quote:

---

It may be that there is no other way of educating people. Possibly, but I don't believe it. In the meantime it would be a help at least to describe things properly, to call things by their right names. Ideally, what should be said to every child, repeatedly, throughout his or her school life is something like this:

'You are in the process of being indoctrinated. We have not yet evolved a system of education that is not a system of indoctrination. We are sorry, but it is the best we can do. What you are being taught here is an amalgam of current prejudice and choices of this particular culture. The slightest look at history will show how impermanent these must be. You are being taught by people who have been able to accommodate themselves to a regime of thought laid down by their predecessors. It is a self-perpetuating system. Those of you who are more robust and individual then others, will be encouraged to leave and find ways to educating yourself - educating your own judgement. Those that stay must remember, always and all the time, that they are being moulded and patterned to fit into the narrow and particular needs of this particular society.'

---

Martin Luthor Kings (or was it Malcom X) that said that "They are more afraid of us sober than drunk." Similar idea with ritalin so that the child does not ask too many questions - especially the ones that the teacher cannot answer without disrupting her single perspective view of reality.

quote:

---

In the universities of the immediate future, the student's problem, despite all the limitations that universities will be forced to put up, will be not so much the difficulty of getting to college as making sure that when he (sic) gets there he will be educated and not merely processed. In the nature of things no instructor, however deeply interested in students, can take initiative in this. The student must cultivate all the virtues of education, and the virtues of education are mainly social vices. He must become anti-social; he must make an unmitigated pest of himself in sitting on his professor's doorstep armed with questions; he should have the kind of maladjusted unpleasantness that goes with the genuine student's mentality. When a good student displays arrogance, it often means that he is pulling away from the kind of well adjusted social behaviour that leads to security, popularity, and death of the free mind (72). - Northrup Frye

---

"You will be assimilated."
"You must comply."

And that's just what some of the teachers have to deal with from the system.

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: MJ ]

What it has become is a petrie dish of leftist socialist indoctrination. "Here's the way WE think", say the teachers, "we HOPE you'll have the good sense (wink wink) to feel the same": Unions good, Harris bad; feel like you're attracted to the same sex - great go for it; two moms is as good as a mom and a dad, men are oppressors, capitalism is bad, all people on welfare are not to blame for their prediciment; workfare is evil.

Kids these days leave school knowing how to put a condom on but not knowing what a verb is, let alone how to conjugate one.

Junior Kindergarten and Kindergarten are tax funded day care centres where kids learn practically nothing of any academic value.

Conformity? yes - the conformity of the semi literate left.

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]

I tend to have one exception to the idea of multiperspective teaching and that is the teaching of hatred. Teaching diversity and tolerance rather than uniformity and hatred may be construed as "one way one view." However, this one view (diversity and tolerance) allows for multiperspective teaching and thinking (the foundation of critical thinking) while the other one view (uniformity and hatred) only allows for single perspective teaching.

They should stay the hell away from imparting morality.

Yes I dislike pandering leftists. But the danger is no less when neo cons use public institutions to indoctrinate the young. Take, for example, the Hitler youth movement. Schools are hotbeds of socialism now. In a hundred years it could be teh exact opposite.

Molding the morals and values of young minds must not be left to agents of the state. It must be the sole authority of the parents. Some parents might not do a great job but at least there won't be brigades of state sanctioned swastika (or ribbon) wearing kids marching down the street.

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]

quote:

---

Schools are hotbeds of socialism now.

---

quote:

---

Molding the morals and values of young minds must not be left to agents of the state. It must be the sole authority of the parents. Some parents might not do a great job but at least there won't be brigades of state sanctioned swastika (or ribbon) wearing kids marching down the street.

---

Molding the morals and values of young minds must not be left to ANY ONE authority be it parents, or the state. A person's morals and values come from the variety of people and experiences one has in their life.

quote:

---

Similar idea with ritalin so that the child does not ask too many questions - especially the ones that the teacher cannot answer without disrupting her single perspective view of reality.

---

That may be the most ridiculous, phony-conspiratorial notion I have ever heard. (no offence) Like the average 8 year old that's on Ritalin is going to baffle educators with probing enquiries about bias in the curriculum. Kids we used to call ill-behaved goons now are labelled as ADD kids and put on drugs. No doubt some have medical conditions, but the educator's understandable reluctance to control a classroom (for fear of sexual and physical harrassments suits for example) brings more "goons" out of the word work IMO.

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: CrankItUpA'Notch ]

The traditional means of controlling a classroom, (now restricted), as everyone knows, is via sexual and physical harrassment. According to the logic of His Thickness, if teachers could only be free once more to sexually and physically harrass "goons" without fear of prosecution, these kids would disappear (to join him under the word work, one presumes), along with the problem of over-prescribing Ritalin.

quote:

---

Schools are hotbeds of socialism now.

---

quote:

---

Kids these days leave school knowing how to put a condom on but not knowing what a verb is, let alone how to conjugate one.

---

quote:

---

I thought kids were supposed to abstain from conjugation.

---

Well, at least they've debunked that myth about its effect on your eyesight.

The only evidence I have is talking to friends and acquaintances in the profession. You know instead of dismissing others opinions and experiences out of hand..actually going out and having some of your own. Ask a long time teacher whether they feel tremendous pressure and scrutiny from parents and administrators, as to their classroom behavior and decorum now as oppposed to, say 10 years ago. Ask them if they would risk hugging a student in this day and age? (think of the teachers as "victims"...seems to be a passion of yours)

If your first instinct is to pump little Bittersweet Jr. full of drugs instead of disciplining him when he won't sit still, throws a tantrum or won't do his math, go right ahead. Lord knows the touchy-feely sensitivity police, such as yourself , scared the teachers out of doing anything of the kind a long time ago.

[ May 11, 2002: Message edited by: CrankItUpA'Notch ]

However, I do need to ask a real live teacher. As long as the kid remains seated, what reason is there that she actually has to sit still? It is easier to think and pay attention when one is moving around a bit or playing with their ruler, chewing gum etc. Even Colleen Jones chews gum to help her concentrate.

quote:

---

However, I do need to ask a real live teacher. As long as the kid remains seated, what reason is there that she actually has to sit still? It is easier to think and pay attention when one is moving around a bit or playing with their ruler, chewing gum etc. Even Colleen Jones chews gum to help her concentrate.

---

Well, I'm a real live teacher and I do not allow students to chew gum in class..first of all I find it distracting...however the big reason is because children and i'm willing to bet some adults have a perverse pleasure in leaving it in hidden areas for others to clean up. It isn't fair to the caretakers to have to clean it. Also, it is a choking hazard.

I also don't let them wear hats or non-religious head coverings. School is a state of mind too...it isn't the streets. I want school to be a separate place in their minds.

As to the whole moving around business...it is totally unrealistic to expect that kids sit down for 5 hours, shut-up and listen. I think most teachers agree with this...at least the ones that I know.

I have a kid with ADHD in my class and he is not on drugs. He hoots out responses at innappropriate times moves about the classroom and generally can't control his body. I've developed a strategies for dealing with his small, but irritating behaviours. First of all, he sits at the back of the class, so if he needs to stand up --he can, with out disrupting the entire class. Also, this takes him out of my immediate range of sight when I'm delivering a lesson and if he does something silly I won't jump all over him.

This thread is very interesting. How many of the people posting are teachers?

For the record, I'm very up front with my politics and my "ethics/ morals/ values" (for a lack of a better term) in my classroom. I talk to my students about current events and issues and I encourage controversy...if i'm accused of educating my students to be "leftists" I'd say damn straight.

However, in the process I'm teaching them how to read, write and add and subtract. If they can do that and get through the year without biting anyone else, I'll have done my job. Hopefully though, they'll leave having thought about some of the other things we've discussed.

I guess you could say that school, by its nature, demands conformity. There is no other place in the world where you have to do the things that you do in school. Very few workplaces (besides teaching) require you to be sitting in one big room with 30 other beings. It ain't natural, let me tell you. as a student you have to be able to work with little johnny, who you may despise, for a whole school year.

Teachers, therefore, have to control 30 little beings and make sure that one little being doesn't do anything that will be to the detriment to the entire group. I'd have to say that classrooms will never be a democracy, rather a benevolent dictatorship.

Wow. I've totally contradicted myself in this post...but it makes sense to me as a teacher.

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: kamiks ]

You put the most easily distracted kid at the back of the class where it is easiest for them to ignore you and for you to ignore them.

quote:

---

Zentall, S. S. (1977). Environmental stimulation model. Exceptional Children, 43, 502-510.
Educational management of the hyperactive child is primarily directed toward reduction of environmental stimulation. Although social consensus is high regarding the use of this management technique, empirical support is lacking. An alternative theory is presented that is based on the homeostatic assumption that the hyperactive child is actually understimulated and hyperactive behaviors function to increase the external stimulation to approach a more optimal level. Empirical support for this homeostatic model is presented, and classroom treatment techniques derived from the theory and based on research are discussed. Suggested treatment is designed to optimize stimulation and thus reduce hyperactive children's needs to produce their own stimulation through activity.

---

quote:

---

Zentall, S. S., & Gohs, D. E. (1984). Hyperactive and comparison children's response to detailed vs. global cues in communication tasks. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 77-87.
According to the optimal stimulation theory, hyperactive children suffer from insufficient arousal, especially in contexts that provide minimal stimulation. In the present study hyperactive children were predicted to perform worse than controls on tasks requiring attention to detailed information because utilization of detailed cues requires narrowing and sustaining attentional focus (optimally produced by states of high arousal). Hyperactive and comparison children were presented with a series of receptive communication tasks requiring attention to (a) detailed cues alone, and (b) global cues followed by detailed cues or detailed cues followed by global cues, under conditions in which subjects were permitted to ask for clarifying cues or information. Findings demonstrated that hyperactive boys performed worse than controls in tasks which provided detailed cues alone. During tasks in which additional cues available detailed, experimental subjects responded more impulsively than controls. Problems with detailed cues were not attributable to overall differences between groups in motivation, ability to request information, information processing speed, or nonspecific impulsivity. These findings suggest that hyperactive children may more readily process global than detailed information in tasks that are analogous to classroom listening tasks.

---

On the other hand, those who habituate (metabolize novely) more quickly, tend to get bored with repetition and to only focus on mundane things like gum chewing when there is nothing better to do. If you do prefer global to detail and are often understimulated rather than over stimulated and you find yourself focusing on gum chewing, you must ask that if your own oration is boring you so much that the chewing of gum captures your attention moreso than the topic or your choice of words, it may be time to liven it up a bit. If the teacher is bored, then the students must be also.

It's late and I turn into a mouthy gremlin after midnight - and all teachers start reminding me of my kindergarten teacher. Miss Simore did a very good Jane Elliot impression, if you know what I mean.

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

wow. it took me several reads through the jargon to let it sink in...and you're right--some what.

I realize that ADHD kids are understimulated. I try to use lots of manipulatives and exploratory work in my class...everyone (not just ADHD kids) learns a lot better that way. I try to vary it up and not spend all my time at the front of the class preaching pedantically to the masses. HOWEVER, there are times that I need to be at the front with all the kids listening to me...if this child was too close to me, I'd be interrupting the lesson to try and bring him back into the fold and then BLAMO a power struggle. I want to avoid these struggles at all costs...this particular student engages in them all the time and it sucks away at my teaching time. Not to mention the fact that it starts eating away at the fragile teaching/learning relationship that we have constructed over the past year. Putting him at the back lets him engage in the small behaviours that he can not control and not disturb the other children. When they move into the subsequent activity, whether it is seatwork or a performance task, he gets my immediate attention, while the other students get to it. It frees me up to support him in his learning while not having to try and modify his behaviour (because I ain't no psychologist)

It isn't optimal for his education. I know. I can't even begin to tell you how much this frustrates me. He belongs in a classroom which has less kids and a completely different program. However, we have to make do. And for the most part he is becoming more successful. He is a cool kid.

As for the gum chewing and being bored with my own oration/livening it up: well, perhaps. It is a personal quibble, some people don't care. I can't stand it at all. But the gum under chairs and in carpets is the height of disrespect for a caretaker's work. Not to mention the fact caretakers in the TDSB are severely understaffed and I am luck to get my portable vacumed and trash cans emptied each night. (but that is another future thread)

Just a query...what precisely is a global cue vs a detailed cue? I'm guessing at the terms and my dictionary and child psych book is at school, in my classroom.

last query: JAne Elliot??? I am missing the reference on that too maybe i'm too tired.

p.s. sorry for sounding so teacher-robot-ish. didn't mean to flash you back to kindergarten.

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: kamiks ]

quote:

---

She said that blue-eyed people were stupid and lazy and not to be trusted. To ensure that the eye color differentiation could be made quickly, Elliott passed out strips of cloth that fastened at the neck as collars. The brown eyes gleefully affixed the cloth-made shackles on their blue-eyed counterparts. ...snipped...
Elliott recalls, "It was just horrifying how quickly they became what I told them they were." Within 30 minutes, a blue-eyed girl named Carol had regressed from a "brilliant, self-confident carefree, excited little girl to a frightened, timid, uncertain little almost-person."

On the flip side, the brown-eyed children excelled under their newfound superiority. Elliott had seven students with dyslexia in her class that year and four of them had brown eyes. On the day that the browns were "on top," those four brown-eyed boys with dyslexia read words that Elliott "knew they couldn’t read" and spelled words that she "knew they couldn’t spell."

---

This is from the March/April 2001 issue of ADDvance

quote:

---

Sydney Zentall and Deborah Gohs (1984) found that ADHD children performed better (and requested less follow-up information) when presented with global cues first ("it looks like...") and worse when presented with detailed cues first ("it has the following parts..."). When given a choice, ADHD individuals were significantly more apt to request information concerning the global aspects of a phenomenon rather than its constituent parts. Conversely, children who score very low on measures of ADHD were least likely to request further information when detailed cues, rather than global cues were presented first. Children may vary, in accordance with their biological predispositions, in how they prefer to be taught.

---

quote:

---

The distinction Derrida makes between analysis and deconstruction, appears very similar to the distinction Sydney Zentall and Deborah Gohs (1984) make between global cues ("it looks like...") and detailed cues ("it has the following parts..."). Like, deconstruction, these global cues tended to emphasize how it is the interactions among the different components which result in the formulation of this picture rather than that picture. Alternatively, analysis, like the detailed cues, tend to promote the idea that the whole and the summation of parts appear on opposite sides of an equivalency sign. To borrow Barkley's earlier sentence metaphor, the same 4 words will almost always form the same sentence. The fact that Zentall and Goh's ADHD children preferred and performed better when presented with the global cues suggests that the deconstruction/analysis dichotomy may offer important clues as to how ADHDers process and organize information differently.

---

quote:

---

The mode in which information is presented and organized in a rote pedagogy also differs in significant ways from the way sensation-seekers encode and organize input. The rote pedagogy uses sequence and order of presentation to organize ideas. Temperamentally rigid children usually can follow what the teacher is saying, because their own thoughts follow each other in a similar fashion. Diametrically, the sensation-seeker`s brain has a difficult time organizing information, regardless of it`s content, according to it`s sequence (or fixed place in line). Organizing information according to order of presentation require that the mind stay put rather than wander in and out among different perspectives. Sensation-seekers need to employ organizing strategies which do not depend on sequence and a single perspective, but, instead, rely on the interaction or contextual connections formed, almost concurrently, between, among and within ideas. The rote pedagogy insures that these instructional needs are never met.

---

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

quote:

---

Susan Villani`s review "Impact of Media on Children and Adolescents" provides a startling portrait concerning the effects of media exposure on children`s opinions, preferences, and subsequent behavior. The media, Villani concludes, is an enormous educational phenomenon. What should concern parents most, she maintains, is the content of this unofficial curriculum - more specifically what is being taught and what our children are learning. For instance, Villani attests that video games, much like those our nations children play with every day, were originally used by the military to teach soldiers how to kill, the inference being that these same video games may also be teaching our children how to become soldiers.

Although only one segment of the review is devoted specifically to advertising, it becomes obvious throughout that whether Villiani is talking about the cigarette in the mouth of the lead singer during a music video or about sexual stereotypes and violence on television, what she is addressing is the effects of advertising. After all, is not advertising the modification of behaviors, preferences or attitudes through the intentional promotion of one product or one idea over another? Villani presents advertising as a pedagogical method by providing considerable evidence that children show evidence of learning and retention of information through their exposure to advertising.
Rote is a method of teaching which presents the subject matter from a single perspective and focuses on the memorization of disconnected facts. Since it considers only a limited amount of information to be relevant to any particular subject, a rote pedagogy may insure that only those assumptions (and sanctioned connections among assumptions) which support this single perspective will be explored. Assumptions omitted from this single perspective, but which are integral components of other perspectives on the subject, will ostensibly be labeled tangential, irrelevant, or, depending on the age of the child and the arrogance of the instructor, gibberish.

Those of us who, as students, became accustomed to learning by rote may be especially susceptible to the effects of advertising. As Gilbert, Tafarody and Malone discovered, when people are prevented from questioning information at the time of presentation (due either to the presence of another task or due to instructions to speed read the statements), their brains will automatically encode this new information as fact. The findings of Gilbert and his associates are especially noteworthy since participators in their experiments were told, prior to the presentation of the statements, to assume that all subsequently presented statements were automatically false. The learned tendency to refrain from questioning new information at it`s outset, an integral component of the rote pedagogy, may also increase the likelihood that a person will accept newly presented information as fact. ...

The rote pedagogy, which promotes the view that there is only one way of looking at things and one way of dividing up reality, does not allow its students to understand how a variety of opinions can exist on issues the pedagogy presents as cut and dry. Its students never learn an awareness of the assumptions that distinguish different points of view, let alone those that make up their own beliefs. Information is accepted or rejected based solely on how well it fits with existing assumptions, and students remain oblivious to how they are being influence by what they see and hear. Of course, advertisers do need to understand how its target audience (or audiences) divide up reality if they wish to manipulate that audience. However, while advertisers can openly present information so that their audience may accept or reject it outright, these same advertisers are well aware that information is more insidiously incorporated into existing thought patterns if presented indirectly.

Memory researcher Elisabeth Loftus has found that information embedded in a relative clause is more easily encoded and remembered as fact, than information presented in the main body of the utterance or sentence. This "misinformation effect" occurs because english-speakers tend to direct their attention towards the accuracy of main clauses, or towards what ever information is most straightforwardly related answering an interrogative. The "misinformation effect" is more likely to occur when one is exposed to misleading information in such a way that, while one may be aware of its presence, one`s focus is diverted from it. In literature, a similar trick is often used to plant plot clues in such a way that they reader initially dismisses the information, yet realizes it`s relevance when the twist in the plot is resolved.

In critical theory, Pierre Macherey and Jacques Derrida concentrate on what they refer to as the "gaps" or "silences" in a written composition which reveal both the works boundaries and its ideological discrepancies. For instance, Derrida psychoanalyzes Sigmond Freud`s work to reveal that, in contrast to Freud`s claims of objectivity, the insecurities presented in his theories belong, not his patients, but to Freud himself. Catherine Belsey, utilizing Macherey`s approach, examines the explicit premise presented through out the Sherlock Holmes series that "all can be explained" through logic and deductive reasoning. Since the presence of that which must remain unexplained contradicts the books` premise that all can be explained, this presence is often only alluded to in vague ill-defined conclusions, and one`s attention is carefully diverted from these ambiguities and on to the logical problems one must solve to preserve it.

The case of Lady Eva and her letter intrigues Belsey, since both are referred to throughout the narrative, but only in passing. Belsey proposes that the contents of the letter can never be revealed, and that Lady Eva, herself, must remain indistinct, if the writer wishes to insure that the reader`s sympathies remain with Holmes' client rather than with the blackmailer. Since sympathies are subjective entities not beholden to logic, all information which may contradict the author`s wish for sympathy (or the book`s premise that all can be explained through science) are glossed over.

The rote pedagogy, which acknowledges the existence of only a single perspective, never prepares it`s students to look beyond the main clause. Innocent questions which reveal the perspective`s inconsistencies or transiencies in what one must learn to accept as cohesive, solid, and, of course, permanent fact must not be encouraged. The closer a student gets to the edge of a perspective, the more one hears slogans rather than well thought out arguments and many turn back when they get to the signs posted near these edges warning of danger. Any way, who wants to be chastised for spouting nonsense, who wants to exert effort trying to make sense of the inconceivable? There are many hoping to convince us that it is less trouble just to sit there and stare blankly at the screen.

---

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

Crankitupanotch, I hug my teachers all the time. No harassment suits yet. Then again, maybe I'm just flauting my "indoctrinated gaynicity" Also, if the only way you can think of disciplining children is to beat them, not only do I find your take absolute bull shit, but you lack creativity as well. Sad, sad...

Rapunzel, I have never had a teacher only give their side of an issue. First of all, it's hard enough to get in a discussion of current events as it is. For instance, we were studying the prelude to WWII when LePen beat Jospin in the first round of the French Presidential elections. Did the topic ever come up? nope. Furthermore, what proof do you have that teachers are trying to "turn students gay" (as if it were a choice! Christ, you're ignorant). In reality, 92% of homophobic slurs in the classroom go totally unaddressed by teachers, a recent study by GLSEN demonstrates. You're letting your bigotry, oops! I mean "bias" get in the way of your view of reality again. Also, Harris makes himself look bad enough, the teachers don't need to egg us on. You should have heard the comments in some of my classes when we were doing prep for the literacy test. Frankly, I wish my fellow students were smart enough to realize that the literacy test wasn't actually one of the bad things he did (though the scheduling just sucked). Anyway, and there has never been a mention of unions to my recolection, with the exception of a wisecrack or two by one of the teachers. It was funny, but certainly not pro-union. Also, if I were to ask a portion of the students what workfare is, I guarantee none, absolutely NONE would know! There is, sadly, next to no current events studies in school, at least not in the soo. Current events, politics, world studies courses aren't even offered until grade 12! Oh, and btw, we learn about condoms and verbs. Not just regular English verbs, but French and Italian too. So please, if you're going to run off on a rant like that again, make sure you can back it up with reality, not just your perception of reality from that fantasy world of yours.

Also, something that shocked me a bit from almost all of you, there seems to be a perception that the only people youth learn from are parents and teachers. PLEASE!!! If my eyes could roll back any further, I'd suffer irrepairable damage! I doubt that the combined influence of my parents and teachers would account for over 50% of my resulting moral code. Other influences that have been overlooked here are siblings, friends, the media (TV, internet, books, music...), and most of all, the self. People can and do make moral/value judgements based on their own experiences and interpretations. Just because we can't vote, don't assume we can't think. Also, it might do you all some good to remember that moral/value development doesn't end after 13+ years in educational institutions. It's ever changing.

Furthermore, if the the "indoctrination" charges of rapunzel and others had even the slightest bit of weight, Harris would have lost the election in '99, and I'd be getting a hell of a lot more action.

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]

If indoctrination came in the form of homework. . . then I would be a brainwashed little socialist, wouldn't I be?

quote:

---

Also, something that shocked me a bit from almost all of you, there seems to be a perception that the only people youth learn from are parents and teachers. PLEASE!!! If my eyes could roll back any further, I'd suffer irrepairable damage! I doubt that the combined influence of my parents and teachers would account for over 50% of my resulting moral code. Other influences that have been overlooked here are siblings, friends, the media (TV, internet, books, music...), and most of all, the self. People can and do make moral/value judgements based on their own experiences and interpretations. Just because we can't vote, don't assume we can't think. Also, it might do you all some good to remember that moral/value development doesn't end after 13+ years in educational institutions. It's ever changing.

---

Thanks for reminding me I went to a p.d. on media literacy and a discussion ensued about the fact that the media, in all forms, has an enormous impact on the lives of youth, yet we persist in focusing primarily on the print based medium to teach. Maybe we should be looking to shift the curriculum towards increased media literacy in order to teach basic literacy itself.

quote:

---

Also, if the only way you can think of disciplining children is to beat them, not only do I find your take absolute bull shit, but you lack creativity as well. Sad, sad...

---

Alice Cooper, the Sex Pistols, Nazareth (huh?), Elvis Costello...

They made me a misfit!!!

quote:

---

Key concepts for Thinking About Media: What do they mean?

1 • all media messages are constructions of reality
Ever buy something, take it home, get it out of the package and use it, only to find it isn’t anywhere near as good as it seemed in the commercial or picture in the catalogue or advertisement? Ever wonder why you can’t get double your fun (and a hot date) when you chew Doublemint gum? Ever get bummed out wishing your life was more like a Britney Spears video? Well, all of that is because media messages construct their product: they create illusions to make a world that is exciting and entertaining enough to keep audiences interested and buying their product, watching their show, listening to their CD, etc. Even so-called “reality” shows are scripted, and doctor “approval” of products happens only when the doctors get paid for it. The producers of media usually attempt to construct things so that their products look appealing and interesting.

2 • the audience must negotiate meaning in media messages
Ever watch a movie, TV show or commercial and really identify with it, maybe even thinking to yourself “That’s like me” or “That is who I wish I could be?” Ever become absolutely convinced about an idea after watching TV or hearing something on the radio? We all have our own view of the way the world is “constructed” based on factors such as our culture, the society in which we live, our age, experiences, etc. Our notions of reality may be confirmed for us by the media; our opinions may be affected by the media. The media is constructed in an effort to affect us like this: the more impact it can make, the more excited and entertained we are, the more interested we are in the product or show or CD. Smart producers of media target specific audiences based on what they expect this “demographic” will want. They expect these audiences to negotiate meaning in their messages and find what they (didn’t know) they wanted, so that their products will appear very appealing.

3 • media messages contain commercial implications, ideological, cultural, and value messages, as well as social and political
implications
Ever think that when people buy a cool car or a Coors Light that they will get a hot date like they do in commercials? Ever notice how usually it is only men using power tools and women washing floors in commercials? Media contain many different messages, some of them almost invisible. All media are constructed in order to sell us something. Sometimes we obviously know what they are trying to sell us (the product in the commercial, the video that tries to get us to buy the CD), other times it is less obvious, because what we are being sold is an idea or a message about what we are supposed to value. That commercial may sell us a car, but it is also telling us that people will respect us more or think we’re cooler if we buy a certain car. The beer commercial is selling beer, but it is also telling us that we will have a party and hot friends if we drink. All media contain these sorts of obvious or hidden messages, and it’s the obvious messages the producers of these media want us to see. We have to look deeper and think harder to be aware of the hidden messages, but it is often these that are the most significant.

4 • form and content are closely related in media messages
Ever watch a news event on TV, then hear the story on the radio and read about it in the newspaper and discover the story is different in each case? The TV, radio and newspapers all stress different things about the same news story because they are different media: one you watch and hear, one you listen to only, and the other you usually look at over a longer period of time. The meaning of something is shaped by the medium and the characteristics or advantages/disadvantages of that medium. As the famous Canadian media philosopher Marshall McLuhan once said, “The medium is the message.” Television may stress the visual aspect of something, radio favours sounds and voices, and newspapers and especially magazines can give detailed background information that radio and TV just can’t provide. The medium (TV, film, radio, print, internet) that an idea is presented in affects how we perceive that idea. No one medium gives us the “whole” idea; every medium has its advantages and disadvantages. As smart consumers, we have to be aware that we never get the “whole story” in any media, or even in all of them put together. Just like everyone has his own point of view and nobody is wholly right, so each medium is just one imperfect window on the world. (Bar analogy)

5 • each medium has a unique aesthetic form
Ever watch a TV commercial about perfume and there is a close-up of a man and a woman, the lighting is dim, and the music is soft and low, and you know already the two will kiss? Ever watch films like Star Wars or action movies and find it really easy to know right away who are the good guys and who are the bad guys? Ever listen to a new song on the radio and you are able to identify it right away as rap-metal, you expect it to sound a certain way and you know how the band will look and act in the video? This is because all media use codes, conventions, and customs which become--after they are used a number of times and “codified”--predictable ways of communicating information. There are many of these ways of conveying information that we understand without even really being aware of them. All of these conventions are used to construct meaning in media. It is important to be aware of these codified ways of communicating information in media so that we can be aware of the hidden ideas and values in these media.

---

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: SamL ]

quote:

---

In groups of 3, students compare the three Internet sites and compose an oral presentation with a visual component to share their findings, USING SPECIFIC EXAMPLES, based on the five key concepts of media, and including analysis of the following:

• compare/contrast the different ways in which these websites represent subject matter, especially focusing on how the same/similar information can be presented in varying ways
• compare/contrast the different ways in which these websites attempt to appeal to their target demographic
• compare/contrast the types and frequency of ads in the websites and the ratio of ads to content
• compare/contrast the inherent biases of the websites; biases may be geographic
(local, regional, or national), political, cultural, age-related, gender-related, commercial, etc.
• analyse how the internet sites offer a unique viewpoint/information which other forms of media cannot offer
• compare/contrast the conventions of websites employed: the codified, predictable ways in which they convey information, such as hyperlinks, (internal and external), headlines, banner ads, background, text colour and size, animation, pop-ups, hypertext, graphics, use of frames, sound, auto-refresh, etc.
Make sure to link to final English media link.
Oral presentations must have a visual component, and will be assessed on the following:

---

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: SamL ]

Who do I teach specifically? A really neat bunch of kids. I've said this on another thread and I'll say it again here : anyone who has lost hope in the younger generation should meet my students...they question things all the time (sometimes to my dismay), but above all they care.

quote:

---

many of the kids that are passing through my class are individuals that are seeking things out for themselves and I think that they'll survive whatever indoctrination that recieve in the school.

---

Yep. They'll buy into the, unions good - Harris bad / teenage sex is natural and good / The WTO will destroy mankind / all poor people are poor because of the oppressive capitalist state and evil corporations - and all the rest of the unionist/socialist dogma until they are out working and start their own families. Then they, like most other rational humans, look around, look at their paystubs, scratch their heads and say to themselves :"gee, I sure do pay a lot of tax for governments to waste and unions to get fat off of".

Then they go out and vote for Harris, or Campbell or Klein.

[ May 13, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]

quote:

---

In the San Fernando Valley High School District, seniors are required to sign up for some kind of post-secondary education if they want to don a cap and gown and receive a diploma with the rest of their class. Those who are so shiftless, so without focus or ambition that they will take a year off, or perhaps, the rest of their lives off, to travel, or work, or read and eat snack foods, are allowed to graduate, but they must do so in private, and perhaps in shame, for there will be no seat on the stage for these laggards in the San Fernando Valley High School District.

...

Students interviewed about the policy by the Los Angeles Times spoke of frantically signing up for community colleges, even though they had no intention of attending. Taft High School senior Kassie Finch got a letter of acceptance from Pierce Community College so that she could go to her graduation. Her real plan is to work at her mother's law firm. "I'm not sure if I'm going to college or not," she told the Times. Even to the most darkly Dickensian school principal it might be hard to understand what is wrong with wanting to be a paralegal near your mom for a while.

---

[ May 13, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]

quote:

---

Yep. They'll buy into the, unions good - Harris bad / teenage sex is natural and good / The WTO will destroy mankind / all poor people are poor because of the oppressive capitalist state and evil corporations - and all the rest of the unionist/socialist dogma until they are out working and start their own families. Then they, like most other rational humans, look around, look at their paystubs, scratch their heads and say to themselves :"gee, I sure do pay a lot of tax for governments to waste and unions to get fat off of".

Then they go out and vote for Harris, or Campbell or Klein.

---

quote:

---

It was trash already. I simply comment on the obvious stench, that's all.

---

quote:

---

Just mail me my diploma and fuck off, is what I'd tell these idiots in San Fernando. All students, including the ones enrolled in college, should have stood together and boycotted the whole damn affair.

---

quote:

---

Yep. They'll buy into the, unions good - Harris bad / teenage sex is natural and good / The WTO will destroy mankind / all poor people are poor because of the oppressive capitalist state and evil corporations - and all the rest of the unionist/socialist dogma until they are out working and start their own families. Then they, like most other rational humans, look around, look at their paystubs, scratch their heads and say to themselves :"gee, I sure do pay a lot of tax for governments to waste and unions to get fat off of".

Then they go out and vote for Harris, or Campbell or Klein.

---

Hoooleeee!! You must of had some militant teachers when you were in school!! I WISH that teachers were that politically motivated to "indoctrinate" the kids that way. Or at least bring these subjects up in class. However, I think that the opposite is true and that the few teachers that do this are the exception rather than the rule.

Socialist dogma is not the word that I would use to describe the curriculum.

If you look at the ONT. curriculum that is taught in health you'll see that abstinence, rather than "natural and good teenage sex" is promoted. Mastrbation is skimmed over as an activity that only "some" people engage and never discussed as a lifestyle option.

The grade six expectations glorifiy "CAnada's trading partners" and gloss over any of the inequities in the trading world. The WTO is generally covered as "the global, governing entity of trade" and they certainly do not cover different economic systems. (IMHO, the crappiest strand in the social studies curriculum)The message is Trade is good, our trading partners (I.e. U.S.) is the best. We need trade.

If my students leave school to vote for the Harrises, Campbells and Kleins of the world...so be it. However, I'll tell them about the other stuff : the poverty, the human rights abuses, the inequity that exists in the world. I'll encourage them to try and change it. Some will, some won't. They'll make up their own minds. Like meades said, I only account for some of the influences in their lives. Hopefully, teachers can model the critical thinking skills, present different perspectives and encourage broader thinking. If they can learn to listen to all sorts of ideas, i'd be happy

Along the way, teachers have to teach them to read, write, add, subtract, multiply and divide. Sheesh.

[ May 13, 2002: Message edited by: kamiks ]

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: kamiks ]

And you're totally right about the curriculum- the WTO hasn't even been brought up -at all- in my experience. But I read the glossary of terms in my Business text book, and the definition was just as you said. ick!

quote:

---

Don't fret too much about him, Kamiks. I don't think he's so much as set foot in a school in decades, let alone bothered to keep up with the issues afterwards. Hell, who knows if he even listened in school or not.

---

I fret not. Actually, I encourage him/ her???? to bring it on. I'd like to know exactly what it is Rapunzel feels we should teach. That is not clear to me --if not socialist dogma, what --conservative dogma??? Anyway you slice it, it will be dogma.

re: sex ed and homosexuality...i guess what we don't say on that subject is more telling than what we do say. Silence speaks very loudly in my opinion. I wonder what those silences are teaching our kids. Is that another form of indoctrination? I think so.

Homophobia is constant issue in the school that I teach at,especially in my grade 7 class (my grade 8's are an enlightened, sensitive bunch). I must admit some of it is cultural. We had a group called SPEAKOUT come to our grade 7 classes about homophobia...it wasn't well recieved in my class. I tried talking it out after with my class but there wasn't a good reception. (I failed to indoctrinate!!)
It wasn't until they started a class with a teacher that is out to the school community, (including his students) that their perceptions started to shift.

http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/
Both have online articles on the topic. For Gilbert just go under his picture and scroll down for publications.

Gilbert is most famous for "You can't not believe everything you read." but "How mental systems believe." is better in that it is a summary article rather than research.

For Loftus, and easy read summary article is "Memory's Future" in Psychology Today, but
"Make my Memory" would be more fascinating for the students because we have all seen those "Remember the Magic" Disney commercials. This is where they convince unwitting subjects that they actually shock hands with Bug Bunny when they were at Disneyland as a child.

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

quote:

---

This is where they convince unwitting subjects that they actually shook hands with Bugs Bunny when they were at Disneyland as a child.

---

That would be quite the feat of memory introduction. I wonder how the Warner Bros. pull it off

quote:

---

we're supposed to be grateful that they now at least cover oral sex- barely.

---

Riiiight. In between discussing Einstein's theory of relativity and the socio-political implications of the Sept 11 attacks, the teacher can pop a condom on a banana and demonstrate oral sex.

The very fact that some people think that it is the job of our schools to teach about oral sex, just shows how much of their personal development they are willing to put in the hands of the state.

What's next, teachers recommending the best brand of lubricant to 15 year olds so they can get the most enjoyment out of anal sex?

I bet some people would approve of that.

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]

quote:

---

The very fact that some people think that it is the job of our schools to teach about oral sex, just shows how much of their personal development they are willing to put in the hands of the state.

What's next, teachers recommending the best brand of lubricant to 15 year olds so they can get the most enjoyment out of anal sex?

I bet some people would approve of that.

---

Rapunzel, as moderator of this forum, I'm going to ask why I shouldn't believe that this is, in essence, a homophobic remark. As I see it, the only reason that it could seem more outrageous to you is if you didn't think that homosexuals had every bit as much right to enjoy sex and learn about it in school as straight people.

quote:

---

Rapunzel, as moderator of this forum, I'm going to ask why I shouldn't believe that this is, in essence, a homophobic remark.

---

Perhaps you hold these opinions because you homeschool your children, or you homeschool your children because of your beliefs.

I obviously don't know if you are on any other forums, but here, it helps your standing if you could add sources, proof, and otherwise elaborate.

Let's try not to jump all over the new people, at least wait until they have 30 posts. . .or something, I don't know.

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]

quote:

---

I homeschool because there are too many people who think it is OK to introduce the subject of any type of sexual orientation to elementary students,

---

I don't know about the USA (or other Canadian provinces) but in Alberta we always had to get our parents to sign if they wanted us to attend a sex-ed class. That way parents were given the option with respect to how much information their children learned at what age.

quote:

---

Biology is all that should be taught in school.

---

Isn't human sexuality part of biology?

The point being that children who feel ashamed of who they are do not learn as well as children who like themselves and feel good about themselves. Jane Elliot found that out unexpectedly with her dyslexic students - the sad thing is that these students were only able to experience self confidence in their own abilities when they were made to feel superiour to someone else. This kind of pseudo self-confidence is like a drug, you keep needing more and more because it keeps wearing off (and the drug is only feeling better by putting someone else down).

Jane Elliot did make a point in debriefing her children and telling them how much better they did when they thought they were superior (better than usual) and how much worse they did when they thought they were inferiour (worse than usual). She said that when they realized that a great performance was in them all along, the whole class ended up performing as if they were superior since they blamed their poor performance on the feelings of self doubt, rather than status or lack of ability.

Some people learn very early that the only way they can feel good about themselves is to make someone else feel worse. These people believe that self confidence is something that can be achieved only when it is taken from another person. It becomes a game of take or guard.

Jane Elliot's students realized that a person can not take away another's ability, but they can convince someone that they do not possess what they really do possess. Her students were taught that success and failure depended more greatly on how much you do or do not believe in one's self.
-----
About shaking hands with Bugs Bunnnny at Disney Land - Loftus does research in ways of creating false memories. Racism, for Jane Elliot was a way of creating false memories of spoiled personal identity. Telling a kid that being irish is bad over and over again is also a form of brainwashing - that once they start to believe it, they will start acting in ways to make it true. But to explore that issue we are getting into Stephen Ceci's book "On Intelligence."

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

quote:

---

Riiiight. In between discussing Einstein's theory of relativity and the socio-political
implications of the Sept 11 attacks, the teacher can pop a condom on a banana and
demonstrate oral sex.

---

We're not talking about demonstrations, or learning sexual techniques- it's about learning safe sex. Let's be realistic. Wether a child has sex at a young age is really pretty much beyond the control of the parent. What the parents and educational institutions can do, is at least make an effort to make sure little Johnny doesn't come home with VD. grow up.

quote:

---

I had never heard of some of them

---

who's fault is that?

quote:

---

In my current school district, middle
schoolers are grouped together (boys and girls) for health so that they will be
comfortable discussing the benefits of a tampon over a pad, or the normalcy of wet
dreams in front of members of the opposite sex. Where did these people get their ideas
from? Like some little girl is really going to ask a questions about her period in front of a
bunch of boys!

---

I agree with you on this one- and in the Algoma district at least, sex-ed classes are segregated along gender lines.

quote:

---

too many
people are missing the points of too many posts.

---

you're telling me

quote:

---

and little boys are "helped" by their girl deskmates because
their tables are sloppy.

---

I don't see why this is a bad thing. Would you rather your child continue to have poor organization and suffer academically because of it? Environment plays a big role on learning, and providing the most efficient environment for education, IMHO, should be a priority, so that everyone can gain as much as possible from their time in school. I don't see how the deskmate being a girl is part of the issue, unless we're concerned about preserving some silly archaic gender roles, here.

quote:

---

I homeschool because there are too many people who think it is
OK to introduce the subject of any type of sexual orientation to elementary students,
yet if I were to suggest that a nun be brought in to talk to students about staying
pure, there would be an outcry for separation of church and state.

---

This is interesting. First, abstinance is a big part of the sex-ed classes. Second, children do learn about religion in the classroom. It's part of the world studies/geography units in Ontario. It just so happens that they learn about them from an objective, and tolerant standpoint. The gay group that went to kamiks school was there, I presume, to fight homophobia, which was a problem in the school- not to win over converts. If you want to add a spiritual level to teaching abstinance, there's always Catholic school. Unless you live in the states (which I recognize you do), but they are soon to have some sort of voucher system, yes? Anyway, I notice not only in oldmom's posts, but in several others that there is a very big misunderstanding relating to the difference between teaching about different lifestyles/religions/cultural/ethnic groups, etc. etc., and forcing students to adhere to one of these things.

Also, perhaps another topic that we can address in another thread would be children's rights vs. parents rights. Do parents have the right to mold their children into moral mirrors? I think we'd see some interesting posts on the topic.

quote:

---

the state should stay the hell out of our children's private lives. And that
includes teachers.

---

How is the state, and how are teachers intruding in students private lives?

quote:

---

but in Alberta we always had
to get our parents to sign if they wanted us to attend a sex-ed class.

---

Same goes for Ontario, but I think once you get to grade 9, permission slips are no longer required, but parents can still exempt their children from the sex-ed course by chatting with the principal or teacher.

quote:

---

the part that
should wait till they have learned to write a decent sentence and can add two and two
before we go there.

---

I've seen more or less this same argument a lot not only in this thread, but in other experiences. It's essentially a red herring, since students can read, write, and excel in math before these sex-ed courses go beyond "my body's nobody's body but mine" (which I think is a message we can all agree should be tought). Some students may fall behind in certain fields, and efforts are made to help correct that if need be- but there's usually well over 20 students in each elementary class, and the other students need to advance their education as well. That with limited one-on-one time with teachers, as well as a horrible lack in other resources. There is a curriculum system in place which is to a limited degree, flexible, but it still has to be followed. So unless we can replace this system with a new magical fantastic system in which all students are given the individual help, and one-on-one time they need, plus get to learn at each of their own individual paces, then we're stuck with this.

quote:

---

yet there is always time for the "cruel
hunter", "rainforest", "evil oil company" modules, along with numerous references to
pollution in every subject.

---

Again, most of this has already been addressed and is just false. As for pollution, it's a reality, and no one can deny it (at least not without looking like a total loon) would you rather kids be ignorant to this?

quote:

---

Good literature has been completely obliterated.

---

Well that depends. What's your idea of good literature?

quote:

---

classrooms are being set up in the worst possible way for boys

---

How so?

quote:

---

Not all people
are white, middleclass or or straight. And a child should not be made to feel ashamed
that she lives with her grandmother or that daddy has a boy friend any more than she
should be made to feel ashamed of her ethnicity, culture, religeon, or the employment
status of her parents.

---

Hear, hear!

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]

The gay group that came to my school (AND to schools all over Toronto, I might add, part of Toronto's equity policy) came to discuss the issue of homophobia not SEX. Homophobia being the fear-mongering and discrimintion that is targeted towards gays. We simply do NOT teach kids how to have sex. Shiver. That prospect is horrifying in the extreme.

I guess what scares me most about homophobia is how institutionalized it has become in our society. I've been teaching for two years now and I've heard the worst atrocities coming from the mouths of pre-teens. "Fag," "You Homo," "if my friend told me that he liked me I'd get a gun and shoot him," Some kids mouths oughta flush before they open them. These remarks, in my opinion, are along the same lines of sexist slurs that are also thrown around. "She a slut." "Whore." "bitch." These words have little to do with the reality of the situtation. They are slurs that are used to empower the person delivering them and belittle the person that is on the recieving end of slur. These things are said and while I don't believe that the kids saying these things are monsters, I do believe we have to teach them.

I'm going to tie this in to the original topic of this thread (somewhat) and i'm going to be horribly pompous and quote myself

quote:

---

re: sex ed and homosexuality...i guess what we don't say on that subject is more telling than what we do say. Silence speaks very loudly in my opinion. I wonder what those silences are teaching our kids. Is that another form of indoctrination? I think so

---

We can't afford to remain silent about this. Any of you who have children, would you like your child to be on the recieving end of this? AND, what if your child was gay? Does he/she deserve to feel the shame of these remarks? When I consider that gay youth have a statistically higher risk of suicide, it bothers me a whole hell of a lot.

HAving said that, I also truely believe that parents should question what their kids are being taught. Challenge the teachers. It is pain, but we need it. Heaven forfend that we become stuck in our narrow point of view. I may be vocal about my politics in class, but I'm up front about it with the students and the parents. And, I can tolerate having my views questioned.

quote:

---

Do parents have the right to mold their children into moral mirrors?

---

The most important point when discussing freedom of thought versus indoctrination is whether children are taught to question some things more than others. For example, a former prof did a study with intro psych students and found that they were more apt to question a peice if they thought it was part of a case study rather than a page out of a novel - because they were accustomed to questioning things when reading research but not when reading literature. I told my Critical theory of English Prof, Keith Louise Fulton this and she insisted that the results would be different for her students who were used to questioning the assumptions presented in works of fiction.

quote:

---

Even if a person later learns to question information presented in one field or subject area, early exposure to rote instruction methods may prevent the recently acquired habit of questioning information under one set of circumstances from generalizing into other circumstances. For example, Daniel Bailes and Deborah Prentise argue that psychology students are often taught to look for flaws in research design, but may not exert such a critical attitude while enjoying fiction. Since these students may consider fiction less worthy of scrutiny, and are, thus, less critical of it`s contents, they may become easy prey to the story`s assumptions. The rote pedagogy discourages the development of habitual skepticism in childhood, making critical thinking an unnatural effort intensive activity which adults easily turn off whenever they wish to relax. Whether one is caught up in the big game, or trying to catch the news while making supper, or watching an infomercial late at night, too tired to change the channel, advertisers know that their audience is not motivated to question it`s content.

---

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

quote:

---

The most important point when discussing freedom of thought versus indoctrination is whether children are taught to question some things more than others.

---

So true. Many of us don't engage in that kind of critical thinking and we lament it when we don't see it in our children or students.

quote:

---

The rote pedagogy discourages the development of habitual skepticism in childhood, making critical thinking an unnatural effort intensive activity which adults easily turn off whenever they wish to relax. Whether one is caught up in the big game, or trying to catch the news while making supper, or watching an infomercial late at night, too tired to change the channel, advertisers know that their audience is not motivated to question it`s content.

---

I'd say that children are naturally skeptic about the world around them and they lose that ability as they get older. Which is why we should be making media studies a larger issue in our classrooms. I remember as a student someone pointing out the obvious discrepincies between the ads in the magazine I was reading and the messages in editorial sections. Editorial says: Love yourself, Love your body. Ads say: you lazy girl look at those thighs!

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: kamiks ]

quote:

---

It seems irreverent to us that Newton should have been subject to satire in his lifetime, and subject to serious criticism too. But the fact is that every theory, however majestic, has hidden assumptions which are open to challenge and, indeed, in time will make it neccessary to replace it. And Newton's theory, beautiful as an approximation to nature, was bound to have the same defect. Newton confessed it. The prime assumption he made is this: that he said at the outset, 'I take space to be absolute'. - J. Bronowski

---

quote:

---

RE: ALBERT EINSTEIN AND LD (Journal of Learning Disabilities, April 2000)

The discovery that Einstein tended to experience difficulty in any subject taught by rote seems to me to be the piece of the puzzle which makes everything we know, or think we know, about Einstein`s style of cogitating fall into place. Rote is not just about the memorization of facts, it is about a way of thinking or organizing information. The rote pedagogy depends on:

a) the ability to maintain a single perspective
b) the ability to think in a straight line of sequential steps which follow one another
c) the ability to use this sequence of presentation as an organizing tool for memory storage
d) the tendency to have a very limited view concerning what is and is not relevant to a topic
e) the tendency to see facts as solid and immutable rather than transient or context dependant
f) the tendency to accept what one is told without asking why
g) sharing the same assumptions as one`s teacher

"Albert Einstein and LD" tends to portray Einstein as a person which seem unable to think in straight lines, and whose sequences constantly dissolve and reformulate in a succession of different patterns. At least that`s what "And when such pictures form sequences, each member of which calls forth another (155-156)" seems to mean to me. The "difficulties in the sequential processing of information, and a superiority in simultaneous processing of information (153)" which you present as a problem associated with Dyslexia, would also present a problems in subjects taught by rote. Einstein`s ability to understand Kant`s work (153), a theoretical perspective which makes Derrida`s concept of deconstruction appear immutable in contrast, would be the antithesis of the thinking process one would need to adopt to become a good rote thinker. Einstein`s "capacity to draw conclusions independently (153)" even to the point of discovering an original mathematical proof (154), his "active mind (153)" and the fact that he was "reprimanded in school for asking too many questions (154)" all point to a person who did not possess the required characteristics to be a good rote learner.

Is it possible that the distinction which Einstein makes between thinking and communicating has more to do with the fact that, unlike thinking, communication involves the presentation of information in such a way that rote thinkers will understand it? The standard format used for academic writing and thinking demands that one choose a single perspective, argue the perspective, and then summarize that perspectives main points. As your paper indicates repeatedly, Einstein did not think according to this standard format.

---

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

No it is not beyond the control of the parent for an elementary student to have sex. That argument only works for middle and high school, so get real. As far as definitions go, no I had never heard of a dental dam and they don't seem to carry them at the local RiteAid - guess I am deprived educationally.

Treating a boy like he is challenged because he keeps a sloppy desk is just as bad as saying a girl is stupid if she can't do a math problem. A boy will live with a greater degree of clutter and not even notice it. I didn't know there was a direct correlation between neatness and genius. In the different places I've worked, quite a few of the top guys (partners in law firms, CEO's of corporations) were very disorganized - but they were sharp as a tack when it came to their field. So that's why there are secretaries. It doesn't help the boy, makes him feel like he has failed, and turns the girl into a "nanny", not a helper (Oh, her first secretarial job). There ARE gender differences.

In the lower grades (to 4th) desks are grouped in a pod, so that four or six students face each other, with their desks touching. Now, if you were at work, and the desks were placed in that formation, how well do you think you would do? How do you think you would do on a test? There are different centers around the room, with students working on different things in these areas. Sounds great, but what about the kid who is trying to take a spelling test at the teachers desk? How to concentrate, when you are staring into the eyes of little Johnny, who of course will make a face, anything to not have to finish the paragraph.

Some good literature would be CS Lewis, Roald Dahl, The Soup Books, some of the oldies like Hardy Boys and Tom Swift, Laura Ingalls Wilder, Lynne Reid Banks, Beverly Cleary and Lois Lowry. Some really bad books are the "dark" books with dead kids at the end. Yes, death is a part of life, but kids dying in a novel is just plain scary to the lower grades. I can only remember two, I wouldn't let my kids read them, but one was A Taste of Blackberries and the other Bridge to Terebithia.

No a child should not be ashamed of their ethnicity, economic status, physical condition, or whether they have a two or one parent family at home. But these are children, and while I would rip the tongue out of any kid of mine who made fun of another, unfortunately not everyone feels the same way. So maybe you get really mad when someone says fag; do you get as upset when someone teases the fat kid? Or the kid with glasses? Do we bring in a bunch of overweight people to talk to the kids about tolerance? One kid will brag that he has a great big house and all the newest video toys. He will tease the kid who is wearing nerd clothes. So you pull the kid aside and you tell him that it's not nice and if he does it again, five extra pages of homework. But if the word is homo we pull in a special interest group to fight homophobia. All those poor, dull, slow readers out there with weight problems just turn into class clowns to get themselves out of being the brunt of a joke, or the quiet kid with glasses and asthma just keeps really quiet and hopes no one will notice him. Everyone is surprised when they show up in HS with a gun.

quote:

---

In the different places I've worked, quite a few of the top guys (partners in law firms, CEO's of corporations) were very disorganized - but they were sharp as a tack when it came to their field. So that's why there are secretaries.

---

The sad thing is the quiet wellbehaved boy who keeps a neat desk does not fit the masculine stereotype. Talking as one Goselyn Mallard to another.

quote:

---

but kids dying in a novel is just plain scary to the lower grades. I can only remember two, I wouldn't let my kids read them, but one was A Taste of Blackberries and the other Bridge to Terebithia.

---

What do you think about the last Harry Potter book where the boy dies near the end? For the rest of you, the next book is coming out this fall, just in time for Xmas.

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

quote:

---

Some good literature would be CS Lewis, Roald Dahl, The Soup Books

---

quote:

---

One thing I have always wondered about people from Ontario, Alberta and the US. If you don't approve of what your Minister of Education is doing why do you keep on re-electing him or her and the government he or she belongs to?

---

God only knows what the electorate has been thinking in the last two elections. The Tories were fortunate enough to be in power while things were good economically. However, it is when times are bad that we get to see the true effects of their policies. They won't last into the next elections.

re: good books. Bridge to terabitha was a great book, IMO. However, I'm pretty biased against some of the books that were suggested as good lit.

quote:

---

Some good literature would be CS Lewis, Roald Dahl, The Soup Books, some of the oldies like Hardy Boys and Tom Swift, Laura Ingalls Wilder, Lynne Reid Banks, Beverly Cleary and Lois Lowry.

---

Lois Lowry's "The giver" is an excellent book and the NArnia series is also quite good, although it is too christian for my liking. (that should provoke some response) I can't stand Lynne Reid Banks's books, it just panders to the sterotypes of first nation people. I have a Metis student in my class and I can't even begin to imagine suggesting that she read that book.

Some excellent books for kids that I've come across lately:

Ruksana Kahn : Dahling if you love me, won't you please,please smile. (written by a Muslim children's author...it had my kids BEGGING me to read it to them.)

KAtherine Paterson: Great Gilly Hopkins

Deborah Ellis: Breadwinner (rather topical lately, it is set in Afghanistan, during the Taliban regime also well recieved in my class.)

In search of X. (by same author)

Bill Richardson: After Hamelin. (beautiful fantasy writing, based on Pied Piper story)

Catherine, called Birdy. (I forget the author)

quote:

---

the NArnia series is also quite good, although it is too christian for my liking. (that should provoke some response)

---

Funny.

I remember Beverley Cleary books - I plan to get him a bunch of the books I loved as a kid. I loved The Great Brain series by J.D. Fitzgerald, even though I can see now that they were pretty formula. And Judy Blume was fantastic. I liked Paula Danziger too.

Michelle, rule of thumb. If you own the movie, get the easy read picture book. It may not be all that intellectual, but any word the kid doesn't know is apt to be one used in the movie a lot. For example "adamantium." Have you got him one of those VTeck Alphabet boards. You know the one where they have the different setting in one you pushe "Square" and it says "Square" and on another setting plays a song.

You can even go all Al Simmons with it and do things like

I M 2 (square) 4 U and G I P and U R A M T 1

Ever notice that the voices on those things sound board out of their skulls?

Anyway, has anyone here ever taken a book by two different teachers who interpreted it in two different ways? Lloyd's Axworthy's ex wife certainly interpreted "Street Car named Desire" from a different perspective than Narth the Narthesist who sided with Stanley who had to put up with his belligerant freeloading sister-inlaw. I got the feeling that there was only so much a man could take before he lost it. I can still remember Mrs Axworthy's lament "Girls don't ever go out with anybody like Biff Lowman or Standley Kowalski they are lo-osers!"

[ May 17, 2002: Message edited by: vaudree ]

Owls in the Family: Farley Mowat

The Jade Peony: Wayson Choy

The Shakespeare ones are always great.

Animal Farm: George Orwell

1984: By the same

Catcher in the Rye: Everyone I know loved it but I can't stand the damned thing.

The Giver was another good one

I suppose of you're reading Narnia in 3rd Grade you don't really see the religion.

I think that Kit Pearson compiled an anthology with snippets of excellent stories from Canadian authors from all corners of Confederation.

A Separate Peace: John Knowles

Lord of the Flies: William Golding

A Wrinkle in Time: Madeline d'Engle

Seems he manufactured some of his experiences (or should i say fictionalized) in the North.

A few other good books:

Road to Chlifa ...again forget the author.

Holes by Louis Sachar

Freak the Mighty

The Hobbit (don't bother with Lord of the Rings)

quote:

---

and while he got his fill quickly and didn't understand it much, he kept begging me to read it to him later. Go figger!

---