A week has not properly passed into the past since parents in America stood up against the US government (figuratively speaking of course) and decided they did not want their kids to be lectured by of all people, their newly elected President, Barack Obama. They objected...and for a myriad of reasons, many of which resulted in a significant number of the patriarchs converging to a singular threat ...to the very same action: to keep their kids at home during the scheduled speech time. It sounds insane, right? Wait… things get a tad more bizarre.
Now, the message of the President's speech would seem to be benign and well intended enough. No bleak and bitter reality of a global recession or comments about ongoing wars. No scares about the healthcare that currently does or does not exist or long talks about persistent threats to the world’s natural environment. No, sir. No, madam. Nope. None of the above. Rather, the talk would have been to emphasize the merits of diligence, importance of hard work and the value of education for all students whom were intended to be part of a nationwide audience. As I said, well intended, right?
Apparently not enough.
Despite the seeming harmlessness of the chosen theme(s), many parents were not happy with this planned ‘pep talk’. Some parents/guardians not only expressed their wariness, but transitioned from a sort of passive outrage of scattered individuals to a significant number in some sort of solidarity that said unanimously “we do not want this for our kids!”What reasons could these adults have to feel justified in threatening to take action, albeit passive one, which would result in the absence of their children from an un-mandated assembly? Well, among the varied explanations only three (3) elaborations stand out as the most common. The GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY.
Not submitting to convention, I will start with the UGLY first. (I apologize to my English teachers who always told me that when making a criticism, I must always say something nice first and then the ‘not so nice’.) Fear makes people paranoid and parents are among the most paranoid of creatures even when not influenced by the various artificial substances permitted to them because of their maturity. I guess I should not be surprise then when some parents accused the administration of planning to brainwash the children intended to be the audience of Obama’s speech. I should not have been surprised. But still I was. Only God-knows-Who could have foreseen that even the most conservative, supposedly intelligent and open-minded adults could so forcefully (I use this word lightly) allege as one blogger puts it that 'Diabolical President Obama and his Administration [are] trying to do what Hitler did to youths…”, influencing their minds with contortions of the truth.
Now for the BAD. Some parents, although sending their kids to school, still want to be heavy handed and decide exactly how, where, what and when their kids learn certain subjects. Subjects that they are usually neither experts on nor even care about beyond the effect that it has on their ability to guard rail their children unto a path that they [the parent(s)] decided upon. Many feel they are of a sufficient socioeconomic status and so feel they are entitled to interrupt if only to investigate. Others never properly articulate their intrusion.“I want to be present when the crazies and med heads are around my kids,” one mother said. I was not aware that academic institutions were in the habit of letting mentally unstable individuals and substance abusers talk to the children. Not any from the White House anyway…
And last but not least, the GOOD. (This is going to be ticklish... but I'm definitely not laughing)...
Some parents stated that their opposition to President Obama’s speech was not based in fear, paranoia or some proclivity to be dictate the dispense of academic content to their children. Their problem with the matter was simple. The President’s address seemed no more than an interruption to the regular course of increasingly important school days. In a country where most kids have significantly more holidays than their parents, their lessons are already so fragmented by free time, thus running the risk of being rushed from the syllabi to the study sessions to the test sheets. And this ‘special message’ would only further retard the progression of learning being ‘unnecessary’ event actually ‘counterproductive’ to the pursuit of and achievement of education. Some of these some, asserted that the proper thing to do would be to dispense his lecture after hours as is usually the case with ‘The State of the Union Address’.
...
To this last reason I have no rebuttal. These parents are absolutely right. Except for being an amazingly good opportunity to teach the true meaning of irony using a real world example, the Obama’s speech would be in contravention of its very mission. And to those who do not agree, as a former teacher and a now graduate student, I have to go beyond my agreement and implore you to think of the difference a few hours make in the learning of a child. Imagine when you were behind a desk whether in school or at home and trying to read that last page or work out that last problem. Try to recall instances that you wish you had more time for a quiz because you did not have enough time to study or practice. Use that to measure the importance of a lost half and in some cases whole day. You would then see that these parents are right.
In an increasingly globalized society, holidays are now being celebrated in places where the events and individuals after which they are/were named are not indigenous to. (A now defunct private school in my home nation used to get the 4th of July off.) Triumphs and tragedies of the past and present are now commemorated using holidays. (As a student, certain commemorative days were half holidays at best while as a teacher, the students got basically the whole day without lessons. Athletic sporting events nowadays even warrant suspending school and work days in my country.)
Yes, those parents and guardians were so very right. Their perception of the situation was a clear one and although the action of keeping their children away from school is not a perfect one (-yes, they could still learn something from the Commander and Chief and yes their actions still resemble those of those parents and guardians suffering from a lack of clarity) If I had kids I would do the same. They are losing time anyway and as long as there is a place for them to open a book to go with a responsible human being to chaperone their one day of home-schooling, they would stay home and perhaps catch up on reading and work on their weak areas.
So I would chose, if I am so lucky, to procreate to see the difference between what is required interruption and just more than likely an instance of recreation. I want to be like these last set of parents. The good kind with a good stance. I want our schools, in my nation, in our regions in our word to be like them. I want our governments to be like them. I want us to take the right and good action even if it means enjoying a holiday or a special feature address by the leader of a powerful nation AFTER school adjourns. That is my opinion and do not care who calls me or seems me as bad or ugly... Education already has enough holidays
***In light of the most recent developments (or accusations rather) I am inclined to make this post not for its content to be part to and parcel of some elaborate and infallible statement but rather to initiate a discussion about something that I feel WE as Caribbean peoples are afraid to talk to and/or about. The obstruction of parents, guardians and other adults in a child's education; The GOOD, The BAD and the UGLY.***
-Steve Duane 'Whitty' Whittaker, Yale '08, Y-WISO Co-President 06-07
Now, the message of the President's speech would seem to be benign and well intended enough. No bleak and bitter reality of a global recession or comments about ongoing wars. No scares about the healthcare that currently does or does not exist or long talks about persistent threats to the world’s natural environment. No, sir. No, madam. Nope. None of the above. Rather, the talk would have been to emphasize the merits of diligence, importance of hard work and the value of education for all students whom were intended to be part of a nationwide audience. As I said, well intended, right?
Apparently not enough.
Despite the seeming harmlessness of the chosen theme(s), many parents were not happy with this planned ‘pep talk’. Some parents/guardians not only expressed their wariness, but transitioned from a sort of passive outrage of scattered individuals to a significant number in some sort of solidarity that said unanimously “we do not want this for our kids!”What reasons could these adults have to feel justified in threatening to take action, albeit passive one, which would result in the absence of their children from an un-mandated assembly? Well, among the varied explanations only three (3) elaborations stand out as the most common. The GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY.
Not submitting to convention, I will start with the UGLY first. (I apologize to my English teachers who always told me that when making a criticism, I must always say something nice first and then the ‘not so nice’.) Fear makes people paranoid and parents are among the most paranoid of creatures even when not influenced by the various artificial substances permitted to them because of their maturity. I guess I should not be surprise then when some parents accused the administration of planning to brainwash the children intended to be the audience of Obama’s speech. I should not have been surprised. But still I was. Only God-knows-Who could have foreseen that even the most conservative, supposedly intelligent and open-minded adults could so forcefully (I use this word lightly) allege as one blogger puts it that 'Diabolical President Obama and his Administration [are] trying to do what Hitler did to youths…”, influencing their minds with contortions of the truth.
Now for the BAD. Some parents, although sending their kids to school, still want to be heavy handed and decide exactly how, where, what and when their kids learn certain subjects. Subjects that they are usually neither experts on nor even care about beyond the effect that it has on their ability to guard rail their children unto a path that they [the parent(s)] decided upon. Many feel they are of a sufficient socioeconomic status and so feel they are entitled to interrupt if only to investigate. Others never properly articulate their intrusion.“I want to be present when the crazies and med heads are around my kids,” one mother said. I was not aware that academic institutions were in the habit of letting mentally unstable individuals and substance abusers talk to the children. Not any from the White House anyway…
And last but not least, the GOOD. (This is going to be ticklish... but I'm definitely not laughing)...
Some parents stated that their opposition to President Obama’s speech was not based in fear, paranoia or some proclivity to be dictate the dispense of academic content to their children. Their problem with the matter was simple. The President’s address seemed no more than an interruption to the regular course of increasingly important school days. In a country where most kids have significantly more holidays than their parents, their lessons are already so fragmented by free time, thus running the risk of being rushed from the syllabi to the study sessions to the test sheets. And this ‘special message’ would only further retard the progression of learning being ‘unnecessary’ event actually ‘counterproductive’ to the pursuit of and achievement of education. Some of these some, asserted that the proper thing to do would be to dispense his lecture after hours as is usually the case with ‘The State of the Union Address’.
...
To this last reason I have no rebuttal. These parents are absolutely right. Except for being an amazingly good opportunity to teach the true meaning of irony using a real world example, the Obama’s speech would be in contravention of its very mission. And to those who do not agree, as a former teacher and a now graduate student, I have to go beyond my agreement and implore you to think of the difference a few hours make in the learning of a child. Imagine when you were behind a desk whether in school or at home and trying to read that last page or work out that last problem. Try to recall instances that you wish you had more time for a quiz because you did not have enough time to study or practice. Use that to measure the importance of a lost half and in some cases whole day. You would then see that these parents are right.
In an increasingly globalized society, holidays are now being celebrated in places where the events and individuals after which they are/were named are not indigenous to. (A now defunct private school in my home nation used to get the 4th of July off.) Triumphs and tragedies of the past and present are now commemorated using holidays. (As a student, certain commemorative days were half holidays at best while as a teacher, the students got basically the whole day without lessons. Athletic sporting events nowadays even warrant suspending school and work days in my country.)
Yes, those parents and guardians were so very right. Their perception of the situation was a clear one and although the action of keeping their children away from school is not a perfect one (-yes, they could still learn something from the Commander and Chief and yes their actions still resemble those of those parents and guardians suffering from a lack of clarity) If I had kids I would do the same. They are losing time anyway and as long as there is a place for them to open a book to go with a responsible human being to chaperone their one day of home-schooling, they would stay home and perhaps catch up on reading and work on their weak areas.
So I would chose, if I am so lucky, to procreate to see the difference between what is required interruption and just more than likely an instance of recreation. I want to be like these last set of parents. The good kind with a good stance. I want our schools, in my nation, in our regions in our word to be like them. I want our governments to be like them. I want us to take the right and good action even if it means enjoying a holiday or a special feature address by the leader of a powerful nation AFTER school adjourns. That is my opinion and do not care who calls me or seems me as bad or ugly... Education already has enough holidays
***In light of the most recent developments (or accusations rather) I am inclined to make this post not for its content to be part to and parcel of some elaborate and infallible statement but rather to initiate a discussion about something that I feel WE as Caribbean peoples are afraid to talk to and/or about. The obstruction of parents, guardians and other adults in a child's education; The GOOD, The BAD and the UGLY.***
-Steve Duane 'Whitty' Whittaker, Yale '08, Y-WISO Co-President 06-07
