This week's tutorial paper posed a question which is at the heart of a heated debate: Who is responsible for school violence?

Toshio Ohsako (1997) took ten separate studies on school violence from countries on every continent. While they all had different types of violence depending on certain factors, Ohsako (1997, p. 12) classified violence into three broad groups:

Similarly to Ohsako, I determined violence can be caused by five different sources. Depending on the country, state/province, and community, these factors can vary in degree and applicability. Many of these come from Ohsaka (1997, p. 13-4), although some other studies by Oliver and Candappa (2007) and Yaakov Iram (1997) are represented.

I would largely blame society and bad parenting for American school violence. Here's why:

Like I said, there are many different causes of school violence, all unique to certain communities, cultures, and societies. I think the absolute worst thing we can do is blame violence on one thing (like gun control) and widen our scope, looking at all possible causes and solutions. I also think we can realize that many districts take preventing violence "to the max" and adopt useless and ridiculous "zero tolerance" policies which do nothing but encourage overreaction and knee-jerking. For their part, the media should not rile the public up about how one thing is causing the destruction of our schools when clearly that's not probable: it will always be a multitude of causes which impact schools.

My apologies to all for not posting anything this week! I've been laid up with what they call "Fresher's Flu" which is rather nasty and not particularly enjoyable. I hope to do one tonight, although I have two tutorial papers due Tuesday so this weekend will be a bit of a mad rush!

Musical Madness March is approaching so I will be posting more regularly about the joys of music education in a multi-part series with guest authors! Something to look forward to I suppose!

Here are a few things I've seen and learned about Oxford. And some pet peeves too!

I do love Oxford though, a lot of fun!

So outside my window today there was a flock of geese that sounded suspiciously like a Tauntaun from Star Wars....

My tutorial paper this week answered the following prompt:

This brought me into the world of higher education, an area in which I most certainly do not specialize. However, it was interesting to read about many different options that institutions of higher education have in facilitating socio-economic mobility. Lois Bibbings (2006, p. 83) separates "widening participation policies" into two separate types:

The key term I focused on here is the "positive discrimination," mentioned in the definition of "hard options," which unfairly discriminates against applicants from good schools" (p. 75). I think it does much more than that and discriminates against hard work and determination!

I concluded in my paper that any kind of discrimination should be penalized, either "positive" or negative. What good is "eliminating" discrimination by substituting one type for another?? All it does is promote and even create tension amid the population!

Removing all discrimination would prompt universities to use more merit-based selection methods which treat students as individuals, not just a set of test scores. They should take students' situations into account and take those who have strong work ethics and who have the potential to excel in college. At the same time, colleges and universities should lower the cost of attendance and provide equal amounts of merit- and need-based financial aid. According to the College Board, the cost of attending any kind of higher education has tripled and in some cases almost quadrupled in the past forty years. Talk about not facilitating socio-economic mobility!

This burden does not just fall on the "institution[s] of higher learning," oh no. Secondary schools can begin the process much earlier than universities can. One big problem among students of low socio-economic status (SES) is that there is a certain level of mystery about higher education: they tend to think they are not “good enough” nor is it “for the likes of them,” regarding it as “highly risky and/or impossible” (p. 77). Schools need to demystify higher education and explain to both parents and students the options available to them upon graduation. They also must remind the student that in many cases, not going to post-compulsory education is an option as well! This is what guidance counselors are for!

I propose that universities pair up with struggling schools and provide outreach activities to all students (visits, tutoring, etc.). The key is to bring low SES students into the fold, demystifying higher education while also providing more services to every possible applicant.

Do you fundamentally disagree?
Want to "let me have it"?
Comment! I'd love to hear about it!

Schools have always been 'in' the center of communities, but in recent years, with the many additional demands and expectations placed on them, some schools have shifted their focus to in fact become 'community centers' in their own right.

Elementary schools in particular have partnered with doctors, mental health, Children and Family Services, child-care providers, and local service organizations to provide the many needs and enrichment opportunities that often go unanswered for today's children.

In my own experience, I saw the impact of what bringing pediatricians and mental health/social workers into the school on a regular basis did for our students and their families. In a rural setting in a rural county, a trip to the pediatrician from "my neck of the woods" was often a 40-50 mile round trip, and to see a specialist in the next county over could be over 100 miles. By partnering with the local pediatrics group, our students could be seen by a physician's assistant right at the school, and prescriptions were called into the local pharmacy in the next town over. We used the same system for mental health workers/social workers from the county's Human Services division. Parents were much more comfortable in the school setting where they were comfortable to tackle issues of abuse, homelessness, custody with a partner on their side.  Our school also hosted a food-bank and clothes closet supported by local churches and service organizations that families were free to "shop" at without having to travel directly to these organizations. GED classes, adult education courses, and family fitness activities were also offered at the school after school hours. In effect, we became the 'one-stop-shop' for families in our isolated community.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is a very simple diagram and, when I first learned about it, I thought it was just another stupid theory that I had to memorize.

Oh boy, was I wrong.

I think the future of schools lies in this very pyramid (yes, including the "WiFi" addition to the bottom).

What Maslow says in a nutshell is that physiological, safety, "love and belonging" and self-esteem needs must be met before any substantive learning can take place. If one comes from the 10th richest county in the United States, chances are one probably will not be affected by the bottom blocks (food, water, shelter, safety, etc.), although one never knows...

Here's where schools need to step in! Children who are missing these basic necessities in their lives can be provided them at school. For example:

• A school breakfast program, coupled with a normal school lunch (and possibly even a late lunch after school) would fix a large portion of their food needs.
  
• Extra-curricular activities and sports are a must, especially as many parents work from 9am to 5pm (or later) and have difficulty finding and paying for someone to watch their children. Activities also keep kids out of trouble, allow students to explore topics that interest them, and create friendships so the more activities the better!
  
• A medical and dental service, and not necessarily only for its students! Some schools have a nurse full time and have a doctor come and do check-ups once or twice a week, for both students and families.
  
• Student Resource Officers are police officers from the community who either visit or work in schools during regular (and/or afterschool) hours. SROs are common in many schools and serve a crucial community-outreach role necessary for students to feel safe and have someone they can talk to specifically about safety issues.

What I'm trying to say is that it's possible and necessary for schools to become community centers, pulling multiple cultures and backgrounds of students together in order to care for their neighborhoods, towns and/or cities. Once we provide for a student and a family's physical well-being, real progress in educating and uplifting individuals and communities can commence!

This past weekend I went on a trip to London with OSAP! In total I think about 40 of us went and afterwards I went to my godfather Steve's house and stayed with his family over night. This trip was anything but uneventful as the transit was marred in obscure accidents and mishaps.

All pictures available on Flickr and on Facebook!