Old authoritarian raising methods are coming back…

Torment written by Ingmar Bergman.

[Updated and a little edited during the whole day]. From an article "Björklund more and more resembles a politician's Caligula" in which you can read that, with some right you can say that, Sweden’s leading school pedagogues are raging against the government’s school politics, or the lack of such politics:

The one and only solution are Nanny-ideals; more discipline, more grades, more tests. Something sounding like “the good old school, from the good old time”: the teacher standing in the teacher’s desk, pointers, chalk and detentions quite ironically.

On Wednesday Sweden’s current school minister Jan Björklund debated these things with the pedagogy professor Mats Ekholm in a morning sofa on TV (you can watch this debate here till March 18 2009 only).

Ekholm namely delivered a petition on the rigths of children to the school minister earlier this week, a petition that was sharply expressed.

All sorts of people (pedagogues, psychologists, grandparents, people in all sorts of occupations - and from abroad) have signed it protesting against the current government’s school politics. A reaction from the initiative takers of the petition leaning on decades of school studies, all showing the same thing, namely that demands only and slavish discipline doesn’t lead anywhere. My addition: probably causes problems instead, problems that can come much later too.

My comment: And it wasn’t much better earlier either according to a book about a study from the fifties on the discipline problems in the school then! Maybe these problems were of another kind then though, but discipline problems in the school are definitely not new!

It was long since one saw such a totally uninterested and arrogant politician in TV the author of the article wrote. Björklund openly derided the critics, cited deliberately the petition wrongly, ascribed Ekholm opinions he hasn’t expressed. Björklund lied casually for the viewers.

Ekholm and his colleagues are worried about the current societal climate and the climate of debate about children. Opinions, ideas and behaviors from people in power that has become more and more strict and a talk about the school and kids without nuances, about politicians in our current government talking about more punishments, new forms of being put in the corner for instance even though they are called something else (in a hope that this would cover what it's about up?).

According to the author of the article Björklund didn’t want any talk; he just wanted to pass his simple populist message to anxious parents forward; children need a steady hand, now we will get order. He knows that such messages go home in people. “Fuck pedagogy!”

And what was worse was that he didn’t seem to understand what use an intellectual talk about those things has. He didn’t even understand the problem formulation according to the article.

The author of the article thinks Björklund’s patronizing, superior politician style will become his flop sooner or later (my addition: it was authoritarian and arrogant!). Yes, I certainly hope so. To listen isn’t what he is best at.

See more about this petition in the earlier posting "Nanny-methods nothing for a democratic school...",

Addition just before lunch: And also see ”The obedience culture or ‘well intentioned’ violence…”; violence can be of other natures too, not only obvious, visible violence in form of spanking, but also in form of emotional abuse - and disrespect. See Andrew Vachss on this theme:

“...of all the many forms of child abuse, emotional abuse may be the cruelest and longest-lasting of all.”

"Emotional abuse is the systematic diminishment of another. It may be intentional or subconscious (or both), but it is always a course of conduct, not a single event. It is designed to reduce a child's self-concept to the point where the victim considers himself unworthy—unworthy of respect, unworthy of friendship, unworthy of the natural birthright of all children: love and protection."

And also see what Alice Miller’s for instance say, in the posting “Child abuse and politics…”

Now I have seen the talk on TV. Here are my notes: Björklund spoke about what’s “best for the children”! I was just taken aback with astonishment. Yes, he believes he is doing those things “for their own good”! And too many people think he is right, sounds reliable.

He also used the words or notions "order, peace and calmness" in school. And I don’t know if it was the programme leader or I who wondered

“But why ISN’T there calmness and peace? (And are, a little, noisy classrooms ALWAYS bad???)”

Then Ekholm tried to point out that a Markus Samuelsson has made a dissertation showing that it IS peaceful and calm in the schools and/or that many teachers CAN deal with things (with some exceptions. In the bottom of the linked site you find an abstract about his dissertation in English, and here is more information on this dissertation and its findings).

The topic or discussion why there isn’t peace and calm, when it in fact isn't, never comes up! And not either if it can be something good with children daring to talk, doing this frankly and openly! Or if we can (ought) to handle it (IF it is disturbing) without “stick and carrot” but in other ways! By the way, teachers over the world are reacting at the neoliberal winds in the school and what those mean for the school and all those working there (children and grown ups)!!

What outlook on children does Björklund have? Björklund has been talking about the importance of children getting “knowledge” in school. But he himself demonstrates the opposite; that he doesn’t respect findings from researchers and “people who knows”! And that he isn’t even familiar with what he is talking about (that he isn't familiar with school research for instance, i.e. the knowledge that in fact IS there!).

Ekholm tried to say that it’s important that we on a system-level have proper knowledge about how children are functioning (in different situations and respects, and that we want to learn more about this, MY addition).

Ekholm also tried to raise the topic what sort of public talk we ought to pursue in our/the society (a much more nuanced!!??), but with very little result or feedback from the school minister.

A retired university teacher, Pia Hellerz said something about frightening and alarming tendencies in our society, mirored in the school and the school politics, how we see children and the school and it's purpose. To use methods like disciplining, early grades and other control measures is to simplify for oneself she meant. So true!

And on top, Björklund said quite frankly that how the parents are raising their kids at home isn’t the politicians’ duty! They have nothing with this to do! With this he said, in my feeling and interpretation, that nobody (not we private people either belonging to the society too) except the parents have anything to do with how they are raising their kids.

What he is saying (as I see it) is that CHILDREN ARE PARENTS' PROPERTIES! But all adults, be it politicians or other people in the society, have the duty to speak up on behalf of other peoples' children when and if a child is badly treated, whether it's his/her own or another person's child, and certainly if a parent is treating his/her child badly (if we recognize this at all!!?? And not all do. We rather tend to minimize and belittle abuse, probably a lot of emotional, and both subtle and obvious abuse)!

But how parents are raising their kids are certainly their kids' business however!!??

Ekholm tried to squeeze in that he wishes we raise the demands even more on showing more consideration to children! Not the opposite! He didn’t get any response on this either from the school minister.

Yes, we ought to, IF we can! And why can’t we?

Albert Einstein:

"Modern education is competitive, nationalistic and separative. It has trained the child to regard material values as of major importance, to believe that his nation is also of major importance and superior to other nations and peoples. The general level of world information is high but usually biased, influenced by national prejudices, serving to make us citizens of our nation but not of the world."

"A human being is part of the whole, called by us the 'universe',
a part limited in time and space.
He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings,
as something separate from the rest -
a kind of optical delusion of consciousness.
This delusion is a kind of prison for us,
restricting us to our personal desires
and to affection for a few persons nearest to us.
Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison
by widening our circle of compassion
to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

We need to treat children with respect from the first beginning. But how should we actually handle a child showing disrespect? Who probably shows what he/she has been exposed to? Because how a child behaves is no mystery!? With treating it with more of the same? Is that the solution?

See Andrew Vachss in “You Carry the Cure In Your Own Heart. Emotional abuse of children can lead, in adulthood, to addiction, rage, a severely damaged sense of self and an inability to truly bond with others. But—if it happened to you—there is a way out.”