Jack's Newswatch

School board officials can be extremely arrogant and dismissive when they want to be on any number of issues and Ontario’s Simcoe County School Board (located north of Toronto in the Barrie area) appears to be no exception. 

Their claim?  That even when it appears radiation from Internet wireless transmitters is making some kids sick, unless every single school in their board goes wireless, they are not taking advantage of the new world of 21st century learning.   

Talk about spin and an exaggerated statement! It is not wireless that brings schools, teachers and children into the world of 21st century learning — it is the Internet. And, being hardwired, while it may be inconvenient to have wires everywhere,  is just as effective to that learning because the key is accessing the Internet, not “how” one accesses it.

Popularity: 1% [?]

This may come as a surprise to many of my regular readers, but I am actually in favour of Ontario’s new health and physical education curriculum (H/T Jack) and hope that Ontario PC Leader Tim Hudak does not come out against it. True, earlier in the spring of 2010, Hudak saw the McGuinty Liberals using the sex education component as a political wedge issue, but any disagreement should just be about at what age the various topics are introduced, not the curriculum itself.

So, yes, I am in favour of the new health and physical education curriculum because the reality is, if the schools don’t teach about such issues as proper eating habits and the dangers of the Internet, drugs, alcohol and gambling, far too many kids simply won’t learn about them. Why? Because not all parents are good parents and not all parents realize they should be talking about those topics. And, no amount of sugar coating that fact is going to change it. Been there and done that and know exactly why such a curriculum is needed.

Popularity: 1% [?]

I would highly recommend an article by Michael Knox Beran entitled “Palin Populism,” in which he talks about what Governor Sarah Palin has to deal with from the educated elites and their obsession (he refers to it as a fetish) that everyone in positions of importance have a upper level university degree.

Talk about elites, or perhaps the better word would be “snobs” (h/t Lee). Think about the interview with Katie Couric during the 2008 U.S. election campaign and you will know what I mean.  Palin was ambushed. The underlying message then and the message that continues to this day: Sarah Palin is folksy, but not too bright because she doesn’t have a master’s or Ph.D university degree from a “certain” university. Therefore, she can’t be President.

Hogwash is all I can say. She did get an undergraduate degree in 1987 in  communications and journalism (with a minor in politics) from the University of Idaho.  However, whether a university education is in communications or the hard sciences, from Idaho or Harvard,  does not make you any more intelligent. It simply builds on natural abilities. It can also provide the skills you need for employment, such as teaching, journalism or pharmacy, or those we used to say learned “on the job,” such as business administration. 

However, having been on both sides of the degree fence, as it were, I can definitely say that, while the skills you learn in higher education can be important, they are not necessarily the common sense and decision-making skills you would need to be a political leader. In fact, you wouldn’t need any degrees at all to acquire those skills.

I went into the job market in the early 1960′s with a grade 12 graduation diploma, combined with a lot of guts, determination and common sense. I worked my way up in jobs but always knew, deep down, that there was a glass ceiling for anyone, male or female, who did not have that special “piece of paper” – a university degree. So, later as a mature student, with the financial and moral support of my husband and children, I went back to school, eventually becoming a teacher. Then, in mid life, I went on to finish a Ph.D in Education and teach university.

My point in mentioning my own story is not to pat myself on my back, but to tell readers that, in spite of all my “higher education,” I am still the same gutsy determined person I was in the mid to late 1960′s. The only difference now is that I know how to conceptualize, research and write in a particular context — much as many people get through advanced experience in a trade or creative endeavour like being a professional celtic dancer.

However, Governor Palin cannot have it both ways. While I agree she is far too often minimized by the mainstream media and the Ivy League establishment, she can fall into the same judgmental mindset herself.  

For example, if Knox Beran is correct in the way he quotes her, he writes: “Governor Palin, in contrasting ‘American values’ with the aspirations of ‘elite education,’ warns us of the arrogance — and the moral ‘spinelessness’ — that today’s higher learning too often fosters.”

In other words, by warning us “that today’s higher learning too often fosters arrogance and spinelessness,” Palin has a tendency to use the same type of “anti” language that the Ivy League ”snobs” use to judge and dismiss her. 

In fact, I read all the time in the blogosphere about how stupid and lacking in common sense people are who have Ph.D’s — as though we were all the same.  True, I have known my share of people without common sense. Some had Ph.D’s, some did not.  The point is, that “broad stroke” attitude is just as unfair as the reverse.

In any event, Governor Palin’s best defence against those who would minimize her and put her down is to just be herself — pretty much as she always is. I mean, she continues “to be out there“ in spite of all the petty and personal attacks. Clearly, she has what it takes to be President with or without an advanced Ivy League degree.

Note: Revised slightly after publishing.

Update: As I mentioned in a comment to Lee, the one thing I didn’t have room to write about was the ridiculous pecking order even for those who do have master’s or doctoral degrees. It starts with undergraduate degrees. Journalism, communications and believe it or not, youth and child studies are at the very bottom. Physics and chemistry are at the top. It’s the same at the Master’s and Doctoral level. I have been ridiculed by those in the hard sciences for my “Mickey Mouse” Ph.D in education.

Then, the pecking order continues with regard to where you graduated from. My first two degrees were from Brock University which is less than Queens or U. of T. However, because my Ph.D is from U of T., I’m okay. (I say that with tongue in cheek.) It’s all so very silly.

Then, of course, there are the people who don’t have a degree at all. I am reminded of how John Snobelen was treated by the Ontario teachers’ unions when he was Ontario’s Education Minister. The MPP I worked for was his Parliamentary Assistant so I saw how he operated. He was brilliant. A grade 11 drop out, he was an entrepreneur and a self-made millionaire. In other words, he didn’t need any degrees at all.

Yet, the snobbery or degree fetish Knox Beran talks about is what he had to deal with. Seems to be human nature. In effect then, if someone has a degree, any degree from an Ivy League university, they are basically set for life — whether or not they have any common sense or not.

Popularity: 8% [?]