April 2, 2008
Play Ball or Educate Students? (Brent Budowsky)
Across the nation, the dropout rates for high school students are appallingly high.
Here in the District of Columbia, where schools are being closed throughout the city, more than 40 percent of our students drop out, an inexcusable number in the capital of our nation in 2008.
I've been a baseball fan all my life, was a student athlete in school, and in fact I was once offered a tryout for the Dodgers at third base (though I told the scout he caught me on a good day, and I'd last an hour in spring training!).
As predisposed towards sports as I am, I think it's outrageous and ridiculous that the powers-that-be of our community rally like the 101st Airborne at Normandy to build a high-priced new baseball stadium, while schools are being closed and more than 40 percent of our kids don’t graduate.
Our new mayor is a good man and is making efforts at rallying the business community for the schools, but through no fault of his, the results so far are modest.
Shame on the adults throughout America for letting the kids drop out at sky-high rates while building big stadiums for games, which, no matter how worthy and fun, should never take such high priority over educating kids and graduating students.
Permalink TrackBack
Email This Post
Share this post
What's This 16 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
brent–i basically agree, in theory, w/ you on this one.
but it's a tough call to make. if people wanna spend money on a baseball field what can, or should, stop them? its probably not their kid that's dropping out of school either.
the "greater-good" argument comes into play here, i understand. but is it a lack of tax dollars for schools that makes them suck, or the behavior of everyone involved, from students to teachers to parents?
would twice as many tax dollars really increase graduation levels? no.
are inner-city schools receiving any less funding than suburban schools? probably not.
more than likely, the financial burden on parents in suburban schools is greater. so what does that say? it's behavioral.
redistributing wealth isn't going to solve the problem of kids wanting to drop out of school. its simply easier to quit going than it is to stick with it, and its the PARENTS that let them drop-out in the 1st place. it's behavioral.
Comment by j — April 2, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
The dropout rate, nation wide, is dispicable. It is really hard to quntify the costs that this dropout rate will impose on our society. But one can be sure the costs would be staggering.
That would be analogous to the '0-2 fastball', down the middle of the plate, and we all stand and watch it go by, without swinging.
Just think if all the money ($1 trillion) thrown out the window in Iraq was applied to improving Our system of public education. It seems that would be an investment that would reep huge returns for this country.
Comment by Lester — April 3, 2008 @ 1:14 pm
The reason public schools are failing is because they are a monopoly. Almost all monopolies fail at some point. Lethargy.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — April 3, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
One word: vouchers.
Comment by Igor R. — April 3, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
Modern stadiums inject money into local economies through new construction followed by business activities surrounding the park, higher revenues for networks broadcasting the games, increased travel, etc. Overall it results in larger tax collections for the cities & state. It's the same arguments that liberals deployed against US lunar program, i.e. $20B wasted for nothing! On the contrary, they would have been wasted if we spent it on "teaching" those bums in inner cities advanced calculus, astronomy or molecular biology. How about just letting them graduate after 9th grade and spend 1 more year on some kind of vocational training? Not everyone has to become a CEO…
Comment by Misha F — April 3, 2008 @ 1:44 pm
Schools are failing because they do not teach what many students want to learn.
Instead gearing school curriculum towards Student aptitude and Vocational needs, schools want to place every student into the same mold.
Trying to Make a "silk purse from a sows ear". Not every student wants to become a rocket scientist or Computer Engineer. Many want to be Cops, Firemen, Plumbers, carpenters, auto mechanics or mill workers etc. like their parents. They have no ambition of being Chairman of the Board of some Fortune 500 company.
They want to go to work, earn enough money to have some left over to save and for recreation, and go home at the end of the day or local bar with friends to relax before going home to spouse and family.
Public Schools refuse to teach them what they want to learn.
Comment by Donaldd — April 3, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
One other point. Is it possible the quest for multiculturalism and force fed diversity is a big turn off to over half the kids? Many people, including young kids, know when they are being brainwashed with BS and it's a major turn off.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — April 3, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
Rosie, it is obvious you are parroting you guru, Druggy Limbaugh. There is no public school monopoly. The public schools have been driven in to poverty by zealous neocons blocking any and all attemps at progress.
Igor, as far as vouchers go, they are constitutionally illegal. Get that through your thick, yet empty, neocon skull. Seperation of church and state, pal.
Comment by Lester — April 3, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
How about we do this: 1) Stop wasting time on Martin Luther King life story, multicultural nonsense, sex education, gay issues and other BS. 2) Emphasize discipline and respect for teachers in schools.
3) Focus on fundamentals like math, science, logical reasoning, reading, etc.
Results will be seen within 6-12 months, not years. BTW, point # 1 above does not cost anything.
Comment by Misha F — April 3, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
I would like to know how many of those kids that dropped out of school in Washington, DC, come from single-family homes or broken/dysfunctional homes? How many of those kids dropped out of school because the teachers in those schools are more like guards in a prison rather than actual teachers? How many of those kids dropped out because they got pregnant? How many of those kids dropped out because they've bought into the MTV "Gangsta" culture, which shows how much easier it is to be a criminal thug rather than a hard-working student? And, while we're at it, how many TV shows or movies today have intelligent, hard-working, dedicated, and honest kids as role models, rather than tough, rebellious, delinquents as their stars? Oh, that's right, none. So before you blame the government (yet again) for all of our social woes, the government can't force families to stay together, it can't convince teenage girls not to have babies, it can't convince teenage girls that having unprotected sex is a really bad idea, it can't convince teenage boys to marry girls they get pregnant, and it can't convince teenage boys that their future would be a hell of a lot better if they stayed in school rather than drop out. You can throw all the money you want at it, but if the parents of these kids don't start acting responsibly and start creating a strong family unit, and if the kids themselves don't start taking some responsibility for their actions, then you're going to have more dropouts and more failed schools.
Comment by Libertyship46 — April 3, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
I'm sorry you don't get it. Parents are responsible for their children's desire for education. Once that desire is there the school doesn't really matter. Our responsiblility for children's education stops at your front door. If you can't or won't meet it your children lose their lives. In the end that's why we build a "safety net" so we don't have to be offended by poorly raised children starving in the street.
In the meantime there is a productive society that raises fine children and is absolutely entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labors. These fruits include mindless entertainments such as various ball games and other cultural events.
As a society we have a responsibility to the less fortunate but we also have a right to work together to advance our culture. I think we can do both
Comment by Pghremodeler — April 3, 2008 @ 8:10 pm
Lester: Who are you parroting? Squawk, squawk.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — April 4, 2008 @ 10:42 am
Lester,
I am unaware of the "seperation of church and state" phrase in the constitution. Can you provide me the Article and Section it is in?
Please?
Comment by Jon Pemberton — April 4, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
Pemberton, no one said 'seperation of church and state' is a "phrase" (your claim) in the Constitution. Your neocon mind is playing tricks on you again.
Seperation of church and state is a legal priciple derived from the 1st Amendment and from multiple U.S.Supreme Court rulings handed down over the years.
See Pemberton, Rush has done you another dis-service in warping your neocon mind. Comprehende?
Comment by Lester — April 4, 2008 @ 2:16 pm
Another thing, Pemberton, since you are so Constitutionally challenged, I thought I'd point out to you that Supreme Court rulings become the law of the land.
Comment by Lester — April 4, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
Lester,
Supreme Court rulings become the present interpretations of the law. They in themselves do not become law. Which of course change over time.
Example it was not until the 20th century that the First Amendment's Establishment of Religion clause was interpreted more broadly as meaning no preference of religion rather than "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishmnet of religion.."
This whole conversation started when you claimed school vouchers are unconstitutional because of "separation of church and state"
Which of course is false. There are school voucher programs in various states.
The First Amendment's wording has not changed since it was ratified, correct?
Then any court ruling is an interpretation, not a law.
btw, not a neocon, do not listen to rush. But your consistent record on labeling people rather than constructively argue with them is intact.
Comment by Jon Pemberton — April 4, 2008 @ 3:57 pm