Educational exemptions

sdavies@MtRoyal.AB.CA
Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:33:44 -0800 (PST)

Writing from a country without the immense educational exemptions
enjoyed in the U.S., I have to ask whether (post-secondary) "education" has
ever been defined strictly as what transpires during a credit course in a
classroom.

Jessica R. wrote:
<<<
Taken to its' extreme , you could get someone to "discuss" the history of
animation in front of an all campus screening of FANTASIA but Disney would
still sue you and win.
>>>
I've fallen into the comfortable habit of regarding Jessica as a guru
(guruette? garrote?) of interpretation about film use, but since I live in
an academic environment, I'm prepared to claim that all campus life
contributes to an education. While not compulsory, opportunities should be
given to students to attend lectures, presentations, demonstrations or
exhibits on a variety of subjects, especially outside of their core
courses. While in school, students should be crammed full of facts and
procedures, but also exposed to "the new", woken up a little. They should
also have access to extracurricular activities (sports, clubs, etc.)

Last October we had an open forum to discuss the terrorist attacks,
with short contributions from faculty of our political science/economics
and humanities departments. The subject was of fundamental interest to
everyone, and I would go so far as to say vital.
We did not show a video, but if we had, I would assume no one would
disagree that this would qualify as an educational experience at an
educational institution. I do believe the teachers were teaching. But
while the audience was primarily students, no one got credit for attending.
If you don't think any teaching took place on that occasion, then my
argument ends right here. But if you can accept that situation, why would
other examples be less valid just because they do not deal with topics of
pressing urgency. Why would non-compulsory exposure to slides about a trip
to Peru, or a tour of a gallery, or a video on any subject be considered
non-educational; i.e. not part of the student's education while attending
an institution.
Let's look at academic policies for a moment. Whether you are in
class or not, your behaviour is regulated by your institution's codes, and
if you violate them it could result in discipline. This would be because
of the detriment to the educational process caused by your behaviour.
"Education" (the point I am weakly trying to make) envelopes the student
and staff in and outside of the classroom.

Finally, and snippily, given the loosey-goosey interpretations of
"educational" when networks are rating their children's programming, if
Disney sued me, I should want to sue them.
Stephen Davies
Mount Royal College, Calgary
former Olympic city (woohoo!)
mailto:SDavies@mtroyal.ca

P.S. is anyone else getting
pestered for rabbit ears. I've
had a curious rash of these
requests at work. Hmmmm.