How to Study Weird Things

As a science teacher in an interdisciplinary undergraduate program, I often encounter students who want to study topics that many of my colleagues would find nonacademic, and certainly unscientific, such as astrology, Reiki, channeling, Tarot, homeopathy, and ESP. What can an instructor, working within the western scientific tradition, do with such requests? One approach is to clearly explain to the student that these topics "aren't science," and they are not going to learn anything from researching them. I think that this gets a student nowhere, and it is just such an attitude that makes many afraid to pursue unconventional interests. This position also reinforces the students' mistrust of science, professors, and academia, an attitude that they will find no shortage of in the books written on the unconventional subjects of their choice.

A few years ago I stopped fighting the New Age educational tide. I asked myself if there were ways that I could turn a student's curiosity to pedagogical advantage. These students were coming to me with enormous enthusiasm for study and research. How could I maneuver this interest into credible, academic work, which would also appear credible and academic to my colleagues? I realized that if I framed their scholastic approach creatively it would be an opportunity for these students to begin learning about science, the scientific method, and critical thinking.

Since then I have tried to help students take subjects that they are already interested in, regardless of how eccentric they may seem from the standpoint of traditional academia, and complicate them. I help them to fashion their interest into a traditional study by choosing an analytical approach we are both satisfied with. Sometimes this is easy, but sometimes it takes quite a bit of creativity. My first step is to ask the students if they want their studies to be credible. For many, this is a pivotal question, as they may be intending to eventually practice the discipline they want to study. For others, this work may be tied to deeply held beliefs. Typically, the question of credibility begins to encourage an openness towards broadening their work.

Is Studying Weird Subjects Credible?

Even though students may intensely want to research an unconventional topic, they are often unaware that it may not be possible to grant credit for studying these areas by reading the books and articles written by the field's practitioners and proponents. As defined and interpreted by the "believers," these are subjects that accrediting institutions and most faculty will not see as academically admissible.

One student asked me about this in regard to her topic, Polarity Therapy. I told her that although she can go to an institution like the American Polarity Therapy Association (APTA), and take legitimate and respected courses, they are only "legitimate and respected" within a narrow spectrum of schools. Accredited colleges and universities attempt to say something different from the APTA. They claim that what an individual is learning in their classrooms, although open to critique and correction, is reliable and broadly applicable. It is the best that the western analytical model has come up with through comprehensive research. If someone wants to investigate something unconventional, the challenge is to transform the study into work that is rigorous and scholarly. How can we accomplish this?

An initial approach is to look at the unorthodox subject through the lens of an established discipline, using the epistemological and methodological foundations and standards of that system. With this procedure, any subject can be examined and becomes credible by traditional academic standards. For instance, if we look at Polarity Therapy (PT) through the lens of history, sociology, or psychology, we can use these disciplines to lend their credibility to our studies, asking legitimate research questions such as: How and where did PT originate? Are there demographic differences in the patients who use PT? Do alternative medical modalities satisfy patients in ways that allopathic medicine does not? Students are often intrigued by scholastic questions closely tied to their unconventional pursuits.

This approach is useful in interdisciplinary programs, where students need credits in a variety of areas. In my work I primarily use the discipline of science studies to meet conventional criteria. In this case, the questions might be: Are the techniques of PT scientific? How does PT compare with scientifically established medical techniques? Even students who claim that they "do not agree with science" are eager to look at these questions in an attempt to justify their beliefs.

The basic idea is to provide the student with a method to examine their subject as an objective outsider, free of unavoidable misconceptions inherent in exploring a subject from too close a perspective.

Using a Book List in Reverse

After we have established an investigative discipline and an appropriate research question, I encourage students to read the skeptical literature on their subject. These are the books that can offer them a challenging perspective from which to examine unconventional topics, deepening their studies. It is helpful to have them read something that looks at a broad range of critical thinking as it applies to unconventional ideas (e.g., Gilovich 1991; Randi 1982; Schick and Vaughn 1995; Shermer 1997), although it is sometimes difficult for non-science-oriented students to completely work their way through one of these texts. Since my students are all working on independent studies, and not in a classroom, they do not have an instructor immediately available to help them through difficult intellectual terrain. In this case, specific articles on their topic taken out of anthologies (e.g., Frazier 1991) or journal reprints from skeptical journals are most helpful.

This material can often be a frontal assault on their beliefs, which is helpful only for some students. After all, most of them are interested in proving that their unconventional topic has research merit and ultimate validity. In this case, I alter the research approach, using an ancient rhetorical strategy for building an argument. I explain to them that, curiously, skeptical articles and books actually include potentially corroborative insights about unorthodox science and medicine. These skeptical resources are a good place to probe unconventional topics, by letting the debunkers do the background research.

Let us say that you are interested in channeling, and you read a number of the articles that Martin Gardner has written on this subject (e.g., Gardner 1996). Of course, the thrust of his rhetoric will be to challenge mediums and channelers; however, in order to do this effectively he will first tell you all about them, including the history of channeling, biographies of famous channelers and unexplained channeling sessions, why channelers themselves think channeling works, stories about exposed channeling frauds, former channelers who have exposed fraudulent channeling, magicians who have replicated the techniques of mediums and psychics, and (importantly) any celebrated (albeit controversial) results coming from conventional laboratories. All this will be followed by citations for books and articles where you can follow up on his sources.

If students are seriously interested in channeling, Gardner may have just saved them a frustrating day of basic library research. They can repeat this process for almost any unconventional topic. Even though these skeptical authors are frequently debunking this research, some of what they are challenging are findings by scientists in reputable university laboratories. Research results can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, and dubious methodology eventually verified or disputed. There is no reason why a student cannot find these articles and cite them in reverse of the skeptics.

Some educators may protest that these students are reading this material for the wrong reasons and missing the point. In my experience, however, students gradually change how they view their topics. An individual may not alter her fundamental beliefs in the efficacy of channeling, but she will learn that its truth value and applicability are not obvious, and that the phenomena may simply be due to natural, unrecognized determinants (e.g., an active imagination). This leads the student to further inquiry. Importantly, students using skeptical reports and analysis in reverse, and in support of their hypotheses, have engaged themselves in the research process.

Once students begin their research it is important to move them beyond the opinions of the believers into scholarly references. Simply because information is in a book does not mean that you can quote the opinion or research and it will substantiate your position. For instance, students can quote the Bible to support a point they are making about the existence of God, and although this may have purchase with a minority of their readers, its value as evidence would be lost on most. Books that scholars do not find credible can be used as long as proper disclaimers and a critical review are added. This distinction between valid and invalid references can be discouraging to students who may feel they are on the right research track, only to discover their resources are of dubious distinction.

Sandy's Talking Goldfish

Sandy is a woman who is intensely interested in nature and animals. She works at a nature center where it is her job to take people on walks and introduce them to the local plants, animals, and ecology. She is also someone who believes fervently that people can communicate with animals and that animals have something interesting to tell us about ourselves. Her writing often includes anecdotes describing conversations with her goldfish.

When I asked Sandy if she wanted to appear credible, I could see her eyes light up. "Of course," she said. Since she already had experiences with the public, she knew how difficult it was to explain the ideas she sincerely believed in. It was not difficult encouraging her to read skeptical authors, so she would know "the other side of the story." I suggested that she read Schick and Vaughn's How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age.

At an informal discussion in the middle of the semester some students, all of whom were involved in unconventional studies, were sitting around discussing the books they had been reading. Suddenly, Sandy launched into an hysterical tirade against "Schick and Vaughn." She proudly told the others that she had finished the book and continued, "I was so frustrated. I wanted to tell them a thing or two. I'd be reading it in my living room and I'd say out loud, `Schick and Vaughn, do you believe in anything?' There were so many times I took my pen and underlined things and wrote in the margin: Yeah, Schick and Vaughn, I'd like to see you prove something!"

We all laughed at this harangue, but I was smiling contentedly inside. Sandy was irritated by the book, and probably had not gotten the full message that the authors intended her to receive, but she was intensely involved with the book and its ideas. It was an interactive workbook for her, and its lesson and cautions about examining fringe beliefs became subtle parts of her perspective, obvious in her essays and analyses.

"Why Do I Have to Address the Skeptics Anyway?"

This statement is the way one irritated student, who was working on Traditional Chinese Medicine, complained about looking into the skeptical viewpoint. I had two immediate responses. First, it indicates thorough research and scholarship about a subject to know its weaknesses, as well as the claims of the proponents. And second, it will help you to establish your credibility.

"To whom?" he asked, since he did not want to fight over concepts and energies that he believed were not measurable. I suggested to him that there were many possible situations in his future where knowing the science, criticism, and full spectrum of issues behind his unconventional subject would be of assistance. For example: 1) With clients who are trying to make a decision between an unconventional therapy and orthodox medicine; 2) At professional meetings where research is critiqued; 3) When writing papers, either popular or scholarly; 4) For protection, as some day someone in power may decide that the unconventional modality he is practicing is dangerous and declare that it is against the law. (I often use the examples of herbs and midwifery, both threatened by government control.); or, 5) To prepare himself for newspaper or radio interviews.

These are all forums where it helps students to have done their homework faithfully. They may not presently see themselves in these situations, but if they stay in an unconventional field the chances are high that they will find themselves there eventually.

Hard Evidence

I once had a student say that she was not interested in arguing with the skeptics, but that she wanted to find "hard evidence" for her beliefs, in this case astrology. I agreed with her that many people do not like to assume an adversarial posture. I pointed out that she did not need to be familiar with all the issues, claims, and counter-claims surrounding astrology so that she could debate with the skeptics. Critically reviewing unorthodox claims is not necessarily about argument, but about fully understanding what you are investigating so you can articulate it clearly and competently.

Students worry that including the skeptical viewpoint in an essay will weaken their position with the reader. In fact, it will have just the opposite effect. Including disparate views will indicate that their research has been thorough, and that they are not afraid of controversial or disconfirming data. In most essays, it is not necessary to completely refute skeptical hypotheses. Simply acknowledging them will often add strength to the student's argument.

I told the student who was interested in astrology that if she was really committed to looking for the "hard evidence" then she could not avoid examining skeptical perspectives. It is the skeptics who attempt to make unconventional evidence "soft." For instance, she wanted to cite an astrological researcher. I suggested she go ahead and quote his data, opinions, and findings, but to not take them completely at face value. Ask some probing questions: Is his work reputable? How do you know it is? What are reasons skeptics offer to question his results? If a student is looking for substantive evidence he or she cannot avoid these questions. It is the difference between deciding that something feels right, and knowing that it is right.

Looking into the skeptical side of things does not have to take away from the student's interests or primary work. Skeptical inquiry should not be something that redirects a student from his or her passion; instead it should enrich their work. Although sometimes scholarship demands us to look into things that seem to take us far afield, it is ultimately useful if this work and time help us to strengthen our analysis. When I suggest that a student look at the skeptical side of things I mean: 1) Reading an article about their subject written by a critical author; 2) Interviewing a researcher who does not agree with the student's approach; 3) Looking at some of the general objections to unorthodox modalities; or, 4) Reading a book that would help them think critically about unconventional topics. This is not a large commitment, it is simply a beginning.

Mr. Whitewing: Openness to the Unconventional

I try to empathize with students attempting unconventional studies, and to treat their work like any conventional research project. By doing this I let them know that I realize the complexities of the world that we share. Occasionally, it is helpful to point out situations where you, as an instructor, are confronted by a mysterious world, and then suggest the ordinary explanations that you are considering. The following story helped one of my students, who was studying the intelligence of ravens, understand that I could relate to her ideas, and also form alternative explanations for seemingly inexplicable phenomena. I told her:

"I was sitting in the physics library reading. Actually, I was staring out the window watching two ravens hop around the parking lot. One of them turned sideways and I noticed that it had a conspicuous white patch of feathers at the top of its wing. When it turned, I noticed that it had a corresponding patch on the other wing. When this unusual bird flew off, its epaulets left a striking pattern of flashing white freckles.

Days later, I was in a different building, sitting in my office, reading your paper about intelligence in ravens. You claimed that, even without scientific evidence, you realized certain things about ravens by intuition. As I read, I marked the places where I thought you should have provided corroborative evidence. I muttered, `No, this won't do,' or `This isn't convincing,' writing my comments in the margins. Suddenly, I looked up and out my window, which overlooks some roof tops. There was Mr. Whitewing, unmistakably perched on the roof right outside, staring in the window at me! He hopped around for quite some time, as if not to let me forget about his presence too quickly."

My student was impressed by this extraordinary anecdote. However, as I told her later, I discovered that the ornithology department on campus was marking ravens in this way to keep track of them. It was not a natural coloration, and perhaps, not even the same Mr. Whitewing at my window. It is helpful to demonstrate that your intellect can be broad when thinking about the boundary between the real and the imaginary, but that the line between magic and science is not always impossible to distinguish.

There are some scholars, however, who believe that the demarcation between science and magic is completely ambiguous. In this view, science is a narrative, similar to any other cultural mythology. This critique of science is one approach for students with unconventional studies to use in their analyses. After all, if science itself is built on an insecure foundation, how can it make any epistemic demands on what it classifies as pseudoscience? Unfortunately, this provocative intellectual observation, besides being confusing for many students, can turn hopelessly relativistic, which is ultimately unhelpful for a student seeking credibility. It is necessary to guide students with care along the path of scientific deconstruction, so that all of western theory and expertise are not abandoned.

Pedagogical Kindness

For those of us who have happily worked with science and analytical thinking for years, it is difficult to realize how frustrating it may be for students to look at challenging ideas. Students can be resistant to opinions that have the potential to upset their worldview; even if they embrace the quest it can lead to upsetting realizations about themselves and their world. As educators, it is important to work with students in a process-oriented and developmental model. It does not help to be condescending or pejorative about their deeply held beliefs, even if these beliefs seem totally absurd. Anyone who has worked with students who hold unconventional views, or who believe in seemingly useless health modalities, knows how deeply these ideas are felt. It is important to realize that students who follow your suggestions, carefully reading critical books and thinking about the skeptical approach, can experience a minor existential crisis. Suddenly they will not know what to believe, and many things they have based their lives on may be insecure. It behooves you, at these moments, to be an ally.

Studying Things That Don't Exist

It is common for students to approach science educators with the intention to study phenomena that the instructor may not believe exists. Where does this leave you as their guide on this unconventional academic expedition? Remember to avoid the temptation of trying to talk students out of the things they believe in. The objective is to share a process of thinking and careful research. An instructor's questions and critique should be an attempt to strengthen the student's approach, not squelch their enthusiasm.

I once had a student who was interested in astrology tell me: "Those scientists and skeptics are so closed-minded. They'll never change their beliefs."

I said, "Do you think you are closed-minded?"

"Of course not. I'm not a scientist."

"So, you're willing to change your beliefs? Are you open to the idea that, perhaps, astrology is a lot of wishful thinking?"

She thought about this for a long moment and finally said, "Yeah, I guess that's real open-mindedness, isn't it?"

I pointed out that if she were truly open-minded she would read the skeptical objections to astrology, and try to come to an impartial decision about its merits. This is the fundamental intention of good science.

However, open-mindedness only works when it goes both ways. For most unconventional studies, completely clear and final solutions to the questions students want to answer do not exist. The best we can do as educators is to help them work on diligently thinking about their subjects, so when they are challenged by a skeptical inquiry they will have an educated response.

Believing vs. Knowing: Faith’s Role in the Evolution Debate

To this day, nearly six decades later, I have memories of my parish priest’s occasional visits to religion classes in the early grades of my school, St. Mary’s, in rural eastern Wisconsin. Those moments that I remember most vividly were when he came to warn us about a distinguished and supposedly all-knowing college professor someday attempting to convince us to accept the evil and atheistic idea that we had evolved from lower animals. As he predicted, I did go on to have many such encounters. Ironically and to my continuing amusement, as a geology professor (albeit not very distinguished and certainly not all-knowing), I am now the cause of such encounters.

Perhaps because I was raised in a strong faith-based environment, I possess a unique appreciation for the critical need to prevent turning the evolution-versus-creationism/intelligent design debate into one of anti-religion versus religion. It is a lose-lose argument for both sides and will simply widen the destructive wedge separating believers, nonbelievers and the agnostics in between. Belief in evolution does not preclude belief in God. But belief is the key word. Fully understanding the concept of belief is fundamental to arguments for keeping creationism and its clever smokescreen, intelligent design (as my father used to say, giving a slow horse a new name doesn’t make it run faster), out of the science classrooms of all of our schools, not just the public ones.

Believing something to be true because of faith and knowing that something is true because of empirical testing are fundamentally distinct. For many people, faith is a wonderful gift, permitting them to believe whatever they want about a natural phenomenon; it does not, however, permit them to know the phenomenon. For example, faith permits some people to believe that an almighty being — God — created them in his image. But faith cannot permit them to know, to empirically prove, that humans instead did not create God in their image, as those without faith often choose to believe. Not recognizing the difference between believing and knowing prevents constructive and intellectually honest debate over faith-based teaching in the science classroom.

Scientific theories expressing what we think to be true at any given time about something as complex as evolution derive from the scientific method, a process in which testing is a fundamental ingredient; it has nothing to do with faith or reliance on some higher faith authority that tells us what to believe as truth. Believing instead of knowing something to be true can lead people to potentially dangerous acts, seemingly justified by their faith.

Religion and especially the concept of an almighty force or forces in nature appeal to many people because they supply easy-to-understand answers to questions that lack easy-to-provide testable answers — for example, how did it all begin and how will it all end? These questions have been around since humans first experienced volcanism, earthquakes and all sorts of other natural processes that were unexplainable within their existing framework of knowledge.

Scientists thrive on unanswered questions. Without puzzles to solve, they would have no careers. But those people who have not had a sound foundation in the process of scientific discovery cannot comfortably live with the unknown. These same individuals become dangerously disruptive to science education when they demand that their faith-based answers to these questions share equal status in science classrooms with empirically testable theories.

In spite of claims by the intelligent designers, no reputable scientist can call on the existence of an almighty guiding force to explain the incredible complexity and order of evolution just because of a lack of total understanding of this complexity and order right now. This notion is no different than creating a god of fire to explain volcanoes, as done millennia ago. Full and open pursuit of scientific truth abruptly ends in our schools when faith is invoked in this way.

For example, we do not now know all the details of genesis. Perhaps space/time is infinite with no boundaries, as Stephen Hawking suggests — we just don’t know, regardless of what those with faith in a creator would like for the faithless to believe. But scientists do not throw up their arms in despair and appeal to a higher being for an answer. (In their own lives, they may make a personal choice to use the beauty and complexity of something like evolution to strengthen their belief in an almighty being, which is perfectly acceptable, but should have nothing to do with their advancement of scientific knowledge in the minds of others.) Thousands of years of knowledge accumulation attest to the fact that with time, answers to even the most difficult questions about nature as we know them today may be discovered.

It seems that fundamentalists, and now more and more mainstream religious people, fear the teaching of evolution in the absence of creationism/intelligent design because they lack sufficient confidence and faith in the existence and power of their deity to be manifest without empirical proof. They believe that if their deity is taken out of the physical mechanism of genesis, belief in its existence among children in our schools will be threatened — how sad, selfish and shortsighted.

All people who feel that way should read Christianity and the Age of the Earth, written by geologist, evangelist and self-proclaimed “creationist” Davis A. Young. He presents cogent arguments that Christian evangelism will be significantly hindered by creationists’ attempts to defend their faith by falsely interpreting geologic evidence and thus arguing error on behalf of faith.

Happy Hour Harvest

The green movement meets the cocktail realm with organic, fruit-, veggie- and herb-infused spirits. Try these savory liquors naked, in a martini, or in creative tipples with fruit juices, mixers and bitters. With these spirits anyone can have a green thumb, all year round.

Square One Cucumber Vodka
“Spa water with a kick” is how Square One founder Allison Evanow describes her vodka, in which two kinds of cucumber essence (for both aroma and flavor) are added to organic rye vodka at the end of the distillation process. Its authentic taste is comparable to slices of the slender green veggie, and Evanow explains that the vodka’s charm lies in its cool and delicate flavor profile. Versatile in both savory and sweet cocktails, Square One Cucumber vodka is equally enjoyable in twists on the Martini or Mojito, as well as in creations like the Pimm’s-based Celery Cup #1, where it easily mingles with cilantro and celery.

Crop Organic Tomato Vodka
If you think you need to wait until late summer to capture that unbeatable garden tomato taste, think again. Take one sip of Crop Organic Tomato Vodka, and you’ll swear you are drinking tomato water squeezed from the ripest of fruits. Director of Marketing Connie Kam says their organic vodkas appeal not only to tomato lovers, but also to people interested in the eco-friendly products and farming practices used at Crop. It’s a natural choice for a kicked-up Bloody Mary, but the fresh tomato flavor shines through even better in a Martini. Increase the Vermouth, and garnish with a basil leaf and freshly cracked pepper, and you can pass on the Caprese salad appetizer.

Indio Spirits Lemongrass Lime Vodka
Citrusy, fresh and so aromatic, Indio Spirits’ Lemongrass Lime Vodka gets its zingy kick from lime zest and lemongrass steeped in the spirit for 36-48 hours. “All of our vodkas are 100% natural and 80 proof, which is a unique thing in this business,” explains Chairman and CEO John Ufford of the Oregon-based company. Indio’s version has a drier and earthier taste than most lemon or lime vodkas, and it adds an enticing Asian flair to a vodka and tonic or gimlet, mixing especially well with freshly made ginger ale in a variation on the Collins.

***Recipes***
Celery Cup #1
Courtesy of H. Joseph Ehrmann, Square One Brand Ambassador and Mixologist
1 ½ oz. Square One Cucumber Vodka
1-inch piece English cucumber
2-inch piece celery stalk (close to the center of the bunch)
Handful of cilantro
1 oz. fresh lemon juice
½ oz. Pimm’s
¾ oz. organic agave nector or simple syrup
Celery stalk for garnish
In a mixing glass, muddle the cucumber, celery, cilantro and lemon juice into a pulp. Add remaining ingredients, cover with ice and shake hard for 10 seconds. Strain into a tall glass over fresh ice and garnish with a celery stalk.

Organic Tomato Vodka Martini
Courtesy of Crop Organic Vodka
3 parts Crop Organic Tomato Vodka
1 part dry Vermouth
Fresh basil leaf
Add ingredients to a shaker half-filled with ice. Stir until chilled. Strain into a cocktail glass, and garnish with a fresh basil leaf, and freshly cracked pepper if desired.

Indio Ginger Collins
1.5 oz. Indio Spirits Lemongrass Lime Vodka
1 tsp. sugar
½ small lime
Ginger ale (freshly made if possible)
Muddle vodka, sugar and lime in the bottom of a Collins glass. Add ice, and top with ginger ale.

Kelly Magyarics is a wine and spirits writer, and wine educator, in the Washington, DC area. She can be reached through her website, www.trywine.net

Internet Network Marketing Secret Tool To Stay In Touch With Your Leads

So you have generated leads online or possibly purchased network marketing leads. The next step is to create a marketing funnel that keeps in contact with these prospects. You can achieve this by using the secret tool most network marketers do not use: an auto-responder.

An auto-responder gives the opportunity to setup a group of automated e-mails that go out to your prospects over a period of time. At the same time you can create some broadcast e-mails whenever you come across something that you feel would provide value for your followers.

In your messages you can share tips, book reviews about network marketing and other information that would be of use to them. I know one network marketer that creates many videos on network marketing topics and then sends an e-mail to his list with the title and link to the video. Another network marketer sends e-mails with the topic of their new blog post where he provides useful tips.

The auto-responder gives you the opportunity to build rapport with your followers while at the same time marketing valuable tools to them that would benefit them. In this way you can also generate compensation for your work. Just don't send an e-mail with sales pitches because people will unsubscribe from your list.

As you are building a relationship with them you want to engage the prospect so that they contact you.

An auto-responder is a very powerful tool when you learn how to follow-up with your prospects by providing them valuable information and building a relationship with them.

Animal doc in demand for serious, weird surgeries

Michael Pavletic has removed a butcher knife from a dog's stomach and tumors from tiny mice. He's performed plastic surgery on injured hawks.

But he draws the line at giving canines body piercings or fat cats liposuction. "That's just not what I do," said the longtime head of surgery at Boston's Angell Animal Medical Center.

The 58-year-old surgeon is known as a pioneer in reconstructive animal surgery and is so skilled at saving severely sick and injured animals he is sought out by worried pet owners from around the world. Pavletic has cared for thousands of animals, including a dog that swallowed an engagement ring right before the wedding, a cat needing a face reattached and a gorilla that required reconstructive surgery on a finger.

He's removed bullets from puppies, performed dental work on wolves, and even tended to snakes with throat problems.

"I've been doing surgery for 30 years and there are very few things I haven't seen," Pavletic said just before going into surgery to remove stones from a cat's bladder.

In the past, animals with very serious injuries may have simply been euthanized to avoid life long pain and because surgical techniques on some injuries had yetto be developed. But advancements in medicine coupled with pets becoming more a part of families have increased the demand for serious animal surgeries.

"If it wasn't for him, my cat wouldn't be alive," said Kristin Gagnon, of Hanson.

Four years ago, Gagnon's Siamese kitten, Max, burned his palate to the bone after chewing an electrical cord. Pavletic reconstructed Max's palate by taking a graft from inside the cat's lip. "What a fantastic job he did," Gagnon said. "He's the only surgeon who could have done this."

For Pavletic, his love for animals started with sick birds and a terrier mutt nam Tiger.

As a 6-year-old in Illinois, Pavletic tried to save injured wild birds by giving them water, food and a little attention. It rarely worked. And he was inseparable from his grandparents' terrier until the dog was killed by a neighbor's car.

But he began his journey into animal surgery after finshing veterinary school at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana in 1974.

As an intern at Angell, Pavletic came across a cat named John Glenn that had a tumor on his face. At the time, veterinarians couldn't remove such tumors from animals while also closing the wound using conventional methods. avletic turned to an older human reconstructive surgery textbook that suggested a simple skin flap might do the trick. He took what was a routine technique in human surgery and tailored the procedure for a cat. It worked.

"My interest in surgery grew from there," he said.

Pavletic held teaching positons at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and Tufts University in North Grafton, Massachusetts, and over the years developed more than 40 surgical techniques. He also authored a textbook, "Atlas of Small Animal Reconstructive Surgery," that is about to go into its third
edition.

He returned to Angell in 1988 as head of surgery. That's when the fun started and his reputation grew as a healer of the strangest afflictions. The hospital began seeing oddball cases.

Once there was a dog with severe stomach pains. Pavletic's team found that the dog had swallowed a pair of red panties. They didn't belong to the dog's female owner.

"I don't know what happened to that marriage," said Pavletic.

Another time a family brought in their recently deceased goldfish and asked the team to perform an MRI to determine why it died. The cause: old age.

There was the case of the Labrador retriever who suddenly stopped\ urinating midway. After various tests, Pavletic discovered that the dog had a pellet stuck in its penis. The bullet had somehow moved down from its bladder after the dog was shot by an unknown assailant. Pavletic surgically removed it - delicately.

And while the injuries Pavletic sees may seem a bit weird, so are requests by some pet owners who confuse animal reconstructive surgery with superficial cosmetic plastic surgery. Over the years, Pavletic has fielded inquiries about dogs getting diamond studs in ears and cats getting liposuction.

"I tell them no," he said.

Nick Trout, an Angell surgeon and author of "Tell Me Where It Hurts: A Day of Humor, Healing and Hope in My Life as an Animal Surgeon," said Pavletic has been a "great mentor" to many aspiring animal surgeons, Trout included, and has always been accessible to veterinary students.

"We see a lot of people who come here specifically to hang out with him and learn from him," Trout said.

Pavletic said laughter is key to any animal surgeon's health, especially when you come across cases of animals that have been purposely injured by humans.

"You have to keep a sense of humor in this business," he said.

"If you don't, you'll either leave it or go insane."

Students make dreams happen

Education

(Cortesy of BIS)

What happens when a small group of International Baccalaureate students get together to talk about how they can respond to some of the needs in their community?

A school for children in need – that’s what happens.

The British International School’s IB CAS team, which first proposed the idea of building the school, won top honors in the UNESCO-DaimlerChrysler Mondialogo School Contest in Rome in November 2006, for coming up with the best initiative in social activism.

The idea has also attracted some very important partners: 15 like-minded students at a partner school in Trento, Italy, who helped raise funds for school supplies, and enthusiastic activists here in Indonesian who belong to mAAN, the Modern Asian Architecture Network.

David Sagita and Felicia Djajadi, young architects with a strong social mission, assisted students in the design stages. They came to BIS every Friday week after week to oversee the students as they drew sketches, added details to their plans and constructed cardboard models of what they hoped might pass for a school!

Then Mr. Ahmed Djuhara, internationally renowned architect and mAAN member, joined the students, giving generously of his time and expertise to ensure the rough sketches and models could become a reality.

Djuhara helped transform the students' models into a computer-aided design of the school. At that moment the students knew, their ideas could work!
The project received financial support from Daimler-Chrysler of Indonesia. Mr Wim Ekel, Senior Officer, Corporate Communications and Mr. Yuniadi Hartono, Deputy Director Marketing and Communication, encouraged the students when they visited to see how their ideas were progressing.

The easy-to-assemble structure was erected first at BIS before it was taken on a flatbed truck to the intended site where the real work would begin: supporting basic education for some of Jakarta’s children in need.

But even at this stage of the school building project, every BIS high schooler on the team could place their hand on the school and say, “I had a part in this. I can help make things better.”

(Ankush Sharda wrote this piece while he was in year 12 at British International School. He is currently reading accounting and finance in Berkeley Universities US)

Making a choice for a school

What is the right school for my child? A lot of parents are struggling with this question and as educator and parent I have experienced that parents tend to keep on assessing schools and bringing up this issue. Thus, an interesting topic to discuss!

We all agree that the choice of a school is important. Everyone is looking for good quality schools for the best price. Harder is it to answer the question: "What is good quality?" If we examine this question, everyone will come up with a different answer.

For some, quality is found in the academic achievement of a school, for others it is the school's facilities and then there are parents who say that a school is a good school when the communication between school and parents is effective and responsive. I think it is safe to conclude that all of these aspects (and more) are important indicators for good quality. Nevertheless, agreeing on what is quality is tough.

Consequently, when defining quality is hard, how do parents choose a school? Research on school choice is extensive and shows that most parents choose a school because it is located near to home.

Other aspects that are mentioned are, for example: the curriculum of the school and factors as "Is the curriculum self built by the school or is it part of a bigger network?", "Is the curriculum/school accredited by an independent organization?", etcetera. Especially, this last question gives important information on the results of the school in relation to other schools. This is a more or less independent and abstract quality measurement.

Strangely overseen is the fact that a school is a learning institute. In other words, the "product" of a school is the learning that is taking place within the classroom and the school.

Most researchers agree that learning in schools should get a holistic approach. Which means that learning is not only about knowledge, but also about applying that knowledge and combining knowledge and skills to understand processes and developments in the world outside school. Only focusing on knowledge (academics) is selling your child short. Especially in the hi-tech world we are living in today, where the amount of knowledge is extensive and a lot of it is fluid. Accordingly, combining knowledge and skills to gain understanding are all three equally important elements of the learning triangle.

Subsequently, research demonstrates that, as the result of upbringing, heredity and environmental differences, people preferentially take in and process information in different ways.

There is also the idea that people use different intelligences to learn new and consolidate old information (refer to Howard Garner and others). Thus, we can conclude that every person learns and develops her or his talents and skills differently. It is evident that a school, being a learning institute, should accommodate these differences to their school population.

Having a complex process as learning as the core business results in lots of different schools and learning-cultures. Parents having to choose a school are therefore facing a challenge. Recommended is to look for the best match between the child and the school's learning culture.

Some questions that might help to find out if the school is the best match are: "Can I see evidence of learning taking place in the school?", "What is the learning approach of the school?" and "How does the school find out the specific learning needs and learning styles of my child?"

Children are resilient and most will adapt to their school environment cheerfully, and being happy is an important ground for learning! Nevertheless, as a parent it is also important to look beyond that joy and choose a school that understands the holistic concept of learning in relation to your child's specific learning.

-The writer has a PhD in Educational Sciences and works at Partners in Educational Development, Jakarta. She can be reached at: educational.development@hotmail.com.