Problems with L.A. public schools not so easily solved

By Nick Bowman

This submission is in response to Todd Smith’s article
(“Social promotion hinders public schools,” Viewpoint,
May 18). I actually agree with his basic premise, which discusses
how students in K-12 schools should not be promoted to the next
grade if they are not academically prepared for advancement.

But I found one part of his article to be quite offensive. When
discussing the possibility of students repeating a grade, he
states, “critics have said that the proposal may lead to
overcrowding, but maybe it will lead to teachers actually doing
their jobs and making sure that everyone in class learns the
material.”

Ouch. Granted, there is a small minority of teachers who do not
adequately perform their jobs, but implying that all of Los Angeles
Unified School District’s problems are a result of teacher
apathy is absurd. Unfortunately, some people have the gross
misconception that teachers only work until 3 p.m., and only from
Monday through Friday.

If this were the case, we would see a lot more people trying to
become teachers. Actually, aside from regular class time, teachers
spend time preparing lessons, grading assignments, learning about
new technologies for the classroom and meeting with other teachers
and administrators. Most public school teachers work an average of
50 hours a week, if not more.

Speaking specifically about LAUSD, the district is infamous for
its students’ low standardized test scores, which some
misguided people might attribute to “teachers not doing their
jobs.” But the second-largest school district in the nation
is also fraught with overcrowded classrooms, underfunded schools
and a lack of parental involvement. While many UCLA students have
had the good fortune of being pushed to attend college by their
parents, peers and teachers, most LAUSD students have not had this
luxury.

As a result, these students not only lack motivation to get good
grades, but they also see no reason to take advanced placement
classes, sign up for the SAT or even apply to college. In fact, it
is appalling to find out how few of these students know about the
college admissions process.

Furthermore, LAUSD is plagued with a major teacher shortage,
which has led to the hiring of an excessive number of teachers with
emergency credentials. So the problem for some teachers is not a
lack of effort on their part, but a lack of training for an
extremely strenuous profession.

Fortunately, I have been able to get some first-hand experience
teaching for LAUSD through an outreach program. I had only 21
students in my class, but I had difficulty even controlling the few
of them. It gave me a new respect for my high school teachers,
since some of them had to work with more than 40 students.

So what do we do about these problems? Smith suggests the use of
school vouchers. But the notion of vouchers is primarily supported
by those like Smith who know little, if anything, about public
education. Basically, the idea is that parents could place their
child into any school they want. To help parents pay for a private
school, the amount of money that would normally go toward that
student’s public education would be removed from the public
school system and put toward the student’s private school
tuition.

This scheme has some glaring problems. First, it would primarily
hurt the schools that already have the worst funding shortages.
Some of these schools cannot afford to repair their damaged
classrooms (let alone worry about education expenses), and this
lack of funds will be further exacerbated by the removal of
students (and money).

Second, many students would flock toward the “good”
schools, thus causing overcrowding and understaffing problems. This
would “force” good schools to hire inexperienced
teachers, import portable classrooms and crowd current facilities.
The influx of students searching for a “good” education
would simply lead to that school’s demise.

Third, not only would the fluctuating school enrollments create
a problem for schools, but the transience of students will hurt
them as individuals. Students who attend a single school for an
extended period of time have an easier time making social
adjustments, participating in extracurricular activities and
receiving necessary special attention. Many individual problems can
be easily overlooked in the midst of school transfers.

The entire premise of school vouchers rests on the assumption
that education should run under the same capitalistic principles
that drive competition and innovation in our businesses. While this
sounds great in theory, any knowledgeable educator would argue that
there are some fundamental differences between running the local
high school and running the local Wal-Mart.