Facts or Fabrications & Funding not the Problem

May 30, 2003

Dear Editor,

I found Denny Zane's May 29 ad hominem criticism of Matt Millen's letter extraordinarily unenlightening. ("LETTERS: Shameful Tripe, Grammar Lesson and S Lets off "Sinfully Rich," May 30)

On the other hand, I found Matt Millen's May 28 letter full of what appear to be some very interesting facts. ("OPINION: Measure S Not Real Answer")

Perhaps Mr. Zane can identify what facts are fabrications.

Thomas Nitti
Santa Monica.

June 3, 2003

Dear Editor,

My letter pointing out Superintendent Deasy's incorrect grammar seems to have touched a nerve with Jean Sedillos of Grammar 'R' Us. ("LETTERS: Grammar Patrol and Thoughts on Measure S," May 31)

Ironically, in rushing to berate me for a missed comma and a split infinitive, Sedillos misses the correct spelling of my name. For the record, it is "Wade" and not "Ward." I suppose we both could improve on our proofreading.

Still, my fellow grammarian might want to reconsider condemning my split infinitive as "unnecessary and awkward." Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and William Wordsworth are just a few of the great writers who have skillfully used split infinitives in their prose.

In fact, the notion that split infinitives are grammatically incorrect stems from a misguided 19th century approach to grammar which attempts to more closely align English with Latin.

And so, Jean Sedillos, we can continue to dance on the head of a pin while evading the point. You are clearly passionate in your support of Measure S, parroting the same old "class size" and "teacher layoff" talking points with which the pro-S camp has indoctrinated its foot soldiers.

You will note that I took no position for or against Measure S. That's because I personally don't think it matters one way or the other. Public education is in a rut and will continue to be in a rut whether or not S passes. That's because funding is not the problem.

In pointing out Superintendent Deasy's error I meant to call attention to misplaced educational priorities and the fact that the vast majority of Americans don't know how to speak their own language. Grammatical errors permeate our airwaves and fill our newspapers. Immigrants who learn English in their native countries understand our grammar better than we do.

I know the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School district well. I attended its schools from kindergarten through High School. I had both good teachers and incompetent teachers. And when I suffered through the latter, I managed to teach myself. But at no point was I ever convinced that the system truly wanted me to excel.

The system has never been designed to demand excellence. It's designed to promote vague social values, instill artificial self-esteem and convince parents that their children will be prepared for the work force.

This much was already clear to me when I was a third-grader at Webster Elementary in the early '70s. A friend and I established a goal of completing the third grade spelling book ahead of schedule. Our teacher encouraged us. About a week later we achieved that goal and asked if we
could move on to the fourth grade spelling book. Our teacher appeared to be amenable and handed us two new books to complete.

It wasn't until year's end that we discovered the truth. The further assignments were only meant to keep us busy. It wasn't permitted to let third graders skip to the fourth grade spelling book.

And so it is with our educational system -- herd the children forward with only average expectations. Encourage them, but never so much that it might foster social inequity. Educate them just enough to get along, but not so much that they actually develop ambition or a sense of independence.

How odd that this nation's most effective education took place a century ago when its student-to-teacher ratios were the highest -- when individual teachers instructed dozens of children packed into one-room schoolhouses.

Most of our nation's founding fathers -- among the most skilled and eloquent writers in the history of the English language -- were educated in such an environment. They were not coddled, they were not pampered and their parents did not whine about insufficient funding. Demands were placed on them and they met those demands. They did so because they were expected to.

It's high time our school officials and parents stop complaining and think about how they're going to rearrange school priorities. It doesn't take money. It takes will. It requires resolve to actually demand excellence of our children. Teachers must refuse to let students fail and administrators must back them up.

That means flunking those who don't achieve and skipping those who do, even if their parents scream. It means being harsh and sometimes punitive in order to build the character necessary to achieve at the highest levels. It means rejecting decades of educational "theory" designed to make students "feel good about themselves."

As for me, I'll believe it when I see it.

Wade Major
Malibu