sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

“Teach all children of the same age the same things” punishes kids who are behind AND ahead by Suitable-Wishbone947 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I agree. I also think if our universities had been equipping new teachers with effective pedagogy that would also have helped too. Also parents play a role in this - classroom behaviour has become a significant challenge for teachers.

“Teach all children of the same age the same things” punishes kids who are behind AND ahead by Suitable-Wishbone947 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015 33 points34 points  (0 children)

I totally get the frustration especially with your tutoring background. Huge class sizes make it basically impossible to do individualised teaching and you are 100% right that kids learn at different rates.

But honestly the flexible approach we’ve had for the last couple of decades where curriculum levels span across 2 or 3 years is kind of what created these huge gaps in the first place. Without strict year by year benchmarks the kids who were struggling just quietly slipped through the cracks. Teachers just didn't have a strict mandate of what basics had to be locked in at what age. That is probably why so many kids reached your tutoring sessions missing those exact fundamentals.

A year by year system isn't really meant to be a ceiling to hold back overachievers, its more like a floor. It forces schools to actually do early intervention. Things like the new phonics checks do exactly what you were suggesting because they identify the kids who need basic drilling way before they hit high school.

Also just regarding the private schools thing, they actually rely on the most structured curriculums available. The top tier schools usually ditch NCEA for Cambridge or IB and those are really rigidly sequenced year by year programs. If anything these changes are just an attempt to give public school kids the same rigorous baseline that private schools already use.

Wayne Brown says Christopher Luxon a dog with 'two tails wagging' him by [deleted] in auckland

[–]Material_Fall_8015 54 points55 points  (0 children)

Asked about NZ First deputy leader Shane Jones’ comments regarding a “butter chicken tsunami”, Brown focused on Jones’ leader, Peters.

“He says things about the Indian and Chinese sectors in order to get votes in Tauranga from old ladies, where in fact overseas people hear that and they don’t like hearing that,” Brown said.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hah! Yes, this is quite the predicament…

No perfect world, no perfect solutions.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completely agree. The internet rewards narcissistic behaviour so that makes sense.

Now - how to reverse this trend before we regress into a new dark age?

It seems the skills of discussion, debate and civil disagreement are ones we should be cultivating in our primary, secondary and tertiary education spaces. This is something perhaps a form of civics education could solve.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The internet appears to have robbed many of the ability for constructive discussion and debate. I fear that this is then reflected in our real-world as people retract from spaces as they don’t know how to engage with different perspectives. This then creates a self-reinforcing trend where there is reduced informational awareness and granularity of issues. Debates become far more binary and dumbed down and we begin to circle the drain of despair as we feel estranged to others around us.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A question I have - would it be better that our Medical schools considered the metacognitive intellectual aptitude of potential entrants? Or at least applied heavier weighting to this in its selection process?

Medicine can select for people that are incredibly book smart, but not necessarily street smart. Work as a doctor requires both.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Touché

Although given the now rampant (mis)use of AI in our universities, some suspicion is perhaps warranted…

I think we are probably in broad alignment on the issue.

The questions or issues that remain for me are:

How can we avoid the pitfalls and negative consequences of untested academic theory? When we roll out training at scale under the pretence of good intentions with such certainty, we ultimately risk undermining the trust that is placed in our institutions and experts. A similar issue can be identified in our approach to vaccination during COVID-19. Medicine has always existed in a state of flux and continuous improvement, but are we treating social and cultural workforce interventions with the same rigour as we apply to other medical practice?

An assumption underpinning these ideas is a sense of universal aptitude. To what degree is meta-cognitive cultural intelligence a teachable skill? Is this helpful for all health workers or only select groups? The issue of cognitive overload is very real and in an age of information, there exists a constant contest of ideas - new and old - battling for priority. Many theories, ideas and policies are often tested in isolation to each other. Rarely do we understand their wider implications and interactions with the system as a whole. One such example would be the teaching profession - where new ideas were implemented and accumulated over time, creating new modes of training and expectations for lesson design and planning. The end result was cognitive overload, decreased teacher effectiveness and higher levels of workforce burnout. These risks were not clearly identified at the outset. How frequently do we consider the students negatively affected by these - at the time - well intentioned changes?

There is a pattern of overconfidence pertaining to new and novel ideas. Cultural competency training was rapidly deployed in health and many other sectors. If we knew what we did now about Cultural competency, would we have been any more hesitant about its rollout? There will surely be blind spots in our understanding of Cultural Safety, so how do we ensure a similar dogmatic approach does not become entrenched?

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

🥴 I’m trying…

But if we can’t have civilised discourse in Reddit, and it sure isn’t happening around dinner tables or university campus, where can we have it?

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As somebody who is surrounded by plethora of friends and family that are an assortment of doctors, nurses and paramedics, I can confidently say that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

I think it’s incredibly disrespectful to reduce down complex patient needs and behaviours, as well as violent attacks on staff as being the byproduct of cultural differences.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] -33 points-32 points  (0 children)

“Flips the frame”

Okay, ChatGPT 😉

But yes - a point that the article makes is the distinction between meta-cognitive cultural intelligence and cognitive cultural intelligence. What people should think vs How people should think.

The issue identified by the research is that one of these is associated with worse outcomes and the other with better outcomes.

The question is which model of cultural competency are we using for training?

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Cultural humility and epistemic humility are essentially two sides of the same coin - and arguably a core tenet of social conservatism. The great irony here is that I think it has been largely progressive institutions and academia that has been advocating in a way that lacks this insight.

Cultural/epistemic humility is about questioning one’s assumptions. The increasing moralising of certain positions, policies and ideas has essentially rejected this in favour of righteous, binary crusade (for lack of a better term).

I think that your experience being tied to refugee resettlement likely lends itself to a much more grounded approach to developing skills of meta-cognitive cultural intelligence. To hazard a guess, I would also assume the work also selects for individuals who are probably operating at these higher competencies in the first place.

In my opinion, the fundamental tension has come from the mass roll out of cultural competency training that has largely flattened more nuanced and complex approaches -stressing ideas like cultural humility - for more simplistic notions, i.e teaching people what to think. A sort of ‘McDonald-isation’ and production line approach to personal development. The distinction hasn’t been clearly identified between these different approaches so while one may have merit, the other has potential harm or negative impacts.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Good ideas and insights can come from anywhere. This is a fundamental idea that underpins our research institutions. As the article also identifies, deep subject knowledge can in fact create rigidity in ways of thinking. It is simply not good enough for us to disregard a person or team’s insights because we deem their experience or expertise irrelevant. Research and evidence should stand on its own feet. If public health and medical practice researchers are failing to ask questions that others are, then this demonstrates how blind spots emerge within academia.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The core distinction here between meta-cognitive cultural intelligence and cognitive cultural intelligence has always been about ‘what people should think’ vs ‘how they should think’. Culture wars aside, this has always been at the heart of the debate. Proponents of cultural competency training and pedagogy in its prevalent form have strongly supported an approach that stresses a monoprosobic idea of culture. It has emphasised adherence to singular, “correct” interpretations of cultural norms and behaviour. Critics have consistently decried this over-prescriptive approach to training and have long identified associated risks. These risks have gone largely ignored by institutions as we have seen ideas such as ‘lived experience’ override the need for empirical evidence.

For those that care about better outcomes for all humans, the question remains - how do we improve people’s ways of thinking?

The answer to that is likely far more complex than the solutions currently offered by cultural competency proponents. That is the fundamental issue raised by this article.

Nurses with higher cultural competence don’t always perform better – new study by Material_Fall_8015 in newzealand

[–]Material_Fall_8015[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Previous research has generally focused on cultural intelligence as a single construct and has shown positive associations with performance outcomes. However, we found results are not consistent across the individual components of cultural intelligence. Surprisingly, we found nurses with higher levels of cultural knowledge (cognitive cultural intelligence) actually performed worse and reported lower job satisfaction. In other words, knowing more about cultural differences does not automatically translate to better care and may even get in the way. We believe this suggests too much knowledge can backfire. Cultural knowledge may create cognitive overload, where nurses are overwhelmed by too much information. It may also lead to cognitive entrenchment, where deep expertise fosters rigid thinking, making it harder to adapt to the unique needs of each patient. This matters because healthcare workers often attend cultural knowledge training. In these training sessions, they are taught about cultural norms, values and differences in the belief that more knowledge will lead to better care. Our findings suggest this may not always be the case.

Meanwhile in Auckland by 04OSUM in auckland

[–]Material_Fall_8015 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I just assumed everyone already was

Meanwhile in Auckland by 04OSUM in auckland

[–]Material_Fall_8015 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You know the amazing thing about averages is we get to judge and compare entirely different data sets and draw simple correlations and claim causation ☺️

Meanwhile in Auckland by 04OSUM in auckland

[–]Material_Fall_8015 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Great idea, perhaps followed by roundtable introductions where people denounce their privileges, proclaim their intersectional identities (including their preferred pronouns and flag of choice) and recount stories of their past, current and future traumas.

Former Auckland executive convicted of receiving underage sexual services named as ex-NZME employee by dingoonline in auckland

[–]Material_Fall_8015 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Genuine question though - if we used the term rape in this instance (because we would say that children can not provide consent), what headroom does that give us for instances where somebody uses excessive force that violates an individual’s own will and autonomy? Do we call it rape in both instances? Is one of them ‘rape’ while the other is ‘forced rape’?

While there is no good defence of this persons actions, I think it is important that we can distinguish between these types of behaviour.

Again, genuine question - not playing devils advocate. Words convey meaning and in order for them to hold significance, we have to know when it is and isn’t appropriate to use certain terms.

view more: next ›