Contribution of the Community Partner in Service-Learning

In service-learning, one of the challenges is to maintain a proper balance between the students’ learning and the benefits for the community.  From the perspective of power relationship, it is often perceived that the university holds the balance of power over those of the community partners.  

The community partners play an important role in the education of the students, in partnership with the teachers of the course.  Much of the students’ learning come from exposure to the community, listening to the community, understanding the needs of the community, and providing the service to satisfy part of that need.  Without the cooperation - passive as well as active - of the community, the students’ learning will be greatly diminished.  The teacher normally decides what the students are expected to learn.   The teacher also does much of the teaching, particularly the conceptual elements.   

But the experiential aspects of the learning, the most distinctive and valuable part of service-learning, typically comes from interaction with the community.  In this sense, the community is teaching the students.  This can happen explicitly and intentionally, when the community partners explains their situation, the social issues they are suffering from, the impact of those issues, and possible remedies.  It can also happen implicitly through the students’ experience in the community, observing, interacting, investigating, and problem solving.  

The community partners invest in the relationship their time, effort, knowledge, and attention.  This contribution should be properly recognised and rewarded.  However, it appears that this may not always be the case.  The contributions of the community partners are often considered to be passive.  Or the potential contributions from the community partners may not be fully utilised.  Partly as a consequence, the university does not feel obligated to recognise and compensate the community partners for their contributions.  When benefits are created for the community, it is often considered something offered by the university out of the goodness of their heart, rather than an obligation arising from the teaching the students receive from the community.  

It is important that this aspect of the relationship between the university and the community be properly acknowledged.  The community partners’ contributions to the students’ learning should be recognised fully, in all relevant aspects.  It should be recognised at least in the following ways: 

1. In the syllabus or description of the service-learning course, who are the community partners and in what way do they contribute to the learning of the students?  
2. The community partners should be aware of the contributions expected of them.  The project is probably initiated by the university, who has a much better understanding of the relationship and related issues.  The community partners may not be very knowledgeable of the concept of service-learning.  They may not have a clear understanding of the relationship, the expectations and the capabilities of the students.  It is the responsibility of the university to help the community partners become aware of these issues.  It should be done, at least, such that the community partners can play their role effectively.   It should also be done for the sake of fairness and justice.  Both sides should have a full understanding of the relationship. 
3. How are the community partners compensated for their contributions? Most likely it is in the form of benefits for the community generated by the service projects carried out in the course.  The efforts contributed by the community partners may not be directly comparable with the benefits generated, since they can be in very different forms and natures.  But the two should be broadly comparable in order for the relationship to be fair to both parties. 

The relationship between the university and the community partner is similar to that of a contract between parties.  The university (and its students) provides a service to the community, in return, the students learn from the community.  The community provides a service to the university, by teaching the students; in return, the community receives certain benefits from the service provided by the students.  

The power relationship between the university and the community partner is on a more or less equal footing.  The roles and responsibilities of both sides are clearly understood by both sides.  When both sides are fully aware of their roles and responsibilities, there is much less chance of misunderstanding, unequal power relationships, and even exploitation, either intentionally or un-intentionally.  It will also be more conducive towards a long-term, sustainable relationship.

In practice, this recognition rules out certain types of projects.

1. Projects of little to no benefit to the community.  The students may learn a lot from the field work and experience, while doing nothing for the community. The community receives nothing in return, after spending time and effort in interacting with the students.  The students may write a report and organise events to publicise their experience and the community.  But the real and practical benefits to the specific community partner are minimal.  Even if the publicity does bring some benefits in the future, to the wider community of which the current community partner is a part, it may still be grossly unfair to the current partner, who may or may not fully realise the reality of the situation, who may enter into the relationship without full understanding.  Often, in such projects, it is claimed that the community benefit from the care and love shown by the visiting team.  Generally such claims greatly inflate the significance and true impact to the community partner.  
2. Projects in which there is a high possibility of failure.  It can be due to poor preparation, very high level of skills possessed by the students, poor understanding of the issue, unrealistic project time allocation and planning, etc.  Students can still learn a lot from a failed project, sometimes even more than successful projects.  Hence a failed project can still be very valuable to the university and its students. But the benefits to the community is minimal.  Often it can even cause loss and damage, when the community puts in time and effort, and make preparations which cannot be completed.  

 

Freedom - relatively speaking

I broke my foot on September 19. It was the fifth metatarsal (the one longish-bone in the middle of the foot linked to the smallest toe on the outside) of my right foot, to be accurate.  I wasn’t aware it was broken when it happened.  All I knew was that I lost balance, my right foot twisted under me, and I fell.  It hurt badly.  I dared not take off the shoe to check, afraid that I might not be able to put it back on. 

I limped to the nearest MTR station, stopping to ease the pain many times, and got home.  When I took off the shoe, the top of my foot was blue and swollen.  I knew it was bad, but not how bad it really was.  My wife put my foot in ice, elevated. 

On Monday X-ray confirmed that it was broken.  There was a deep V where the fifth metatarsal was cracked almost completely into two pieces, almost at the end closer to the ankle.  The doctor put my foot in an air cast, and I had to use a cane when I walk. I was thankful that I could take the cast off when I was not walking.  

The pain eased quite a bit as soon as my foot was put in the air cast.  And it gradually went away in the following weeks.  Two weeks after the break, a second X-ray confirmed that the broken bones did not shift.  There wasn’t much pain by that point.  

At 6 weeks, the pain had completely gone.  The deep V crack was still there in another X-ray, however.  So I was worried.  I started walking a little without the cast, but very carefully, and only for short distances.  

Sometimes I retain the cane with me, to remind myself not to walk too fast, and to warn people against bumping into me.  (It actually happened more than once.)

At 3 months, another X-ray indicated that the two broken pieces had fused into one.  The bottom of the deep V had filled in, leaving a fuzzy, smaller U at the top.  I can walk normally, even briskly, now.  But still no running.  I am thankful and, in fact, overjoyed for the relative freedom already!

Thank you for all the prayers!

 

Who does knowledge serve?

There are always people who seek to exploit, dominate, and oppress other people, some of whom are willing to take extreme measures, putting others in prison, even to death.  And there are always people who seek freedom, justice and happiness, not only for themselves but also for others, some of whom are willing to suffer, even to die.  What happens in Hong Kong is no exception. 

In the struggle, there are people with special skills, training, expertise, knowledge, which can serve either camp. Writers, lawyers, judges, teachers, economists, researchers, politicians, businessmen, … Knowledge is generally believed conducive to getting to know the truth.  And as the Bible says, the truth will set you free.  Hence it is reasonable to assume that such knowledgeable people will work for freedom, justice, and compassion.  

Hence it is ironic, sad, even despicable, that many people privileged in possession of such special knowledge, who should know better, who turns out to use their gift, advantage, to serve the oppressor.  To dress up oppression as instruction, brutality as justice, meanness as effectiveness, enforced silence as cheerful agreement, subservience as loyalty; to twist liberty as disturbance, exercise of rights as challenge to authority, spontaneity as conspiracy, sincere criticism as abject subversion.  

It is often difficult to judge another person’s motivation based on their actions and words.  One does not always know whether such deplorable actions are driven by misunderstanding, bias, or a desire for status, power, and wealth.  It is sad if the former, and despicable if the latter.  

There is no doubt that the truth will set us free. What is unsure is whether knowledge necessarily leads to truth.  Parents, teachers, adults, have a great responsibility in nurturing the youth.  But the ultimate responsibility is personal.  God help us. 

Service-Learning during the pandemic?

In the academic year from September 2020 to August 2021, the whole world was in the grip of the coronavirus pandemic, which still has not yet been relaxed.  In a normal year, we send 600-700 students to serve in Mainland China, and 400 students to foreign countries.  Under the pandemic, travelling outside Hong Kong become impossible.  Many universities all over the world cancel their service-learning programs, completely or at least partially.  Many struggle to maintain the projects as much as possible.  PolyU is one of those.  

We have managed to offer as many courses and student places as we had been doing prior to the pandemic.  In fact, after an initial dip, we have be able to expand the number of places in response to the increased number of students.  Beyond Hong Kong, we were able to continue with projects on the Chinese Mainland, and several foreign countries.  Some of the countries we serve for the fist time.  Without being able to travel, we offer our services online.  Yet the service is not just conducted with words.  

We employ tangible tools and materials as much as possible.  We ship STEM toolkits, cameras - regular ones and sophisticated ones such as 360 degree cameras, virtual reality glasses, …, to local partners, and overseas ones.  We even shipped 150 sets of solar panel systems to Rwanda, and worked with local volunteers to install the panels for 150 households.  We never stop.  We are so proud of our teachers, assistant, and students.  We are grateful to our partners who continue to work with us.  We are grateful to our university and donors who continue to support us.  

In the current year and coming summer, God willing, we are and hope to be doing even more.  

So what if you gain the whole world, but lost your soul?

In a dim sum restaurant in Tsuen Wan, early in the morning on Tuesday at 7:30 am, the clients were mostly the elderly.  A grandma, 87, made a remark to her nephew, 65.  She was glad that the city is calm, now that the “black shirts” of 2019 are no longer making trouble.  She seems to speak for many people, particularly those favourable to the establishment.  Even for many who are more neutral, confrontation makes them uncomfortable, worries them.  They feel that disturbances are not good for business, and for their lives in general.  A calmer city lets them return to their old way of life.  

Those who are in power, in the establishment, rich, of course, are elated.  They retain, even enhance their power.  Those who oppose them, criticise them, are in prison, stripped of power and status, driven out of business, driven away from the city, or otherwise silenced.  They can go about making money, exercise their power, with so much less restraint than before.  What is not to like about the situation now?

Except that the calm is a deadly calm of despondency.  The silence is a result of hated suppression.  The calm is bought with injustice.  The situation reminds of a familiar verse from the Bible. “What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?” - from the Gospel according to Matthew, chapter 16, verse 26. 

Calmness in a society is normally a good thing. Unrest and confrontation is indeed usually bad for business, bad for living a normal life.  But if the calmness is bought with a loss of hope, loss of soul, what good is that?  If some people are getting rich and powerful, by stepping on the backs of those fallen, broken, brutally suppressed, what good is that?

It is doubly ironic that some Christian leaders are preaching submission and even active support for the oppressor, while turning a blind eye to the injustice.  They seem to value superficial calmness and material benefits over justice and compassion.   What in the world is happening?  Aren’t believers of God looking towards the future, to everlasting life beyond this world?  Shouldn’t Christians be willing to suffer temporarily for the sake of lasting righteousness?  Why, then, are we willing to sacrifice justice for the sake of a life of superficial and fleeting calmness, even material wealth?   

 

Hopefully, the desire for justice, for liberty, has not actually died - at leat not completely.  Hopefully, it is only a temporary setback, a time to recuperate, to rethink, to learn, to deepen, to strengthen, to educate.  True faith does not die.  It strengthens in adversity. God bless. 

When will the gloom be lifted?

When will the place feel like home again?

When will the guns exercise self-restrain, and be restrained?

When will the young not be regarded with suspicion and even hatred?

When will citizens not be considered pests?

When will the strong stop stomping on the weak?

When will the rich stop exploiting the poor?

When will those who hold the power persuade with reason rather than brute force?

When will the arrogant stop saying a deer is a horse?

When will the worse stop being sold as improvement? 

When will the self-serving stop claiming to be serving the public?

When will those who should know better stop using their skills to paint the dictator as a democrat?

When will the gloom be lifted?

When will God decide enough is enough?

Why is Fake News so hard to deal with?

Some people sees a post, likes something in it, and forwards the post - without bothering to check whether that something that they like is factual.  Perhaps they trust the source.  Perhaps they don’t care whether it is actually true or not.  Perhaps what they like is true, but the post contains other things that are not.  There are many reasons why things that are not true are permeating the Internet.  

But one of the most sinister is that much of the fake news come from powerful, resourceful organisations. Even political leaders, national governments. When a president, prime minister, spokesman, press secretary, chief of police, minister, …, puts out something that is not true, repeatedly, how does one tackle that?  When powerful, rich people buys up scholars to put out objective-sounding but factually wrong statements about the climate, industries, companies, the economy, events, …, how does one tackle that? 

For individual citizens, it is hopeless. News agencies, presumably, address that on behalf of the citizens, by pooling together resources, rigorous training, courageous investigations, and tireless devotion to finding the facts and reporting it.  Not all of them are trust worthy.  But over time, people find out the truth about these news agencies.  Generally, people know where they stand, who has what kind of bias, who to trust, and which is propaganda.  

But the powerful people who put out the fake news themselves know that relatively objective news agencies are a threat - to them.  So they harass them with threats, law suits, threaten their supporters, put reporters and operators in prison, shutting them down.  How a government deals with news agencies is an indicator of how fearful of the truth and authoritarian a government is.  Unfortunately, it is also a very powerful tactic in the hands of the powerful, ruthless and shameless.  

When a government cries about “fake news”, it may mean something very different from what we ordinary people think.  And when they claim to take action against “fake news”, it may actually mean the opposite.  Just like the word “democracy” - it means radically different things to different people.  

That is one of the main reason, perhaps the major reason, why fake news is so hard to tackle.      

The Dumbing down of Hong Kong

Hong Kong used to have an advantage in its people.  Hong Kong people had to work hard to survive.  Many were immigrants seeking new opportunities.  Refugees even., fleeing from war and oppressive situations. Such people had to be bold, quick, adaptive, and creative.  To take advantage of opportunities or even to create openings themselves.  People are not afraid to try new things when everything is new.  Particularly when you feel you have nothing to lose. Failure may mean that one loses face, time and money, that one has to start all over again.  It is a risk that many were willing to take. 

Sadly, that is no longer true.  Now many actions, words, and even thoughts are taboo.  The price for crossing the numerous, very fuzzy lines is so high.  It is no longer your face, time and money that is on the line.  It is your life, security, and freedom.  Some people also feel they have too much to lose.  Many have given up and moved away.  Many who are staying are scared of crossing the lines.  The people are advised, threateningly, “If you are in doubt, just don’t do it.”  The people are explicitly warned against risky actions, words, and even thoughts.  

Who can blame the people for playing it safe, doing only things that are known to be acceptable? A person cannot be easily compartmentalised.  Our personality drives every aspect of our lives.  When one is trained to be safe on one aspect of our lives, it is near impossible to be bold in another.  Innovation requires boldness, taking risks.  A people will become dumb and dull when it is trained to take the safe road all the time.  Such a people may be easy to tule over.  But will a dumb and dull people continue to be an asset in the long run?   

Working on the streets of Hung Hom - transport

Working on the streets in Hung Hom can be hard work, challenging, requiring much dexterity, unpleasant, even hazardous.

 

Delivering take-out on a bicycle.

Delivering cooking gas canisters on a bicycle.

Delivering goods on a push cart. 

Pushing madam in a wheelchair up a steep slope. 

Collecting trash on a cart. 

Handling two push carts full of trash at the same time, crossing a busy junction. 

Giving some car a traffic violation.  

Can you do it?