Saturday, 28 February 2009
Monday, 23 February 2009
If it looks like a duck…
I recently lamented the state of the nation and with the product of so many of the UK’s schools: kids turning out with little respect for others, less themselves. (http://www.speakwithoutinterruption.com/site/2009/02/anonymous-arrogance/comment-page-1/#comment-99") We have produced a youth of today that finds it much easier to deliberately diss the efforts of others, where young people get seem to get some kind of Schadenfreude joy. I think it’s sad but true. So let’s call it what it is and not duck the issue.
Yet there are those in the education sector who believe that all is well with the system and that no child has been ‘left behind’. Too much testing, a rigorous ‘teach-for-the-test’ approach, a rigid, failsafe way to produce results not smart, creative individuals, is what’s at the heart of the British system, but it is not the only problem.
If you read the report that came out recently about youngsters in the UK being the unhappiest in the developed world, you’ll know what I mean. Here’s the headline - ‘Childhood ruined by ‘me-first’ society, landmark report claims - Children’s lives are being blighted by Britain’s selfish society, a landmark report has concluded.’ Here’s the URL if you’re interested (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/4435100/Childhood-ruined-by-me-first-society-landmark-report-claims.html)
As the author of the article says,
‘The Good Childhood Inquiry claims that almost all of the problems now facing young people stem from the culture of “excessive individualism” that has developed in recent decades. It says the “me-first” attitude of adults is causing family breakdowns, competition in education, a growing gap between rich and poor, unkindness among teenagers and premature sexualisation by advertisers. The pioneering two-year investigation, backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and based on interviews with 35,000 children, parents and professionals, claims British children are less happy than those in almost any other developed country.’
How strange then to read in The Daily Telegraph this morning that the root cause of so much of this misery is connected to the recruitment system. We learnt today for example that Almost 7,000 criminals 'applied to be teachers' last year’. The convictions were uncovered in a Freedom of Information request to the Criminal Records Bureau. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/4787846/Almost-7000-criminals-applied-to-be-teachers-last-year.html)
Is it any wonder with these problems that today’s kids are turning out with a ‘me me me’ attitude with absolutely zero respect for the world they find themselves in? If 7,000 were criminals were detected, it’s more than possible that twice that number applied and are now teaching in schools up and down the country. Is it any wonder then that the kids grow up full of resentment given these problems? When the morals they learn at school play a big part in defining who the will become as adults?
A spokesman for the The Department for Children, Schools and Families said, ‘It's important to remember that these figures are for people who applied for a job in teaching and do not refer to those who were appointed. These figures show the system is effective in blocking those who should not be working with children. And since 2007, tough new regulations provide that all those convicted or cautioned of sex offences against children are automatically barred from working with them.’
Somehow I do not feel reassured by these words.
Yet there are those in the education sector who believe that all is well with the system and that no child has been ‘left behind’. Too much testing, a rigorous ‘teach-for-the-test’ approach, a rigid, failsafe way to produce results not smart, creative individuals, is what’s at the heart of the British system, but it is not the only problem.
If you read the report that came out recently about youngsters in the UK being the unhappiest in the developed world, you’ll know what I mean. Here’s the headline - ‘Childhood ruined by ‘me-first’ society, landmark report claims - Children’s lives are being blighted by Britain’s selfish society, a landmark report has concluded.’ Here’s the URL if you’re interested (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/4435100/Childhood-ruined-by-me-first-society-landmark-report-claims.html)
As the author of the article says,
‘The Good Childhood Inquiry claims that almost all of the problems now facing young people stem from the culture of “excessive individualism” that has developed in recent decades. It says the “me-first” attitude of adults is causing family breakdowns, competition in education, a growing gap between rich and poor, unkindness among teenagers and premature sexualisation by advertisers. The pioneering two-year investigation, backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and based on interviews with 35,000 children, parents and professionals, claims British children are less happy than those in almost any other developed country.’
How strange then to read in The Daily Telegraph this morning that the root cause of so much of this misery is connected to the recruitment system. We learnt today for example that Almost 7,000 criminals 'applied to be teachers' last year’. The convictions were uncovered in a Freedom of Information request to the Criminal Records Bureau. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/4787846/Almost-7000-criminals-applied-to-be-teachers-last-year.html)
Is it any wonder with these problems that today’s kids are turning out with a ‘me me me’ attitude with absolutely zero respect for the world they find themselves in? If 7,000 were criminals were detected, it’s more than possible that twice that number applied and are now teaching in schools up and down the country. Is it any wonder then that the kids grow up full of resentment given these problems? When the morals they learn at school play a big part in defining who the will become as adults?
A spokesman for the The Department for Children, Schools and Families said, ‘It's important to remember that these figures are for people who applied for a job in teaching and do not refer to those who were appointed. These figures show the system is effective in blocking those who should not be working with children. And since 2007, tough new regulations provide that all those convicted or cautioned of sex offences against children are automatically barred from working with them.’
Somehow I do not feel reassured by these words.
Thursday, 19 February 2009
Too much monkey business?
Last Sunday, I wrote a blog in which I castigated the money men, the kind of people who've been around for aeons; the kind that Jesus kicked out of the temples for usury. No, I'm not talking about the Jews of that time but today's equivalents: the corporate titans, the Wall Street shakers and movers who single-handedly destroyed the American and world economies with their insatiable greed.
I compared their behaviour to the new study that suggests that monkeys cooperate better when they are threatened by an external force, in the case I mentioned with real monkeys, the Ice Age and the dominance of Alpha males who try to hoard all the food supplies.
Now it appears that there is a right royal row going on in America about equating the American president, Obama, as a monkey that has been shot. That's what the cartoon was about in The New York Post and which caused a few people to raise their eyebrows, most notably the Reverend Al Sharpton who demonstrated against it calling ti a clear case of racism.
Am I missing something here? Are we not allowed to joke anymore? Are we not allowed to indulge in that age old practice of satire? Of being able to lampoon those whose task it is to protect and serve us? Our politicians? Our policemen? Our journalists?
The creator of the cartoon, Col Allan, stands by the cartoon and is on record as having meant the following only to be interpreted from the cartoon:
'The cartoon is a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy.'
Is Mr. Sharpton trying to jump on a political bandwagon here? Trying some political posturing or jousting? Trying to stir up racial hatred? It does seem to me that he has blown it out of proportion in tandem with whatever hidden agenda he is currently following?
The Huffington Post says, 'At its most benign, the cartoon suggest that the stimulus bill was so bad, monkeys may well have written it. Others believe it compares the president to a roabid chimp.'
I'd be really interested to know what other people think.
Sunday, 15 February 2009
Quit monkeying around...
I read with interest that the origin of our very human sense of morality is not something handed down by God as in the Ten Commandments, but in something much more mundane and organic.
According to the study done on primates by Professor Frans de Waal, who led the study at Emory University in Georgia, monkeys and apes can make judgements about fairness, offer sympathy and comfort and help and remember obligations.
This occurred because at some point in the past, probably through a perceived threat from Alpha males who hogged all the food supplies, or because of the Ice Age where food was scarce, cooperation was vital for survival, and this sense of a shared morality came about.
One wonders then about the wise monkeys in the finance sectors e.g. those corporate titans on Wall Street and elsewhere who caused the world recession. Was that why they were so greedy? Because there was no major external threat to their activities and therefore they didn't need to act morally? They didn't need to cooperate other than when it ensured a decent plunder of the financial system?
So are these people corporate monkeys or corporate flunkeys?
According to the study done on primates by Professor Frans de Waal, who led the study at Emory University in Georgia, monkeys and apes can make judgements about fairness, offer sympathy and comfort and help and remember obligations.
This occurred because at some point in the past, probably through a perceived threat from Alpha males who hogged all the food supplies, or because of the Ice Age where food was scarce, cooperation was vital for survival, and this sense of a shared morality came about.
One wonders then about the wise monkeys in the finance sectors e.g. those corporate titans on Wall Street and elsewhere who caused the world recession. Was that why they were so greedy? Because there was no major external threat to their activities and therefore they didn't need to act morally? They didn't need to cooperate other than when it ensured a decent plunder of the financial system?
So are these people corporate monkeys or corporate flunkeys?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)