Opinion
The Battalion
Page 9B • Thursday, April 15, 2004
iplj":
A school district in peril
issing students who fail core classes to next grade does little to help them learn
on
fter last year’s
dropout rate
scandal and
subsequent retalia
tion against a whis
tle-blowing assistant
principal, it would
seem almost impossi-
iiATTHEW ble for the Houston
/iaddox Independent School
District to shock the
lie more with its self-serving disre-
for student interests. Almost. Just
week, the HISD school board
imously approved a policy change
would promote students to the
grade level even though they have
d core high school courses such as
English or math. This policy does
Nothing to help students and only ben-
;fit> administrators too lazy to
lirove the quality of children’s edu-
Jw?. The HISD school board needs
j|sson in hard work.
lie new HISD policy is simply a
n of “social promotion,” or a pro-
(i based on making students feel
d rather than based on merit. In the
e of “self-esteem,” these educators
willing to put unprepared students
lasses above their ability or must
nb-down upper-level courses so
; socially-promoted students can
eed.
ISO trustee Diane Johnson
ribed this pie-in-the-sky mentality
way: “1 view this policy ahead of
compassionate high standards.”
truth is, there is nothing compas-
ate about giving students a false
se of accomplishment by promot-
them instead of educating the stu-
1 correctly the first time.
1HISD officials said the reason for
MAIL CALL
the policy change is to prevent stu
dents from dropping out. As stated by
Kaye Stripling, HISD superintendent,
“A student sitting in the ninth grade at
age 17 is a kid who is going to say,
'Forget this; I’m dropping out.' And
Houston can't afford to lose its chil
dren that way.”
Stripling must have missed the part
of the policy that requires students to
pass the class before graduating, for a
student who fails basic English at age
17 cannot graduate anymore ranked as
a senior than as a freshman. Rather
than keeping hard-working students
from dropping out, the policy lets stu
dents know they don’t have to try the
first time around, because they can
always try taking the class later, at no
penalty. Besides, a 17-year-old student
who has yet to get serious about his
education should not be a ward of the
state and should be treated as the irre
sponsible adult that he is.
Another problem caused by this
social promotion is how it puts stu
dents who do not learn or who do not
want to learn in the same classroom as
students trying to get the most out of
their education. This punishes success
ful students by taking the classroom
focus off new course material, and
instead placing it on the remedial or
disciplinary needs of socially-promot
ed students. As long as this policy is in
place, administrators, and even par
ents, can pass the buck of failing kids
off on the teachers and students of the
next grade level.
Numerous school districts have
actually done the opposite of HISD
and have raised their standards and
efforts to educate students. “We've got
all sorts of interventions for kids who
are struggling, and have been able to
significantly lower our dropout rate,
improve our four-year completion rate,
without changing the policy on grade
promotions,” said Austin schools
spokesman Andy Welch. It is this hard
work and commitment to academic
integrity that is not only possible, but
necessary for school districts to cor
rectly educate students and use tax
payer dollars efficiently.
Rather than promoting uneducated
students to make them feel good,
administrators must ensure that they
are educated the first time. That kind
of earned success leads to real self
esteem.Teachers must also be paid
based on their performance, rather
than by tenure. Hard-working teachers
need to be rewarded for their effort.
Social promotion hurts the very
people its proponents claim to want to
help: the students. HISD should raise
the bar and lead by example. Hard
work and merit are the answers for
both wayward students and lazy
bureaucrats.
Matthew Maddox is a smior
management major.
Graphic by Grade Arenas
:Adams campaign ‘pulling an Al Gore’
lij response to Kyle Ross' April 13 news article:
dHsWtebvand 'won \he SBP election. He 'won because of who he
And what he stands for. He won because more people voted for
He did not win because of the stickers and wristbands sitting in
ix somewhere, unused. The unused campaign materials have no
jet on his campaign budget, because they were not used in his
paign.
Furthermore, did Will McAdams include the gas required to go buy
the candy that was attached to the flyer that I was handed at the bus
■) in his campaign budget? Did he pay the people helping him
attach that candy to the flyer? Isn't that "shipping and handling?”
this is beginning to look like another presidential election held
afewyears ago, and we all know how that turned out. Jack won, so
quit pulling an Al Gore and get over it!
Charly Boyd Stagg
Class of 2006
Leaving Iraq gives terrorists the victory
In response to Nicholas Davis’ April 14 column:
fhat part of "time of war" and "war-time president" do you not under
stand, Mr. Davis? Why do you and other cowardly liberals insist on criti-
ng our courageous and noble commander-in-chief as the forces of
((ness continue to knock at our door?
Resident Bush has done a great job handling the war effort, and thus
far has made few, if any, mistakes. By withdrawing our troops, as Mr.
[is believes we should, we would only be handing the terrorists a vic-
fon one of the central fronts in the war on terror. It is crucial for vic-
in this most epic, of battles that the Iraqis be liberated from the
clutches of terrorists and tyrants, and with Bush as our commander, this
will most certainly happen — even if we have to liberate all of Iraq's cities
iotothe ground!
I ask you, Mr. Davis, would you rather terrorists be blowing up
Americans in New York, or blowing up Iraqis in Baghdad? I think the
answer is obvious. We must stop complaining about the deaths of
our soldiers, as soldiers traditionally die in war time, and instead pro
vide unwavering support to our great Republican president as he
continues to let swing the sword of freedom. Any other option will
empower liberals and terrorists as they seek to destroy the
American way of life.
Kurt Branagan
Class of 1993
Kerry must decide between
his politics and Catholicism
His support of key issues contradicts Catholic dogma
W hat does it mean to be Catholic? The simplest
answer \s someone who accepts the teachings of
the Catholic church and has received the
Sacrament of Baptism and eventually Confirmation.
When a convert is received into the church, part of the
profession of faith is to state belief in all that the Catholic
church teaches.
So what happens to those who deny the teaching of the
church, especially those such as presidential-hopeful John
Kerry, who openly oppose and work against the church?
Over the past few weeks, this question has become the
subject of fierce controversy.
Because of Kerry’s views supporting abortion, embryonic
stem cell research and homosexuality, pro-life groups and
church leaders have confronted Kerry and asked him to not
receive Holy Communion.
Kerry, for the most part, has avoided the problem by attend
ing non-Catholic services or attending mass in locations where
he has not explicitly been forbidden
Communion. He cannot continue to avoid
the situation, though. To do so would
bring harm to the American people, his
church and his God.
According to Catholic.org, Kerry said,
“I will not overturn Roe v. Wade; I will not
appoint judges hostile to choice; I will
allow poor women to have free abortions; I
will never outlaw abortion; I will increase
American taxpayers’ dollars on population
control efforts around the world.”
Church law is clear. Kerry’s goal to
make abortions available, not only to
Americans, but to the whole world has
caused him to incur a common excom
munication. Canon law 1398 says, “A
person who procures a completed abor-
tion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” This applies
not only to the woman having the abortion, but to the abortion
ists, those who support abortion, and those who willingly make
it accessible.
Also, Canon 1331 §1 says, “An excommunicated person is for
bidden to receive the sacraments.” This includes Communion. The
logic is clear: If Kerry has been excommunicated and if an excom
municated person should not receive Communion, then Kerry
should not receive Communion. In a situation such as this, there is
no need for a bishop or priest to make a point of forbidding Kerry to
receive Communion; canon law already says that he is not able to.
However, only a handful of people are experts on canon law.
This is why church leaders should tell Kerry not to receive
Communion and why some have done so. In February, Archbishop
Raymond Burke of St. Louis warned Kerry that he would not serve
him Communion due to his obstinate defiance of church teaching.
The bishop was right in doing this; unfortunately, either out of
timidity or fear of backlash, other bishops have failed to make
similar statements.
Kerry, for the most part, has
avoided the problem by either
attending non-Catholic services
or attending mass in locations
where he has not explicitly been
forbidden Communion. He
cannot continue to avoid the
situation, though.
Referring back to the church’s law, Canon 915 says
“Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted
after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and oth
ers obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not
to be admitted to Holy Communion.” Even if Canon
1398 did not exist, Kerry should not receive or be given
Communion because church leaders such as Burke have
pointed out Kerry’s grave and public sin and he refuses
to repent.
Some people might wonder what harm Kerry actually
causes by receiving Communion.
First, there is the problem of creating scandal in the church. In
a March editorial for Catholic.org, Barbara Kralis wrote, “A per
fect example of giving scandal to the faithful is what took place
after Kerry's Mass. I was told that many parishioners remained
outside of Church and asked one another if abortion was still a sin,
or did the Church change her teachings on this murder.” Simply
put, Kerry is deceiving his fellow Catholics by leading them to
believe that the church’s stance on abor
tion has changed and that it is no longer
considered sinful.
Second, Kerry should have respect for
the church’s belief and policy even if he
does not agree with it. The church teaches
that when one receives Communion, he is
literally receiving the body and blood of
Jesus Christ. Thus, when one receives it
unworthily, that is nothing short of blas
phemy. If Kerry truly cares about his fel
low Catholics in the world, he must
respect their most cherished beliefs and
not receive communion.
Moral issues in the Catholic church are
equal to issues of faith. To deny that abor
tion is a sin is equal to denying the exis-
tence of God. Any known atheist would be
denied Communion. Why should Kerry be
different if his rejection of morals is equal to an atheist’s rejection
of faith?
Kerry has stated that he wishes to keep his religion out of his
public life. Father Frank Pavone, director of Priests for Life, told
LifeNews.com that “If referring to his ‘public life,’ Kerry means
‘supporting the dismemberment of babies, then not only is he sep
arating his public life from religion, but also from basic human
decency.’” Since one’s religious beliefs are essentially one’s phi
losophy on life, it does not make sense to separate personal reli
gious beliefs from one’s political beliefs.
Kerry must now make a decision and make it public: either he
renounces his support of abortion, embryonic stem cell research
and anything else that contradicts his faith, or he respects his
church and the faithful believers and stops receiving communion.
Cody Sain is a junior
philosophy major.