Segacs's World I Know

Posts Tagged ‘education’

An opinion piece in today’s Gazette speaks of the “dishonourable generation” – in the writer’s words, the boomers who now seek to deny future generations the benefits and advantages that they had. Patrick Barnard, a CEGEP teacher, laments the fact that what was good enough for them seems now to be “too good” for their kids. Specifically, he’s talking about the government’s proposal to reform or altogether eliminate the CEGEP system in Quebec:

The dishonourable generation went to CEGEP and university, enjoyed relatively small classes, received scholarships – all the result of public funds channeled through the state. Now those same people have become private and public managers who wish to wrest those benefits from their own progeny. They are the “chicken hawks” of public policy.

I don’t agree that all of the baby boomer generation fits into this category. Most of them – my parents’ generation, in fact – only want what’s best for their kids and grandkids.

But on the CEGEP issue, I think that Barnard is right on target. Quebec may be a messed-up place, but IMHO the CEGEP system was one of the best ideas that any provincial government ever had. Maybe I’m biased – my two years of CEGEP were two of the best years of my life – but the system itself makes an inherent kind of sense. After all, how many people really know after high school what direction they want their lives to take? It wasn’t until I had the opportunity to take a number of different kinds of courses in CEGEP that I had an idea of what field to pursue in university. Not only that, but I learned how to work to a college standard. There’s no way that my high school experience would have even come close to preparing me for a university workload.

CEGEP is a time to adapt to a college-like environment without the stress of a university workload. It’s a time to narrow one’s area of focus slightly while avoiding having to over-specialize just yet. It’s a chance for people to learn a technical career without needing to go to university at all, if they so choose, or to learn the basics of a pre-university field without being too restricted. It’s a chance to make the transition from being a high school “kid”, subject to strict rules and regulations, and an independant university “adult”. And best of all, if you attend a public CEGEP, it’s absolutely free!

My own CEGEP experience was great… an amazing social environment and school atmosphere, excellent teachers, interesting classes, and lasting friendships. I’m not suggesting that everyone loved it as much as I did… but most people seem to enjoy it – students and teachers alike. More importantly, it works.

The solution isn’t to eliminate CEGEPs but to expand their programs and funding. At the same time, the university tuition freeze should be lifted. This would give students access to quality free education at the CEGEP level, and provide them with the option of attending well-funded, world-class universities upon graduation. And by the time they get to that point, thanks to CEGEP they’ll have a fair idea of what they want to study, thus saving wasted money on a year of core courses or on program changes. Hopefully, the government will recognize this and save the CEGEP system before a successful experiment is dumped out the window.

Yep, good ol’ France, as expected, overwhelmingly backed the ban of religious symbols from the classroom, thus endorsing what is arguably one of the best candidates for prominence on dumblaws.com:

France’s National Assembly voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to banish religious emblems from state schools, a measure meant to keep tensions between Muslim and Jewish minorities out of public classrooms.

Deputies voted 494 to 36 to ban Muslim headscarves, Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses and to expel pupils who insisted on wearing them. It will not apply to private schools.

[ . . . ]

“What is at issue here is the clear affirmation that public school is a place for learning and not for militant activity or proselytism,” Assembly Speaker Jean-Louis Debre said.

Er, no, what is at issue here is whether the public school system will actually deal with racism and militant activity, or whether it will just sweep it under the carpet. All this law will do is force Muslim girls out of the public system and into private Madrassas, where they will lose the opportunity to have a secular education. All this will do is force the militant wing of Islam underground in France, and insult all the mainstream Muslims by telling them that their symbol of faith is really a symbol of “militant activity”.

France is attempting to solve a serious problem by pretending it doesn’t exist, and we all know how well that works.

If this is true, it’s a disgusting example of what can happen in places where gays are the last remaining legally persecutable minority:

An 18-year-old student has filed a suit in Palm Beach County, Fla., against a private school, alleging he was expelled for telling a teacher he is gay.

Jeffrey Woodard claims that Jupiter Christian School expelled him three days after he was pulled out of Bible class by a teacher and asked in confidence if he was gay.

When Woodard answered “yes,” a school official called his mother and told her Woodard couldn’t attend an upcoming school retreat unless he and his mother, Carol Gload, met with the school to talk about his sexual orientation, according to the lawsuit.

“We were given three choices at the meeting — to get counseling, for him to voluntarily withdraw or expulsion,” Gload recalled.

[ . . . ]

School President Richard Grimm said last week that he could not comment on the issue because it involves private information about a former student, but he said the school’s policies are based on Biblical values.

Florida laws don’t prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. So the sickest thing is that this student might actually have no legal recourse.

All this is assuming, of course, that he was expelled for being gay. There could of course be some other reason – maybe he failed all his courses, or assaulted a teacher, or set fire to the locker room.

But if it’s true he was thrown out for being gay, then I can only hope, for his sake, that his case causes enough public debate in Florida to make some changes. It’s time for people to stop justifying this blatant kind of discrimination.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favour of racism:

In upholding the law school’s policy, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said for the majority in the 5-4 ruling that student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify use of race in admissions decisions.

Sad.

My old high school was vandalised over the weekend with antisemitic graffiti:

Staff from the United Talmud Torah elementary school and Herzliah High School in St. Laurent were busy removing anti-Semitic graffiti from their doors and windows yesterday.

The building that is shared by the two schools was struck by vandals overnight. They covered two entrances and several windows with messages including “Free Palestine” and “Die Sharon.”

This is extremely unsettling and disturbing to me, who spent 5 years dragging myself to that building on a daily basis. I may have felt imprisoned by the endless math, chemistry, and Talmud classes, watching the endless seconds tick off the clock until the final bell . . . but I never felt threatened.

Luckily it was just a bit of graffiti – most likely written by idiot kids – but nevertheless, the swastikas and disgusting slogans that were pictured in the print version of the Gazette are cause for concern in light of the rise in antisemitism around the world. It’s a reminder that, as secure as we may feel in our home and community, we’re never really entirely safe.

Yves Engler has an editorial in today’s Gazette about what the Liberal government should do, in his opinion, to help make university education more accessible to students.

Engler, with his involvement with the past CSU and his far left political views, has frequently criticized government policy on education. Today’s editorial avoids some of his more radical views that he has put forth in articles in the Link, and sticks to a more reasonable position:

As a result of cutbacks and fee increases, the average debt load of Quebec residents graduating from an undergraduate program is $13,100 and climbing. Students from less affluent backgrounds are finding it increasingly difficult to attend university.

[ . . . ]

Around the world, governments are concluding that education is fundamental to society’s economic, social and political development. That is the reason the U.S. government has gradually increased its share of GDP allocated to education to the point it is now greater than Canada’s. It’s also why Ireland and Wales recently eliminated tuition fees.

Here in Quebec, to improve post-secondary education the new Liberal government should:

- Significantly increase funding;

- Maintain the tuition freeze;

- Prohibit further increases in ancillary fees;

- Gradually transform student aid from loans into needs-based bursaries;

- Progressively eliminate differential fees.

These steps would be a wise investment in Quebec’s future.

All very well and good. But here’s why I think that Yves Engler is wrong:

Engler is talking about education as a right. Everyone, he says, should have the right to a degree. I would amend that by saying that everyone should have the opportunity to obtain a degree. But not everyone should just have a degree hand-delivered and gift-wrapped. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be worth anything.

The government already funds elementary, high school, and here in Quebec even college education. And everyone has the right to go to university. Everyone even has the opportunity – provided, of course, that they earn it. Scholarships and financial aid are widely available to deserving students. Tuition is more than reasonable; in fact, it’s the lowest in Canada. And if Engler is griping about the price of a Concordia degree, he should try having to pay for an American university; he might appreciate the measly $2,500 a year that Quebec students pay a whole lot more.

What exactly is the “right” to a degree? Not all degrees are created equal. The value of a degree from Harvard, for example, far exceeds the value of the same degree from Concordia, even if the student worked equally hard to achieve it and obtained an equally high grade point average. Everyone knows this, and expects it. But why is that?

Unfortunately, the answer is usually money. The top professors are attracted by research funds or high salaries. The big donors will fund a university with an excellent reputation much more than one with a mediocre one. The top universities have lower student-teacher ratios, top facilities, and prominent professors and graduates.

University education isn’t simply a right, it’s an investment. And either way, society pays, with the expectation of a return on that investment. Where my opinion differs from Engler’s is in who should make that investment. Taxpayers already fund most of a university education for students. And I do agree that partial funding is necessary; other problems are created when tuition is allowed to spiral out of control. But what happens now is that students have absolutely no concept of the true value of their education. They grudgingly pay their $2,500 a year and figure that’s the cost, when in reality their education is worth many times that. This makes it easier for them to float around school year after year, not getting a degree, just wreaking havoc and never graduating and moving into the real world, because it’s so cheap. Maybe if tuition was closer to the true cost of an education, it would be more appreciated and people would take it more seriously.

Scholarships and bursaries can be helpful. But student loans are already low-interest and have flexible repayment terms. The reason that society funds education so heavily is the same as the reason students go to university in the first place: investment. And as an investment, it should pay off for students down the road, so why shouldn’t they be expected to pay off their student loans in order to give back some of that investment into society to help fund education for the next batch of students coming through?

If tuition were raised, more students could receive financial aid who need it. At the same time, the universities in Quebec would receive badly-needed funding in order to recruit top professors, fund vital research, improve facilities, and build a name that puts them in the top rungs of world-class educational institutions. And then everyone – graduates as well as wider society – would reap the benefits in the form of more business investment, better employment, higher salaries, and a more productive economy.

Obviously, governments are afraid to propose lifting the tuition freeze because of negative reactions by student unions and groups like the CSU or the CFS. The Liberals were afraid of losing votes if they campaigned on that basis. So until a government has the courage to say what needs to be said, and raise tuition to a more reasonable level, education will continue to be woefully underfunded, hampering our ability to compete on a global scale. That is the real tragedy here.

Israeli and Palestinian youngsters are learning about diplomacy at an Israeli mock U.N. conference:

Ramzi Sfeir, a 17-year-old from the Palestinian village of Bet Jalla, never believed that Palestinians and Israelis could agree on anything.

But after he was offered a chance to sit at a mock negotiating table with Jewish Israelis his own age, he says that many of his preconceived notions just faded away.

“I learned that you can talk without fighting,” he said, after participating in a model United Nations in Israel, aimed at teaching diplomacy skills to youth. “I also learned that Jews have convictions we can’t change and that Judaism is like a nationality for them. [The Jewish participants] also came to understand us better.”

Though there are hundreds of model UN programs in countries around the world, Israel is one of the only Middle East nations to host one; and is the only one with a special committee that brings Israelis and Palestinians together to negotiate regional issues.

This won’t create peace in the middle east. But it seems to be an extremely valuable step, because unlike other left-wing efforts to “bring together” Jewish and Arabic kids and teens in Israel, this one doesn’t shy away from the thorny political issues. Instead, it gives the participants a forum to attack them head-on, but in a non-violent, diplomatic way.

There are no miracle solutions. Only baby steps. This seems like a good one.

A group of students from the high school down the street from me got to miss class time to protest the war in Iraq. Understandably, parents are incensed – but, in my opinion, for the wrong reason:

Theresa Leblanc was appalled to learn that her daughter spent her time in art class on Monday at École secondaire Des Sources making anti-war posters while students were ridiculing U.S. President George W. Bush.

Then when she heard the posters were for an anti-war march that would take place during school hours, she hit the roof.

“I’m just up in arms,” said Leblanc, who has a nephew in the U.S. marines, fighting in Iraq.

“This is such a lack of respect. You can have a debate but it’s another thing to have a demonstration like this during school time. It’s appalling.”

Another parent, who didn’t want to be named, said she was also furious when one of her two daughters said she had been forced to make posters.

She, too, was unhappy about a demonstration during school time. “My girls missed physics and French – that’s more important than a march.”

It’s not as though it’s a big sacrifice for most high school students to miss class time. We used to invent any reason we could think of, from play practices to charity walkathons, all in effort to spend as few hours as possible behind a desk.

But this crosses the line, since it is essentially pressuring the students into all thinking the same way. While the Gazette reports that “students who didn’t want to participate in the march had the option of attending a debate on the Iraqi situation”, I bet I know exactly what form that so-called “debate” took.

I’m sure there were students who wanted to demonstrate because they read up on the issues and formed educated political opinions. But I’m also sure that there were equally as many who did not. Consider the following quote by one of the organizers:

“I’m against killing innocent people,” said Grade 11 student Ruba Al Karan. “Saddam (Hussein) did a lot of stupid things but Bush is no better.”

Other students spoke of U.S.-bashing going on while the students used their time in art class to draw up posters.

High school can be a difficult time for students with dissenting opinions. There’s an incredible amount of pressure to follow the crowd. Not to mention, about half the students at the school had probably never taken a history course in their lives. Students are entitled to their opinions, but this was incredibly inappropriate.

A group of high school students have been suspended for skipping class to protest the war. Apparently, many of them are complaining, but the school board is standing firm:

“We’re sending a message out to students who want to do the same thing,” said Michael Cohen, spokesperson for the English Montreal School Board.

“We have nothing against the idea of them protesting the war. If they would have done this after school hours, it would have been fine.”

[ . . . ]

Frat, who has two kids at Lester B. Pearson, said the “demonstrators” were probably more intent on enjoying the balmy weather than denouncing George W. Bush.

They could have added a couple of points: firstly, most of these kids probably have no idea why they oppose the war, since it appears they don’t spend too much time in classrooms reading their history textbooks. They probably are protesting because their friends are, and they think it’s cool. Secondly, anything high school students do as an excuse to skip class isn’t exactly a protest, it’s just an excuse to get out of class. Maybe it’s a little more creative than the ones we used to use, but come on, we’re talking about high school here!

Note that if this had happened at Concordia, the CSU would be suing the administration as we speak.

Josh pointed me towards this great article by Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times on the issue of school prayer in the U.S. In it, Ebert argues that while he has no problem with personal prayer, the problem comes with public prayer aimed at either recruiting others or else making them feel excluded. He defines the distinction as “vertical” and “horizontal” prayer:

This is really an argument between two kinds of prayer–vertical and horizontal. I don’t have the slightest problem with vertical prayer. It is horizontal prayer that frightens me. Vertical prayer is private, directed upward toward heaven. It need not be spoken aloud, because God is a spirit and has no ears. Horizontal prayer must always be audible, because its purpose is not to be heard by God, but to be heard by fellow men standing within earshot.

To choose an example from football, when my team needs a field goal to win and I think, ”Please, dear God, let them make it!”–that is vertical prayer. When, before the game, a group of fans joins hands and ”voluntarily” recites the Lord’s Prayer–that is horizontal prayer. It serves one of two purposes: to encourage me to join them, or to make me feel excluded.

[ . . . ]

This simple insight about two kinds of prayer, which is beyond theological question, should bring a dead halt to the obsession with prayer in public places. It doesn’t, because the purpose of its supporters is political, not spiritual. Their faith is like Dial soap: Now that they use it, they wish everyone would. I grew up in an America where people of good breeding did not impose their religious convictions upon those they did not know very well. Now those manners have been discarded.

I agree with all of that so far. Individual prayer is fine. After all, I went to a religious school most of my life, where daily prayer was just part of the routine. But of course it wasn’t compulsory for me to have gone there – I could have gone to a public school where religion wasn’t forced down anyone’s throats. Prayer aimed at excluding those different from oneself is another story.

And here’s the kicker:

Because our enemies are for the most part more enthusiastic about horizontal prayer than we are, and see absolutely no difference between church and state–indeed, want to make them the same–it is alarming to reflect that they may be having more success bringing us around to their point of view than we are at sticking to our own traditional American beliefs about freedom of religion. When Ashcroft and his enemies both begin their days with displays of their godliness, do we feel safer after they rise from their devotions?

Good question.