http://squid314.livejournal.com/275614.html
Sheesh, who thought this whole "World War 2" story arc would be a great idea? They started out with a bang - this whole Napoleonic thing, lots of dashing actions, fairly believable characters (a typically megalomaniac yet lovable dictator who is also AWESOME at everything notwithstanding). That was cool. Then they switched gears to a whole different continent and did "Civil War". Still lots of dashing action, they even did an episode or two set in the Wild West, good mix of romance, war, politics, and humour (they even slotted in Mark Twain! That's badass!), and the characters were more believable too. The action scenes were kinda monotonous though, Gettysburg and Antietam episodes plainly used much of the same footage for instance. But whatever, I enjoyed it so I kept watching the show. Then they dropped The Great War season on us! That was the highlight of the show for me - shit got so grim and dark (grimdark even!), and there was tons of stuff going on, and lots of famous people making cameos, and it was just over the top in general. The battle scenes of Verdun, or Vimy Ridge, or Somme, or Brusilov's Breakthrough were epic! The filmmakers used the gritty grainy effects combined with shaky cam to great effect actually. I felt they reused the sets of trench life and warfare too often, but the sets of life in the rear were refreshing. The ending was kinda meh, the authors wrote themselves into the corner with the whole positional trench warfare thingie, and they already used the 'gas' gimmick in the earlier episodes. The Russian Revolution and Civil War was a pretty clever way to bring the season to a close, but come on! Everyone must've seen it coming a mile away! World War 2 on the other hand was the most disappointing season yet (I'm still waiting to see how the whole Middle East season gets resolved, it's really dragging and I feel like they should just cancel the show). I pretty much agree with everything the guy in the blog I linked says: characters are very one-dimensional, super-weapon macguffin to resolve the season's plot is much less clever plot device than the Great War ending, the bad guys are Bad with a capital 'B' and seem to do EVILEVILEVIL all the time just for the LOLs, and come on - the entire plot is basically a rehash of the previous season with some new characters, nicer sets, better special effects (I have to give them credit - the special effects in this season are way better than Great War season), and more action. It's like they got Joss Whedon and J. J. Abrams to write the script, but didn't allow them to put in any lipstick lesbians or 'oooooooooh mysterious monsters scary!!!'. Epic fail!
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Private school frenzy
Toronto Private School Expo was an interesting experience to say the least. Probably the most interesting aspect of it were the attendees, the vast majority of whom were parents or parents-to-be. Strollers were dominating the convention floor of Ron Thompson Hall despite the abundance of five-step stairs and lack of easily accessible ramps. The strollers were dominated by offsprings of anywhere between 6 months and 3 years - so this is a clear indication of how early some parents (call them responsible, well-prepared, obsessive, or worry-wort) start worrying about their children's education. Children of older ages were surprisingly few and far between, majority of parents there I guess weren't interested in considering their spawns' input on the choice of schools. The facial expressions of the parents betrayed a mix of desperation (how hard is this school to get into? How do I choose a school? How do I pay for it? Will it be good for my son/daughter? What do I do if I can't get my child into this school/afford to pay for it?), incredulity (38 thousand a YEAR? The uniforms cost HOW MUCH?), weariness (jeez that's a lot of private schools), and hope. Not quite as heart-breaking as the faces of parents waiting for lottery results of a charter school in "Waiting for Superman" documentary, but very interesting nonetheless.
Then there were the booths of the private schools themselves. If the booths and stands are any indication, there are clearly the 'have' and 'have-not' schools. Just about every booth had a laptop running some sort of demo, or showing the school's website or whatever. The crests, logos, and mottos were on prominent display, even as the PR people practically tried to pry potential customers away from competitors' booths. What I found faintly sickening or pathetic were the number of schools that trotted out their students to either give out brochures, model school uniforms (at least that's what it looked like to me), or demonstrate some sort of artistic commitment that the school has (usually music). Overall the effect was probably the opposite of what was intended: rather than highlighting the schools' commitment to student success, it presented a picture of the schools using the students for their own means. OK, so private schools are of course more interested in students as a source of revenue, but these displays drove that home. "We're going to use your child to get more parents to send their children to our school so that we can make even more money." And then there was the usual spiel about the limited spaces availability, and how important it is to make the choice ASAP and register your child, or else it's too late and the spots will be filled and oh my god what will you do then send your child to a PUBLIC school how can you possibly do that to your dear Johnny/Betty and oh my god the sky is falling!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111!!!111ONEONEONE
OK, take deep breaths you poor breeder. Take nice deep breaths. Everything will be fine. But oh no, here comes the solicituous vulture from one of the financial institutions attending the expo! (I won't list them, but rest assured that a variety of both general banks and credit institutions, as well as companies specializing in education loans) And then the panic really sets in, pitches a cooler and a lawn chair, and cracks open a brewski. Because your child's education will run you anywhere from 12 to 40 thousand a year depending on the type of school, programs, uniforms, lunch options, trips, school locations, and so on. But never fear, these helpful folks from Insert-Your-Debt-Here company will help you take out a second or third mortgage on your house, or advance you a nice 10 year line of credit. Because we wouldn't want to risk your child's future, now would we? Because clearly if you throw money at your child's future, it'll turn out better, won't it?
Dear parents: I'm very critical of some of the methods and reforms in public and Catholic education, but it's not nearly so bad that you need to sell yourself into debt slavery to send your offsprings to a private school
Then there were the booths of the private schools themselves. If the booths and stands are any indication, there are clearly the 'have' and 'have-not' schools. Just about every booth had a laptop running some sort of demo, or showing the school's website or whatever. The crests, logos, and mottos were on prominent display, even as the PR people practically tried to pry potential customers away from competitors' booths. What I found faintly sickening or pathetic were the number of schools that trotted out their students to either give out brochures, model school uniforms (at least that's what it looked like to me), or demonstrate some sort of artistic commitment that the school has (usually music). Overall the effect was probably the opposite of what was intended: rather than highlighting the schools' commitment to student success, it presented a picture of the schools using the students for their own means. OK, so private schools are of course more interested in students as a source of revenue, but these displays drove that home. "We're going to use your child to get more parents to send their children to our school so that we can make even more money." And then there was the usual spiel about the limited spaces availability, and how important it is to make the choice ASAP and register your child, or else it's too late and the spots will be filled and oh my god what will you do then send your child to a PUBLIC school how can you possibly do that to your dear Johnny/Betty and oh my god the sky is falling!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111!!!111ONEONEONE
OK, take deep breaths you poor breeder. Take nice deep breaths. Everything will be fine. But oh no, here comes the solicituous vulture from one of the financial institutions attending the expo! (I won't list them, but rest assured that a variety of both general banks and credit institutions, as well as companies specializing in education loans) And then the panic really sets in, pitches a cooler and a lawn chair, and cracks open a brewski. Because your child's education will run you anywhere from 12 to 40 thousand a year depending on the type of school, programs, uniforms, lunch options, trips, school locations, and so on. But never fear, these helpful folks from Insert-Your-Debt-Here company will help you take out a second or third mortgage on your house, or advance you a nice 10 year line of credit. Because we wouldn't want to risk your child's future, now would we? Because clearly if you throw money at your child's future, it'll turn out better, won't it?
Dear parents: I'm very critical of some of the methods and reforms in public and Catholic education, but it's not nearly so bad that you need to sell yourself into debt slavery to send your offsprings to a private school
Monday, September 20, 2010
Jetting away?
Looking for a teaching job sucks. But more specifically, looking for a teaching job in Canada sucks, because the system is stacked against the newcomer, because the job market and the economy are stacked against the newcomer, and because the means of searching for a job are positively medieval. Let me break it down for you:
The system is stacked
Teachers in Ontario enjoy some of the best working conditions for teachers in the world: the pay's good, the job security is good, the time required to reach salary ceiling is relatively short (9 years), the opportunities to raise one's qualifications (and therefore pay) are many, the pension and other benefits are fantastic. All of this, however, depends on powerful teacher unions, and therefore there is a price for all these great benefits. Teachers' unions protect their members (they wouldn't be unions if they didn't), but they do so in ways that make entry into teaching profession difficult. Retired teachers are allowed to be on occasional teaching lists (supply teaching, filling in for disability/maternity leaves, etc.) and speaking from experience most supply teachers I've encountered so far have been retired or returning teachers. By contrast, newcoming teachers are at a disadvantage because of lack of classroom experience. It is expected that they will pick up experience through occasional teaching, but just how one is expected to compete with retired teachers who are favoured by the unions and the schools (schools prefer to call retired teachers and old colleagues rather than new teachers - this is a sentiment that I've heard expressed openly)?
The Catch-22 that all fresh newcomers to a job market face ("How am I supposed to get experience if no one will hire me because of lack of experience?") is especially bad for teachers. I'm not saying this to whine, but this is a simple statement of fact. The vast majority of teaching jobs in this country are in the public and Catholic sector, both with powerful teaching unions. A lawyer might not be able to start in a big firm right away, but maybe he can go to a small firm first, work for less money, get experience, and then work his way up. A teacher faces the same public/Catholic school system and union everywhere s/he goes in Ontario. Ah, but maybe the hopeful teacher can pick up experience elsewhere first? Sure, but experience picked up in other provinces or out of country is not valued as highly in Ontario, and moreover you don't accumulate contacts in the Ontario school system. The adage "it's not what you know - it's who you know" is as true in the teaching profession as anywhere else. Getting hired is a lot easier when you know the people interviewing you, or the principle of the school, or if you both know some other third party, and so on.
The job market/economy is stacked
There is a glut of teachers in Canada. After looking at jobs in other provinces, I can safely say that the supposed deficiency of teachers elsewhere in Canada is largely a myth. There are areas constantly in need of teachers (NWT, Yukon, Nunavut, the reserves). There are good reasons for this constant deficiency, but it has nothing to do with a chronic shortage of teachers. Judging by rejection emails I've been receiving, even tiny schools in tiny towns up north in Ontario receive upward of 50 applications per position. The numbers in south-eastern Ontario are much much higher - the highest number of applicants for a single position I've seen so far is 163. So the job market sucks. The economy also sucks. Even if I was to be able to get at least some employment by doing occasional teaching, in today's prices it's enough to live on, but no money to save or pay off the debts with.
Job searching is medieval
Oh sure, they (education employers) found the existance of the internet, but I think they're still a little baffled by how to use it properly or to its best potential. Dig this. Some boards in Ontario hire through a single website www.applytoeducation.com while other boards hire through their own board websites, while other boards choose to post jobs on third-party websites. Now applytoeducation would be the best place to look for a job as most of the employers in Ontario use it (but not boards in GTA area strangely enough), were it not for the fact that you have to pay for its use. It costs 80 dollars or so to register with the website, and then you have to pay 10 dollars (plus tax) per board that you wish to apply to. So I have to pay 10 dollars to apply to Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, another 10 dollars to apply to Ottawa-Carleton Catholic District School Board, another 10 dollars to apply to Simcoe Country District School Board, and so on and so on. Having looked at jobs in other countries I can safely and honestly say that this is just about the dumbest, greediest, and inefficient system for job seekers around.
So what next? So far U.K. seems like a pretty good opportunity, and it's something I'm starting to pursue. Will post more later.
The system is stacked
Teachers in Ontario enjoy some of the best working conditions for teachers in the world: the pay's good, the job security is good, the time required to reach salary ceiling is relatively short (9 years), the opportunities to raise one's qualifications (and therefore pay) are many, the pension and other benefits are fantastic. All of this, however, depends on powerful teacher unions, and therefore there is a price for all these great benefits. Teachers' unions protect their members (they wouldn't be unions if they didn't), but they do so in ways that make entry into teaching profession difficult. Retired teachers are allowed to be on occasional teaching lists (supply teaching, filling in for disability/maternity leaves, etc.) and speaking from experience most supply teachers I've encountered so far have been retired or returning teachers. By contrast, newcoming teachers are at a disadvantage because of lack of classroom experience. It is expected that they will pick up experience through occasional teaching, but just how one is expected to compete with retired teachers who are favoured by the unions and the schools (schools prefer to call retired teachers and old colleagues rather than new teachers - this is a sentiment that I've heard expressed openly)?
The Catch-22 that all fresh newcomers to a job market face ("How am I supposed to get experience if no one will hire me because of lack of experience?") is especially bad for teachers. I'm not saying this to whine, but this is a simple statement of fact. The vast majority of teaching jobs in this country are in the public and Catholic sector, both with powerful teaching unions. A lawyer might not be able to start in a big firm right away, but maybe he can go to a small firm first, work for less money, get experience, and then work his way up. A teacher faces the same public/Catholic school system and union everywhere s/he goes in Ontario. Ah, but maybe the hopeful teacher can pick up experience elsewhere first? Sure, but experience picked up in other provinces or out of country is not valued as highly in Ontario, and moreover you don't accumulate contacts in the Ontario school system. The adage "it's not what you know - it's who you know" is as true in the teaching profession as anywhere else. Getting hired is a lot easier when you know the people interviewing you, or the principle of the school, or if you both know some other third party, and so on.
The job market/economy is stacked
There is a glut of teachers in Canada. After looking at jobs in other provinces, I can safely say that the supposed deficiency of teachers elsewhere in Canada is largely a myth. There are areas constantly in need of teachers (NWT, Yukon, Nunavut, the reserves). There are good reasons for this constant deficiency, but it has nothing to do with a chronic shortage of teachers. Judging by rejection emails I've been receiving, even tiny schools in tiny towns up north in Ontario receive upward of 50 applications per position. The numbers in south-eastern Ontario are much much higher - the highest number of applicants for a single position I've seen so far is 163. So the job market sucks. The economy also sucks. Even if I was to be able to get at least some employment by doing occasional teaching, in today's prices it's enough to live on, but no money to save or pay off the debts with.
Job searching is medieval
Oh sure, they (education employers) found the existance of the internet, but I think they're still a little baffled by how to use it properly or to its best potential. Dig this. Some boards in Ontario hire through a single website www.applytoeducation.com while other boards hire through their own board websites, while other boards choose to post jobs on third-party websites. Now applytoeducation would be the best place to look for a job as most of the employers in Ontario use it (but not boards in GTA area strangely enough), were it not for the fact that you have to pay for its use. It costs 80 dollars or so to register with the website, and then you have to pay 10 dollars (plus tax) per board that you wish to apply to. So I have to pay 10 dollars to apply to Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, another 10 dollars to apply to Ottawa-Carleton Catholic District School Board, another 10 dollars to apply to Simcoe Country District School Board, and so on and so on. Having looked at jobs in other countries I can safely and honestly say that this is just about the dumbest, greediest, and inefficient system for job seekers around.
So what next? So far U.K. seems like a pretty good opportunity, and it's something I'm starting to pursue. Will post more later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)