The thesis of Patricia Roy’s article, “The Education of Japanese Children in the British Columbia Interior Housing Settlements during World War Two” is about how the Japanese students in Canada were able to get “the utmost” out of their education during WW2 in settlement camps.[1] However, the bulk of the paper seems to indicate otherwise. The author goes into grave detail about the lack of trained educators to teach these students as some teachers were teenagers and others previously trained in different professions. Also, the author shows that there was a lack of funding for these schools because “relocation took priority over education.”[2] Roy also pointed out the lack of communication and confusion among the governing bodies in setting up these schools which caused for many delays in schools being established and even providing minimal teaching tools. Not only did Roy focus a great deal on the educators that had little to no experience she also focused on overcrowding, the conditions of the school and the isolation the Japanese children experienced which again shows a less than ideal environment and not optimal. All this information is contradictory to the thesis that these students were getting the “utmost” out of their education and especially since they were isolated from other Canadians and Canadian Educators, they were poor students in the English language. The author provides in depth information on the grades of the students prior to the evacuation and during. There is reference to some strong grades in math and as stated the Japanese were poor in English. There was a single reference to other schools but more comparisons may have strengthened this article to show that because of the war all schools suffered. However, without that and with all the obstacles that the Japanese faced does not support the author’s thesis.

Robert M. Stamp discusses his own personal experiences in, “Growing Up Progressive? Part II: Going to High school in 1950s Ontario,” his main focus was on the content being taught during this time and how it was politically based. “The prime purpose of schooling, he emphasized over and over again, was “to produce loyal, intelligent, right-thinking, religious, and freedom-loving citizens.””[3] This gives perspective of the provincial government being in control of their curriculum in which no one had a say in. The first half of the article solely focuses on what was taught throughout Grade 9-13 which gives insight on the type of education they were achieving. Stamp gives examples of what they were learning versus what they should be learning. As the author states, “We learn to understand that text according to predetermined official interpretations coming down to us from the provincial department of education via our own teachers.”[4] The second half of the article gives more insight on teacher’s qualifications which were high at this school. For example, “Teachers of the decade were highly qualified, with more than half possessing honours degrees.”[5] Stamp briefly discusses how their were gendered classes which relates to the article “Disciplining Children, Disciplining Parents: The Nature and Meaning of Advice to Canadian Parents, 1945-1955” by Mona Gleason also reiterates the gender groups in which, girls were to do sewing and shorthand, and boys were to learn trades which supports his point of the content that was given despite qualified educators.

Mona Gleason’s article, “Disciplining Children, Disciplining Parents: The Nature and Meaning of Advice to Canadian Parents, 1945-1955” is essentially on maintaining nominalization of children through their families and teachers at school. The balance in children’s life is important, as they need guidance but also some leniency throughout their childhood. “Experts tended to put much of the blame for ‘problem’ children squarely on the shoulders of insensitive parents, mothers were warned against giving their children either too much love and attention, or not enough.”[6] This also gives perspective on the pressure put upon the mother, as this time was very much so categorized by gender. Although, this article emphasizes the importance of psychology as well, for example, “Efforts to ensure the psychological stability of young Canadians, quite apart from their physical well-being, shaped the impact public institutions made upon the family and the interactions between institutions and home.”[7] This article continues to give parents specific advice on how to raise their children as well as harsh criticism towards their ways of parenting. However, towards the end of the article it strongly contradicts the points being made, “You don’t need to be right all the time. Your child wants a man for a father, not a formula. He wants a woman for a mother, not a theory. He wants real parents, real people, capable of making mistakes without moping about it. You’re not going to do any harm as long as you do your best.”[8] Throughout the whole article, it was continuously reiterated how detrimental the mistakes made by the parents was on their children and yet it negates that point.

 

Bibliography:

Gleason, Mona, “Disciplining Children, Disciplining Parents: The Nature and Meaning of  Advice to Canadian Parents, 1945-1955,” in Sara Burke and Patrice Milewski (Eds.), Schooling in Transition: Reading in the Canadian History of Education, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012. 357-375.

Roy, Patricia, “The Education of Japanese Children in the British Columbia Interior Housing Settlements during World War Two,” Historical Studies in Education, Vol. 4, No. 2 (1992): 211-231.                                 http://historicalstudiesineducation.ca/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/969/1111.

Stamp, M. Robert, “Growing Up Progressive? Part II: Going to High school in 1950s Ontario,” Historical Studies in Education, Vol. 17, No. 2 (2005): 321-331. http://historicalstudiesineducation.ca/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/81/63

 

Endnotes:

[1] Patricia Roy, “The Education of Japanese Children in the British Columbia Interior Housing Settlements during World War Two,” Historical Studies in Education, 4, no. 2 (1992): 211-231.

http://historicalstudiesineducation.ca/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/969/1111.

[2] Ibid, 218.

[3] Robert M. Stamp, “Growing Up Progressive? Part II: Going to High school in 1950s Ontario,” Historical Studies in Education, 17, no. 2 (2005): 330.

http://historicalstudiesineducation.ca/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/81/63.

[4] Ibid, 325.

[5] Ibid, 330.

[6] Mona Gleason, ““Disciplining Children, Disciplining Parents: The Nature and Meaning of Advice to Canadian Parents, 1945-1955,” Schooling in Transition: Reading in the Canadian History of Education, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012), 358.

[7] Ibid, 358.

[8] Ibid, 368.