| ashu |
Posted
on 20-Dec-01 12:15 AM
Arvin Mainali from Pokhara FIRST made the attempt to be the world's youngest climber since Shambhu Tamang to climb the Everest. Due to bad weather conditions, he could not make it to the top. He fell short by less than 100
meters or so. He returned home exhausted but unharmed.
Temba too made the attempt to be the youngest climber. During his first attempt, he lost his fingers to frostbite. He returned back to Kathmandu and spent several days in a hospital. He lost months of school time.
BUT
Temba pulled all his resources again. He went back to the mountain the
following season. Went all the way to the top. Made it to the record books.
My question: Mountain-climbing is a difficult venture. Both Arvin and Temba are brave young Nepalis. Both had the support of their families, their schools, their larger communities and the Nepali press.
Yet, at the end, how come one succeeded in reaching his dream and the
other didn't?
All things being equal, could it be that, at the end, victory rested primarily on Temba's own emotional intangibles such as persistence, determination, focus,
a belief in oneself and, yes, optimism?
I think so.
What do others say?
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 20-Dec-01 12:28 AM
Ashu:
I think you are right.
Temba's success was primarily because of his belief on himself. I am pretty sure
that he knew he was almost 'there' in his first attempt. And you know that happens
to us also a lot of times.
----
Here is a story of one close friend of mine.
He scored 80 in math in test (class 10) when we were in highschool. He was
adamant it was 100. (Had it been 100, he could have been district first in the test).
The school teachers persuaded him not to recheck."Test doesn't matter, SLC is
the one that matters" was what they said.
He told me he worked hard on mathematics just to see 100 in his marksheet, since
there were basically no subjects in which one could get 100 except mathematics.
He worked hard in math again.
In SLC, he told me he wrote all answers spick and span, (not even a scratch in
the whole paper), and he solved arithmetic and algebra questions twice with
different methods.
He ended up with 100 in mathematics in final. [1001 in marksheet!]
---
Yea, not a big deal, a lot of people score that much every year. It is not
comparable to Temba's achievement.
I am just writing it to give one example of how you feel you are almost there, but
are cheated by some unknown reason, and you need to prove that you were
'almost there'!
|
| GP |
Posted
on 20-Dec-01 05:49 AM
100% in maths is possible, but, its matter of luck,
and also the surrounding factors.
In my campus life, I got 19.5 out 20full marks, and I
asked the teacher, why he deducted 0.5, when he
could not find or point out a single mistake. In both
Math I and Math II, I was forced to satisfy with 19.5
out 20 full mark. The reason given by the teacher
was "100% means you know everything, since
you as intermediate student, can not know everythihg
in mather, I can not offer you 100%", that sound
funny, but, I had no other way to go against with
his justifications. I accepted it. Then, my room partner
who was also classmate of mine, was surprised with
the justification, but, he could not appear the
exam, so he challanged me that he can get 20 out
of 20. He went to the teacher's home paid Rs. 125
x 2 (two maths) as private tution fees, then, he
requested the teacher to help him regarding the
exam. Surprisingly, he got 20 out of 20. Thats
the things happening in Nepal's mathematics
department.
Many peoples still say that the SLC Board was
anohter place like Hulak Bideshik Bibhag in
corruption, looked like it has nothing, but,
inside so many tricks.
SLC should be dismantled. In those old days,
we did not have enough schools, nor we had
enough colleges nor we had enough eng. or
medical seats for higher studies, but, now
we have enough. Thus, the SLC Board should
be dismantled and let any one can appear
in the entrance examination in any area.
Well, the money spent on SLC Board exam
can be switched to University entrance
exams and its monitoring. It will dismiss
SLC as a big thing, but, 10th grade should
be considered a thresold line of calling
someone literate. So, that no one will
think of avoiding joining blue collar jobs
just because they went to 10th grade
schooling. In this sense, Japanese are
doing very good, here you go to school,
but, if you have minimum or even below
thresold attendance, you get admission
to next grade. I think if we are going to
educate all, then, why should we have
strict exams and failures right from class
I. It has made peoples cynic, and leg pulling,
and its the greatest contrast I find in Japanese
education system, where classes are decided
according to age, not according what some
kid knows, at least to the level govt. is providing
free education. In this sense, if we need 2000 engineers
and doctors every year, why should govt. be biased,
and why not let any one be engineer or doctors, and
the govt. funded education should not be aimed
at teaching above age standard, but, just be objective
of producing literate citizens. Let tertiary education
be strict and make them competent to work in market.
The curriculum in Nepal in schools is so tough that kids
have to spend all the time in studies, and have no extra
time to devout in other extra curricular activities, and under
such circumstances, how the young mind can think
of traveling around their own country, or go in week
long trekking or in mountaineering trainings. Damn with
current competition in education. I hate it, but,
unfortunately, our kids in Nepal are still under the
same mental pressure, and there can not be
any expectation except "Padhbe Padhne Padhne".
I really feel Pity.
GP
|
