Do “They” Even Belong In Schools?

The hardest part of spending so much time with children that have special needs, in a school setting, was people asking me if “those” children should be there at all.

“Aren’t the special needs kids holding the normal kids back?”

“Are they really getting anything from the classes anyway?”

“Wouldn’t they be more comfortable in special classes, or schools?”

To start with, you might notice that I make the attempt to say “children WITH special needs” and not “special needs children”. It is a slight difference, but an important one. When we talk about people with special needs we use their “label” as their identity. We might not mean to, but let’s say we are introducing someone who has Autism. We usually say something like, “This is George. He is Autistic.” but that isn’t who he is, it’s a condition he has. Think about it a different way. I had a brain tumor, and no one said, “This is Philip, he is a brain tumor.” The brain tumor wasn’t who I was; it was something that I had to deal with. It may seem like a minor point, but it does play into how we see people with special needs now, and how we saw them before.

I am sure most people would assume that back in the time when there was no real understanding of mental, or physical, differences, people that had special needs were usually left to die. If the disability came later in life, the poor people were beaten, been tested on, burned at the stake, and many other horrors. In the Second World War things weren’t much better. People that weren’t “perfect” were experimented on, or just right out killed. Sadly we don’t even have to look back that far to see People who were deemed “feeble minded”, or “morally defective”, treated like, less than, dirt.

For the majority of the 20th century people who had special needs were shoved into institutions. Reports came out of those places of mental and physical abuse. Some said that if a staff didn’t like you they would beat you, almost drown you, humiliated, and made to eat their own vomit. Their letters were censored, and more. I always thought those were such a long time ago, but in reality, persons with special needs were treated horribly and segregated from the community until the late 70’s. It wasn’t until the 80’s that things started to change. People with special needs were finally starting to be allowed into regular school (although they were in the school, they were not always part of the school, even into the 90’s). Closing in on the year 2000, society started to shift to a point when some people started to see “special needs people” as people, not just a label. Hence the difference in “George IS autistic”, and “George Has Autism”. We, as a society, are still learning to put the person first and the challenges secondary.

Since the concept of looking at people that have special needs as actually people is fairly new, it is no wonder the questions of whether “those people” belong in a regular classroom continues. I am going to start this portion with the question, “Do they really get anything out of being in “our kid’s” classroom?”  Something we have known for decades is that children learn from each other. They learn limits, by watching others get hurt. They learn how to behave from their peers, almost as much as from family. They challenge each other academically. If that is how people learn, why would it be any different for children that happen to have extra needs?  When placed in an asylum, with other people that have difficulties in multiple areas, the children learn from each other.  There is little to no emotional or academic growth when put in a situation like that.  When put in a class with “regular” children and they learn off those children. They learn socially acceptable behaviour, physical abilities, and are challenged academically. I have talked to some people from other countries that still don’t embrace people with special needs, as people, and they are amazed at how “high functioning” some of our children are.  The people I have talked to were amazed that “our children”, with the same labels, are able to do things they thought possible for “those children/adults”.  Children that have special needs do benefit A LOT from being in a regular school, just like any other child benefits from being with peers who have a wide range of abilities. Amazing what can happen when we treat each other like people, isn’t it?

What about all the other kids? What do they get out of this deal? Something even us adults need to learn is to try to look at the person first. Children that are in the same class as someone who has special needs get to learn how to find things that can be done, and push through things that are hard to do, together. Some of the children I worked with (I call them “my kids”) had severe physical and mental disabilities, but they were well liked by every student that came in contact with them. The children I worked with were limited, and some couldn’t even talk, or eat their own food. We didn’t shy away from talking to the other children about those difficulties, why they had them, and what we had to do to accommodate them, but we also emphasised what my kids could do. They could recognise people’s voices. They had favorite pastimes. They could smile, frown and cry. We, kids and adults included, learn from children that historically were tossed aside as a waste of space. We learned what it looked like to fail at a “simple” task, but to keep trying, and celebrate even the small victories. We learned that, even when faced with pain and discomfort you could still smile, and laugh. We learned how to actually take the time to get to know someone, no matter what language they spoke (if they could speak at all), what color their skin, or what their abilities. We learned to put others first, on occasion.  We learned to look at what a person can do, and find some common ground.

Socially, there are huge benefits to having someone you have to work to get to know, but are the regular kids academically suffering by having this presence in the class that is so far behind in some, or all area(s)?  In the Education system we know that there are different types of learners. We have auditory learners, who learn by listening to lessons and repeating them out loud. Visual learners crave visual cues. Visual learners often work best with pictures, multimedia presentations, or organising information on paper. Finally Tactile learners need to move. A tactile learner is a multitasker, they like hands on lessons, acting out information. All of these learning styles fit in perfect with a full inclusion classroom. I liked to get other students in the class my child’s class to help teach academics to my student. The visual learners would draw pictures, use flash cards, or other media to present the information they are learning to my student. An auditory learner would describe the lesson to my student; they had a chance to read information out loud so they and my student could learn. The tactile learner would help move my student’s hands around tactile media; they had the opportunity to move around while they taught. All of these different types of learner got to present information to my kid in a way that they best learn in; reinforcing the lesson even more than if they were working on their own. To add to the benefit, they not only were working with my kid, but I was sitting right there to help out on difficult areas, or correct misinformation. My child was learning from these students, and they were getting extra two on one time with an educator that they otherwise wouldn’t get.

Having children with special needs in a classroom is an amazing thing for everyone concerned. The students that have special needs get to learn social, emotional, skills from the “regular” kids, and the “regular” kids get to learn about compassion, equality, how to find similarities and work through differences. The “regular” kids get the added bonus of teaching another person using a learning style that they understand best, while getting extra educational assistance. To be honest I wonder if the “regular” kids actually get more out of having these children with extra needs in their classroom.

I have mostly been talking about children with physical or cognitive impairments, but children with mental health and violent tendencies get the same benefit as the other children with special needs. Children in a class with a child that has a mental health issue learn how to read body language really well (a trait that will serve them well as they enter the work force), how to adapt to changing situations, and how to see deeper than the outward actions of a person and find the reason for the actions.

The issue isn’t, should these kids be in a regular school, but why are there so many cutbacks to the educational system that is pushing us backward, toward segregation. There is less consideration for children with special needs, within the government, forcing the very students that are helping others learn, while learning themselves, back into the corner to be in the school but not part of it.  It’s sad, really. Over a century to get to where we are, with regards to inclusion, and now we are slipping backward. There are difficulties and large costs to include children with special needs into the classroom, but I firmly believe that the gain far outweighs the cost, both socially and academically on both sides.

References:

http://collegequarterly.ca/2005-vol08-num01-winter/schlifer.html

http://www.worldofinclusion.com/res/altogether/AltogetherBetter.pdf

http://www.life.arizona.edu/docs/ra-section/ability-hist.pdf

http://www.newstatesman.com/society/2010/12/disabled-children-british

Can’t Lose Even If You Tried

My kids are crazy when they play together. They have races and everything they do is either a win or not a win. I didn’t teach them that. I didn’t need to. It’s not just my kids that are all about competition. Their school friends also try to do things faster, better, further than all the other kids, but when it comes to schools and sports events people try to get rid of winners and losers all together. The funny part is that you know every kid there is keeping track of some part of the game. They may not get credit for the win, but they sure will know in their heads if they won or lost.

The years I worked in the schools, the more the school tried to squash competition the more the kids acted out on the playground. There were fights, and extra physical sports being played at recess and lunch. I also noticed that kids started having a hard time coping with the times they failed to keep up with their friends on the playground, didn’t catch that football, or when another team wins in one of their games.

We seem to be coddling our kids to much. We have been too careful trying to keep our kids from getting their feelings hurt; we ended up forgetting to teach them how to deal with not being the best at something. What happens to the kids when they get into the competitive job search, once they get out of school?

I firmly believe in completion, I just think we need a new way to look at what makes a winner. One school I worked at had constant fights during and after school. A good chunk of children we had in our schools were refugees from waring nations, and they did not like being close to “their” enemy. With some new systems for dealing with difficult situations, and helping those with PTSD, seemed to really be helping. But there was something missing so, some co-workers and I came up with a plan to allow kids to learn about winning and losing, while changing the way kids looked at competition. Within a couple of weeks fights on the playground, including racially driven fights, dropped significantly.  We were able to teach the kids a new way to look at winning, and a new way to look at each other.

The first thing we did was pick a sport(s) that no one could, or would, turn down. In our school basketball was the go to sport, so we started there (then we moved to dodgeball, football, and even yoga). Just a sport wouldn’t get kids to sign up for our tournament; we needed to come up with a reward for the winners. Our choice was a chance to play against the teachers, and principle in front of anyone in the school that wanted to watch. Then it was time to work out the rules and point system.

Every school has a favorite staff member. In our school it was one of our Educational Assistant (staff that assists students with special needs in the classroom). We used him to promote our tournament, and explain the rules. First of all WE choose who is in what team, they don’t even get to request someone to be on, or off, their team. We also made sure that our children with special needs signed up (that includes children who can’t move without assistance, to those students that have sever behaviour issues). Being able to control who was on what team we could make sure teams were evenly matched for a win. We also had the choice to put people that didn’t like each other, for whatever reason, on the same team. Originally the kids were concerned when they saw our list, but they all stuck with it.

Our point system was simple, and told to the kids upfront. First off we pick the teams (I already mentioned that). Second we only were working with our grade 4-6 kids, our grade 7 students signed up to referee the games and keep track of the points each team got (I’ll explain why we did that latter). The points were given out for showing up to play with your team, unless you were absent from school. A second point for teamwork; every person on your team HAS to touch the ball. A third point was given for sportsmanship; Show respect for the other team no matter what. A forth point was given for winning the game. These rules applied during the game, and for the rest of the school day. Teams could lose points if even one person was seen mocking other team mates, or getting in to fights with anyone. We had more kids sign up than we thought there would be, and all of them wanted to win.

The grade 7s didn’t get to participate in the playing of the game because we thought they would be old enough to handle responsibility that they may not have had before. They ran the games (we had too much fun jumping in and out of games, so we left our job to the kids. lol), gave us the points sheets, and the reason why they gave points the way they did. They were responsible for keeping an eye on the lower grades to make sure they didn’t lose points out on the playground, in the classroom, or after school.  They may not have played in the sport, but they got to learn a new way to play, and a new way to look at winning.

That first game went the way we thought it would. Talented kids tended to take the majority of the shots, got frustrated with the slower players, and were rude to the other team. We posted scores after every game, since we had so many teams we printed off the standings once a week. When the kids saw the rankings for the first time, and saw where they got point and were they lost points, they were shocked. A large group of the teams that won the game were at the bottom of the point’s board. They won the game, but that only gave them one point. Some of the teams that didn’t win a game were a head of the “winners” by a lot. The kids forgot one thing….Math. Most of the points we dealt out were for respect of everyone. There were three points just for respecting your team, your opposition, and everyone else in the school. It was then that the kids put two and two together and realized they really could win, even if they didn’t win. Fights on the playground were, more often, being stopped, not by a teacher or supervisor, but by the teammates that wanted to win. A person’s race became obsolete. The goal was to win. They were competing for a prize that only one team (occasionally two) got to win. They were competing with each other, not against each other anymore.

As the weeks progressed teams started working together, giving chances to children that otherwise would have no hope of playing a sport. The child I worked with had sever cerebral palsy and couldn’t move his arms or legs with much purpose. The children on his team gave him the ball often, and the other team would back up and cheer him on. They would give him a chance to pass the ball to his team by himself. It wasn’t out of pity that they stepped back; it was honest to goodness respect. They treated him like anyone else. They adapted to his abilities, and enjoyed seeing him smile as he pushed the ball off his lap to a friend. It wasn’t just the kid I was working with that got that kind of respect from the other children. The dynamics of the older grades changed. The kids started treating each other like people. Even in between tournaments, when there was nothing to win or lose, people became friends with others that they would have otherwise looked twice at.

The game wasn’t all lovey dovey. If there was a strong player that had the ball, or any fully able body child that knew how to play the game, the other team would go all out trying to win and take down the opposition. They loved the win, and learned from loss..

Was our tournament responsible for all the good that happened at that school? No, I don’t think so, but we were an important piece of a bigger system. There were a lot of things that changed at our school in that year, but I do believe without competition, and changing what winning actually means, the other methods we used would only go so far.

Awards were given in front of the entire school. Not all the players got a prize, but the ones that didn’t get a prize didn’t seem upset by it. Hopefully those kids took what they learned with them, and applied it to their entire life, but I’ll probably never know that. What I do know is that for those years they got to play or referee, there was a change in them and everyone became equal.

The New School Year Shuffle

Another school year has begun. Kids are back in their old classes and waiting for the next week when they get to go into their new classes for the year. I have heard parents complain that this week is a waste of every ones time, since the kids are in a circling pattern waiting for the “real” school year to start. I have even heard some parents’ question why they don’t just start school next week, or actually get kids into their new classes and start doing something productive right away.

Even if the kids aren’t learning anything in that first week…which they are…. That week being in their old class is essential for the entire school year, and class room dynamics. Teachers can work endlessly preparing for the next year, even have classes picked out for each and every kid at the beginning of the summer. They know what kids would thrive with another child, and what children would raise hell if put together. Problem is, until those warm little butts hit the chairs, the school has no actual idea how many kids are going to be in the school.

Over the course of the summer, many things can happen. Kids will move away, others will move to town, some will be pulled for home schooling, while others will change schools. In a perfect world the teachers, and school boards, would know all of this at the end of the year, but often registration will happen at the last second, or during summer when the schools aren’t in session. Some parents just don’t think about telling the schools when they are leaving town. So we come to the first week of school, and the number game begins.

The schools need to figure out how many students are actually going to be there (This year I heard of one school that had 20 unregistered students show up on the first day of school) Once they know that, they have to figure out what student goes into what classroom, because now we have new kids and lack of old kids to work around. Once the numbers are counted, the school board determines how many teachers need to be in each school. That means shuffling teachers around. If there aren’t enough students in a school, some teachers will need to be transferred out, or put back on the “teacher on call” list. If there are too many children, teachers will need to be hired, or shuffled from other schools.  Can you imagine that first week for teachers. The teacher with lowest sonority at a school waits and watches to see if there are enough students to fill their class, while others stare patiently at the job postings to see if there are any new full time jobs available.

It is the same for the staff that work with children with special needs (Educational Assistant, Teacher Assistant, Special Education Assistant, or whatever your district calls it). Some children will gain a designation, based on multiple factors, and some children will lose their designation. A child’s designation gives them a percentage of extra support time needed to help them succeed. For some children, the designation just mean they get help by going to a resource teacher every once in a while. For other children they could have funding for a “fulltime” designated Assistant. Others will lose that extra help, usually by the governments constantly changing definition of what counts as Special Needs, and how much help the children, supposedly, need (this is on a sweeping scale and has no actual bearing on each, actual, child’s needs. Nor does it mean that child actually gets their designated help since other children also need support, designation or not).

Special needs children, throw another wrench in the cogs of the number game. The teachers have tried to negotiate what a class should look like. They talk about the max amount of “regular” children that are allowed in each class, and how that will change when children with special needs are also allowed in the class, in an attempt to be fair to everyone and give them the best education they can. Let me make something perfectly clear here. When I am talking about children with special needs I am talking about everything from children that have difficulties in only one subject, all the way to the child that can’t move or eat. There is a full gambit of children in the middle of that mix: Children with violence issues, children that are dyslexic, children that run away a lot, children that are dying from a medical condition but are able to be in a regular classroom, children that are blind, hearing impaired…. (The reason children that have special needs are so important to have in a regular classroom will come in a different post)

With all that to do, it is amazing that they get that all done in one week.  So give it up for teachers. They don’t have an easy job during the beginning, middle, and end of the year.

Death Is Disturbing

A recent thread that showed up on my Facebook got me thinking about death. The conversation circled around some article that showed a dead child as a header. I don’t know what article or picture was used, and it doesn’t really matter. The point was, people were upset by the sight of this dead child, and offended that the picture was used without any warning of graphic content, or that Facebook didn’t shut the image down right away. News sights always put up a warning before you can view any images that could be deemed inappropriate for all audiences, but social media has no such warning. But why, in a world of video games, and movies that glorify death, do we take objection to yet another picture of a dead person up there for the world to see.  I can think of a few different reasons.

To understand people’s reaction to death I was always taught that psychologically we are OK with an older man’s dead body. We are more affected by the death of a woman. The death of a child is hard to handle for even the best at compartmentalising. The differences between sexes I don’t understand as much, but the child is much easier to explain. With a child there is more than just a loss of life. There is a loss of potential, of first experiences. A child is the future of the human race, as corny as that may sound in any other conversation. Putting a child’s body on display is taking the worst part of death and shoving in “our” faces.

There is something else about death that we don’t often see, unless we are part of the medical community, or forensic officers/techs. In the movies, and video games, death is big, it’s bloody (unless you turn down the blood level on the computer games) and it takes time. The truth about death is that it is silent, often devoid of any gore or action. Death happens in the blink of an eye. We are used to seeing the type of death that is less uncomfortable. No matter how good an actor or makeup crew may be, it is impossible to take the life out of a person. I call it a soul, others call it a spirit and some just say it is neurons firing, but it is there inside a person, and you can tell. It’s the subtlety of death that is the most disturbing.

Blood splattered all over a room is gross and might make some people upset. A body under a blanket is a little more disturbing than just blood. But if you do get a look at an actual body it can rock most people’s emotions, but the face…. Well the face is something different all together. The face is where the subtlety happens. The body is just a bag of flesh, bone, and skin, but when you look at a face you see the person behind the skin. In a picture, I find, you can see where that person once was, and aren’t anymore.

You can see it as it happens as well. There have been, more than there should be, videos of police shootings on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and anywhere else someone could find to post a video of death. That is where the lack of blood really comes into play. Normally we would expect to see a puff of blood or something, but all we get is a moving body stop dead in its tracks and fall.  When a boxer gets knocked down cold you can tell that he is under, but he is still in there. A man gets tazed and goes down, but normally we can still see a life in there.

I love a quote from the TV Series House. “There’s no such thing! Our bodies break down, sometimes when we’re 90, sometimes before we’re even born, but it always happens and there’s never any dignity in it! I don’t care if you can walk, see, wipe your own ass… it’s always ugly – ALWAYS! You can live with dignity; you can’t die with it!”   Death can be messy. Death can be unfair. When it all comes down to it, there is no dignity in death, but when you’re dead you wouldn’t care about the aftermath (as far as bodily secretions, smell, and other unpleasant things). People who use death to get “likes”, “shares”, “re-tweets” and all other such things are not living with dignity. News companies that use a dead body to boost sales are not working with dignity (or at least they are in a moral, very, very gray area)

Real death is much creepier than the fake stuff. It takes a special person to deal with that time and time again, and it is really sad when it is sold for money or something stupider, 1000000 likes, or 5 min of fame.

Top Ten Pet Peeves

top ten pet peeves.

1)actors/directors: stop make people just randomly push buttons when playing a video game…its not how ANY game works. it just makes them look stupid

2) Roundabouts in Canada (more specifically BC): the joy of the single lane round about is that you no longer need to stop if no one is coming. If someone is in the loop you yield to the person, weather they are “turning left”. If you are willing to “Hollywood” stop at an actual stop sign, then you should be ready to do the same at a roundabout.

3) 2 lane roundabouts: Listen. when you are driving on the road and a corner comes up, are you allowed to just change lanes, even if someone is there? NO! so if you are in an outer lane DON’T cut the corner into my lane. If you don’t know how to use those, guess what, they have signs just before the roundabout (or at least they do in Squamish.

3) Driving on movies/tv shows: I hate watching a show where the actor is constantly turning the wheel, when the background shows you are going straight. The reverse can also be annoying (I know, little things aren’t they) I am willing to let the driver spend 3/4 of the time looking at their passenger (It barely gets a pass, but a only because they need eye to eye contact, occasionally, to sell connection to each other. I wish they could do it when they are stopped, but beggars and choosers right? lol)

4)stupidly unrealistic tech on tv/movies: I am sorry Enemy Of The State. but no one can recreate what is at the back of Will Smith’s bag. No matter how good your tech is. Exception to this rule would be sci-fi, cause as we know, anything goes when you are talking stupid distances into the future.

5)Environment: I am sorry. environment is important. Where I have the problem is when people forget that not everyone is going to agree with you. When that happens, what makes us who we are is our tendency to discuss issues, agree to disagree, or start bullying the other side with liable or slander forms of Defamation. They say that kids are mean, but adults are just as mean, and have connections to more than just the school kids to make your life hell.

6) Parents at playgrounds, number 1: Parents that don’t care what their kids do at the playground. The “other day” we were at a playground with our two kids and two friends that we were hanging out with. Near the end a group of 8-10 year old kids took over the little playground. That wasn’t really a problem UNTIL the kids started trying to stop everyone else from getting on the playground. Problem is, most of the ways to get up involved climbing up steep ladders, or the sort. if our kids were unsure about what was going on the one of the kids tried to push our kids off the ladder things. Normally I don’t scold other peoples kids, but when they are trying to push my kids of a high structure you bet I was going to say something. Turns out the kids dad was sitting on the other side of the playground just watching his kid try to bully my kids. NOT OK

7) Parents at playgrounds, number 2: Helicopter Parents that think their kids deserve to do everything first. Your kid is taking a few extra seconds to build up courage to go down the slide they either tell your kid to go, or move it on. The parent that encourages their kid to push, or pull kids. I’ll talk to kids, but only if my kids are being bullied, but…….. Bully helicopter parents suck.

8) facebook changing my news feed to top stories instead of, my preference, most recent.

9) People believe video games are ruining our kids minds. Video games have so many good qualities…most of them… But I’ve preached on that topic many times, and probably many times more in the future.

10) people that make top ten lists. lol actually I love High Fidelity and that was nothing but top ten lists…but most of the time they suck. lol

Why I Just Don’t Get It

I want you to imagine being in a collage class room being taught by someone who only spoke French, but your French only got to grade 10, and you barley remember anything from grade 10. Now, same scenario, the teacher spoke in French, but wrote on the board half in English and half in French. Let’s go further with this. Now your teacher speaks in French, writes partly in English, and visually shows step by step instructions…In English.  I could go on and on with the different scenarios, but the point is you only are going to fully understand the information when it is presented in a way You learn.

There are thought to be 3 main types of learners. We have: Visual learners (learn by looking at the material taught), Auditory learners (learn best with lectures), Kinesthetic learners (learn by doing).  On top of those 4 learning styles there are multiple combinations, and amounts each type of learning style is retained. No one kid learns the same way, or at the same speed. There is a quote floating around that says, “We Learn . . .10% of what we read, 20% of what we hear,30% of what we see, 50% of what we see and hear, 70% of what we discuss, 80% of what we experience, 95% of what we teach others.”  Although it is a nice quote it isn’t true. The truth is, they are portraying the learning style of a multitude of different learners, and the percentage is just numbers pulled out of thin air.

Let’s take me as an example. I am bad at grammar and spelling, but I don’t do half bad at science and Math (although I am kinda slow with math). When I say I am bad at spelling and grammar I am not joking. The spelling you see before you is an amazing example. The only reason half the words may, or may not, be the right spelling is thanks to spell check. Even then I often pick the wrong word to correct it to, or not even the computer can guess what I am attempting to spell, forcing me to pick a new word altogether. As for the grammar…well that is obvious. Not even a computer, with all its billion lines of code, can help me there.  I got the comment, often, that I didn’t study hard enough. While I wasn’t one for homework, and a goal of grades at C+, anything higher was a plus for me. Seeing the words written on the page, or the multitude of repetition, did nothing for me. I did try, but I failed so badly I occasionally just made a 50% grade, but I never had to repeat a grade.

Math and Science were different. In math we start out with counting apples (you have one apple and your friend gives you another apple, how many apples do you have…) then moved on to money. That sold me on math. I had something Solid, even if it was just using my imagination, to work with. I could move blocks around, buy things, and so much more. It was something I could DO. Science was a similar style of teaching, usually. I got to measure, mix, see, do, and set some things on fire. I dreamed of being a stunt man, or forensic police officer (I did none of those) and I could figure out how to do those things (not that I could pull it off with just a grade 12 education).

You might notice a trend those two paragraphs. With spelling, I read, copied, and wrote. With science I did, and then I explained what I did. I was good at what I DID, not what I heard, read, or wrote. I was a classic sign of a kinesthetic learner. I also learned well by watching people do things…again I said do things, not read. It didn’t hurt that with math and science the rules governed all. With Spelling there were so many exceptions to the rule I didn’t know how anyone could remember how to spell knife. Not to mention, what’s up with the letter C. It is an useless letter. It either sounds like a K or an S. There is no real sound that is just C’s….But I digress.

When it came to testing, there was only one method used, written exams. You have to prove that you know what that poor teacher has been trying to bash into your think scull all year.  So they put a piece of paper in front of you, and give you a time limit to prove your new knowledge. I don’t know about you, but I do not test well. Not only do I have to read each question and understand the subtleties of our English language (I already mentioned that I don’t learn like that), but I had a time limit (I don’t read that fast as it is, but when there are trick questions I need even longer to understand the question). There are people out there that are great at writing tests. Some of my friends even got 100% on some of their tests, but people like that are the minority of students.

With so many learning styles, it is funny that there is only one style of testing. There are some brilliant people out there that feel dumb, because they couldn’t pass a written test if their life depended on it, and tests make up the majority of most classroom grades. Some teachers I know have adapted their testing styles to include more than just written assessments. The greatest teachers I have ever had, or worked with, have tried to include as many of the different learning styles into one lesson, in order for more of the children/adults will actually understand what is going on. Changing teaching styles is only part of the changes that need to be made to truly understand what a person has learned.  Testing must be done throughout the year. The style that a person learns with is not always the way a person will express what they learn. Teachers and the education system has a lot of work to do.

That brings me to the wonderful government’s standardise testing. The scores on the tests are used to determine how well a child has learned a subject, and what mistakes they are making. There are many different steps to make a standardised test, and it is no easy task, but the problem still remains. How do you know what a person knows when you are giving them only one way to express what they know. There are multiple ways to learn, and an equal amount of ways to express that knowledge.

Standardise testing is a bit of a joke among teachers (or at least it is in Canada). Some schools will drill kids on things they think are going to be on the test. Making them take past tests. Making sure a majority of students will get a high grade on the test. It makes the school look good to the government, but you lose out all the other things that they could learn.  Other schools work hard on teaching as much as they can, weather it has a high probability to show up on a test. The kids learn a wider range of subjects, but don’t do as well on the government test. I am not saying there isn’t merit in those tests. I am saying you are missing out on knowing what the kids really do know. The trick is….how do you test kids in all learning styles but put the information together in a way that the government can get their statistics.

I have no idea what the answer is to correct government assessments. I do know, however, that our understanding of how people learn, and how they express themselves. It is a big job for a teacher, especially when they have so many different children in one class.  30 different children, multiple styles of learning, and multiple styles of expression. I salute those teachers that are able to work as many styles of teaching and testing, as is humanly possible, into their classrooms.

Karma’s a Bitch

I wanted to write a post about how I, and others, seem to see Karma nowadays, but then I realized that I needed to be respectful, since it is part of someones religion. So I thought I should show what Karma is supposed to be, in the simplest way I can. So here it is.

 

Karma (Sanskrit, also karman, Pāli: kamma) is a Sanskrit term that literally means “action” or “doing”. Karma was explained and the doctrine formulated as it is known now by Buddha. Although Karma existed before Buddha. it is the cause and effect of ones actions and thoughts. It is so much more than a good out, good in doctrine.

 

the first thing that needs to be made clear is that Karma isn’t something that will balance itself out in this life time. When born there is a biological event taking place. the father and mother pass on their genes to make a life, and part of that life is created based on the parents genes, and environment. Then Karma comes into play. based on your past lives, good or bad, you are born with your own personality, looks, status, and challenges.

 

There is an inequality in life. Some people get dumped on, struggle through hardship, addiction, and crime. Others get to live normal lives, and still others get to live the good life. Even looks are part and parcel of what makes you, you. Its the genes of your parents, environment, and even more important than all that is your accumulative Karma in past lives that decide how you are born. Karma is so powerful, however, that it can take over completely and change the potential passed down through your parents genes.

 

“…the Atthasalini, being a commentary on the Abhidharma, states:

 

‘Depending on this difference in Karma appears the differences in the birth of beings, high and low, base and exalted, happy and miserable. Depending on the difference in Karma appears the difference in the individual features of beings as beautiful and ugly, high-born or low born, well-built or deformed. Depending on the difference in Karma appears the difference in worldly conditions of beings, such as gain and loss, and disgrace, blame and praise, happiness and misery.'”

 

Karma is like our current legal system…sort of…. You see, in order for there to be a crime one of three things need to be present (Actus Reas and Mens Rea, or both at the same time)

 

lets start with the simple one. Actus Reas is the control of self. you can not be charged with a crime if you were not in control of your body. a muscle spasm is not voluntary and there for is not a crime. A good example would be tripping on a farm and knocking someone into a grain auger, either killing or maiming them. You are not in control of your body, reflexes kick in, there for you have no Actus Reas.

 

Mens Rea is a bit trickier. but it is broken up into three camps:

 

1)General Intent Crimes: these are actions that require an intent to do a forbidden act. you have to want to do something you know is wrong. lumped into General Intent is acting negligent and reckless. a decent example of a General Intent Crime, would be a driver texting while driving. In British Columbia, Canada, it is illegal to use your phone while driving (unless its hands free). A driver texting is an intent to commit a crime. If an accident happens the driver has also been reckless, they knew the risk and acted anyway, and negligent, “inadvertently creates a substantial

and unjustifiable risk of which he ought to be aware.”

 

2) Specific Intent Crimes: You know what you want to do and set out with a specific criminal outcome. Break and enter for the purpose of stealing is a Specific Intent Crime.

 

3)Strict Liability Crimes: this is like an extension of the General Intent Crimes. a person must know that there is a high probability of a crime, but acts knowingly. Or with acts with willful blindness, knows that a crime is possible but willfully refrained from making inquiries to find out if there is an actual crime they are committing.

 

Of course there is WAY more to the legal system, but that is a really big side track. My point is, with Karma you also need to have Actus Reas and Mens Rea. If you knowingly wish harm on someone, you have Mens Rea and therefor gain negative Karma. but if your action was accidental and without knowledge of harm you neither have Actus Reas or Mens Rea and you are exempt from gaining bad Karma.

 

So, very simplified, Karma is the reaction to an action, that effects not only this life but the one after as well. Buddha said that, “We are the heirs of our own actions.” the temptations you have failed to abstain from, addictions, crime… in this life will be transferred to the next life. However we have free will. That means that the life we live now, and in the past, can be changed, with hard work and willpower.

 

It feels like Karma has become a cosmic bank (in non-Buddhist circles), one that you put good into and you can then expect good to come back to you, with interest, in a “short” period of time. Or where bad Karma goes and gets stored until one day life takes the bad Karma out on you. People say things like “Karma’s a bitch.”, or my favorite, “Karma will catch up with them eventually.”

 

I was tormented by a group of kids from grade 7-12. My life was a living hell for those years. I often get people assuring me that they will get theirs in the end. but there is the problem. If Karma is the banking of good and suffering the bad, eventually, than hoping that Karma will do to them in kind, is actually bad Karma.

 

Let me explain further. My teen years being as bad as they were didn’t just effect me. My family, and friends suffered a long with me, as others actions, and my reactions spiraled me down into depression. I didn’t trust easily, and still don’t. I shut out most people, family included, and I had a short fuse with my brothers. being hurt in anyway effects more than just one person.

 

If I hope that those people will get whats coming to them, I won’t be just wishing misery on them, but I am also wishing hardship on anyone they know. One of My tormentors is now a professional rugby player, in Europe, and has even competed on team Canada rugby teams. He has a wife, and I believe a child. (when you live in a small town and someone makes it big they tend to brag about it often. so I know a bit about him). What would happen to his family if Karma bit him on the ass in a big way. his marriage would suffer, his child would suffer, and so would his friends and family.

 

Personally I believe that horrible things happen, sometimes to good people, sometimes to bad people, because we live in a broken world. ever since people entered the world (you can fight over when that was, personally I am a creation person, but that, again is beside the point) there has been fighting, killing, stealing, raping, special needs children, addiction and an entire gambit of other wrongs people commit.

 

I am not Buddhist, and don’t believe in multiple lives. to be honest it would scare me to believe that I did something so bad as to deserve being bullied for years, or had a brain tumor. I do believe that there is cause and effect to actions, it is a cognitive milestone for children to learn cause and effect. sometimes the effect is felt right away…I piss of a violent person, they hit me. totally my fault. I speed past a cop, I get a ticket…. some effects are felt later in life…I spend more money than I make, eventually I go bankrupt. someone smokes, they might get lung cancer, a horrible cause and effect situation.

 

Karma is great and all, but we should never wish on someone else something negative that we experienced. our thoughts, if you think of Karma, or anything like it, should stop at us. What we are doing. How we are handling negative and positive things. We can hope for positive outcomes. I truly do hope that my tormentors have changed, for them and for their families. I still have a hard time forgiving everyone, and I get a sick feeling when certain people are mentioned, or events, but I am working on that.

Car Airfoil or Spoilers?

I have wondered for a long time why people would be driving with those really big “Spoilers” at the back of their car. So, like so many other things I turned to the collective wisdom of the internet. I tied to steered clear of the forums, as much as I could, because forums are usually full of people saying ” I think…”, and “it might be because…” I did. however get sucked into one forum, for no other reason than the person that responded actually had the credentials to answer the question.

The first thing I learned was, what I called a spoiler was in fact NOT a spoiler. What I was looking at was a “wing”, or “airfoils”. turns out spoilers are a beast of a different sort. Since wanted to do a post about spoilers, I might as well start with what a spoiler actually is. In really simple terms, a spoiler is an obstruction blocking air passing over the trunk of a car. if you want a visual of that, check out the pictures at this google search link:

“https://www.google.ca/search…“.

In my ignorance I thought that a wall like that would just increase the drag of the car slowing it down, but now I know better. That wall actually traps air in the space between the spoiler and rear window. With that pool of stagnant air in place, almost all air that is rushing over the car avoids the stagnant pool, choosing the path of least resistance. That is part of the reason a truck doesn’t create more drag with a canopy or without.

Even though that wall doesn’t look so aerodynamic, it does in fact reduce the drag, but it does more than just that. Part of the biggest problem drivers have is in cornering at speed. if you go to fast you skid. Anyone with a drivers license, or that have played a lot of video games, should know that. There are a few different reasons for that. One is the tire composition. A more expensive tire is softer and will grip better, a harder, cheaper, tire will slide a lot more (the ones that grip better will also go bald much faster. that is why they guys in Nascar have to make pit stops for their tires. the tires are not cheep, and are very soft, so they can grip better. it is a trade off, like everything else here). The other problem you come across is wind going under the car. Mixed that with wheel type, and weight of car, and your car starts to lift. The faster you go the more lift, and inertia you have to work against. The spoiler reduces lift, allowing the weight of the vehicle, as well as some push from the wind going over the car, keep the tires on the ground. The trade off is that a spoiler is best used when there will be banked corners, it will not help with flat corners at high speeds.

Now I get to talk about Wings, or Airfoils. The science behind these have been confused over time and incorrect information has become so common it has been mistaken as fact, even within the auto part sellers. The first myth was about the design. You see, a LARGE number of the posts I read talked about the Airfoils being an upside down wing, forcing the car down like a plane wing brings a plane up. Turns out….Nope….( the information we have learnt and teach kids about how plane wings work is wrong… but that is beside the point, although it might be part of the reason for this myth). while the shape of the airfoil may, in parts, look like an upside down plane wing the big difference is in the Area-Of-Attack (aoa). Truth be told, a lot of airfoils I looked at do have a airplane wing look to it, but doesn’t look upside down. Rather, it looks like the front of the wing is tilted down for the car, and up for the plane. For a race car, each car has its own airfoil specifically designed to increase the downward force while not having the aoa to aggressive causing more drag than needed.

Formula 1 race cars use airfoils to keep their cars on the track at high speeds. Since the corners on a Formula 1 style track are flat the car needs added force to keep the wheels stuck firmly to the ground, in order to be able to enter and exit a corner quickly. But there seems to be a trade off. where the spoiler creates less drag, allowing the weight of the vehicle to produce the downward force, but doesn’t handle flat corner as well, an airfoil will push the wheels into the ground at much greater force, but increase drag. The trade off of the airfoil is lower top speed, needing more torque to speed up, in exchange for being able to corner at higher speeds than you might otherwise be able to do. Gas is not conserved using a airfoil.

Either way you decide to do it (almost all the people I see choose the airfoil option) there is a positive and a negative. There is, also, no way to see if the spoiler or airfoil actually work properly for your car, unless you have access to a wind tunnel or a perfect 3d model and a wind tunnel software. “Neither have any positive impact whatsoever on straight-line low-speed acceleration. Both are primarily intended to improve stability and cornering at high speeds.”

Oh, and it turns out airfoils that go above the top of the car are actually less effective than ones that stay below the top of the car. The higher the airfoil the greater aoa needed to drive the wheels down.

http://www.quora.com/How-much-downward-force-does-a-spoiler…

http://aprperformance.com/tech/

http://rubbingsracing.com/…/ford-racing-aerodynamic-expert…/

Planned Parenthood controversy

I feel like I should weigh in on the planned parent not for profit service. As most of you might know, they have been the source of controversy, accused of selling aborted fetus. There have been, I believe,  3  videos released of people in meetings with high up officials pretending to be in the market for aborted fetuses. Both times they succeeded in getting prices out of the executives, but that isn’t the full story.

In the United States every medical, or medical research, costs money. The same things happens in Canada, but since we get medical for, practically, free we don’t see the money changing hands. For example, in the United States it costs “The mean (SD) acquisition cost for one unit of red blood cells purchased from a supplier (n = 204) was $US210.74 ± 37.9 and the mean charge to the patient (n = 167) was $US343.63 ± 135”. If you look at full grown cadavers,  “The Anatomical Board charges universities a fee of about $1,800 per body.”

Canada isn’t exempt from the need to buy bodies, body parts, and blood. “Canadian Blood Services purchases plasma protein products (PPPs) like IVIG, albumin and various coagulation factors from the United States and Europe. This is because Canada uses a volunteer-only donation system and does not have the donor base to support demand. Canadian Blood Services, and its Québec counterpart Héma-Québec, are non-governmental bodies tasked with safety, procurement and distribution of blood products.”….and “Canada has seen a rise in IVIG use, with requirements going up six to eight per cent each year in the last decade. Last year alone, Canadian Blood Services and Héma-Québec purchased $670 million dollars of plasma protein products from the US and Europe, an increase from $630 million spent in 2012. Canada is the largest per capita user of IVIG in the world.”

So let’s go back to those videos. The prices ranged from $10-$300, compared to the other costs to hospitals/schools, that is a “good” price. Let me make this 100% Clear, I am very opposed to “therapeutic abortions”, but I want to make a point to win an argument based on real facts, rather than gut reaction. When I first heard about the videos I was not furious, but then I sat down and thought it through. That’s when I listened to the clip (not the entire thing…. It was 2 hrs, but I skip to the price points, and other advice given), given what I heard, and what I researched, I don’t see a lot wrong with the prices, or the selling off the fetus. I remember when we had to have a deceased fetus that needed to be removed, we were asked to sign a form to allow it to be used for research, it doesn’t seem like an uncommon practice, here in Canada, or the US.

The part that planned parent did apologize about was the casual manner that they talked about the fetuses. To be honest, if I worked with death, or just don’t see the fetuses as a child to begin with, I would have to develop a morbid sense of humor, or get a really thick skin. So I don’t see much fault in that either. After all They are selling to schools, not the black market that some people report.

I wish those fetuses turned into children, but that just isn’t how things work no matter how much I or anyone else want it to be different, but I don’t want to attempt to change things based on lies.

http://healthydebate.ca/2014/04/topic/cost-of-care/paying-plasma

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_9090020

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21174480

Economics of Squamish’s Woodfiber LNG Project

Right now Woodfiber LNG is a huge point of contention within the town of Squamish. As with any energy venture most of the people against will argue safety (the bad kind) and the disruption of our ecosystem. the people that are in favor of the project like to argue safety (the good kind), economic growth, and local jobs. Often the “discussion” get really personal and outright rude. Its a Trolls paradise on these sites. So I thought I would talk about something not many people, on either side, talk about…. The Global demand for this energy source.

At this point, in the global market, the global LNG market has dropped the price of LNG in tandem with the drop of oil prices. Sadly once oil bounced back the LNG market didn’t. On the plus side, those LNG projects already in production have worked hard at obtaining long term export contracts at specific prices before the drop in prices in late 2014. Sadly, British Columbia has not signed long term export contracts. Now the, ” “Asian marketplace is now beginning to embrace the North American gas indices as the pricing forum,” said Tom Tatham, managing director of BC LNG.”, but he goes on to say “I think what we’re doing will have a positive effect on the gas market. But it isn’t going to make a huge difference to the producers involved in Train 1,” (1).

Experts say that there are multiple factors in the lowered LNG prices. Also, the potential bounce back, of LNG prices, is not going to come to the high that LNG was trading at in the beginning of 2014.

The economy in Asia is not growing as fast as hoped, leading to the lowered global pricing of LNG. Then there was mild winters in key import locations, followed by a surplus in stock. “Asia may average just $10.30 per million Btu (MMBtu) in 2015, a 38 percent decline from last year” (2). (Btu = British Thermal Unit, MMBtu = 1 million Btu)

Another problem is Japan’s plans to restart some of their Nuclear power plants is going to kill the demand of LNG. Since there is about to be a large amount of new LNG plants, who will flood the market, increasing the LNG supply, when there isn’t going to be enough demand. BC is still far away from going into production, let alone signing those crucial long term LNG contracts with buyers.

As for Woofiber LNG, they have gained an export license back in December 2013, But, stated above, have yet to find a long term buyer. We will be a small scale plant at 2.1 mtpa project (Million tonnes per annum. turns out one ton is approximately 2.47 cubic feet, with a export license of 0.27 bcfd (Billion cubic feet per day). so we can export, but we have no one to export to.

The news gets worse for us in BC. turns out that “Although Canada’s LNG projects would be closer to Asia than projects in the United States, they suffer from higher capital costs and follow the traditional integrated upstream model; their remote location is also adding to the investment bill.” (3)

But wait…there is more complications with Canadian LNG production. Ironically we don’t have enough natural gas to feed all the Canadian projects. “In total, these projects are seeking permission to export more than 500 Bcma of natural gas, which is
nearly three times Canada’s current gas marketed production. A forecast by the National Energy Board estimates that Canadian natural gas production could grow from 136 Bcma (13 bcfd) in 2013 to 182-238 Bcma (base and high cases), but that would be insufficient to feed all the proposed
projects” (4)(Bcma stands for Billion Cubic Meters per annum)

Will Woodfiber LNG create jobs to locals? Yes. Will there be specialized jobs that foreign worker will hired? Yes. Is it bad for the environment? Well that depends on who you talk to, and how far back in the production line they decide to take that question. Is it a good investment for Canada? Sadly it isn’t looking good for us. If we were up and running, with long term contracts locked it, back before 2014 we might have had a chance to make money off these projects, but now we might find it hard to break even on the investment. Our government is much more optimistic than the researchers on the future market for LNG, so we push on.

I lived in Squamish, back when people made a good wage, and some got “rich” off all the industries in the area. We had a booming Logging industry, a paper mill, and a railway facility. Sure Squamish smelled bad, from Woodfiber, when the wind was blowing the wrong way, but people had jobs. then the railway facility shut down leaving many people jobless and many just moving out of Squamish looking for work. Then Woodfiber shut down, and Squamish seemed to have only one thing going for it. The tourism market held the town together. As time went on, Squamish turned into a Tourist destination. Once the Winter Olympics came to Vancouver/Whistler, the road linking Squamish to Vancouver, people started moving back to Squamish, in droves. Now we had a tourist, commuter, town.

Personally the more I research the proposed LNG plant the more I fear that there will be a population boom, Local jobs, and people making good money off the construction, and production of LNG, just to have the bottom fall out.

1) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/bc-lng-inks-asian-sales-contract/article7563307/

2)http://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/Oil-Prices-May-Recover-But-Not-LNG.html

3)http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/could-falling-natural-gas-prices-kill-some-lng-projects

4)http://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/NG-98.pdf

other sources used are:

http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/canadian-lng-prospects-have-darkened-says-international-energy-agency

http://blog.financial.thomsonreuters.com/the-global-lng-market-a-look-ahead-to-2015-and-beyond/