where your education closes doors, when it should be opening them

I have heard, time and time and time again, how the 'education system is screwed up'. Many times. I've watched the Sir Ken Robinson video, I've discussed it with friends, and the book I'm reading now - 'Linchpin' - skims over it too. And I've always kind of agreed - I remember ranting a bit about it when I did an issues thing in year 9 about the nation curriculum. But there are times when you can talk about something a lot without it really hitting you. Like advocating for the death penalty, until you know someone  personally who's being put on death row. And then it's personal.

Well, this just got personal.

So right now, my sort of excuse for a job is tutoring. I have three students. One is a girl in year 12, for English - let's call her Vera. I have another kid in year 8, who's a family friend, and I'm prepping her to take an exam for a selective entry school (*growl*). She will be henceforth known as Zena. And lastly, I just got a new year 12 student for History, but we won't worry too much about her. Mostly, this is about Vera and Zena.

Selective entry schools. I hate them. With a passion. I know hate is a strong word, but for the amount of unnecessary pressure they cause, I think they can take my hate. I had to try out when I was in year 8. They have a policy where they don't take more than 12 kids from any school, and my school met that limit, so I didn't get in. I know I would have gotten in otherwise, because they sent me a letter explaining this, and they said that if I really wanted, I could apply through another way. But I sabotaged this application, because I had decided that I was not going there, that I could do well in my below-average public school, and  I would prove it. The arguments I had with my mother, the tears - bad memories, man. But I proved it, didn't I?

Yet it came back to haunt me with little Zena. Zena... When she started tutoring with me, she was really quiet and reserved. She's still pretty impassive, but I think it's her natural state. Our relationship has evolved, in the sense that she talks to me more, and she's even brought in her school homework, which makes me giddy because it means she actually thinks that I help her...

Anyway. Selective entry schools. Firstly, they don't do anything. I have friends who have gone to these schools, who have told me that these schools don't do much for them. Really, there's a higher level of competition, but in the end, the school doesn't have to do much because they already handpicked the smartest kids around, so it's sort of guaranteed that they're going to do well. And more often than not, these kids already attend jizbillions of tuition classes, so it's not like they have to put in a lot of effort. So these nerdy kids go into this high pressure environment with a million extra classes on the side, and they get good results because really, they've had it written for them their whole lives, and when it's all said and done, the school looks great because all their kids did well, and they take credit for it, but they didn't actually do much for the kids because those kids were already going to do well anyway.

And then you have All Other Normal Schools that take in all students and cater to all needs, and people think they're not so great because there isn't a 90+ average in VCE, but in fact, these school are just doing their job by accepting everyone and giving them all an opportunity. Selective entry schools are missing the point of schooling in general - it's not about pumping out the highest achievers, it's about giving everyone the foundation of a good education to pave whatever path they want in life. If it's something academic, that's great. If it's not, well, that's just as great.

No matter what people say about my school, and God knows what they say now considering the shooting of Numan last year, the arrest of two more this year, plus the death of one who went overseas to apparently fight for ISIS - all boys I knew personally, two I went to primary school with... this is a whole other crisis... BUT. No matter what they say, I think my school is a good one. I think we are limited in resources, and the students have difficulty seeing it, but the teachers really try to help you get wherever you want to go. They try to help you achieve your personal best. They help you when it comes to academics, they help you get into TAFE, they help you join police academy or whatever. They do it without judgement. And I appreciate that.

Anyway. Selective entry schools are stupid, they serve no worthy purpose, and I hate them. Let me talk about the kind of pressure this puts on kids.

On the weekend, Zena went to one of the specialised tuition centres that train kids specifically for selective entry schools, to sit a practise exam. She brought the exams and results to her next class with me so we could go over them. She was disheartened by her results.

So I know from experience that these exams are pretty harsh. I had to attend tuition a month or so before doing the exam myself, and at first, I was absolutely distraught because I did terribly on each practise test - like, barely scraping 50% at times. And then I learnt that this was pretty average in the class, if, at times, above average. And then I was mortified.

But taking a look at the practise tests now - I was downright horrified. Disgusted. Let's talk about her reading comprehension test. It runs for 30min, with no extra reading time. There are 50 questions. Did you see that? 50. That's already less than one minute per question. But now keep in mind that it's reading comprehension. Now tell, where the Hell is she supposed to find time to read the damn passages before she tackles the questions?

It's basically designed to fail kids. It's impossible to excel. It's just...

It... It...  makes them feel stupid because they don't realise it's impossible.

Can you see how cruel that is?

I mean, it's not even just this tuition thing. Think about VCE. You can't get a perfect ATAR, only close. And that system is all about ranking. I mean, let's say a vast majority of one cohort worked super hard in preparation for an exam, and they all got 90%. Well, that just gets standardised so that when they get their results, it gets scaled down because it becomes average. How is that fair? Why must we take down a generation because so many are smart? Why can't we embrace their effort?

Even university. A few weeks back, I was in a tutorial, and everyone was expressing their frustration over the recent results that had come out. I was feeling quite good because I did well (it's my blog, let me brag ^_^ ), but then I listened to the tutor talk to the others, and ... ugh. Basically, she said that if everyone did well on their exams and whatnot, the higher ups would tell them that their assessment wasn't 'sensitive enough'. So in fact, no one should feel bad about getting an average mark, or a credit, because, well, average isn't bad. And I'm not saying average is bad. It's just that the way this tutor spoke, she was basically saying that they design tests with the expectation that most people won't do particularly well, and we should be satisfied with that. It's that... attitude. That attitude that you can't ever shine, so don't bother.

And sometimes they don't even seem to care about their subjects. In one unit, last year, the staff in our tutorials said at the start that they didn't expect people to show up to lectures or the tutorials, which weren't compulsory. For our assessments, they said that we wouldn't need to put in too much effort - they even told us that we could keep all our notes open when we do the quizzes. I've had similar experiences this year too. Now, how do you expect anyone to be motivated if you can't even fake enthusiasm for your own subject? If you, who teach it, don't value it, why should we?

Do you see what I'm saying, or am I just in an irrational rage about everything?

So let's get back to Vera. For English, you have three main types of written pieces that you do - a text response, a language analysis, and a context piece. A context piece is really a written piece of your own choice, which responds to a prompt about a theme that you've studied for the year - the main ones being Identity & Belonging, Encountering Conflict, and Whose Reality? I don't know if there's another one... But basically, you study them with a few texts, and it's got a lot of philosophical aspects to it.

So my kid is doing Identity & Belonging, which is what I studied. I coached her into writing a creative piece, a sort of made up reflection. Her writing has really improved since I started tutoring her, not because of me in particular... I think it's just that the school she goes to isn't so well off, according to her, and because her peers aren't too bright, the teachers are focused on bringing them up to speed, and they don't challenge them that much. But I've been challenging her, and she's basically risen to the challenge. She has deep ideas. She expresses them well, because I've helped her to expand her vocabulary, and so now she has more words to say what she wants to say. I'm so proud :')

So she does her SAC for context, and she gets her result. It's a B+. It's not bad, all things considered, but we had hoped for more. But then she showed me the feedback. There's literally ticks everywhere, there's positive commentary on the clarity and depth of her ideas... So where'd she lose a whole grade? On the marking rubric, the only 'negative' or 'critical' thing this teacher had to say was that she was too 'wordy'. Well, I didn't know what she meant by that in relation to the piece, because it looked reasonable to me. I know what loquacious looks like. I've tutored kids, and seen peers writing, and believe me, I know loquacious. As for word limits, technically there aren't any for any of the essays you're supposed to do. It's your own judgement call - in the end, they're going to look at your response, the quality of them, and how well you express them. If you can do this in less words, good for you, and if you can do them in more, that's fine. As long as you finish on time. So she can't have taken off a whole grade for it being too 'long', because there's no such thing as too long - if you wrote it within the time limit, well, that's that. Does that make sense?

So I got Vera to ask her teacher what she meant by that. Her teacher basically said that for example, where one person might say 'let's have lunch', Vera's approach was a bit 'when the sun is at its peak on the third day of the week, let us convene under the ancient oak at the park in the corner of the city for a simple meal, yadda yadda yadda'. What is that? That is loquacious.

I understand that. Except this piece wasn't like that. It was a creative piece, for God's sake, so it had description in it. But it wasn't irrelevant or frivolous. It had a point. It was art, and it suited the mood of her piece. Besides - even if you were to write this as an expository, I would think that you would still have to be quite descriptive if you want to break down your ideas for this kind of topic. Identity and Belonging has the potential to be really deep, so you really can't just leave it at 'let's have lunch'. You need to explore it. Heck, that's the whole context title - exploring issues of identity and belonging.

I mean, this goes back to the whole 'schools kill creativity' thing, right?  I don't think all schools do that. Just some schools,  and in particular, some idiotic teachers. When I was in year 12, yes, my teacher was wary of letting kids do creative for context, because he understood that it could be difficult to come up with something brilliant and original on the spot. But he humored whoever wanted to try it, including myself, and let me say it again - I did  well. What's important is that he let us make our own choices, because to him, it wasn't about doing it a certain way to get a certain grade; it was about achieving your own personal best, something you could be proud of. And he was happy if you were.

So I guess this rant touches on many little things to do with schooling and education, a bit here and a bit there. Let me sum it up for you:

1. Don't waste your time with selective entry schools. They suck. 

2. There are some institutions, some schools, some teachers, that just - for whatever reason - drag you down. Sometimes they do it because it's a system they're used to, sometimes it's because they think they're doing what's best for you. Sometimes they don't know what they're talking about. But they suck too.

3. Don't let people make you feel stupid. Wherever you go, whatever you do, put in a 100%, and you may reap the rewards, or you may not. The point is, you need to feel like it's your best, because you can't rely on these systems or people to appreciate you. You need to appreciate yourself. Own your genius, whatever kind it may be. 

Erm... take feedback too. I don't mean that people should always hug you and tell you you're awesome just because you did the work. Sometimes you are wrong, sometimes your ideas have a flaw or two. That's okay. Take it and improve. But don't let people limit you. Don't ever let them hold you back.

Man, it feels good getting that off my chest.

Peace in,
Laila

These Are My Favourite Things #4

So what happened between then and now is life. It goes on, as it normally does. And things get better. They put themselves back together. It all works out.

Oui, you were right Ghadeer, as was Arvie... as was everyone. I knew it then, I know it now. It's just that at the time, you're just so overwhelmed, it's not so much the worrying about whether things get better, it's more about the when will they get better, because you can't see the light at the end. Yet.

I got there.

So it's okay.

And now I'm 20. 

How completely and utterly bizarre is that? I'm the big two-oh. I'm two decades old. It's not that I feel different or anything. It's just that the idea of it is so... strange. I feel like things should be different. But I feel like I'm no different than I was at the end of high school.

I mean, I certainly know more things, I've experienced more things, I can do more things. But as a person, I don't think I've evolved much. Or I can't see it.

Anyhow, I actually haven't much to write about. I feel like my life has become a pleasant series of minute moments, only worth reiterating for a short period of time, before they become irrelevant. I say 'pleasant series' rather than 'pleasant moments', because in all due honesty, there are still the normal stressors of assignment/exam pressure, family dramas, and everyday hiccups, but that's to be expected. And  it's okay, I like it like that.

But I like keeping this blog alive, so I thought I'd do another one of these things, just because. It's kind of therapeutic, too.

Firstly, I've been re-reading Harry Potter, because, as a self-professed fan (and having been labelled as one too), I actually haven't re-read it too many times. Watched the movies a dozen times over, but not sure about reading the series. It's embarrassing. I'm not going to bother recommending it, because, well, come on. If you read books, you must have already been recommended this series jizbillion times, and I can't see why my recommendation would be the one to finally compel you. But. I wanted to show y'all this...

Okay, okay, I’m going to tell you what Hermione sees in Ron.

A trio is a balancing act, right? They’re equalizers of each other. Harry’s like the action, Hermione’s the brains, Ron’s the heart. Hermione has been assassinated in these movies, and I mean that genuinely—by giving her every single positive character trait that Ron has, they have assassinated her character in the movies. She’s been harmed by being made to be less human, because everything good Ron has, she’s been given.

So, for instance: “If you want to kill Harry, you’re going to have to kill me too”—RON, leg is broken, he’s in pain, gets up and stands in front of Harry and says this. Who gets that line in the movie? Hermione.

“Fear of a name increases the fear of the thing itself.” Hermione doesn’t say Voldemort’s name until well into the books—that’s Dumbledore’s line. When does Hermione say it in the movies? Beginning of Movie 2.

When the Devil’s Snare is curling itself around everybody, Hermione panics, and Ron is the one who keeps his head and says “Are you a witch or not?” In the movie, everybody else panics and Hermione keeps her head and does the biggest, brightest flare of sunlight spell there ever was.

So, Hermione—all her flaws were shaved away in the films. And that sounds like you’re making a kick-ass, amazing character, and what you’re doing is dehumanizing her. And it pisses me off. It really does.

In the books, they balance each other out, because where Hermione gets frazzled and maybe her rationality overtakes some of her instinct, Ron has that to back it up; Ron has a kind of emotional grounding that can keep Hermione’s hyper-rationalness in check. Sometimes Hermione’s super-logical nature grates Harry and bothers him, and isn’t the thing he needs even if it’s the right thing, like when she says “You have a saving people thing.” That is the thing that Harry needed to hear, she’s a hundred percent right, but the way she does it is wrong. That’s the classic “she’s super logical, she’s super brilliant, but she doesn’t know how to handle people emotionally,” at least Harry.

So in the books they are this balanced group, and in the movies, in the movies—hell, not even Harry is good enough for Hermione in the movies. No one’s good enough for Hermione in the movies—God isn’t good enough for Hermione in the movies! Hermione is everybody’s everything in the movies.

Harry’s idea to jump on the dragon in the books, who gets it in the movies? Hermione, who hates to fly. Hermione, who overcomes her withering fear of flying to take over Harry’s big idea to get out of the—like, why does Hermione get all these moments?

[John: Because we need to market the movie to girls.]

I think girls like the books, period. And like the Hermione in the books, and like the Hermione in the books just fine before Hollywood made her idealized and perfect. And if they would have trusted that, they would have been just fine.

Would the movies have been bad if she was as awesome as she was in the books, and as human as she was in the books? Would the movies get worse?

She IS a strong girl character. This is the thing that pisses me off. They are equating “strong” with superhuman. To me, the Hermione in the book is twelve times stronger than the completely unreachable ideal of Hermione in the movies. Give me the Hermione in the book who’s human and has flaws any single day of the week.

Here’s a classic example: When Snape in the first book yells at Hermione for being an insufferable know-it-all, do you want to know what Ron says in the book? “Well, you’re asking the questions, and she has to answer. Why ask if you don’t want to be told?” What does he say in the movie? “He’s got a point, you know.” Ron? Would never do that. Would NEVER do that, even before he liked Hermione. Ron would never do that.

 - Melissa Anelli THROWS IT DOWN about the way Ron and Hermione have been adapted in the movies on the latest episode of PotterCast. Listen here. This glorious rant starts at about 49:00. 

I saw this on CricketFreak's tumblr (I do not thank you for the distraction, but then I sort of do), and I decided it was gold. I'm not usually one to fangirl about relationships, but I've always loved how they panned out in Harry Potter, so it irks me a lot when people criticise them. Ginny is an awesome gal, and she and Harry make such a great team, as do Ron and Hermione (*squee*). But what I really love about that little rant is that it just revealed to me how important details are. I have always loved the movies for Harry Potter, no matter that they can't do the books justice, and I've always thought the cast was perfect. But I never realised how the little shifts to do with the character really impacted the bigger picture - how utterly perfect it was in the books, and how damaged it became in the movies. Poor Ron, mostly. I think I filled in the gaps when I watched the movies, but now I see that he was robbed of his noble traits to be made comedic relief, almost. What a tragedy. I still love the movies, but you know, I really appreciate the finer details of the books now. 

Okay, that was just food for thought. The real food that I recommend is sugar, of course. I don't think I've ever done this before, but I really ought to, because honestly, I love sweets, and baking to sublimate my rage has always worked for me. So now I'm going to link you to a website that I tend to covet, because it is my all time favourite dessert/sweet blog, and it is utterly divine.   

Behold: Pretty. Simple. Sweet. 

I'm telling you, this is gold. I've made a dozen recipes from here, and they have all worked out superdy well. 'Superdy well' is an understatement. I don't have words. And I love Shiran, the lady that runs this blog, I really do. This will sound creepy, but she makes my dreams come true. And she's such a sweetheart (haha, see what I did there?). Anyway. My favourites thus far are her Cinnamon Streusel Coffee Cake, Cheesecake Brownies, & Classic Peanut Butter Cookies. You do not know how hard it was for me to narrow it down to just those. Trust me. Everything is worth trying. I've made it my lifelong goal to make everything on her blog. Until then, I spend an inordinate amount of time perusing her recipes and salivating. So there you go. My secret. Take a look. She has pretty photos too :) 

What else can I recommend? Music. I have two new obsessions.  

Firstly: The Script. Most people know them, right? 'Breakeven' and 'The Man Who Can't Be Moved' were pretty big. And 'Hall of Fame'. Well, Panda gave me two of their albums, and I just found a dozen more songs that I absolutely adore. Give the Love Around, No Words, Superheroes, Never Seen Anything (Quite Like You), The Energy Never Dies, to name a few, and ...

 

(I mean, the video isn't particularly spectacular, besides the fact that he is actually on that wire so very high up... but it's the song. This song  :') ) 

Secondly: Ella Henderson. Have you heard of her? I first heard her song 'Ghost' when I was placement last year, one of my paramedic mentors kept playing it, and I did quite like it. But then Panda reintroduced me to her, and gosh, she is something else.  She's become our cruise-y singer, because she just has all these wonderful songs that you really just have to blast out and sing along to. My recommendations: Mirror Man, Glow, Give Your Heart Away, Pieces, The First Time, and...

Come on, ain't that the perfect feel good song? ^_^ 

Anyhow, I don't have anything else to recommend, except maybe getting yourself a cat, and reading. Every day. It's good therapy. 

That is all. 

Peace in, 

Laila