We'll all be better off when teachers stick to teaching

We'll all be better off whenteachers stick to teaching
EDITOR:
Apparently, to Maggie Hagan (Vindicator, June 6) ACCOUNTABILITY is a buzzword. To the rest of us, it is a way of life. We are all accountable for our actions. It's the first thing a responsible parent teaches a child, a profitable business teaches its employees and a successful doctor teaches his patient. Only in teaching and politics is accountability an anathema.
Of course, it's tempting to dismiss the whole piece as disingenuous. It is hard to take seriously a teacher who, after 35 years of doing it her way without success, retires & quot;dispirited, resentful and angry & quot; because she has been asked for just three years to try another way.
She is outraged by the president, et. al., & quot;... who by accident of birth or luck or circumstance, are in positions of power to impose No Child Left Behind on our pupils ... & quot; There are no accidents of birth here. These are elected officials empowered by us to monitor how our money is spent. They are not imposing on the pupil. If anything, they are imposing on the teacher to deliver results. After all, teachers have no problem imposing their demands for higher salaries. Why can't we, as taxpayers, through our elected officials, demand better results?
And even if we were to subscribe to this liberal accident mantra, what about the accident that put her students into the greatest country in the world. This country provides those students with a 12-year opportunity to learn, regardless of their ability to pay. It is not the country, or the president, or the taxpayer that has corrupted that opportunity. Liberal educators have turned it into a feel-good experience where no one is challenged, no one loses and no one wins. In the hands of these educators, teaching isn't so much a mission as it is a gold mine.
I am not surprised that the Commission on Student Success gave her views short shrift. By her own admission, after 38 years of teaching, & quot;I still ask myself: What does it mean to be educated? & quot;
I am sure that it is difficult for her to watch students fail in spite of her best efforts to help them succeed. But maybe it's a failure of philosophy, not the pedagogy. Maybe the state cannot replace the family or the teacher replace the parent or the school replace the church. Maybe liberalism asks too much of our teachers. Maybe we should go back to the basics -- reading, writing and arithmetic -- which can be tested. Leave the feel-good psycho-babble to those who spend their lives perfecting it -- parents, pastors and politicians. Let teachers teach, not over reach.
THOMAS MASKELL
Poland
YSU needs to ask directorsof programs for their input
EDITOR:
The article that appeared in the June 6 Vindicator about the gloomy future of Women's Center at YSU raised important concerns that require further comment and clarification. I understand the plight of the Women's Center, and especially the real possibility of its demise. It serves a useful function in the university as the article rightly points out.
I also understand the administration's reasoning that under the harsh squeeze of budget cuts, advisory and service related functions of the center could be absorbed by the academic program or other student centered services. I firmly support the students' initiative to maintain the Women's Center as they've known it, that is when funding was not in question. But these are not normal times. The collection of 700 signatures on a petition for the retention of the center illustrates the students' seriousness.
If the central argument by Terri O'Connor-Brown, whom I know as a sincere and committed worker, is based on diversity as your article suggests, I wonder if she has her facts right. I disagree with her contention that "in this town and on this campus, diversity means African-American." I wish that were the case.
I don't think it is accurate for Ms. O'Connor-Brown to suggest that what is being done at YSU in the name of diversity is limited to blacks. If we take a look at specific university programs related to diversity like the programs of the Office of Diversity Initiatives or activities of the Diversity Council, they unquestionably go beyond racial equality and inclusiveness.
The coordinator of Diversity Initiatives, Leon Stennis, has organized events in the past that dealt with Hispanics and other minorities on and off campus. Recently, in events commemorating 50 years of Brown vs. Board of Education and a program on life cycles in the major world religions, women were well represented as participants, if not in the majority.
In addition, two other important faculty diversity initiatives that have received the support of the university administration prove Ms. O'Connor-Brown wrong. A new course on diversity was recently introduced by a group of faculty, who are mostly women under the leadership of Dr. Sherry Linkon of the Center for Working Class Studies, and Dr. Anne McMahon of the Williamson College of Business organizes a popular yearly workshop on "Diversity in the Workplace" at the university.
The Africana Studies Program, like the Women's Studies Program, will bear the brunt of budget cuts, but new ways should be sought by the administration to maintain these vital services. I agree that the decisions unquestionably boil down to priorities, but the priorities need not be defined in terms of a truncated view of diversity.
Dr. VICTOR WAN-TATAH, director Africana Studies Program
Youngstown State University
Don't allow churches to getmore involved in politics
EDITOR:
Here they go again!
Republican members of the House of Representatives are attempting to clear the way for partisan politicking by houses of worship by slipping an important change to the nation's tax laws into a job-creation bill. Two sections of H.R. 4520, the & quot;American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, & quot; deal not with jobs but with partisan politicking by churches. The so-called & quot;Safe Harbor for Churches & quot; provisions would essentially gut current law, which forbids churches from endorsing candidates for public office and replace it with watered-down language giving wide latitude to such activity.
The bill was introduced just days after it was revealed that President Bush's campaign has plans to recruit & quot;friendly congregations & quot; into its election efforts.
The bill, introduced by U.S. Rep. William M. Thomas, R-Calif., contains provisions that would allow church leaders to & quot;unintentionally & quot; endorse or oppose candidates up to three times per year. It also greatly reduces the tax penalty for church electioneering. The bill's 20 co-sponsors are all Republicans, and the bill has apparently been put on a fast track in the House by Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Despite its controversial nature, the church-politicking provision was buried in a long bill that deals mainly with economic matters.
This bill is a blatant attempt to recruit churches into partisan politics. Even worse, this measure tries to make sweeping changes in tax law through the back door and out of public view. Does anyone really believe that it's a coincidence that this bill will help the Bush campaign's outreach to churches? Some members of Congress apparently want to open the floodgates for partisan politicking by houses of worship in time for the November elections. Their attempt to turn churches into political machines must be blocked.
I encourage everyone in the Mahoning Valley to call or write Congressman Ryan today and ask that he work to the defeat the & quot;Safe Harbor for Churches & quot; provisions of HR 4520. If we allow these provisions to become law, we will have given the Bush administration a green light to put another nail in the coffin soon to hold the U.S. Constitution. Urge that congressman Ryan say NO to the continued muddying of the waters in matters regarding the separation of church and state.
AL BLAZO
Youngstown