Meredith's Blog

In class today, on Tuesday the 26th of November, we completed peer reviews for the drafts of our research papers. The ‘read aloud, think aloud’ concept as the method for peer reviewing has both its merits and demerits. The exercise is extremely effective in that it develops our critical thinking skills, which we can then use on our own papers in the future. The factor which makes it such a valuable activity is the academic nature of the discussion. With a third person involved in the more recent peer reviews, the element of direct critique is removed from the communication of ideas.  The suggestions for improvement are thus more willingly given, are more accurate and are also more well received by the writer. In the case of corrections of content, the mediator is able to indicate the improvements in a non-invasive manner and thus the better is more likely to be improved.

Peer reviews are also useful for encouraging academic dialogue between peers. The simple fact of completing the same assignment within the same parameters means suggestions about how to improve the work in question are more likely to occur, and be accurate. The evidence of a peer reviewed paper is cogent in the lack of implicit diction used, as well as the more limited lapses in grammar. A problem related to this aspect of peer reviewing is that there are common grammar mistakes which many students make. This means that even if a peer reviewer detects a problem within the text, they may not be able to provide a solution easily, or it may lead to more incorrect grammar.

Peer review is a positive method of analyzing work in terms of it being criticism ‘coming from a good place’ as Professor McNeill specified in the lecture on the 21st of November. However, some of the students in our peer review workshops had trouble with ‘read aloud think aloud’ initially, as it can be challenging to read, understand and speak out loud at the same time. Another major issue inherent in the peer review system is the limitation of time. Often completed in a university lecture or seminar time slot, it can be difficult to have conversation between the mediator and the peer reviewer without running out of time.

Peer reviewed sources are the ones which are the most trusted by scholars in their obtainment of research. This is due to the evaluation by scholars in the academic specialization which the paper pertains to before publication. Despite sharing the same basic concept, peer review of sources in the professional world differs greatly to the peer review which occurs in university lectures. Being older, having more work experience, and having more knowledge means those in the academic community who are peer reviewing sources are better than university students. The peer review concept is, however, very versatile and can apply to a multitude of faculties such as sciences and arts within the university setting, where it has been proven to also have success.

In light of the recent attacks on women on our campus, a blog post concerning the gender roles in these cases can be quite polemic and may spark a discussion.

All the media and communication between students and the administration thus far have been concerning the women who have been attacked and precautions the rest of the women on campus should take in order to avoid a similar fate. In truth, the women who have been assaulted thus far were not acting in their own safety, as it is a commonly held perception that women should not travel alone at night, regardless of the country.

Where, however, is the advice for men?

We are so focussed on the precautions women should take, but what about directly discussing the problem? Rape culture permeates this campus, as supported in the Sauder School of Business orientation chants that were less than appropriate and condoned underage sex, and these recent assaults. Women should not be out late at night, but men should not be shamelessly attack women. We should all have the right to walk freely, not just men. Targeting women due to the presumption of their inability to defend themselves due to lack of know-how or sheer strength may be accurate, but it does not make it ethically correct. It is easier for us as a society to warn people to avoid those who create the problem rather than dissuade those who are attacking to stop their actions. This can be related back historically to the fact that men stereotypically dominated women in the workforce, physical strength and intellect in the past. This relates to male chauvinism and the idea that ‘what is available is there for the picking’, which simply is not correct. Moreover, it is not only women who are attacked and yet it is women who are targeted, supporting this incorrect presumption that all men are strong and can defend themselves.

Call me a feminist for asking for equal treatment of genders in this issue of sexual assualt, but it seems that Canadian society is intent on protecting the women, rather than preventing the men from their actions.

Namwayut. It means, ‘we are all one’. After the week of events in relation to the signing of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, I know this to not be true. The light shed upon the monstrosity that occurred within the Indian Residential Schools confirms this truth. Over 143 years 150,000 children have been taken from their families to attend Residential School (www.reconciliationcanada.ca/explore/history/). This action was one of the worst crimes committed in history, through the loss of Aboriginal culture and the emotional and physical abuse inflicted upon so many innocent children. It is now, however, that the actions in the residential schools are finally being formally recognized. In my visits to the Pacific National Exhibition (PNE) and to the Belkin Art Gallery, it became startlingly clear to me that these people needed a voice all of those years. And now we have finally given them one.

The British Columbia National Event about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission at the PNE was awing. The sheer collection of Aboriginal people who had come to provide testimonials, share their culture, or simply to provide support was truly shocking. Listening to stories such as that of Amy George, who was physically abused via a strap, but also emotionally, with nuns telling her, ‘You’re so hard to teach because you’re so dumb’, made it difficult for me to control my emotion of unbearable sadness. If I am reacting in such a strong way to one woman’s story, one can only imagine her emotional trauma for much of her life, during and after her time at the residential school.

The Belkin Art Galley held a subdued tone when I entered on Sunday. The predominant colours of red and black in the artwork, both in dark tones, indicate pain and apathy to me, as if indifference was the only way to endure. I found Skeena Reece’s movie ‘Touch Me’ especially provocative. Instead of the distress that was so clearly expressed in the other works, this piece was about kindness and forgiveness. As one of the curators of the Belkin Gallery questions, ‘I think because we’ve had such a difficult history in Canada that it’s produced, as it’s called, difficult knowledge. What do we do with that?” (www.blogs.vancouversun.com/2013/09/17/witnesses-bringing-residential-schools-into-the-present/).  Ms. Reece has clearly captured the essence of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission through her piece, which is to mold the population to accept this ‘difficult knowledge’, to respect that we have failed as a nation and too move to rectify these wrongs through awareness.

Moreover, the tenderness with which the Aboriginal woman attended to the Caucasian women moved me to tears, and proves further the indecency that the Residential Schools created. All people have the capacity to be brilliant, we just need to give them the voice.

The subjugation of Aboriginal people has caused me to question my Canadian citizenship. Although the ethical values concerning human rights were not present in the late eighteenth century when these schools first emerged, they were certainly present in Canada in 1996, when the last residential school finally shut its doors. It’s appalling that a country in which the national anthem exclaims ‘the True North strong and free’, such freedom doesn’t exist for all. In the future, I hope this freedom upon which we base our nationalism can ring true for all Canadians, all of our ‘home and native land’.

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!