Friday, December 26, 2008

Meteorological anomaly


Not infrequently in winter the Chilcotin Plateau to the east, just across the Coast Range from us, fills up with very cold, dense, arctic air.

Usually when that air escapes over the mountain passes and down the fjords it is countered by relatively warm and damp Pacific systems and the result is a lot of wet snow on Mount Washington, our local ski mountain. This accounts in large part for the fact that Washington, which rises only 1585 meters above the Comox Valley, frequently has more snow pack than any other Northwestern ski hill, with the exception of Mt Baker in Washington State, which, at 3286 meters, is of course even more attractive to accumulation.


Most winters Campbell River gets maybe one or two “snow events”, which rarely last even days before they are overwhelmed by the rain. Some winters are just rainy from start to finish.

So this winter is off to an meteorologically interesting start, our contribution to Canada’s first coast-to-coast white Christmas since (apparently) 1973. So far we’ve had more than two weeks of cold (for us!) temperatures, dipping to minus 10 C and with one or two short exceptions, staying below freezing. When the snow finally arrived, it was that light, fluffy stuff we associate more with the Prairies. And it accumulated, a few cm at a time, until today we have nearly 40 cm on the lawn.

Unfortunately, Mt Washington has not received much more. Today it claims only 63 cm at mid-mountain; it is not unusual for it to have 2 meters by now. So the conditions there haven’t been worth the drive, and Sandy and I have been out on skis only once: yesterday in the local Beaver Lodge Lands.

However, it’s snowing again. The forecast is more familiar, threatening rain this afternoon. It’s been an interesting time, but with any luck we’ll be back to our usual weather pattern and winter habits soon.

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Bilious post

When I saw "Interim Reports December 11" on the Carihi Senior Secondary School sign today, I had one of those immediate and visceral reactions. I knew it wasn't reasonable and the topic no longer actually concerns me at all, but I could still feel my bile rise.

So why should the issuing of interim report cards still have the power to annoy after three and a half years away from the classroom? I'm glad you asked. Maybe if I explain it once more I'll retire that particular animus:

It's not primarily the implied increase in work load, although for some that's a significant factor. However, I was never in a school (they do exist) where the format for interim reports was mandated and hence time-consuming; consequently, my interim reports did not take a great deal of effort. Furthermore, in the later years, when class sizes ballooned, technology came to the rescue: if one used the mark manager effectively, one could produce a report for each member of an entire class with literally no more than a dozen keystrokes.

The downside of this method, unfortunately, is that while the results appear impressive, they rarely convey much useful information. Perhaps it could be useful for a parent to know that his or her child doesn't complete assignments, but the fact that he or she received 67% for assignment 34 gives only the impression of significance. For most parents (assuming he or she gets to see the report at all) the only important statistic is the percentage, and by three-quarters of the way through the course this is unlikely to be a surprise.

By the time December 11 rolls around, at a minimum parents will have had an opportunity to meet the teacher (typically September), will have received the first interim report (October), and received the first official report (November). Some of them will have received a phone call or two from the teacher, and all of them will have had the opportunity to phone or email or visit the teacher whenever they felt a need to do so. I can report that, in my 33 year experience in both high school and middle school, in BC, Quebec, and even Islington in Inner London, parents stayed away from the first teacher meeting in droves, they rarely phoned, and they were often less than grateful to be called. The parents who monitored their child's education made the contacts if concerned; those who didn't and weren't were not persuaded to by interim reports.

So interim reports are annoying because they take teacher time away from preparing for the classroom, and because they're not actually productive. They are also annoying because they suck hours of secretarial time and cost a considerable amount of money to mail.

Teachers are required to participate in this charade because interim reports are an administrative reaction to the statistical fact that too many children don't graduate from High School. Unfortunately, while there are many reasons for children not graduating, a lack of reporting is not one of them. In fact, this kind of reporting is a smokescreen: it gives the impression that something is being done about a real problem, without the school, the district, or the government having to spend the enormous human resources that would actually be required to make a dent in it.

And the kicker is that everyone knows it.

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Letter to my Member of Parliament

John Duncan, MP
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6

Dear Mr. Duncan,

I am more than a little disappointed to read in the newspapers that you are accused of accessing and recording an NDP caucus conference call. In itself, this would be an act unacceptable to most of your constituents, but to then use that recording in an attempt to score cheap political points is dishonourable, to say the least.

Frankly, sir, I expected better of you. Although I am not a political supporter of either you or your party, I have always considered you to be an honest man and a good representative of North Island. Indeed, the candidate I supported, Catherine Bell, said as much when speaking for all of her partisans, after losing to you during the last election.

If the reports are true as printed, you have clearly crossed that line which separates the ethical from the unethical, the honest from the dishonest. And you have done so for political gain. I think I can say without fear of contradiction that your predecessor would never have compromised herself as profoundly.

As a high school teacher, I spent literally years trying to encourage in my students a view of our society and world that was tolerant and ethical. I fear that actions like yours are corrosive to such ideals, and therefore corrosive to our society and system of government. You do our future voters and politicians no favour when you act so cynically so publicly.

Actions such as the one you appear to have perpetrated, sir, diminish us all, not the least your constituents in North Island. You owe us an apology.

Yours very sincerely,