There’s yet another article on “learning styles” which demonstrates that this concept has no usefulness in teaching. Attempts to co-ordinate learning style with teaching have come to naught. This demonstrates, once again, that if one’s livelihood doesn’t depend on results, one can believe in, and practice, any fad. The learning styles myth is usually just a throwaway concept to demonstrate that the speaker has esoteric knowledge beyond the grasp of the unenlightened. I’m not sure what the proprietary situation is on this paper, but if anyone wants it, I will send it–my email address is grantcoulson@rogers.com. For the netbot harvesters, harvest away, my email is well-protected.
The New York Times says that the census will provide a jolt to the economy because thousands of people will be hired by the government. If this is such a good idea, why doesn’t the government hire all the unemployed? Just a minute, that’s a reason why the Great Depression was “Great”. Also, there was Roosevelt’s high-wage policy, Burlesque dancers were also prohibited from putting on too many shows in a night to give less attractive girls a chance. No, you don’t have to make this stuff up. If a government program fails, it must be repeated.
The Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen was a failure. I hope so. “Green jobs” will also fail. One can easily win bets by going against political spin. Watch for the watermelons. Green on the outside, red on the inside–envirosocialists.
And this makes things better: “…federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14 percent to 19 percent of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months – and that’s before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.”
On a local weather note, a cold front is protecting Ontario from a large winter storm which is passing South of us. Think about that in terms of Global Warming.
Back to psychology.
from the book: Shadow Dancing on the Grave of Hope:
What does work?
The research of Don Andrews and James Bonta shows that effective criminal rehabilitation programs are those which, (1) concentrate on criminals with a high risk of recidivism, (2) concentrate on changing behavior which is directly related to criminality and not on unrelated hypothetical issues such as self-esteem, depression and anxiety, (3) are carried on, after release, in the world outside of custody and, (4) adhere closely to program protocol. All of these stages must be backed with sanctions that “bite” such as return to prison or loss of “good time” for failure to adhere to the program.
The real life (outside of incarceration) component of correctional rehabilitation, known as follow-up, is vitally important because correctional programs must take into account competing reinforcers “on the street”. One of my most poignant memories of my time in corrections comes from an offender named Therese. She said, “You don’t know what it’s like to be a ‘happenin’ person’.” It was exciting to be the center of attention as a drug dealer when “everyone wanted you. You get calls at four in the morning. There’s always somethin’ goin’ on.” That statement was a vivid reminder of reinforcers in direct competition with those of a law-abiding life . Alas, Therese was found in a stairwell with a bullet in her head a few years later. And no, I don’t make up these examples, even the poignant ones.
This Is Too Easy, But I’ll Do It Anyway
At a conference to examine causes of a riot in a woman’s prison, one of the participants, a tenured professor, insisted that all would be well if the people in the prison were called residents rather than prisoners, convicts or inmates. Rehabilitation is merely a question of renaming. Labelling theory, where this nonsense comes from, had a great influence on Canada’s Young Offender Act. A person under the age of eighteen who commits a crime, however heinous, is not allowed to be named, except under rare, special circumstances, lest they be tainted for life. This is what passes as effective programming in academia and is another example of what happens when continued employment is independent of productivity in publically funded organizations. Symbolism and intention are emphasized and accomplishment ignored
Really Hard Time–Boot Camps
It seems very satisfying to some that convicts should be yelled at during all their waking hours, worked hard and continuously, and be demeaned in all they do. This is the basis of the “boot camp” type of rehabilitation based on the early training routine of many armies. During this basic training, the theory is that all of the trainee’s “personality” is removed so that a new, more manageable type of soldier can be created. A conceptual problem with this procedure in corrections is the assumption that a manageable person will make a more law-abiding citizen. Regardless of theoretical strengths and shortcomings, boot camps are, according to the evidence, no more effective than ordinary incarceration. One sleight of hand in boot camp publicity is selection of low-risk offenders, who are more amenable to all kinds of discipline, and then pointing to their low recidivism rates as evidence of the success of the boot camp training. For example, criminals with a low recidivism rate of .13 (13% of inmates reoffend in a year, for example) go through a boot camp program and have a recidivism rate of .13 upon release from boot camp. This rate is then compared to the overall rate of .72 of general offenders and the conclusion is that the large difference is due to boot camp programming. In reality, the .13 should be compared to .13 and the conclusion drawn that being in a boot camp has no effect. The failure of boot camps does not affect the appearances on TV talk shows of people insisting that, “Boot camp saved my life.”
Andrews, D.A. & J. Bonta (2003). Psychology of Criminal Conduct. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co.
Cheerio and ttfn,
Grant Coulson
