Mother is thankful for charter school alternatives

Mother is thankful for
charter school alternatives

EDITOR:

I am writing in regard to a Vindicator article I read recently quoting Wendy Webb, superintendent of the Youngstown schools.

I am a parent who was failed by the Youngstown schools, and I know I am not the only one. I am not saying all the teachers are like this at Youngstown schools, but the ones I have dealt with are.

When my daughter was in the second grade, she attended Taft Elementary. She failed miserably. Every time I would go to a parent-teacher conference, her teacher would say she was being lazy and did not even try. Unfortunately, these kind of children are left behind with Youngstown schools. I let her repeat the second grade per the school’s request and again she failed miserably. I stepped in and took her to a doctor. After several tests and a year’s worth of therapy, my daughter was diagnosed with ADD.

I refused to put her back in the Youngstown school system. I found a wonderful lady named Mollie Kessler who sat down with me and talked with me about my daughter. She genuinely cared about my situation and I enrolled my daughter at her school, the Mollie Kessler School. My daughter did a complete turnaround. These teachers truly care about the kids’ feelings and how they can get frustrated. They work with them and don’t use the excuse that they are just being lazy.

My daughter is now 18 years old and attends Summit Academy. This school was heaven sent.

All the teachers that my daughter has at Summit treat my daughter like she is one of their own and I thank them from the bottom of my heart. I have an older daughter who graduated from Wilson High School in 2005 and she barely made it through. She told me of all the fights every day and she was afraid to go to school. My daughter who graduated is now attending college to be a nurse, and she is getting straight As.

Does Mrs. Webb have children who attend Youngstown schools? Do they fear for their life? I used to be afraid sitting in the parking lot to pick my daughter up.

WANDA VAUGHT

Youngstown

Most charter schools
in Ohio fare poorly

EDITOR:

It was with a great deal of interest that I read a letter in the Nov. 8 edition of your newspaper.

Before reading this gentleman’s letter, I had read some editorials on the Web site of The New York Times edition of the same date.

One editorial in particular caught my eye: “Ohio Goes After Charter Schools That Are Failing.” According to this article, three failing charter schools in Ohio are being closed by Attorney General Marc Dann with more to follow. According to the findings printed in this report, Ohio has a higher failure rate than most states that have charter schools. Fifty-seven percent of the charter schools in Ohio are in academic watch or emergency, compared to 43 percent of traditional schools.

This leaves me wondering about the assertions in the Vindicator letter. I believe it is true that more people who have children should be in parenting classes, learning what being a parent involves. But because a person can add to the population, a parent does not make.

Should there be more involvement and interest in what happens in schools by the pupils’ parents? How much improvement would follow? Should parents accept their responsibilities and allow the school system to fulfill their mandates? How much better would the whole society be?

Needless to say, if the voting populace would fund the public schools, particularly in the city of Youngstown,the mandate of providing the learning and necessary environment in which to learn would make the school systems more effective.

SHIRLEY A. BARTLESS

Youngstown

Ohio must not outlaw
informative labels on milk

EDITOR:

The Ohio Department of Agriculture’s Dairy Department is considering prohibiting labeling such as “no pesticides, no hormones, no antibiotics” on dairy products sold in the state. Ohio is following on the heels of Pennsylvania’s ban on the same kind of labeling. A decision to do so would effectively use our tax dollars to keep us from receiving information that we want.

The argument against providing this information to consumers is that to label something as free of rBST (Recombinant Bovine somatotropin—a synthetic hormone marketed by Monsanto under the name of Posilac) or free of synthetic hormones implies that those products not claiming absence are inferior.

Though the federal government states there is no difference in milk treated with rBST and untreated milk, the controversy has intensified for a variety of reasons. An expensive supplement, rBST gives an advantage to large-scale dairy farms, edging out the little guy. From a health perspective, increased antibiotic use could result in new strains of antibiotic resistant bacteria. From an animal welfare and sustainable-practice vantage point, the production of milk can be increased by feeding cows a variety of grasses on open pasture rather than having them tied to milking station eating grain all their lives.

The rise in popularity of “absence claims” labeling reflects our growing knowledge and desire to distinguish between like products and make informed decisions for political, social and personal-health reasons. We must be able to distinguish between seemingly like products in order to make our collective purchasing voice heard. The act of choice in purchasing is a powerful way in which we take political action.

The legal issue is with the First Amendment and its protection of commercial speech. Rulings by the Supreme Court in the last 30 years allow commercial speech many of the freedoms given to persons. In 1993 in Edenfield v. Fane, the court ruled: “…the general rule is that the speaker and the audience, not the government, assess the value of the information presented….”

In this case, the speaker is the dairy (and for that matter many farmers who practice sustainable farming) and their audience those of us who choose to encourage sustainable production. We are their market, and we are choosing to influence our health, our local economies, and our government policy by purchasing products that have been produced without the energy consumptive additives essential to large scale monoculture farming where the dollar is the bottom line.

Our demand is getting louder as evident by the growth of the organic food industry and the common sight of informative labels such as: “no rBST,” “no synthetic hormones,” “no antibiotics,” “grass fed,” and “pasture finished.” If conventional producers are afraid of losing their market, let’s help them transition to production methods that meet the market’s demands rather than prevent that market from getting desired information.

Please call the governor’s office (614-644-4357), your state senator (John Boccieri/614-466-8285 or Capri Cafaro/614-466-7182) and state representative (Robert Hagan/614-466-9435 and Sandra Harwood/614-466-3488) and let them know your opinions.

ELSA HIGBY

Youngstown