The increasingly common approach is to point to teachers — the scapegoats of student and parents alike. However, this method is too easy and too lazy, and it demonstrates the paradox of respect for the teaching profession but not for the individual teacher. Arguments by students and parents with teachers about grades and behavior foster a negative learning environment — one that could be avoided if we students assumed responsibility for our actions.

In a poll of 44 East teachers, 26 believed the number of confrontations in which a student or parent held the teacher responsible for poor grades or behavior was on the rise since they began teaching (13 had not noticed a difference and 5 believed that number had fallen).

Now, not all teachers feel under-appreciated, just as not all students and parents attack teachers on a weekly basis. In the end, however, these confrontations continue to occur — and they harm all parties involved. When conflict arises, it is harder for teachers to teach and students to learn.

To find a better learning approach, we should turn to Europe. Finland’s students consistently top the charts in science, math and reading scores, a fact which Scholastic Administrator Magazine attributed in part to student respect for teachers. Julie Walker, a Finland educational system researcher, compared the degree of respect for teachers in Finland to that of doctors in the U.S.

Some have argued that American teachers receive a similar degree of respect. The 2011 PDK/Gallup Poll concluded that most American parents regard teaching as a worthwhile profession for their kids. In fact, PDK International Executive Director Bill Brushaw and Gallop Senior Scientist Shane Lopez wrote that, “Not only do Americans understand the need for great teachers, [but] they also trust and support teachers who are in classrooms now.”

However, the poll does not address how students and parents act towards teachers. Respecting the profession does not equate to respecting a teacher in the classroom.

Finland, on the other hand, showed that a classroom devoid of conflict and filled with mutual respect fosters successful learning. Clearly, heated confrontations about homework, tests and grades can be easily prevented, but it takes initiative on our part. Here are three simple steps to creating better relationships with teachers:

1. Actually read the course handouts — knowing late work policies and project deadlines prevents any negative surprises. “What does the syllabus say about that?” is a common question teachers ask students who plead ignorance.

2. Meet with teachers before or after school to settle any disputes. Teachers are more flexible one-on-one than in front of thirty sets of eyes, especially when they are not in the middle of trying to explain how to write an FRQ.

3. Keep a cool head. Tone and body language are just as important as speech, so when a teacher calls you out for rolling your eyes, do not claim, “I didn’t say anything.” Teachers are much more likely to listen to a calm, composed high schooler than a stuck-up teenager with a strong sense of entitlement.

If these steps are way over your head, remember this simple rule: empathy goes a long way. Teachers deal with a lot, after all. With public school budget cuts, they have picked up more classes and more students. A new teacher might be unsure at first how to handle a classroom full of kids, and an experienced teacher might be skeptical of your excuses because he or she has heard the same ones for twenty years. Understanding is the first step to preventing unnecessary confrontations.

But why bother improving your relationship with your teacher? After all, we move on after only one year or even one semester.

We should bother, though, because aside from our parents, teachers are some of the most influential adults in our lives. They affect everything from our political beliefs to our communication skills, and that in of itself should demand respect.

Disrespect from students should not just be “part of the job;” instead, students need to take initiative. Grades are usually based on merit, but our relationships with teachers are based on effort.

When it comes time to decide what school to attend out of the ones a student got into, price often eliminates some choices altogether. In a Harbinger survey of 104 seniors, 32 percent reported that cost prohibited them from considering at least one of the schools. A restructuring of the university system for better management of tuition funds would allow universities in the U.S. to do more with less.

Cost shouldn’t remain as the determining factor in a student’s decision to attend a certain college or not. Students shouldn’t be forced to make decisions about which college to attend based on price, and should instead be able to make the decision based upon things important to the experience, such as academics and atmosphere. And while increasing financial aid offerings would help, they aren’t long-term solutions. To solve the problem, the universities need to rethink and completely restructure the methods in which they spend students’ money to make it more affordable for the students to attend first-choice-school.

A student attending the average public university can expect to pay $29,657 a year at sticker price, including tuition and room and board, according to a survey by the College Board for the 2011-12 school year. However, the most prestigious universities in the United States happen to be private—the top 20 universities on US News and World Report’s 2012 list of the best universities are all private. Private universities had an average sticker price of $38,589 a year, according to the College Board’s survey. Unlike at public universities, where students rarely pay full sticker price, because of greater government assistance, at private universities students are 10 percent more likely to go into debt to pay for their education, with the average debt per borrower at $28,100.

Student debt is a big problem, and inflation is not to blame for the rise. Tuition and fees at universities for 2011-2012 rose an average of 4.6 percent from the previous school year, which exceeds the rate of inflation of 3.16 percent, according to a survey by the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. Instead, the problem rests with inefficient management of tuition dollars by schools, where tuition dollars are spent on items of questionable importance to students’ educations.

It’s unlikely that some of the expensive perks that universities are providing to students like free laundry service at Davidson College and free housekeeping at Trinity University are improving the quality of education, and can be gotten rid of.

It doesn’t make sense for undergraduates to be funding the university’s research program. Federal grants, in many cases, are unable to fully support university’s research programs, and so many schools, like the University of Rhode Island, turn to tuition dollars to bail out research programs. While research is good for the public, English majors shouldn’t be subsidizing physicists. Their money should only be spent on the things that are directly related to their education—most of it should go towards teaching.

Next, the universities need to reorganize their administrative models by eliminating bloat. Schools spend an average of $7,000 per student per year on “administrative support” according to the Economist. These costs aren’t just spent on the deans, but also on psychologists and human resources managers. While these administrators are nice to have around, colleges can educate their students without, or at least with fewer of them.

Schools should also reevaluate class sizes. Studies show people generally prefer smaller classes, but the research and studies into the effect of class size are inconclusive as to whether they provide better education. Large class size does not reduce the ability for students to learn in economics classes, according to  a 2002 study published in the College Student Journal. Furthermore, most business and law schools already do well with large classes. Schools should look into what classes are best served by smaller, discussion-oriented sizes, and which ones can be equally effective with more people. With a larger student to teacher ratio for certain areas of study, schools could save money and be just as effective.

Myers is not alone. She is one of many students who are unable to attend the school of their dreams—ones that they worked hard to get into—because of cost. Schools need to get creative, and soon. Reducing the cost of education should be a top priority.

Hiba Akhtar | Harbinger Online

The Shawnee Mission School District (SMSD) should allow East and its fellow high schools to tailor administrative policies to their unique needs.

With the beginning of the 2011-2012 school year, East’s students and staff faced a major administrative change: the schedule.

After three years of one seven period and four block period days per week, East was forced to conform its schedule with the four other SMSD high schools. The 2011-2012 school year launched a standardized three seven period and two block days per week schedule. At any time on any day of the week, the five high schools are in the same class period.

Unifying East, North, Northwest, West and South through this compromised schedule change creates consistency within the district, which theoretically allows teachers who split their time between schools to manage their schedules. At East, however, changing the schedule was unnecessary and inconvenient.

“I just didn’t see the need for us to do that,” Krawitz said. “But that’s a very biased statement on my part because we don’t have the dilemma that the other schools have in terms of specialty teachers that have to be shared with one building and another.”

At East, only a handful of teachers travel between buildings within the district — namely specialized music teachers. Replacing beloved block period days with seven period days didn’t benefit East. Although unifying the schedule may benefit other schools, East should be given the liberty to choose a schedule that best benefits its staff and students.

The SMSD fails to adapt its administrative policies to the individual needs of each high school. Scheduling isn’t the only SMSD policy that East is forced to comply to: the grade point average and class rank system also harm students.

GPAs of high-achieving students at East, which makes the class rank system hyper-competitive. Students with 4.0 GPAs, who would rank well at other high schools, may not even be in the top third at East. Dr. Krawitz hopes to eliminate the class rank system, but changing this policy throughout the SMSD is unlikely.

Though all five high schools are a part of the unified school district, each is located in different communities and has different skill sets. East offers a learning environment and extracurricular opportunities distinct from the four other high schools and therefore has different needs; students in Prairie Village have different needs than those in Overland Park or Shawnee. The SMSD should grant the freedom to different schools to adapt their own administrative policies.

Even if policies are the same across the district, the student bodies, staff and buildings are diverse. Each of the five high schools are unique and should be treated as such – especially with policies like block scheduling that directly affect the students.

Director and head of the organization Invisible Children Jason Russell uploaded a 29-minute documentary about the leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), Joseph Kony, that sent the world into a whirlwind. The movie was a persuasive use of media that called viewers to “change the world” and take a closer look at the happenings in Uganda.

Millions of social media users began to retweet or post the link, but those retweeting, reposting and reblogging the video might need to take a closer look at what exactly they’re advocating with Invisible Children, instead of blindly following the cause.

The Kony 2012 project was launched to raise awareness about Kony, a man who, in the past, has had a griphold on the nation of Uganda, committing atrocities such as enslaving thousands of children to kill or become sex slaves. The video encouraged the world to make Kony’s name popular so that lawmakers and members of Congress could use their power to stop his reign. Many became outraged and took the link and posted it on their personal Facebook or Twitter accounts.

This brings up the first main issue with the Kony 2012 campaign: the approach of simply educating people doesn’t fix the problem.

There is nothing wrong with awareness, but merely posting a link to a documentary didn’t, and won’t change anything. Problems aren’t solved with a simple copy and paste on a computer. It could be a nice jumping off point, and helps to get the word spread and to get people educated sure, but there are better ways to help the cause. Like, for example, donating to other organizations.

Invisible Children gives you that option with the Kony 2012 “action kit,” which brings up the next problem with the campaign: The donated money doesn’t go toward what you may think it does.

They suggested purchase of their 30 dollar kit, which comes with a T-Shirt, a bracelet, an action guide, stickers, a button and some posters. But according to the Invisible Children audit, only 31 percent of their profits actually go towards direct relief, meaning that of the 30 dollars you spend on the “action kit,” 69 percent goes toward different promotional costs strictly for Invisible Children, not the Kony 2012 campaign. So really, only 10 of your dollars actually mean anything to the campaign — whatever that is.

According to Russell’s appearance on the Today Show, over 500,000 action kits had been sold, meaning they brought in at least $15 million in the first week of the Kony 2012 campaign. Though a flashy number, all that means is that over $10 million of the $15 million raised by the sales of over 500,000 kits, didn’t go to the cause.

This poses another problem with the campaign: people blindly followed a campaign they didn’t know about fully.

You can’t blame Invisible Children for leading people to believe they were going to fix the problems in Uganda — they’re actually just doing what they intend to do: raise awareness. Russell told reporters, “the truth about Invisible Children is that we are not an aid organization, and we don’t intend to be. I think people think we’re over there delivering shoes or food. But we are an advocacy and awareness organization.”

The problem with that, is that most people don’t know that.

The final issue is that things in Uganda aren’t nearly as bad as the short film portrays them to be. According to Nikita Bernardi, a Ugandan woman interviewed by Guardian News, “northern Uganda is no longer what it is portrayed as in the [Kony 2012] video. He is no longer terrorizing northern Uganda and the region is now relatively stable.”

So not only has Invisible Children fooled you once with your money, they have also fooled you again with their dramatization of the footage shot in Uganda.

The solution would have been simple if the 85-million-plus people hadn’t already been mislead by Invisible Children’s campaign without doing research and actually knowing what they were advocating before they promoted it.

However, by informing friends and family of the misinformation being fed to the masses via the media, you can still make a difference. You can donate to organizations or relief efforts that actually help out countries like Uganda, like blood:water mission, Kiva or Love146. Each help make the lives of the impoverished by improving living conditions, and help to free enslaved children — both things Kony 2012 fails to do.

Kony 2012 is a nice try, and is helpful to spread a message, but it’s not the answer to the problem, as much as it may seem.

With the bleak job market, young adults attempting to enter the workforce in a job that pays well enough to sustain themselves need a distinctive advantage or skill to help set themselves apart. Although a student won’t be able to achieve a thoroughly developed trade in plumbing or electrical work, for example, they would have a head start and knowledge that is marketable.

Our district’s negligence can be seen in their inability to accommodate for the changes. Despite their goals being to get 100 percent of their students to go to college, they need to accept the fact that for some students college isn’t in the cards and that making the students more employable is the best way to help their students and the committee. For these students, a core curriculum loaded with liberal arts and sciences isn’t nearly as useful as a curriculum that is able to find a healthy balance between traditional standard level courses mixed in with courses that focus on practical learning with real-world application.

These students know early on in their high school career that they don’t intend to attend college due to family circumstances or the economy, but having the ability for them to go through some practical learning courses may make the difference between them getting and keeping a job to not. Courses that have more of a vocational feel to them will make them more adept for the job market. A basic knowledge in the fields of plumbing or electrical work will give them a head-start and maybe an initiative to pursue a job like this out of high school. These courses should be optional but students should be very aware of their existence and availability.

Although these courses don’t set the stage for the traditional four-year college, it won’t matter.

The district can also use this approach for students planning on continuing their education as well. Allow a student to opt out of a math class for an accounting class, or maybe a computer programming class. Allow journalism to be an English substitute, as well as having a career advisory seminar as a substitute for seminar or one of your other core classes.

To make a program like this successful, the district must do more than simply making the classes available. They must be treated like core classes and not electives — the difference changes the student’s mind set and encourages them to take it more seriously. With these courses only being electives, the students it was actually designed for will be scared away.

Already having a less realistic form of these programs at the district’s Broadmoor facility the district already has a way to run these in a pilot program. But gradually implementing them in each area high school is the only way to ensure they reach their full potential.

Teachers, not students or parents, are the ones who know the time commitments and difficulty of their classes — thus teachers should be given greater influence on enrollment decisions for Advanced Placement classes and the International Baccalaureate Programme. Teachers should come together to devise a set of qualifications for enrollment in these classes, and end the policy of open enrollment in AP and IB classes.

It needs to be made clear that these programs are not just for resume-padding, and that they are intended only for those who are willing to make a commitment to learning. In devising a system, East needs to ensure that their advanced classes meet the criteria that the College Board and International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) sets out for the classes.

The College Board states on their website that the courses are supposed to be at the college level. According to the website, students in AP classes are supposed to engage in intense discussions, solve problems collaboratively, and learn to write clearly and persuasively. The IBO states similar intentions in their Mission Statement for their Diploma Programme. But not every student in an AP or IB class is capable or willing to make a commitment to learning in such an environment — a commitment without which the student is more likely to succeed in a standard-level class.

As a result of the open enrollment in advanced classes, many teachers employ the “scare tactic,” where on Syllabus Day, they are prone to hyperbolic statements about the difficulty of their classes. This method is ineffective for two reasons: most students see right through the trick, and it might scare off students who really do belong in the class. There needs to be a more reliable system for teachers to ensure that only students capable of meeting the expectations set out by the College Board and IBO enroll in their classes.

Because the qualities of a successful math student are different from those of a successful English or Visual Arts student, each department should come up with their own policy of determining eligibility for enrollment in AP and IB classes. But each policy should be firm and exact, with few exceptions being made for those who do not meet the criteria.

As an example, a possible policy for AP classes in English would be the minimum requirement of a B in a previous honors English class or an A in a regular one. Along with the grade, the student would have to have a teacher’s signature confirming that the student contributed positively to class discussions and met or exceeded all other class expectations.

For a student to enroll to become an International Baccalaureate Candidate, a suggestion for a policy would be to require a student to have a 3.6 unweighted GPA and recommendations for the program from teachers in all six of the subjects the student will be taking IB courses in.

Growth in both the AP and IB programs might slow down, possibly hurting East’s in the Newsweek rankings, but we shouldn’t put the value of unofficial rankings above safeguarding the success of our students. The fewer students will be surrounded by the best of their peers. They will take the classes more seriously when it becomes a privilege to take them. The students will develop ideas together, with everyone focused on  learning — not on the college credit they might earn.

Another benefit of a new system would be for the gifted-but-fearful students. When the opinions of teachers become a more important component of enrollment discussions, some talented students who might not have otherwise taken an advanced class would be encouraged to.

Teacher’s opinions are already taken into account when students select their math classes. Based on the student’s ability and performance, the student’s current teacher gives a recommendation for what course they think the student should enroll in. But the flaw in this plan is that the choice is still ultimately left up to the student. The teacher’s opinion should not be so easily discarded when it comes to the AP and IB Calculus classes; those classes carry the expectation of a certain work ethic. If a student fails to demonstrate that they value learning complex math and not just the extra grade point, they should be prohibited from enrolling.

Some would argue that making enrollment more stringent will deny the students who do not already possess the qualities of a successful AP student an opportunity to develop them. But that’s what the honors courses freshman and sophomore year are for. Students in AP and IB classes should be capable of working collaboratively and dedicating enough time to studying before they enroll in the course. Extra time is increasingly scarce, as The College Board is consistently updating their AP curricula, often adding more topics to the history and science classes. Teachers shouldn’t be spending any time going over the basics of the Socratic Method.

Others might say that a new system would limit educational opportunity to only a fortunate few, but this isn’t true. There would be no caps on how many students can enroll in a class. Everyone who has done the hard work to meet the eligibility requirements would be allowed in.

Ensuring that the right students end up in the right classes should be taken more earnestly by the school. Enrolling in an upper-level class needs to be much more difficult than writing on a piece of card-stock and getting a parent to sign it. The school should focus on making sure that students are in the classes that they will succeed in, and by doing this they will do a better job of preparing students for the future.

However, the threat of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) still looms over both the Internet and the billions of people who use it. Even as high school students, we still have a say in whether or not ACTA has as big of an impact as it promises–we beat censorship last month, and we can do it again. Here are five concrete ways to get involved in the protection and preservation of the Internet–before the SOPA/PIPA and ACTA bills come back to bite us.

1) When Internet users caught wind of Congress’s plan to meet and vote on the passing of SOPA in the United States set for Jan. 24, according to Fight for the Future (a nonprofit organization working to defend online freedom), over 75,000 sites banded together and blacked out their content to show the public what a SOPA-patrolled web would look like. Another survey shows that over 13 million Internet users participated in the Jan. 18 protest overall–and within 16 hours of the blackout, 2.4 million SOPA-related tweets blew up feeds on Twitter, with the hashtag “wikipediablackout” constituting one percent of all tweets that day. Congress can’t turn a blind eye to the Internet community’s ability to unite over a cause that they believe in, and what better cause is there to unite users from all corners of the Internet, from Reddit to the Drudge Report, than the threat of losing free speech? By using the Internet as a mechanism to rally support, users brought about the exact change they wanted to see. And with SOPA set to make an appearance in the coming month, what better a time to tweet “#stopSOPA” or “#SOPAstrike”?

2) Being referred to on the Internet as “SOPA on steroids,” ACTA is a bill that has been being internationally negotiated behind closed doors since 2007. ACTA could potentially shatter the Internet as we know it. While the United States has already signed the treaty to put it into effect, we can still make a difference by calling European Parliament (EP) representatives and asking them to, please, vote against the ratification of the agreement–the EP has until June of this year to vote on whether or not the trade agreement will go through with all of the ramifications it is supposed to entail. A quick Google search (that, under this new agreement, could become obsolete) of “how to stop ACTA” reveals links to the phone numbers and email addresses of the Committee of International Trade members, free for contact.

3) A quick visit to SOPAstrike.com makes it easy for citizens to help sway opinions on the impending censorship bills within Congress. This website, run by Fight for the Future, offers the option to sign up to “flood Congress with phone calls” when SOPA returns to be voted on in the Senate. In the last major protest of SOPA on the 18th, Tumblr and Mobile Commons contact tools enabled over 400,000 calls to Congress, which averages to 919 calls per Congressional Representative. Wikipedia’s call look up tool also enabled over 8 million attempted calls to Congress, according to Fight for the Future. When a 45-second call can mean the difference between being able to access more information than you could read in one lifetime on Wikipedia alone and the website being shut down completely due to a lack of user monitoring, why wouldn’t you pick up the phone?

4) The pen alone can bring down institutions–SOPA’s opposition proved that when participants in the SOPA strike gathered 10 million signatures for various petitions in attempt to stop the bill from being passed. Along with petition signings, over 3,000 letters were sent to Congress in an effort to stop SOPA through the site SendWrite.com–and, clearly, they made a difference. Attempting a personal angle by writing a tangible letter to Congress can make an impact on their decision making. By communicating public opinion, we citizens have the opportunity to influence officials–which, in this stagnant political climate, is a reassuring fact. Taking the time to write out how you feel about being censored in the “land of the free” can only benefit the cause of putting an end to censorship.

5) Spread the word. Mass movements can only take place when information is abundant and people can support informed opinions. Use your Facebook account to “Share” articles and websites that inform your friends and family about the consequences of an online censorship bill being passed in the United States. Do a presentation on ACTA’s background for your history class. Bring it up at your lunch table in the cafeteria. Tweet to your followers about what websites they’ll be missing if the Internet is constantly being patrolled for copyright infringement. Above all, talk. Discuss. Form opinions. Never stop asking questions.

Kat Buchanan | Harbinger Online

If a government office is truly interested in initiating dialogue with a person who has criticized or commented on their policies or office, they should contact that person, ask what their concerns are, and then ask what they would suggest doing to change them. Not only does this allow for the government to make a direct connection with the people it is leading, it also shows that the administration respects the opinions of its constituents.

The course of action taken by Brownback’s office concerning Sullivans’s tweet was unacceptable. Emailing an SMSD administrator with no discernible call for action was an inappropriate and ineffective way to handle a teenager’s criticism. The email from one of Gov. Brownback’s assistants, Niomi Burget, to SMSD Youth In Government coordinator Deborah Brown about Sullivan’s tweet simply said: “I would like to share with you a message that was brought to our attention.” If the office had instead asked to talk to Sullivan directly and asked why she tweeted the way she did, the situation could have been resolved in a much less confrontational, media-frenetic manner. Brownback’s acknowledgement of the fact that his office “overreacted” to Sullivan’s tweet hopefully signifies that his office will take a more constructive approach to criticism or comments in the future.

Policy EGAEA-R, SMSD’s current policy concerning computer usage and internet safety, does not specifically cover the use of social media by students. It seems like the precautionary measures taken by the district to limit social media access-blocking social media sites, prohibiting cell phone use in class—would negate the need for a policy on its use, but that is not the case. Sullivan’s tweet showed just how easy it is to use social media during a school-sponsored event or even school itself. A social media policy is a much-needed addition to the Administrative Guidelines and Procedures booklet.

The new policy should only apply to social media posts that are deemed unprotected free speech (e.g. defamation, speech that causes a substantial and material disruption, instigating a riot) that happens during school or a school-sponsored event. For example, if a student posted on their Facebook during school, “I am going to kill Daniel Simpson tomorrow, I hate him so much,” the school should take action. This statement, which is hate speech (speech that disparages a person based on race, sexual orientation, religion, etc.) and could cause Daniel to miss school due to fear of being hurt, is not protected by the First Amendment. Disciplinary measures would be acceptable. The school should also be able to deal with cyber-bullying that affects students in the same way if the bullying can be argued as hate speech .

Had a policy similar to the one above been in place at the time of Sullivan’s tweet, SMSD could have simply stated, “Emma’s tweet, although coarsely worded, was an expression of protected free speech. Therefore, as our policy states, it does not warrant any school disciplinary action.”

This being said, just because students have the right to speak out doesn’t necessarily mean that they are exempt from all rules of politeness and class. Decorum is too often brushed to the side when voicing opinions today. Brownback said in his apology for his staff’s overreaction to Sullivan’s tweet, “freedom of speech is one of our most treasured freedoms.” This treasure is not something to be wasted. Washington Post writer Alexandra Petri pointed out in her Nov. 28 blog concerning Sullivan’s tweet: “The race is always to the loudest, the rudest, the most unapologetic, the least grammatical.” It’s a sad truth in today’s world, but it can be combated. The ability to support your opinion is much more important than the opinion itself. Communication and publication in the 21st century may be faster and more publicly accessible, but that doesn’t mean our words need to be less structured and supported.

Social media isn’t going anywhere, and for that reason we need to learn how to use it and respond to it appropriately. The government needs to be able to handle criticism via social media sites, schools need to be able to mediate social media-based conflicts, and students must remember to use social media in a respectful manner.

Around 10 years ago, a problem in acquiring applicants for East’s athletic coaching staff became apparent: there weren’t enough teachers within the building that were certified teachers by the district, who wanted to take on a extra coaching position. In this case, applicants from outside the building—and completely outside of the Shawnee Mission School District (SMSD) —were given the opportunity to apply for head coach and assistant coach positions, to work at the school as a side job of sorts. These “Rule 10” coaches, a title based off of the Kansas State High School Activity Association (KSHSAA) rule book, are, officially, “anyone who is certified in compliance with standards established by the Kansas State Board of Education” who are “eligible to coach in any activity under the jurisdiction of the KSHSAA.” Meaning that these are coaches employed to run athletic teams without being affiliated with any teaching position at East.

Now, we are seeing an even more prevalent indifference from the current teaching staff when coaching opportunities open up. At the beginning of this school year, when both the cheerleading and dance team head coach positions were up for grabs, no one who was already working within East was there to respond to the call.

“We had one applicant—that’s it. One applicant,” Dr. Krawitz said. An applicant who, while attending school away from East full-time during the day, is the essence of a Rule 10 coach, requiring practices to take place during evening hours for cheerleaders.

According to Dr. Krawitz, we would be without a variety of our athletic programs if we got rid of these Rule 10 coaches—all of East’s volleyball coaches are Rule 10, as well as all softball coaches. Two out of three baseball coaches, five out of the 10 football coaches, three out of the four girls’ basketball coaches and one out of the four boys’ basketball coaches are Rule 10. Get into soccer, and you find two out of the three as being Rule 10. Gymnastics? Both are Rule 10—and that’s just a taste.

So what happens to these programs if the often-short-term coaches turn away?

“If we don’t have people to fill the job, the program goes away. Literally,” Dr. Krawitz said. “So, is it possible in the future, even in Shawnee Mission, that some schools have cheerleaders and others don’t? Yep. Is it possible that certain levels of athletic teams may not exist because you don’t have coaches? Yep.”

However, the problem with the staff operating solely from within the East body is the added work load that current teachers have received. According to Dr. Krawitz, we have gone from 17 teachers this year who were teaching a sixth assignment to 44 teachers.

“So, if I’m a teacher who’s picked up another added class load, that’s another 25-30 papers I have to grade, tests I have to do,” Dr. Krawitz said. “People are saying, “Gosh, I don’t think I have time to do this. I don’t have time to devote to this in the manner that I would need to devote to it.”

As of now, we have to see the availability of Rule 10 staff members as a good thing. While the majority of our coaching staff at East is affiliated with the school through Rule 10, we need the extra help to keep our athletic teams.

“If we didn’t have them wanting to do this, if we didn’t have these outside people, we’d be in a world of hurt to keep these sports and activities going,” Dr. Krawitz said. “It’s just a tremendous amount of time,” Krawitz said. “The young people coming out of college, they just don’t want to give up that time.”

But the problem isn’t entirely a matter of the time commitment, though it’s definitely a factor—the real problem lies in the pay.

Dr. Krawitz recalls being the coach of three sports teams before his days at East, and the commitment that had to go into such a low-paying profession.

“My pay, if I broke it down by the hour, would have been 31 cents an hour,” Dr. Krawitz said. “Not many people are going to sign up for a job like that, so you have to love doing it.”

Luckily, being away from the school for most regular business hours doesn’t keep all Rule 10 coaches from being invested in the school. Since day one, 25-year swimming coach Wiley Wright has been working with students in the program to push them toward success—not once would you question his devotion to his teams.

“I think [Wright’s] reputation as a coach, as a motivator, speaks for itself,” Dr. Krawitz said, “and because of that I don’t think there’s been any affect [from him not being a teacher at East].”

More teachers should be “the exception to the rule,” like Wright has become. Investing time in the development of youth’s athletic programs is something that the coaching staff should be openly passionate about.

Dr. Krawitz also believes that the development of high school students has been on the back burner for those in charge of our public school system, a problem that seems to be reinforced by a lack of long-term teaching staff.

“Even in Kansas, our legislative body doesn’t really have a high perception of education and so they don’t believe that we need to be throwing money at the development of young people,” Dr. Krawitz said. “You kind of have to wonder: “They’re the future of the country, what do you want?”

Sadly, kids can’t be motivated to step up to their full potential without teachers and officials who are fully invested in their wellbeing.

In this day and age when sex and sexuality-filled forms of media, like T.V. and advertisements, are exposed to younger and younger groups of children, parents and schools need to start sex education earlier, too. While SMSD does begin a form of sex education in fourth grade, this education focuses on growth and development and puberty; it spends no time on sex and sexuality. The sex education curriculum in SMSD should begin in 7th grade, two years earlier than it does now. Fourteen-year-olds are trusted with driving a car. This age group should be expected to understand the importance of sex-ed, and not giggle at every other word.

In the Shawnee Mission School District, sex education, taught now in Health, is approached in three main ways: abstinence and contraceptives, physical consequences and emotional and life consequences. The curriculum is oriented toward teaching students how and why teen sex is unsafe. It also focuses on teaching safe sex practices if students ignore, or understand, the consequences and still decide to have sex.

While the administration believes that this policy is working, still nearly one in 11 teen girls are impregnated every year in the United States. That figure doesn’t even count the tens of thousands of teen pregnancies that are never reported–the pregnancies hushed up by parents. While teen pregnancy rates have stayed relatively stable, according to the Guttmacher Institute, 8 in 10 teen pregnancies are still unplanned.

As Johnson County Government officials deny grants to organizations such as Planned Parenthood that teach contraceptive use, they continue to fund abstinence-only programs. This July, the Johnson County Health Commission gave $500,000 to a program aimed at teaching abstinence to young teens between 11 and 13 years old. The negative results of these policies can be seen: last year alone, teen pregnancy rates in Johnson County increased by 25 percent. But at least the local government is doing one thing right: focusing education on young teens.

Sex education does not have to start in the school. Who do children trust more than their teachers? Their parents. Parents should be actively engaging their children in conversations about sex well before the time sex becomes an attractive option for their children. Yes, talking to children about sex seems awkward. But imagine having your 15 year old daughter tell you that she’s pregnant. Which is more “awkward?” Just as important is having children feel comfortable enough to ask the tough question of their parents. If a student does not feel comfortable asking a question in class, both the student and the parent need to be OK with talking about the subject of sex.

When both the school and parents engage children in sex education that focuses on physical and emotional maturity and contraceptives between the ages of 11 and 13, teenagers will be better prepared when they actually encounter sex. While some may think that teaching kids just beginning puberty about condoms is inappropriate, the long term effects of an inadequate sex education are too great for the system not to change. ]]> http://smeharbinger.net/opinion/editorial/editorial-sex-education-should-begin-at-a-younger-age/feed 0 http://smeharbinger.net/opinion/editorial/editorial-teachers-with-multiple-spots-on-payroll-costing-the-school http://smeharbinger.net/opinion/editorial/editorial-teachers-with-multiple-spots-on-payroll-costing-the-school#comments Mon, 31 Oct 2011 18:24:06 +0000 Editorial Board http://smeharbinger.net/?p=31605 Budget cuts here, budget cuts there. Thirteen teachers were let go last year, causing a rise in class sizes to an average of about 30 students. It’s hard to not feel the effects of the slashed budget. The closing of Mission Valley and two other elementary schools has pushed the replacement schools close to their maximum capacity. Indian Hills’ enrollment jumped from 498 to 757 students this fall. School board meetings have primarily focused on budget cuts in the past year with the cutting of $8 million district wide, but they could have been cut from the district bonuses for club sponsorship.

Teachers make a set amount of money each year based upon their individual contract, but there are many teachers that also get bonuses on top of that number—sometimes, seemingly just for an extra title. There are teachers that make extra money for putting in time for their own classes, such as concerts, but English teachers also put in many unpaid hours of grading. East has a “drug free school club” that is sponsored by two faculty members who earn $850 for that position—the club isn’t even mentioned on the “clubs” page on the East district website. It is not logical to be paying teachers money for a club that is not recognized by the student population. Granted, there are teachers that put hours of work into sponsoring their clubs and they are appreciated. However, the clubs that aren’t as as known by the student body shouldn’t bring bonuses to teachers.

Many teachers and faculty are, in fact, putting in hours working on their various clubs, but the money that the district pays could be cut in excess positions as well. Having teachers that collect tickets at games, a position that gets paid roughly $370, is a wasted expense. There are students who are looking for service hours and parents who are generally willing to help in any way they can. Having them volunteer would be a great way to avoid this added expense. No one would get paid and the district wouldn’t have to waste that money. Not all of the money has to be eliminated, but if it was reduced then that would free up more funds for the district.

In some cases teachers are earning $4,000 for extra time outside of school that is already part of the class that they teach. There is not a need for the district to be spending this kind of money on positions that are closely related to the job they’re already doing.  The district is already low on funds, so cutting these costs would take some pressure off of the general fund.

There are a few valuable areas in which the district could reallocate the money to be used in more effective and beneficial ways. One of these is the library. This year the district cut out all funding used to purchase new library books. Some of the money used for club sponsorship could go to purchasing new books.

Money could also be used for buying more computers for each department, so more than one Spanish teacher could use the laptops at the same time. The district has also implemented a new $90 activity fee where $50 of that go to the district general fund.  If some of the excess salaries were shaved off families wouldn’t have to have that extra expense.

East has also lost two janitors this year causing more work for the ones left and not as clean of a building. If some sponsorship salaries were cut then the cleanliness wouldn’t be compromised.

There is not a problem with having many clubs and ways for students to get involved in. But the district could find better ways to spend the money spent on them in a way that would affect a greater variety of students and the student body as a whole.

Sure, these kids knew the risk they were taking. They signed an athletic participation contract when they made their teams saying that they wouldn’t drink or use drugs. The punishments for violating these rules vary. A first-offense student will be kicked out of their sport for the remainder of their season. Upon the school administration’s confirmation of a second offense, the student will be prohibited from participating in any extracurricular activities for an entire calendar year.

While these rules display the honorable intentions of the district, the consequences for breaking these rules are counterproductive to the overall goal of the prevention of alcohol and drug use among teens.

Involvement in extracurricular activities, be they athletic or academic in nature, plays a big part in deterring students from experimenting with drugs and alcohol, according to John Hoffmann, a sociologist at Brigham Young University. Yes, athletes’ fear of the season-long suspensions may be what keeps some athletes from drinking, but the actual punishments don’t prevent drinking because removing athletes from their sports also removes the fear of suspension that kept them from drinking more often.

Since the prevention of such illicit activities is one of the main goals of the district, removing students for extended periods of time from such activities is counterproductive. A student who is kicked off their team or activity after getting caught drinking is much more likely to drink more afterwards, especially if the only things previously preventing that student from drinking regularly were the restrictions set by the district.

At the heart of the problem are the lengths of the suspensions. Suspending athletes for the remainder of their seasons creates a drastic inconsistency in how long athletes are suspended. Depending on when the punishment is enforced, a convicted athlete can face anywhere between a week to three months of suspension time. This inconsistency in punishment is unfair to the athletes who are caught and punished earlier in their seasons. They end up serving longer suspensions than others who are caught later than them.

In most cases, the lengths of athletic suspensions are too long. A student who is suspended for a two-month remainder of their season is likely to give up on coming back. The more time they spend away from their sport, the more likely they are to not return to it, and the more likely that they resort to drinking more frequently.

The solution to these problems is to have shorter, consistent suspensions. It’s not beneficial to avoid punishment all together, but the current system isn’t either. To discipline students who violate drug and alcohol rules and to prevent substance abuse among athletes more effectively, the district must set a consistent length for all athletic suspensions.

In order to limit substance abuse, this set length must be short, too. A universal two-week athletic suspension should be sufficient. It’s long enough to force a student to reconsider their ways, but short enough to ensure that they don’t give up on returning to their sport and start drinking or using drugs more. Additionally, students should be required to attend all practices and games during their suspensions, which will keep them away from the party scene during their time off.

The district’s goals are honorable in their alcohol and drug policies for athletes. But the inconsistent and excessive punishments it has set for violating these rules must be amended in order to meet its goals. Without reform, the system will continue to do nothing for the problems it intends to prevent.

Maintaining the cleanliness of East is often more of a struggle than it should be. According to Janitor Steve Peck, most of the messes custodians have encountered this year are unnecessary. On a typical day, there’s graffiti scribbled onto the walls of the bathrooms, remnants of food left out in the cafeteria and papers strewn across hallway floors. Peck says one of the problems he has seen in particular this year is even as simple as wrappers left on the floor of classrooms.

For students and staff alike, fixing this problem can be as easy as using the wastebasket. Simple things, like throwing away trash, can help our janitorial staff immensely. There is no excuse for the extraneous filth.

This year, pitching in with the cleanup effort is more important than ever before. With cuts in the district, our custodial staff has been hurting. For the 2011-12 fiscal school year, the number of night-time workers has gone from 11 to 9 due to budgetary reductions. Janitors have had to cut out the third time slot from 10:30 – 7 a.m.; Peck has complained that there’s “less time to get it right.”

While the state board of education is not at fault for making a tough decision in a dwindling economy, it’s the reaction from East that has been disappointing. Janitors have not seen a decrease in any of the excess trash around the building. Graffiti is still prevalent and trash still clogs the halls. The problem, instead of slowly dying out, is staying the same.

English Teacher Laura Beachy notes that students in her class carelessly throw papers on the ground. She says she still feels like she needs to remind her kids to pick up wrappers and worksheets strewn on the floor. Across the building, janitors have seen more of the same. Peck notes that at the end of the day classrooms and halls are typically a mess. In this financial climate with layoffs affecting our custodial staff, it’s inexcusable that teachers and students are not carrying any weight.

Part of the blame lies with the administration. Although we applaud the various efforts made around East to keep the school clean–art murals in the bathrooms, environmental club–it is ultimately ineffective. The steps taken are only beneficial in the cleanup process, when there should be a focus on a preventive course of action. This could entail seminars or meetings where our school’s administration puts an emphasis on throwing things away and sidestepping graffiti.

It’s all about trying to change the way students think. Last year, when artists decorated the bathrooms with colorful images, students continued to write on the walls. When environmental club picked up papers, they found their way onto the floor anyway. And although it is far-fetched to think that the filth will disappear with a speech and a few handouts, some effort by the administration, and even teachers, can help to prevent the build up of trash in our building.

Beachy says that she always tries to be “at least somewhat vigilant about trash.” When students of hers get up to leave the room she makes sure that everything is accounted for; if there is garbage remaining on the ground then she sees that it is taken care of. It is this attitude that is lacking from our staff. If all teachers make some sort of an effort, custodial worker’s jobs will become that much easier. It’s the reasonable and right thing to do to help out our custodians.

In the end, they will take notice. Currently, janitors are spending a majority of their night picking up a mess that is carelessly left by students. This is not the only thing listed in their job description. Granted, janitors are expected to pick up trash, but there is much more to what they do. They are the ones who set up for events around East and coordinate with other schools for sporting events; the schools electricity and air conditioning is also left to them. When we don’t pitch in, the now nine-man janitorial staff can spend most of their nights scrubbing and sweeping up our excessive mess.

The solution is easy. Students, teachers and administrators need to wake up and begin to make an effort to keep the building clean. It is unacceptable to leave the bulk of cleanup solely to the janitors. Here at East, we need to display a little more effort and a lot more common sense.

Let’s start by using the wastebasket.

“We feel that school should be a place where children can learn good eating habits that they will carry with them throughout their lives,” Director of SNP, Cheryl Johnson, said. “Because of this, we made it a priority to have realistic portions and healthier alternatives to the traditional school lunches.”

Another major change that was instituted this year in the cafeteria deals with the variety of some of the entrees. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is proposing a major overhaul of school lunch requirements and programs, which would take effect in the 2012-2013 school year. In order to make the next year’s transition into this new regime less drastic, SMSD decided to start making some needed changes this year.

The main goal of these changes is to provide more types of vegetables and fruits, as well as focus on including every food group in the entrees for a more balanced meal.

It is clear from the actions being taken that SMSD has been making an effort to make their cafeterias more health-conscious. However, if the district keeps offering students the kinds of unhealthy foods that are currently available, no change can be made.

Instead of focusing on issues like decreasing portion sizes, SMSD should be looking into permanent solutions that truly lead students to pursue healthier lifestyles, both in the cafeteria and out in the real world.

The initiatives taken by the district this year are definitely a start to achieving this goal.

For example, students now have the choice of regular french fries or “confetti fries,” a mix of both french fries and sweet potato fries. This alternative provides a source of legumes, a type of fruit that many adolescent diets are lacking, according to a study conducted by the University of Georgia in 2007.

The biggest change to the menu so far has been the switch to whole grains, which are now present in all pastas, rice, and bread that is sold by the cafeteria.

“We thought that switching to whole grains was an easy change that could greatly improve the nutritional value of many of the foods that we make,” SMSD food manager Nancy Coughenour said.

Although the cafeteria is applying all these new options, many students have stuck to their old ways when it comes to choosing healthy foods and smaller portions.

This can be seen each day in the lunch line, where many students skirt around the new smaller portions by simply buying two bags of Otis Spunkmeyer cookies instead of the recommended one.

“I don’t think that [the new changes] are that much healthier,” Junior Michael Kennedy said. “I usually end up having to buy more than one item anyway because of the smaller servings, and lunch costs way more for me now.”

To achieve a truly healthy cafeteria, it is necessary to cut out the foods that have little to no nutritional value. This way, if students are hungry, they will be forced to eat a nutritional meal. Over time, this could have a major effect on the health of students who buy school lunch. Not only would they be healthier in general, but they would have more energy to face the second half of the school day.

The efforts being made at East to change students’ eating habits are by no means unnoticeable, but as long as there is an unhealthy option for every healthy one offered, there is no way that the school is going to make major headway in the fight towards healthier student population.

Instead of trying to hide or expel the “blemishes” and “problem kids,” counselors should look to these students even more than the high-achieving students. Although some students may not find their way to a selective college, the goal of reaching the University of Kansas or a community college isn’t unreasonable, and would benefit them much more than having their education end with their tenure at East. In fact, many students might find their home better at such a school.

East does have programs in place to give these students the knowledge they need to succeed in the world, even if it has to be at a slower pace; some just don’t have the desire to be interested in it.

The school’s attempts to try to get every student more involved, interested and excited about their studies have gone, for the most part, unrecognized. Mass assemblies and interactions between an entire student body, although well planned out, are predominately ignored by many—often the ones that need to hear it the most. These students feel like they are neglected. For the most part, they are. The school wants them to feel like they care about them, but how can they feel that if they are being talked to in a group of 2,000?

The approach should be a more personal one; the effect of having these deemed “troubled” students meeting with an adult individually as little as once a month could give them the sense of purpose and personal connection that they’ve been missing. Although the counselors office doesn’t have the time to be the ones meeting with these students, volunteer parents who have formerly had East students which have moved on the college could act as these college counselor-like mentors.

Such a program could work at the leisure of both the parent volunteers and the students. The meetings would be multi-purposed, but the end goal would be to aim the student in the right track to continue their education, choose the right college, help with college essays and tests and applying for financial aid. Many of these services are offered by the counseling office, but without a more personal approach, no one is going to go for it.

The problem’s roots lie much deeper than just within East. Within the next few years, Shawnee Mission North will be the third school in the district to gain the International Baccalaureate label. Just to receive the IB designation costs around $10,000, not to mention the thousands of dollars needed to train the teachers to the program’s standards.  Clearly, the district is willing to devote more funds to help high-achieving students; they should investigate options to help low-achieving ones as well.

The goal of a high school is to prepare their students for life in the real world, and with around 96 percent of their student continuing on to college, East does it as well as almost any school in the country. But with a little more support, even low-achieving students could find schools that fit them as well as possible. From the beginning of our freshman years at East we are told to strive for perfection; this standard should apply to everyone, not just the high-achieving students.

The cuts come as a result of federal and state funding cuts the Shawnee Mission School District has been forced to enact this spring. According to Dr. Krawitz, the state has not been issuing their full allocation of funding to districts since January; he says the district is “literally running on reserves.”

“That’s where we’re at, because we’ve already cut to where there is no more,” Dr. Krawitz said. “It’s like starving the cow where there is no more fat, and now we’re cutting into the heart of what makes you tick.”

The special education department will unfairly suffer the most; according to Dr. Krawitz, the staff will drop by one-third, from eight to 12. This includes a Transition Specialist, who helps students with special needs find jobs or further their education after high school.

Even with cuts, the East administration needs to allocate more funding to  the department so that it can maintain quality of instruction and keep student-to-teacher ratios from raising. Cutting one-third of a department is an unacceptable drop, especially when the bigger cuts are yet to come; Dr. Krawitz thinks the budget situation could result in 15-20 more teachers being put on excess next year.

Special education depends on hands-on teaching (see “Sharing Their Skills,” pages 16-17), something that is lost when significant numbers of a department are put on excess. The teachers will also have to oversee more Individual Education Programs (IEPs), which are the academic programs tailored for both gifted and special needs students. Special education teacher Maureen Johnson is afraid the increase in case loads might pull the department too thin.

“As a teacher of students with severe disabilities, history of special education tells us that they are the first ones to kind of be pushed aside to sit and do activities that are not meaningful, like sitting and doing puzzles and coloring all the time, because that’s the easiest thing to get them to do so you can focus on other tasks,” Johnson said. “That is very sad and unfortunate, and I don’t want to see that happen.”

The case load could also be reduced if IEPs were assigned more sparingly to gifted students. While some gifted students do indeed benefit from the specialized curriculum, the teacher’s time could be better spent on special needs students; the gifted students should not have to opt-out of the IEP, but rather opt-in annually if they want the extra guidance that an IEP provides. Otherwise, valuable teacher time is wasted on students who will benefit less from the added attention than a special needs student would.

Dr. Krawitz insists that the state is responsible for 75 percent of Special Education funding, but says that the school has received in-between 62 and 68 percent in recent years. The rest must come out of school’s general education funding. According to an article published in the Lawrence Journal World on Feb. 23, Kansas has been mandated by the federal government to increase special education funding by $26 million.

This state boost in funding will help, and it is important that the state gives more money to special education–even amidst general education cuts–so that individual schools don’t have to decide whether to reduce the department or pull more money from the general education fund.

The federal government has realized the importance of special education, and it is imperative that the state and district follow suit, even when cuts are made to education elsewhere. It is understandable that some teachers from each department would be put on excess, but it is inexcusable when one of the departments that supports students the most is given the least funding.

Precedence is everything. The domino effect of big decisions can extend far beyond their intended impact. After a recent decision by our state’s governor, the importance of arts have been greatly diminished in the eyes of the public, unfortunate as it may be.

On Feb. 7, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed an executive order to abolish the Kansas Arts Commission and replace it with the Kansas Arts Foundation, a private, nonprofit organization that will have to fundraise on its own. The move will make the Sunflower State the first to abolish its art commission. Brownback cited the state’s budgetary shortfall of nearly $500 million, coupled with the $600,000 in savings that the decision would cause, as his reasoning.

The plan is both alarming and rash. Not only does the small savings fail to make a dent in the massive budgetary shortfall, but it may actually end up costing the state money. Henry Schwaller, chairman of the arts agency, told the Kansas City Star that the loss of the commission will cost the state economy $1.2 million in donations to the commission from various organizations.

More importantly, Brownback’s decision sends a message to our local community and district administrators that the arts are a superfluous commodity that can be stripped in times of economic downfall. Sending this kind of message is a critical mistake. That kind of thinking is exactly what could lead to financial cuts to the fine arts from the school district, a decision that would leave a much greater impact.

Here at East, there are examples all throughout the halls that dispel the notion that a reduction in financial support for the arts is a necessary sacrifice. The latest musical drew consistently large crowds despite icy weather conditions. The choir, band and orchestra programs continue to hold a reputation as some of the strongest in the area. And display cases all over the school, as well as the new artistic flair on several bathroom walls, reveal the high levels of creativity among the student body.

This type of creativity needs to be encouraged, not cut.

Art classes and activities are often the one time of the day that students can forget test scores, homework and grades in order to submerge themselves in their passions. They represent the few opportunities for highly-stressed students to express their creativity. These values seem to be lost upon our governor, as he appears willing to cut the arts commission in order to save a relatively small amount of money. To protect the valuable programs from eventual cuts, efforts must be made to keep the community aware of the importance of the arts and their impact at the high school level.

Fine arts department head Wanda Simchuk said that high enrollment is vital to keeping strong funding, since enrolled students pay to take part in the various art classes. Currently, Simchuk said that enrollment is high enough to keep all six art teachers in the department. However, Brownback’s abolishing of the arts commission could send a message to the public that the arts are not an essential need, and that perception could begin to affect enrollment.

In order to keep steady financial support for the art department, Simchuk said it is imperative to show the community the work being accomplished by students at East. Through display cases and art shows, Simchuk and her students hope that the public will be reminded of the importance of the arts and their value in society.

The challenge would be easier to overcome if the governor weren’t trying to convince them otherwise.

Cartoon by Peter Hung

For the first time since 1983, when the district first began recording snow days, school has already been cancelled six times this winter due to inclement weather. KMBC chief meteorologist Bryan Busby estimates the Kansas City area has seen 30 inches of snow this winter. More snow could be on the way and students, parents and staff all have increased responsibilities when it comes to the East parking lot and surrounding roadways.

The first responsibility falls upon the district’s operations and maintenance team to make sure that, should we experience snow or ice again this winter or anytime in the future, they properly treat and plow the parking lots and sidewalks. Huge snow piles on the medians made visibility weak and students had to be extra careful when pulling out of the lot. After one snowy day, the parking lots weren’t even plowed and no one could see the parking lines. Because of the ice-covered roads, one teacher has been sent to the hospital with broken ribs and a punctured lung. Students have also taken plenty of falls this year walking from their car to school and one teacher fell and had a bleeding elbow. The junior lot has had issues with cars being unable to leave because a lack of snow removal caused parking problems. Now, in an effort to keep that problem from happening again, the district treats the parking lots daily in the early morning with salt and sand, according to Principal Karl Krawitz. While we applaud this step, in the future, the district should do a better job of taking preemptive measures and not just reacting after someone gets hurt.

Secondly, parents need to have student safety in mind. The East parking lots are bad enough with traffic when there’s no snow on the ground, so when a two-car lane only fits one car due to snow then all drivers in the lot need to be patient and courteous. Rushing to the turning lane and cutting other drivers off is not only impolite, but dangerous. Another obstacle in bad weather has been students and parents turning into the senior lot going north on Mission Rd. While this is generally a problem throughout the year, bad weather adds another element to the conditions. Parents and students driving south to turn into the lot need to do the best they can to allow cars coming from the south to also turn in. If the Prairie Village police or a district police officer were to direct the road traffic on these icy days, getting to school would be an easier and safer task.

Whether Mother Nature has more snow in store or not, students, staff and students need to take care to put in the extra effort on snowy days. The district needs to make sure the lots are clear and students can park without fear of tires spinning out or breaking a leg walking into schools. Ensuring safety is always a priority. It is our collective duty as members of the East community to make an extra effort on days with poor driving conditions to prevent accidents from occurring. Keep our Lancer family strong by driving safely.

Despite being based on only one aspect of school achievement, class rank has a profound impact on students and college admissions. Grade point average is the sole determining factor of rank, calculated to the ten-thousandth decimal point. At East, minor differences matter: these miniscule GPA points can create huge deviations in class rank. A student ranked in the seventies may take the same classes and be academically on par with the Top Ten, but that ten-thousandth point keeps their rank lower.

Transcript records don’t take into account extra-curricular activities. Playing an instrument or being involved in theater doesn’t matter. Artistic talent or prowess in a sport won’t help your rank. This categorizes students as either academically “smart” or “dumb,” with no way to redeem a bad grade with some other skill. Students may feel discouraged to try new things or to get involved in school activities outside of the classroom. Even going to a basketball game is out of the question, for fear of not getting enough study time and falling down the class rank!

There’s no way to fairly account for extra-curricular activities or school involvement on a numerical scale; therefore, instead of creating a needless competition, the idea of ranking students on such a scale should be eliminated.

Principal Dr. Karl Krawitz is strongly against class rank. He argues that the unfairness between East and other Kansas schools, the labeling of students and the obsession with the number creates a ridiculous “game” that kids have to learn to play.

Being ranked in the top third at East compared to other schools in the state of Kansas can vary exponentially. Being ranked low in the class can cause limitations in life after high school. College may be out of the question and a student can be thought of as “dumb,” all because of a number.

“The reality is that schools should never squelch the dreams of its students,” Dr. Krawitz said.

Dr. Krawitz admits his opinion is not the most popular, which means the system is very hard to change. Class rank isn’t a school-based decision, but a district one. The principals of each Shawnee Mission School District high school would have to agree to abolish class rank, propose it to the District, and the district-level administration would have to pass it onto the SMSD Board of Education, where a vote would be taken on whether to keep or eliminate rank in schools.

The ideas of class rank remain crucial to the educational society. Being ranked in the top third is one of many potential admissions qualifications to get into public universities in Kansas, as well as other schools across the nation. While an East student may reach the GPA qualification, their class rank could be lower than a student in another Kansas school with an identical GPA.

As long as the public believes class rank has a meaning, it will remain. It’s a traditional system that has no place in the modern-day educational system, where students do much more than sit in a classroom. Neither GPA nor class rank take anything above-and-beyond into account, and this narrow standard of “excellence” is not a benefit to students.

“Unfortunately, we continue to use old rules, even at the detriment of kids,” Dr. Krawitz said. “It goes against common sense and logic.”

Class rank is just a number: it shouldn’t be the defining characteristic of students at East or any other school. By abolishing class rank, students will feel less pressured and the school can do away with the ancient philosophy that for someone to win, someone else has to lose.

No, I heard it’s Indian Hills, since Mission Valley just got that new library.

Well, my friend’s mom said it’s definitely Mission Valley.

In the weeks leading up to the release of superintendent Gene Johnson’s boundary change and school closure  proposals, conversations like this were heard through the halls and in the classrooms of East.  No one knew for sure which middle school would be closed, but everyone had their ideas and guesses.

On Sept. 13, the proposal, “Charting a Course for Continued Excellence,” was presented to the Shawnee Mission Board of Education and it seemed that the doubt was gone: it was Mission Valley that would be closed at the conclusion of this school year. But the decision was far from over and the process of presenting it to the community was handled poorly.

Until the Board meeting on Nov. 8, the district held community meetings. These discussions period was filled with protests from parents, including the formation of the “Save Mission Valley” group, whose black and white “Don’t Compromise: Save Mission Valley” signs soon dotted yards in the area.

Then on Nov. 8, Johnson’s final recommendations were announced and voted on by the Board.

Mission Valley’s closing was tabled. At first, Johnson announced that he would appoint a committee to evaluate the middle school situation and report to the Board of Education on Feb. 2. Now, the Board is set to vote on Dec. 13.

As stated in Johnson’s proposal, Mission Valley’s projected enrollment is low, just 36 percent of its capacity in the 2011-2012 school year. Closing Mission Valley is  projected to save $832,865 annually. The proposal is logical and the Superintendent and Board are doing their jobs in trying to find ways to save money and maximize resources.

While the reasoning for the changes make sense, the Board has put off making the final decision for far too long.  If the benefits of the closings were rational enough for the proposal, then it doesn’t add up for the Superintendent to change his mind after parents complain. It seems that the Board is avoiding the decision to escape conflict and that isn’t fair to anyone involved. This stalling is both  illogical and insensitive to students, their families, counselors and teachers.

One of the main arguments of parents protesting the closing of Mission Valley is that they don’t want their kids’ lives to be disrupted. At board meetings, parents have spoken about their elementary school students looking forward to attending Mission Valley like their older siblings.

This is an understandable concern, since middle school students aren’t known for being flexible. But if Mission Valley is closed, they’ll simply have to be flexible, and the more time they’re given to adjust to the change, the better.  If a Mission Valley student has already decided they want to take Performance with their friends and Choir, because their older sibling loved the teacher, it won’t be easy for them to scrap those plans and attend Indian Hills. So, the Board should have made the decision earlier to give students more time to adjust.

Mission Valley closing will likely affect many families’ routines. If a parent living at 90th and Mission now has to drive their kid to 64th and Mission every morning that will clearly take much longer. That may not be a problem for many, but in families where both parents work it would be a challenge, one they would need as much time as possible to figure out a solution too.

Enrollment is already hectic time for middle school counselors and with more students, it will become an even more overwhelming task. Middle school enrollment begins in January, so if it is announced Dec. 13 that Mission Valley is going to be closed, that will leave little time for counselors to reassess scheduling practices to accommodate the new students at Indian Hills.

The Board has stated that Mission Valley teachers and other staff members would either be reassigned to positions at Indian Hills or at another building within the district. They should also be given the maximum amount of time possible to rearrange their lives if their jobs move.

At the Board meeting on Nov. 8, parents were elated that Mission Valley wasn’t closing for sure. Cheering broke out. The front page of the Kansas City Star the next day showed a gleeful Mission Valley mom. Parents and students were relieved, hoping this meant Mission Valley was spared, but that’s not the case. It was insensitive for this decision to be put off, in what seems to be an attempt to dodge conflict. At the upcoming meeting the Board should make a decision and stand behind it.

Illustration by Emma Schulte.

Despite students’ original criticism of Rule 52, which states that “the concept of ‘sportsmanship’ must be taught, modeled, expected and reinforced in the classroom and in all competitive activities,” these guidelines for game nights have slowly but surely made a positive impact on fans of East sports.

The once-rowdy crowd members have figured out how to exercise the appropriate behavior while still bringing the adequate amount of hype to the field this fall season.There are the kids who attend every game, home or away; the tank top wearers in the 40 degree weather; the chant starters who love to “throw their hands up in the air sometimes.” But no longer will you see the “Proud Violator of Rule 52” t-shirts that graced the chests of boisterous seniors two years ago.

This time around, there is no sneering or jeering or commandeering. It seems that, after much defiance, Rule 52 and the enforcement of it by school officials has effectively kept students in check.

Fans of East sports deserve their own round of applause. Their own crowd shouting out “ah yeah, East” to pump them up. Their own fans to serenade them with the school song.

But more than half of the glory goes to the administration for issuing the dictum in the first place.

After seasons full of ridiculous chants against the opposing teams and over-the-top behavior ranging from excessive amounts of baby powder on the basketball court and malicious call-outs to our Rockhurst rivals,  the administration put their foot down and decided to reinforce rules adopted 20 years previously by the Kansas State High School Activities Association’s Board of Directors. Much to the student body’s chagrin at the time, the officials began harshly controlling the unsportsmanlike conduct. It’s clear now that they made a decision to better the experience for fans, players and administrators.

In a day and age at East where you can certifiably become a Lancer Soccer Super Fan through the purchase of a nifty T-shirt, it seems we have rekindled our positive attitude in the bleachers with grace and poise. By wearing a tank top and shouting their lungs dry in the crisp fall air, students have kept it clean and made a name for their team without actually making the team.

Athletic director Jeremy Higgins has seen a prominent change in the behavior of East students at sporting events in the past year alone. The positive vibes that have emanated from the crowd this season have not only made an impact on the players, but the administration as well.

“Their cheering is what it’s meant to be,” Higgins said. “The point of being there is to cheer on the team, not to be in Halloween costumes.”

Administrators can attest to the fact that this has been our best season yet, as far as sports and sportsmanship are concerned. The turn out at games and tournaments this season has been more impressive than ever, and the fans are doing great things that the officials hadn’t seen before, at least in the past few years. Though there have been a few jabs at rival teams here and there, the cheers and chants coming from the lips of East students have been more positive and uplifting than anything else.

So, consider this your pat on the back, East sports fans. And here’s to continuing our true school spirit this winter season.

This year the administration has taken a different approach to the typical mid-morning announcements. Instead of the original over-the-intercom information, they attempted to go digital with a PowerPoint shown over the school’s closed circuit TV channel. Trying to take a fresh approach to the daily announcements, the administration thought that a video PowerPoint would be more interesting and make students more intrigued by what was going on in the school.

Rather than the usual intercom, announcements were shown on all the projectors in the school in a PowerPoint-like presentation, filled with blurry text and clip art. The idea was a bust and seemed like a poorly-executed joke. If the energy of all of the projectors in the school is to be used, they should be used on the original plan, innovative live broadcasting, rather than a simple, flat PowerPoint presentation.

Though teachers were encouraged to show announcements on the screen or read them aloud, some teachers didn’t even show the announcements. And in the classrooms that did, some students paid less attention to the presentation than when they were spoken aloud over the intercom.

The complete lack of announcements was unacceptable. Throughout the first quarter, it’s been inconvenient that the announcements have been so scattered and announced in an inconsistent fashion and in a non-constructive way. It seemed like more students were getting informed by passed by water-fountain talk rather than daily announcements.

Yet, the administration made an effort to take fresh approaches to spreading the news about the school. The fact of the matter is, they didn’t give up and quit. Even when the PowerPoint announcements were not going as well as they thought, they kept trying their best to inform the student body about their school.

But the intercom announcements have always worked. Though some may pay more attention to an energetic StuCo executive than a less than excited teacher, they work. The students that want to listen, can listen. And the ones that don’t want to hear certainly don’t have to. Considering there are five extra minutes during fourth hour on seven period days specifically for announcements, why did we ever switch from the intercom? The best and clearest way to get a message across to the entire area of the school at this moment is to play it over the intercom speakers, just like they do to call students to the office and announce cancelled sporting events. Why not use that for announcements, which are of equal importance?

After StuCo approached the administration about the announcements, they considered changing the announcements back to the regular intercom. But once StuCo unanimously voted to return to the intercom, the administration ceased the PowerPoint announcements.

Announcements are important. They inform East students of important dates coming up and accomplishments their counterparts have achieved, and the absence of announcements is unacceptable.

Knowing this, the administration made a respectable effort to try to keep students informed of their school, rather than shutting it down completely when the PowerPoints failed.

But most importantly, the original intercom announcements are back. They have worked in the past and will continue to work in the future. The administration and StuCo are working on a live broadcast that will take the place of intercom announcements and are set to be in effect later this year. The administration made a valiant effort mixing up the announcements, but should have sustained with the intercom until the live broadcast was ready.

Both Republican candidate Sam Brownback and Democratic candidate Tom Holland have made the issue central to their campaigns. The fate of millions of tax dollars hangs in the balance as school districts across Kansas watch the contest closely.

At the heart of the matter is the school finance formula, used to calculate the amount of money each school district can use to pay for yearly operational expenses, including salaries, benefits, course offerings, supplies and utilities.

According to Dale Dennis, deputy commissioner of the Fiscal & Administrative Services Division of the State Department of Education, Kansas provides a base amount of $4,012 per student enrolled in a district. That number is adjusted to account for extra expenses an individual district may have, such as more special-needs or at-risk students. The final amount is called “State Financial Aid.”

Districts are required to raise money locally for education through mill levies, a type of property tax, if they cannot cover expenses with the $4,012 per student. The amount they can raise is limited to 31 percent of the State Financial Aid amount, however. If a district still cannot cover expenses (for instance, if it has especially low property values), the state provides it with additional money in the form of equalization dollars.

This formula was adopted in 2005 after a lawsuit against the state in which the Kansas Supreme Court deemed the previous finance system inequitable and unconstitutional. In public debates, Holland has stated that he wants to preserve the current formula. Brownback, on the other hand, has proposed revising the formula to give more local control to school districts while also providing for poorer districts unable to raise as much money for themselves.

However, the Senator has not given specifics on exactly how his plan would work, and a storm of debate has ensued over what actions he would take if elected governor and instituted “more local control.” Most worrisome have been claims of a larger rural-urban split in funding and a greater tax burden on local communities in order to make up for drastic educational budget cuts.

Constituents have every right to be concerned. Without a concrete course of action, we can only speculate about how Brownback would achieve his goals. On the surface, the idea of allowing local voters to decide if their own tax money should go toward education goals sounds like a harmless proposition. But dig a bit deeper, and the divide between Kansas’ wealthy and poorer counties becomes more evident.

For instance, Johnson County, the most affluent county in Kansas, has the financial resources to invest in education. But a declining county such as Syracuse, located in the northwest corner of Kansas, is struggling to survive, let alone fund educational programs. More local control will not help Syracuse, and it cannot replace basic state funding of education for students there.

When changes to the finance formula are being considered, the situations of students in all districts should be considered. If more local control is deemed to be the right path, and districts are allowed to raise funds independently, then the most fair choice is to apportion the funds raised by individual districts with the rest. Some may say that is unfair to districts like SMSD that have the ability to raise more funds; they may feel it’s their money, so they should keep it. But truly, that attitude is not what education in this country should be about. Education should be about giving every student the same resources and quality of education, so they are equally prepared for the future.            Legislators should strive to make sure that the educational experiences for all Kansas students are not vastly different simply because of where they live. It may seem like a lofty goal, but ensuring that all school districts have equal access to funds is a step in the right direction.

If you want to do more, do more for everybody.

11 For | 0 Against | 1 Absent

Letters to the editor should be sent to room 521 or smeharbinger@gmail.com. Letters may be edited for clarity, length, libel and mechanics and accepted or rejected at the editor’s discretion

This sounds good and well: South is moving to block scheduling, therefore the other schools don’t have to move back to the traditional method. The problem, however, occurs with the way the block is handled. The principals of the high schools met to discuss the common scheduling issue and decided on a compromise: a 3-2 split. This schedule has two block days on Tuesday and Thursday, and the rest of the week is full schedule.

Four years ago, the East staff voted with a fifty-one percent majority** to move to 4-1 block scheduling, with 4 block days and only 1 traditional day. Next year, because South voted on 3-2, the other high schools will all change to match. While the district has not officially announced the change to a common schedule, the teachers have all been informed that that will be the case next year.

Teachers have to vote to move to block. The District cannot force any school to change to block; the change must come from a majority vote from the teachers. However, the superintendent determines the schedule, and must approve any changes.

South held off on block scheduling because, according Ron Millard, the math department chair at South, they didn’t want to lose the two weeks worth of contact time with their students.

“Learning is a function of quality and quantity of time spent in a learning environment,” Millard said. “The seven period day has provided that for our students.”

Block scheduling, according to Associate Superintendent Dr. Gillian Chapman, is more expensive. Seminar eats up 180 minutes a week and offers no credit to students. A staff member must be staffed, which eats up valuable instruction time. While seminar is a valuable resource for students, it is a needless fiscal expense. A 3-2 schedule will not completely eliminate the cost, but will help lower it.

Common scheduling will help remedy scheduling conflicts with students enrolled at Briarwood and students interested in the specialty programs at different school who don’t want to transfer.

But the 4-1 block scheduling is the superior schedule. There is more time for discussion, teachers have more planning time, students have less homework stress and it allows more in-depth study of the class subject matter. No matter what, people will be bothered by the schedule changes, but it would be better for all the staff and students at every school to use a 4-1 schedule. A few years ago, most of the students at East were against block scheduling until a month after it started. Now, the 3-2 compromise is causing a similar uproar. While students will get used to the schedule after a while, the change isn’t worth it. Staff and students have adjusted, and adjusted well. Most teachers, from the English to the World Language departments, support the 4-1 block, and even prefer 3-2 to traditional schedule because, as English teacher Laura Beachy put it, “Some block is better than no block.”

In the past five years at East, there has been a new principal, construction and the change from 7-period days to the 4-1-block schedule. With the proposed boundary changes (discussed in issue 3 of the Harbinger), there will be even more changes to come. Staff and students have enough on their plates to deal with yet another change.

This schedule change will affect more students in a more profound way than the boundary changes currently causing uproar. This is a district-wide change for every high school. This year’s seniors didn’t go 4 years with the same schedule, and the juniors are now cursed to the same fate. There’s no consistency from the district, and the 3-2 idea is not a functioning compromise. While some teachers consider some block better than no block, the day-to-day switch will be hard to adjust to.

These schedule changes aren’t fair to students or teachers, who are the oft-ignored victims of district decisions. Since the district has yet to announce an official change, there is still time for parents and students to be heard.

**Update: This percentage is incorrect. It was closer to a sixty-seven or seventy percent, according to East teacher Vicki Arndt-Helgesen.

This is a great option for a number of reasons, but above all else, it would give more power to the everyday citizen even if it is not passed.

With the current troubles that the SMSD is going through, this connection between administrator and citizen is now needed more than ever. Improvement cannot be brought about simply by budget cuts. Citizens need to be involved in local elections and given the right to vote on these issues. A simple solution, if passed, would be a minor tax that can be either be voted yes or no on in local elections.

In 2003, this was used in Johnson County when voters were asked to answer yes or no on a quarter-cent sales tax which would help fund public schools in Johnson County. It was ultimately adopted and renewed again in 2006, but for the last time. In its three year span, the eligible public school districts received slightly more than $66.4 million dollars in taxes, according to JoCogov.org.

The SMSD was included among these districts. The extra money that went to the district was used in many areas and ultimately beneficial.

However, if our district wants to make a tax like this a possibility yet again, they must get the state to change current restrictions put on our Local Option Budget (LOB). Currently, 31 percent of our general fund comes in through this budget, which is essentially just taxes. The other 69 percent comes from state legislature. The formula used for how much money the state give districts is $4,200 multiplied by the number of students a district has, in our case, 28,000.

This law was originally enacted in 1992 so smaller districts who don’t have a lot of local income can sustain themselves. The problem now with the larger districts is that the 31 percent coming in locally is not enough. In the SMSD’s case, they need more money now, and if 31 percent was to raise to 40 percent, the district would have much more money coming in through taxes.

The district is currently trying to get this law changed and they are right in this stance for a number of reasons.

Currently in the district, a tax similar to the aforementioned is an absolute necessity. In the past decade, the district has steadily declined financially, losing state funded money each year. Last year, budgetary cuts were deemed necessary in many departments– certain elementary schools were combined or flat-out shut down, the CIS program was relocated to Shawnee Mission South and Driver’s Education Programs were eliminated.  And this year an additional $10.2 million is estimated to be cut from the budget according to the local budget meetings.

So, if the state can change the current law, a very minor tax could be an option in local elections that would go towards fixing the current budgetary woes in the district.

Some may make the argument that people will not be so quick to vote yes on something that will take money from their own pocket. But as the second largest school district in Kansas with 28,000 students and 4,100 employees, the SMSD’s problems are an obvious concern for a large demographic of people. Already a group has been formed called “Save the Shawnee Mission School District.” The group follows the district and even has their own Web site where you can learn about the current state of the district and offers steps on how you can help out.

Also, some people find this tax unfair because rural districts with less money would not be able to pull off such a levy. And while this is true, in some ways the SMSD is in more need of financial aid than rural districts.

One of the main reasons the SMSD is eligible for this tax in the first place is that their money per student rate is notably low — $8,890 according to the Kansas City Star. But in rural schools that number is substantially higher — Healy School District in Healy, Kansas has $19,943 available per student, West Solomon in Lenora, Kansas has $19,356 and Jewell in Randall, Kansas has $18,580.

All of these districts contain just a fraction of the students that the SMSD has and consequently, more money is open for each student. So right now, the SMSD needs these taxes more than that of rural districts.

So why not go for this additional tax? If our current funding system can be changed, a tax like this could only be beneficial to the district. If it is passed, it will bring in a substantially higher amount of money than now. And if it’s rejected, at least citizens had a say in the tax and were involved.

A key element to getting out of financial debt is involvement of the people. In continuing to move towards this tax, the SMSD is giving hope that they can get out of their problematic financial state.

In a recent 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court struck down laws governing spending on political advertising by corporations and unions. Prior to the ruling, the 2002 McCain-Feingold Act prevented TV and radio ads funded by those groups from appearing within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election. Corporations and unions can now spend unlimited amounts of money on political ads.

This decision is a mistake for several reasons. First, the Court’s decision violates Constitutional principles. Though the Court claims that the 1^st Amendment justifies their ruling, their decision actually reflects a basic flawing in their interpretation of it. Corporations have existed since the time of the Founding Fathers yet are not mentioned in the Constitution as having the same rights as people. Thomas Jefferson, in particular, was fearful of the influence of corporations and hoped to “crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations.”

Furthermore, unlike human rights, the rights of a corporation are not inalienable. A corporation must be granted a charter and rights by the state. Those rights are not and should not be tantamount to those of human citizens.

Another common defense is that the 14th Amendment gives corporations the same rights as people. In fact, the amendment was added to ensure that newly freed slaves gained full citizenship after the Civil War. Using it to defend corporate personhood is in a completely different spirit than amendment was written in. Simply put, corporations have no legal basis to claim the right of free speech.

Beyond Constitutional issues, the practical implications of the decision are also significant. Supporters of the decision claim that the decision restores free speech. In fact, it makes it harder for the average American to express their opinion.

Our nation is built on democracy and free speech protects that democracy by guaranteeing every person a voice. Creating an environment for free expression means allowing everyone to be heard, not just lifting spending limits. When corporations may spend freely, they drown out other voices. The days of the soapbox are gone, and free speech now almost requires some amount of money to be heard. TV and radio stations broadcast ads from the advertisers who pay the most.

In real terms, this means that the corporation will win out over the citizen or small group every time. The median household income in 2007 was roughly $50,000, according to the US Census Bureau. By contrast, Wal-Mart’s 2009 net income was $13.5 billion. Wal-Mart can drop $10,000 on a political ad without even noticing the missing money. The average American family cannot. This is not free speech but priveleged speech

Campaign finance rules don’t limit free speech — if the heads of corporations want to speak freely, they’re allowed to do so, with their own money or through a political action committee (PAC.) But, it’s unfair to use enormous corporate profits to speak for a non-political organization whose members may disagree with the message.

Finally, the ruling establishes a dangerous precedent by allowing corporations to be considered “persons.” This ruling overturns campaign finance reforms that have existed in some form for decades. Future courts could use this ruling as a springboard to grant corporations even more rights. One remote yet disturbing possibility is that the court could allow corporations to donate directly to candidates.

There is absolutely nothing in the GNHS handbook about community service.  Membership is based solely academic merit.  While individual chapters “may [my emphasis] set additional eligibility requirements,” no one is forced to do so.  I hasten to add that during the years when SNHS was involved with the Franklin Center, I did offer help from the GNHS and was told every time that the offer was appreciated and that SNHS would act upon it if necessary.  As it happens, our help was never necessary.  Moreover, my GNHS members are already asked to participate in volunteer undertakings for the IB Program, for NHS and for other in-school and out-of-school projects.  Our little organization is not numerous enough to make a big impact, but if asked to do anything in league with another, we would certainly make every effort.

It should also be noted that my colleague, Madame Losey, was quite right in her observation (p. 2 of your most recent issue) that some people come just to put something on their résumé.  She went on to say that she doubted the seriousness of their commitment, “and part of it is because they’re involved in way too many things.”

So before you accuse any faculty sponsors of failing “to do their job,” it would be wise to examine why the students feel the need to pad their résumés in the first place.  I have no objection to doing my part to help develop well-rounded students, but there first have to be students willing to commit to service and  then also a school environment that truly supports genuine service projects.  I do not doubt the seriousness and sincerity of some students in their willingness to serve, and some of them are serving in worthwhile projects.  But please remember as well that GNHS is not first and foremost a service organization; membership is based solely on academic merit, and I do believe that there is still a place in our society for that.