|
Archives
- October, 2006
Scary Stuff – October 31, 2006
Global warming is getting more serious by the week and, finally, some
countries are paying attention to the threat – possibly because they
are beginning to understand it will hurt them economically. According to
a recent report from Britain, unchecked global warming will devastate the world economy on the scale
of the world wars and the Great Depression. Report author Sir Nicholas
Stern, a senior government economist, said that acting now to cut
greenhouse gas emissions would cost about 1 percent of global GDP each
year. Introducing the report, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said
unabated climate change would eventually cost the world between 5
percent and 20 percent of global gross domestic product each year.
Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, who has emerged
as a powerful environmental spokesman, will advise the British
government on climate change. The government is reportedly considering
new “green taxes” on cheap airline flights, fuel and high-emission
vehicles and intends to become a world leader in reducing greenhouse gas
emissions.
Meanwhile, in Bonn, Germany, the secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) has just released new data showing an upward trend in
emissions of industrialized countries in the period 2000–2004. This is
not new information, but the report ‘Greenhouse Gas Data, 2006’
constitutes the first complete set of data submitted by all 41
industrialized Parties of the Convention to the Bonn-based secretariat.
According to the secretariat, in the period
1990–2004, the overall emissions of industrialized countries decreased
by 3.3 per cent. However, this was mostly due to a 36.8 per cent
decrease in emissions on the part of economies in transition of eastern
and central Europe. Within the same time-period, the greenhouse gas emissions of the
other industrialized Parties of the Convention grew by 11.0 per cent.
The UN’s chief climate change official pointed
out that despite the emission growth in some countries in the period
2000-2004, Parties of the Kyoto Protocol stand a good chance of meeting
their individual emissions reduction commitments if they speedily apply
the additional domestic mitigation measures they are planning and use
the Kyoto Protocol’s market-based flexibility mechanisms. Trouble is,
both the U.S. and Canada have turned their backs on Kyoto. For instance, Canada’s proposed Clean Air Act will wait until 2050 to cut emissions by 45
to 65 percent. For further information on climate change and what
is being done about it, visit the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change
website.
Posted: 2006/10/31
2:10 PM
Take Back Your Time – October 23, 2006
Tomorrow is Take Back Your Time Day.
Take Back Your Time is a U.S./Canadian initiative designed to challenge
what has become, for many people, an epidemic of overwork,
over-scheduling and time famine. My personal experience is that not
controlling our time threatens our health, our families and
relationships, our communities and our environment. This year’s theme
is “Let’s Get Back to the Table” and focuses on ways to stop
neglecting our relationships by gathering together to eat, to chat, to
rekindle friendships and to celebrate being alive. I’ll be meeting
some friends for coffee and making sure my husband and I sit down for
dinner together. (I printed off some of the posters found on the Take
Back Your Time website and suggested his boss could be the recipient of
one, with my regards!)
Posted: 2006/10/23
9:50 AM
The Fragility of our Ability to Learn – October
22, 2006
I’ve often written and talked about how easy and natural it is for
children to learn. But that is only if their interest and ability are not
impeded by well-meaning adults. Reading and math are two areas assumed by schools to be so challenging that
intervention is required…intervention that usually ends up impeding
instead of helping.
A press release about women’s ability to do math,
which came across my desk a few days ago, underlines how easy it is to
get in the way of learning by convincing someone that a certain subject is
hard, or that they aren’t cut out to master a specific skill. Women and math is a controversial topic that led to
the resignation last summer of Lawrence Summers, the former president of
Harvard. He had speculated in public that one of the potential reasons
why women are represented less in math and science professions is that
fewer women than men have the intrinsic ability required by such jobs.
Some teachers of children seem to agree with Dr. Summers. But a
new study underlines how that theory itself is, in fact, detrimental to
girls’ and women’s ability to do math.
Researchers at the University of British Columbia
have found that women perform differently on math tests depending on
whether they believe math-related gender differences are determined by
genetic or social differences. Women who were told they are naturally as
good at math as men did twice as well on math tests as women who were
told men have more natural numbers sense. In a paper published in the
October 19 edition of the journal Science, UBC investigators Ilan
Dar-Nimrod and Steven Heine suggest that women tend to perceive gender
differences in math to be innate or genetic, but when they consider such
differences to be based on theories of nurture rather than nature, they
can improve their performance.
“Our study doesn’t explore whether innate sex
differences exist,” says Dar-Nimrod, a Psychology doctoral student.
“Instead, we investigated how the perceived source of stereotypes can
influence women’s math performance.” Associate Professor Heine, who
teaches in the Department of Psychology at UBC, adds, “The findings
suggest that people tend to accept genetic explanations as if they’re
more powerful or irrevocable, which can lead to self-fulfilling
prophecies. But experiential theories may allow a woman to say this
stereotype doesn’t apply to me.”
There are a number of messages here for life and
learning, including one that says if you belong to a group for which
there is any kind of negative stereotype, you may end up acting out that
stereotype, whether or not it really
applies to you.
Posted: 2006/10/21
11:40 AM
AD/HD or Doing What Comes Naturally? – October
19, 2006
I just received a news release on behalf the
Attention Deficit Disorder Association (ADDA). They have
conducted a survey of people working in various types of jobs to see
which ones had more people who had AD/HD “symptoms,” based on their
responses to a short questionnaire. I’m not sure what the results tell
us, since it looks to me like the classic chicken or egg scenario. But
here’s some of what the AD/HD in the Workplace survey found: The
profession associated with the highest likelihood (23 percent) of adult
AD/HD is the trades – plumbers, electricians, carpenters – followed
by elected officials and entertainers at 21 percent. Lawyers, law
enforcement personnel,
retail clerks and the media are among the least
likely to have symptoms of AD/HD. Business executives, athletes, clergy
and scientists fall in the middle, along with teachers (11 percent).
The “symptoms” of this “disorder” are
defined as frequent fidgeting; inability to get organized, sit still or
wait in line; as well as distractibility and procrastination; lateness
and relationship problems. I’m guessing that the latter “symptom” is
more a result of living with a disorganized, pushy fidgeter, but nobody
asked me. According to the news release, “with treatment, a person
with AD/HD can sometimes turn negatives into positives.” Uh, or
without treatment, maybe people find careers for themselves that fit
their personalities! Those supposedly AD/HD-ridden tradespeople (who are
often very highly paid, by the way) may simply be cut out for jobs that
are free from rigid structure and prolonged desk-sitting. On the other
hand, office, bank and retail clerks, with more structure, more public
contact and more sitting still (but presumably less pay,) were among the
group reporting the fewest symptoms of AD/HD.
David Giwerc, a past president of the ADDA who
apparently has AD/HD, is quoted as saying, “Adults with AD/HD have
unique strengths that can also manifest as a result of understanding
their AD/HD. They are often creative, spontaneous, inventive, humorous,
risk-taking problem-solvers.” So where’s the disability from this
disorder? Those qualities sound to me like they bode well for success in
life. Unfortunately for some kids (those with parents who don’t
know about, believe in or feel they can take advantage of unschooling), those traits pose problems in
typical school situations. And perhaps that’s the disability for which they “need” to be treated with drugs.
Posted: 2006/10/19
3:42 PM
Preventing Violence Against Children – October
15, 2006
In the upcoming November/December issue of
Natural Life magazine, we report that the United Nations has recently
released a study on violence against children. And a few days ago, I
received notice that a
special website has been created with links to the report in many languages. The
report provides a global picture of violence against children and
proposes recommendations to prevent and respond to this issue. The core
principle behind the report, with which I agree, is that no violence
against children is justified and all violence against children is
preventable. Yet, sadly, the report confirms that such violence exists
in every country of the world, cutting across culture, class, education,
income and ethnic origin. Not only that, it is often socially approved
and frequently legal and state-authorized. The author hopes that his
study and recommendations mark a turning point – an end to adult
justification of violence against children, whether accepted as
“tradition” or disguised as “discipline.” His recommendations
include a prohibition on all forms of violence against children,
including all corporal punishment, transforming attitudes that
“condone or normalize violence against children”...including
corporal punishment, development of public information programs to
promote non-violent values and ensure that children’s rights are
disseminated and understood (including by children) and development of
parent education programs focusing on non-violent forms of discipline.
The report notes that for many children,
educational settings expose them to, and may even teach them, violence.
“Violence perpetrated by teachers and other school staff, with or
without the overt or tacit approval of education ministries and other
authorities that oversee schools, includes corporal punishment, cruel
and humiliating forms of psychological punishment, sexual and
gender-based violence, and bullying. Corporal punishment such as beating
and caning is standard practice in schools in a large number of
countries around the world.”
In spite of this excellent report, those working to
eradicate violence against children will, I’m afraid, continue to have
an uphill climb against those whose activism is not propelled by the
best interests of children. There is a vocal lobby against anything to
do with the United Nations, including its Convention on the Rights of
the Child, and against the abolition of laws that permit spanking of
children. For instance, in Canada in 2004, the Supreme Court refused to
criminalize spanking as a form of parental discipline, disagreeing with
one of its most internationally respected and outspoken members –
Justice Louise Arbour, the UN’s former chief prosecutor in the
International War Crimes Tribunal – that spanking should be
criminalized. Arguing on the side of parental abuse of children was a
group calling itself the Coalition for Family Autonomy, headed up by the
Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) and including Focus on the
Family, Canada Family Action Coalition and REAL Women of Canada. At the
time, HSLDA’s Dallas Miller characterized the court case as an attack on parents by those who
support children’s rights. Lest you wonder about the connection with
homeschooling, the logic sees this attack, if successful, as eventually
making homeschooling illegal. This fear-mongering has served HSLDA well
over the years, but that’s another story. The court seemed to believe
that family disruption is more harmful to children than corporal
punishment. As Miller is quoted as saying on the HSLDA website, “The
decision...is grounded in the recognition that to criminalize the
actions of parents who provide loving guidance and correction to their
children would result in ruined lives and broken families. As the court
noted, this burden is often borne by the children involved.” Um, I beg
to differ, but I wasn’t in court.
Unfortunately, the support of violence against
children is not restricted to right-wing conservative organizations.
While the Canadian Teachers’ Federation has a policy that opposes the
use of corporal punishment in schools, it has warned that repealing
Section 43 of the Criminal Code, which allows parents and teachers to
use “reasonable force by way of correction” of children would
quickly lead to chaos in the classroom – a confusing and, to my mind,
hypocritical stance. But maybe it's
“just” semantics. Their current policy notes that “Section
43 of the Criminal Code does not sanction or condone child abuse”
and that it provides protection to teachers when
the use of force is justified.” Hmmm, I thought
that whether or not the use of force is ever justified was what was
under dispute!
Aside from violating the Canadian Charter of
Rights, Section 43 has been singled out as contrary to the Criminal Code
in at least three decades’ worth of reports, many of them commissioned
by governments themselves. In addition, Canada, as a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, is
obliged to make the physical punishment of children an offense. A
growing number of countries, many of them Scandinavian, combine law
reform with parental education to change public opinion and private
conduct when it comes to striking children. These governments believe
that as the public becomes better informed about the well-established
link between the physical punishment of children and heightened
aggression among children and youth, attitudes toward disciplining
children will be altered. It’s time for other so-called civilized
countries to come out of the Dark Ages and do the right thing.
Posted: 2006/10/14
12:29 PM
Early Learning, Not Necessarily Early School – October 14, 2006
I recently came out from under the cloud of a stress-induced lupus flare
to hear an acquaintance inform me that I’m hopelessly out of step with
public opinion. She then quoted a statistic she’d read in that day’s
paper. Nearly 90 percent of Canadians view early childhood learning as
critical to success in today’s society, according to the Survey of
Canadian Attitudes Toward Learning, conducted on behalf of the
Canadian Council on Learning, which is funded by the federal government.
That, said my acquaintance somewhat triumphantly, negates my position
that young children don’t need – and are even harmed by – formal
instruction.
Nice try, I said, but my body’s forced slow-down had
given me the leisure time to read the papers too. And I countered that
the survey had found that Canadians feel that fostering positive
attitudes toward life and learning in early childhood is more important
than school readiness and personal development. It also found that we
believe that parents should have the primary responsibility for
providing early childhood learning opportunities, which should comprise
play rather than academic pursuits. That does not mean that we all think
babies should be sent to schools of one sort or another; it does
illustrate an impressive awareness of the need to protect and nurture
children’s inherent enthusiasm for exploring the world. However, since
they frequently reference the need for access to quality child care, I
suspect that the researchers/report authors haven’t made the
distinction between teaching and learning. That’s not surprising,
since most people fail to admit that one doesn’t necessarily lead to
the other, and forget that young children are always, energetically
learning.
There were some interesting (although perhaps not
surprising to many unschooling mothers) differences between mothers’
attitudes and those of fathers. For instance, more mothers than
fathers said that informal activities are more important than organized
classes for young children, while a majority of fathers felt that
organized classes were at least as important as reading and playing, and
that the instruction should involve communication and problem-solving
skills.
These are important topics for public discussion. I
hope that this survey, which claims to be the first edition of “a
yearly barometer of opinions, perceptions and beliefs about lifelong
learning in Canada,” will explore attitudes about informal learning and help to place
non-institutionalized education on the menu of choices for people of all
ages.
Oh yeah, and I’m learning how to say no more often so
that I don’t get so stressed, but that’s another blog entry for another
time.
Posted: 2006/10/14
4:21 PM
Solving the Problem, Not Avoiding It – October 4, 2006
Over the past few days, I’ve received a couple of email messages saying
that I should be using the recent string of shootings in schools across
North America
as justification for homeschooling. Yes, people who don’t spend any
time in schools will avoid being shot there. But unless we are willing to
become hermits (and that’s not the image of home-based learning I like to
portray), we can’t avoid the violence that occurs in other places.
Instead, we need to examine why these mass shootings are occurring and
try to prevent them. I suspect the reasons are complicated. Apparently,
some of the shooters, including Eric Harris at
Columbine High School in 1999, were taking anti-depressant drugs, some of which have suicidal
and manic side-effects (see an
article we recently published in Natural Life magazine). Some may have been
influenced by violent media. Many seem to have had troubled or
dysfunctional childhoods. Some had self-esteem issues. All had access
to guns, legally registered or otherwise. And they all have watched
adults and governments try to solve problems with varied kinds of
violence, from coercion of children, including bullying and spanking, to
guns and bombs. No, as much as we want to protect our children from
violence, avoidance will not solve the problem. We need more people
willing to admit to the need for widespread societal change and exploring
the solutions, not fewer.
Posted: 2006/10/04
9:29 AM
Embracing Their Choices – October 1, 2006
I’ve just sent the electronic files off to the printer for the
November/December issue of Life Learning. Once again, a bunch of
inspired contributors have helped me put together a unique collection of
thought-provoking articles about the journey we’re all walking toward
life learning. The letters section has suddenly become quite lively, at
least partly in reaction to Peter Kowalke’s series of interviews with
young people who have grown without schooling. A number of readers have
been reacting with dismay to the life path choices some of his recent
interviewees have been making. However, as one reader wrote – and as
I’ve told Peter a number of times – the candor displayed by his
subjects is both refreshing and thought-provoking.
My own ongoing journey involves embracing and
rejoicing in the life choices made by my two now 30-something daughters.
And that’s how I view the life decisions made by the young people
Peter has interviewed: If we are confident that we’ve given our
children the tools of life learning – the ability to reason,
experiment, take risks, make mistakes, regroup, change direction and try
again – we should be comfortable that they are making the best choices
for themselves at any given point in time. Bringing up independent
thinkers means respecting the choices that result from that
independence, even when we might not agree with them. I do not share the
view of one letter writer who suggested that their making choices with
which we don’t
agree means that “the world of unschooling is in flames.”
That
level of acceptance is not always an easy path for parents to walk
and we can’t always look to our own parents as role models, but it’s
an important part of the life learning journey. One of the contributors
to the November/December issue – Karen Ridd – has an accepting
parent as a role model. Karen interviewed her mother about her feelings
around the unschooling of her grandchildren. Her joy in watching her
grandsons learn provides a good role model for us all.
Posted: 2006/10/01
3:16 PM
|
