Franklin Schargel’s Blog

Alexa Gonzalez, 12, was arrested by  New York City Police for drawing on her desk in her middle school because of a zero tolerance law.  Zero tolerance policies became more popular after the Columbine High School massacre.  There was no profanity, no hate. Just the words, “I love my friends Abby and Faith. Lex was here 2/1/10 :)” scrawled on the classroom desk with a green marker.

She was handcuffed by the police and escorted out of the school past students and teachers.  This is not the only time police were called into a school to enforce school zero tolerance laws.

The Strategy Center, a California-based civil rights group that tracks zero tolerance policies, found that at least 12,000 tickets were issued to tardy or truant students by Los Angeles Police Department and school security officers in 2008. The tickets tarnished students’ records and brought them into the juvenile court system, with fines of up to $250 for repeat offenders.

And another California school — Highland High School in Palmdale — found that issuing tardiness tickets drastically cut the number of pupils being late for class and helped tone down disruptive behavior. The fifth ticket issued landed a student in juvenile traffic court.

In 1998, New York City took its zero tolerance policies to the next level, placing school security officers under the New York City Police Department. Today, there are nearly 5,000 employees in the NYPD School Safety Division. Most are not police officers, but that number exceeds the total police force in Washington, D.C.

In contrast, there are only about 3,000 counselors in New York City’s public school system. Critics of zero tolerance policies say more attention should be paid to social work, counseling and therapy.

Kenneth Trump, a security expert who founded the National School Safety and Security Services consulting firm, said focusing on security is essential to the safety of other students. He said zero tolerance policies can work if “common sense is applied.”

“There is zero intelligence when you start applying zero tolerance across the board,” he said. “Stupid and ridiculous things start happening.”

Should these people be punished for doing this?  ABSOLUTELY! Should they be arrested instead of being taken to the principal’s office and have their parents called?  And then be given “community service” like cleaning graffiti in and around the school?  Sure!  Zero tolerance laws make little sense when common sense is not taken into account.  Each offense and the person who has committed them needs to be taken into account.  How would you like it if the police took away your driver’s license every time you went faster than the speed limit?  Or how would you feel if your car was taken whenever you passed a red light?  There needs to be some rational thought when schools call in police officers.  And we need to admit that certain offenses need to be penalized with more rational thought.

On March 1, 2010, General Colin Powell, America’s Promise Alliance Chair Alma Powell and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced the formation of Grad Nation. Grad Nation is a 10-year campaign to mobilize the nation as never before to reverse the dropout crisis and enable our children to be prepared for success in college, work and life

The goals:

• Ensure that 90 percent of today’s fourth-graders graduate high school on time.
• Help fulfill the President’s pledge to be the world’s leader in the proportion of college graduates by 2020.

Just 12 percent of the nation’s high schools generate half of the nation’s dropouts.  By focusing our community work on these 2,000 lowest-performing schools, their feeder schools and neighborhoods, we can have tremendous impact.

Why Grad Nation?

• Every 26 seconds, another student drops out of school in America ““ more than 1.3 million students per year.
• Today, more than one in three students fails to graduate from high school.  As a result, we lose an entire graduating class every three years.
• Among minority students, less than 50 percent of Native American and a little more than half of African American and Hispanic students completing high school on time.
• Young people who drop out are twice as likely as likely as graduates to be unemployed; three times as likely to live in poverty; eight times more likely to wind up in prison; and twice as likely to become the parent of a child who drops out.
• Of those who do graduate, only about one-third have the skills they need to succeed in college and the 21^st century workforce.

The funding for the project will come through America’s Promise Alliance.  Go to America’s Promise Alliance’s website for more information.

Why shouldn’t high school be two years for those students who can complete all of the credits they need in a shorter time?

An article in the New York Times (2/18/10) indicated that dozens of public high schools in eight states will introduce a program next year allowing 10th graders who pass a battery of tests to get a diploma two years early and immediately enroll in community college.

Students who pass but aspire to attend a selective college may continue with college preparatory courses in their junior and senior years, organizers  said. Students who fail the 10th-grade tests, known as board exams, can try again at the end of their 11th and 12th grades. The tests would cover not only English and math but also subjects like science and history.

The new system of high school coursework with the accompanying board examinations is modeled largely on systems in high-performing nations including Denmark, England, Finland, France and Singapore.

The program is being organized by the National Center on Education and the Economy, and its goals include insuring that students have mastered a set of basic requirements and reducing the numbers of high school graduates who need remedial courses when they enroll in college. More than a million college freshmen across America must take remedial courses each year, and many drop out before getting a degree.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has provided a $1.5 million planning grant to help the national center work with states and districts to get the program running. He estimated that start-up costs for school districts would be about $500 a student, to buy courses and tests and to train teachers.

To defray those costs, the eight states intend to apply for some of the $350 million in federal stimulus money designated for improving public school testing.

High school students will begin the new coursework in the fall of 2011 in Connecticut, Kentucky, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont. The education commissioners of those states have pledged to sign up 10 to 20 schools each for the pilot project, and have begun to reach out to district superintendents.

The project’s backers hope it will eventually spread to all schools in those states, and inspire other states to follow suit. Supporters include the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers’ union.

Kentucky’s commissioner of education, Terry Holliday, said high school graduation requirements there had long been based on having students accumulate enough course credits to graduate.

“This would reform that,” Dr. Holliday said. “We’ve been tied to seat time for 100 years. This would allow an approach based on subject mastery “” a system based around move-on-when-ready.”

Its backers say the new system would reduce the need for community colleges to offer remedial courses because the passing score for the 10th-grade tests would be set at the level necessary to succeed in first-year college courses. Failure would provide 10th graders with an early warning system about the knowledge and skills they need to master in high school before seeking to enroll in college.

Currently, many high school graduates enrolling in community colleges are stunned to find that they cannot pass the math and English exams those colleges use to determine who need remediation.

In that respect, the effort is similar to the growing early college high school movement, in which students begin taking college-level courses while they are still in high school and earning college credit through nearby community colleges.

As long as we are looking into going in that direction, why not extend high school to “as long as it takes” for those students who need more time to master high school curricula?  Isn’t that preferable to having students drop out?

Six in 10 Americans now say colleges mainly care about their bottom line instead of making sure students have a good educational experience.  And that feeling has been rising, jumping eight points in just two years, according to the latest survey.

Squeeze Play 2010,is a new report from Public Agenda and the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education tracking public views on college costs and access.

Americans remain skeptical that colleges are doing all they can to keep costs down. Six in 10 say colleges could take in more students without raising prices or reducing quality, and more than half say colleges could spend less and still provide a quality education. Two-thirds believe colleges should use federal stimulus money to hold down tuition, even if it means cutbacks in programs and services.

This public skepticism comes as two other trends collide in the Squeeze Play research: Americans believe that higher education is necessary, even as they worry that it’s becoming less available. The number of Americans who believe college is essential for success remains high, at some 55 percent (a 24 point increase from 10 years ago). Yet majorities believe college is out of reach for many students (69 percent say many qualified students don’t have the opportunity to go to college).

This could not happen at a worse time for colleges.  The recession has cut donations from alumni and foundations.  See a previous posting from this website of whether the cost of college is worth it.  The question is whether colleges will look into their purses and see if cuts in cost can be achieved.  California attempted to raise the cost of public colleges by 1/3, in order to raise funding in a near-bankrupt state, and had to deal with student protests.

What do Bill Gate of Microsoft, Steve Jobs of Apple Computer, Michael Dell of Dell Computer, Larry Ellison of Oracle and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook have in common?  They all dropped out of college.  College costs are rising fast – faster than the cost of inflation.  So there is a valid question, is the cost of college worth it?  Statistics and studies still show that a college degree usually translates to a higher income.  But in these globally hard economic times having a college degree is no guarantee of higher income.

Based on current estimated cost of tuition, room and board, four years at Harvard University costs $188,860.  The four-year cost for an in-state student at the University of Kansas is $60,236.  Paying for college today, for most students means either they or their family takes loans.  The average student debt after foru years is $22,656.  Yet less than 1 in 5 students in the graduating class of 2009 had a job at graduation.

There are many benefits that come with college attendance.  College students are healthier, vote more often, smoke less, exercise more and according to a Pew study say they are happier.  In addition, according to the Census Bureau, the incomes of people 25 years or older in 2008, who graduated from high school was almost $33,800 while those who attended college salary was $39,700 and those with a bachelors degree, $55,600.

And even in today’s economy, the gap between the earnings of a high school graduate and a college graduate is still growing.

US News and World Reports had an interview with Michelle Obama, first lady of the United States (www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2009/10/15) I find her comments worth repeating here.

“We all remember the impact a special teacher had on us””a teacher who refused to let us fall through the cracks; who pushed us and believed in us when we doubted ourselves; who sparked in us a lifelong curiosity and passion for learning. Decades later, we remember the way they made us feel and the things they inspired us to do””how they challenged us and changed our lives. So it’s not surprising that studies show that the single most important factor affecting students’ achievement is the caliber of their teachers. And when we think about the qualities that make an outstanding teacher””boundless energy and endless patience; vision and a sense of purpose; the creativity to help us see the world in a different way; commitment to helping us discover and fulfill our potential””we realize: These are also the qualities of a great leader.

Today, more than ever before, we need precisely this kind of leadership in our classrooms. As the president has frequently said, in a 21st-century global economy where jobs can be shipped to any place with an Internet connection and children here in America will be competing with children around the world for the same jobs, a good education is no longer just one road to opportunity””it is the only road. And good teachers aren’t just critical for the success of our students. They are the key to the success of our economy.

But the reality is that with each passing year, we are losing more and more of our most experienced teachers. More than half of our nation’s teachers and principals are baby boomers. And in the next four years, as many as one third of America’s 3.2 million teachers could retire. The U.S. Department of Education projects that by 2014, just five short years from now, our nation’s schools will hire as many as 1 million new teachers. And the challenge to our schools is not just an overall teacher shortage but a shortage of good teachers in the schools where they are most essential: high-need schools that face some of the most daunting obstacles but have students with so much potential. We also have a shortage of teachers in subjects like math and science that we know will be critical to our children’s future.

Today, we need a new generation of leaders to take their place in our nation’s schools. We need passionate, talented, committed men and women to step up and devote themselves to preparing our students to succeed in this new century.

We need universities to double down on their efforts to prepare teachers and to improve and expand effective alternative routes to certify teachers. We need to encourage more experienced professionals to consider teaching as the next chapter in their careers. And we need to treat teachers like the professionals they are by providing good salaries and high-quality professional development opportunities. We need parents to do their part as well to match that leadership in the classroom with leadership at home. We need to set limits and turn off the TV. We need to put away those video games and make sure that homework gets done. We need to reinforce the example that’s being set and the lessons being taught at school and make sure that learning continues at home.

And we need government to support significant efforts to recruit and retain teachers and to reward high-performing teachers. Along those lines, President Obama is already investing more than $3 billion to turn around struggling schools. And he has proposed a nationwide Teacher Recruitment Program to attract more people to the profession, especially in high-need schools. I look forward to being involved with this program and encouraging people across America to put their leadership skills to work in our nation’s schools.

Much work lies ahead, and it won’t be easy. But I am confident that with a new generation of outstanding leaders in our classrooms, we can make a lasting difference in the lives of our young people and a lasting impact on the life of this nation.

A survey commissioned by Seventeen magazine and the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, asked 42 questions of 1,200 males between the ages of 15-22 about sex and relationships.

The findings indicate:

• 30% said they were virgins
• 45% lied about how far they have gone.
• 24% lied about the number of sexual partners they’ve had.
• 23% claimed not to be a vigin when they were.
• 57% of sexually active males said they had had unprotected sex.
• 51% said having sex before marriage was acceptable in their family.
• 53% said they had had a conversation with a parent about preventing pregnancy.
• 66% said they be happy in a serious relationship that didn’t include sex.

For me, the most disturbing data, are the percentage of sexually active males who had had unprotected sex and the low percentage who had had a conversation with their parents about preventing pregnancy.   Peer pressure continues to play a major role in what males tell other males about sex.