Credit: Edutopia
Daydream Believer
Has anyone in your organization been in a typical public school in California lately? Not only is there no money for your lofty programs, there are not even basic supplies, and the facilities are in terrible shape. While your organization has fabulous ideas, I wonder who they are for. Public education is the heart of our country, and the kids who are coming out unprepared will not be able to contribute in a positive way to our society. We must all care about this, even those whose children are not in the public school system.
Barbara Peleg
Credit: Getty Images: The Image Bank
Just the Ticket
I read your fine article "The Teen Ticket: Are Teenagers Old Enough to Vote?" (September/October), about young people voting. I believe one reason for the decline in the rate of young people's voting is the Supreme Court decisions of Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) and Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988), which sided with school administrators in limiting the First Amendment rights of students. (The Bethel case dealt with free speech, and the Hazelwood case dealt with the censoring of a school paper.)
The previous standard for limiting First Amendment rights had been set in the Tinker v. Des Moines case in 1969, in which the Supreme Court ruled that students could wear black armbands to school in protest of the Vietnam War. The court ruled that the armbands did not represent a material and substantial disruption. To his undying credit, Chief Justice Abe Fortas, in delivering the majority opinion, said, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional right to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."
Unfortunately, nineteen years later, the Supreme Court ruled in the Hazelwood case that school administrators could restrict students' right to free expression based upon pedagogical concerns. Conservative administrators, more focused on docile obedience than on creative expression, can severely limit free speech and easily manufacture "pedagogical concerns."
Students who have had little practice in democracy are not likely to suddenly express their views at the ballot box upon reaching their eighteenth birthday. Indeed, figures from the Federal Election Commission show rapid decline in voting by eighteen- to twenty-year-olds after the above-mentioned Supreme Court decisions.
To me, a judicial litmus test of pedagogical concerns does not adequately protect students' rights, especially since many administrators were appointed to their positions because they were always deferential to authority. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau said, "You would have him docile as a child; he will be a credulous dupe when he grows up."
Paul Webb
Both my thirteen-year-old son and I were most impressed with your latest issue. My son's first comments were, "The graphics are terrific, Dad. And that article on the voting age is cool. If kids knew about the chance to be drafted for war, they would want to vote now."
Rich Feller
It’s Settled, Then
"Settle Down, Please: Keeping Order in the Classroom" (September/October) contains erroneous information on the chart labeled "Parents and teachers don't always agree on which disciplinary problems are serious . . ." The sources of the data, Public Agenda and Common Good, have listed outcomes, not problems, on the chart.
For example, cheating is an outcome of the following problems among students:
1. Bringing books and notes to a test
2. Sitting too close to one another during a test
3. Talking during a test
If one is able to accurately identify a problem, then an appropriate solution is often very obvious.
Brenda Pruitt-Annisette
Performance Anxiety
As a school board member concerned with teacher quality, I wonder how effective performance-based salary increases for teachers can be ("Good Grades = Higher Teacher Pay: Compensating Teachers for Student Achievement," September/October). I'm concerned that they create an adversarial environment between teachers and students. Though I understand the motivation, it seems prudent to keep the issue of money separate from the kids. I can imagine a situation where teachers would become resentful.
Lisa J. Cooleym
Credit: Edutopia
Box Cutter
George Lucas is right on the mark in terms of the way we approach education ("Life on the Screen: Visual Literacy in Education," September/October). I am beginning my sixth year as a high school principal, and I have had a difficult time making minor changes, let alone the major ones needed to bring our school into the twenty-first century.
Like Lucas, I grew up in the Central San Joaquin Valley. I, too, was considered somebody who was not working up to his potential. Now, I am principal of a large high school, and I am very open to new and creative ways to meet the needs of our students. I would like to do more than just think outside the box; I want to destroy the old box.
Michael Martinez
Credit: Hugh D’Andrade
Un-"Con"-Scionable
"No Con Left Behind: Time to Rethink Priorities?" (September/ October) is irredeemably disingenuous. By echoing the title of the president's education initiative, it implies that convicts are receiving education costing as much as Harvard tuition. Nothing could be further from the truth. Prisoners are stripped of all individuality and dignity. They are housed in overcrowded warehouses, fed substandard food, and begrudgingly issued the cheapest clothing and bedding that can be found. Education of prisoners is a very low priority.
The piece suggests that readers complain to the governor. What do you expect -- that the lights and water will be shut off, that less will be spent on feeding prisoners, that less health care will be afforded them, that guards' salaries will be cut, or staffs reduced? The largest item in a prison budget is salaries, and next is health care. The amount spent on food, clothing, and education can hardly be reduced.
While less money spent to house prisoners could lead to more money available to educate children, the only way to free that money is to eliminate the causes of crime, thereby reducing the number of crimes committed and, hence, the number of convicts. Your piece is mean spirited and has no place in an optimistic, uplifting magazine like Edutopia. A society can be judged by its treatment of its least powerful members. By suggesting that something be taken away from prisoners, you have debased the humanity of our society.