When Education Becomes Perverted

 “If you’re not straight, white, and conservative, it doesn’t feel safe” - Raineesha Day, California teacher.

Having had a career as a teacher, I have always believed in educations's mitigating effects: it can help bridge the gap between ignorance and critical thinking and can mean the difference between poverty and economic stability. Most importantly, it can contribute to citizens' healthy, knowledgeable participation in their democracy.

But all of those benefits are predicated on an education system that is honest and earnest, that sees itself as a conveyor of truth rather than a weapon to promote ignorance. Sadly, both in Canada and the United States, as I have written in many posts, it is the latter that often prevails today.

In The Guardian, Robin Buller writes about a deplorable situation in California where education has become weaponized by a right-wing faction.

The small southern California city of Temecula made headlines across the US when its school board banned critical race theory and attempted to purge elementary school textbooks that reference gay rights icon Harvey Milk.

On Wednesday, a group of parents, students, teachers and a union sued the Temecula valley school district, alleging the critical race theory ban violates California law, the right to due process and the right to be free from discrimination. If the court rules in their favor, lawyers on the case say it will set a new precedent for the right to fact-based education in California public schools.

 It appears that the real problems began during the pandemic, when parents objected to school mask mandates. As we know from our own experience, that brought out the extremists who, in this case, managed to elect three board members who appear to believe that ignorance is bliss. Homosexual icons like Harvey Milk and so-called Critical Race Theory wound up being banned.

In the spring of 2022, three new school board candidates – Danny Gonzalez, Joseph Komrosky and Jen Wiersma – ran on platforms that opposed masking and vaccine requirements, accused the teacher’s union of working against parents’ interests, and suggested standard curriculum had been replaced by “sexualized” material. 

 The developments echoed those in other parts of California and across the country.

Reshaping suburban school boards was part of a national Republican strategy in 2022 to energize voters. Often, those interventions were funded by national conservative groups with deep pockets, like Moms for Liberty, the American Council and Turning Point USA. The campaigns of Komrosky, Gonzalez and Wiersma were financed by the Inland Empire Family Pac, which is headed by a local evangelical pastor.

And such repression has real-life consequences.

In past years, homophobic and white supremacist graffiti has been scrawled in public spaces, football fans at the local high school have greeted a visiting team with loud racist taunts, and a mayor was forced to resign following the release of emails in which he made racist remarks about police violence against people of color.

Tuesday Cortes, a 16-year-old queer student, 

... said she was bullied for her sexuality throughout middle school, with limited intervention from school administrators. In eighth grade, Cortes said, classmates chanted “there’s only two genders” during recess and mocked her for her short hair.  

Black parents have also been made understandably uneasy by statements from the board such is this:

...board member Komrosky called CRT a “racist ideology” that uses “division and hate as an instructional framework in our schools”. Gonzalez and Wiersma did not respond to questions.

The only real brights spots here is the fact that sane and reasonable people are fighting back against the unhinged through the lawsuit that has been filed. That, and the fact that both parents and people like Cortes are unbowed.

[Involved parent Jennifer] San Nichols and others say the events will not push them out of Temecula. If anything, the ban has had the opposite effect, bolstering their activism.

“The harder they try to suppress us, the harder Black and Brown parents will push back,” said [Christina] Johnson, the mother of three. “I am staying for as long as I can.”

The final word goes to Cortes, who correctly identifies the poison that ignorance can engender:

...ensuring that the history of gay rights is taught in school is a critical part of preventing anti-LGBTQ+ bullying. “If queer history isn’t available to learn, we will never progress and people will stay full of hatred and ignorance,” she said.

 

 

 

 

 

When They Start Talking About Ideologies And Agendas

 ... you generally know where they are coming from.

"We must protect our children from sexual grooming and pedophilia. The sexualization agenda is robbing children of their innocence."

"I am a very concerned person who has done research on the subject of the LGBTQ ideology" .

Thus spaketh Lorraine Hackenschmidt, described in a CBC report as a constituent and grandmother making a presentation to the Brandon, Manitoba school board trustees last Monday to express her desire to have school libraries remove objectionable materials, materials she fears will taint the children and lead them into 'unnatural choices' in life.

You can watch Hakenschmidt's presentation here, starting at the 50-minute mark. I don't find her entire presentation objectionable, especially regarding puberty-blockers and gender-reassignment surgery at an early age; however. in her desperation to prove her points about the danger of books, she starts quoting 'authorities' such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, not a man known for political moderation, and the National Post, not exactly a balanced source of news or views.

Unsurprisingly, Hakenschmidt's views are challenged by actual experts.

Brandon Sexuality Education Resource Centre program manager Kerri Judd says it's very concerning to see people asking for LGBTQ books to be removed — especially because many children rely on their school to be a safe space of inclusion and respect.

"We're seeing this in many parts of the province. And if we look at what's going on in the United States, I think that it's not that big of a surprise ... I'm just disappointed that it's a conversation that's happening within the community I live," she said.

"It is completely inaccurate and false and actually really disgusting that people associate gender identity to pedophilia," Judd said. "It's a false narrative … and so it has nothing to do with one's gender identity."

Another expert opines,

Students must see themselves represented in school resources for their well-being, says Patty Douglas, a professor in the faculty of education at Brandon University Faculty of Education. Douglas says human sexual diversity, neurodiversity and all kinds of diversity are normal, and children, just like adults, have the right to be able to see themselves represented.

"I think that bullying ... of kids who are different is ubiquitous. It happens all the time, every day. You know, educational trauma happens every day for kids who come from, you know, non-white cultures, from non-normative family arrangements and this will just worsen that," Douglas said.

"School then becomes something to survive rather than thrive in."

And the  University of Manitoba's Sarah Hannon, a political scientist, 

says the call to remove books in Brandon shows two issues coming together: protecting transgender kids and the queer community more broadly, combined with a more general point about book banning.

"They're not pornographic materials. They are sex education materials. And schools should be in the business of educating people about their own bodies and about their sexuality," Hannan said. "That is a crucial part of ... everyone's well-being."

Manitoba Liberal Leader Dougald Lamont condemned the book ban request at the Legislative Assembly Wednesday, calling it disgusting for its "terrible accusations" against educators and librarians.

"You don't get converted to being 2SLGBTQ by reading a book," Lamont said. "I want my children to be safe and this includes being safe from extremists who want to take away our freedom of choice and freedom to read."

He called on the Progressive Conservatives to take a stance against the proposal. 

Where will this presentation lead to? It is too early to say, but here is something worth bearing in mind: books, knowledge and learning are never subversive. Ignorance, and actions based on it, are.

 

And The Answer Is ...

Education. Well, it's part of the answer anyway. And the question? How does society mount a serious effort to combat racism in its many forms, be it directed against Muslims, Asians, Jews, Blacks, Indigenous or anyone else who falls within the sights of  the benighted and the evil?

The stakes are high. Elmira Eleghawaby writes:

Recent data from Statistics Canada paints a disturbing picture about who is involved in hate crimes. According to the agency, nearly a quarter of those accused of hate crimes between 2010 and 2019 were between the ages of 12 and 17, a majority of whom were male.

And the effects of racism are even higher:

Hate crimes, described as message crimes by the American Psychological Association, are a threat to the safety and well-being every person in Canada deserves to feel.

“Hate crimes send messages to members of the victim’s group that they are unwelcome and unsafe in the community, victimizing the entire group and decreasing feelings of safety and security,” reads an analysis by the association. “Furthermore, witnessing discrimination against one’s own group can lead to psychological distress and lower self-esteem.”

The role of education in all of this should be obvious. While many advocate teaching so that students have a better grasp of things like Islamophobia and how online hate is propagated, it seems to me that a better counter-strategy would be to establish a mandatory course, likely attached to the history department, in which students can learn from a Canadian perspective about the various cultures that are under attack, thereby, if you will, better 'humanizing' them. Such a course would include our own country's mistreatment of the Indigenous, the Asian, the Sikh, the Jewish and the Muslim, as well as stories of collaboration and easy co-existence. How many know, for example, that the first mosque in Canada was established in Edmonton in 1938?

Such an approach would not, of course, eradicate the stench of racism that will always linger. And my experience as a teacher, despite education's perceived role as an equalizer and answer to society's woes, is that we have limited impact in countering the home environment that sometimes fosters an array of attitudes that infect children, much to their detriment.

Education has often been described as shedding light on the darkness. Even if it has only limited impact in addressing all that ails us, it seems a good place to start.

France Has The Right Idea

I am a member of an increasingly endangered and probably peculiarly-regarded minority. I do not have a smartphone. While I am an avid user of the Internet via my laptop and generic tablet, the thought of constant connectivity has never appealed to me. I value the kind of focussed solitude that promotes true connectivity with the world around me far too much.

I therefore applaud the bold step that France has taken: it has banned phones from all state middle schools.

“I thought I would be freaked out, but it has been fine,” said one 13-year-old girl, who got an iPhone when she was 11. “I left my phone in my bag all day and I was surprised to find it didn’t bother me. Normally I’d be on Snapchat and Instagram. But my friends are here at school so it’s pretty easy to just talk instead.”

To prepare for the ban, Claude Debussy middle school in Paris started with Monday bans on phones. And one of the results I suspect they hoped for, increased social interaction, emerged early in the ban, according to principal Eric Lathière.

“About four or five weeks into our phone-free Monday experiment, we saw children bringing packs of cards into school to play in break time...We hadn’t seen cards at school for years. Children brought books in to read and pupils stood around chatting far more than they had before.”

The logic for the ban is compelling:

The French education minister has called the ban a detox law for the 21st century, saying teenagers should have the right to disconnect. Children’s phones were already banned in classrooms – except for teaching purposes – but under the new law they are banned everywhere inside the gates, including playgrounds and canteens. The French senate expanded this to allow high schools to ban phones if they choose, but few, if any, are expected to do so. Many suggest 18-year-old pupils with the right to vote can make their own decision on phones.

I doubt that the political will for such a ban exists in Canada. For example, going completely in the opposite direction is the Toronto District School Board which last week restored access to Netflix, Instagram and Snapchat. The blocking of access to those services had nothing to do with educational principles but was prompted by the high amount of bandwidth such services require.

The board's egregious vacuum of leadership is perhaps best reflected in this statement by board spokesperson Ryan Bird:

“We leave the decision up to individual schools and individual teachers to put in place guidelines that work best for them.”

It is heartening to know that at least in France, that kind of buck-passing has yielded to educational integrity that puts the real needs of students first.

Who Is To Blame?

Regular readers of this blog will know that I am a staunch advocate of critical thinking, to me a foundation for any kind of meaningful life, and essential to a healthy democracy. And, as I often note with genuine humility, it is an ideal to which I constantly strive, realizing fully that I often miss the mark.

Recently there was an article in the Toronto Star calling for testing of basic skill levels of students when they enter and when they leave post-secondary education, this is response to complaints from the corporate community:

Executives in 20 recent employer surveys said they look to hire people with so-called “soft” or “essential skills” — communicating, problem-solving, critical thinking, teamwork — “yet this is where they see students being deficient,” said Harvey Weingarten, president of Ontario’s higher education think-tank.

There has been a very healthy and vigorous reaction to that article by Star readers. I reproduce the lead letter here for your consideration. I especially like his paragraph on talk radio:

I’ve taught at a Toronto community college for the past 10 years, and have come to the alarming conclusion that recent cohorts of students represent the first certifiably post-literate generation. At least, the first in several centuries.

A broad disinclination to pick up a book without being compelled to do so, alongside a stubborn disinterest in any concept of a shared general knowledge, might be blamed on any number of factors. But when a teacher has to pause to explain a passing reference to World War II, for example, since there will inevitability be people in the class who’ve never heard of it, despite their having spent almost 20 years in school already, an uneasiness begins to set in.

Perhaps these kids’ early schooling let them down, in which case we have a conveniently blameworthy excuse for the present epidemic of unconcerned know-nothingness that begins already to define our culture. Or perhaps their parents let them down, by never expressing an interest in literate pursuits themselves and consequently establishing the model of obliviousness that their children can’t help but emulate, since it’s the only example they know.

I believe, on the other hand, that it’s simply indicative of a process of atomization. How can we maintain a collective adherence to a hard-fought ideal like universal literacy when collective enterprises of any sort are routinely smeared by a ruling corporate media that’s hopelessly reliant on the dumbest common denominator for its profits and its successes?

Just listen to local talk radio for five minutes, or for at least as long as you can stand it. You’ll be treated predictably and in rapid order to a breathless rundown of the current hit parade of a carefully-tended backlash, all centred on a visceral dislike of unionism, pedestrians, bicyclists, teachers, general dissent, income redistribution, and any other concept redolent to any degree of collective social progress, even as it applies to the former generational achievements of our parents and grandparents, the fruits of whose efforts to establish an ethic of universal citizen potential and prosperity we can only thank for our own present, if now fading, economic privilege.

The motto for this cultivated fake outrage could very well be: I lash back; therefore I am.

If we want kids to start picking up books again, the only thing that might yet forestall our slide into what Jane Jacobs called the Dark Age Ahead, then we better do what grownups are supposed to do and lead by example.

Assuming we’re not all screwed already, that is.

George Higton, Toronto

Clearly, there is plenty of blame to go around.

One Thing Is Clear

The older I get, the more I realize that there are no simple solutions to problems, be it world hunger, war and conflict, climate change, or something as seemingly straightforward as getting along with that difficult guy down the street. And while I have cast aside most of the facile answers I thought I had in my youth, one thing remains, for me, an immutable truth: the power of education.

In a world beset by extremism and creeping demagoguery, some of it very close to our doorstep, the only real inoculation, although hardly a foolproof one, is that which is conferred by being as well-educated as possible. Had I not believed this, I doubt that I could have managed 30 years in the classroom.

Knowing things, especially how to think critically, provides tools that can help prevent people from falling into an insularity that ignores the larger world and allows for the construction of a world based, not on reality, but rather the prejudices and values that appeal to the lowest instincts of humanity.

A well-considered letter in today's Toronto Star addresses this issue quite nicely, I think:

Re: Fear of Donald Trump is overblown, Dec. 18

Wondering why Donald Trump has so much support for his racist views?

Two anecdotes: In 1941, when I was four, my parents moved from Chicago to a suburb that had good schools. So by 1941, long before the documented flight of whites from U.S. cities, some U.S. school systems were in trouble.

Fast forward to the mid-1960s when I was the manager of Actors’ Theatre of Louisville, Ky., the local professional theatre company. In an attempt to sell tickets, I visited an official at the Jefferson County Board of Education, responsible for Louisville schools. When I suggested that the board consider buying play tickets for their students, the official told me that they had trouble finding dollars to buy chalk, paper and pencils, and couldn’t think about theatre tickets. He said that any increase in school funding had to be approved in a plebiscite, and citizens always voted “no.”

In addition to poor investment in education, many U.S. citizens have no experience outside of their country. In the far west and far east, near the coasts, people do travel, but in most of the U.S., including the giant midwest, people don’t even have passports. Plus, their slimmed-down, dumbed-down media are mostly controlled by big corporations whose civic responsibilities are thin.

So who better to respond to a demagogue’s simple, angry answers to complex questions than people who have been poorly educated, don’t know the rest of the world, are poorly informed by media, and have been fed a diet of myths about U.S. greatness. All this while their higher-paying union factory jobs have gone to low-wage countries.

Little was learned from the loss of the Vietnam War, other than learning not to allow the media unfettered access to what is really happening in U.S. wars. Little has been learned from the 1940s and 1950s McCarthy “Red Scare” blacklisting of supposed Communist sympathizers, another time in which politicians deliberately stoked U.S. citizens’ fears, ruining the lives of thousands.

And, most people are unaware that, beginning in the 1930s, large corporations deliberately and successfully courted U.S. Christian leaders in an attempt to counter Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. The message was, and is, that Christianity and capitalism have similar goals.

We in Canada, my chosen country, can’t be smug. We are the people that elected Rob Ford, and Stephen Harper three times, and “the base” in both countries is angry for real reasons, but instead of real solutions being offered, “the base” is fed fear and hatred of others by cynical opportunists. Unfortunately, hate boomerangs.

The solutions lie in better education and more opportunities for all, and in setting strict limits on how much wealth or power any person or corporation can amass.

A long, dangerous path is ahead of us. The enemy, and our better selves, are within each of us. In the words of W. H. Auden: “We must love one another or die.”

Douglas Buck, Toronto

Spoof, Or Not A Spoof?

Were it not for the telltale insignia on the bottom-right of the screen, it might be hard to tell.


High School Student, Teacher Applying For Same Summer Waitressing Job

A Teacher's Truth Costs Her Her Job

It seems to me that any school should feel very lucky to have a teacher of Kristen Ostendorf's character and courage. Totino-Grace Catholic High School in Minnesota is not one of those schools:

Ignorance Is Bliss (For Some)

George Carlin left us far too soon.

Watch as he offers his trenchant views on what the corporate agenda wants and demands from us.

WARNING: SOME PROFANITY AHEAD:

Reflections From Cuba - Updated

The following is one of several pieces I wrote on my Blackberry Playbook while on a recent holiday in Cuba. Because Internet access and outside information is limited there, I spent some time writing pieces largely drawn from things I was thinking about at the time, and therefore are perhaps not as overtly political in nature as my usual fare.

January 21, 2013:

What, I wonder, is worse, a society in which there is little or no opportunity to learn and grow, or one in which the opportunity exists but is ignored by a substantial proportion of the people?

That is one of the questions I am left with after our most recent visit to Cuba, our sixth time in the island nation, and our third occasion to learn about the 'real' Cuba under the auspices of friends we have there. And while I must, owing to the country's repressive political system, remain vague and circumspect about our friends and what we learned from them, let me say that they are educated people who do not work at or for any of Cuba's resorts.

Since we first visited the country, it has been difficult to regard it as a developing nation by virtue of the proportion of people who are educated. For example, Cuba's doctors are well-known throughout the world for the medical humanitarian assistance they give in disaster-relief (they are, as an illustration, still in Haiti three years after its devastating earthquake) and medical missions throughout the developing world. There are also many teachers, lawyers, engineers, etc., all thanks to the fact that education is free for all Cubans, as is medical care.

But there is, from my point of view, a much darker side to Cuban life. Their ability to realize their human potential is so constrained as to be almost non-existent.

As one would expect in a dictatorship, access to books and information is very limited. The lifeblood of the mind and spirit, writing that exposes us to new ideas and challenge our complacency, is generally unavailable, political tracts and screeds in their stead as far as I could discern. Libraries, where they exist, do not permit the borrowing of materials; all must be read within the library. And while some have access to email, only a select few, for example doctors, can utilize the internet. Television, except that available to tourists in hotels, is limited to state broadcasts consisting of old movies and information the government deems permissible for the people.

There are other things we have learned that I think prudent not to discuss here, but let me sum up this portion of the post by stating that, in my view, it is a country that infantalizes its citizens, resulting in a life that from my perspective and background would be a kind of living death. And while it would be easy to dismiss my assessment as a kind of cultural imperialism or arrogance, I can only say that I have been witness to the deep intelligence, passion and yearning of the people, forced into a kind of stoic acceptance of a life in which they would prefer more choice. That being said, I don't think their choice would necessarily involve embracing our lifestyle or values either, i.e unbridled free enterprise and worship of things material, just a less austere and controlled one.

Books. Learning. Reading. Writing. Without these, to paraphrase something Bob Marley once said, my life would be madness. They are what make existence worthwhile for me; their absence would reduce the level of my humanity and spirit.

So how do we judge a culture or society where access to such riches are scorned and rejected? As a teacher, it was something I saw all too often in students, but its incidence was not especially troubling, as much of such behaviour could be attributed to an immaturity they would eventually outgrow. Indeed, even those for whom encouragement to stay in school failed was, to me, never the tragedy that others made it out to be, as they always had the opportunity to 'drop back in' when experience taught them that their options without education were quite limited.

My larger consternation, however, resides in the intractable underclass in our society who, raised in a culture of poverty and welfare-dependency, never realize that the only way out is through the possibilities afforded by education. A partly self-induced form of infatilization, they live out their lives without realizing their potential, ignoring the opportunities the country makes available to improve their lot. Such waste is a tragedy that parallels what I see in Cuba. I will extend this further by being critical of both the conditions and the insularity seemingly extant on the native reserves in Canada, where by all that we have heard about places such as Attawapiskat, the people live in abysmal squalor. Like the aforementioned culture of poverty, unproductive living and unfulfilled potential seem endemic.

I realize, as my policy analyst son has taught me, that issues are never simple. I also realize that there is a richness to native culture and tradition that my comments here would seem to belie, just as I realize there is a constellation of social factors that contribute to the larger culture of poverty that I have briefly mentioned here. I also suspect that my apparent judgementalism here will offend the sensibilities of many. Yet simply excusing conditions because of their genesis does no good either. But solutions remain elusive, fascism and classism frequently substituting for real dialogue and problem-solving.

Solutions are never simple or obvious, either for Cuba or for Canada.

UPDATE: A sign of hope as to how education can heal some of the wounds still felt today by aboriginals over the their traumatic residential school experiences can be found here.

Noam Chomsky Reflects on Contemporary Education

Despite the fact that it was fraught with a marking load I would not wish on anyone, my career as an English teacher offered many satisfactions, not the least of which was the opportunity to explore issues that are increasingly considered off-limits in the classroom: contemporary politics, the use and abuse of language for manipulative and sinister purposes, environmental degradation, etc., all within the context of the literature we were studying. However, by the time I retired six years ago, thanks to curriculum changes in Ontario, many disciplines became locked in a race to cover the material at the expense of what I would consider an essential part of learning: an open and informed discussion and the concomitant development of critical thinking skills. Structure began to supplant imagination, and I think students became the poorer for it.

I recently came across a very interesting interview on Alternet with Noam Chomsky, the famed linguist, political commentator, activist, and iconoclast. A man rarely heard these days in the mainstream media thanks to his seemingly endless capacity to challenge what passes for conventional wisdom, Chomsky reflects on his own upbringing and education, and has some very pointed observations about the current overemphasis on test results:

...the great educational innovation of Bush and Obama was 'no child left behind'. I can see the effects in schools from talking to teachers, parents and students. It's training to pass tests and the teachers are evaluated on how well the students do in the test - I've talked to teachers who've told me that a kid will be interested in something that comes up in class and want to pursue it and the teacher has to tell them - ' you can't do that because you have to pass this test next week'. That's the opposite of education.

Chomsky suggests that at its best, education is essentially subversive, in that it challenges the corporate demand for trained but passive and submissive workers. The cultivation of such an education model is regarded dimly by the elite, a fact he demonstrates by reference to a report and book produced in 1975 for the Trilateral Commission called The Crisis of Democracy. Its conclusion? ... the problems of governance "stem from an excess of democracy" and thus advocates "to restore the prestige and authority of central government institutions."

Says Chomsky:

[The] commission that put together this book was concerned with trying to induce what they called 'more moderation in democracy' - turn people back to passivity and obedience so they don't put so many constraints on state power and so on. In particular they were worried about young people. They were concerned about the institutions responsible for the indoctrination of the young (that's their phrase), meaning schools, universities, church and so on - they're not doing their job, [the young are] not being sufficiently indoctrinated. They're too free to pursue their own initiatives and concerns and you've got to control them better.

That an independent-thinking citizenry should be regarded as a threat speaks volumes about the power of a real education. I'm glad I was a part of it for 30 years, and while I ardently hope that a reasonable balance can be struck between the needs of industry and the larger needs of society, I must confess that I am not especially hopeful about education's future.

Education and the Digital World

The other day I wrote a post commenting on an article by Doug Mann, a University of Western Ontario professor who calls into question the wholehearted embrace of all things digital in the classroom, arguing that efforts should be made to curb its distracting potential.

A good letter by David Collins appears in today's Star advancing that discussion. Since it makes eminent sense, expect it to be ignored by educational authorities.

I reproduce it below for your consideration:

Re: Unplug the digital classroom, Opinion, Oct. 7

When many whose level of education should make them know better are towing the party line equating use of the latest technological devices in the classroom with “progress,” professor Doug Mann's straightforward account of the actual effects of this thinking in education is most welcome.

Having been both a TA and a college instructor over the past 10 years, I can confirm there has been a dramatic drop in literacy, numeracy, critical thinking and basic verbal comprehension among college and university students in that time, coinciding with the rise to ubiquity of mobile/digital devices.

While no cause can be definitively proven, the amount and type of use of such devices by students in the last few years is the only real demographic difference between them and students eight to 10 years ago.

More important than proving a cause is the recognition that mediating education through computerized devices is actually less engaging, more passive (students become mere users of programs, while the programs do the work!) and, by reducing education to content delivery, promotes the uncritical acceptance and regurgitation of information far more than traditional approaches.

To say today’s learners learn differently is a cop-out; if students show difficulty understanding via listening, reading and in-person discussion, the answer is surely to give them practice in these skills. Handing them computerized crutches to make up for lack of ability while ignoring the fact they're using them to surf the Internet and “chat” in class is not helping — it's manufacturing artificial disability.

David Collins, Toronto

Psst! What's The Latest On TMZ?

In the latter part of my teaching career, I had the feeling that those in charge of education, especially on the local level, were suffering from a kind of drift that was largely absent when I started my career. More and more, administrators were embracing technology, and the next 'big thing' that it promised on a regular basis, as the solution to student underachievement.

The process started off mildly enough, with the introduction of video (reel-to-reel was actually the first format used in the classroom) as a supplement to instruction, but by the time I had retired, whiteboards, school wi-fi networks, etc. were starting to gain currency. As my last administrator said, we have to hold their interest with new technology, a statement I took as sad evidence of pedogogical bankruptcy.

All the while, I was dubious of each new marvel; any reservations I openly expressed were readily dismissed, the assumption being that I was some kind of Luddite naturally resistant to change. And of course, for those who harboured notions of advancement, objecting to any new 'paradigm' would have been tantamount to career suicide, the institution of education quite Machiavellian in imposing its own brand of control on critical thinking.

It was therefore with some satisfaction that I read a piece in today's Star entitled Let’s unplug the digital classroom. Written by Doug Mann, professor in the sociology department and in the Faculty of Information and Media Studies at the University of Western Ontario, it argues that the ubiquity of digital technology in educational settings is not an unalloyed good, and suggests what some would regard as drastic measures in an effort to curb the distractions students fall prey to whilst in the thrall of that technology.

Cross-posted at Education and Its Discontents.

A Success Story Rob Ford and Other Reactionaries Won't Like

Those who see issues in simplistic and absolutist terms will not care to even acknowledge the existence of this letter from a Star reader. It speaks to something that neo-conservatives are loathe to acknowledge, the fact that we live in a society where interdependence and co-operation rather than selfish and exclusionary individualism are key factors in success on many levels:

I grew up at Black Creek and Trethewey. I ran with a tough crowd. I have been in more stolen vehicles than I can count. I hid a gun in my locker in high school for a friend. I was popular — everyone knew who I was. I had parents who seemed to not care what I was doing or where I was. I was playing basketball outside three blocks away on the night police officer Todd Bayliss was shot.

So how did I get out? How am I not in jail? How did I go to university, graduate, get a job, get married, move to Milton and have two kids? Why didn't I get pregnant in junior high like three of my classmates?

I'm not sure I have the definitive answers. I got involved in sports teams and music. I had teachers who cared if I showed up. One teacher asked me what I was going to do with my life. I didn't have an answer. When he asked me about my university applications, I laughed. We didn't have any money, my parents were uneducated and not concerned with school. My situation was not uncommon. After that conversation I was approached by many of my teachers with offers to help with applications, loans and scholarships and a higher paying summer job. Something clicked from there. I was important to people, they didn't want me to fail.

Community and school programs work — maybe not for everyone but they work. We need to show kids that there is hope, that people care what we become, that we can have pride in ourselves and our achievements. Pointing out “immigrants” and trying to deport gang members doesn't work. They come back.

What is the solution? Start young, give kids options, and put money into keeping them off the streets and out of gangs.

It's not a short-term solution, it's a long-term one. There is no quick fix, this takes time and investment. Aren't the kids worth it?

Deanna Churcher, Milton

The Erosion Of Educational Integrity

I rarely write directly about education these days, now that I am several years into retirement and believe that dwelling upon the past can be unhealthy. Every so often, however, a story comes along that causes me to relive some of the sleazy politicization that continues to erode educational integrity to this very day.

Thanks to a link sent to me by my son, who is now living in Alberta, I read a story reported by CBC about an Edmonton high school physics teacher who has been suspended for giving zeroes on uncompleted assignments or exams:

Lynden Dorval, a physics teacher at Ross Sheppard High School, has been giving the mark for work that wasn't handed in or tests not taken even though it goes against the school's "no-zero" policy.

The thinking behind the policy is that failing to complete assignments is a behavioural issue and marks should reflect ability, not behaviour.

Dorval said he couldn't in good conscience comply with the rule.

Towards the end of my career in Ontario, we were moving toward a similar policy, but at the time of my retirement, many of us were still practising what we called a 'drop-dead date' beyond which late work could not be submitted and would be assigned a zero. However, for me the proverbial line in the sand, one upon which I was never actually tested, was the Ontario Ministry guideline that described plagiarism as a behaviourial issue and that students should be given opportunities to do makeup work.

While some teachers actually provided such opportunities, it was, in my time still only a guideline and not school policy. I vowed to myself that I would never submit to such a stipulation, and fortunately, like the teacher in the Edmonton story, was close enough to retirement to have been able to stay true to my principles had an administrative ultimatum been issued.

And what foundational principle was so important to me that I would have put my job on the line? It was that I would never reward academic dishonesty as if it were a mere slip of judgement, a quirk or peccadillo easily remediated by second and third chances.

And my reasoning was simple: to give makeup chances to errant students was to simply encourage academic dishonesty, since there would be no real consequences for committing what used to be considered a grave academic crime. It also would have mocked the majority of students who were hardworking and earnest in their efforts. That was something I could not live with.

So, as my friend Dom, also a retired teacher, says about those who promote such inane policies, 'educational principles' are now in the hands of the resume-builders, those whose concerns for quality in education are at the very least a distant second, far behind their insatiable appetite for career-advancement.

You can perhaps appreciate why I prefer not to revisit "the good old days' too often.

P.S. If you read the CBC story, be sure to note the student reactions to Lynden Dorval's suspension, especially the first two.

The Purpose of Education

As a retired teacher who spent 30 years in the classroom, I long ago recognized how crucial the development of critical-thinking skills is to a good education. During my career, the cultivation of these skills was really an intrinsic part of literary exploration as we questioned, speculated upon and analysed the motivations of characters from some of the world's great works, whether it was Shakespeare's Hamlet or Macbeth, or Coleridge's protagonist in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, to name but three.

However, for a number of years now, such pursuits have often become regarded as rather 'soft', not what is needed in a society where 'hard-skills' are increasingly in demand. Of course, I and countless others would argue that critical thinking is one of the most important hard skills that are crucial to any thriving society, imparting as they do the ability to think widely, deeply and nimbly, facilitating adaptation not only in the workplace but also in the demands of daily life.

I have many concerns for the future, not the least of which is that as a society we no longer recognize the central importance of these thinking skills, making us increasingly prone to easy manipulation by those who do not have our best interests at heart. It is for this reason that I found an article on Alternet.org of particular interest; although written for an American audience, it explores education from two perspectives, the conservative and the liberal, and while its bias is clearly in favour of the latter, it offers some real food for thought as we confront, in our own country, almost daily assaults on logic and reason as the Harper regime perfects its campaign of demagoguery and denigration against all who disagree with it.

Entitled How the Conservative Worldview Quashes Critical Thinking -- and What That Means For Our Kids' Future, you can read the article here.

The Politics of Education

After I retired from teaching, my first blog was devoted to matters of education, including the institutional politics that frequently deform it. Now, more than five years into retirement, I spend most of my writing energies on this blog. However, today I would like to write a post in which the two subjects are very much intertwined, the politics of education.

Since the announcement of the Ontario provincial budget, Premier Dalton McGuinty and his Minister of Education, Laurel Broten, have become fascinating studies into what Orwell called the political use of language. It is language frequently involving demagoguery, fueled in this case by the knowledge that teachers are widely envied and despised, despite the vital role they play in society.

Take, for example, the Premier's call for a 'voluntary' pay freeze and elimination of the retirement gratuity. How 'voluntary' can it be when the province promises to legislate it if teachers don't capitulate? (BTW, although I suspect that no one really cares, the retirement gratuity is usually seen by teachers as partial compensation for the fact that they have no benefits in retirement and must purchase expensive private coverage).

My own former federation, OSSTF, has had a very muted reaction to these ultimatums, not surprising since it has essentially devolved into an opportunistic political entity itself. The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, on the other hand, has shown real spine; it walked away from the 'negotiating' table. After all, since government by fiat seems to be McGuinty's choice, what is there to negotiate?

It is this principled move that has led to the government's use of some of the demagogic arrows in its quiver. Designed no doubt to both shame teachers and inflame the public, Laurel Broten, Dwight Duncan and Dalton McGuinty has all very publicly proclaimed they will not sacrifice full-day kindergarten and smaller class sizes to the implied greed and selfishness of the teachers.

The latest escalation in this campaign of intimidation is reported in today's Star, as Broten threatens elementary teachers with 10,000 layoffs unless they accept a pay freeze..

So can a government really have it both ways? Can it claim to be negotiating while very clearly telegraphing that there is nothing to negotiate? Are McGuinty and company afraid of the loss of support from the education sector, or do they feel that loss will be more than compensated for by a public that sees teachers as rather tiresome and perhaps even disposable commodities?

Time will tell.

One More Thought For Today.

A few weeks ago, I wrote a post on education, lamenting the fact that like just about everything else, it has become a commodity, measured almost exclusively by its ability to lead to a good-paying job. Last evening, while watching the local news, I once more had confirmation of this.

An economics professor from McMaster talked about how education gives you a much better return on the dollar than most 'financial instruments' such as stocks or RRSP's. The report went on to say that having a Masters will enhance your earning power 8 or 9% on top of a Bachelor's degree.

As I have written previously, there is nothing wrong with the idea of pursuing education for the economic benefits it can confer, but to have it considered purely in those terms, without any acknowledgement of the value of the critical thinking skills benefits than can also accrue, seems to me quite short-sighted and yet another indication of the shallowness of our times.

You can watch the full report here.