Melanie_

The beginning of a discussion about this A thread on this topic You might be interested in the discussion happening in another part of the forum, Betsy.

Welcome to the forum, Jiblethead! I disagree that 18 is too young for any of those things (including drinking alcohol - the legal age here in Manitoba is 18). There is not likely to be a great difference in maturity between an 18 year old and a 19 year old, and raising the age simply extends childhood, so if the age is raised to, say, 21, there would be discussion about whether or not 21 year olds are mature enough to make these decisions. Edited to add: I don't know if I would vote for an 18 year old or not. It would depend more on the person's ideas than their age. There are certainly many older candidates whose age hasn't brought them wisdom!

Blended families used to be called stepfamilies - its when a new family is created where one or both partners have children from a previous relationship. The reality is, every time a child leaves their home and is in a public setting, they are being exposed to diversity. Kids learn about other kids' families in all sorts of ways, and it starts much younger than 5. In daycare settings, it is common to have pictures of the children and their families displayed; if a child has two mommies, their family picture is displayed alongside everyone elses'. The idea is not to push one as better than the other, but to have all children feel that their families are a valued part of the community. And people don't make fun of people they value, or beat them up.

This made me laugh so hard I almost spit coffee on my keyboard! Let me remind you of your own words, earlier in this thread...

A 5 year old isn't being taught about sex, they are being taught about families, as Jacee pointed out early in the thread. Families are a common topic in the early years, and it is important that all the children's family structures are recognized and valued. So kids learn about traditional families, single parent families, same sex families, blended families, etc., because of the diversity in the classroom. No one is telling them what goes on behind the closed bedroom door.

We seem to have a philosophical difference in the purpose of education. You feel that the only thing that matters is the accumulation of facts; this approach values only academic achievement, regardless of any other considerations. I take a different approach. Education is certainly about academics, but I also value the whole person. This means that academics are only one facet of education; other facets include life skills, development of personal characteristics, and social and emotional competence. When a student is held accountable for their actions, it helps them to understand responsibility. If a student doesn't meet an acceptable standard, they need to know that more effort is required; rather than seeing this as crushing their confidence, you could see it as an opportunity to build resilience. One of the biggest problems I have with a policy of no zeroes is that it is applied to everyone, regardless of effort or circumstance. If someone has a legitimate reason for needing an extension, or can demonstrate their learning in an alternative manner, I have no issue with adjusting my expectations to meet their needs, as long as their work meets the standard. But when someone misses class after class, hands nothing in, and then thinks its my job to create success for them, they need a wake up call. If they have earned a zero, they will get a zero.

Me too!!! My confidence has been crushed because I feel like I scored a zero! I may never be productive again!

Why a new thread? A new article can be posted in the previous thread. I understand what you are saying, that it is a behavioural issue, and it doesn't actually reflect the student's knowledge of the topic. I've marked essays and assignments that demonstrated a thorough understanding of the content, but were handed in so late that the late mark deductions caused the student to fail. There are clear guidelines for requesting an extension, but it is up to the student to initiate the process. Is that fair? I believe it is. Time management and organization are life skills, and knowledge has to be applied in a timely manner for it to be effective. A holistic approach to education values knowledge, but also values behaviour, attitudes, and communication.

Then provide some data. There is no data in his website, it is solely based on his opinion. Where is his research? Where are the links to empirical evidence? Anyone can come up with a position on a topic, and if they are clever they can market their position to gullible people willing to pay to hear them speak. But unless there is statistical evidence, he is an expert in bullshitting. Show me the data.

Socialist, I am still waiting for empirical research. This, again, is opinion.

Your link is a blog, based on subjective opinion. Do you have any actual research that backs up your position? You have stated that research shows that giving zeroes crushes the confidence of students. I am waiting for empirical data. Blogs don't count. Also, I am curious about the blog that you have posted here. The writer talks about giving students until the end of the term to hand everything in. What happens if they do not hand in assignments? Would he give them a zero?

Do you have any actual research to cite to support your position? I'd like to see the data. Children's confidence has to be authentic to have any value - false confidence just sets them up for a bigger disappointment later on. I don't believe that giving someone a mark they have not earned does anything to increase their confidence. Instead, it contributes to their feeling like a fraud, and undermines the value of their educational experience. I failed a course in my first year of University, and had to take it again to fill the requirements for my degree. The second time around I got an A, and felt much more confident in my knowledge of the subject matter. I was also able to understand more advanced concepts in other courses. It is far better to give someone the opportunity to master the concepts, even if it means taking a course over again, than to have them go on to build new knowledge on a shaky base.

Failure is absolutely an option at the post secondary level. If you don't do the work, you don't get the mark, or the credit. And it costs you $$$ to take the course again. Teachers who blindly pass students in elementary and secondary school are not doing them any favours.

Betsy, its too much of a stretch for you to understand it.

You are trying to find a way to justify discriminatory hiring practices, but it just doesn't work. Saying "what if" can go both ways - what if your boss had taken a chance on this guy, and found him to be the best employee he ever had? What if he never had cause to fire him, so there was never any need to find out if he would have played the race card or not? It seems like your boss took a very pessimistic approach to business. By your logic, no one should ever hire anyone who shared this guy's culture, since they are all likely get the company into trouble. Even if someone has spent years achieving the best qualifications, and does their job well, they are too big a risk. So should they all just go back to where they came from?

Do you think the potential employee was treated fairly? Did he deserve to be held accountable for the actions of people he didn't even know, but who shared his country of origin?

No, it was racism. He didn't hire him because of the conduct of other people who shared some of his characteristics. He was judged on other people's actions, regardless of his own merits.

I agree. So often we hear complaints about how immigrants don't "adapt" to Canada, with no acknowledgement of how many ways they have already adapted, and continue to adapt daily. And if they find friends that share their home culture, people criticize them, without stopping to think about what they would do in the same situation. If I were to move to the Punjab, and find some English speaking Canadians there, I would almost certainly want to associate with them. That wouldn't mean I didn't want to be there, just that it would be nice to be able to communicate in my own language sometimes, with people who share, to some degree, my culture.

So the guy's qualifications were excellent, your boss wanted to hire him, but didn't do so because he was a visible minority. He didn't hire him because he thought that maybe, perhaps, someday, a problem would arise that they couldn't resolve, and this guy just might, perhaps, accuse him of racism. And you don't see that as racist?

Ah, but the word "stretches" doesn't appear in any of those Chinese translations. How can it be a valid Bible without the key word, "stretches"?

My daughter's boyfriend came up with Kevin Hart (who I've never heard of). His Bacon number is 3. Kevin Hart and Jason Segal appeared in "The 5 Year Engagement". Jason Segel and John Lithgow appeared in "This is 40". John Lithgow and Kevin Bacon appeared in "Footloose".

Socialist, you will do more damage than good with such a judgmental attitude towards parents. Try adopting a strength based approach, where you recognize that everyone brings some value to the table.

Socialist's ideas seem eerily similar to the reasons Canada created the residential school system... (I'm borrowing a link from Pliny, from another thread)

We've crossed our wires somewhere; I'm not sure we are talking about the same things. I thought you were objecting to child development theory in public school classrooms; I pointed out that typical teachers don't study child development, so it really isn't an issue. In that context, I don't follow your statement, "Sorry. No. It blunts one's ability to observe for one's self." Also, my statements about the impact of the residential school system actually support your initial argument, in that I agree that the State intervention inflicted on Aboriginals in Canada contributed to the dysfunction that we continue to see today. I understand that you see the residential school system as symbolic of the power government has, in that it can decide to disempower entire groups if it so chooses. This could apply to any government institution, whether it be education, health care, the military, immigration, etc. You rightly have faith in individuals to make good choices - I believe that those individuals will choose to elect good government.

For gods sake. You are just trolling, right? You can't actually believe this (not the evolution part, the part about parents). Maybe its time for you to evolve into a rational human being. (And please, if you are intending to be a teacher, learn some grammar and spelling.)