out grades but the work has to be put in which may be difficult for some
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
Honestly very practical knowledge. The subject matter is very useful. Writing skills are also very useful although I kinda already know beforehand.
About the Instructor:
Pretty good not much else to say except for the criticisms already given.
Content (Structure/Organization): -
Overall, the module is rather well organized with pockets of time dedicated for students to ponder beyond what is taught.
For the content covered, the first two-thirds of the module may feel disjointed as the readings expose you to a variety of ideas on the purpose of education within society as well as different mechanisms contributing to epistemic violence. However, all the concepts will tie perfectly together when they are applied in the final third of the module where the intersections between the concepts within epistemology and philosophy of education are highlighted.
Prof Amy usually allocates a portion of class time towards a discussion about the text, and it usually becomes a back-and-forth on how said concepts may be applied to the context of Singapore education. The quality and utility of the ideas surfaced in these discussions are highly dependent on the workload for that particular week, and can differ across classes depending on the students present. This is the only portion of the module which I think can create variable outcomes in organization and structure
As for the writing lessons, Prof Amy does an excellent job in defining learning objectives and gives us actual examples/real-time feedback in class to ensure we gain the relevant writing competencies.
Accessibility and Assessment: 4
The module begins with ideas about the purpose of education in society, concepts surrounding epistemology, and how these concepts may be applied in an educational setting leading to various consequences. As someone without any prior knowledge of the concepts in the module, the readings Prof Amy provides are typically sufficient to introduce the broad idea for that very class. Depending on one's flair for concepts in the social sciences, however, you might have to spend more time dissecting the ideas contained in the passages. As for the writing classes, Prof Amy condenses the ideas and skillsets one requires into neat handouts which very clearly illustrate how one is supposed to apply said skills. I would give the accessibility of the content portion of the module a 3, and the writing portion a 5, hence the average of 4.
Manageability of Workload: 1
As someone with zero background knowledge, this mod probably commands the workload of 2 or 3 other (non-NUSC) mods, with the majority spent on digesting the key ideas presented in the readings as well as coming up with insightful questions/responses in the forum posts. The papers we have to submit are also extremely taxing, especially if you do not have a clear direction on where to take your essay. The intellectual journey the module embarks you upon, however, is well worth the sacrifice.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
I would consider a B+ a really decent grade in this module. Prof Amy strongly believes in building our competencies and dislikes high-stakes grading, which is reflected in how 15% of the module grade is class part and 15% are forum posts. If one puts in the work and engages during class, this 30% is a definite clinch. The remaining 70% of the module grade is split amongst 3 graded papers, with each successive paper accounting for a greater weightage. As long as you demonstrate an understanding of the content covered as well as properly apply the writing skills taught, prof Amy tends to award a decent grade, taking into account your progress and improvement over the course of the semester. Tl;dr if one puts in the work a good grade is really within reach.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
It certainly is an eye-opener to a whole new set of concepts I have never considered about education, and helps you evaluate what you observe in your own educational experiences.
About the Instructor:
Prof Amy is possibly the nicest and most understanding prof I have ever met, and she is extremely well-versed in philosophical concepts surrounding education. Not only does she insightfully discuss the readings, she is also very quick to consider the unique viewpoints brought up by various students and challenge the thinking by posing follow-up questions as food for thought. As for the writing portion of the module, her handouts give a very clear structure for the writing competencies needed and she does very well in bringing the class through the handout
Additional Comments/Word of Advice:
10/10 recommend if you are passionate about education systems
Name: Jackson Yeong (@comradejackson)
Content (Structure/Organization): -
This module was organized into three content units (which are the three sections I described previously) where we spend 3-4 weeks on diff readings for that unit each lesson. I felt that the content units were really well organized. I feel that the content units ended up tying together really well when we reached the third unit, as you now have various social and philosophical frameworks to explain inequality in relation to the educational system.
During class time itself, Prof Amy split each lesson into roughly 2 parts - going through the reading for the day and the writing lesson part. The ""content"" part mainly involves smaller group discussions with guiding questions on the week's reading, after which each group then shares with the class. I found the discussion part to be very enjoyable and insightful, and Prof is quite good at picking up the more interesting points brought up by my classmates and steering the discussion in that direction, which gave me a more insightful view on the readings So, she's quite flexible in and very affirming to whatever the class brings up.
Also, I liked that Prof was very open to feedback about the syllabus and class structure. I feedbacked to her that I would like more writing practices and she introduced optional writing based forum post (as an alternative for the content based form posts).
Accessibility and Assessment: 4
NTWs sort of have two learning components to it - the content and the writing skills. The content covers the societal goals of educational systems, more philosophical analyses of knowledge production and how educational systems relate to societal inequity (in exacerbating or alleviating inequity). I find the content to be largely very accessible for most people, as everyone would have had some personal experience navigating educational systems and most people, I think, have some opinion about social inequality. The more social science nature of this NTW and the relatable content (for students), I feel, makes it relatively easy for people to contribute to class discussions and apply what they learnt in class to their own personal educational experiences or personal encounters with social injustice. There is a content unit on epistemological and psychological concepts which can be a bit daunting at first, but I think it's not too hard to get through as later on you can apply these more philosophical concepts to the more familiar context of education.
As for the writing skills portion, Prof Amy distills down various writing concepts into very neat and accessible handouts, and spends half of each class going through the skills in the handout. I think its quite accessible for those who are new to writing in general.
Manageability of Workload: 3
Class Syllabus
Participation (30%)
In-Class Participation – 15%
Readings and 6 discussion questions – 15%
Writing (70%)
Paper 1 - Snapshot (ungraded) 500 words
Paper 2 - Exposition Paper (10%) 1000 words
Paper 3 - Response Paper (25%) 1250 words
Paper 4 - Final Research Paper (35%) 2500 words
The weekly workload is mostly just read your class readings, and do your forum posts. The readings are sometimes a pain to get through, but just try to at least get the general idea of what its saying and process it a little before you go to class (so you don't look like a blur sotong in front of your classmates lmao). The forum posts consist of a discussion forum on that week's reading where you are expected to ask 6 questions and answer 6 questions over the entire term (12 posts in total). You can also do a writing exercise which is often something like ""rewrite your intro from paper 2"" for example to fulfil 1 out of the 12 forum posts. The Q&A forum posts don't have a word count, but generally you should be looking to hit maybe 100+ words for questions and 300+ words for answers. I would say that the forum posts are not that time consuming, but i would recommend fulfilling your 12 post quota as early as possible in the sem so you don't regret it when workload ramps up for your other mods.
As for the papers, this might be the only NTW with 4 papers LOL. The workload for the essays, like for all other NTWs, will be relatively high for a Y1 mod. 3 graded essays are no joke, and I felt that the final research paper was quite a bit of a step-up from the previous 2 essays. There will be a lot of time spent brainstorming and trashing ideas for your essays which was both quite rewarding and brain-melting
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
I think that it is challenging to get an A but it is not too hard to get a B+. I've heard horror stories of other NTWs where students come back with a B- or even a C but I think Prof Amy is relatively forgiving in her grading. Moreover, this NTW has a relatively low weightage for the actual writing itself (70%). With class part being relatively easy to get (the small class size of 12 people, I feel, makes it easier to speak up), your grade will probably be cushioned by this larger class part percentage.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 3
Overall, I would say the content was very interesting and engaging for me, and the course provided me with many new insights and fresh perspectives into educational topics. However, I felt that I was relatively disappointed by the writing skills component. It felt like Prof was mostly just going through quite general writing skills so when I had to actually write my research paper, it felt a bit like I was thrown to the deep end. I think Prof really helped me improve the clarity of my writing and my writing style in general through her very good feedback, but I would have preferred if there was more on the specificities of academic writing.
About the Instructor:
Prof was not only super duper nice, but I felt that she was really good specifically at giving feedback and working with what you give to her, rather than imposing her own opinions/style on you. In class discussions, she's very good at probing your points and guiding you to push it further. But, I think she is especially fantastic at her feedback sessions for your papers' drafts. She is really good at looking at your essay drafts, and going "how can we work on this?", giving comments which feel feasible to work on, expanding on parts of your essay she finds interesting and commenting on how your own personal writing style can be refined and improved.