International Service-Learning is an experiential learning pedagogy that combines academic learning and community-based service in an international context. Combining aspects of study abroad and service-learning, it embeds an intensive experience of community service into a foreign culture. International service-learning has been increasingly adopted by universities to better prepare their students to become ‘global citizens’ with needed intercultural competencies to help them function effectively in a progressively interconnected world.
Service-Learning itself does not have to be conducted in an international, cross-cultural context. In fact, the majority of service-learning at PolyU, approximately 75%, is conducted locally. On the other hand, international, cross-cultural service-learning is recognised as a powerful pedagogy that can help us achieve the dual, complementary purpose of service-learning and internationalisation at the same time. The societies in Mainland China and Hong Kong have fairly distinct cultural environments, even though the racial demographics are quite similar. These are due to the different political histories, linguistic practices, economic development, etc., over the past more than a hundred and fifty years. Currently approximately 15% of service-learning is conducted in Mainland China, and slightly under 10% is in foreign countries, although the numbers fluctuate quite a bit year by tear.
There appears to be a commonly-held belief that international exchange is effective in helping students develop a global perspective. An immersive experience in a foreign country reaps great benefits. It is on this basis that universities and funding agencies are investing so much resources in sending students on expensive exchange programs, both academic and extra-curricular.
However, we have learned that putting students in an international experience may not be, by itself, sufficient to enhance significantly all aspects of their intercultural competencies and global citizenship. It requires purposeful preparation and effort to make the exposure meaningful and beneficial to both students and the host community, and particularly in achieving specific learning objectives.
The pandemic has forced most schools to close, all over the world, from kindergarten to university.Many, perhaps most, have asked their teachers to teach online.Is it working?The short answer has to be NO.
For some schools, it is working more or less successfully. Typically these are universities and wealthy schools who have the hardware and software, the teachers with eLearning experience prior to the pandemic or least are learning through it, the technical support needed, and most importantly, whose students also have the requisite resources and skills to benefit.
For example, I am involved in teaching service-learning online at PolyU. We have a strong teaching team, with a couple of professors experienced in teaching online in various ways for some years even before the pandemic. We are supported by a team of assistants with strong information technology skills and passionate about what we do. We experiment with many different modes of teaching: lecture, small group discussions, group projects, game-based teaching, mix of virtual with tangible artefacts, … We experiment with different setups suitable for different modes of teaching: placement of cameras & microphones, augmented reality, virtual reality, tools, software, …
While the professors teach, the assistants manage the students, help them with technical problems such as installation of software, logging into and switching from system to system, solving problems with the audio and visual signals, etc., to smooth out the frustration with the technology. We teach the students to set up their own environment for the best result. We use a variety of methods, encouraging, persuading, pushing, coercing, rewarding, …, to keep the students engaged. We use a lot of tangible artefacts: robotic and scientific kits, virtual reality viewers, 3D cameras, …, to make the learning engaging and physical.
We search for game-like tools for students to post their responses to questions, brainstorm on projects, and collaborate on projects. We link up our university students from Hong Kong with those from USA and South Africa, high school and primary school students from Hong Kong, Vietnam, Cambodia, Rwanda and South Africa. We are using the technology to learn and to serve.
We are able to do things online that is not possible in person. We can reach the poor in the poorer parts of Asia and even Africa almost just as easily as we reach those in Hong Kong, without actually travelling. We have seen how kids in Hong Kong, Cambodia, Vietnam, Rwanda and South Africa lit up with joy when that happen.
But those of us who have the relevant experience, access to resources, plus a technically-adept and passionate support team, are in a privileged position. Such cannot be said about many university professors, who are in other disciplines, with different prior experiences, and different access to resources. Let alone most secondary school teachers. Most primary school teachers can barely manage using common video conferencing software to deliver a 20 minute, one-way, lecture. Many primary schools have one technical person supporting dozens of teachers. Most students, from primary to university, do not show their face during the online class. Teachers are often at a loss. Many teachers do not even show their own face themselves. Many do not care whether their students show their faces, or have no clue how to encourage their students to engage. The delivery is mostly one way. No interaction, no feedback to speak of. Students find it difficult to follow what is being said. Even the diligent students find online learning boring. This is because what they are being fed is boring, not necessarily because online learning is boring by nature. It is not their fault.
And this is true for those who are privileged to have the means to follow the online classes. Many students simply don’t have the hardware, the necessary Internet bandwidth, the home environment and the needed support to attend online classes properly. In many countries and communities, the Internet infrastructure is simply not there to make online teaching work. When there is no electricity or Internet access at home, what is a student to do? When the teachers themselves don’t have computers, how can they conduct online classes?
The digital world is available to those who can afford it. The best-resourced schools and students may be thriving and driving its development. Many schools, on the other hand, have effectively shut down completely. The poorly-resourced students have learned practically nothing in the pandemic. They have lost more than a year of learning, and will continue to lose more. The digital divide, if anything, is widening in the face of the pandemic. A tremendous amount of human potential is unfulfilled, wasting away. The world cannot afford to continue to do that. It is grossly unfair and the world will be poorer because of it. It is up to those of us who have access to the technology, skills and the will to reach out, to share, to help to realise that potential. We will all be better because of it. But do we have the will to do it?
Research is a critical element of a credible service-learning program. At the least, we need to know how much of the intended learning outcomes have been achieved by the students, and how much impact have been achieved in the community.Have the students gained better understanding of social issues?Are they better in applying their academic knowledge in solving real world problems?Have they become more emphatic and passionate towards others? Are they inclined to be more socially engaged? Are their work bringing sustainable benefit to the community?
Beyond these obvious questions on visible outcomes, we also need to know how these are achieved. What pedagogies are effective in facilitating these outcomes? What features are not effective? What is the mechanism in play in the process? These general questions have to be asked in order for anyone to improve their program, to achieve greater impact.
There are also questions on features that are specific to our own program, that may be of particular interest to us, but which can also be useful for others who are considering similar measures or facing similar challenges. Our program is compulsory - all undergraduates are required to take at least one service-learning subject. How does that impact on the students’ motivation, performance, and learning outcome? We have two fairly different types of service-learning courses. Students can take a SL course in their own discipline (discipline-specific), applying relatively advanced skills in their own discipline to address society issues. They can also take a SL course in another discipline, as general education, to broaden their education while addressing social issues. How do these different approaches compare? Our program invests heavily on international, cross-cultural SL, making available a lot of opportunities for students to be involved. Is it really achieving the dual purpose of SL and internationalisation at the same time? We purposely integrate leadership education in many SL courses. Does it work? Are SL and leadership education truly complementary and strengthen each other? Overall, does SL making a lasting impact on our students in the long run? Are we truly successfully embedding responsible citizenship as our core value?
As discussed earlier, we started researching on some these questions as soon as the SL program was launched in 2011. And we had already had some encouraging results by the time the first batch of students graduated in 2016. But those were necessarily preliminary results. Our research team was small and inexperienced. We did not have the resources to mount large scale, in depth studies. The Office of Service-Learning was actually discouraged by some to engage in research - ostensibly because it was considered a non-academic unit. We found the rigid differentiation between academic and non-academic units artificial, unnecessarily restrictive and unhelpful. We realised we had to push harder for SL at PolyU to get better. We started to apply for research and teaching development grants. We started seeking collaboration within and outside our university to research on some of these important questions.
On Sunday morning, at the end of my 10K run, I passed by a mulberry tree. I had been aware of the tree for some time.But that morning I spotted some very dark (ripe) mulberries.
I picked a few. By then my fingers had started to turn pink, from the juice of the mulberry. When they are ripe, the slightest pressure would break the very thin skin. And often you do have to apply a tiny bit of pressure to pick them off the tree.
Obviously I could not put the mulberries in my pocket. They would become a mess and inedible. The only other thing on me that seemed useful was a big handkerchief that I used as a face mask. I tied up corners of the handkerchief to make a bag and put some mulberries in it. But then how could I re-enter my building without a mask? Perhaps I could empty them into my hands then. How much can I hold in my hands? And how would I then put my “handkerchief-mask” back on? And the mulberry would certainly stain my colourful handkerchief. What to do?
While I was thus fidgeting, someone called from across the street. It was a woman in worker’s clothes sitting on a low hedge on the sidewalk. Perhaps a worker from some company contracted by the government to take care of the vegetation or the space along the waterfront. I couldn’t tell what she was saying. I was afraid she might be trying to stop me from picking the mulberries. Hence I was inclined to ignore her.
But her voice sounded friendly. So I walked over. She waved a plastic bag at me. What? Then I realised she was offing me the empty bag to hold the mulberries. She had noticed my struggle to find something to hold my mulberries. She was eating a small cake as a snack while taking a break. She consumed the cake quickly and offered me the bag! I had mistaken her generosity as hostility. Shame on me! I did thank her and was happy with the turn of events. Now I could pick a lot more mulberries to share with my wife and our two good friends that we were going to go hiking with later in the day.
I was doubly surprised that morning. Firstly by the very tasty mulberry. Secondly by an act of kindness.
While I was picking, a young Caucasian couple walked by. They saw me and joined in - picking and eating happily. It turned out they were from Ukraine. Mulberries are common back home but they couldn't find them in Hong Kong until that morning. For me, this was my first encounter with someone from Ukraine in Hong Kong.
I remember feeding mulberry leaves to silkworms and eating the berries while I was in primary school. Mulberries do have a special place in my memory.
It was a good morning which was going to get even better.
PolyU’s very successful efforts into international service-learning could not have succeeded in this way without the generous support from the university as well as donors. The university funds all the costs for teaching service-learning, and some of the additional costs such as equipment, materials, manpower, and some necessary travelling. However, the travelling costs sending teams of students to far away places, and other unexpected costs often exceed way beyond the regular funding provided.Some students from more well-off families can afford to cover such costs with their own resources.In fact, many universities, including some in Hong Kong, require the students to cover the travelling costs themselves.The heavy financial challenge can result in the undesirable situation of preventing less well-off students from participating in international service-learning.This situation perpetuates some of the inequalities in education and is hence in direct conflict with the purpose of service-learning.Hence it is important for us that we find other funding sources to cover much of the travelling costs so that students who quality can participate equally.We do expect students to cover a certain reasonable portion of the costs themselves, to ensure their commitment and accountability.
It is not feasible to discuss in a lot of details the funding support from all sources. We will simply highlight the donations from one prominent alumnus for illustration. Our first foray into Rwanda in Africa was funded by the university as an activity that promotes internationalisation, back in 2013. That helped us to initiate one of our most impactful projects. Unfortunately, the funding was provided to us in just one shot. When it was exhausted, we had to seek other sources to keep the project going. This is particularly critical for the projects in Rwanda, which is almost 10,000 kilometres away from Hong Kong, without direct flights between us. The project involves a lot of engineering, such as the installation of solar panels to generate electricity. Hence there is a significant need for funding for equipment and materials. For the past several years, the Rwanda projects, and some others, have been generously funded by Mr. Wong, Tit-shing. Mr. Wong is an alumnus of PolyU.
Mr. Wong graduated graduated from PolyU’s predecessor, the Hong Kong Technical College in 1967. He later founded Jetta Company, a very successful toy manufacturing group. Dr. Wong has also gained a reputation for his dedication to producing safe, high quality toys. In 1998, he founded the Jetta Charitable Foundation, which has financially supported the construction of many schools and hospitals in mainland China, along with disaster and poverty relief. Among his many donations to PolyU, he has been funding the Wong Tit-Shing Student Exchange Scholarship for outbound exchange of students in the engineering faculty for many years. The programme helps engineering students develop their international horizons, understanding on global development and extend their global network. When we approached him for his support for our international service-learning programs in Rwanda and other locations, he gave us a generous donation and has been supporting the program every year since. His is keen to meet with the students to find out what they have done, what they have learned and how their experience fit in with their studies and career aspirations. The students are very grateful to him, and other donors for help to make international service-learning so successful at Polyu.
Throughout the process, we have worked closely with our Alumni Office. They helped us approach Mr. Wong initially and develop the concept, gets approval on the donation by PolyU management, negotiate on the concrete details and budget, arrange for Mr. Wong to meet with the team, etc. This little episode goes to demonstrate that service-learning is much more than just a bunch of students doing something to benefit a community. It involves many parts of the university working together on a wide range of aspects, in order to make service-learning happen. It has indeed gone a long way towards embedding service-learning into campus life, and indeed making it part of our culture and values.
I took the Covid-19 vaccine shot 1 on Monday, 4:30 PM.
When I got there I was the fourth in line. Within a few minutes I was getting my shot. I watched as she gave me the shot. The nurse was very skilful. It was quick and I hardly felt anything.
About 7 hours later, by the time I went to bed, I noticed my upper arm was a little sore.
About 16 hours after the shot, when I got up the next morning, my arm felt like someone punched me hard. But as long as I don’t put any weight on it, it doesn’t bother me. During the day, it seemed to get better.
About 40 hours after the shot, when I got up 2 days later (this morning), it was still a bit sore if I touch it. Otherwise I wouldn’t notice it.
Other than that, there have been no other adverse effects. That is the extent of my reaction to the shot so far.
In 2013, we started in Rwanda with something we were familiar with. We installed a computer network at the Center of Champions, their primary and vocational school for young people who missed their opportunity for an education the first time. We visited several of their self-help groups to help document the good work being done, and to help publicise their stories through pamphlets and social media.We then run workshops for their staff on information technology and social media.
Then we started installing solar panels to generate electricity. Firstly for two primary schools in the mountains in Gikomero. When that had proven to work, we started installing single systems for families for 10+ families in the following year. Then we refine the design to install solar panels on a few selected houses as charging stations. That way many more houses can charge their batteries at the charging stations and then bring their batteries back home to power the lights and phone chargers that we install. We ended up providing electricity to hundreds of houses in a village deep in a valley where there has never had electricity, and the Internet does not reach yet. When the lights turned on for the first time, the villages feel they were in Kigali! Along the way, we also setup wireless networks for many of AEE Rwanda’s offices all over Rwanda. We ran many workshops on a wide range of technology related topics to children, adults, …
We later on brought another team to do health promotion and started some vegetable gardens. Another team design more efficient brick stoves to replace their 2-stone stoves. We brought along a team from University of Maryland to work alongside PolyU students. We brought along young people from a local NGO and students from the University of Rwanda. We trained young people from the villages to install solar panels for their own villages and neighbouring ones. When the pandemic hit, we are able to leverage the connections we have developed to set up remote classes for children who cannot go to school, taught by our students through the tenuous Internet. We are developing ways to strengthen those classes. We may even be able to teach local youths and university students to install solar panels remotely. Using our experience in Rwanda, we are planning to take our projects to other African countries.
Rwanda/Africa offers tremendous service and learning opportunities because it is so different from Hong Kong/China/Asia. Also because it is so far away, the cost of travelling, logistics and time is high. For these reasons it is difficult to bring a large team, or to stay for a long time. Hence we have always to be very well prepared when we come, and to make every day and every person count while we are on the ground. That has forced and stimulated us to not just work hard but also be creative. Increasingly, we are taking advantage of the advances in the Internet and associated technologies to create new projects and new ways to engage.
In return, we have made so many friends. We learned it is possible to recover from horrible horrible genocide. It is possible to forgive and reconcile. It is possible to live in poverty with hope. It is possible to be confident even when you are dirt poor. We learned hardship can build character. We learned that technology can divide but also unite. We learned how gratifying it can be when you can use what you know to do good. We learned how to live with very little water. We learned why we should treasure what we have. We learned you need to learn in order to be useful. We learned to not take good fortune for granted. We learned that when we share we gain so much more. We learned and continue to learn so much.
In many places in the world, we may have an opportunity to make an incremental change, from 100 to 101, or 10 to 11. In places like Rwanda, we have an opportunity to make a quantum change, from Zero to One, from nothing to something. Wouldn’t we want to make a quantum jump?
Rwanda has been, and remains a challenging as well as fruitful offshore base for us.
Rwanda is a landlocked country in the Great Rift Valley in East Africa.It is surrounded by Uganda to the north, Tanzania to the east, Burundi to the south, and Democratic Republic (DR) Congo to the west.It was colonised by Germany in 1884, and invaded in 1916 by Belgium during World War I.In 1962 Rwanda became independent. Ethnic conflicts have plagued Rwanda since the colonial days and continued after independence.In 1994 it flared into a horrendous genocide in which an estimated 800,000 Tutsi and moderate Hutu were killed over a period of 100 days, among a population of ~8 million.It was a horrible horrible time for Rwanda.The world watched but little was done to help. It was stopped only by a rebel Tutsi army.
Since 1994, however, Rwanda has been going in a very different direction. The killers were taken to court, but there was no revenge massacre. Instead, the country put a lot of effort into resolving the ethnic conflict. The government abolished the ethnic label (Hutu, Tutsi, Twa, …) in the identity card and encourage everyone to identify themselves as Rwandan rather than members of specific ethnic groups. The Christian churches in particular have worked hard on reconciliation, emphasising that faith can help overcome the bias, sense of injustice, and break the cycle of hatred and revenge at the core of ethnic conflicts. The country remains very poor - GDP per capita is only USD 820. But the economy has been growing fast at around 7% per year and is quite stable. Many rate Rwanda as one of the best countries in Africa to invest in.
Much of the country, even within the capital district of Kigali, is still without electricity and running water. The government is working hard on electrifying the country. But given the limited resources available, it is going to take a long time before the vision can be fully realised. Despite the poverty, Rwanda is very clean. The streets and the environment are clean, even in the countryside. The government is generally considered to be free of corruption - its corruption index is on a par with much more advanced economies such as South Korea.
A lot of people probably know very little about Rwanda. Many cannot place it on a map. Among those who have heard of it, there is a perception that Rwanda is a violent, dangerous place. It is interesting that even in Africa, people who live far away from Rwanda, e.g., in South Africa, seem to perceive of it only as a poor violent place. But people in neighbouring countries, e.g., Tanzania, seem to be more envious of its success. Perhaps its bad reputation among people from afar derives from the tremendous impact of the horrible genocide, while its neighbours are more aware of the current, actual situation. The reality is that the genocide happened more than 20 years ago, and the country has been stable and developing for many years. Our teams have traveled all over Rwanda extensively, particularly in and around the mountain villages north of the capital Kigali, to a school in Rwamagana to the east, to Akagera national park near the border with Tanzania in the east, to a university at Nyagatare to the north east near the border with Uganda, to schools near Nyamata in the south near the boded with Burundi, to the north west to see the mountain gorillas at the Volcanos National Park near the order with Uganda and Democratic Republic of Congo. Never ever do we feel unsafe. Everywhere we go, the streets are clean, the muddy paths are clean. We have taken taxis and buses, walked and run the streets., hiked up and down mountains Everywhere we go people have been friendly.
From our perspective, one of the most attractive features of Rwanda is our partner, African Evangelical Enterprise Rwanda. We have received good recommendations prior to our getting to know them in person. And the more we get to know them and work with them, the more we are impressed by the organisation and their people. AEE Rwanda is completely run by local Rwandan people, and their philosophy is to help people help themselves. We have visited many of their projects: vegetable gardens, butcher’s shops, small experimental farms, rabbit/fish farms, chicken farms, pigs farms, public toilets, passion fruit farms, schools staffed with volunteer teachers, villagers working together to build houses for children who lost their parents, water sanitation projects, self-help groups learning to cook, bake, and do all kinds of things together. We have always been impressed by how well their staff interact with the villagers and how hard they work, how volunteers run and train the self-help groups, … We feel we can learn so much from them.
Given the depressing situation, people seem to be dealing with it in a number of ways. One is to capitulate and join the powerful; save your skin or even prosper; never mind justice and conscience.Two is to fight even more desperately, by any means possible; never mind that it is destructive and leads to no good end. Three is to retreat into a small circle and pretend that the outside world does not concern them; never mind that it still does and there is really no escape.Four is to run away as far as possible, at least to a place where it is safe; never mind that one cannot run away from one’s conscience and no place is really safe.
But there are still ways to live in dignity. Yes, there are suffocating pressure coming from so many angles. So many things one cannot do, discuss, teach, write, and even think about without getting into trouble. But it is not true that therefore there is nothing that one can do.
I know of this teacher of English. She does not teach in a classroom in a formal school but outside. She does not help the student with homework. She teachers her students to read newspaper and magazine articles, analyse them and discuss them. She teaches them to think clearly and critically. She teaches them to distinguish between news and fake news. She teaches them to live in truth. This is certainly one way. There are others. The inner world is always ours.
Yes, there are red lines that we cannot cross. But it is still possible to find room behind the red line. Even the authoritarian needs science and technology to drive productivity and development. To do science and technology one needs the ability to think logically. So people can continue to think and help others to do the same.
If it is a just world that we seek, then we have to learn to know and live in truth. We have to learn to tell the difference between news and fake news. We have to help our young people learn to respect diverse points of view. But we also need the courage and the discipline to not say anything that is not true even if it serves our purpose. We have to learn and teach that the end of justice does not justify the means of falsehood and violence. In fact, a system of democracy is of no use if the citizens are not capable of distinguishing between news and fake news, and not able to reason reasonably. It would only become the tools of demagogues. We have witnessed too much of it recently, all over the world.
But this is a hard way. It does not bring instant gratification. We may not see the real impact even in our own lifetime. Yet it is the necessary way. Perhaps even the only way. In the end, truth is God’s. He is there for us. But truth is always the hard way.
In 2010, we sent a team of ~30 students to Cambodia. The team was split into 5-6 small teams to a number of community organisations on various computer-related projects. Our partners include an organization set up by an American running 3 community learning centres in the slums around the city, Emmanuel Christian School - a primary school run by missionaries near the infamous Stung Meancheay garbage dump where kids scramble up and down the mountains of garbage for things to recycle, Rhenish Homes - an orphanage run by a Christian charity from Hong Kong, White Lotus - a women’s shelter run by 2 lady missionaries from the USA for the victims of human trafficking, and a charity teaching children photography, among other things, in Siem Reap.
These contacts, in turn, introduce us to other organisations: another women’s shelter run by a lady missionary from the USA, Rahab’s House - a shelter run by an American pastor for the children victims of human trafficking, House of Rainbow Bridge - a hospital run by Christian missionaries from Hong Kong for kids with HIV/AIDS, Asian Human Resources Development Institute (HRDI) - a vocational school run by another missionary from Hong Kong for the youths in poverty, the Cambodian Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), Young People Do - an indigenous community organization run by an enterprising young Cambodian woman, New Life Fellowship - a large energetic Christian church started by an American pastor but run mostly by Cambodians helping a lot of young people who come to the city from the countryside for work and education, Vatanak Vong’s Living Water Farm, …, and finally, the Royal University of Phnom Penh, the premier university in Cambodia.
We have introduced numerous teams from PolyU with a total of ~1,000 students and staff to work with these organisations and communities., from 2010 to 2020. A team teaches English professionally at Emmanuel Christian School at the garbage dump. They subsequently created another team to help social enterprises document and publicise their work through social media. An optometry team performs eye inspections in the schools and other sites. A team does health promotion in the villages and slums. A team from our famed School of Tourism and Hospitality advises local hotels that employ and train young people for the hospitality industry. A team designs and implements water filtration systems for a village. A team installs solar panels to generate electricity and indoor wiring to light up several villages. A team builds community learning centres out of converted cargo containers. Students and volunteers from AHRDI, New Life, YPD and others work alongside PolyU students and RUPP students in may projects. Since the pandemic cancelled travel, we have been experimenting with long distance workshops conducted through video conference over the Internet on various topics such as social media, science, …
We have built up such a strong relationship with the Royal University of Phnom Penh (RUPP) that they let us use one of their offices as our home base. We also get to use classrooms, meeting rooms, conference facilities as needed. We hire some of their staff part-time to support our project preparation and execution. RUPP staff and students work alongside PolyU staff and students in many projects. With all these support, we have been running training workshops and student conferences with hundreds of participants. We have accepted students from our partner universities from Mainland China and foreign countries such as USA, Israel, Vietnam, …, to work alongside our students in numerous projects. We have run staff training courses for several years, with 20+ participants in each cohort, from Hong Kong, Mainland China, Philippines, Vietnam, … These teachers observe the students in the field in a wide variety of projects, interview their teachers and partner NGOs, and plan their own objects. They have since created many service-learning courses and projects at their own home institutions.
We have also learned some important lessons building up our relationship with RUPP. We have always try to develop collaborative relations with reputable, leading universities in the countries that we operate it. Initially we approached the senior management of RUPP. They were positive about working with us, but for a while we could not reach the right people on the frontline who are willing and have the right skills as well as authority to actually carry out service-learning projects with us. Subsequently, through our community partners, we were able to connect with some frontline teachers who could work with us, even arranging for our team to use facilities on the RUPP campus for training and preparations. But they do not have the authority to approve formal collaboration. At one point, we had dozens students from multiple countries training to assemble solar panels in their big assembly hall. We were also training the students to insert batteries and LED lights into dead palm tree leaf stems shaped into desk lamps, and then use the solar panels to charge the batteries. The Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Dr, Leang Un, happened to be playing badminton in the cavernous hall next to our students. He was impressed by the concept of sustainability taught and practiced through installing solar panels as well as turning dead palm tree leaf stems into something useful, and gave us the blessing to move ahead with serious university-to-university collaboration. He has proven to be a staunch supporter and mover that make a lot of things happen. The experience has taught us the value of hard work as well as serendipity, and often the need for both at the same time. Those of us who believe in God might think Him for His provisions. But we also have to work hard and be creative. Sometimes we need an opportunity to present itself. But when it does, we have to be ready. In order to be ready, much hard work have to be done before hand.
The Cambodian base has been very fruitful for us. But much hard work and serendipity had gone into it.
Cambodia was once a mighty empire about a thousand years ago. dominating much of the Indochinese Peninsula, nowadays often called the Mainland Southeast Asia, in contrast to Maritime Southeast Asia. The Khmer Empire left a most notable legacy in Angkor, the former Khmer capital.The majestic ruins such as Angkor Wat help us imagine the grandeur of the Empire.The Khmer Empire declined as its neighbours, Thailand and Vietnam, gained in power.In 1863, Cambodia became a protectorate of France.In 1953, Cambodia regained independence but remained troubled.In 1969, the USA started bombing the Cambodia section of the Ho Chi Minh Trail, through which the Communist North Vietnam forces attacked South Vietnam, embroiling Cambodia in the conflict. In 1975 the murderous Communist Khmer Rouge took over Phnom Penh, starting the Cambodian Genocide until being ousted in 1979, during which a quarter of the then 7.8 million population in the country were believed to have perished.Vietnam invaded Cambodia in 1978, and occupied it until 1992.The country gradually stabilised after a coup in 1997, and was accepted into the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1999.By the time we started taking our teams to serve in Cambodia in 2010, the country was still poor but was starting to develop rapidly.
The genocide and the civil war destroyed much of the infrastructure of the country. At one estimate, only 20% of the reading material were left when the National Library was re-established in 1979. Another study reported that there were not enough books in the Khmer language left to fill a small room in the re-established National Library. In the early 2010s, much of the countryside were still without electricity and running water. People who can afford it run their own electrical generators powered by gasoline, and dig their own wells for cleaner water. People who cannot afford it live their lives by the sun, and fetch muddy water from rivers and ponds. There were still frequent power outages even in Phnom Penh. Schools were poorly funded. School teachers were paid around 100 US dollars a month, not enough for feeding a family. Basic education were supposed to be free. But the schools often have to collect fees for various reasons in order to operate. The poor often cannot afford to send their children to school because they cannot pay their fees. It was estimated that in the mid 2010s, Cambodia, with a population of 16 million, has about 800 people (0.005%) with PhD degrees. In contrast, Hong Kong, with a population of 7.5 million, produces more than 1,000 PhDs each year. USA has about 3.1 million PhDs (1.2%). The universities are also poorly funded. Academics have to teach additional self-financed courses to supplement their income. Under these circumstances academic positions are not attractive. Half of the government’s budget depended on foreign donations. The local currency was so weak that people pay and accept US dollars at hotels, restaurants, …
On the other hand, Cambodia seems to impose fewer restrictions on foreign agencies, compared to many other Asian countries. Cambodia is said to have one of the highest concentration of foreign agencies in the world. Foreign investment from Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Europe, …, are flowing in rapidly. Garment and other types of factories line the main roads leading out of Phnom Penh. Slums are cleared and pushed to the outskirts to make way for new construction. Commercial buildings and posh gated residential estates are springing up all over the capital. Resorts and casinos flood the tourist areas. The roads are improving, with potholes being filled. More and more fancy cars compete with motorcycles and tuk-tuks on the streets. Coffee shops and karaokes take over many street corners. Nominal Gross Domestic Personal (GDP) per capita in 2019 was estimated by the United Nations to be USD 1,644 (For reference it was 65,134 for USA, 32,134 for South Korea, 11,414 for Malaysia, 10,004 for China, 2,715 for Vietnam, 2,116 for India, 1,817 for Kenya, 1,187 for Pakistan, 820 for Rwanda, 545 for DR Congo). The economy grows at 7%. Many young entrepreneurs are prospering. In the mean time, young people flock to the capital for education and job opportunities, providing huge amounts of manpower, generating more needs for space and services, … Churches and agencies struggle to help the with housing, education, career and other needs. Few people seem to starve. But the living conditions in the slums are atrocious. The gap between the rich and the poor seems to grow, …
