What has been and continues to be required of students and teachers during times of national crises and uncertainty?
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: Readings in the Canadian History of Education, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012: 357-375.
- Gleason starts her article with the legislative consequences seen as a result of crime comic books: the Fulton Bill. This made it a criminal act to ‘print, publish, sell or distribute any magazine or book that was devoted to the pictorial presentation of crime.’ This act shows the intentions of the government in their pursuit of creating psychologically sound young humans. From here, the intervention of psychologists and the government into Canadian lives only increases. ‘The psychologically informed advice of the experts helped to shape attitudes towards genders and, by claiming to safeguard the mental health of the country’s children, legitimized the intervention of outside institutions into the private real of the family.’ More often than not mothers and female teachers alike were made the scapegoats for unruly children, whether it is in the home or in the classroom. With new information on parenting, regarding youth’s psychological vulnerability, flying around, approaches to parenting were constantly being revised. In turn, this created the need for parents and teachers to continuously relearn the appropriate methods in childrearing. Constant scrutiny of others followed children’s behavior reflected teachers within the classroom, and mothers in regards to home life. This article shows that parents required disciplining themselves (by experts), in order to properly discipline their children in a socially acceptable way to meet social norms.
Neff, Charlotte. 2000. “Youth in Canada West: A Case Study of Red Hill Farm School Emigrants, 1854-1868.” Journal of Family History 25, no. 4: 432. Complementary Index, EBSCOhost (accessed November 4, 2017).
- Within this article, Neff depicts the changing roles within the family as compulsory schooling came to play. As children spent a longer time at home and attending school, the age in which most children left home rose to age 16-21. This implies the degree of dependency that parents fostered in their children. School attendance accounts for significant lifestyle changes for most children. Though it was only mandatory 4 months of they year, many in rural areas attended periodically. Neff shows that attendance declined gradually after age 12 and dramatically after age 16, but reliance on the family refuses to wafer. This article takes into account the benefits of living away from home as well: “being able to enjoy a degree of choice, mobility, and freedom, not shared by those living with their families, particularly those still in school.” This allows the reader to interpret the changing requirements of children and adolescents, whether they live with or without their families.
John, B. (1996). Hidden Workers: Child Labour and the Family Economy in Late Nineteenth-Century Urban Ontario. Labour/ Le Travail. 163.
- This article explains the roles of children aged 7-14 years old, and how their duties contributing to economic stability were necessary for a successful home. For a home to survive financially, many mothers entered the work force, leaving the children responsible for domestic duties. Often these domestic duties included working out of sweatshops. With a surplus of workers, employers are able to lower wages leaving the workers to compete with one another. This issue meant that many brought their work home for those precious overtime hours. ‘The more the sweating system exploited the free or cheap labour of children, the less of a chance adults faced of ever receiving a fair wage for their own work.’ This cycle allows insight as to how families were stuck in ruts, just making ends meet. With education in question, it was an unfortunate reality that the achievement of education brought no occupational reward to children and they were more beneficial as wage earners or contributing to the household in other ways. Everyone had to pull their weight. Though there are many differences between rural and urban life, John Bullen points out that despite where they lived, workers still found ‘their most reliable and effective support system under their own roof. This is a key note as it allows insight as to how all work that was needed to be done in and around the home was a family affair. The parents often were not out to be cruel, but for economic survival it was necessary for everyone to contribute.