Mental health connection to girls ethnic clothing

A new study by Queen Mary University of London has raised some interesting questions. It suggests that in the UK Bangladeshi girls who wear ‘traditional’ clothes suffer from fewer behavioural and emotional problems than ones who wear more mainstream clothes.

This apparently only applies to females and nothing equivalent could be seen in the mainstream community.

It is extremely doubtful that the actual clothes make any the difference, and the report does not claim it does. There is likely to be some indirect link.

One of the authors of the study, Professor Kam Bhui, , felt the result was "surprising", having expected the reverse. He conjectured the reason could be:

"Traditional clothing represents a tighter family unit, and this may offer some protection against some of the pressures that young people face.

"What it suggests is that we need to assist people who are moving from traditional cultures and becoming integrated into Western societies, as they may be more vulnerable to mental health problems."

One wonders if it has occurred to the reports authors that yes traditional clothing does indeed indicate a tighter less integrated family with more ‘traditional’ attitudes towards females and all that that implies.

Bangladeshi girls that don’t resist this come under less pressure from their families. They are often resident in effectively ghettoised areas, where this is the prevailing attitude and may well attend schools containing a significant number of girls from similar backgrounds.

Girls from traditional families under these circumstances that choose to step outside the somewhat narrow confines of this, to embrace a more mainstream ‘western’ lifestyle are surely more likely to come under increased pressure from the family, face the possibility of disapproval, loosing family support in some cases - and in some extreme cases even the possible threat of honour killing.

These factors are bound to undermine their equilibrium.

A comparison with girls of more mainstream integrated Indian decent might prove instructive.

Local Council use anti terror legislation to spy on ordinary family over school application

This is not the first time this blog has touched upon the UK’s sinister (but innocuous sounding), Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

Now don’t get me wrong - in this day and age there may be a place for some of the draconian measures within it. But only if kept under the tightest controls, left exclusively in the hands of the police and security services - and fiercely overseen and regulated.

As was predicted, this slapdash piece of state control legislation is being used by local councils - and who knows what other jumped up junior clerks, to spy and intrude upon ordinary people - on us.

It seems Poole Council are getting into the James Bond business, spying on school children and their parents. Petty beurocracy given powers far beyond their remit or capability.

If this act gives them the powers to do so, when it was railroaded through on the basis of countering terrorism, then it is simply yet more of New Labour’s Fascism-Lite (or maybe not so Lite anymore) at work; and deeply, morally, wrong. It should be repealed, or amended beyond recognition at the earliest opportunity.

It is part of the same mind set that uses so-called anti terror legislation and the police to violently eject and bar an 82 year old who speaks up for what they believe in from a party conference and heckled a minister. The same mindset that wants us all to have to carry ID cards to prove we have a government granted right to even exist.

It is supposed to be the other way around, we the citizen are supposed to grant the government the limited right to exist for around 4 years.

Make no mistake. If legislation exists it will, sooner or later, be used. None of us should countenance any legislation without keeping it in mind that it may be used - not as allegedly intended, or advertised, but on ordinary people.

Not just mad bombers, or criminals who ‘deserve it’ but people like you and me.

How long before they use this and other legislation to spy on you over something like your council tax, or a library book or parking ticket, for all we know they are already…

NUT suggests pupils 'lured' into UK armed forces

It is their conference week - and the UK National Union of teachers (NUT) in the form of Catherine Brennan, have raised their skirts and are showing their anti military unmentionables in public.

They are attacking the Ministry of Defence (MOD) for giving careers advice in schools, alongside banks and the local council, marching in the opposite direction to the current New-Lab stance claiming pupils are being 'lured' into joining.

Mealy mouthed Steve Sinnott, the NUT general secretary briefed that he was ‘concerned’ youngsters from ‘poorer backgrounds’ were being targeted.

"Youngsters from the most disadvantaged backgrounds have more limited opportunities in life than youngsters from better off backgrounds.

"It's simply a fact. I am not saying that youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds cannot get something from a career in the military."

There is an apparent subtext here that one might suspect may indicate a certain masked antagonism and contempt.

He rather betrays his prejudices in that he seems absolutely unconcerned about those ‘youngsters’ from what he presumably feels are probably ‘better off backgrounds’ enticed into Sandhurst… I don’t suppose he is suggesting that they can’t get something from a career in the military either.

Education in the UK continues it’s inexorable slide under New Labour

At one time the British education system was one of the leading ones in the world and arguably helped pioneer the concept of universal education.

Sadly, this is no longer the case.

In the stewardship of the present government and confirming what many believe but has always been strenuously denied by New Labour it now seems our world standing has slipped out of the top ten.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development produce an international study. The Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa). They assess the performance of 15 year olds and are published every 3 years. The UK’s marks are not good – a definite ‘could do better’.

The UK avoided participating in the 2003 round of tests and their chickens are coming home to roost now. The latest assessments now place the UK, previously in the top ten, 24th in maths and 17th in literacy.

According to the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study, the fact is the reading performance of 10 year olds in England has fallen to a world ranking of 19th.

Government ministers have tried to spin away the results, attempting to claim the rankings were not comparable with previous years. But a spokesperson for the OECD refuted this insisting the comparisons were "perfectly legitimate".

If the Government were actually serious, or even capable, of managing the education system they should look at scrapping all of the meddling changes and targets they have introduced over the last decade or more - Before them we were in the world top ten, now we are not. It speaks for it's self.

Kids avoiding healthy School meals

The Fib Lib-Dems are saying the number of pupils eating school meals has dropped by 428,000 in the last two years and they are concerned.

They are complaining that that the healthy eating campaign has put kids off eating school dinners and are demanding Nu-Lab take fresh action to stop pupils stuffing themselves on fatty food until they explode.

When I was at school many of us would have happily gone hungry, rather than eat the school meals on offer, ‘School Dinners’, as they were known.

Unfortunately we did not have that option. We had little old ladies who had apparently been unable to secure posts as women prison guards, on the grounds that they were just too scary.

They had a gimlet eye and the infallible ability to detect untruth. They would not let us out of the dining hall until they were satisfied that we had eaten ‘enough’.

Perhaps David Laws, their schools spokesman, should suggest recruiting some scary old ladies, (preferably the kids own grannies) instead of complaining about ‘meltdowns’ and 'balls ups’. This lot would probably need ninja training first, as they did not go through ‘the war’.

Still he probably does have a point. Anything the Government has a hand in these days is bound to be a cock up of some sort, even something simple. As he said: “This is a classic example of a Government policy”

Trying to persuade a bunch of finicky kids to eat something decent, who have never seen ‘real’ food and whose parents’ culinary skills are limited to microwaving the virtually unidentifiable contents of a ‘value pack’ was never going to be easy.

UK Report suggests teacher’s gender not important

Alan Johnson, UK Education Secretary, prior to the cabinet reshuffle, had been concerned that there are not enough male primary teachers. Also suggesting that lessons should be fast, practical and factual in order to engage boys attention.

Aparently a report by Schools Department officials poo-poohs this. It seems they actually asked the children themselves, rather than do the sensible thing and check the matter objectively. Apparently the older pupils thought men were harsher on boys than women teachers. Translation – Didn’t let them get away with so much. one suspects.

Did they get them to vote for sweets, fizzy drinks and cake for school meals as well?

Researchers also found that two-thirds of pupils rejected the idea that the gender of their teachers mattered.

Is this reliable given that they have been bombarded with sex equality messages and have learnt the answers expected of them. Plus there is the probability that any actual difference would be a subliminal effect the pupils would not necessarily be aware of?

Kids that age are not known for being deeply self aware. Thinking about it - that goes for plenty of adults too.

One reason why there are not many men willing to teach at this level these days is probably the paedophile witch hunt. Evidence suggests pupils are not averse to making false accusations and paranoid parents can make unfounded accusations spurred on by some of the more ‘responsible’ tabloids.

I seem to recall after one witch hunt a paediatrician came in for some grief from some more of the intellectually challenged readers - well they liked the pictures anyway ;-).

What Guy in their right mind would put themselves in the way of that?

French Kissing Cyber bullying in the USA

It seems teachers in the UK are not the only ones being cyber ‘bullied’.

While teenagers still think that most bullying happens offline, one third of online teenagers in the US have reportedly been cyber-bullied, according to the Pew Internet Project .

The most common complaint from teens, was about private information being shared, rather than direct threats.

One has to question exactly what they are counting as bullying. Is it the perception, or do they have a list and does it actually include things that most people would not even consider bullying?

Though it may not necessarily be the case here, I have seen some surveys where the criteria were dubious, to say the least, effectively designed to maximise the response.

According to this report, girls were more likely to be bullied than boys. Girls tend to network more, so that makes sense. People who share their identities online were apparently the most vulnerable.

Some 32% of teenagers questioned had experienced one, or more, of the following:

• Receiving an aggressive email, IM or text message.
  
• Having a rumour spread about them online or having.
  
• Having a private e-mail, instant message, or text messaging forwarded, or posted where others could see it.
  
• Having an embarrassing photograph posted online without permission.
  

The last two are a bit ambiguous. The more sensitive, the more likely to experience bullying if it is intended, or not.

This from a 16 year old girl certainly fits the bill:
"There's this boy in my anatomy class who everybody hates and some girl started up this I Hate [Name] MySpace thing. So everybody in school goes on it to say bad things about this boy."

I guess the one who started that - and the ones that joined in - never heard of Columbine High School, or Virginia Tech...

According to Secret service investigators, many of the shooters in those situations had feelings of alienation, or persecution, that eventually drove them to violence.

Teacher's say mobile phones are weapons

The National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT), a UK teaching union, is calling for mobile phones to be classified as ‘potentially offensive weapons.’

Chris Keates, their general secretary said that pupils were using them to bully their teachers and they should be banned from school premises on those grounds.

She had evidence of over 100 teachers being bullied by phone, email, or online and is worried that sites such as Ratemyteacher and Bebo which, provide a vehicle for false allegations and abuse by pupils which can damage teachers' self esteem and careers.

Stating: "These sites are fed by pupils' misuse of mobile phones. The time has come for mobiles in schools to be placed in the category of a potentially offensive weapon and action taken to prevent their use by pupils while on school premises.”.

I don’t imagine anyone reasonable would take issue with preventing their “use by pupils while on school premises”. Use of phones in class would not appear, at first sight, to be exactly conducive to learning.

However given the fact that the government is cracking down on cyber bullies and has given teachers the power to confiscate mobile phones, also one presumes individual schools could and should make use of the phones in class against the rules any way - why are the NASUWT raising the matter in this way?.

One also wonders what practical use this would all be anyway. How would it stop bullying outside of school hours? A site can probably be more easily be accessed from home than school?

As for ‘offensive weapons’. UK law already classifies anything that is used as an offensive weapon as an offensive weapon. Though in this case the phones are not actually really being used as a weapon in the normal sense at all, but then there is also the offence of ’Harassment’ that would be applicable.

Still, one can understand teachers might be reluctant to use the law to handle what they may see as a matter of discipline and one has some sympathy for the NASUWT. They always opposed the abolition of corporal discipline in schools.

From recollection, whatever your ‘moral’ stance on the subject, this was a teacher’s only actually effective means of control in their arsenal. Just knowing it was there was enough 99% of the time. Now pupils know teachers have no real sanctions, from their point of view.

Unfortunately for the NASUWT, after vigorous and vocal campaigning against corporal discipline by the ‘Fluffy Bunny Squad’ - particularly the teachers' pressure group STOPP (Society of Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment), abetted by the National Council for Civil Liberties and around half of NUT (National Union of Teachers) branches, a ban was imposed in all UK state schools in 1986, it was extended to private schools in 1998.

A survey, carried out by FDS International for The Times Educational Supplement has found that a significant majority of parents believe pupil behaviour had declined since then and over half were in favour of the return of corporal discipline in schools.

It is worth noting, that the argument against corporal discipline, was largely along the lines that; if you treat children violently (and opponents classified corporal discipline as violent), it will produce a violent society.

Interestingly, though corporal discipline has not really been used in schools since 1987, violence and discipline problems appear to have become much worse since then and to a greater problem now than ever.

One has to wonder how still apocalyptically worse it might have become, had the cane not been banned…