March 2001

To be fair
To increase the college prospects of low-income students, Britain needs the SATs. So says a new report from the Sutton Trust, a British foundation dedicated to improving access to education.

Currently, British students take subject-matter exams, known as A-levels. But there’s no SAT-like test of verbal and mathematical aptitude. The Sutton Trust gave an experimental aptitude test to 1,300 students and then evaluated how well scores predicted their college performance. Adding an SAT-like test to A-level results would help universities evaluate applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds more fairly, the report concluded.
.
Singapore, which uses A-levels, will introduce the SAT in 2003, reports a Nov. 26, 1999 Daily Telegraph column by John Clare. The motive: “meritocracy, transparency and objectivity," a Singapore spokesman says. "This will give a more holistic evaluation of a student's potential to realise the benefits of university education."

The University of California is considering going the opposite way, dumping the SATs in favor of the SAT II subject exams, which resemble the A-levels. In the name of fairness to disadvantaged students. Ultimately, UC President Richard Atkinson wants a more holistic evaluation of each student’s potential. -- 3/5

Friends don't let friends kill friends
“Zero tolerance’’ policies raise the risk of school violence, argues Fiona Morgan in Salon. Why did Andy Williams' pals keep quiet when he threatened to shoot up Santana High? They didn’t want to get him in trouble.

I think it's a valid point. Surely, schools would be safer if students believed reporting a friend’s angry outbursts would summon help, not reflexive punishment. Kids who fantasize out loud about killing others need a counselor's attention, whether they're "just joking" or dead serious. -- 3/7

The self-esteem army
In California kindergartens, every child is “special.’’ Just as special as every other kid, which, of course, means nobody is special. That dubious concept is now the policy of the U.S. Army, which announced last fall that berets -- now worn only by elite units -- would be issued to all soldiers. The idea is to boost morale. Of course, it will do the opposite, turning a symbol of distinction into a piece of fuzzy headgear.

President Bush has asked the Pentagon to rethink -- which I think means dump -- the berets-for-all policy. While he's at it, W should tell the generals to ponder the meaning of their new recruiting campaign in which a soldier declares he’s “an Army of one.’’ The message is bizarre: Military service is for egomaniacs, loners and mini-Rambos. With black berets for all. -- 3/8

Groupthink is nothink
I agree totally with Joan Walsh's Salon column on the campus flap over David Horowitz's anti-reparations ad.

The Daily Cal ran the ad, then apologized abjectly for doing so when protesters said the ad was racist. UC-Davis also ran the ad, and then apologized. A conservative-leaning University of Wisconsin newspaper was accused of racism, but refused to recant.

The ad is provocative, not racist. It makes some good points: Should descendants of Union soldiers or post-1863 immigrants pay reparations? It makes some bad points: Black Americans shouldn't feel grateful for their ancestors' suffering, no matter how much richer they are than Africans. I'm very grateful my great-grandparents left Russia, but I don't think I owe the Cossacks a thank you note.

Newspapers can reject ads for any reason, as Walsh and Mickey Kaus point out. Most have guidelines on sexual explicitness, for example. Every now and then, student newspaper editors have to decide whether to run an ad declaring the Holocaust is a Jewish lie. Should they refuse to sell space for blatantly false statements? I'd run the ad with a story explaining why it's nonsense. But thoughtful people may decide differently.

What's bad about the reaction to the Horowitz ad is the absence of thought by all parties. The protesters see no obligation to refute the ad's reasoning. They just scream "racism'' to squelch debate. Perhaps students believe that words that hurt their feelings violate their right to be shielded from a "hostile environment.'' The editors have no notion of their responsibility to provide a forum for reasoned debate, or the perils of declaring they won't print anything that's offensive to their easily offended readers. -- 3/8

Chads for Bush
Miami’s pregnant chads have given birth to Bush votes. So says the Palm Beach Post, which looked at 10,600 “undervotes’’ that would have been recounted manually if the U.S. Supremes hadn’t stepped in. If all the dimples and hanging chads had been counted, George W. Bush would have gained six votes, the Post concluded.

There’s bound to be different numbers from future media counts, such as the Miami Herald/USA Today review, done by hired accountants, which is due this week. But it’s clear the Gore campaign was way off base in predicting Gore would pick up 600 votes from a full recount of Miami-Dade.

The Post claims to have counted the faintest dimples, but didn’t find very many. Only 5 percent of Miami-Dade’s undervotes could be counted as votes. A much bigger issue was off-kilter voting: Nearly a quarter of the ballots were punched for all races in spots that didn’t correspond to any candidate.

This is not a butterfly ballot issue. That was Palm Beach County. It’s not about worn-out voting machines: The pattern of misvoting suggests that these people didn’t use the voting machine. They lined up the punch card with the ballot pamphlet instead.

The error rate was higher in black precincts, where an energetic get-out-the-vote campaign pulled many inexperienced voters to the polls. Precincts with lots of elderly voters also registered more misvotes. -- 3/11

Keep it clean
Mr. Parker told Jimmy that he’d never be a doctor if he couldn’t even clean up his desk. It seemed like a non sequitur at the time, but our fourth-grade teacher was on to something.

According to a University of Michigan study, the cleaner the home the farther kids go in school and the more they’ll earn as adults 25 years later. The children of Mr. and Mrs. Clean averaged 13.6 years of education; kids raised in a pig sty averaged only 12 years.

Cleanliness may not reside near godliness, but it’s a sign of people who are organized, efficient and orderly, say researchers. Organized parents tend to raise successful children.

The analysis used data from a long-term study that started in 1968. (White-glove interviewers visited respondents’ homes to judge cleanliness.) Researchers factored out parents’ education, intelligence, socioeconomic status and other possible reasons for kids’ success. It was the Ajax.

In his autobiography, “Growing Up,’’ Russell Baker quotes his mother’s saying: Nobody’s so poor they can’t clean up the yard.

Or as Columbia Professor Jeanne Brooks-Gunn puts it, "Our results highlight the fact that success is not totally accounted for by the education and income of one's parents. Motivation, will and conscientiousness all make a difference."

Jimmy came to our 30th high school reunion. He's Jim now, of course. He is not Dr. Jim. -- 3/13

Sez who?
A Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story reports: "In a recent survey about their needs, poor, single mothers in Wisconsin used terms such as 'limited empowerment,' 'cookie-cutter approach' and 'slave system' to describe Wisconsin Works, or W-2, the state program
designed to help them move off welfare and onto payrolls.''

"Limited empowerment'' is a term in common use by Wisconsin welfare moms? What are they putting in the cheese?-- 3/13

Scared straight
Johnny can't read very well. But he shows up in class most days and turns in homework occasionally, so he passes what's billed as ninth, 10th, 11th and 12th grade English. Johnny's credits are worthless, however. To earn a diploma, California students must pass the state graduation exam, which requires eighth grade reading and writing skills; the math exam includes some ninth grade questions. When Johnny flunks his final try -- he's got nine chances -- his parents sue the school. By fraudulently claiming Johnny has mastered high school-level work, the school has denied him a chance to improve enough to earn a diploma.

At the California Network of Education Charters (CANEC) convention in Burbank last week, New Haven Superintendent Ruth McKenna warned charter high school directors that the era of self-esteem grading is over. High schools must prepare students to pass the test, or risk a lawsuit. That means requiring students to master ninth grade skills to earn credit for ninth grade classes, and offering remedial help to students who fail one or more portions of the exit exam.

Some freshmen will need to take no-credit catch-up classes so they can tackle real ninth-grade work the following year; they may need an extra year to graduate. Others will prefer to leave school at 18 with a certificate of completion and basic literacy and job skills. If a 14-year-old hasn't met the sixth grade standards, meet with him and his parents, McKenna said. Be straight about the choices. If a special education student is working for a diploma, make sure she can take standardized tests. "You're more at risk for not teaching them and giving them good grades then you are by flunking them if they can't do the work.''

California ninth graders took the graduation exam for the first time in March. For some, it's a chance to get the test out of the way. For most, it's a first look at what they'll need to learn to earn a diploma.

Since many charter high schools specialize in students who've failed in traditional schools, getting everyone to the eighth-grade level is a real challenge. But it's a problem for non-charter public schools too. There's a reason the state didn't put 10th, 11th or 12th grade questions on the exam. The failure rate would be astronomical.

Educators are starting to get the message: Don't pretend your students are on track for a diploma if they're not. Johnny needs decent reading, writing and math skills to succeed in college -- or in a union apprenticeship program. He needs to know what he doesn't know while he's still got time to do something about it. So teach him. And tell the truth. -- 3/19

Notorious
In a funny column on the acquittal of Sean "Puffy'' Combs, Michael Kelly observes: "We are much less tolerant of a much wider range of social sins (bigotry, adultery, drunkeness, sloth) than we were 30 years ago. But, we have decided, the Decent People standards do not apply to famous people. Famous people get a pass. . . It is as if we are all living in a national, American version of "Upstairs, Downstairs." Downstairs, we are appalled if the chauffeur is caught tickling the parlor maid. Upstairs, meanwhile, his Lordship and Lady are playing naked Twister with three members of Parliament, two choirboys, their cocaine dealer and a large Rottweiler -- but that is different, because they are different." -- 3/20

A prayer for the pubescent
Catholic school students start out at the same level as public students, according to a study conducted in New York City. Elementary school scores are similar, reports the New York Times. But by eighth grade, Catholic school students have pulled ahead in reading and math scores.

The city's Catholic schools spend less per student. They average one teacher for every 21 students, compared to a 1:16 ratio in the pubic system. However, school size is smaller, averaging 345 students in K-8 Catholic schools versus 790 in public elementary and middle schools combined.

There could be curriculum differences that explain the performance gap. I think it's puberty. Many students disengage from school in the middle school years. They have more important things to think about than pre-algebra. Like which boy band singer has been chosen most adorable by the popular crowd and who's, like, so last week. Small, cohesive schools led by authority figures -- backed by God -- probably do better at keeping hormone-addled students focused on their studies.

Parents who choose private school -- religious or secular -- often are looking for a more controlled environment for their children.

Support for vouchers is very high among black parents: Three out of four want a ticket out of their public schools, according to a poll by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Adding older blacks brings support down to 57 percent. Here's a political analysis by The Economist headlined "Blacks v. Teachers.'' -- 3/22

Profit in its own time
When I left the San Jose Mercury News on Jan. 2, the bonus policy was in effect. Any staffer who recommended a new hire was promised a $2,000 bounty. During the Internet boom, recruiters had raided our business writers, looking for Silicon Valley expertise; the young and unmortgaged defected to dotcoms. The Merc hired feverishly to fill the vacancies.

In January, the Merc's sky-high employment advertising revenues dipped down a bit. In February, revenues plummeted. In March, publisher Jay Harris announced layoffs would be necessary. But it turns out he's the only one leaving. Harris quit rather than cut the editorial budget to maintain Knight-Ridder profits. The next day, the executive editor announced no layoffs will be necessary, though restructuring and a hiring freeze will eliminate about 20 positions.

Newspaper people pose as cynics, hard-bitten if possible. Actually, we're mushy romantics. We work for a large, publicly traded corporation and think it's all about serving the people and democracy and free speech. We think it's OK to make higher profits in a boom year like 2000, lower profits in a downturn like 2001. Silly us. Wall Street doesn't want to see high-quality newspapers; it wants to see high profits.

I was on the editorial board, so I worked with Jay. I thought he had a good shot at the top job some day. Since he's black, that would have been a very big deal. He'll do fine now; he's a hero to most journalists. But he doesn't have a future as a corporate exec. Mushy romantics don't cut it in the board room.

I also worked with Knight-Ridder CEO Tony Ridder, when he was publisher of the Mercury News. He left to go to Miami, then KR corporate headquarters. I know Tony wants to run quality newspapers. But he also wants to boost return on investment, now 19 percent, into the 20s. He wants that more. -- 3/22

Voting counts
California's Latino and black politicians are winning office in close proportion to their group's percentage of registered voters. That's the interesting story of a chart in the March 24 San Jose Mercury News. Latinos, who make up 13 percent of voters, are 12 percent of the congressional delegation, 16 percent of Assembly members and 18 percent of the state Senate. Blacks make up 6 percent of voters, 6 percent of the congressional delegation and 5 percent of state legislators. Only Asian-Americans are under-represented, as 6 percent of voters, 4 percent in Congress and 0 in the Legislature.

Representation looks very different for high-immigrant minority groups when it's compared to their percentage in the state's population: Latinos make up 31 percent of residents, and Asians, 12 percent. That is, half or more aren't registered voters, no doubt because many aren't citizens.

Blacks, 7 percent of the state, are almost as likely to be voters as they are to be residents. (Non-Latino) whites are half the population, three-quarters of voters and hold 78-79 percent of congressional and legislative seats. -- 3/25

Justice for all
According to “difference feminists,’’ justice is a guy thing. We women are into situational ethics not the universal application of laws.

Let’s hope not. Come September, 50+ percent of entering law students will be female, the American Bar Association predicts. That’s up from 4 percent in 1960, 10 percent in 1970.

“That trend will affect the way schools operate -- perhaps making classes more teamlike and less adversarial,’’ predicted a March 26 New York Times story. That prompted a letter from Miriam Chesslin, a Justice Department lawyer, who rejected the sugar-and-spice theory: "The experts who espouse such 'difference' theories, which suggest that female lawyers think or function differently than their male counterparts, fall into the very stereotypes that in an earlier day kept women from being taken seriously in the profession."

The Times threw in the usual meaningless stats: Women are 41 percent of associates at New York law firms, 14 percent of partners. About 20 percent of judges and full law professors are female. Come on. Tell us the median year of law school graduation for a partner in a New York firm. What percentage of graduates that year were female? Do the same for judges and law profs. Then we can talk about the “important obstacles’’ that still remain.

Another sentence also bugged me : “While certainly seeking the security, income and prestige that have long drawn men to the law, women are also reacting to the decline in real and perceived barriers to the profession.’’

My daughter, now a sophomore, is considering law school. She’s not seeking security, income or prestige. She’s seeking a chance to work for justice, to do good in the world. Is that so bizarre a motive as to be unworthy of mention?

By the way, barrier decline may have been a factor 20 years ago. For young women today, those barriers are as relevant as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. -- 3/28

Good reads
Black attitudes -- anti-intellectualism, victimology and separatism -- are "What's Holding Blacks Back'' argues John McWhorter in City Journal. McWhorter, a Berkeley professor, blames the "acting white" accusation for subpar performance by middle-class black students. McWhorter's book, "Losing the Race,'' has drawn mostly positive responses from black readers, he reports. But not from black intellectuals. (Yes, McWhorter is black.)

I also recommend Andrew Sullivan's commentary on the risks of cheap AIDS drugs. Sullivan is HIV positive so he knows how difficult it is to follow the drug regime, and he's very interested in encouraging further research on better treatments for AIDS. That means letting drug companies make a profit. -- 3/28

Stepford students
What’s the matter with kids today?, asks David Brooks in the new Atlantic. Young elites -- that is, students at prestigious universities -- are just too darned respectful of authority, hard-working, earnest, content and complacent, argues “The Organization Kid.’’ They’re not staying up all night debating moral dilemmas, plotting to overthrow the establishment or expanding their consciousness. They’re staying up to study so they can get good grades and get into a good law or biz school.

Brooks blames overanxious parents and enriched, structured childhoods. High-achievers’ parents shuttled them -- in seat-belted safety -- to scheduled play dates with approved friends, violin lessons, Scout meetings, soccer clinics, computer clubs, Chinese classes and SAT prep. They had little time to hang out with friends, free of adult supervision. (An elementary school in West Annapolis, Maryland has banned tag because it violates the school’s “no touching” policy and leads to roughhousing. Children may play tag only in phys ed class under the teacher’s direction.)

The Organization Kid is a team player, not a prickly individualist, Brooks complains. That's not surprising: Today's college students are the veterans of "collective learning'' groups designed to teach cooperation.

In angry postings on the Atlantic’s forum site, Princetonians are eager to make it clear that they’re “well-rounded, driven by interest, and not die-hard workaholics,’’ as one put it. They want Brooks to know that they get drunk on weekends. Good grades, social life, extra-currics . . . They have trouble understanding what might be lacking. When Brooks refers to the struggle between the angel and beast within, good and evil and a sense of sin, they tune out. It sounds like religion, which is unmentionable, unthinkable. Besides, they do community service.

Organization Kids have been directed by adults in every aspect of their development except for one, Brooks writes. “When it comes to character and virtue, the most mysterious area of all, suddenly the laissez-faire ethic rules: You’re on your own, Jack and Jill; go figure out what is true and just for yourselves.’’

In rebuttal, a Princetonian writes: “We respect differences and want others to be happy. There's virtue for you.”

There's a definition of virtue. Virtue Lite.

As a parent, I feel no nostalgia for angry, alienated, drugged-out and defiant youth. My daughter is a sophomore at UCLA. She wasn’t quite as enriched as Brooks’ Stepford Students: She’s the only child in Palo Alto who never played soccer and she spent enormous amounts of time hanging out with friends and doing -- I hope -- nothing. But there's no doubt she is respectful, cheerful and diligent. Well-adjusted. When she was looking at colleges, she told me: “I don’t want to to go somewhere where everyone dresses in black and sits around drinking coffee and talking about how fucked up everything is. That’s not me.’’

She’s also deeply concerned about ethical issues. She assumes she’ll lead a comfortable life. She worries about leading a good life. Cheerful, well-adjusted people can be morally serious too.

UCLA is not trying to shape her character or give her "a concrete and articulated moral system.'' But I am. I want her to save the world.

“What about you, Mom?’’ she said. “Why don’t you save the world?’’

“Hey, I’m trying,’’ I said. “I’ve been working on it for 20 years! I could use a little help!’’

I was a low-angst adolescent too. I protested the war. But I never spelled America with a ‘k.’ And while I respected some of the people who did, I thought many were self-important, small-minded jerks trying to deal with their personal problems by breaking windows and ranting reflexively about the military-industrial complex.

Rebels should have a cause, and there isn't a good one out there. Some college students oppose globalism, seeking to keep the poor in culturally appropriate poverty. They protest biotechnology, rejecting science as long as the beneficiaries are farmers, people they don't know. (Where are keep-genetics-out-of-medicine rallies?) But elite students know too much economics and science to be swept away. One of my daughter's friends attended an anti-WTO rally with only the skimpiest knowledge of what the WTO does because attending rallies was on her check list of what students ought to do. Sort of a generational extra-credit project.

I don't think it matters whether young elites are protesting, drinking or studying in the library. The real question is whether they're developing high ideals to go with their high test scores. They're nice. But are they morally tough? I'm more optimistic than Brooks. But perhaps I've looked too long on the bright side. -- 3/29