newly ancient

The problem with our society is that ageism has been institutionalized. It is what makes personal assaults like this on students socially acceptable, since we aren’t really full people, are we? It limits out freedom of speech, since we can’t be expected to say anything intelligent. It lets us get away with ‘murder’ because we can’t be considered fully responsible for our actions. I think it is reasonable for certain restrictions to be placed upon people based upon their scientifically proven development and maturity. Unfortunately, the law and society draws a hard line in the sand, universally, which is based upon fear instead of fact.

Most neurologists agree: the brain is not fully developed during adolescent years. Adolescents, and to a greater extent children, lack full intelligence and emotional maturity. However, most research puts the brain peak at sometime in an individual’s 20s–not at 18. I do not disagree with this, but the problem is that this science is not reflected in society and the law. This research yields two conclusions:

1. The brain does not develop at an equal speed for everyone. Some people achieve intellectual or emotional maturity well before their 18th birthday. Others never do.
2. The age of 18 is not a critical milestone in the average individual’s brain development.

Unfortunately, these points are not taken into account within the frameworks of the law and society. In the eyes of the law (and thus society), everyone is an adult when they reach the age of 18 (though they can lose that status if proven to be severely deficient). If the age of majority isn’t based upon science, then it must be based on tradition, right? Wrong. Before the 26th amendment, the age was at 21 (which is still reflected in drinking laws). In other societies, it has been lower (around 13 or 14). Therefore, tradition doesn’t play a large role in why the line should be drawn at 18.

Put simply, the line is drawn at 18 because of fear. Society is always afraid of the next generation. Some day, we will be taking your jobs and stealing the upper hand. Naturally, those with the power (read: voters and politicians), would like to keep that age as high as possible so as to delay their eventual loss of power. The problem with this approach is that it ignores the merits of an individual in favor of a simple rule. (On another note, the powers are perfectly happy to use labor lower than 18 both domestically and in the military.)

Obviously, I am not going to change society with a blog post. However, that’s not my goal: my goal is to get you to stop standing behind the paltry defense of irrational laws which legislate the value of vast swaths of people. Instead, I ask you to judge people based upon their individual merits, intelligence, and maturity.

Of course, a natural argument against that is that you as a teacher are entrusted with the well-being of your students. While that is true, it does not apply online since almost none of your students are online.

To me, I think the contract between a teacher and student is a sacred one. (By association, the parents as well) In exchange for the teacher’s time and expertise, the student offers himself to be open to learning from that pool of knowledge, and trusts the teacher. Coming with this, the student (and his parents), expect that the teacher will always have the best interests of the student at heart. Where the teacher loses sight of that, even if he thinks he is doing the “right” think, for whatever reason, that contract has been breached and the teacher is at fault. Keating broke this pact, and dire consequences ensued.

Most importantly, this contract supersedes age: even if your student is 52, it still applies. However, when not engaged in a student/teacher relationship, simply asses an individual based upon their personal merits. No matter how hard it may be, try to put assumptions based upon age aside and see a person for who they are.

Naturally, this brings up some moral and legal conflicts which Christian summarizes quite well:

Intellect aside, our ability to engage in serious/sincere conversations inside our classrooms and inside the blogosphere demands that we accept the roles of a) legal and b) moral implications. With regards to a “student” that is under the age of 18, the courts and society both demand that adults must play by different roles than children (using the legal sense of the word, not a pejorative sense of it). Arthus — intelligence, computer/coding/digital knowledge and blogging ‘personality’ aside — you desire for ‘peer’ status with legally adult bloggers (etc) holds ground in terms of common decency, respect, and our collective interest in ‘learning’. On the other hand, once you get into moral and legal realms, it begins to fade in terms of legitimacy (not because you or someone else lacks ability, but because society and the courts deem it as such). Because of that, any adult who acts in a formal or informal way in the blogosphere must still behave in a way that a child is not required to. Consider your ability to make mistakes when it comes to blogger discourse/debate to be more protected than that of an adult who is working beside you or in opposition to you.

As discussed, society and the law do create higher standards for “adults” than for teens. The way that society and the law can be completely avoided is simple: ignore them. Rather, act in such a manner that society and the law would never have reason to question you. To do so, treat everyone (online) as though they were morally and legally a child. What that means:

1. No cyber-bullying.
2. No creepy stuff. You know that guy. Don’t be him.
3. Respect people’s boundaries. If someone chooses to remain anonymous, leave it at that, whether they are an adult or a teen.

If you hold yourself and others (including youth) to a high standard, then society has no reason to question you and your motives. Achieve equality through raising the standards for everyone. (To be clear, the student/teacher relationship will always supersede this when someone is actually your student.)

Just as I expect adults to follow these guidelines, I hold myself to them as well. If students want to be treated equally, we must accept equal responsibility.

1. Photo by Elephi Pelephi on Flickr
2. Photo by Mikey G Ottawa on Flickr
3. Photo by Thorne Enterprises on Flickr

You hear about it in the news all the time. Becoming sustainable or carbon neutral is the latest thing to do. When we look at these trends, we should see how the education system can become sustainable - environmentally, economically, and socially. Ethan Bodnar planted the sprout in my head that became this idea of a sustainable education. In order to digest this, we must first determine what it means to be sustainable according to Wikipedia:

Sustainability is a characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely.

In the case of education, that process would be the creation of individuals prepared to function and thrive in society. This process must be sustainable on three levels:

• Socially - The system must be socially sustainable. This is probably the most important factor of the education system. Students must feel comfortable and thus learn in the system. Additionally, the community must feel a strong connection to the system.
• Economically - The product of the system (an educated individual) must be equal to or greater than the amount spent on them. This means that we must create individuals who can excel in the economy through innovation, knowledge, and hard work. Thus, they will contribute enough back to society to offset the cost spent on them.
• Environmentally - The system must not hurt the environment and must produce individuals with a respect for the environment surrounding them.

Wikipedia outlines various characteristics of sustainable development that can easily be applied to the education system, so as to accomplish the above objectives.

1. Participation and ownership. Get the stakeholders (men and women) to genuinely participate in design and implementation. Build on their initiatives and demands. Get them to monitor the project and periodically evaluate it for results.

   Students, teachers, parents, and community members should all be involved in the design process of the school. In addition, students should be invited to take an active role in the leadership of the school. Finally, the school should welcome to the community and provide outreach programs.

2. Capacity building and training. Training stakeholders to take over should begin from the start of any project and continue throughout. The right approach should both motivate and transfer skills to people.

   Students and the community should be able to maintain the education system without Federal assistance. Students should receiving transferable skills usable in the work force.

3. Government policies. Development projects should be aligned with local government policies.

   Educational standards should be implemented and followed on a national basis so education is truly equal.

4. Financial. In some countries and sectors, financial sustainability is difficult in the medium term. Training in local fundraising is a possibility, as is identifying links with the private sector, charging for use, and encouraging policy reforms.

   Develop fundraising methods and mold parts of the fundraising model after higher education. If we offer a better education, it will be easier to encourage former students to donate and provide a supplemental source of income for new projects.

5. Management and organization. Activities that integrate with or add to local structures may have better prospects for sustainability than those which establish new or parallel structures.

   It is far better to build a new initiative or curriculum, buy newer technology, or pay more competitive salaries then to build a new school. Integrate management throughout the system to save resources.

6. Social, gender and culture. The introduction of new ideas, technologies and skills requires an understanding of local decision-making systems, gender divisions and cultural preferences.

   While the standard for achievement should be national, the methods of reaching it should be tailored to the local socioeconomic group.

7. Technology. All outside equipment must be selected with careful consideration given to the local finance available for maintenance and replacement. Cultural acceptability and the local capacity to maintain equipment and buy spare parts are vital.

   A careful selection process should be observed when buying new technology. Teachers and students should be brought into the process. Open source and web-based solutions can help to ease costs and often will work with current hardware. Technology should be close to what students will see in the work force and extensive training should be given to students and teachers so they can leverage the latest technologies effectively. Technology should be open and transparent to the entire community.

8. Environment. Poor rural communities that depend on natural resources should be involved in identifying and managing environmental risks. Urban communities should identify and manage waste disposal and pollution risks.

   As in higher education, schools can set an example for society by using renewable practices. In addition, schools should foster a respect for the environment in students.

9. External political and economic factors. In a weak economy, projects should not be too complicated, ambitious or expensive.

   Whenever possible, schools should be scalable and should be locally sustainable within 5 years.

10. Realistic duration. A short project may be inadequate for solving entrenched problems in a sustainable way, particularly when behavioural and institutional changes are intended. A long project, may on the other hand, promote dependence.

    There wil allways be more students needing education, so short-term solutions are not acceptable. Instead, the quality of teaching should be the #1 focus.

By observing the practice of sustainability, we can ensure that students will be well educated for generations to come. In addition, schools can be seen as a boon, rather than curse, by non paternal taxpayers. If we do not change, schools will continue to be stagnate if not grow worse. Just as in business, sustainability should be an important factor of out education system.