Mam for president!

Teaching is so much more than just teaching content! As a teacher you Jane to fill so many roles. The one I love best is talking about real world issues that will affect my students outside of the classroom, now and after school. Today was just such an example.

Part of the Gr 11 & 12 Life Sciences curriculum is looking at the impact that humans are having on the planet. Today we were discussing the consequences of climate change, and I pointed out that as a result of increased droughts people migrate to cities, which puts more stress on food resources.

Student 1: We should ban all immigrants because they steal our food.
Student 2: Build a wall!
Me: That's like getting a cut and, instead of cleaning it out, you simply put a plaster on it in the hopes it will get better by itself. Short-term solutions create long-term problems. Rather, we should be thinking 20, 50 or 100 years ahead and making sure our solutions solve the problem for the people living after us...

Student 3: MAM FOR PRESIDENT!!

Well, that wasn't quite the response I was looking for, but okay!

Not this year, she ain't!

I used to think I was a disciplinarian, that I had such great discipline in my class. And I do. I mean, my classes work, and pay attention, on the whole. I've realised though, that I'm not actually all that strict. I achieve what I do by making my lessons interesting, but I don't actually set the highest standards for my classes in terms of what I want them to achieve. Oh, I talk a good talk, but I've realised that anyone who watches me teach any class other than a top set will quickly realise that my expectations of mixed ability and bottom set groups is low, and that becomes a self-fulling prophecy.

As with most teachers, I guess, I focussed on certain things, and left other things undone, unnoticed, or deliberately ignored. (Others, like chewing gum, I spot a mile away. Don't bother coming near me with gum in your mouth - I will see it, and you will be punished.) Because of the nature of teenagers, this ultimately led to difficulties later in the year, as the kids pushed boundaries to find out how elastic they were, and I got increasingly tired of battling the same fires.

While I recognise what is possible for me given my personality type, level of involvement at school and at home, something had to change. Why? Because I have a class of kids who have been specially placed in my class purely on the basis that they are underperforming. This year, I have taken upon myself, as subject head, the responsibility for sorting these kids out. Huge task. (I speak as someone who was an underperformer at school, and thus as one who has been at the receiving end of many programmes to attempt to make me perform.) Maybe impossible. Yet, I have to try. Thus, in this one class I have made an agreement with myself that I will sweat the small stuff. The talk I talk must match the walk I walk. They must achieve 50% or more, because I say so, because they are capable of it, because it's good for them. To do so though, means that I have to sweat the small stuff with this group. I simply have to set the standard and refuse to deviate.

Some in this class have been taught by me before. They were expecting me to be the same as last year. They were under the misapprehension that I would be laid back, and not really care about the small stuff. And they were WRONG.

I have been keeping tight records on the small stuff - textbooks not covered, books not brought to class, stationery missing, homework not done, late to class, assignments not handed in on time - and I have been emailing home. With this class, I am prepared to take the 2 mins out of the lesson to stop the class and email the offending child's parents. Right there. In front of the class. And I have been following up. I have already issued 2 DTs, and I don't usually give DT's. (The debate about the worth of DT is something to be had at another time. Suffice to say that for me, in this moment, with this class, DT works.)

The result? My students from last year commented today that "You mean business this year" (or words to that effect). You bet your bottom Rand I do. This year, if you fail, it will not be because I did not do my utmost to help you. It will be because you failed to meet the minimum expectations and because your parents failed to help you meet those expectations. It will be because you lied to yourself, to me, to your parents.

In this class, you will arrive on time, bring your books to class, do your homework, bring your stationery, listen attentively, ask questions, engage with the work, hand in assignments on time, and generally get off your lazy backside. I am no longer accepting your half-hearted efforts as meeting the minimum standard. You will bring your best effort to my class, because you deserve it and I deserve it. That's "all" there is to it.

(Of course, I'm simply going to avoid asking the all-important question of whether I can go against the grain of my own habitual teaching practices and sustain this for the full academic year... It's one class. I can do this. Right?)

Worker worth his wages?

It's that time if year again when the unions strike as part of their wage negotiations.
The miners have ben on strike for weeks now, with many dead after the cops opened fire (although I believe things are more complex than just laying the blame at their feet). Needless to say, the country has lost billions as a result.
Then there is the truck drivers' strike, now in it's 2nd week (I think). ATMs have run out of cash as a result.
On the one hand, I have little sympathy, because their actions have cost the country money, because their requests are out of life with what can realistically be awarded and because they resort to violence, which I am totally opposed to.
On the other hand I feel for them. They work long hours, in dangerous situations, for very little pay. In fact, how they manage to survive on such a small salary is beyond me.
The amount we pay someone us a measure of the worth we ascribe to them. As a poory paid teacher, I know about that, although I get more than either a money our a truck driver.
A friend recently had her eyes opened to the worth ascribed to teachers as evidenced by their pay skip when she became a school treasurer. Working in marketing, not only are the salaries exorbitant but the bonuses are ludicrous. When teachers work overtime, which we do, we get an honorarium of a few hundred rands. Compare that with overtime in marketing, where you would get several thousand our even trends of thousands of rands for the same amount of time and effort.
Or look at Mr Zuma's salary...one of the biggest in the world, and we've got a third world economy....
Something is just so wrong with this picture. From this perspective, I can almost see myself becoming a communist. Yet, there should be some justice somewhere.
How is it that someone who designs an as for a drug like nicotine, while exploiting women to do so should earn in one month what a miner earns in a year? Mining its our primary industry, which brings in bucket loads of foreign cash into the country, while the advert only promotes drug abuse and self-destruction. Where is the justice in that?
How do we fix this though? If the miners receive their demands (and again, I've heart rumours that they are supposed to be receiving the amount they are demanding, but a fat cat I won't name is pocketing the difference) then as a teacher I feel my salary should increase by about R4000-5000 nett per month as well. And what about our police, armed forces and health care professionals?
What are we worth, SA? Those of us who are working to keep this country functioning, or are generally working to promote our future as a nation - what are we worth to you?

Cell phone trial

A few folks who follow me on Twitter have been asking about a cell phone trial we'll be conducting at school starting this week. Although I have a class blog up and running, it's a closed readership to protect the kids taking part. I therefore reasoned that it might be a good idea, periodically, to post something about it here.

At the moment, the school has a no cell phones policy. If a child is found with a phone, it is confiscated (with SIM card as well) for a period of time and the child has to sit a DT before it may be returned to them.

From Wednesday a group of 50 Gd 11s (top academics) will be allowed to use their phones in their maths and LS classes only. The phones have to be handed in at reception in the morning where they will be placed in a box. This box will be collected at the start of the lesson, and returned to reception at the end of the lesson. Any of these kids found with their phone outside of these two lessons will suffer the normal penalties.

In class, the kids will be allowed to use their phones after they have signed a AUP. The AUP has a clause in it that states that if a teacher feels the use of the phone is disrupting the learning of others, or the owner, it will be removed. That's purely to cover us, so that if we need to we can remove the phones during lesson. Other than that, the kids may use their phones in any way. We're not going to restrict them too much at this stage.

Initially, we anticipate that they will use their phone for personal communication a lot.  I don't anticipate that the personal communication will stop, much in the same way that teachers will send personal emails from work, or log on to Twitter or FB during their free lessons. What I hope for, and what we're aiming for, is the ultimate position where having the phones in lesson becomes so normalised that it becomes just another tool.

I'm hoping that the use of the phone will:

• help to extend those who are currently bored
• engage those who are currently too shy to participate in lessons
• increase collaboration between students
• raise attainment for all
• improve the quality of lessons as teachers become aware of misconceptions currently held or difficulties being faced with content
• enable learning to continue beyond the time limits of the lessons, making learning a whole-life experience (rather than a classroom experience)
• teach pupils to engage with technology respectfully and appropriately
• teach pupils how to monitor their online presence
• make lessons FUN (not at the expense of content and learning, but in addition to it)

Like any good experiment, I have no idea how this will turn out. It might crash and burn. The kids might be unable to cope with the extended freedoms. I, and the other teacher involved, might be unable to cope with the change in teaching style this will demand.

But what if it doesn't? A vast majority of schools in SA can't afford to buy ipads, or tablets, or notebooks, or even build another computer lab. Yet almost every child has access to a cell phone. In this land where the infrastructure for hard-wired computers is difficult to install because of the distances and terrain involved, and in an environment where so many are poor, cell phone learning has to be the way that education in SA will move. If I'm right (and if only I had the arrogance to say, in the words of Prince Humperdinck, "and I am never wrong"), and if this trial works, then maybe allowing cell phones in class is the way to move forward.

When the first computers were brought out, everyone scoffed. Look at the way they have revolutionised the world, and particularly the world of teaching. Everyone is so scared of using cell phones for a variety of good reasons. BUT. What if we as teachers learnt to engage with this technology, taught our kids how to engage with it responsibly, and then used it as a teaching tool. Surely then, cell phones would have the power to revolutionise teaching in much the same way that computers did originally?

We'll never know until we try. So I'm going to try.

In the words of a man I highly respect, Tony Reeler (head of Pretoria Boys High and the former head at our school), if you aim low, you will definitely achieve your goals, but if you aim high, you will achieve more than you thought you could, even if you don't reach your goals.

Fake it till you make it

I used to think that emotions (from the inside) changed behaviour and body language (on the outside). Thus, if you were sad, you looked sad. If you were happy, you would look happy. Then, a few years back, I came across the idea (in the Bible, actually) that you could fake it till you make it. It's the idea that you do something repeatedly (i.e., on the outside) until you feel it on the inside. It's the idea that even if you don't WANT to pray, or worship, or believe, you do it anyway, because (besides the fact that it's good for you and the right thing to do because God is worthy) eventually your heart will come in line with what your head says is a good idea, and then you'll WANT to do it and enjoy doing it.

Putting this into practice has been one of the ways that I've been able to move from intense grief to healing. In the deepest part of my grief journey, I wanted nothing to do with God. (I realise now the paucity of my belief in God, how skewed my understanding of the gospel was, how seduced I'd been by the 'health, wealth & prosperity" gospel, but that's another story for another time.) Reading through Scripture though, I realised that I had a choice to make - either God is God, or he isn't. If he is, then the Bible is true and I needed to follow it. If he isn't, then why bother pretending with Christianity?

I decided that God is God. Since I needed to follow the instructions in the great manual of life - pray, worship, meet with believers on a regular basis, etc. - but didn't want to, I had to fake it to make it. I know God doesn't want us to be religious, or just go through the motions. For me though, it was only in my obedience to the Word, irrespective of what my heart wanted, that I have found my heart being won back to God. (Again, I know that all this is NOT by me, but is actually God drawing me back. It is the result of HIS action in my head, and in my heart, not by anything that I have done out of my own strength.)

OK - so all that is merely background to what I really want to say.

Having read some of Malcolm Gladwell's stuff and enjoyed it, when G was given a book voucher we decided to buy his first few books. I've just started reading 'The Tipping Point'. As with other books he's written, it's well-written and extremely interesting - if somewhat depressing. I was amazed, though, to discover that the 'fake it till you make it' idea features in the early portion of this book.

As the title indicates, Gladwell explores the reasons behind big changes in the world. He examines two events to try to illustrate the reasons he believes that revolutionary changes and trends can be predicted: the resurgence in demand for Hush Puppy shoes, and why Paul Revere's night-time ride resulted in such success for the colonial revolution while that of his friend - William Dawes - in the other direction was a complete failure.

As part of a discussion about personality types, he engages in a brief digression to talk about the importance of non-verbal cues in communication. He discusses research conducted from the 1960s by William Condon to a recent publication (1994) by Elaine Hatfield and John Cacioppo, all of which shows that emotions can be passed on like an infection - contagiously. By getting people to nod their heads while hearing something, they accept it; by shaking their heads, they reject it. By putting them in a room with another person and not allowing the two individuals to talk to each other, the non-verbal cues given off by one of the parties is picked up by the other, changing their mood. By smiling more during pieces on particular election candidates, news anchors influence the way in which people choose to vote. This stuff is all documented.

So, while most of us believe that the emotions affect our behaviour, it is equally true to say that behaviour affects our emotions. Emotions are contagious, we often become infected with the emotions of those around us by the non-verbal cues they send us. If you don't, that's because you are one of those people who is a carrier for emotions in the same way that some people are carriers of viruses or bacteria but are not infected by them. Your emotions infect other people.

Some people will look at this and talk about the 'energy' that people have (I know that Oprah loves the whole 'energy' idea), but actually, it's all physical. It's all about the non-verbal micromotions which might only last for a 1/45th of a second, but are there nonetheless and have a profound impact on those around you.

Where am I going with all this? What non-verbal cues do I give out when I'm teaching? On the days when I have difficulty with a particular class, am I to blame? We're so quick to lay the blame on the kids - too much sugar at break, last lesson in the day, poor work ethic, etc, etc. Am I sending out non-verbal cues that are negative, causing my kids to be infected with a negative emotion, bringing the whole tone of the class down? This whole 'negative vibe' thing is much more scientific than it first appears, and I need to do some long hard thinking about my body language to ensure that I'm increasing the happiness/ good learning quotient in my class.

Solution: maybe I should start nodding my head and smiling more?

Teaching the teachers

So many people at work think that I know everything about IT, when the truth is that I just know more than them. (As long as I'm one step ahead of them, I'll be okay, right?) Today I had the pleasure and privilege of helping several staff members in various IT related queries or problems. It was awesome.

Then I came home and had a complete role reversal. I've been using Twitter far longer than my dear husband, yet in the past 24hrs he has taught me two new things about improving my use of it:

SelectiveTweet - an app that allows you to select which tweets are published to Facebook, so that you don't overwhelm FB with all the chatter on Twitter. Great stuff!

SplitTweet - an app that allows you to manage multiple Twitter accounts from one screen. I've tried using TweetDeck in the past, but because it was desktop based, found it a pain. Then, with the onset of Chrome, I've been using two browsers - Chrome to view one account, and IE (yeuch!) to view the other in. That was a pain, but was easier than using a desktop app. There are things I don't like about SplitTweet, but maybe that's just a familiarity thing and once I'm more familiar with it I'll figure out how to make it work for me. Still, it's nice to be able to tweet to either or both accounts from one place, and to view all the traffic from one place.

I guess that goes to show - just because you're the teacher doesn't mean you stay the teacher. Isn't that what 21st century education is all about - a sharing of knowledge, rather than a top-down impartation of knowledge? If we can do that between colleagues, why can't we do the same with the kids we teach? Why do we assume that because we're the official teachers, we hold all the knowledge?

This is a scary thought, even for me. Especially for me. I'm a control freak. Yet, this truth is essential to grapple with. How do I go about creating an environment in which the kids I teach are empowered to teach me in return, to create a truthful sharing of knowledge and not just a one-way impartation?

The WCED on Twitter

I am often disparaging about the WCED, and the national education dept as a whole, because I feel that (as an organisation) it is incompetent, meddlesome and increases teacher stress by increasing teacher workloads.

However, every now and again there are individuals within it that utterly amaze me. When I come across them I feel compelled to laud them, not just because they deserve it, but because I feel that I need to give praise as much and as often as I can, given that I run the organisation down so often.

So... I was AMAZED to read this blog post by a WCED top honcho about why you need to be on Twitter. I was amazed because he actually operates in my universe. I was amazed because he writes so eloquently. I was amazed because he works for the WCED and yet operates in my universe while writing eloquently (and no, that's not the same point as the first two!)

Go Hendrik Mentz!! You rock!!

Fame! Baby, remember my name!

So it seems that my name is about to get known in education circles. I got an email today from a WCED chap who would like to profile (pending all the bureaucratic yay-saying) my previous post on one of their email newsletter-type of thingys. (I never know what to call them - they're essentially email group membership list reminders, but can be used to disseminate other info too.) He obviously had a search term for the WCED (or similar) in his Google Alerts RSS.

While I'm flattered, and while I'm happy for others to read my blog, at the same time it makes me nervous. I have always known that complete strangers read my blog. I have no problem with that. I'm never going to meet you, you will never really know the people I'm talking about, so it's felt rather like going to a psychologist. I can tell you anything because you're anonymous and what you know can't hurt anyone because you don't know me or my family.

But of late I've begun to realise that there are increasing (although still very small) numbers of people reading my blog who, while currently strangers, have the potential to be people I will know through other circumstances. I find that a bit unnerving. It's one thing NEVER meeting someone who knows about me; it's quite another meeting someone who does. It's like meeting a stalker, except not. (And no, I don't consider you all to be stalkers! Let's just clarify that before someone complains.)

On the one hand, the fact that anyone else would really want to read my musings is vastly gratifying as I write predominantly (although not exclusively) as a record for myself, or as a reflection on my life for myself. (Reflection, for me, is a version of meditation. It helps me keep perspective.)

On the other, I do worry about my kids, my hubby, my family and my real-life-in-the-flesh friends. I'm a WYSIWYG kind of girl. I don't hide behind (or at least, I try very hard not to, but sometimes my insecurities get the better of me) pretensions here. I say what I mean and I mean what I say. Unfortunately, in the telling-it-as-it-really-is scenario, I also say things that open me up to things like identity theft.

And this is what worries me.

I talk about my kids here, my family, my friends, my daily life. I muse on all matters. However, I'm not sure that I want to open my life up too much to those with the criminal bent who might just decide to take my life (metaphorically speaking) from me. (Yet the thought of constantly having to censor my thoughts fills me with enough dread to stop writing entirely.)

Or is that just my paranoia rearing its head again?

Did I tell you that the family 3 doors down from us were held up at gunpoint last weekend? No? Yes, well, they were. My reactions are a bit all over the place. Firstly, HOW DARE anyone with a criminal bent come into our little street and perpetrate any kind of violence?

Secondly, I have become anxious: we are the last house in the complex, next to an open field, so very vulnerable; our doggies aren't half as vicious as the dog in the home 3 doors down (who still got held up); you can't see all the potential hiding places from our gate very easily (coming home I can change the route I drive to be able to see them all, but the time that really worries me is leaving home, because then I can't see them all, so will be driving blind, as it were....).

Thirdly, I want to shrug my shoulders and say "well ya shouldn't be coming home at 4.30am in the morning in the first place, now should ya?!", but I'm trying to restrain myself desperately, cos I know that if that HAD been me, I would have been scared witless - so a bit of compassion won't go far wrong.

So anyway, maybe my paranoia is not so misplaced after all.

In this day and age when we can be famous for being famous (Miss Bess Stovall from Max Lucado's book 'Best of All' comes to mind...) and where everyone wants to be famous (including me, if I'm honest), fame does have its drawbacks. I really do wonder how the really famous people cope with their lack of privacy.

Of course, I'm not famous, and I'm not even close, but the potential increase in readership of this blog has given me pause for thought. I shall have to think carefully about how I shall respond. I don't want to change this blog into something else. I also don't really want to start another blog for my teaching stuff (although I may have to do that).

Where does that leave me? I guess, in your hands. I'm thrilled that people want to read what I write. All I ask is that you show me some respect regarding the things I say here. That way, I don't have to change what I'm doing, and you still get to read all my drivel. Sound fair to you?

What makes you good at what you do?

Yesterday I attended a meeting for our district, to discuss the changes to the syllabus for next year's matrics. Once again, I was really impressed with our curriculum advisor. She's the first person I've met from the WCED in a very long time who actually speaks from the hips - she tells it like it is, she doesn't sugar-coat stuff, or (even worse) side-step the issues, or try to make her problems mine. I was really very impressed. I hope that the bureacracy at the WCED doesn't wear her down.

The meeting took place in a school just across the railway line from where we are. Although I've been that side of the tracks before for several different events, I was struck afresh at the disparity between my experiences of teaching and education, and those of my colleagues in those areas.

I consider myself a good teacher, but if I was asked to work in those circumstances, would I still be such a good teacher? What makes a good teacher, really? Is it the ability to effective use of the resources at hand? Is it about the ability to communicate effectively with OR WITHOUT resources? Is it about particular character traits? I'm not sure. I know I have the potential to be a GREAT teacher, not just a good one, but I really don't know whether I could still say that in circumstances vastly different from my own.

When I read this story this morning, about a teacher who has been banned for life for incompetency, it made me wonder afresh. I recalled teaching in one particular school in the UK, in which I found myself not performing. The reason I stopped caring, and stopped trying, was because the kids were so horrible. Their attitude towards learning depressed me, and because I was immersed in such a culture of poor work ethic, lack of respect for others, and general apathy, I found my strength sapped and my will to perform eroded. (Eventually, I wound up depressed and then resigned in order to take myself out of the situation.)

So what makes you a good teacher? Can anyone with resources can look good? or is there more to it than that? Will the same person be regarded as a good teacher in all circumstances? Is that a quality of who you are, or a choice you make despite your circumstances? And who holds you to account for it in SA? Your Subject head? Your principal? or do you hold yourself accountable?

What's his name again?

It's not often these days that I feel a sermon is particularly brilliant. While many are good, they don't always strike that perfect balance of entertainment value coupled with hard-hitting message. Usually they're either one or the other, or neither.

But this Sunday past was one of those rare occasions when I heard what I think must be the best sermon I've heard all year.

Sibs Sibanda. Google him. You'll find very little as far as his bio is concerned, but lots of links to his sermons. He's a preacher (part of a team of people) at a church in Jo'burg called Godfirst.

The man is a gifted communicator. No. He's a genius at communicating.

While he's driving home the most incredibly hard-hitting stuff, he has the ability to give a little humourous aside that allows the congregation to chuckle, without losing the building tension of the message itself. Brilliant! I want to learn to do that.

Plus he's just very funny.

Plus he really has a gift for opening up the scriptures to us.

I would say I know my Bible pretty well. I've read it through more times than I can remember. (Not lately, of course, but in the course of my Christian life.) For this reason I find I often skim read passages, because I feel like I know them so well I can't really learn anything new from them anymore - I can just be reminded of what I already know. I recognise, of course, that that is just my own arrogance, but that's the way I often feel.

Well, Sibs Sibanda shure showed me. He took a passage I was very familiar with and blew it completely wide open for me. He showed me things I'd never realised before (about the passage, I mean).

Oh. My. Word.

All the while, making me both laugh at myself and take a good, long, hard look at my sin.

PLUS - not once did he make me feel judged or inferior.

Incredible.

Just incredible.

I don't ever download the podcasts from the sermons. I think I just might have to download this one to listen to it again. If you want to have a listen, you can find the mp3 here. Give it a listen, seriously. It'll be worth both your time and your bandwidth.

OMW - the best day ever?

Do you ever have those days where everything just seems to go right? Where you find yourself getting more and more excited? Where you find yourself getting creative, making connections, seeing possibilities? Days when the future is rosy and golden?

I had one of those days today. It was so great that I had verbal diarrhoea for about 45 minutes when G and I met for coffee at lunch time. And then again all over my principal when I reported back to him about my day. Terrible, really, but I had such an amazing day I couldn't help myself.

I think one of the reasons that today was so awesome is that it ticked all my boxes for the things that really make me happy - meeting new people, learning new stuff, playing with technology, getting creative with problem solving, and lots of excellent, free food!

I went to a breakfast this morning, at the Mount Nelson, on someone else's account. What a great start to the day, right? I have to say, it's been a while since I have had a breakfast that awesome. Truly. There's a reason that the Nelly has such a great reputation.

But even before we got to the eating bit, the day got off to a great start. I had just walked through the door, when in walked someone who's face I recognised. (I'm good with faces, hardly ever forget a face, but names! Ooh boy, I'm rotten with names.) Since I was there on my own, I decided to take the bull by the horns, figuratively speaking. I wandered over and mentioned that I recognised her face, and would she mind telling me her name.

Wouldn't you know it? It was Maggie Verster! (She had been the keynote speaker at an ICT conference I went to 2 years ago, and have been following on Twitter since.) So the conversation goes like this:

Me: MAGGIE! Of course! Now I remember.

MV: (looking mildly confused)

Me: (seeing her confusion) Oh, not to worry. I've followed you on Twitter since the ICT conference 2 years ago.

MV: Oh! Right! (brightens, smiles broadly) What's your twitter designation?

Me: I'm Nixgrim.

MV: (huge smile) Of course! Fabulous to finally meet you! (and gives me a bear hug)

Turning to the others standing in our circle, she says: See how amazing Twitter is?! Isn't this amazing?

LOL!

I follow a blog of a woman in the US who frequently goes to conferences where she meets people she follows/ is follwed by on Twitter. She often comments on how lovely it is to meet people and put faces to names. As the above scenario was playing itself out, I couldn't help but think of Cecily and think to myself that this must be what she experiences on a regular basis. It's SO COOL!

Then I got to chat to a whole bunch of other people, Maggie included, who are keen to see how they can use web 2.0 and technology in the classroom. This was awesome for two reasons - firstly, I got to meet new people. I love meeting new people. It gives me a certain kick. However, I like meeting people with whom I have something in common even more (who doesn't?!). So meeting the people at this breakfast was exciting because I found myself having conversations that were meaningful, not just the usual social chit chat that one makes when meeting new people.

The purpose of the breakfast was to officially launch FullMarks (see yesterday's post). Hearing afresh the details about the programme, what it does and how it works, got me thinking long and hard about what's happening at the school. It struck me, as I was listening and pondering, that we aren't going about things the right way. We're doing it all (as my father would put it) arse-about-face. (I think that's a rather apt description...)

Not being one to be satisfied with identifying the problem, my brain immediately set to work trying to find a solution. This in itself was fantastic. As long as I'm not tired, I love problem-solving. I love working at a practical problem and finding a practical solution.

Well, I came up with a possible solution - KACHING! - one that has the potential to make my job even more interesting, which would be a win-win. So I'm feeling good because I think I've found a workable solution, and I'm feeling excited at the possibility of what the future might hold.

Then, since the brain cells have been nicely oiled, and since I was sitting at a table of like-minded individuals, we got to chatting about other problems. During the discussion, I came up with yet another solution to a problem we are currently facing at school - KACHING! Now I'm really hitting the ceiling. I'm on top of the world!

Things can't get any better, right? Wrong. I've had a particular problem/ project I've had for several weeks now, that I've been trying to solve, to no avail. In chatting to Maggie this morning, she made a flyaway comment that could be the solution to my problem. Wow!

Oh there were a few other small things, connections I made for myself, with things that I can do to help my kids, but they're small, so I won't waste time on them now.

End of the breakfast, and off I went to a meeting that didn't happen. Instead, G and I went for coffee and biscuits. And I got to pour all my enthusiasm and excitement over him. Poor guy. He took it really well and even asked some really penetrating questions. I love that he listens to me, really listens to me. I'm a very blessed woman!

So feeling more grounded, but still buzzed, off I went to school and happened to find the principal with a few minutes to kick around. I promptly sat him down and gave him the edited highlights package. Nervously. In a completely unrelated situation I discovered that some people don't react well to initiative. While I know that the principal isn't one of those types, my confidence was shaken, so I'm nervous of over-stepping boundaries. But he responded very positively to my comments and suggestions. Very well. Yay!!

Reading back through this, I know that I haven't really given you the details that some of you would like. Sorry. You can blame that on a crisis of confidence too.

Teacher's strike - professional babysitters

This week saw a one day's strike by government employed teachers. Why? Well, for lots of reasons. I know that many of the public don't really understand the reasons for the strike, and think that we teachers are just being selfish. Of course, I disagree, but let me explain why.

What does a typical work week look like for me? I work, on average, a 40hr week, which includes teaching lessons, cooler lessons (where I get to supervise the kids that get thrown out of class), substitution lessons (where I get to babysit for teachers who are off sick), subject meetings, management meetings and sport extra-murals.

On average, I get a 5 min tea break around 10am, and about 10 mins lunch break around 1pm. I'm supposed to get a 20 min tea break and a 20-25 min lunch break, but I'm often either working or meeting with pupils, so I either don't get to take them, or get a dramatically reduced break. Unlike other occupations, I cannot go and have tea (or take a loo break) whenever I feel the need. The ONLY opportunities I have for these things are the official break times.

Now, notice that nowhere in all of the above is there any time allocated to lesson preparation, marking or attending parent-teacher meetings. Those are IN ADDITION to my 40hr work week. Notice that there is also no time allocated there to the admin tasks that come with my job - like record keeping (code for: catching up on paperwork for naughty kids so that when we have a hearing to have that child expelled there is sufficient evidence of misbehaviour to warrant an expulsion OR sorting out the paperwork associated with being a tutor - attendance records, detention records, etc) or managing my inbox. Neither is there any time allocated to being a mentor (I have 3 kids I don't teach that I mentor). Neither is there any time allocated to setting tests and exams, or printing of worksheets/ notes/ tests or attending ProGro (professional growth) weekends away.

So when does all this extra work take place? At night and over weekends. On average I would say I spend anywhere between a further 2 and 15 hours a week doing all of that stuff.

Some people have commented to say, with a sneer in their voice, that I am obviously trying to be a "good" teacher. What they mean is that they think all the extra time I put in is because I either don't have a social life, or don't want a social life, or because I'm just too committed to my job. When we were discussing this in the staff room today, one of my colleagues commented: so do they want us to be BAD teachers then? Do they want us NOT to prepare lessons or mark the kids work? Do they want us NOT to prepare the youth for the future when they will be leading us, employing us, healing us?

Teachers supposedly get such great holidays. In fact, many people have commented that we've just had a 5 week paid holiday, so why are we up in arms and striking. We've clearly got it so good.

Yes, let's think about those holidays, shall we? We started work this year on 11th January. Our first "holiday" was on 29th March. We got 2 weeks. Although we did go away for 1 week, I spent the other week working:

*I gave a workshop to teachers from under-resourced schools on how to do practicals in Bio without having lots of expensive equipment.
*I set an exam and a test.
*I marked a set of projects and a set of reports from a field trip.
*I put together a financial plan for a revision workshop for the matrics.
*I put together a revision cd-rom for the matrics.

Back at work for the second term, and after several weeks, we were on holiday again on the 11th June. Supposedly for 5 weeks. What did I do?

Well, I had 10 days away on holiday (including weekends) and then was back at work. This time I was:

*preparing two revision modules covering half the matric syllabus
*planning and preparing for the revision workshops (Graeme & I organised the whole thing)
*preparing the school diary for 2011 (I publish a diary that is tailored to the school so has lesson times and all the calendar events already in it, etc, etc)
*running the revision workshops
*delivering two modules at the revision workshop
*preparing and planning various items for the Eskom Expo for Young Scientists
*preparing lessons for the 3rd term
*sourcing material to use in the matric mock exams

So, thus far we're 7 months into the year and I have had 2.5 weeks holiday.

Okay, end of this term (which is still 5 weeks away) we get one week. What will I be doing? I will get 5 days at home as a single parent as Graeme is away on a ProGro, and then I'm taking about 20 kids to a science Expo in Pretoria for 4 days. During the 5 days while I'm at home, I will also have to:

*make final preparations for the 2011 Science Fair, which will actually begin in the first week of the 4th term
*prepare the sets/ classes for Life Sciences for 2011, including sorting out the current Gd 9s who are choosing LS for Gd 10 and putting them into correct sets (balancing sexes, abilities, races, etc, etc, etc)
*prepare final revision lessons for matrics
*prepare lessons for the other grades
*set exams for the start of November

Then we'll be into the 4th term, with all the stress of final exams. Of course, I've applied to be a matric marker, which means that I will finish work at school 3 days early... so all my marking and reports, as well as all my admin as head of subject, have to be finished 3 days early. Then while other teachers may be on holiday, I will still be working and marking - probably until the 16th December. I will then get about 3 weeks' holiday until I have to be back at work for 2011.

S0 - grand total of ACTUAL holiday in a year: 5 weeks.

So I work at least 40hrs a week, often as much as 50hrs in a week. I don't get the sort of tea & lunch breaks that you get in other jobs. I get 5 weeks of actual holiday. And what do I get paid for this? A first year teacher gets less than R10 000 a month. Most teachers earn between R12-R15000 a month.

Do you still think we're unjustified in striking when we're asking for a living wage?

The government has offered us R630 a month for housing, when they're currently paying Eskom workers R1500 a month. Seriously? More importantly though, they've broken their promises to us. 3 years ago they promised that they would sort out the medical aid debacle. Oh? You don't know about that?

It's simple - they will give you an EXTRA R1000 a month if you join the GOVERNMENT medical aid. If you join any other medical aid, you lose R1000 a month. Effectively, they are forcing all their employees to join their scheme - which is completely unethical.

They also promised us the salary progression scales would be 1.5%, but now they're only willing to give us 1%.

They gave Eskom workers and steel workers a cost-of-living increase that was in the 20% bracket, but they won't give us the 8.6% we have asked for. Instead, they've offered us 6.5%. Seriously? 22% or 25%, compared to 6.5%?

They promised to back date our cost of living increase to April. Now they're reneging and saying they will only pay it from July.

Add up all of these, and you're looking at about R20 000 a year - that's about R1500 extra a month. And we're not even demanding that they pay us what they're paying other civil servants or parastatals.

But an extra R1500 a month would mean that I could actually pay back my bond interest PLUS some capital, instead of my repayments bouncing once in every 3 months. Or it would mean that I don't have to get to the end of every month and worry that I don't have enough money to buy enough electricity to last till the end of the month.

So - do you still think that the teacher's strike is unwarranted? Don't you think I'm WORTH an extra R1500 a month? Seriously? When you look at what I do, and how hard I work, and when you consider the fact that I am training the future leaders, engineers, doctors, nurses, firefighters, policemen, judges, lawyers, IT guys, etc, etc of this country - don't you think I deserve to be paid more than a professional babysitter gets?

Evolution and God

In our cell group we've just started studying Mark Driscoll's book 'Vintage Jesus'. It's kind of like Alpha (for those who know what that is). There's a DVD to go with the series, which we watch (about half an hour each week) followed by discussion. The idea of the series is for Christians to re-discover (or to discover for the first time) what their faith is really all about ... back to first principles, as it were.

Mark Driscoll is an excellent preacher - he really has a gift for public speaking. Listening to him for half an hour is usually inspiring. However, on Wed, we looked at whether Jesus is who he says he is, and I found myself really struggling. Like Alpha, he ultimately approached the subject using C. S. Lewis' argument that either Jesus was a liar, a lunatic or Lord.

I have no arguments with this. I believe that Jesus is the Lord. No questions. However, after losing Zoe, my stance is more one of believing in Jesus because I recognise that the alternatives aren't true, than believing out of a sense of joy in discovering the truth of Jesus. Like Peter, my heart says : "To whom else shall we go? You have the words of eternal life."

That's not to say that I don't find joy in my faith, or in Christ, because I do, but just that I still find it hard to worship with joy, just that my heart is still mostly in the valley of the shadow of death.

I guess that's why I found Friday afternoon so incredible.

On Friday, I had one of my matrics come to chat to me about Evolution (which we're studying at the moment). She's really struggling to learn about something she believes she can't reconcile with her faith. For a long time, so did I. The more I've learnt about it though, the more I've been able to believe both. (Right now I know that members of my family are shuddering with horror. Sorry guys, but there it is.)

I spoke to her about how the Bible teaches the why of creation, not the how, and evolution teaches the mechanism (the how) and not the why. I spoke to her about what it means to be created in God's image, about how most scientists today are still Christians, about how nothing continues to exist (including all the Laws of Nature) without Christ's direct involvement, about how the theory of evo-devo (current evolutionary research and thought) shows that intermediaries were probably not necessary because the original DNA contained all the genes necessary for sudden change, about how God loves variety, about what the new heaven and earth will be like, about how modern studies of DNA archaeology and other sciences show that the Bible is true .... the more I spoke about how amazing God is and how I think he's brought us to today, the more joyful I became.

I couldn't help but walk away from that meeting full of joyful praise for the Creator who created such an incredible universe, with such incredible diversity on it, and all because he wanted to have a relationship with creatures made in his image. The fact that God chose US to be those creatures, that he put his spirit in US... the fact that God planned us before the Big Bang... the fact that God knows us personally and intimately, yet remains the master of everything in the universe.... Wow.

And the fact that he plans to do it all over again, just without the effect of sin... and that he invites us to be a part of that 2nd creation - to walk and talk and discover and share and learn and grow and work alongside him in that.... Wow.

What an awesome, amazing, incredible God we serve. My heart is filled to overflowing with joy just thinking about it.

Days like today

Working for a large corporate: R30,000 per month. Moments like I had today: priceless. Days like today make teaching worthwhile

I don't want to go into too many details, but I have to share a fabulous moment with you. One of the girls I teach is having serious problems at home. Her friend's mother came to me (!!!) because she was concerned about her. So I took some decisions and put a few plans into place. Today when I informed this pupil about them, and explained why I had taken those actions, she just about burst into tears, threw her arms around me and thanked me!

I was blown away by her response.

You know, I do this job because I love it. I do it because I love being with teenagers and trying to teach them to think, to broaden their horizons, to help them have those 'A-HA!' moments. There is nothing better than seeing the lightbulb go on for them. I just LIVE for those moments.

The pastoral stuff that goes with teaching is NOT why I do my job. I usually hate the pastoral stuff. It's messy, it's complicated, and it usually requires TONS of admin. When I have to make pastoral decisions, I usually make them as objectively as I can and try to keep myself as much as arms' length as I can. I never really know whether what I do makes any difference, or whether the decisions I make are the right ones, but I try to do the pastoral stuff as right as I can because I really don't like it. (Does that make sense? I don't like it, so I know that unless I make a concerted effort, I'm likely to mess it up.)

I was expecting her reaction to be one of grudging acceptance - the normal teenage response when one is faced by a disciplinarian and told how things will be from now on. Instead, I got this sudden rush of emotion and gratitude.

For whatever reason, she understood that I really do have her best interests at heart, that I really do care, and that I am taking steps to help her - and she was grateful for it.

And I realised that she probably doesn't have anyone else who really cares enough about her to do that for her at home. And so while my heart was bursting with joy that I got this one RIGHT,
my heart was breaking BECAUSE I got it right - and the implications of what that means for this poor child.

It's days like today that inspire me and keep me coming back, even though my salary isn't enough to live off. I don't do this for the money. I teach because of days like today.

To learn or not to learn...

So Denmark hits another homerun when it comes to assessments. Yup, Denmark is running a trial in which kids are allowed to access the web while writing their exams. Think of it as an open book test in which the book happens to be electronic and self-updating.

The Danes are quite open about the fact that they have no way of preventing the kids from emailing or messaging each other (or anyone else) and that they are relying on the kids' own moral standards to prevent them from cheating in this manner. The head honcho chappie says that they'll be too busy with their tasks anyway, because there are too many of them for them to waste time goofing off like that.

Hmm...

While I think it's a great idea in theory, I'm not sure how it would work in practice. I mean, in theory, what you're assessing is the child's ability to analyse and synthesise. In the current world, in which the www plays such a vital role and information is not only growing at the most rapid of rates but is also so easily available, I think it is (in some ways) silly to assess anything else. After all, we're supposed to be training these kids to be employed in jobs that don't yet exist. In such a world, what's of vital importance is that you are able to analyse and synthesise stuff, problem solve, debate, perform reliable research, etc.

However, I still believe there is a place for the rote learning of some basic information. If you don't know the basics off by heart, then you don't have the groundwork on which to base your analysis.

I'm very interested to see how it works, what the results are like, and (more importantly) how the kids tested in this manner fare in the Big Wide World, not just the World Wide Web.

Why washing your hands may be bad for you

This is the text of the lecture I gave this evening to a group of our top academic kids at school as part of an extension programme we run for them.

Good evening. This evening we’re going to be talking about a rather unusual topic – something that is rather close to my heart. Actually, it’s rather close to YOUR heart, as well as mine. We’re going to be talking about parasites.

Now why on earth would I choose a topic like this to discuss? When I was at university, I had three weeks of lectures on parasites and our lecturer started off by telling us how ubiquitous parasites are. It was a description he gave that initially captured my imagination, but as I studied these creatures I began to realise how incredible and amazing they are. If I had not opted to become a teacher, I think I might have become a parasitologist and spent my days marvelling at them.

The description my lecturer used was this: If all living tissue apart from parasites was instantly removed from the planet, you would still be able to see the outline and form of everything you see now – humans, animals and all plants. Think about that for a second. You would still see ‘people’ walking around, you would still see ‘trees’, ‘plants’, ‘dogs’, ‘cats’ and ‘butterflies’. If our success as a species is measured by our numbers, or our proliferation, then we don’t even rate on the scale, let alone come close to winning the prize. Rather, it’s the parasites that do. Humans have more DNA than most other species, we are much more technologically advanced and like to think that we have the greatest impact upon the earth. Yet, the humble parasites are more successful than we are in many respects.

Many people think that when discussing human parasites, we are discussing a Third World problem. This is not so. With the rise in international travel, increasing pollution and water contamination, increasing sexual promiscuity, and with many parasites becoming immune to the treatments we currently use (such as DDT to control parasite vectors), many people in the First World are infected and are not even aware of it. These parasites may enter their hosts’ bodies through any contaminated food or water they consume, by burrowing through their skin (either while swimming or while walking barefoot over contaminated soil), through the inhalation of contaminated dust, through sexual contact with an infected person, or through a vector like a house fly or mosquito.

Talk to any international traveller and they will probably be able to tell you a horror story of some sort. In Ecuador mosquitoes can deliver a Bot fly egg onto your skin, which will hatch and the larva will burrow into your body. In Malawi, swimming in the water will expose you to another microscopic burrowing parasite that will use any of your hair follicles as an entry point to your blood. In Nepal, drinking mountain water could result in a leech entering your nasal passages. Closer to home, in the Kruger Park, a mosquito bite could give you malaria.

Every human being has several parasites, they simply aren’t aware of it. Just in our guts, there are about 3200 different parasites we can have, from unicellular through to multi-cellular organisms. That number accounts for only about 30% of all human parasites, with the other 70% living in our other organs. Parasites really are ubiquitous, and as such, they deserve our special attention, and our grudging praise for the manner in which they manage to survive despite our best efforts to eliminate them. They are the ultimate Survivors!

For the benefit of the non-biologists present, let’s just spend a few moments reviewing some basic information about parasites.

Basic parasite info

Parasites exist on and in all living organisms, not just in animals or humans. In multi-cellular organisms they can be found externally – ectoparasite, internally in body spaces – extracellular parasite, or internally inside cells – intracellular parasites. In the life cycle, parasites have at least 3 different forms they adopt: eggs, larvae, adult; but many have several different larval stages. Often the larval and adult stages have different hosts and are unable to survive if they wind up inside the wrong host. If they do survive, then they are unable to reproduce. In other words, each parasite and each parasite stage is specially adapted to a specific host. This adaptation includes specialisation to:

1. gain entrance to the host (or attach to the host in the case of an ectoparasite),
2. bypass the host's defences or immune system, and
3. avoid detection by the host that would lead to its destruction
   

This indicates that parasites have evolved alongside their hosts. It’s a pas de deux as first the host species evolves to try to protect itself and then the parasite evolves to bypass the host’s new adaptations, and then the host evolves again, etc. All of this begs the question though – what exactly is a parasite?

So what exactly is a parasite?

At school one learns that the definition of a parasite is any organism in relationship with another, in which the parasite benefits while the host is harmed. The parasitic relationship is more fully defined as a long-term one, one in which the parasite is highly specialised and adapted to suit their host, and one in which the parasite reproduces more quickly and frequently than the host. The parasite depends upon the host for protection, nutrients or some other life-supporting function and therefore the parasite does not usually kill the host, although it does reduce the host’s overall fitness. In truth, parasitism is much more complicated than that. In fact, it can be very difficult to prove or demonstrate what harm has been done to the host.

As a biology teacher who happens to be a Christian, I am often asked by my students why God created parasites. My students want to know what ecological role parasites play. Until recently, the only answer I could give was that they help to control population sizes by being the top predators or by being the keystone species (the species that has the greatest impact on the environment), or occasionally provide some small benefit. For example, as you sit here, you all have the parasite E.coli in your gut. Most strains of this parasite are fairly harmless, and in fact, most strains actually benefit their host by producing Vit K for you and by preventing other parasites or infections that could potentially kill you from being able to flourish.

However, the latest research has given me another, better answer. The latest research has shown that some parasites actually benefit their hosts in such a way that removing them would have a detrimental effect on their host’s survival. Specifically, it is now understood that many parasites help to prevent auto-immune diseases and allergies. Imagine that!

What is an auto-immune disease? This is any disease in which the body begins to attack itself, because it mistakes some organ or tissue as being foreign. Asthma and Multiple Sclerosis are both examples of auto-immune diseases.

The human parasite Schistosoma mansoni is a flat worm trematode, or fluke. It normally causes two different infections. In the larval stage it travels in the blood, feeding on your blood, and causing Bilharzia. In the adult worm stage it infests the intestines where it mates and lays eggs. These eggs can become trapped in the intestinal tissues instead of passing out of the host’s body. If this happens it causes an immune response that blocks the colon, leads to blood loss, increases blood pressure and causes swelling of the spleen and oesophagus which can tear and cause internal bleeding. All round, not a pleasant character to have living inside you.

Type 1 diabetes is caused when a person’s own immune system attacks the beta cells in the pancreas. These cells are responsible for producing insulin, which is essential for regulating blood sugar levels. Amazingly, research has shown that being infected with the Schistosoma eggs prevents the person from developing diabetes. This is because the parasite eggs release a soluble enzyme that stops the host’s immune system from producing the specific T Helper cells of the immune system that destroy the beta cells of the pancreas. So – having the parasite (which causes all those nasty side effects) can actually save the life of the host. Isn’t that a thought?!

Of course, this complicates matters when trying to define a parasite. If parasites actually benefit the host, can they still be called parasites? It would appear that for our immune systems to develop properly, they need to be exposed to these parasites so that they can learn to react against them, but also so that they are regulated by these parasites. Thus, for the moment, the answer is yes. Although parasites do bring benefits, those benefits are only fringe benefits. Their main effect on their host is still assumed to be a negative one. As our understanding and knowledge of parasites grows though, there may come a time when we change our definition, but that is the nature of science – constantly changing and adapting to accommodate new knowledge.

I am particularly fascinated by Schistosoma. The adults consist of a double layer of membranes. The outer one is continually shed and replaced as a protective mechanism against the host’s defences and digestive system. It’s only 1cm long, but the male has about 8 testicles. The Schistosoma is also one of the few parasitic worms that actually has a separate male and female worm.

Interestingly, if an infection only contains female worms, they don’t mature properly and remain unable to reproduce. However, if an infection contains only male worms, they still develop properly. In other words, the females need the males to develop, but the males don’t need the females.

When both males and females are present together though, they form mating pairs that last for life. This is because the females actually live inside the males. Well, sort of. Even though the worms are only 1cm long, the males are about 10x the width of the females. They develop a special groove on their side, and the much slimmer female crawls into it and spends the rest of her life there. She will lay about 300 eggs a day, which is basically the same as her own body weight. (Some parasites can lay 1 million eggs a day, so 300 per day is pretty insignificant.)

Another reason I’m fascinated by this particular parasite is that I was infected with it back in 2000, after going on holiday to Lake Malawi. It was only after my trip there that I discovered that the leading centre for the study of Schistosoma is found on Lake Malawi, not far from where we camped. It’s found there because the Lake has the highest incidence of the parasite in the world. There’s almost no way to avoid it if you swim in the lake. That’s because the parasite’s other host is a water snail. After it completes the part of its life cycle in the snail and leaves it, the parasite swims through the water, using its forked tail to propel it, until it finds a human. It attaches to your skin while it begins to search for a hair. As soon as it finds a hair, it then burrows through the hair follicle and into your bloodstream. Of course, it’s so tiny you won’t feel a thing, although you may develop a mild rash at the point of entry. You initially develop normal flu symptoms, but after those symptoms disappear you are left feeling extremely fatigued – a bit like Post Viral Fatigue Syndrome. That’s because the parasite is feeding on your blood, so you don’t have enough red blood cells to meet your own oxygen demands.

But let’s get back to the recent research on parasites.

The Hygiene Hypothesis

This new knowledge about parasites is part of what is becoming known as the “Hygiene Hypothesis”. This hypothesis has been in development since the late 1980s. The term was coined by the media following a short article entitled ‘Hayfever, hygiene and household size’ by David Strachan, in which he commented that:

Over the past century declining family size, improvements in household amenities, and higher standards of personal cleanliness have reduced the opportunity for cross infection in young families. This may have resulted in more widespread clinical expression of atopic disease, emerging earlier in wealthier people….

Atopic disease is an allergic hypersensitivity in parts of the body that are not in direct contact with the allergen. E.g. developing eczema on the elbows.

In the late 1990s, Dr. Erika Von Mutius compared the health of children in East and West Germany before the Wall came down. Her hypothesis was that the children from East Germany, living in much poorer and dirtier environments, would suffer more illnesses related to allergies and auto-immune diseases. When the Wall came down, she was able to really compare the two groups of children. To her surprise, the children from East Germany were far healthier than their counterparts from West Germany, despite having a more restricted diet and living in less healthy environments. This surprising result caused her to investigate further, whereupon she discovered that children in East Germany spent more time in crèches and nurseries where they were exposed to more germs. This piece of research leant further credibility to Strachan’s research.

In a nutshell, the current explanation of this hypothesis says that until sanitation became commonplace, exposure to germs and parasites was a regular threat that our immune systems faced. Our immune systems have two types of immune responses, caused by two different T Helper cells – T_H1 and T_H2. T_H1 cells react to germs (viruses and bacteria), while T_H2 cells react to allergens. Exposure to germs stimulates the T_H1 cells, which in turn suppresses the T_H2 cells. Thus, if we are not exposed to germs, the T_H1 cells are not produced, so the T_H2 cells overproduce, and we experience allergies.

This theory has been refined to include our reaction to parasites. In pre-sanitation times, if the immune system reacted to a parasitic infestation with a T_H2 response strong enough to kill the parasites, the body’s own tissues would be seriously damaged in the process. Thus, our immune systems evolved to be able to tolerate parasites to some extent, by producing fewer T_H2 cells, rather than kill them outright and damage our own bodies in the process. Since the body’s immune system has adapted to tolerate parasites, its responses to the mild allergens like pollen have also effectively been toned down, since these also require a T_H2 response.

However, since the advent of sanitation, we are no longer routinely exposed to these parasites. The consequence of that is that our immune systems are no longer maturing in the way they should, and with fewer anti-inflammatory chemicals being produced, with the result that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of allergies and auto-immune diseases.

This research has been backed up by tests done comparing lab mice and rats to those found in the wild. The lab mice and rats were fed a healthy, nutritionally rich diet as well as being given various vaccines and kept in conditions similar to what people in the First World experience. Researchers then compared the production of antibodies called immunoglobins between the two groups of organisms. They found that those in the wild had significantly higher concentrations of the antibodies that prevented parasitic, bacterial and viral infections and also had significantly fewer allergies or auto-immune diseases.

If true, then this Hypothesis has potentially major implications for diseases like multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s, asthma, hayfever, some cancers, eczema, Parkinson’s, Irritable Bowel Syndrome and a host of other diseases. It might be possible, for example, to harvest the soluble enzyme produced by the Schistosoma eggs, or to synthesise it in a lab, to give to diabetics to stop the development or escalation of the diabetes.

In 2002 it was found that long term infections with tapeworms resulted in increased levels of anti-inflammatory chemicals called cytokines being produced. At the same time it was noted that high levels of these anti-inflammatory chemicals corresponded with fewer allergies and auto-immune diseases. Thus, the spin off from a parasitic infection is that these cytokines are produced. It might be possible to synthesise these chemicals in a lab to assist those who suffer from auto-immune diseases.

In the meantime, though, a branch of medical treatment is being trialled in which people are deliberately infected with parasitic worms, or helminths. The helminths obviously have to fulfil certain criteria, such as not being able to reproduce in humans, in order to protect the patient from potentially life-threatening side effects of a parasitic infection. Currently, there are only 3 species that meet all the criteria necessary: Hookworms, Pig Whipworm and Human Whipworm.

Crohn’s disease is one type of Inflammatory Bowel Disorder, or Irritable Bowel Syndrome. It is an auto-immune disease that is also thought to be inherited at some level. Treating patients who suffer with Crohn’s with Hookworms results in a 100% recovery rate. This kind of medical treatment falls under a new branch of medicine called Darwinian Medicine or Evolutionary Medicine.

Multiple Sclerosis is a brain disease in which the myelin sheath around nerves is slowly lost. As this layer is lost, the nerves cease functioning and progressive disability ensues. In 2007 Correale and Farez conducted a study with Multiple Sclerosis patients. 12 patients were already infected with intestinal parasites, so 12 uninfected patients at a similar stage in the disease were found. The 24 patients were then followed for 4.5 years, monitoring the development of the disease in each of them. It was found that the 12 who were infected with the intestinal parasites had fewer incidences of relapses and a greatly reduced disability accumulation. Being infected certainly did not cure the MS, but it did substantially reduce the impact of the disease.

Of course, nothing is ever quite that simple. Since the Hygiene Hypothesis was first proposed there have been several studies that seemed to contradict it. The incidence of asthma, for example, in poorer urban areas in the USA is increasing. This contradicts the Hygiene Hypothesis, which would expect that the poorer areas have a higher incidence of germs and worms, and thus that children should have fewer incidences of this auto-immune disease.

The problem arises because asthma can be caused by a variety of different things. It might be a reaction to cigarette smoke, vehicle emissions, an allergic reaction, obesity or an inherited condition, to list just a few. If the condition is inherited, then no amount of exposure to helminths during early childhood is going to help. If it is caused by obesity, and the subsequent inflammatory response of the lungs, the only a change in diet and loss of weight will help.

Thus, when considering the Hygiene Hypothesis, one must always bear in mind that chemicals, viruses and hygiene (i.e. exposure to helminths) impact upon the prevalence of a particular disease. When treating such a disease, or trying to prevent it, one must tackle the problem from several different directions at the same time.

One of the reasons that I quite like studying parasites is that they are so different to us. They usually consist of a just a digestive system and a reproduction system, with the more advanced ones possessing a few very basic senses. Yet, for all their relatively primitive development, they have such a massive impact on the world. From their impact on food production, to our health, they are responsible for so much of the suffering in the world. With advances in medical technology, we may yet be able to curb them, but I seriously doubt we will ever be able to eradicate them. If this recent research is to be believed though, then I’m not sure we would want to eradicate them.

So what does all this mean for us? Does it mean we should give up being vaccinated, or that we should stop cooking our food properly? Does it mean we should go around deliberately infecting ourselves with parasites? Quite simply, no. While exposure to germs and parasites is now accepted as having immunological benefits for humans, these things are still pathogens. They still cause tremendous disease and can threaten our very lives. However, there is a case to be made for not using antibacterial soaps, for allowing our young children to spend time with lots of other children so that they can be exposed to germs, and for letting our children play in the dirt. Maybe we should all relax and get a bit filthy, and maybe our grannies were right when they told us that what didn’t kill us would make us stronger! Maybe washing our hands all the time is actually not as good for us as we used to think.

Effects of OBE

Back in May, we had the rector of UWC present a professional development session to the staff. During the session he commented on several discussions he'd been having with a variety of lecturers.

He had been asking them how they found the first cohort of OBE students (given that 2009 is the first year that kids who have been on the OBE system since they started school have entered tertiary institutions).

His summary of those discussions made the staff laugh: the kids have all the interpersonal skills we'd love - they can ask questions, they can relate to staff, they can debate - but they can't read or write or add.

His comment, while tragic, is true. At least, it's true in my experience.

On Friday, according to SABC News International, Dr Mamphela Ramphele, said basically the same thing in her address to principals at a conference in Polokwane when she was commenting on why transformation in the private sector is not taking place: "Excuse me, I will not appoint someone who cannot read; write and add. I don’t care how committed you are,” she said

The education department is adamant that OBE is here to stay. Personally, I have no problem with OBE. All good teachers teach in an OBE style: even under the Apartheid government that was true. What I have a problem with is the manner in which the curriculum has been changed and the manner in which OBE is being taught now. I don't mind if OBE stays. I mind if the current curriculum stays. There is no balance in the curriculum, and to my mind there has been no real referencing to the needs of tertiary institutions or the developmental stages of teenagers' brains, let alone any attempt to accept that one simply can no longer teach it all at school: there has simply been too much progress, research and development in every field to continue to teach all the history AND all the current developments at school level.

That debate aside though, there is an even bigger problem in education: a lack of teachers. If I was teaching classes of 20, instead of classes of 30, or if my colleagues at other schools did not have to teach classes of 40 or 50, then maybe, just maybe, the kids would have enough individual time with their teachers to get both the knowledge AND the skills.

Eskom Expo for Young Scientists

The Cape Town Expo took place this week. Despite being on maternity leave I was involved as a judge (well, actually, a convener, but let's not split hairs) for the seniors (Grades 10-12; approx ages 15-18). I'm really glad I was. It was a fascinating experience and I picked up some good ideas for our in-house school version.

I have to say though, I was disappointed with the overall standard of the projects. One of the projects that particularly sticks in my mind was about the effects of alcohol on unborn fetuses. Before I say more, I need to point out that a) this expo is supposed to be about investigations (ie. experiments) and not just about research projects, and that b) projects involving alcohol are severely frowned upon (in fact, they will not be permitted AT ALL next year). This project was from a learner who was obviously not a first language English speaker (if the spelling and grammatical errors were anything to go by) and was obviously from a disadvantaged background (if the quality of the poster was anything to go by). Neither of those things should severely disadvantage a learner though, as the adjudication is mostly based upon the content of the project and an interview.

What did impact rather negatively on this project was that, in the first paragraph, the learner said something like (I can't give an exact quote, but it is close to the real thing): Alcohol makes babies cuter because they are filled with fruit.

Yes, you read that correctly. I had to read and re-read the sentence several times, just to check I'd got it right. And then I proceeded to howl with laughter, and cry with dismay that a) this learner's teacher thought this project good enough to bring to Expo and b) this learner's teacher probably didn't care enough to look (not even look closely) at the project before submitting it to Expo.

Seriously - is this the quality of teacher that exists in SA? If so, then God help us, because our youth are essentially being set adrift by the very people who are supposed to anchor them. I knew that the qualification level of teachers wasn't necessarily very high (I've been told that many only have matric themselves), but that was during the Apartheid era. I had thought that the government had been fixing this by creating all sorts of special categories for schools to channel more money to them for the training and equipping of staff and schools. Apparently though, the situation is worse than I thought.

I mean, really? Babies are cuter because alcohol fills them with fruit? Yeah, okay - fruity as in Fetal Alcohol Syndrome fruity. Brain-damaged fruity maybe, but not cute fruity! Sorry, but no.

If this weren't real I would continue laughing, but this is so sad, so tragic I can't laugh anymore. Even crying about it won't help. How do we fix this? How do we save this great nation of ours when this sort of thing is happening? And more importantly, what role do I play in fixing this problem?

On the plus side, we got our first gold medal (which is automatic entrance to the next round) in goodness knows how many years! I was very proud of little Daniel (He's only in Gd 9). It couldn't happen to a sweeter child. He had those beautiful shiny eyes and eager expression that spoke volumes when he received his medal. He isn't one of those kids who achieve this kind of success every day and for whom receiving a medal is either embarrassing (because it marks them as geeks) or blase (because they always succeed at whatever they do).

National Finals are in Pretoria in a few weeks' time. For Daniel, this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. He can't wait. His words to me were "I'm overwhelmed." Now I need to find him sponsorship of about R2000 to ensure he gets there. So if any of you faithful readers can suggest someone I can approach, please do let me know. (He has to pay his deposit by Thursday this coming week and the balance the week after.) His project was a physics one entitled "Determining the effect of different shapes of caravans on stream-lined cars in a cross-wind environment". Yup. And he's only in Gd 9. Bright child. You know, I think this experience might just enthuse him enough to take Science at varsity level, which is the point of the Expo. Whether or not it does, just seeing his face light up was enough of a reward to make all the hard work to make the Expo happen worth it!

Well done, Daniel! And I will do everything in my power to make it possible for you to be in Pretoria come October.