LDRS591

Introduction

The goal of this article was to look at how young people view the First World War. Specifically, if they hold common views about the war or whether or not they have a variety of different perspectives. Specifically the battle at Gallipoli, which is largely accepted as a great moment of national identity emerging.

Methods

A total of 1,453 participants were chosen according to age range. There was a purposeful mix of genders included. In addition, students were picked from a wide range of schools from small to big regional areas to ensure that the results reflected as much of New Zealand as possible. Surveys were administered in two parts. For the first one 43% were European, 16% indigenous, 1% as Pacific Peoples, and 22% Asian (Sheehan & Davidson, 2015, p.263). The survey, in this case, asked two questions: 1) Is Gallipoli a significant event for us to remember? 2) If so, what aspects of Gallipoli are significant for us to remember? (Sheehan & Davidson, 2015, p.263).

The second survey was given to a smaller amount of 329 students from twelve secondary schools. These schools were chosen due to their broad range of cultural representation. Of this group 46% were European, 23% Asian, and 11% Maori (Sheehan & Davidson, 2015, p.263). For this survey, all students were in social studies unlike in the first study. They are also provided with different questions. By looking at the sample page from the survey included in the article, students in survey two were asked to choose which images from Gallipoli they would choose to share in creating a museum display.

Results/Findings/Conclusions

The first was a survey showed that while many viewed the Gallipoli conflict as important they didn’t draw on any historical evidence to support this idea. Then again, it was noted in the article itself that Gallipoli is not taught specifically at this level in the curriculum. The second survey was given to the same age range but only 345 people who were actually enrolled in social studies courses at school. This time the results showed that while common ideas of Gallipoli were still present there were a great number of people who “demonstrated a range of perspective that challenged the cultural memory messages of the war remembrance in New Zealand in diverse, nuanced and critical ways” (Sheehan & Davidson, 2015, p.260).

The results showed that while young people believe that Gallipoli is important to commemorate they had very little understanding of the actual conflict itself. The results given for why Gallipoli should be commemorated had a large range. The majority, being 45.5%, attributed their reasons to loss of life and sacrifice. Meanwhile, 32% said it should be remembered because it contributes greatly to New Zealand’s national identity. The rest had a mixture of reasons including relatives who fought in the war, the 100th commemoration ceremony, no reason, or that violence was something not to be celebrated at all. All in all, although there were some students who did show knowledge about the conflict, however, this number was small in comparison.

Personal Comments

I found this study to be interesting yet slightly obvious. It was very interesting to see all of the reasons that students gave as to why they should commemorate Gallipoli. I was a little shocked and embarrassed that some simply attributed it to merely the 100th anniversary in 2015. Yet, as an educator, I am aware that students ages thirteen and fourteen wouldn’t know specific details about war conflicts. Specific conflicts in war are not looked at in Canadian curriculum until grade twelve due to its mature content. I don’t expect that pre-teens would have a complex and educated response to the conflict. As far as my research question goes, this study is useful because it gives me insight on how much pre-teens know as far as conflicts of war go in history. It definitely alludes to how much educators have taught on this level for this topic.

Reference

Sheehan, M., & Davison, M. (2017). We need to remember they died for us: How young people in New Zealand make meaning of war remembrance and commemoration of the First World War. London Review of Education, 15(2), 259-271. doi:10.18546/lre.15.2.09

The e-book listed below was written by Samuel Totten. Information Age Publishing is the company that published the book. It is well known for publishing journals and books of scholarly merit. Totten is a retired professor from the University of Arkansas and editor of a series on genocide studies with Transaction Publisher.

The book is about how to teach social issues. While its intended audience is educators it could easily be used for parents or students themselves. The book covers a large range of topics including genocide, environment, and democracy.

The book was published in 2010. It’s hard to say whether or not this book can be considered old. On one hand, I don’t think of the year 2011 as being too long ago. However, a lot of new research can be done in almost a decade. I would hope that a new edition is published by the time 2020 comes around as this would allow the book to consider new material in the relative fields.

Concerning bias, it is clear that Totten tries to avoid prejudice in all areas, “We have tried our best to include a broad array and a solid representation of the most notable and powerful models, programs and approaches to teaching and learning about social issues” (Totten, 2011, p. 5). This is specifically seen in the chapter dedicated to a global perspective.

I thought the book was a good place to start for my research question regarding how to teach difficult content. I really liked that the content never concentrated too much on one subject. Chapters weren’t named after different historical conflicts, but instead different perspectives and themes. Overall, I will consider this book in my research because it is clearly peer-reviewed and knowledgeable on the subject.

Sources:

Totten, S. (2011). Teaching and Studying Social Issues: Major Programs and Approaches. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

http://ezproxy.student.twu.ca:2152/ehost/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=cf425c2c-1fd0-4115-a7fb-3911f1207aed%40sessionmgr4007&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=nlebk&AN=470276

National Writing Project. (n.d.). Retrieved January 13, 2018, from https://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/nwp_au/317

The article listed below is written by Philipp Mittnik and was published in the year 2016 in a peer-reviewed journal by Mercy College. The goal in writing this piece was to make a case for why Holocaust and Nazism should be taught at younger ages in Austria. While its obvious intended audience is educators in the Austrian school system, the information could easily be valuable to parents, those working in government, graduate students, and historians. Of course, the information isn’t limited to Austrians either. People from all over the world who partake in ceremonies to remember those affected by war could find the informative insightful as well.

In addition to being a respected and well-known speaker, Philipp Mittnik has a Ph.D. from the University of Wien. His specialties are in history and political science. He is currently the head of the civic department at the university and has many published works. Needless to say, he is a reliable source who is well-versed in his area of expertise and is trustworthy as far as knowing how to compose professional scholarly work.

It is difficult to say whether or not this article has a bias as I have no idea what the school system is like in Europe, let alone Austria. Yet, I have a feeling that Mittnik is right in his idea that Austria and Germany do not want to be associated with this chapter in history because of the role they played (Mittnik, 2016, p. 138). He also explains that these topics are often merely mentioned briefly as oppose to being explored with deep discussion (Mittnik, 2016, p. 139). I concur with this as well.

I will say that throughout the article Mittnik clearly shows that while he is a scholar he has limited experience working with small children. His article fails to address at what age exactly what level of material should be taught. He does say something about ages nine and ten being good ages to start going with in-depth material on this subject. However, he keeps referencing ‘elementary school levels’ without understanding that children as young as five are included in that mix. Anyone working in a school can tell you there is a difference between a child of six and eight years old. Mittnik does not get specific enough with ages and thus his outline on how to teach this history falls short in a major way. In addition, he criticizes the lack of how often words such as ‘National Socialism’ are mentioned in texts. I personally find that large words like this wouldn’t be suitable for younger ages. Not for what it means but for the complexity of the word itself. Then again, if Mittnik had specified what age these texts were assigned to I may have agreed that the word should be been mentioned more often.

Sources:

U. (n.d.). About Philipp Mittnik / / Political scientist- Austria. Retrieved January 12, 2018, from https://upclosed.com/people/philipp-mittnik/

Mittnik, P. (2016). Holocaust Studies in Austrian Elementary & Secondary Schools. Global Education Review, 3(3), 138-152. Retrieved January 12, 2018, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1114862.pdf.

I found that each of the authors of the articles posted conceptualizes evidence-based leadership in a slightly different way. The Patton article viewed evidence-based leadership as seeking the absolute best of “lessons learned”. When the best is sought out the more transferable and dependable the research is. The Trybus article looked at evidence-based leadership through an educational frame. In this case, evidence-based research was seen as high standard but also a necessity to achieve reliable and accurate information to help students. Lastly, the Walshe and Rundall article had a medical take on evidence-based leadership. From the clinical perspective, not the healthcare management one, research is not only important to have but also to use properly as it is often applied incorrectly. In addition, having an environment in which research and evidence are supported and encouraged helps it flourish thereby helping those in the medical field give their patients the best treatment possible. In all of these cases, the evidence is being considered as reliable information that allows professionals in all fields to better serve others.

In my opinion, evidence-based leadership is important because it separates speculation from fact. Professionals can contemplate forever but unless there is factual proof that a certain thought-process produces the intended results then the process is pointless.

On another note, I believe research is not only the best place for professionals to learn but also beginners. For instance, as a teacher, whenever I have a student who has a rare medical condition the first place I go to is concrete research on the subject. This enables me to be a better leader because it gives me a more firm understanding of how to go about teaching a particular student whether it be adapting their work or finding new ways to scaffold their thought processes. In cases like these, however, I’m already in a leadership position. Which makes me wonder, should evidence-based research only be for experienced leaders? Or can it be for anyone on any level of experience in any field?

Sources

Patton, M. (2001). Evaluation, knowledge management, best practices and high-quality lessons learned. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 329-336.

Trybus, M. (2007). Understanding scientifically based research: A mandate or decision-making tool? Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 73(4), 5-8.

Walshe, K. & Rundall, T.G. (2001). Evidence-based management: From theory to practice in health care. The Millbank Quarterly, 79(3), 429-457.

All teachers in the educational field have students who learn at different speeds and in different styles. It is important as an educator to try and accommodate each learning style in order to maximize the gain for each person. Occasionally I have students with rare medical conditions that need even further support that is more specific to them. While it may seem non-optional there are many teachers who feel they don’t have time to adapt every lesson for just one student and leave much of the research to educational assistants who are assigned to help certain students in the classroom. However, I made the decision in both the case I describe below and in ongoing situations to do my own research and take the time to implement adaptations as necessary.

When I taught in London I came across a challenging situation when I was given a student with William’s Syndrome. Being that there wasn’t much information in this file I was left to find whatever resources I could. I first began by consulting my sister Kristin who is an experienced doctor and my sister-in-law who is a pediatric nurse. All three of us went for coffee and discussed what William’s Syndrome is and its effects. This was done in order for me to get a basic understanding of the affliction. From them, I learned that William’s Syndrome is a mental disability that affects development and spatial awareness. Because of their developmental delays, they learn to read, write, speak, and walk at a much later and slower rate than average.

For my own evidence-based learning, I first looked at the most prominent researchers in this field. Through these resources, I found that while development in those with WS is significantly slower than most there are some incredible silver linings in their abilities as well. One study found that 100% of those with WS were kind spirited (Dykens, 1990). In tune with this, other findings suggested that the amygdala of a person with WS has a greater volume than the average person’s, this may be indicative of greater social awareness (Carrasco, 2010). Another study showed that children with WS show no racial biases (Santos, 2010). Essentially what this information was telling me was that while people with WS are lower in one area they clearly surpass in others.

Concerning the specific area of teaching students with WS, I found an amazing resource by Levine, Mervis, and Pegg. With this resource, I received a plethora of information not only for my lessons but my day-to-day interactions with the student as well. For instance, students with WS have a short attention span and so it was recommended that I include social games in my lessons (Levine, 2013). They also enjoy relaxation techniques such as yoga and calming music. In addition, to help them with reading and math is was recommended they wear noise-canceling headphones during quiet time in class.

While I could go on with the ways in which I adapted my lessons, the point I am trying to make is that without strong evidence-based research I would not have been able to properly lead my student with WS or other help staff in this area.

Sources

Carrasco, X., Castillo, S., Aravena, T., Rothhammer, P., & Aboitiz, F. (2005). Williams Syndrome: Pediatric, Neurologic, & Cognitive Development. Pediatric Neurology, 32(3), 166-167. Retrieved July 15, 2017, from http://repositorio.uchile.cl/bitstream/handle/2250/127156/Carrasco_X.pdf?sequence=1

Dykens, E. M., & Rosner, B. A. (1999). Refining Behavioural Phenotypes: Personality, Motivation In Williams & Prader-Willi Syndromes, 104(2), 158-169. Retrieved July 16, 2017, from https://my.vanderbilt.edu/pwsi/files/2011/11/Refining-behavioral-phenotypes-personality-motivation-in-williams-and-prader-willi-syndromes.pdf.

Levine, K., Mervis, C., & Pegg, R. (2013). Information For Teachers: Strengths, Challenges & Strategies For Working With Young Students With William Syndrome. Retrieved from https://williams-syndrome.org/sites/williams-syndrome.org/files/WSA%20Information%20for%20Teachers%202012.pdf

Santos, A., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., & Deruelle, C. (2010). Absence of racial, but not gender, stereotyping in Williams syndrome children. Current Biology, 20(7), 307-308. Retrieved July 15, 2017, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982210001442