Letter
to Editor
Dear Sirs:
On March 1, I was trying to explain to my students various forms of government, including fascist, oligopolist, monarchist, and totalitarianist.
During my second period, a voluntary conference was scheduled with my principal to discuss school priorities and grievances. As a surprise, I was given some teaching tools to explain these forms of government, which I will explain later. A department chairman, the vice-principal, and the principal attended this meeting. I listened for most of the meeting about how to deal with declining teachers’ morale—and learned that better lunch room facilities and a 7th-l2th grade faculty counsel, rather than a pay increase, were the real desires of teachers; and about a committee set up to work on the needs of the basic students.
This is my fourth teaching year at GES. My first year I taught 4 classes of Basic English, and I went to English Department meetings and growled long and often about money spent on books for honors and mythology students while those who needed the richness of a variety of sources to read from—the basics—got a 1961 textbook, and few, if any, supplements. Now, five years later, a committee is set up to work on a basics’ needs. Might those needs be less today if some supplemental books or a new text had been in use for the last five years? Are the honor students likely to be the dregs of society, the functional illiterates that cause welfare, prison, and law enforcement costs to soar—is that why we spend more on them?
Isn’t the town library and the high school library crammed full of books that students, capable of honors and mythological readings, could read?
When it was my turn to speak, I mentioned what I’ve written here, and aired grievances and offered suggestions about the lack of environmental emphasis on campus. I also offered my suggestions concerning teachers’ morale. Hence, this general conversation, which I noted immediately afterwards, followed:
“If you are so interested in teacher morale, why don’t you start with allowing teachers to elect (presently principal appointed) their department chairman?” I asked.
“Teachers must reach certain prerequisites,” said my boss.
“Which are?” I asked.
At this point the vice-principal interjected,
“A teacher must demonstrate leadership qualities.”
“Which are?” I again repeated.
“Just leadership qualities. A teacher must demonstrate these before entering such a position,” the vice-boss clarified.
“Are there teachers out there who don’t have these qualities?”
“Sure,” he asserted emphatically.
“Who determines which teachers have these qualities?”
“We do. Management assesses.”
“Don’t you believe teachers would choose from their midst those teachers
who possess these qualities?” I queried.
“No.”
“After twenty plus years of maturity and learning you don’t believe teachers are qualified enough to choose who should represent them?”
“Some aren’t capable,” the vice-boss replied.
“Are you saying you would disenfranchise some of those teachers out there because you assess ‘some aren’t capable’ and some ‘don’t demonstrate leadership qualities’? They vote for Senators and Congressmen, you know.”
“If I had my choice, I’d disenfranchise some till they demonstrated competency.” said the vice-boss.
Yes sir. Sometimes the local high school offers some novel, first-hand examples for teaching systems of government.
Perhaps someday, when all the teachers reach the prerequisites and leadership qualities dictated by a few, teachers at GHS will have a novel, first-hand example for teaching some system like democracy.
Why they’ve even wetted their tongues on such radical isms by voting 39-12 in favor of elected department chairmen—but they have yet to taste any results. Wonder why?
Sincerely,
Dwayne
Hunn
Glendora High School