kimmy

Not to sound flippant, but "been there, done that." It's very expensive to go to the moon, and until there's a good reason to go back there, I think the money spent on space could be better spent on other projects (like the international space station, exploring Mars, or putting up a more sophisticated replacement for the Hubble Telescope (which I believe is soon going to be out of service, isn't it?)) It's a big universe! Going to the moon was an amazing achievement, but unless there's more to be learned by going back there, mankind should aim for a new target. -kimmy

It might be worth keeping in mind that with ongoing Islamist violence in south-east Asia and particularly Indonesia, the threat of terrorism is considerably more personal for the average Australian than it is to Canadians. -kimmy

Most university campuses allow clubs or student groups (Young Liberals on Campus, Engineers Without Boarders, Gays and Lesbians On Campus, whatever...) to use university areas to hold their meetings. If a campus is willing to allow the Dungeons And Dragons Nerd Society to use campus space to hold their meetings, why shouldn't a Muslim or Christian group be able to also meet on campus space? If they close the door before they start praying, surely they won't be infringing on other students' sensibilities. -kimmy

What about Pierre Trudeau? Was Syrup a member of the press corps back then? I'm not upset at all that the press was critical of her abilities and qualifications. As I wrote, I shared a lot of those doubts about her experience and her ability to articulate. What did upset me was the nature of some of the coverage she received, and the nature of some of the attacks made against her. Pocklington or Pocklington Jr might have been subjected to a lot of unqualified rich-guy criticism, but I doubt they were ever subjected to anything comparable to: -"Blonde Ambition!" -"Blonde Date: Who Should Get Belinda's Rose?" -the Ottawa Sun apparently ran a photo feature on her legs, shoes, and stockings. -"bimbo" -"Parliament Hill Barbie" -"The Magna Tarta" -"Paris Hilton" -suggestions that she could flash a breast during debates to gain votes -"challenge Paul Martin to a cook-off" That's why I found the tone of the coverage personally offensive, and would have loved to see some of these neanderthals choke on their words. -kimmy

Do shoddy 3rd-world regimes have an undue amount of influence in the UN through sheer force of numbers? We know that there are many national governments that couldn't run a hot-dog stand without resulting in corruption and human rights violations. When the UN gets together to vote on an issue, do these banana republics have just as much say as civilized nations? And if so, does that seem right to you guys? -kimmy

When Belinda Stronach entered the CPC leadership race, I didn't know much about her... and when I watched her talk she seemed kind of nervous and not very good at articulating her opinions... and there were lots of questions about her experience and whether she'd achieved anything on her own. So I didn't really know what to think of her as a potential Prime Minister. However, some of the media coverage of her was absolutely disgraceful. "Blonde Ambition!" exclaimed the Toronto Sun. "Blonde Date: Who Should Get Belinda's Rose?" asked the Toronto Sun in another article, wondering which handsome young parlimentarian bachelor might be a good mate for her. The Ottawa Sun apparently ran photo features on her legs, shoes, and stockings. Aside from Syrup's man-crush on Jack Layton, has a male politician's fashion sense ever been the subject of so much reportage? Certainly the mentally retarded hacks at the Sun chain of papers don't represent all Canadian media, which was for the most part able to stay out of the gutter with regard to Stronach. Not all Canadians were as open minded. I saw her dismissed as a "bimbo" by posters on a number of forums, for maybe no reason other than her hair color. The neanderthal who distributed "Parliament Hill Barbie" flyers at one of her events was the last straw for me. After that, I was hoping she'd win, whatever her merits, just to make that prick choke on it. Going back through some of the old threads on this very forum, I found Belinda Stronach called "The Magna Tarta", "Paris Hilton", saw suggestions that she could flash a breast during debates to gain votes, and "challenge Paul Martin to a cook off". It is our right as observers to be critical and even insulting about our politicians... but the tone of these comments says much more about the people who made them than about Stronach. -kimmy

Well, I guess the entire concept of law enforcement is out the window, then. Back to the drawing board. -kimmy

...and whenever a story hits the press about pitbulls, it's because the animal brutally attacked someone. I'm not sure I agree about the pitbull owners we see on the news either... most of them seem to be dumb-ass types. But Newfie has a good point. If you ban pitbulls, what about pitbull crosses? What about other dogs with bad dispositions who are not registered as members of a designated breed? Ban purebreed pitbulls, and I'm sure some enterprising breeder will be hard at work raising a litter of puppies that will be just as vicious, strong, and won't be banned under the law. There has to be some sort of way of making people responsible for their dogs. -kimmy

Uh.... Jack Layton? That was outstanding, August! -kimmy

And the devil take the hindmost? It's not a matter of specialized, individualized teaching for each student: it could simply be a matter of zeroing in on students who's performance is lagging and trying differnt methods to get them up to par. If a school board can help the average student raise his grade by 10% but chooses not to, they're failing their students. Identifying the students who are struggling can certainly be dealt with on an individual basis just as easily. It's the best tool by which schools can measure their success in their primary mission. Are higher test scores the goal? Not exactly... the goal is education. Whether you agree with testing as a means of measuring student achievement or not, I would suggest that testing is a pretty good means of measuring the school's effectiveness. I submit that there has to be some means of evaluating the effectiveness of schools and teaching, and given the sheer number of students involved, test scores are the most practical (and probably the only) means of doing so. If we accept that both boys and girls do better in a gender-homogenous environment, shouldn't we ask why? For instance, girls will often "dumb down" in class, avoid speaking up and generally under perform so as to be seen as demure and not pushy know-it-alls. Boys will often not seek help because they don't wish to betray weakness. These are socialized behaviors. These are the thingswe should be targeting. As you've pointed out, these kids have been shaped almost from birth by a zillion factors. Even if each child arrives in this world as a blank slate (a highly contentious issue to start with) the children are certainly not blank slates by Grade 9. To think that a school board can somehow re-engineer the students' behaviors seems ...wildly optimistic. I don't think you can tell boys to stop being afraid of looking dumb in front of the girl they have a crush on (well, I guess you could... but I don't think it's going to work.) I don't think you can tell girls to stop being afraid of being pushy knowitalls. I don't think you can tell boys to be less aggressive or girls to be less demure. I don't think you can prevent teenage pregnancies just by telling teenagers to not get pregnant. You're in favor of understanding students as individuals... can you at least agree that gender has played a large role in the individual that the student has become? They have to get the most out of the resources they have, and the gender-separated math classes seem to be one way of doing so. Spending their resources trying to re-engineer the gender-identities of its students, on the other hand, seems well outside their mandate. I also think the only myth being perpetuated by the gender-separated classes is that gender-dynamics are a big factor in the lives of teenagers. I don't think it's a myth, and I don't think it's unreasonable for the school-board to take it into account. -kimmy

Certainly each child is a unique snowflake. However, given the limitations of our educational system and its limited ability to monitor and mentor each child as an individual, isn't maximizing the benefit to the most students a worthy goal? Dividing children up according to their academic ability is a somewhat difficult and arbitrary task... dividing children according to what teaching style they respond best to would be even more problematic for systems that have to deal with tens of thousands of children each year. Gender, on the other hand, is an easy distinction to make, and the results mentioned in this article, and in similar experimients for both sexes, show it to be an effective distinction as well. I mentioned other opportunities for "social interaction" because Syrup and Slavik44 argued that this policy would harm the students by preventing from interacting with the opposite gender. That's what I (and I believe August) was addressing. The "nature vs nurture" debate is far from settled... and the "nature" side has far more merit than you're giving credit for. Even experts are far from agreed on what has no biological basis in fact. I appreciate the basis of what your saying. If you take a boy and a girl at random, you have no reason to assume one might be better at math (or any other subject) than the other. Take 20 boys and 20 girls (as the school district is doing) and you might have a large enough sample to make some assumptions about either group based on relevant statistical data, but you'd obviously be mistaken in applying that data to any one of those 40 kids. In a situation where you're comparing two kids, like for a job or university admission or whatever, then certainly you have to consider them as individuals. But we're not talking about a situation where you're comparing individuals, we're talking about a situation where you're trying to maximize the effectiveness of a mass education system that has to cope with thousands of students, and almost by definition can't consider them as individuals. The issue, as I see it, isn't of competition between genders. The theory is that boys and girls both learn math better when gender-dynamics are removed from the equation... I don't think that makes any comment at all on the relative ability of boys or girls at math. -kimmy

It *doesn't* show that. Differences within genders don't discount differences between genders. What causes differences within genders? It would be interesting to know, for sure. Genetics? Role of parents? Role of siblings? TV and other influences? Early childhood experiences? Nutrition? Perhaps all of those things and more... but it still wouldn't disprove that boys and girls respond better to different techniques. And even that isn't exactly the point... which is simply to teach. I thought a jerk was somebody who does something rude or inconsiderate. -kimmy

Calm down, syrup. The election isn't over, and it is too close to call. And personally, after watching tonight's debate, I don't think it will change anything. -kimmy

The claim is that the learning experience of both sexes in some subjects is improved in gender-separated classes. Why does it matter that the variations within each sex are larger than the variations between them? It seems like a non-sequitur. Certianly, which is why I think blaming girls for boys' poor performance is faulty. My big problem is with the framing of this issue. For instance, earlier you pointed out that girls do worse is some subjects when they demure to boys. However, no one blamesthe boys for "distracting" or intimidating the girls. In the Abbotsford case, why is the blame, as it were, being placed on the girls for being distractions and not on the boys for not paying enough attention. It I didn't get a sense that girls were being accused of anything from reading the article. If anything, the quotes from the school board superintendant place the blame on teenaged testosterone. I guess the question is, solution to what problem? If the problem is to find a way to teach math more effectively, the results so far sound pretty positive. If the problem is something other than teaching math more effectively, could you put it into words? So why do you? Well, up until now, I'd never thought much about it. But as of now, I do it because you made an issue of it. -kimmy

... What in the blue hell are you two talking about? Did I read the article wrong? I thought they were doing gender-segregated math classes and english classes. They didn't say gender segregated schools... they didn't say gender segregated hallways or lunch hours... they didn't even say gender-segregated Social Studies or Art or Science or Drama classes... they just said gender-segregated Math and English classes. Kids aren't SUPPOSED to learn "social interaction" in math class. They are supposed to sit down, shut up, and do math. You could, I suppose, make the case that English class is a litdifferent, since discussion portions of the class could benefit from different viewpoints. However, I would still claim that English class is not there for learning social interaction either. I just find it baffling. Some people here are reacting as if the school district had ordered separate schools. Or proposed burqas for female students. I know that some people try to find a conservative conspiracy hiding under every rock or lurking behind every tree. But seriously guys, if this was some kind of sinister plot to keep boys and girls from hooking up... uh, isn't MATH CLASS probably the last place to start? -kimmy

Failed experiment? The early results mentioned in the article seem to indicate that it's a very successful experiment. Ok, but what does alcohol have to do with teaching math? -kimmy

Do you honestly feel that "social constructs" and adolescent psyches and human interaction are this easily changed? Don't be obtuse. You've never heard of parent/teacher conferences? Report cards? Mrs. Jefferson: "Mrs. Jones, I'm concerned about Timmy's math grades. Is there some kind of problem?" Mrs. Jones: "Mrs. Jefferson, I'm concerned that Timmy is not paying attention in math class. I think he might be distracted by the girls." later... Mrs. Jefferson: "Timmy, I want you to pay more attention in math class, and stop being distracted by the girls." Timmy: "Ok, mom." Problem solved! Or is it? Don't you think that social dynamics in teenagers, even in a supposedly regulated setting, are a little more complicated, a little more difficult to control, than you're giving credit for? Of course I don't need to. There's need to get touchy about it... -kimmy

Well there's the whiff of sexism about tailoring an education program to advance boys' education. Are they also segregating girls in subjects they "traditionally" do less well in? The message is that boys' educations are more valuable. When I saw the article, the first thing that came to miind for me was a study a while back that gender-segregated math-classes are highly beneficial ...for girls. Reasons cited were that girls are deferential in class... less likely to raise their hands to ask for help or participate in discussion, and as a result teachers focus more on the boys. I believe that the Edmonton Public School Board had a trial project where girls at some schools were offered the choice to attend all-girls classes; I don't know any details, however. Dividing students into "smart kid" and "dumb kid" classes might have some merit (but would probably be difficult...) It might already happen to some degree as some students pursue university matriculation track courses while others don't. However, the idea that another idea might have merit doesn't mean that this one doesn't. I'm not sure... are parents attending classes with their children in BC now? -kimmy

Is there somewhere we could read about this for ourselves? Ah yes. Those right-wing extremists, the Greens. How is it that BC has no PC party? Are you sure he's the "David" in this story? Given the troubles of the BC Liberal government, and splitting of right wing votes you mentioned, and the ethnic vote manipulation Caesar mentioned, it sounds like Jagrup might actually be Goliath here... ... I still can't see how Jagrup looks like John Travolta or any other movie star (except maybe Robert Davi ...and movie star is pushing it...) However, looking at this photo: http://www.thenownewspaper.com/issues04/09.../093204nn4.html I do think Carole James looks an awful lot like that other well-known Canadian actor Sheila Copps.... -kimmy

So, this business about higher grades and better learning is all fake, and it's actually a plot to bring Social Conservatism to Math Class? -kimmy

Isn't any system going to result in the candidate with broadest appeal being chosen leader? Like, by definition? At some point, won't it always boil down to simple math? -kimmy

Do more parties equal more democracy? Having 5 major parties in Canada gave us the Chretien era of almost autocratic rule. -kimmy

It has always been obvious that nobody would vote for Nader. Always, always, always. The guy never had a chance of doing anything other than taking votes from Kerry. The only people who don't recognize it are you and Ralph. -kimmy

If you're getting hung up on details about whether purchases of major items are against the rules of Buy Nothing Day, stop worrying... there are no rules, and the penalty for non-compliance is ... nothing! If you're trying to get around the principle of Buy Nothing by scheduling payments and shipping and possession dates to land on other days, then you've missed the point. It's not an exercise in planning your purchases to fall on the day before or the day after. It's a statement against commercialization. Do you really need a new car or toys to make you happy? Maybe instead of buying your sweetie a new piece of jewelry, a rose or a poem would be more meaningful. Instead of buying the kids a video game, take them hiking. People often can't see the forest through the trees. Personally, I suspect that Maplesyrup would be an outstanding spokesman for Buy Nothing Day! Most days are probably Buy Nothing Day for syrup. I bet that when he opens his wallet, moths fly out. -kimmy

Why? Of that list of things that make Canada supposedly "cool", according to the Economist, how many of them have changed since Paul Martin became PM? Something happened on the gay marriage front that I hadn't heard about? Has there been some sort of dramatic change in First Nations policy that I wasn't aware of? Has Martin put in some sort of anti-immigration policy? Are anti-immigrant racists roaming the streets "backlashing" (?) ?? Are the Canadian writers and cultural figures not "cool" anymore? Has anything happened on pot-- one way or the other-- since September 2003? Has any of this actually happened? Are all these things that The Economist say make us "cool" ... not happening anymore? Have we changed? Or has what's "cool" changed? Or are we not "cool" anymore because that corrupt thug is not running our country anymore? -kimmy