Are we preparing our students to become resposnbile citizens and employees of the future?

 

(http://blog.isecore.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/important_message.jpeg)

 

Something to Ponder…

What do you feel about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? I have to say, I’m all for it (sorry for the lack of objectivity).  That being said, lets focus special attention on two articles:

Article 19.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 26.

• (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
• (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
• (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

You can access the full document at  http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

So we all have the right, but parents also have the right to deem what is apporpriate to expose their children to.  Do teachers, principals, and school boards have the same right? Should we argue that due to this declaration it is okay to share any news with everybody, regardless of age (or any other factor)? Or are there limits and exemptions?

 

Censorship in Post-Secondary Institutions

While we typically think of post-secondary institutions as a place of learning from all view points and a place where we can question what we’ve being told, we may be turning a blind eye to what we’re really exposed to. At Capilano College (Vancouver, BC, Canada) the heartbeat club, an anti-abortion club, was denied the right to club status by the students union.  This isn’t the only institution that have banned pro-life clubs.  Others joining in are Carleton Univerisity (Ottawa) as did the Univeristy of British Columbia.  The Univeristy of Victoria (BC) also joined in with censorship, banning the Canadian armed forces from recruiting on campus.

Students feel they are learning how to develop their critical thinking skills at college and university, but what are they learning when being censored to one side of the story?

We can  debate censorship in PUBLIC schools from K-12,  but lets think about it at another level of education.  How do you feel about censorship in Universities? Is it any different than censorship in elementary, junior high and high school? At what age to we get to determine what we are exposed to? If you don’t believe censorship occurs in post-secondary institutions, check out this clip from the documentary of Indoctrinate U.

 

What exactly does censoring the internet mean?

(http://www.norcimo.com/blog/archives/upload/2008/12/2008-12-07-dear-internet-censors.png)

While the goal of internet censorship in schools is separate the “good” from the “bad,” the filtering programs are often too restrictive and can actually stop students from accessing information for research projects and school assignments. Schools tend to want to restrict websites that are not going to contribute to school learning: social networking sites, child pornography, sexually explicit sites, etc. But this is what typically happens:

“Auto-censorship against sexual words in matter for children, set to block the word “cunt”, has been known to block the Lincolnshire placename Scunthorpe. Likewise, a block against the word “penis” may block the Yorkshire placename Penistone; and at least one big web forum, set to block “twat”, automatically changes “wristwatch” into “wris****ch”, and refuses the name “Dick” even when it clearly means a man’s name. Another example is blocking “specialist” because it contains the drug name “cialis”” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship)

Unfortunately there hasn’t been a system that is adequate enough at deciphering between what is a “good search” and what is a “bad search”. And, if such a system were to exist it would probably be too expensive for schools to afford because of lack of government funding.

This description doesn’t even get into the cases of 9/11 alternative theory websites or alternative news sources that are being blocked in schools. How are they deemed inappropriate? What is the key word that allows these websites to be banned?

It’s not just schools that are being censored. In the United States, any libraries that receive federal funding are required to have internet filters on.   Libraries are suppose to be  PUBLIC institution. They should not be censored by the government.

Take it a step further. Countries such as Australia, China, and Israel all have national censorship on the internet. The government is literally controlling what its citizens can and cannot view all in the name of “inappropriate material.” Who determines inappropriate material? Some government official acting in the name of public good who is actually removed from the needs of the public locked away in his government tower? Is this who we want determining what we can and can not see?

Perhaps schools, school boards, and governments should put more emphasis on educating its citizens to critically analyze information that they are exposed to. Wouldn’t it be a great society if people could insightfully interpret the information that is provided to them rather than just believing everything the government feeds them. Think about the world change that would occur.

 

rise of the students

Some people would state that if we allow students to think for themselves we will have a coup d’etat on our hands.  And it is for that reason that students shouldn’t deviate or question what they are learning.  This video is from the same kid that was mentioned previously on this blog and shows students taking action in their learning.  Some would claim they have gone to far, what do you think?

 

wwpfd? (what would paul freire do?)

Paulo Freire is the educational theorist that I love to hate.  His book, “The Pedagogy of the Oppressed” is one of the toughest books to work through, yet, the words are amazing. Better yet, once you get Paulo Freire and stumble through his “dialectal materialism” and overuse of  “oppressed and oppressors” you can apply the words of Freire to nearly every situation in education.

In Pedagogy of the Oppressed Paulo Freire makes constant references to the “banking” system of education. Essentially, educators tend to view students as a blank slate (building on Rousseau’s tabula rasa idea) that teachers, and the greater education system, can imprint knowledge on.  Therefore, the student teacher relationship is one where the teacher holds all the authoritative knowledge that they in turn transmit facts and knowledge to the student. The student simply learns to be the receipt of the knowledge and is not allowed to critic or question the learning at hand. Freire claims that this system can essentially dehumanize the learner in situations like this.  Freire describes this situation,

“Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.” (Pedagogy of the Oppressed)

Freire proposed a change to this system: a more democratic system where the teacher acts as a facilitator of knowledge. The teacher becomes a learner who teaches and the student can act as a knowledge base as well, therefore they are able to learn from each other.

How would Freire approach the situation of censorship in schools?

I think that it is safe to say that Freire would be against censorship in schools.  Censoring websites and books does not allow students to analyse information or be exposed to multiple perspectives.  When we censor students access we refuse to allow them to participate fully in the education system;  further, it disallows students to participate in the student as a teacher, teacher as a student relationship.  We oppress students by not allowing them access to specific experiences and websites.  If schools, school boards, and government censor student access we will continue to view students as a tabula rasa rather than the brilliant minds they are.

(Photo references: http://badattitudes.com/MT/paulo-freire.jpg and http://www.hermes-press.com/freire1.htm)

 

Shirley Jackson wrote the short story The Witch in 1949.   The text was approved for the Ponoka county (AB, Canada) as part of English 10, however after a school trustee read part (but not all) of the text, she brought it to the board, who voted to have it removed from all the schools in the county.  After the motion was passed, the books were to be removed and teachers were threatened with dismissal if they didn’t comply.  A substitute teacher wrote to the media supporting the short story and was subsequently fired from the board.

The story is available online at:  http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:NE5CYRSxOLwJ:jlax.wikispaces.com/file/view/THE%2BWITCH.doc+the+witch+shirley+jackson&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

Do you think this story should be allowed in the classroom? Was the dismissal of the subsitute teacher warrented? What are the implications behind banning a text?

 

a nice little indoctrination camp

This is the video that started it all.

The video features NsaneSk8er007, an American high school student, who had his personal 9/11 website banned from his school. In the video, he makes reference to the fact that he agress with websites such as myspace being banned, but claims that his website is different: it is a news driven website that is delivering information to the global internet community. Obviously this kid is well informed, mature, and understands the actual workings of the American government and is balsy enough to question the accepted rhetoric.
So, what do you think?

Should websites be banned in schools? If yes, what is the criteria that must be used?