the visit to pearson college

the experience of pearson college could be summarized in just couple of words; quoting my thai friend neung would say: "it is same, same, but different".

joy and carelessness: playing football on an tarmac field in the rain.

confusion: a presentation on tibet by one of the chinese students.

beauty: the bay and white sails in the marina.

surprise: quietness and stillness on a saturday night (but no, we did not stay sober).

delight: the cafeteria food (just kiddin', but it was better than in norway).

hope: it is all within in me; the colleges live their own lives and breathe at their own pace. the change after the experience of uwc is in me! the world has stayed the same. and in that there is hope for this moment and for the future.

vancouver: panoramas

a month to go

that's right. in a month i am flying out of here for at least a year and a couple of months. there's still so many things to do which will preoccupy me before the departure, for sure. couple of essays, assignments and exams. but it's all fineeeee, as the might mf would say. i am determined to land in europe. soon.

playin' with a new camera

the world is dangerous place

i went to the meeting for the future exchange students (yes, i am going for an exchange to universiteit van amsterdam. yes, it is fantastic). it was a day long, chilled meeting with the administrative staff, former exchange students and some counselors. what did they talk about? well, about the wide dangerous world. i maintained a subtle smile on my face throughout the entire meeting. apparently, in italy when in trams you gotta hold onto your wallet, cause otherwise you get robbed. while abroad don't eat cheese or any dairy products for they are pasteurized and your stomach won't be able to take them. wtf? how can you tell something like that to somebody who is going for an exchange in france!? they probably go there to eat baguettes with brie and drink wine. furthermore, the counselor advised the women to bring the birth control pills and condoms testified in canada, because in europe they don't have any or perhaps somebody is purposefully making holes in them. oh, and watch the ticks in hungary (as if there were no ticks around here, let alone the bears).

so the message was: anywhere outside vancouver is dangerous and sketchy, be prepared. but, hey, otherwise have fun! [and have a walk through east hastings before you go].
very north american tactics of inducing fear. why do they like inducing fear in their people?
is it the only means of communicating common sense?

pictures from work (zdjęcia z pracy)

go and...

i have reached this point of the semester when i can hear myself gasping. seriously. literally and metaphorically. i am trying my best to use the frontal cortex of my brain (specific for higher mental functions of humans) to plan my last month here. it mainly consists of the phrase: "go and..." here is some examples:

• go and pay the phone bill
• go and deal with the outstanding fees on the go.sfu account
• go and finish the essay
• go and do the homework
  
• go and cook some dinner (so you don't collapse)
• go and talk to the international adviser (well, that's actually not so bad ;-) )
• go and take a shower
• go and talk to the professor
  
• go and drink some coffee
• go and work an 8-hour shift
• go and call the parents
• go and don't forget somebody's birthday
• go and meet person X in place Y at time Z
• go and don't stumble
• go and don't stop
• go and go and go and go and go
• etc. etc.

everything is "on the go". even coffee, which pisses me off

* * *

siedzę właśnie na balkonie w koszulce z krótkim rękawem. bose nogi. świeci piękne wiosenne słońce na niebie pełnym rozmytych stratusów. autentycznie pachnie wiosną. mimo całego zamieszania z globalnym ociepleniem etc. wiosna jeszcze przychodzi w tym roku. to dobrze.

w głośnikach pozytywnie grają "the doors".

na kolanach trzymam talerz pełen sałatki z łososia (przepis jest bardzo prosty: zebrać pomidory, paprykę w dwóch kolorach, sałatę, ogórka, łososia w puszce, oliwę z oliwek, ocet winny, pieprz i sól. składniki pokroić i wymieszać. e voila! efekt oszałamiający), a w szklance woda z kranu, bo taka najlepsza tutaj. zaraz jak tylko opuszczę pióro, podniosę widelec i zjem to co sobie przygotowałem.

razem z łososiem pożywi mnie słońce.

i gdyby największy filozof na świecie, mędrzec nad mędrcami podszedł do mnie w tym właśnie momencie i zapytał mnie jaki jest sens życia, odpowiedziałbym bez najmniejszego wahania. sensem życia jest ta sekunda, ta chwila, to popołudnie słoneczne, sałatka z łososia i muzyka "the doors".

on moral education

i decided to share this paper i have written for education220. it's pretty good stuff; i.e., i haven't been so pleased with a paper for a while. here it comes:

There are methodological flaws in the North American system in dealing with crime, violence and other deviant behaviors. Predominantly, focus is on fighting the outcomes of the undesired behaviors, instead of their causes. For instance, police forces are expanded to fight gangs, drug-trafficking and prostitution; criminals are convicted and put into prison. It is relatively easier to do, but has no long-term implications. Preventative measures, such as education, are to large extent neglected. Therefore, not surprisingly, the rates of crime and violence are steadily on the rise in United States and Canada since 1960s (Statistics Canada, 2004; The Disaster Center, 2006)*.

Believing that every member of a society desires to live in a moral environment, the following paper proposes introducing moral education into North American school curricula. A carefully designed program could become a very powerful means to create better societies through raising morally conscious and responsible citizens. The paper discusses ideological reasons for such a reform and points to its potential applications.

There are firm theoretical grounds for teaching morality in schools at all levels (e.g., Piaget, 1932[1997]; Ikemoto, 1996; Nucci, 2000; Bandura & McDonald, 1963). Contrary to what people had believed at various times in the history, immorality is not innate (Berk & Shanker, 2004). There is no such thing as the original sin in a DNA code. Nobody is born a bad person; a burglar, a rapist or a gang member. People rather become such characters due to, broadly speaking, situational and educational factors. Hence, importantly, learning becomes of crucial importance in acquisition of moral reasoning.

Generally, the earlier learning takes place the better. It is true about a whole wide range of skills, but it is especially evident in terms of language acquisition (Pearson, 2007). In fact, there is a great parallel between the acquisition of language and that of social and moral reasoning: neither of the skills are innate, yet the newborns certainly posses the capacity to attain them. The change may occur with an intervention of the adult (Piaget, 1932[1997]) and appropriate stimulation is critical as the acquisition is taking place gradually. The parents’ input builds a foundation to expand vocabulary and make sense of grammar, but it is the school that teaches children to read and write. Without a certain degree of schooling, literacy may be incomplete or even impaired. Similarly, without an appropriate input, social and moral reasoning skills may develop in deviant and detrimental ways.

Acquisition of moral reasoning, requires not only experience of appropriate social planes, but also sufficient levels of biologically restricted cognitive maturity (Piaget, 1932[1997]). Nonetheless, consistently with theories of Lev Vygotsky (for general review, please refer to Berk & Shanker, 2004), socialization is the most important process in development of human-specific higher mental functions, such as language or moral reasoning. Thus, it is socialization that shapes the child’s general idea about the world, including the sense of morality.

The main problem of the current situation with the socialization of morality is diffusion of responsibility. Who exactly is responsible for children’s moral development: parents, teachers, spiritual leaders or perhaps children themselves? The society awaits the young people to become moral and well adjusted citizens, but at the same time is conservatively reluctant to teach them these skills. Alluding to the language acquisition metaphor, it is as though the parents did not send their children to school, believing that they themselves would learn to be fully literate. It can happen, but is rather unlikely. Thus, how can we even expect the citizens to be moral, if they have only limited opportunities to explore the nature of morality, moral judgment and moral reasoning?

The school is an institution which could readily take the responsibility to promote the development of ‘moral literacy’ for several reasons. Children spend about ¼ of the day at school, which after sleep is probably the most time-consuming activity for approximately twelve years of their lives. Thus, the school shapes and socializes children like no other person or institution. It is also a reasonably good model of the society and experiences gained at school give the child a concrete idea of how the world functions. In a group of peers, social relations completely change and the children continually gain more and more autonomy from parents and other adults (Piaget, 1932[1997]).

Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that moral development can be altered by modeling and social learning (Bandura and McDonald, 1963; Bandura, 1969). Interaction with teachers and peers already is an informal, intuitive type of moral education. However, modern educators need to consciously become appropriate role-models. Through fostering mutual respect and understanding of morality of cooperation, the teacher will not only accelerate, but also deepen the maturity of moral reasoning (Piaget, 1932[1997]).

Curriculum-based moral education is a brilliant way to facilitate child’s moral development, but is not its only benefit. Classroom moral education creates a friendly community and improves general academic standards (Ikemoto, 1996).

All the above mentioned arguments suggest that children are ready to learn whatever they are taught. If they are taught mathematics, they are very likely to become mathematicians. If they are taught morality, they are to become moral citizens. Nonetheless, this argument might meet with an opposition from some parents and religious institutions.

In North American multicultural societies, religious and ethic minorities could feel threatened that morality taught at school will contradict the teachings of their religion or culture. However, the research clearly distinguishes between moral and social conventions (Turiel, 1983 as quoted in Nucci, 2000) suggesting that moral conventions are fairly universal across religions and cultures. The curriculum-based moral education ought to teach universal moral conventions.

Specific religious moral conducts (e.g., Ten Commandments of Judaism and Christianity or Five Pillars of Islam) are usually rigid, dogmatic, impractical and rarely explained. The contemporary world and everyday decisions are not as black-and-white as they may seem to the child (Kuhmerker, 1991). She needs to understand that rules are created and demand a subjective interpretation (Piaget, 1932[1997]). For example, according to the 5th commandment (Thou shalt not kill) killing is immoral. However, how moral is the capital punishment (Kieslowski & Piesiewicz, 1989) or killing in defense of one’s daughter?

Traditionally, family was another institution responsible for socializing morality. Unfortunately, in the world today average North American parents do not have adequate time for their children. They have extended working schedules and the divorce rate is high (Statistics Canada, 2006). Supporting moral development needs time, effort, commitment and patience from the adult’s side. Although the parents want to bring up their children the best they can, many of them hold conservative misconceptions of moral education and commit basic mistakes. Piaget (1932[1997]) calls parents “poor psychologists” (p.191) who provide their children with a rather controversial moral training, promoting the morality of constraint rather than morality of cooperation. Furthermore, an average parent usually only increases child’s mental confusion through imposing contradicting rules and often providing no explanations for them.

The collaboration between the parents and teachers in moral upbringing of the child is the most desirable. Ideally, moral education at school should only reinforce what is taught at home (Ikemoto, 1996), but for many children the curriculum-based moral education may be the only one they will ever get. We cannot make sure that all children are getting the same quality of upbringing at home, but we can at least provide a similar quality of education.

Importantly, teaching morality in schools will not replace the traditional institutions (the family and religion) which have socialized morality. The ultimate goal of all moral educators is to help the child to become a better person and an adjusted citizen. A universal moral education in school will promote the moral welfare of the entire society, but will not deny the influence and access of family and religion to the child.

There are examples which North American educators and policymakers could follow in creating the moral curriculum. Japan has a long tradition of teaching morality in school. Universal moral conventions, such as respect for humanity, independence, problem-solving, equality, democratic government and good workmanship are promoted (Ikemoto, 1996).

How does it translate into practical terms? Japan has only 1.3 robberies and 1.1 murders per 100,000 people, while the United States has 233 and 8.7 accordingly (Crime in Japan, n.d.). Of course, the issue is more complex and there are additional variables adding to such significant differences (e.g., strict gun regulations in Japan). Nonetheless, Ikemoto (1996) points to curriculum-based moral education as the most important preventative method of fighting crime, violence and other deviant behaviors.

Therefore, teaching morality in North America could be teaching respect for life (Ikemoto, 1996), fostering development of empathy and perspective taking abilities (Piaget, 1932[1997]; Roots of Empathy, 2006) and also transmitting social and communications skills. Teaching such morality is free of religious and cultural biases and definitely falls under the category of universal moral conventions.

According to Nucci (2000), the curriculum-based moral education could rest upon four universal aims: (1) to develop the student’s abilities to reflect morally on their own social life and the structure of the society, (2) to engage in moral decision-making with examples relevant to everyday contexts, (3) to facilitate integration of general moral understanding with the student’s self-conception, and finally (4) to stimulate the capacities to act as moral agents and ethical leaders. Hence, the ultimate aim of modern moral education is not teaching children any specific rules, but rather general and universal guidelines upon which they can build their own sense of morality and interpret the existing rules.

In the long-run, promoting the understanding of the rules is far more successful than forcing them. Thus, the path to moral maturity is greatly a question of gradual acquisition, not one-time learning. Through cooperation, sympathy and reciprocity, moral educators need to use the above mentioned guidelines to create an atmosphere of trust and mutual respect within the classroom. Children attain a more in-depth understanding of concepts through peer discussion than through hierarchical indoctrination (Piaget, 1932[1997]).

There are already existing classroom-based programs which assist the child in moral development. Roots of Empathy (2006) has a main purpose of promoting development of children’s emotional literacy and empathy. Increasingly popular in elementary schools across Canada, Roots of Empathy has shown to be strikingly effective in reducing levels of aggression and violence among school children while increasing social, emotional and moral skills. Nucci (2000) proposed an active Discovering Ethical Leadership (DEL) seminars for middle school children to promote empathy, concern for others’ welfare, and a general regard for moral norms, and healthy respect for authority.

Older children may discuss Kohlberg-like dilemmas (see Kuhmerker, 1991) in contexts of their everyday lives. Also dilemmas posed in relevant movies, for instance, Kieslowski and Piesiewicz’s (1989) Decalogue could be discussed and justified.

The above mentioned examples are only several suggestions for curriculum-based moral education. It is a very important, but sensitive project. It needs to be carefully designed by education professionals to suit cognitive and social levels of child’s maturity. Consistently, this paper is not calling for an educational revolution, but a carefully planned educational evolution. It has depicted theoretical frameworks in which universal moral conventions could be taught. In fact, there is enough of theoretical grounds on development of moral reasoning to apply it into a real-life, North American setting. We have the tools. Now we need the courage and determination to commit to this project.

*I do not include the references. If you are interested in them, please feel free to contact me.

guru kieślowski przemawia o amerykańskim świecie

cytat

zasłyszane z filmu krzysztofa kieślowskiego "bez końca":

"wyjeżdżam. ... Niczego tu nie zastałem, nie ma już tego świata który był, który właściwie zapamiętałem ze zdjęć. Jakieś roześmiane twarze, ktoś komuś podaje rękę. Wszystko jasne, proste. ... Ludzie się pozamykali, porozdzielali, niewiadomo co dobre, a co złe. z jednymi być nie chcę, z drugimi nie mogę. próbowałem osobno, ale i tak zawsze się jest samemu. ... nic. wyjeżdżam"

i ja niedługo znowu gdzieś wyjeżdżam.