This comment from JunkkMale originally appeared on Geoff Chambers’ Moderation in Moderation thread. I’ve moved it here, with the comments it attracted, because I think that this is the kind of problem that seriously needs talking about.
The government talks about the importance of individual actions in the fight against climate change, and it is up to each and every one of us whether we buy an electric car, put a solar panel on the roof, or cancel a weekend flight to Rome. Children do not usually have a choice about what they are taught.
This thread has strayed into many areas beyond the main topic, and I for one have enjoyed the quality of debate on display.
One topic I noted was how certain issues are being shared with our kids. To be honest, it was passing interest… until last night.
The subject of ‘who tells, controls’…. especially in terms of authority figures, was rather brought home to me last night.
My kids are revising currently for some serious exams that do count.
One brought in this book, which forms part of the curriculum: AQA GCSE Science Core Higher Ed. Graham Hill. Pub: Hodder Murray
He wanted some advice on a question. From a series including sections such as 3.3, entitled ‘How do humans affect the environment?’ and 3.5 ‘Global Warming’ (other aspects of global warming and the greenhouse effect also covered in Section 6.4, Air Pollution), and 3.6 ‘What can be done to reduce human impact on the environment?. Here it is, as posed, under 6.4, p113:
21. Which of the following three do you think will actually happen? Write a paragraph to explain your answer.
a) We’ll worry and blame ourselves for climate change for thousands of years.
b) Fossil fuels will run out and renewable energy will save us.
c) The oceans will evaporate as the Earth heats up and humans will die.
His face, when I opined that ‘none are very coherent, accurate, or suggest definite answers that are sensible, at least as posed’, was a heartbreaking picture. He just wanted… needed to provide the ‘right’ one as the system demands it to be one of them. Sighing at the ‘will happen’, I therefore attempted to assist based on the hope that the paragraph of explanation would be rewarded if well argued and having a basis in fact and scientific interpretation.Forget a), which is facile and shows a poor grasp of even basic climate science terminology, though maybe does reflect the ‘worry’ mindset being churned out in some quarters.
If you have to choose, choose b) as fossil fuels will run out. They are finite. As to whether ‘renewable’ energy ‘will’ ‘save’ us, that rather depends on how many of ‘us’ there are, and from what we are being ‘saved’. It seems, currently, optimistic to presume renewable sources can meet all current and projected energy demands.
As for c), well, yes, as the sun goes supernova in a few billion years. But humans may be in a different place by then.
THIS… is what they are being served????!
More touching still was his further plea to me NOT to get in touch with the school with my now serious reservations about the way this information was laid out and the questions posed… as he just wanted to pass the unit and not get in trouble.
If this is the state of education, at least in this area (I now wonder about history, etc), I am seriously troubled not only by the course structures, but the mindsets prevalent in our educational establishment.
Are there any teachers out there who would be prepared to comment? anonymously if necessary.
My oldest son took Geography last year in his final year of high school. He had to write a piece on global warming. Being like his father, likes to argue, he decided, with my blessings to write his paper against it. I sent him the e-addy to jonova’s sceptic handbook and away he went. Well either his teacher was a closet sceptic, or more then likely a REAL teacher and graded him on his paper and how it was done. He got an A. There are still some really good teachers out there.
Short answer: yes. In part because it addresses the reality that you also kindly acknowledge, namely the fragile relationships between children, parents, teachers and oversight bodies that go beyond the specifics of the topic.
Longer answer: However… and I am ashamed to say that I don’t know the answer having not until now taken enough interest to find out, is this not something that could/should be addressed by OFSTED?
That said, I have (through some experience) a certain cynicism with what the priority sets are for most ombudsmen, from traffic appeals to PCT complaints to telecoms to the BBC ‘system’. Most seem more concerned with inflicting a wadge of paperwork on hapless victims to make things go away than lead to improvements that serve the public better.
And, as far as I am currently aware, the teacher who passed that book, and question to my boys (if without clarification or comment) may be one of them. My kids are vague (‘Why are you still harping on this Dad?’) on who this question will be marked by and whether ‘we’ will get to see the result/feedback.
But second guessing the second guesses of second guessers seems a short route to madness. Especially in a multiple choice dominated system.
If, sadly, confusing personal view with what ‘is’, and on anything bar the topic in question. Which is, ultimately, the most telling comment of all.
If you are seeking to persuade, you are doing an awesome job. Just… not in the way I presume you intend. Frankly, ‘textbook’.
JunkkMale said;
“If, sadly, confusing personal view with what ‘is’, and on anything bar the topic in question. Which is, ultimately, the most telling comment of all. If you are seeking to persuade, you are doing an awesome job. Just… not in the way I presume you intend. Frankly, ‘textbook’.”
Shhh! We reckon ‘tempterrain’has converted more people to scepticism than even climategate, so let him get on with it… :)
tonyb
Tony N,
The last post of mine which was censored was about [snip]ing education!
[It was about using taxation to curb Co2 emissions which is OT. The word ‘teacher’ was thrown in as camouflage . If you want to argue about moderation then comment on the Admin or Blog Rules threads.TonyN]
To all that are concerned about AGW alarmism in the schools:
We all tend to drift off the main topic in order to pursue our favorite interests (until TonyN nudges us back “on topic”), but I believe this thread has shown that there are many parents (especially in the UK) who are dissatisfied with (or even alarmed at) the way their schools are addressing the highly politicized topic of climate change in the classrooms.
Half-baked hypotheses predicting disastrous consequences (unless we drastically change our life styles now) are being taught as scientific fact. Alternate hypotheses are ignored.
Fear mongering of children is being used as a tool to “raise awareness” of the postulated impending disaster.
“Splattergate” has shown us that there is no tolerance for independent thought, which could lead to dissenting opinion, and this intolerance is being seen in the schools in “real life”, as well.
Almost everyone posting here agrees that the current approach adopted by educators, teachers and school boards (particularly in the UK) is not working satisfactorily and must be changed.
Most also agree on “what” needs to be changed
The open question is still “how?”
Suggestions have been made how to handle this problem without getting the pupils themselves into the middle of the fray (which would result from the “one on one” approach between each concerned parent and his child’s school authorities).
I am sure that a regional (or even better, a nationwide) grouping of “parents for a better education for our children” could apply pressure at the political level on those who are responsible for the problem. It would be important to keep “cranks” out of this grouping and concentrate on the key issues where change is needed (ex. “brainwashing” and “fear mongering”), rather than ending up with a mile-long laundry list of complaints.
Do such organizations already exist in the UK?
If so, can they be strengthened to end up with a “political lobby group” that is strong enough to outweigh the powerful (economic, financial, industrial, socio-political and environmental) “AGW lobby groups” that are already out there?
The key underlying problem is political.
Politicians must begin to “feel the heat” (before they will do anything). If it begins to feel like a “change in direction of the prevailing wind” to politicians, there may even be one or some who are politically astute (and courageous) enough to take up the cudgel as the champion(s) for this new cause.
Could this be a way?
Any specific ideas?
(I’m a bit far removed, being in Switzerland, but I’m sure many of you have concrete ideas on this.)
Max
http://www.cre.org.uk/
The Campaign for Real Education was formed in 1987 to press for higher standards and more parental choice in state education. It is not affiliated to any political party and is funded entirely by voluntary donations.
I wonder if there is any mileage for us in this group? I know nothing about them, except from a quick look at the website. The section on geography http://www.cre.org.uk/docs/geography.html seems sensible re the teaching of environmental issues.
:) Followed, with some sweet irony, by the sound of a point being neatly confirmed.
JunkkMale,
I think that complaining to the school is the wrong thing to do. This is a political decision and taking a complaint to the school risks causing embarrassment for your child with other possible negative effects. Even though it will not change anything, I would still write to local education boards, MPs and so on, just so that your dissatisfaction is registered somewhere. Most likely you will get a cut and paste response but yopu might be lucky and find someone to champion your cause.
None of this will change anything for your children though. As far as I can see you have a limited number of options- you can either pay for a private education, or for tutoring, or you can do what you can yourself by discussing everything with your child and showing alternative views, more advanced work, and encouraging reading and independent thought. Really it is down to you to do something about this because the educational and political establishment is not interested in what you want for your child. They are interested in what they want.
Junnkmale
I’ve finally found a site which is relevant, British, live (ie has recent comments) and seems to encourage lively discussion, here
http://learningnet.co.uk/geoforum/
You could register and possibly start a thread there
Messenger
The Campaign for Real Education’s site seems to get updated twice a year. Though their comments on the geography syllabus (from several years ago, I think) look extremely sensible
Campaign for Real Education sounds like a start.
But how about organizing a more active lobby group, specifically opposed to fear-mongering and negative brainwashing in schools, such as:
SANITY – Sack All Negative Instructors Traumatizing Youths
PRESSURE – Parents Reprimanding Educators Scaring Schoolchildren Using Ruse of Environmentalism
Agreed and accepted. No benefits; lots of negatives.
Well, I have just had a follow-up contact from my MP’s researcher. Honestly, I don’t want, yet, to get as ‘heavy’ as even dissatisfaction, but certainly am in the mood for some decent explanations or justifications, as the very few attempted here have not been relevant or laughably inept. I have suggested there is some interest beyond my own efforts.
Many tx. ‘ve given it a gander. Ironically, one of the first posts on the general thread caught my eye as it refers to ‘AQA’. Not on a topic relevant to this discussion, but either a coincidence or it is a pervasive entity in the educational community.
As to starting a thread, it seems highly specialised for those well bedded within the educational community, and while a well-meaning innocent can prove refreshing, the potential for a backfire could be huge if my concerns are seen as an attack as opposed to an appeal for explanation.
Junnkmale #110
About the 4th page of threads, I found one titled “climate” or the like. Only four comments if I remember, but one cynical one about a photo of London underwater being a “climate change fashion statement”. You could start with a comment on the open thread wondering if it’s ok for a parent to voice his concern directly to the professionals, and see what reaction you get. Of course, any of us are free to do the same, but I think it would be only right for all of us to hold our fire and let you decide.
I wondered at the lack of threads on climate. Self-censorship? Then I thought: maybe they’re fed up with the subject, feel they get pressured from all sides, and just don’t talk about it much in public, the way most of us don’t discuss religion
Fair do’s. I feel a bit like Wellington’s Forlorn Hope, mind!
It won’t happen immediately, as I do prefer to get a ‘feel’ for a site before leaping in. Not angelic; just professional courtesy.
The irony is that, of all things, I would wish it were not this topic that got me knocked so offside. I am an enviro-type! Just.. I like my science well sorted (as opposed to Milibandesque ‘settled’, which kicked me waaay offside) and debate fields of play level.
Now I am wondering just what the heck lurks in other revision guides on even more subjective topics!
I recall back in the 70’s, as a Civ Eng at Kings, ending up in a very touchy feely group ‘discussing’ the ‘Scientist at War’ on the topic of the dropping of the atom bomb.
Exciting stuff, but didn’t end well as I was not toeing the Prof’s, or group line.
What do you plan to do about your child’s education (hope you don’t mind me asking)? Can you discuss this with him or would that be counter productive?
Before presuming to respond, may I confirm to whom this question is directed?
If me, apologies but a reply will not be until tomorrow… two hungry boys to feed!
The underlying problem is that schools and the schools syllabus are being used for political propaganda.
The “climate change” scare is just one example out of many.
For me the approach is to campaign against all propaganda in schools. I don’t want the current set of propaganda replaced with my approved propaganda – I want it replaced with proper objective teaching.
This will help to stop it turning into a big school-gate argument about whether CC is true or false. The key is that endless promotion of the subject is propaganda.
The question was directed to you JunkkMale. As a parent myself I am interested in how people deal with this problem.
In our (wife a full partner in all this) case it is children as we have twin boys. Opportunity and challenge in equal measure.
We could have afforded private, but family circumstances (first a dying Dad and then, for the last 13 years, a dementia stricken Mum that has pretty much decided our location) brought us to a bucolic idyl in the boonies with few options.
As it happened the only state secondary in the area had/has a top reputation (local parents, OFSTED ratings, Uni entry) and is a 10 minute walk away.
Time passed, friendships got forged, parent-teacher evenings were held and were very encouraging.
And we were seduced into hearing and seeing what we wanted. Frankly, as ‘low-pressure’ parents, so long as the boys were bright and looked forward to going school we were happy.
The additional interest has kicked in only in the last few months, as serious exams that count to career options loom on the horizon.
I have moaned about horrible penmanship, dire spelling and slopping maths logic, but so long as a series of professionals have said they are happy and the boys are ‘on track’ I was happy enough. I look back at my reports at their age and things were none too stellar either.
There was also the convenient delusion that what was taught in the ‘old’ days is so different now it’s no wonder ‘we’ are unfamiliar with so much… ‘best to leave it to the pros’.
Perhaps, accidently, that IS still the best approach… if the cynical view is that all that matters is to play the system and ‘success’ is passing exams, and exam passing is not through the ‘right’ answer or even well reasoned methodology, but by rote learning of ‘accepted’ views and/or guessing what examiners (and those who have ‘guided’ them) want to hear.
My dilemma is that I was confronted, purely coincidentally, by a clearly awful ‘question set’, on a topic I do know a fair bit about, that at best was sloppy in posing, but at worst also suggested an umbrella agenda being imposed that has piqued fears I already have over unwarranted meddling on social issues by an out of control and poorly accountable politico-media ‘establishment’ with freedom of speech and democratic process being things to circumvent and suppress rather than celebrate and encourage.
Was this just bad luck or poor timing… coincidence? The book went back (another story) before I had a chance to scope further… but possibly get further embroiled and stir up things within the family and beyond that which, by now, would serve no one well.
I am looking on the table at a set of revision books on other topics. Do I wade through them all? Do I have the time? What would I do if in that history of WW2 some actions by Hitler or Stalin or Churchill or Truman are used to project the authors’ evidently ‘keenly held’ social viewpoints?
I fear all I have done is opened a can of worms, and a vast one that.
But ignorance is not bliss.
To answer your final question we are discussing this with them, but softly softly. Those teen antennae are well attuned to a parent on a mission, especially if it will serve them poorly.
I had relied on them bringing stuff to me more than going to them and demanding involvement. And look what happened! They had a question they thought I was qualified to provide an answer on… and it all went pear-shaped as I got distracted by the back story.
Actually I am hopeful that this may have worked out positively. As a family we have resolved that ‘specific’ case, with the compromise discussed above of doing what is necessary to play the system, backed by a healthy cynicism and desire to look around further to try and ensure the brain is ticking over.
I am not too thrilled by that fudge, as it means more work, carrying competing information and then having to not just call it up but then assess which is ‘better’ to apply merely to satisfy a clearly compromised educational system.
Which is why I will be very interested in what my MP has to say. For a start.
I am hoping I can support my boys in prevailing through school to Uni, to a productive and stimulating set of careers.
Maybe, in complement, I can also do a few things (with luck in concert with like-minded folk) to ensure the routes they are guided down by educational professionals and their political masters do not stray into areas that seem irrelevant or destructive to objective information sharing, a capacity to think creatively, and an encouraged ability to argue sensibly.
A big ask, TBH, with a 4 year window on this family’s doorstep.
Hence I am pondering much more radical options. My Mother is in the last stages of her dementia and life (the state’s competence in this arena also being challenged I might add). That obligation will soon pass. And hence our need to be constrained by location. However, yanking the boys out of a school and from friends they have shared their whole lives may be even more counter-productive.
Especially if, as I suspect, to get them into a school that does deliver an education as one would wish, whilst still meeting the demands of a corrupted system, may be a bit of a shock at their ages and stages.
There is talk of ‘An inconvenient truth’ being shown in Australian schools.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/mps-divided-on-educational-value-of-an-inconvenient-truth-20101027-17326.html
Does anyone know from first hand experience wth their own children whether this is now being routinely shown in British schools, if so are the sceptics explanatory notes being distributed at the same time?
tonyb
Jack Hughes,
It may surprise you to learn that I do agree with your statement: “The underlying problem is that schools and the schools syllabus are being used for political propaganda”
I’d add religious propaganda too. And if anyone has any family connections to places like Northern Ireland then they’ll know that the two can be closely linked. But how do we stamp it out? For instance, I do believe that in the UK, and in Australia too, it’s still not unusual for children to be segregated according to their family background. I can put up with having to sing a few hymns if the need arises and stand for National anthems etc , even “God Save the Queen”, which has more than a few, and more than just minor non-acceptable political phrases. “And like a torrent rush, Rebellious Scots to crush” ???
But what shouldn’t be acceptable, to anyone, is the segregation of children according to their family religion. The acceptance of the notion that children of different backgrounds can’t sit in the same classroom, even if they are only learning about climate science, and for children to grow up viewing that situation as the norm, has got to be the worst of all forms of political propaganda.
The next worst has got to be separation and segregation of children according to social class. Is that political or what?
PeterM, Jack Hughes
It looks like we (almost) have a “consensus” here.
I agree with you both that schools “are being used for political propaganda” and that this is a problem.
The propaganda we see here in Switzerland is less religious, as you mention, Peter, although “religion” is still an optional public school subject in some cantons.
Although there were some very cruel and bloody wars here in Switzerland between Catholics and Protestants, that has been a few hundred years ago (unlike in Northern Ireland), and children of both faiths (plus the Jewish faith) attend classes together. There is no “segregation according to family religion”. More recently, we have had an influx of immigrants from Muslim countries (Bosnia, Kosovo, Turkey, etc.). These have a harder time “integrating” into the Swiss-European “value system”, and many (adults) resist this integration stubbornly. There are isolated cases, where Sharia Law is being practiced in Muslim communities, but this is not nearly as common here as it is, for example, in Germany or France.
So here it is not so much “religious propaganda”, to which our pupils are exposed as you mention, Peter. It is more “socio-political propaganda”, with which they are being indoctrinated. AGW-brainwashing is not nearly as big an issue as it appears to be in British schools (based on this thread), but there are cases where children are being frightened by over-zealous teachers, in the misguided belief that they must make their pupils “aware” of the “impending disaster” (presumably so that they can make their parents “aware” and thereby support “action”).
This politically motivated fear mongering of impressionable school children is unacceptable and is not tolerated here, in general.
But there is a creeping emphasis away from teaching the basics (math, science, history, literature, language, etc.) plus rational, deductive thinking and more into indoctrination in politically correct socio-political concepts. Many educators fear that this trend is resulting in the “dumbing down” of our children and young adults, as they are not being taught to think for themselves, rationally and skeptically.
The fact that AGW fear mongering in schools is less prevalent here than, for example, in the UK, possibly stems from the fact that we do not have a “majority” government (as you do in the UK or Australia), but rather a parliament (plus a seven-member executive) composed of members of several parties. So the “party line” of one party (or one political leader, such as Gordon Brown at the time) cannot easily become the “party line” of the government (unless it is supported by a majority in the parliament).
A government-sponsored fear campaign, such as the UK “fairy tale” ad, is unthinkable here for that reason.
Max
This is being shown in American schools……
The Story of Stuff
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GorqroigqM
Brute
Just looked at your “Stuff” youtube.
Pretty dismal “stuff”.
Max
The story of stuff is such blatant and one sided propaganda that I would be embarrassed to show it to children.
JunkkMale
“Perhaps, accidently, that IS still the best approach… if the cynical view is that all that matters is to play the system and ’success’ is passing exams, and exam passing is not through the ‘right’ answer or even well reasoned methodology, but by rote learning of ‘accepted’ views and/or guessing what examiners (and those who have ‘guided’ them) want to hear.”
I certainly think this is part of the answer. But unless you want your children to merely function in the current system without realising what it is and what they have not received from it you have to give them more somehow. You are doing it by talking to them and making them aware of other options which I would agree is a viable method for teenagers. If I could afford it though I think I would move schools and pay for top quality teaching at A level or IB. A difficult decision I agree.