Book Learnin' Meme

FOUR FOR FRIDAY - THE EDUCATION EDITION

Q1 - Hands Off: Hugging is now a punishable offense at a Fairfax County, Virginia, school. School children at Kilmer Middle School in suburban Washington, DC, are now under a zero-tolerance touching policy. They're banned from poking, prodding, hugging, and even high-fiving one another. In your opinion, is this a good or bad thing?

That's crazy! As a massage therapist, it makes me really sad. It seems like lazy administration. The rules need to be more complex to govern the complexities of touch: high-fives are okay, holding hands is okay, groping a buttock is not okay. I understand that counselors at the school claim to have been told by some female students that the girls are uncomfortable being hugged by boys but too intimidated to say anything. But is the solution to ban all touching and allow the girls to graduate still uncomfortable with certain types of touch but unable to set clear boundaries for themselves? Or would training in self-assertion, including asking girls to role-play setting limits with their peers, be a better approach?

I believe that role-playing to the point where girls roll their eyes and make fun of the exercise is better than doing nothing because at least then the language of self-assertion becomes part of their vocabulary. When I was a kid, "I'm not comfortable with you touching me like that" was a joke phrase that we used to sling around but when you were serious, everybody knew.

Clearly aggressive touch can only be sanctioned during sports activities, and then only within the parameters of what is allowed by the game. I understand the appeal of having a zero-tolerance rule and then allowing adults wiggle room in the enforcement because kids will pore over the rules and then stretch them to the limits of what is permitted. And as I recall, there was not a lot of non-aggressive non-sexual touch going on in my middle school, so the truth is that most kids probably aren't missing out on warm fuzzy hugs and hand-holding. But still, it seems sloppy and lazy to me.

Q2 - School Lunch: Did you bring a bag lunch to school or did you buy your lunch in the cafeteria? Did any of the schools you attended--excluding college or prep school--offer breakfast?

I always bought lunch. My mom didn't really have time to make lunches for me. When I was in elementary school, I always bought my lunch from Mrs. Kramer and then hung around by the little wooden desk where she sat in the auditorium talking to her. In sixth grade, they created this mentoring program where each of the faculty mentored one of the sixth graders. Even though she wasn't strictly faculty, I begged for her to be my mentor. She made me feel comfortable and appreciated. She took me to Burger King every Friday and then at the end of the year, she gave me a pin with a picture of a girl herding sheep on it, which I still have.

Q3 - Paying for Performance: Starting this fall, New York City students and their families could earn as much as $1,000 a year for doing well on standardized tests and showing up for class. As part of the City's new Opportunity NYC program (a conditional cash transfer program aimed at helping New Yorkers break the cycle of poverty), families can earn $25 or $50 per month for 95 percent school attendance for elementary, middle, and high school students; $25 for attending parent-teacher conferences; and $50 for obtaining a library card. An improvement in scores or proficiency on standardized tests at the elementary and middle school levels can earn a family from $300 or $350 per test; while at the high school level, a student can earn $600 for each passing grade on individual Regents exams. Incentives of $25 will be earned for both parental review of the test and discussion with teachers; high school students can earn $50 for taking the PSAT exam, and will share $600 with their parents for annually accumulating 11 credits, and a $400 bonus for graduating. Again, in your opinion, is this a good or bad thing? Should we be offering cash incentives for academic participation and performance?

(This is a really long-winded response since I'm trying to figure out what I think as I write and I don't really have the luxury of going back and editing while I'm at work. Sorry!)

I don't really see this program as a cash incentive program as much as it is compensating families for the wages they lose by being involved in school programs rather than working. The amount of money provided doesn't replace lost wages but it may be enough to bring parents into meetings and encourage kids to study rather than feel they have to work.

Families are rewarded for test scores, however, rather than exceptional performance on projects requiring creativity, innovation or leadership. The school system is struggling to provide the best education possible within the framework of No Child Left Behind. I don't believe that NCLB allows teachers the freedom to inspire kids because the stakes for low test scores are so high - you lose all of you federal funding, which is a significant portion of many school districts' budgets, if the scores fall below a certain point. I love the idea of having standards, which is what NCLB tries to implement. But NCLB punishes the most vulnerable students by robbing struggling schools rather than offering further support and intervention.

NCLB also fails to recognize the greatest responsibility of a educator: to teach its students how to learn. Curiosity and creative expression are the characteristics of a budding leader, not the ability to regurgitate facts in the extremely narrow ways that standard testing allows. But school administrators don't have the option to change the federal law, only operate within it. With that in mind, I admire the pioneering spirit behind the cash for performance program and believe we should give the program a chance. Who knows, may it will inspire better test performance from the students and more support from their families.

Many objections stem from the belief that hard work should be its own reward. When I read this, my first thought was, Why should they be paid to go to school? However, in a community where academic performance comes second to the community obligations of gang and racial affiliations, good grades just don't give kids that warm fuzzy feeling. Nothing brings pride as much as protecting each other and demanding respect whatever the cost.

If a young person is to grow up believing that school is important, he or she needs a lot of support from an adult who believes unquestioningly in the value of education and respects the child. Only then does the adult have the authority in the eyes of the kid to offer valuable advice. We want to emulate the people who make us feel valued and admired. Many parents are so burdened by keeping body and soul together that they simply don't have the emotional reserves to care for a child beyond food and shelter. They leave before their children, they are numbed by their worries and overwhelmed by their responsibilities when they stumble in from work at night. I don't know if that is condescending but having lived on a very low salary with a husband and without children in this country, I can guarantee that it is true for many many low-income parents. So if the families aren't inspiring academic performance and if the peers aren't, if the other community institutions, the churches, clubs and extracurricular activities whose numbers have been steadily diminishing can't inspire the kids, then that leaves money.

Yes, the money would be well-used to pay teachers more, to update facilities and materials. But it will take a lot more than the program's allotted 53 million dollars in private funding to make significant change to teacher salaries or to make more than superficial improvements to the schools themselves. I am curious to see how the program works. But let's keep in mind that this is a temporary solution aimed at destroying the cultural more that tells kids that academic achievement is "for pussies." If the program is successful, there will be a time when it becomes obsolete because the kids will have grown up to find good jobs and economic security and will have the energy and resources to teach their own kids to appreciate education.

I fully recognize that I don't live in the areas of New York where these families live. I don't understand their daily lives or speak with any authority about what they do or do not need. But the people who decided to give this program a chance appear to be listening to the residents and researching various methods. Having discovered a similar program in Mexico, they are open-minded or desperate enough to give it a try. I think we should too.

Q4 - High School Reunions: Have you ever been to a high school reunion (yours or someone else's)? If so, what was it like? If not, is it because you refuse to go to one? If so, why?

I didn't go to my five-year college reunion because I hated college. I didn't go to my ten-year high school reunion because I felt embarrassed about being fat and I thought it might be kind of lame. In retrospect, I wish I had gone to the ten-year reunion because I really loved high school and would have liked to have seen what all the kooky people I went to school with have done with their lives.