From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Fundamental dilemma for welfare
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:31:12 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <dliebman.1pwu@terapin.com> dliebman@terapin.com (David Liebman) writes:
>In article <BvE9BH.Cnx@apollo.hp.com>, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
>writes:
>>
>>  Anyway, you still haven't made your case that class-size is
>>  a major determining factor of academic achievment or discipline.
>>  Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your thesis:  perhaps you are
>>  suggesting that American children are uniquely bad or delinquent
>>  and NEED smaller class sizes and more individual attention to
>>  compensate for this.  But if this is the case then I would
>>  suggest that rather than using the schools to correct the flaws
>>  in the culture, US parents should shape up. 
>

>and i'll be sure to file your abovementioned suggestion in my
>collection of most treasured maxims.  but the page seems a bit blank --
>perhaps you could tell us exactly how you propose to get US parents
>to 'shape up'? 

   Insist on their children doing homework and if the child
   is unreliable, check the homework every night.

   Throw out the TV.   TV is THE most pernicious factor in the
   lives of today's children.  It is a giant time sink; it con-
   tributes to short attention spans; it sets a standard for
   "knowledge", "information", or "facts" that is way too low;
   it fosters a value system that emphasizes consumerism, status
   symbols, and immediate gratification.  

   Set discipline standards at home and stick to them!

   Foster respect for scholarship and study.   Those cultures
   which in the US have always produced the best students, e.g.,
   Jews, Chinese, etc, are ones which have always set a premium
   on scholarly pursuits, whose heroes are scholars.  Parents
   should *read*, discuss books and ideas, and honor scholars
   and thinkers, rather than just celebrities and sports stars.   
                                 
        
> i speculate that your reply will be that they must
>gain a decent living environment,

   Some of our greatest scholars, scientists, teachers, judges, 
   etc, came to this country as penniless immigrants.  In most
   communities a library card is free.  The alternative in most
   children's lives -- TV, videos, movies, records/CD's are very
   expensive.   Yes, *obviously* we are doing a wholly inadequate
   job of ensuring that all children have adequate food, medical
   care and security.   But the problems I'm describing apply to
   even healthy, well-fed kids.



>another discussion of whether it is proper to give it to them, help
>them acquire it, or force them to deal with it on their own.  i suppose
>what i am really wanting to know is, given that any of these solutions
>-- assuming we and/or our leaders eventually choose one -- would take
>some time to demonstrate their benefits, why do you prefer to allow
>so many children to wait for this anticipated golden age? 

   Changing school policy, class size, etc would take even longer 
   given the budget deficit, the political deals that would have
   to be made, etc.  

   The changes I'm describing could be made RIGHT NOW, *TONIGHT*
   if only parents wished to.  They cost nothing -- in fact they
   save money (no cable bill, etc) and require no new taxes, 
   political changes, etc.


>rhetorical sensitivity -- i'd recommend that you wander into the
>inner city of your choice, knock on some doors, and when a parent
>answers simply inform them that they must 'shape up'.

   The inner city kids are probably a lost cause.   The problems 
   confronting them, from their single, drug-addicted, often teenage,
   parents, to their total lack of security on the street, to gangs,
   to lead paint, to poverty, poor nutrition, and poor health care,
   to the prevailing inner city culture, are all so overwhelming that
   merely changing class sizes will be a drop in the bucket and have 
   little effect.  Putting more money into inner city schools without
   addressing these other problems will be throwing good money after
   bad.  Only an extremely comprehensive program, involving permanent
   24 hour police coverage of the streets, complete breakup of gangs
   (this tendency for police to make "truces" with gangs is appalling),
   on-demand drug treatment, long, no parole prison sentences for 
   violent crimes, major welfare reform including job-training and
   daycare for mothers, and strong incentives for paternal responsibility,
   can MAYBE correct the situation there, and I have no idea where the
   money for something like that might come from.


   But:   *most US kids are not inner-city ghetto dwellers*.  
   These kids suffer only from parents who have abdicated their
   responsibilities as parents.   These kids have everything
   of a material nature that can be imagined or bought on credit.
  

---peter