blogcutter

Let's suppose your kid has been labeled as bright by the Educational Experts. What does that kid need to succeed in classes for the gifted and beyond them, as a Leader of Tomorrow?

Sixty years ago, the answer to that question was (cue drum roll) ... A set of encyclopedias!

https://beatcrave.com/the-meaning-behind-the-song-the-encyclopedia-salesman-by-reese-lansangan/

Let's just say that back then, educators believed in streaming not mainstreaming, and in enrichment not homogenization. And while those long-ago Educational Experts might now be tossing and turning in their graves if they knew what some of us had become, I can see upsides and downsides to both approaches, depending on the particular child.

Anyway, sixty years ago, my parents did indeed buy the World Book Encyclopedia. Those green-and-white volumes made the journey to my mother's retirement home and after she died, they came into my possession. I still have a sentimental attachment to them which is probably just as well, since the places that will accept your discarded books mostly stipulate NO ENCYCLOPEDIAS OR TEXTBOOKS!!! Still, once I shuffle off this mortal coil, I suspect they are doomed to end up in the great graveyard in the landfill, and my grandchildren will have to pay the dumping fees!

So the encyclopedia was actually not a bad investment, though perhaps not quite for the same reasons as those touted by Encyclopedia Salesman of the Year 1964, or by those Educational Experts who decided via the black magic (or at the very least grey magic) of I.Q. tests that I showed promise.

Fortunately I was the kind of kid who loved reading encyclopedias and dictionaries and almanacs, picking up useless bits of random information that my much-more-learned older siblings might not know.

So as a tribute to the World Book Encyclopedia and to encyclopaediae in general, allow me to present a few selected excerpts.

First off, from the entry for EDUCATION. It begins as follows:

"EDUCATION includes all the ways in which one person deliberately tries to influence the behavior of another person."

The entry goes on to distinguish between formal education and informal education. In terms of people and institutions (other than actual schools and teachers) that educate, the article credits: parents; libraries and museums; churches; and governments.

The entire article takes up nine pages, including various illustrations, tables, diagrams, a map of world literacy rates, and a list of suggested further reading. Of course, it has to be borne in mind that it's an encyclopedia aimed at children and deals in much more detail with the American context. There are nine sections to the article: three for education in general, three for education in the U.S., and one each for Canada, "Other countries" and "International education".

One feature of the encyclopedia that always fascinated me as a child was the trade-named Trans-vision maps. Under the entry for CANADA, Its Changing Frontiers, there was a map of Canada showing its physical topography. On top of it were 6 transparent pages showing the political divisions in 1763, 1812 ("Brave explorers probe the far Northwest" it informed me),1846, 1873, 1914, and "Canada Today" [i.e. 1964].

The entry under HUMAN BODY also had Trans-vision overlays, beginning with a skeleton over which you could (just by turning the page!) gradually overlay the various internal organs, veins and arteries, and so forth, all of them meticulously labelled. If you remember the buildable 3D models of The Invisible Man that used to be sold in hobby shops (maybe they still are), this was basically a 2D version of it. Mind you, I'm hard-pressed even as an adult to determine whether it's an invisible man or woman or intersex person - they do seem to have done their utmost to keep them gender-neutral!

Obviously an encyclopedia geared to kids - or any encyclopedia, for that matter - is not going to fulfil all of a person's homework-related or research-related needs for long. But 60 years ago, it was not a bad starting point. And it's interesting to note that World Book is one of the few encyclopedias that continues to publish in print, in hardcover, and on genuine glossy (and Trans-Vision) paper:

https://www.theledger.com/story/business/columns/2024/01/06/yes-world-book-encyclopedia-still-publishes-in-print-gadget-daddy/72110891007/

An article in the National Post pages of today's Citizen led me to contemplate how charities use the money that is donated to them:

https://epaper.nationalpost.com/ottawa-citizen/20210806/281925956066432

Of course, the National Post tends to promote rather right-of-centre viewpoints and I don't know that I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed in the above article. Nonetheless, since things started opening up here a little more, I've been making a concerted effort to support our local businesses and other organizations, many of which have sustained substantial losses during the extended months of lockdown. Last week, I went with friends to see the Queens of Egypt exhibit at the Museum of History, after which we enjoyed an excellent lunch at Fairouz in the Byward Market. It was outdoors, but nicely sheltered from the rain. Then this morning, I did a Merivale Road crawl to patronize the various local businesses along the golden mile. Even the Book Market is now open! I made it to Nicastros and an interesting Asian-oriented kitchen supply place in the Bleeker Mall, very reminiscent of Global Homeware in Chinatown. But I digress.

One item in today's paper that really impressed me was about the Society of Photographic Arts Ottawa. They are an independent nonprofit educational organization which will be providing free tuition to its students for the 2021-22 academic year. They also have public gallery space and offer some other interesting-sounding events like public lectures:

https://spao.ca/

We are all getting tired of doing everything via Zoom, even the highly cyberwise young adult population aspiring to a career in the arts, or anything else for that matter! The SPAO is to be commended and that's where this week's donation is directed.

School has been starting up again in most Canadian cities over the past couple of weeks. For some, it's a hopeful sign that things may be returning to normal. For others, all the complex pandemic provisions and restrictions may be causing more anxiety than they alleviate.

I think it must be particularly hard for young people in transitional years - like those entering their first year of high school or university or some sort of special program.

Take, for example, the International Baccalaureate program. The Ottawa-Carleton school boards have apparently decided that no online version will be offered:

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/no-online-learning-for-students-in-the-international-baccalaureate-program

I kind of understand where they're coming from. The dynamics of the program probably work much better, at least in the initial stages, when participants - both students and teachers - are able to get together in person and get to know one another. Trouble is, there are only two high schools in the city offering the program and kids commute from all over the city, many of them on public transit. If they or anyone in their family happen to be immune-compromised, they probably would not be willing to risk the in-person thing. And what if at some point the entire school has to close its doors on account of the virus? Then there'll be nothing to fall back on! It seems to me there should be some sort of online alternative. Keep in mind too that these students are supposed to be highly motivated and able to work well independently, as they will need to be if they hope to pursue the postsecondary and postgraduate programs of their choice. Perhaps to some extent they could play a part in crafting their own course of study, in collaboration with key educational advisors?

There's another high school in Ottawa, Canterbury, that is unique in the city for its arts programs: music, drama, visual arts and so forth. To its credit, it seems that Canterbury does intend to provide some online options, although I don't think anyone would deny that it will we quite different from pre-pandemic programming:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/extracurriuclar-covid-19-pandemic-ottawa-1.5712524

And as is also mentioned in that article, even non-specialized schools generally offer an array of extracurricular sports, clubs and activities, not all which will be possible in the Coronal universe.

To what extent does all this matter? It's hard to say at this point. One the one hand, everyone is somewhat in the same boat and some day we'll have a vaccine, an effective treatment or a cure. On the other hand, a year or two is a large portion of a young person's life and can have a huge influence on their future.

The most resilient of them will survive and even thrive. Those who are less so may be in for a long and difficult period of recovery.

On Thursday, September 3, many Ontario kids will head back to the classroom, where they will learn not to share, not to play well with others, and not to ask a grown-up for help unless that grown-up is wearing plenty of personal protective equipment.

There's plenty of anxiety to go around for parents, kids, educators and other school staff, and some public health experts too. About the only thing that's clear is that the classroom experience in the fall of 2020 will be very different from how it was in 2019. Apparently the Danish model is seen as one to emulate, while the Israeli one is to be avoided. In Ontario, a group of stakeholders is advocating the notion of going slow to go fast:

https://peopleforeducation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Gentle-Re-opening-of-Ontario-Schools.pdf

Some parents feel they simply have no choice but to send their kids back to school if their family is to survive. On the other hand, many others are fairly optimistic and look forward to a return to modified normalcy.

I honestly don't know what I would do if I still had school-aged children to consider. Parents are being given very little time to make rather crucial decisions. I've always been interested in the phenomenon of home-schooling, although it never seemed practical for us. For that matter, it's impractical for a lot of modern-day families. But since the pandemic struck, in-school schooling has come to rival it in impracticality! Education has become one big ad hoc experiment.

The main consolation is that everyone in the education system is at least to some degree in the same boat. So we all have a vested interest in putting appropriate measures in place to keep that boat afloat!

... and Sally, sometimes referred to in those books as "Baby". This pandemic has dramatically changed how We Look and See; where We Work and Play; and whether We Come and Go.

In my home library, I have a book called Storybook Treasury of Dick and Jane and Friends. It contains the complete text of the three pre-primers that ageing boomers and WWII-era babies and even some Gen-Xers and Millennials know (but maybe don't love) so well: We Look and See, c1946 (copyright renewed 1974); We Come and Go, c1940 (copyright renewed 1968); and The New We Work and Play, c1956 (copyright renewed 1984). They formed a large part of my early schooling and they are an even more interesting read today.

I'm really not sure who is under the most stress these days. Is it the harried parent who's multi-tasking like crazy, trying to simultaneously look after the kids (and maybe an elderly parent who also lives on-site), teach them their school curriculum, maintain the household and telecommute to the pre-pandemic day job? Or is it the Covid-19 (or prospective Covid-19) invalid stuck at home alone in enforced idleness and self-isolation? I'll readily admit that it's not us, a couple in our sixties who can keep each other's spirits up, bake our own bread and put in an online order at the local Petsmart for OUR Puff, which we can then have delivered to the trunk of our car an hour later in the pet store's parking lot.

Still, worry can sap one's energy, so I think this is about all I'll write for today. But if you'd like to take a look at these literary classics I've just mentioned, you can "look inside" the book here:

https://www.amazon.ca/Storybook-Treasury-Dick-Jane-Friends/dp/0448433400/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=storybook+treasury+of+dick+and+jane&qid=1586278711&sr=8-1

In a Staples commercial, that time isn't Christmas. In fact, Christmas seems to be a bit of a dirty word these days, even though most people I know celebrate Christmas and not primarily in a religious way, either! No, it refers to back-to-school.

Actually, autumn, back-to-school time and Thanksgiving have long been my favourite time of year. They feel like a time of renewal, even though the leaves are getting ready to fall off the trees, the geese and other migratory birds are flying south, and nature is hibernating and going dormant.

Is it a good time for most families? The implication of the commercial seems to be that the adults are tired of having their kids around, that there's been just a bit too much family togetherness for their liking.

Staples is not the only organization making the link between Christmas and back-to-school. Ottawa's Christmas Exchange has rebranded itself as the "Caring and Sharing Exchange" and started providing school supplies to low-income families. Because for most families, if fall is the most wonderful time of the year, it's also the most expensive time.

I've donated to the Christmas Exchange for a number of years now, following a family tradition. I recall as a kid, my mother would pick up a few extra packages of nylon stockings - a luxury in those days - to donate. The charity has always been non-denominational although I think at one time, they had a policy of dispensing their largesse only to the "working poor", not those on welfare - this notion of "deserving" versus "undeserving" poverty and helping those who help themselves. Or maybe I've got that wrong and the philosophy behind the policy was that the state was already looking after those on public assistance, whereas the working poor tended to get lost in the shuffle.

Although I'm still sending them annual donations, I have to say that I'm seriously conflicted about their expanded role. While it's undeniable that back-to-school can be a heavy financial burden for many families, I firmly believe that most school supplies should be provided by the schools themselves, at least for the elementary and perhaps intermediate grades. After all, half of our property taxes in this province are earmarked to support public education - and I've always considered that to be a valid price to pay to support a public good like that.

When I was at school, notebooks and pencils and paper and textbooks were all provided to us up to grade eight. They even provided ink and pens too, if you didn't mind scratching away with a straight pen - the type with cod-liver-oil on the nib that you had to lick off before the nib would work properly. In grade eight, we actually had a somewhat eccentric home-room teacher who demanded that we use these nefarious pens until our handwriting was good enough that we could "graduate" to a fountain or cartridge pen. Ballpoint pens were strictly taboo, though - perhaps not surprising since in those days, they were very messy and blotchy and leaky things. Anyway, I'm not sure what the rationale was for thinking we'd have neater penmanship wielding a straight pen than if we were allowed to use the more user-friendly fountain or cartridge pens. Whatever the case, I seem to recall he told us some time between Christmas and Easter that we could all start using fountain pens, since if we hadn't perfected our straight-penmanship by now, there was no hope for us!

Nowadays, of course, kids hunch over keyboards and no one worries about their handwriting any more. As for adults, we have fewer and fewer occasions to sign our names and more and more PINs to forget!

But I digress. By the time I reached high school, we had to provide all of our school supplies except the textbooks - but there WERE school fees to cover at least a portion of the textbook cost. And if we lost any of them, we had to replace them at our own (or really, our parents') expense. Only in grade 13 did we have to buy all our own texts (this, I believe, was a change from when my siblings had been in high school a few years earlier, and textbooks were the family's responsibility right from grade nine onwards).

If we went back to having school supplies provided in elementary school, this would make for better standardization - the kids would have the supplies that the teachers wanted them to - and the school board could take advantage of bulk purchasing and economies of scale. And there would be far less stigma and embarrassment for the children of low-income families.

But, you might protest, we don't have unlimited funds here. Well, no. So I'll briefly outline a few of my ideas as to how the school system could save money.

First of all, it's tremendously wasteful that we have TWO school systems in Ontario - one for the "public" schools and one for the Roman Catholics. But I realize that can't be changed overnight, so I'll leave it aside for now.

Secondly, what's with all the bussing? On the one hand, we lament the growing obesity rate of today's children but on the other, we bus children far from their neighbourhoods and supply the transportation at public expense. I couldn't believe it when I read that the public school board was thinking of providing those yellow buses even to high school students - as the Catholic schools apparently already do. Couldn't we reframe how we think about this, and consider it a basic right of most elementary school-age kids to live within walking distance of their schools, and high school students perhaps at a farther distance, but still accessible by public transit? That would save the boards considerable money on transportation. Yes, in some areas it would mean some sparsely-populated classrooms but given that teachers have been bellyaching about high teacher-pupil ratios for decades, is that really such a bad thing? I also think that split grades are not such a bad thing. After all, the old-fashioned one-room schoolhouses were the ultimate in split grades - the older children helped the younger ones and learned responsibility, and many subjects can be tackled by children of various ages, just with a greater or lesser degree of sophistication. I was very impressed recently, for example, with a project on photography that the students (of all ages, K-6 or possibly K-8) at Brooke Valley School in Perth had done. Mind you, I'm not suggesting a return to rote learning and corporal punishment or some of the other aspects of old-fashioned education.

I also have some reservations about full-day kindergarten. It's very expensive. Early childhood education is certainly important, but does it have to be in a classroom setting? There's probably no going back on that one but at the very least, it seems to me that it shouldn't entirely supercede half-day kindergarten for parents who prefer the half-day model. More important, in my view, is preparing teenagers for what they'll do after leaving high school. That includes possible attendance at university, although that should NOT be presented as the only socially acceptable option, and not necessarily something to be done right away, either. What about encouraging a "gap year" as they do in many parts of Europe?

Lots of issues. Lots of possible future blog entries here!

Is Wi-Fi in the classroom harmful to the students' health?

If by "harmful" we mean that it poses a direct, scientifically verifiable and quantifiable health hazard, then I suspect the answer is no. Even if there WERE some risk, it would be pretty hard to protect your children from it altogether, as there are hotspots in most public libraries, coffee shops and other well-frequented public spaces. Still, a small but vocal lobby group of parents and teachers clearly believes that WI-FI is dangerous and should be banned from the classroom.

It's a nonstarter just to tell these concerned adults that they are complete and utter fools who ought to know better than to react so irrationally and subscribe to all this voodoo-magic-nonsense. Instead, we should say to them, "Tell me about these children's symptoms so we can get to the bottom of this problem." Because the symptoms, whatever their root cause, are real. If it's something ELSE (or more likely, a number of other things) that's putting our kids at risk, I sure as hell want to know about it so we can eliminate or at least mitigate that risk.

I'm reminded of the scare surrounding video display terminals (VDTs) that occurred in the 1970s and 80s when libraries were ditching the card catalogue and moving to an online environment. A majority of cataloguers were young women in their childbearing years. Rumour had it that the VDTs were giving off dangerously high levels of radiation that would harm a developing foetus and infiltrate a mother's milk supply. The doctors, particularly if they worked in the field of occupational health, were quick to dismiss these fears. Nonetheless, a certain number of young women who worked at VDTs - maybe a statistically significant number or maybe not - went on to have pregnancies or postpartum experiences which were in some way problematic.

Chances are, these experiences were nothing to do with radiation. Maybe it was the air quality in those ultra-energy-efficient office buildings of the era, where you couldn't even open a window to get fresh air. Maybe it was the insulation in the buildings that was the problem - many buildings contained asbestos or UFFI, for example. Maybe the women were simply exhausted from working full days almost up to their due dates and then returning to work as soon as their 15-week "unemployment" insurance benefits ran out, so their resistance was down and their health suffered.
Who knows?

So to go back to the WI-FI scare, we need to really LISTEN to and THINK about these parents' and teachers' concerns if we are to have any hope of properly diagnosing the problem.

There's something else too. Maybe schoolchildren really DO spend too much time these days doing things on the computer - at the expense of, say, physical activity, or reading real books made of real paper or talking to real-live people in real time about real-life issues. Maybe they should even be doing more of the things that people of my generation scorned as being too mechanical or robotic, like memorizing poetry and doing mental arithmetic.

If we could arrive at a compromise solution and balance the risks so that kids simply spent LESS time exposed to WI-FI, less time peering at a computer screen, less time being subjected to endless computer-generated worksheets, busywork, and standardized IQ and aptitude tests, would that be such a bad thing?