First-Year Writing Competition (AY2526 Term 1)

These are the winners of AY2025-26 Term 1, who impressed us with their originality, creativity, and clarity of expression:

● First Prize: Kang Pei Zhen Daphne for "Hustle Culture is a Trap!"

● Second Prize: Kenzie Li Zhixian for "Smooth Work, Smooth Brains: The Cost of Letting GenAI Think for You"

● Third Prize: Syaza Batrisyia Binti Mohammad Zulkiflee for "They Gave Me Grades, Not Guidance: Why Universities Must Prioritise Skills and Practical Exposure"

● Merit award: Phang Sze Ting for "The Hidden Cost of Phone Notifications"

● Merit award: Evangeline Loh Qi Hui for "My Favourite Public Holidays and Why it is a Problem"

Here are the winning pieces:

Hustle Culture is a Trap! by Kang Pei Zhen Daphne

Imagine Winnie the Pooh in Singapore. 

His “Thoughtful Spot” would be a co-working space with a monthly subscription. His simple search for honey would be reframed as a “passion project,” complete with a business plan and pressure to scale into an artisanal honey brand. Christopher Robin would tell him to network with the bees on LinkedIn. This sounds absurd, yet it is precisely the lens through which we have been taught to view our own lives. Hustle culture has invaded the “Hundred Acre Wood” of our minds, undermining both our health and capacity for creativity, as we are forced to dedicate every moment towards achieving success.

In the digital era, social media has glamorised hustle culture, weaving it into the very fabric of our lives. Through hashtags like #riseandgrind and #workhardplayhard, exhaustion seems like the price of success (Chairunnisah & Kurnia, 2023). As a result, this mindset creates a loop of worry and fear where rest is perceived as laziness, self-care as indulgence, and exhaustion is masked under toxic positivity (Molina, 2023).

My A-levels became a painful lesson in the dangers of hustle culture. I pushed myself through late nights and an overloaded schedule as I was convinced every moment had to be productive. This was until a serious illness forced me to repeat the year that I realised the true cost of that mindset. Research shows hustle culture weakens the immune system, increasing the risk of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular disease. It also takes a toll on our mental health, driving burnout, stress, and anxiety (Yuningsih et al., 2023). If ambition is a good that has to be bought with the currency of health, is “hustling” truly worth it? 

I get why hustle culture is tempting. In an environment with such intense competition, taking a break can feel like you are falling behind. Stories of Silicon Valley titans glorifying the non-stop grind reinforce the idea that hustle culture is the path to purpose and achievement (Saltzman, 2023). These narratives make constant busyness seem not only admirable but necessary. 

But here is the catch: Hustle culture is ultimately harmful and counterproductive. While it may seem like the fastest route to success, our brains were never designed to operate at full capacity without a pause. Studies show that periods of rest and daydreaming give the brain space to draw new connections, allowing for sharper problem-solving and more creative breakthroughs (Ritter & Dijksterhuis, 2014). Without dedicating the time to introspection, we undermine the very innovation and growth that hustle culture claims to fuel.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is not that we have dragged Pooh into our hyper-optimised world, but that we have convinced ourselves that he is better for it. The way forward lies in change at both the organisational and individual levels. Organisations must set sustainable goals and avoid an “always on” culture (Balkeran, 2020), while individually, the shift begins with reclaiming our right to rest. This means setting firm boundaries and recognising that saying “no” is not a sign of weakness. It means practising self-compassion by allowing for hobbies, relationships, and moments of idleness without guilt (Yuningsih et al., 2023). Just like Pooh, who finds contentment in a jar of honey and comfort under a quiet tree, we too can rediscover fulfilment in simplicity when we give ourselves the permission to pause. 

Ultimately, a world where Pooh forgets how to simply sit and be is not just a world that has lost its honey. It is a world that has forgotten how to be human.
 

Reference List

Chairunnisah, A., & Kurnia, L. (2023). Hustle culture in Social Media: Exploring the imagined success in the modern era. ATHENA: Journal of Social, Culture and Society, 1(4), 2. https://journal.mediadigitalpublikasi.com/index.php/athena/article/view/151/66

Molina, O., & Catchings, C. V. (2023, February 20). Hustle Culture: The toxic Impact on Mental Health. Talkspace. https://www.talkspace.com/blog/hustle-culture/

Yuningsih, Mardiana, N., Jima, H., & Prasetya, M. D. (Eds.). (2023). The effect of hustle culture on psychological distress with self compassion as moderating variable. Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-046-6_102

Saltzman, J. (2023b, February 16). The pros and Cons of hustle Culture: How to work hard without burning out. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/02/16/the-pros-and-cons-of-hustle-culture-how-to-work-hard-without-burning-out/

Ritter, S. M., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2014a). Creativity—the unconscious foundations of the incubation period. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3990058/

Balkeran, A. (2020). Hustle culture and the implications for our workforce [City University of New York]. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1100&context=bb_etds

Smooth Work, Smooth Brains: The Cost of Letting GenAI Think for You by Kenzie Li Zhixian

Skip the gym and your muscles shrink. Stop running and your stamina disappears. But what about your brain? What happens when we offload our mental heavy-lifting? That question nagged me every time I saw ChatGPT climbing my most-used apps list. The satirical film “Idiocracy” imagines a future where human intelligence collapses from disuse (Judge, 2006). Absurd as it is, the reality of 346 million GenAI users worldwide (Statista, 2025) makes it hit closer to home. Only, the true dystopia is not a future where we are born dumb, but a present where we actively choose to be.

Due debt: losing critical thinking
Specifically, our overreliance on GenAI erodes our critical thinking skills. This erosion begins with what MIT researchers call “cognitive debt,” where “repeated reliance on external systems like LLMs replaces the effortful cognitive processes required for independent thinking” (Kosmyna et al., 2025, p.10). At first, it feels freeing — like your professor is writing your essay. But debt always comes due. As our brains start gathering dust, this cognitive debt becomes a mental crutch: the habit of offloading dulls our ability to think critically and independently (Lee et al., 2025). Or for students, we barely earn what we could lose.

Put simply, the more we prompt, the less we practice. And this matters: learning and reasoning depend on strengthening neural connections through effort and struggle (Harasym, 2008), especially for students. When we lean on GenAI as a mental crutch, that effort is skipped. Before we even notice, our thoughts turn to dust.

Same models, same minds
The danger is not just about my brain or yours. This erosion chips at our collective reasoning. As GenAI establishes itself as a ubiquitous and useful tool, our “subjective trust toward tools” encourages us to lean against it even more (Peng & Yeh, 2025, p.3). We stop questioning and take every “Here’s your answer” as our own thinking (Li et al., 2025). In a society where our thoughts are shaped by the same models, independent reasoning becomes rare. The result? A uniform, self-reinforcing echo chamber verified by both humans and GenAIs alike. A chamber where nobody questions if “Brawndo” is an appropriate water substitute. It just is.

Not GenAI’s fault? 
Of course, most would argue that a sword’s power depends on who wields it. Indeed, GenAI is not inherently harmful. Like any tool, it can handle routine tasks, freeing us for higher-level thinking. When used intentionally with structured prompts and critical reflection, GenAI can train rather than replace our thinking (Xia et al., 2025; Zhu et al., 2025).

Illusion of control
I used to think so too, until I started unconsciously reaching for GenAI for every assignment. Alas, I was not the chosen one. But who is? Doshi & Hauser (2024) found that 88% of writers use GenAI, while Gillespie et al. (2025) uncovered that students could not finish their tasks without it. The evidence leaves little doubt. Despite believing we are in control, this sword is wielded as a dangerous crutch.

Reclaiming what was lost
What now? I stare at this half-filled page, cursor blinking. The ChatGPT tab stares back. The deadline looms. In a society obsessed with efficiency and grades, my hesitation seems idealistic — even foolish. But when was the last time you struggled over an assignment? Painful as it was, that struggle probably added to the wrinkles in your brain (Bjork & Bjork, 2011).

I refuse to trade a sharp brain for smooth work. I hope you do too. So next time, before you mindlessly dump a prompt into the chatbox, pause.

Struggle. That is our strongest defense against an “idiocracy.”
 

Reference List

Judge, M. (Director). (2006, September 1). Idiocracy. 20th Century Studios.

Statista. (2025, July 1). Number of AI tool users worldwide 2020-2031. Retrieved September 18, 2025, from https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1449844/ai-tool-users-worldwide

Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., Situ, J., Liao, X.-H., Beresnitzky, A. V., Braunstein, I., & Maes, P. (2025). Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task. MIT Media Lab. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2506.08872

Lee, H., Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025). The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778

Harasym, P. H. (2008). Neuroplasticity and Critical Thinking. The Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, 24(7), 339–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1607-551X(08)70130-X

Peng, J., & Yeh, S. (2025). Cognitive Offloading in Short-Term Memory Tasks: Trust toward tools as a moderator. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2474449

Li, J., Yang, Y., Liao, Q.V., Zhang, J. and Lee, Y.-C. (2025) “As Confidence Aligns: Exploring the Effect of AI Confidence on Human Self-confidence in Human-AI Decision Making,” In Proceedings of CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’25). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2501.12868

Xia, Q., Zhang, P., Huang, W., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2025). The impact of generative AI on university students’ learning outcomes via Bloom’s taxonomy: a meta-analysis and pattern mining approach. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2025.2530503

Zhu, Y., Liu, Q., & Zhao, L. (2025). Exploring the impact of generative artificial intelligence on students’ learning outcomes: a meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13420-z

Doshi, A. R., & Hauser, O. P. (2024). Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content. Science Advances, 10(28). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn5290

Gillespie, N., Lockey, S., Macdade, A., Ward, T., & Hassed, G. (2025). Trust, Attitudes and Use of Artificial Intelligence: A Global Study 2025. The University of Melbourne and KPMG. https://doi.org/10.26188/28822919

Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society 2. https://bibliotecadigital.mineduc.cl/handle/20.500.12365/17342

They Gave Me Grades, Not Guidance: Why Universities Must Prioritise Skills and Practical Exposure by Syaza Batrisyia Binti Mohammad Zulkiflee

With some coffee, I can memorise 20 pages of notes, ace a 3-hour exam the next day and forget everything once I leave the exam room. In theory, that makes me a great student, but realistically, it makes me a terrible employee. This is the conflict most Gen Zs face. We excel on paper but are unprepared for real work. Employers want skilled, adaptable problem-solvers with soft skills, not just an academic achiever (President of the Republic of Singapore, 2025). To break the “smart but unready” cycle, universities must prioritise skills and structured real-world experience alongside academic achievements.

Our relentless chase for grades often results in shallow learning. We become experts at quick fixes, like rote memorisation to score well (Choi et al., 2022). In my own experience, the focus is more on checking boxes and passing exams, rather than mastering concepts. The pressure to perform also discourages risk-taking and stifles creativity. As a result, we struggle to apply what we memorised when faced with scenarios that demand adaptability or critical thinking (Ng, 2024). This gap between what's taught and what the working world needs isn’t just a student problem. It affects the quality of our future workforce and our ability to respond to ever-changing challenges.

Employers are also increasingly sceptical of new graduates’ technical knowledge and essential soft skills. Many stress the need for better interviewing and communication skills among Gen Z job seekers (ManpowerGroup, 2025). According to Daniel CF Ng, the traditional focus on academic excellence has overshadowed skills like communication, adaptability, and teamwork. Even internships are falling short. Ask around, and you will find students taking on multiple internships throughout their academic studies. However, many are brief, making it hard for employers to judge what students gained or contributed (Yeong et al., 2024). As a result, academic transcripts and internship records are losing credibility, leaving employers questioning if graduates are truly work-ready.

To close this gap, universities must integrate academic studies with sustained workplace experience. Germany’s Dual Education System offers a proven solution. Combining rigorous study with hands-on experience, it produces students with both theory and practice (Ng, 2024). Having turned “apprentices into specialists”, the country has Europe’s lowest youth unemployment rate at 5.7% (Germany Trade & Invest, n.d.). In Singapore, a similar approach could mean academic year-long industry-mentored projects or work placements directly tied to coursework. These allow students to build practical expertise and soft skills throughout their education. With degrees becoming increasingly common, universities, employers and students need to push for such reform not just to balance academics with real-world preparation, but to redefine what it means to graduate.

It can be argued that universities are not meant to be training grounds for jobs, but places to cultivate critical thinking and academic knowledge. The responsibility falls on individuals and employers to train and develop workplace skills. However, in today’s world, the boundary between education and work has blurred. Internships and industry collaborations have become standard in degree programs worldwide. But simply offering opportunities isn’t enough if students aren’t guided to develop the skills employers need. Isn’t it unfair to expect us to bridge that gap ourselves?

If we don’t act, the gap between education and employability will only widen. Universities can’t just award degrees and take credit when students succeed. They need to help us bridge the gap between classroom theory and real-world demands. It’s time for higher education to step up, so graduates leave with knowledge, skills and confidence to thrive beyond the exam hall. Otherwise, what’s the point of a university degree if it doesn’t prepare us for life? 

 

Reference List

Choi, H., Cheng, CY., & X. R. Wee, S. (2022, September 29). The impact of fear of losing out (FoLO) on college students' performance goal orientations and learning strategies in Singapore. Social Psychology of Education, 25(6), 1351–1380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-022-09728-0

Germany Trade & Invest. (n.d.). Labor market. Investment Environment. https://www.gtai.de/en/invest/business-location-germany/business-climate1/dual-education-system-65348

ManpowerGroup. (2025). World of Work for Generation Z in 2025. https://www.manpowergroup.co.in/whitepaper/MPG-Gen-Z-White-Paper-2025.pdf

Ng, D. C. (2024, June 18). The Paradox of Singapore’s Education Excellence and Talent Shortage. Medium. https://medium.com/@danielcfng/the-paradox-of-singapores-education-excellence-and-talent-shortage-cf5d1ac24fe9

President of the Republic of Singapore. (2025, January 23). Closing The Jobs Gap -  Remarks by President Tharman Shanmugaratnam at the World Economic Forum 2025 in Davos, Switzerland on 22 January 2025. The Istana. https://www.istana.gov.sg/Newsroom/Speeches/2025/01/23/Closing-The-Jobs-Gap-Remarks-by-President-Tharman-Shanmugaratnam-at-the-World-Economic-Forum-2025

Yeong, J., Kam, C., Lye, E., & Boo, S. (2024). The Impact of Internships on Graduates’ Employability: Employers’ Insights. Singapore Labour Journal, 3(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1142/S281103152400007X

The Hidden Cost of Phone Notifications by Phang Sze Ting

The metal brick in my pocket buzzes lightly, like a toy demanding a toddler’s attention. The digital world calls for me, and instinctively, I reach for it, curious to see what awaits. Sound familiar? Chances are, you have been guilty of the same. These notifications may seem harmless, but they are little devils always lurking around us. They are the cause of reduced productivity and increased mental stress (Kim et al., 2016), a phenomenon known as ping fatigue.

Unfortunately, this habit is a widespread behaviour. The average person checks their phone around 85 times a day, roughly once every 15 minutes (Horwood, 2022). A quick glance might seem harmless, but in reality, it takes an average of 23 minutes and 15 seconds to fully refocus after an interruption (Mark et al., n.d.). I must admit, I am guilty of this too. One buzz and I drop everything to check my phone, only to forget what I was working on. Each buzz not only derails my focus but also increases brain activity related to conflict monitoring and slows reaction time (Upshaw et al., 2022).

The toll does not stop at productivity. Another buzz and my mind spirals. Who is it? What is it about? Do I have to reply now? This constant stream of notifications never fails to keep me hypervigilant, stressed and anxious. Frequent notifications also create pressure to respond due to the fear of missing out (FOMO), further contributing to mental strain (Horwood, 2022).

So, what can we do to reduce the impact of phone notifications? Batching notifications. A simple and convenient solution for everyone. Instead of being constantly bombarded, notifications are delivered at predictable intervals throughout the day. Apple’s Scheduled Summary and Android’s Notification Digest group non-urgent notifications and deliver them at chosen times. Batching notifications, specifically 3 times a day, has been shown to reduce stress and improve overall well-being (Fitz et al., 2019).

I have tried it myself, and it works wonders. Before using Scheduled Summary, I relied on Do Not Disturb (DND). And sure, the name says it all. It blocks out all notifications for the entire day. At first glance, it seemed like the perfect solution. But in reality, it wasn’t. With no notifications at all, my anxiety and FOMO increased. I found myself constantly worrying if I had missed any important notifications. Ironically, I ended up checking my phone more often.

This is exactly why batching notifications is a game changer. Unlike DND, which blocks everything, batching allows you to decide which alerts are urgent and which can wait. By knowing that notifications will come at predictable times, I no longer feel the constant need to check my phone and can stay focused without the stress of missing something important.

Of course, some might argue that phone notifications are not the true cause of our stress and lost productivity. The regular checking of our phones may be caused by our own urge and not by notifications. I have found myself doing it too, sometimes picking up my phone without realising it. In fact, only 11% of interactions are prompted by an alert (Heitmayer et al., 2020). Still, it is undeniable that notifications incentivise us to pick up our phones more often. Managing them may not solve the problem entirely, but it surely is a significant step.

With batching features like Scheduled Summary and Notification Digest readily available, why not give them a try? Notifications are here to stay and blocking them entirely is simply not realistic. So, take control. Don’t let these little devils heighten your stress and drain your productivity any longer!

 

Reference List

Fitz, N., Kushlev, K., Jagannathan, R., Lewis, T., Paliwal, D., & Ariely, D. (2019). Batching smartphone notifications can improve well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.016

Heitmayer, M., & Lahlou, S. (2020). Why are smartphones disruptive? An empirical study of smartphone use in real-life contexts. Computers in Human Behavior, 116, 106637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106637

Horwood, S. (2022, December 18). Commentary: Constant smartphone notifications really do tax your brain. CNA. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/phone-push-notification-interrupt-distract-productivity-task-focus-work-school-3152141

Kim, S., Kim, S., & Kang, H. (2016). An Analysis of the Effects of Smartphone Push Notifications on Task Performance with regard to Smartphone Overuse Using ERP. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2016, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5718580

Mark, G., Gudith, D., & Klocke, U. (2014). The cost of interrupted work: more speed and stress. In Department of Informatics, University of California, Irvine [Journal-article]. https://ics.uci.edu/~gmark/chi08-mark.pdf

Upshaw, J. D., Stevens, C. E., Ganis, G., & Zabelina, D. L. (2022). The hidden cost of a smartphone: The effects of smartphone notifications on cognitive control from a behavioral and electrophysiological perspective. PLoS ONE, 17(11), e0277220. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277220

My Favourite Public Holidays and Why it is a Problem by Evangeline Loh Qi Hui

1st September 2023 and 3rd May 2025 marked significant national events for Singapore. However, for me and many young people, they were just long-awaited holidays. I vaguely remember the ‘pineapple’ craze, not realising it symbolised one of the presidential candidates. While Singaporeans headed to the polls, my friends and I saw it as a chance to earn double pay rather than a political event. It wasn’t until I read about corruption in other countries that I realised my indifference was not harmless; it was ignorance. While others fight for their rights to vote, I had taken mine for granted. This realisation brought light to a bigger problem: many Singaporean youths remain politically unaware due to limited civic education and reliance on parental views – a gap that can be addressed by integrating open civic classroom discussions.

Singapore’s education system has long been under scrutiny for not preparing students to engage actively in democracy (Chia & Neoh, 2024). Personally, I recall learning about politics in Social Studies lessons, which felt more like memorising facts rather than a genuine understanding of real issues. Now, just a year away from my voting rights, I am certain that my peers and I will face the same struggles as first-time voters in Singapore’s 2020 General Election (GE2020), many of whom felt unprepared and insecure (Kwan, 2021). Without structured civic education, many youths like me lack the literacy needed to participate meaningfully in politics.

Yet, the classroom wasn’t the only environment where politics felt distant. At home, my views were more of a reflection of my parents’ than my own. I vividly remember GE2025. “Mummy so who do we vote for ah?” my siblings asked before heading to the polling station.  Research shows that youths often adopt their elders’ party affiliations and behaviours through family discussions (Hong & Lin, 2017). It never crossed our minds to form a different opinion; we just assumed our parents knew best. This is dangerous since we were never encouraged to think independently. It is not political literacy, just borrowed perspectives.

The most important step to address this problem is to integrate open civic discussions into classrooms. Studies show that “an open classroom climate is significantly associated with higher civic knowledge” (Biseth & Huang, 2016). Unlike rote learning, open discussions allow students to debate, disagree and investigate, making learning active, not passive. When we talk about politics, it pushes us to think more deeply, challenge our assumptions, and learn for ourselves (Persson, 2015). If Singapore wants a generation that engages meaningfully in politics, our classrooms must be the starting point – and professors play an important role in fostering such spaces.

Some critics argue that introducing political discussions risks bias since professors might discourage opposing views or steer conversations in favour of their own opinions (Linvill, 2008). Yes, bias is a risk – but so is silence. The purpose of these discussions is not to impose beliefs but to expose students to diverse perspectives. While we cannot eliminate bias, we can help students develop skills to avoid blind conformity. Professors can assist by undergoing training and teaching students the “Consider the Opposite” (COS) strategy. COS encourages learners to test their opinions against opposing evidence, which mitigates confirmation bias and cultivates evaluation skills vital for responsible political participation (Brussel, 2020).

Too many youths grow up to be politically apathetic, fuelled by silence in school and borrowed perspectives at home. If we want a future of citizens who vote responsibly, we need to support the integration of open civic classroom discussions, so that each ballot can be a voice – not an echo.


Reference List

Biseth, H., & Huang, L. (2016). Openness in Scandinavian Classrooms: Student Perceptions of Teaching Practices and High Achievers of Civic Knowledge. Creative Education, 7(5), 713-723. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.75075

Brussel, S. V.,  Paas, F., Timmermans, M., & Verkoeijen, P. (2020). ‘Consider the Opposite’ – Effects of elaborative feedback and correct answer feedback on reducing confirmation bias – A pre-registered study. Contemporary Educational 
Psychology, 60, Article 101844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101844

Chia, Y. T., & Neoh, J. Y. (2024). Latent democratic potential: reflections on contemporary citizenship education in Singapore. Curriculum Perspectives, 44, 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-024-00270-x

Hong, Y., & Lin, T. C. (2017). The Impacts of Political Socialization on People’s Online and Offline Political Participation—Taking the Youth of Singapore as an Example. Advances in Journalism and Communication, 5(5), 50-70. 
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=74728

Kwan, J. Y. (2021). ‘Democracy and Active Citizenship Are Not Just About the Elections’: Youth Civic and Political Participation During and Beyond Singapore’s Nine-day Pandemic Election (GE2020). Young, 30(3), 247-264. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/11033088211059595

 Linvill, D. (2008). Student Perspectives of Political Bias in the College Classroom. Clemson University. https://open.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/261/

Persson, M. (2015). Classroom Climate and Political Learning: Findings from a Swedish Panel Study and Comparative Data. Political Psychology, 36(5), 587-601. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12179