Comments on: What We Ban and What We Allow

By: Angela

Angela — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:19:52 +0000

I never considered that before, Kristin. I tend to think that our desire to ban access to certain things is grounded in good enough intentions–I just don’t know that it accomplishes much. I also wonder if we tend to make assumptions about things “in general” based upon less frequent incidents. I’m thinking of the “sexting” scare in particular. I wonder how much that happens, and I also wonder if resolving the problem has to do with something different or something more than banning cell phone use. Don’t get me wrong–when I’m engaged in any kind of collaborative learning experience, I am sure to shut my phone off. I’d expect the same from kids. I guess I just struggle with the whole idea of taking them away altogether–I’ve seen examples of great learning that can happen when kids have access to them. Sticky issues, I guess.

By: kristin smith

kristin smith — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:12:38 +0000

Isn’t it interesting that we will ban books that we deem to have topics of controversy, but will allow our children to play video games that horrifically depict the glory of guns, shooting, bombing and toturous deaths?

Isn’t it interesting that books are banned with controversial topics, but our children have access to explicit media on tv, music, video, not to mention sexting via cell phone?

Give me a controversial, banned book anyday ….

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 00:41:06 +0000

I don’t understand our society at all, never have.

My first school was alternative and many of the kids had been sexually and physically abused. It still bothers me we didn’t do a better job trying to help them. No counseling, nothing. Tutoring if they were near passing the state test, but no help in so many key areas.

By: Fighting mythical battles « Otter of Fate

Fighting mythical battles « Otter of Fate — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:34:54 +0000

[...] October 1, 2009 · Leave a Comment Banned Books Week? How about Banned Resources Week? Overzealous internet filtering keeps students away from resources in the same way that censorship keeps books out of their hands–that’s the argument of this great post from WNY Education Associates. [...]

By: Angela

Angela — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:51:59 +0000

You’re right Tom–the statistics around this can be misleading. If you take a peek at other resources online, including incidents reported in more recent years–the sad fact is that very little has changed. Another interesting point–there are those who suggest that the incidents of abuse are actually much higher, since data is only taken from those who are willing to report. Children are often unable to do so. In fact, many cannot even name the experience and often dissociate from the trauma that occurs. What happened isn’t fully understand until much later. I’m a pretty firm believer in the fact that data is rarely complete–which is why it’s so important to look at a lot of different pieces before we draw conclusions, and it’s the conversation and learning that takes place around data that helps us develop good hunches. I have some pretty good hunches about the prevalence of childhood sexual abuse based upon far more than that quick citation—and the greater point of this piece, I suppose, has very little to do with that specific data at all. Even if one child in our world has been subjected to this, it’s important that the adults in our world–particularly those who have power–respond appropriately. It seems that every time this topic is on the table, greater effort is made to defend those who perpetuate these crimes, dismiss their actions, or question the legitimacy of the claims. We are, as a nation, unwilling to look at this closely or act on behalf of kids first. We tend to pursue our inclinations to disprove and discredit survivors first.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:42:40 +0000

That is a powerful juxtaposition. I'd love to work up some comparison stats between real life safety and internet safety. Alfie Kohn has some interesting thoughts that parallel this idea of misguided perceptions and subsequently misguided responses. I think you're dead on but I find the stats to be somewhat misleading. If you look at what's going on with the respondents from the data source around 65% are over 50 (almost 50% are over 60) so they're reporting on abuse statistics from an entirely different generation despite the fact that the survey was given in the mid 1990s. This doesn't necessarily make anything true or not true, it's just interesting to see how stats are slanted in different ways. Ever since I read this series of books I feel compelled to dig into the source of stats if possible and see for myself. So after all that, thanks for an interesting post that made me think more and learn a few things.