Our exam yardstick is very conservative and superficial by considering only academic performance. Students' morality, aesthetic perceptions and civil awareness are all ignored. Students are not really educated or enlightened, although they can perform very well in certificate exams.

When we ask them about basic human and social values such as human rights, freedom, democracy and fraternity, they are often left speechless.

The underlying reason is that they don't think, and even if they try to start, they don't know how.

To be progressive, we should lead them to subjects such as philosophy and ethics. When this gets mentioned, some people may think it is like building castles in the air. But actually, it encourages and trains our students to think rationally and logically. Who thinks this is unimportant? Does our society want to continue to see children and graduates who are materialistic, politically pessimistic, ignorant and selfish?

A society having no belief and insight into life is doomed to fail, even if it is rich in a materialistic sense. Do we want to have a future? Our students need to think more and to be taught how to think. When they realise the meaning and values of life, they will have a positive attitude and lifestyle, and work for the best in all aspects of life, including academic competition. Name and address supplied

I am glad that Hong Kong pupils are among the top in worldwide rankings. However, there is still room for them to improve.

Firstly, pupils are passive in learning. In class, they just listen to teachers, but don't take a more active role in learning. They do not want to express their views on different issues. Maybe they think they will be embarrassed when they give wrong answers. This problem will become serious when they grow up.

Also, Hong Kong pupils do not have much incentive to learn. They learn only because they just want to get good results in exams.

Secondly, 'memorisation' has become the only way for pupils to learn. Under the spoon-fed education system, students may think that they can get high marks when they can memorise more. Therefore, they do not develop critical thinking abilities when they answer questions.

Finally, Hong Kong pupils lack a global outlook. When they face open questions, they can't articulate the problems. It is because they lack any interest in reading the news. Therefore, most of them cannot put real-life examples into use in their answers.

There is no denying that Hong Kong pupils are hard working. Provided that they can be active and creative, they can become well-rounded students as well. Yiu King Wo, Tuen Mun

Q Does Hong Kong need an anti-racism law?

I offer my full support regarding the implementation of proposed anti-racism laws. Having such laws would serve to protect individuals from unfair treatment and practices. However, anti-racism laws should extend beyond racism in employment, education, admission to professional bodies, the provision of goods and services and the use of facilities.

To take an example, the government currently discriminates against people born in Hong Kong of non-Chinese parents. Despite having been born in Hong Kong and afforded the right of abode, I am not entitled to hold a Hong Kong special administrative region (SAR) passport as my parents are not Chinese.

If one of my parents was of Chinese ethnicity I would be so entitled. To apply the logic of Deputy Secretary of Home Affairs Stephen Fisher, if the Hong Kong government offers HKSAR passports to Chinese people born in Hong Kong, but not to non-Chinese people born in Hong Kong, that is discrimination in favour of one ethnic group and therefore against the local community. I hope the government will redress this clear example of racism. Aaron Connell, Happy Valley

On other matters...

How do we find out which food has been irradiated? I've asked almost everywhere and checked time and time again. This seems to be the world's best-kept secret.

It would be nice to know genetically modified from unmodified food, but if you really look into it you'll probably come to feel that food irradiation is an equally pressing issue. Dr N. W.Walker, Central

There have been recent reports on the harmfulness of noise to the ear. I would like to add that although workers at construction sites, road repairs etc, readily wear a hard hat, rarely do they guard against noise-induced hearing loss. Even workers on the airport tarmac don't protect their ears.

The relevant departments in government should be more strict, with a no-tolerance altitude in enforcing existing laws which require contractors, factory owners and others to ensure workers protect their ears.

To enforce these laws is not easy. Public education is the long-term solution. On a day-to-day basis, more unannounced inspections by the relevant department is essential. Fines must be heavy to bring home the message to those liable. I believe the present level of fines is too low.

Deafness is a severe disability. Noise-induced hearing loss is incurable, but preventable. Like the keep Hong Kong clean campaign, there should be zero tolerance and the penalty for an offence should be a deterrent.

Name and address supplied