Perhaps one day I’ll write my own version of this article. Tom Good, Ted Kantorowski, Dave Fundis and another Mr. Tabor populate a very short list of Cooperstown teachers of my era who possessed uncommon teaching ability. Cooperstown Central School has a laughable “Greatness by 2010″ plan – lipservice to improvement, really – as they move further away from these masters of development.

But enough of that – here’s Bob Lettis’ take on the great Cooperstown educators of his day, courtesy of The Freeman’s Journal.

Apologies for the wonky formatting, it’s part of the e-original.

BOB LETTIS’ TALES OF COOPERSTOWN: INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE

Red Bursey Never Mentioned That Cigaret

By BOB LETTIS

Cooperstown was a wonderful village for a boy to grow up in. Being somewhat handicapped, the village was especially protective of me. It was a great place for all its children, but I seemed to get more attention than most.
Many special people guided me as I grew up. I cannot mention all those that were helpful, but I will try to pick out those that I felt were the most important and influential. All, I think, are dead now, but regardless of their circumstances, all will have a special place in my heart reserved for exceptional friends.
Lester Bursey was my gym teacher, coach and friend. He made sure that my polio affliction never stood in the way of an opportunity to participate in games and sports. From the time I went to the summer playground as a young child until I graduated from high school, having played varsity sports in football and baseball, Lester “Red” Bursey was my mentor.
When I was a 120- pound sophomore, trying to make the varsity football team, he wrote
in the local paper: “Bob Lettis can lick his weight in wildcats.”
I made the varsity that season, and Red encouraged me all the way. I was his varsity catcher on the baseball team, batting fourth in the batting order, which is the spot for the best hitter on the team. His advice and inspiration allowed me the chance to play sports at a very high level. Without his confidence in me, I might never have been given the chance to even try out, let alone play, baseball (and certainly not football).
As wonderful as he was to me, I’m afraid I let him down very badly.
He was always encouraging his athletes to maintain a healthy life style while participating in high school sports. When I was 16, I started smoking. I felt, as most smart-ass teenagers do, that I could smoke and play sports without any adverse effects.
One day I passed him on the street with a cigarette in my hand. He never said a word, either then or later, but I knew that he saw what I had done.
I’m very ashamed of that violation of his trust. I now know that it made a difference. Perhaps not physically, but psychologically it made me ashamed of having let down such a dedicated and warm human being. He had given me the opportunity to become a good athlete, despite my handicap, and I felt that I had been a disappointment.
•
While Red was very influential helping me with sports, there were others who had an intereste in my artistic development. I had several wonderful art teachers when I was growing up.
At an early age in elementary school I had Miss Bea Prine. Alongside several other talented students, she saw potential. She proceeded to nourish this talent by giving us special attention and encouragement. Our work was always well displayed and we were continually talked to about going on to art school to develop our skills and talent.
When Miss Prine retired, she was replaced by a beautiful young woman, Marcia Matoon. Miss Matoon had graduated from Syracuse University, where I eventually obtained my undergraduate art training. She continued the encouragement begun by Miss Prine years before. She entered my work in national poster contests, in scholastic art competitions and I won several awards.
She wrote a letter of recommendation that went into my school records, and, when I attended Syracuse University, it became part of my entrance credentials. After graduation from high school, I went into the army and Miss Matoon wrote to me several times while I was in training and serving overseas.
However, the most influential art teacher that I had was Helga Edge. I not only learned a great deal from this wonderful, dedicated woman and professional artist, but was also encouraged by her to pursue art as my life’s work. She was British, though had come to the United States just prior to our country entering World War II and stayed here for the rest of her life.
I took private art lessons from her for several years, paid for by my patron, Grandma Hail. After high school and my stint in the army, I attended Syracuse University because Miss Edge thought that it was the best art college in our area. After graduation, she was instrumental in my getting my first teaching position, at Worcester Central School.
During my years as an art teacher in Worcester and Cooperstown, I maintained close contact with her. We worked together in her studio in Toddsville and my son, Daniel, took art lessons from her at that time. Upon her death in 1980, she willed her entire professional art library and her small etching press to me.
•
During the years I attended elementary and high school, many teachers took a special interest in my life. I’ve already mentioned Miss Prine and Miss Matoon. Mabel Wagner, a drama and English teacher was also one of them. She came to our village as a beautiful young woman who immediately gained the attention of all the single men in the community. We as high school boys thought she was pretty terrific as well.
At that time, I had a slight speech impediment that she helped by giving me lessons in oration and allowing me to compete in several speaking contests. She cast me in several plays and encouraged me to enter an essay and speaking contest. Miss Wagner was the kind of a teacher that every one of her students could fall in love with.
Alas, Robert Atwell, a young and upcoming civic leader, won her hand and her heart, for they were married a few years after she came to our village. They had two beautiful children, Bobby and Neil, both of whom were students of mine when I came to teach here.
Nick Sterling, another teacher, was a special person in my life. He became principal and superintendent of our high school when I was a sophomore. While I never took a class from him, he always treated me with kindness and respect. I was on the ski team at the time and Mr. Sterling became our coach.
When I was teaching art in Worcester and Schenevus, I chaperoned a group of students to a basketball game in Cooperstown. I met Nick again for the first time since I was in the service. He had become superintendent of Cooperstown’s schools by then. After asking me how my teaching was going in Worcester, he said that he was looking for a high school art teacher and asked if i might be interested.
After talking it over at home, I decided to accept his offer. And so for the next eight years I taught at my old alma mater. Besides teaching, I coached junior high baseball, was adviser to the Student Council, taught ski lessons at Mount Otsego and collaborated with Bob Squires, another teacher, on high school theatre productions. I did sets, lighting and costumes while Bob directed and took care of the drama end.
As well as working on high school theatrics, Bob and I were instrumental in starting a community theatre group called “The Back Stagers.’’ Both in high school and the community we managed, in just six or seven years, to stage many productions ranging from musical theatre to Shakespeare. (Nick Sterling gave us a free hand to do all these things.)
I need to say at this point, Nick Sterllng was the finest educator and energetic community leader that Cooperstown has ever had.
•
I’ve mentioned these people because they stand out in my mind. There were others, as well, who were not quite as central, but nevertheless played a role in my life within this village.
To name a few: Greeny (I do not know his real name), Smith Tolmie, Harold Wall, Bob Wright, Jake Schaffer, Ellamae Hanson, Mrs. Denton Stillwell, Angelo Pugalese, etc. Not all were teachers. All helped me through my difficult years as a polio kid. After my mother and father separated, all acted as friends and mentors.
The cliché, “It takes a village to raise a child,” was certainly true in my case, at least.

I’m not a secretive voter, either. I don’t mind telling anyone how I vote or why I do it.

As a resident of Otsego County, I’ve got 3 local races to vote on tomorrow:

• Otsego County Judge, Jill Ghaleb [D] vs. John Lambert [R]
• 111th NY Assembly District, William Magee [D], unopposed
• 51st NY Senate District, Jim Seward [R] vs. Don Barber [D]

Otsego County Judge, Jill Ghaleb [D] vs. John Lambert [R]

Mr. Lambert turned in an impressive performance last Monday at SUNY Oneonta. Though the Otsego County Judge handles mostly Family Court cases – about 70% are family cases, I think [***please read the addendum below] – a deep knowledge of Surrogate’s and Criminal Courts is necessary. Lambert’s experience as Asst. District Attorney has prepared him will for the job. While Ms. Ghaleb’s familiarity with the Family Court is admirable, it isn’t enough to warrant a 10-year term as Otsego County Judge.

Ghaleb’s speech at the SUNY Oneonta event was weak. I want a clear, confident, knowledgeable judge on the County bench. Mr. Lambert talked to us like a judge. Ms. Ghaleb talked to us like a kindergarten teacher.

My vote for Otsego County Judge is for John Lambert.

*** Mr. Lambert’s campaign sent a brief explanation of the 70% Family Court figure. I could have been more clear, but what’s above does imply that the majority of cases heard by the Judge are Family Court cases. I referred to the number of cases, not the Court’s commitment to those cases.

In short, it stands to reason that several custody hearings are easier than a single murder trial. They explain it this way:

“In your blurb about John, I couldn’t help but see that you mention that Family Court is 70% of the job.  Unfortunately, this statistic is misleading.  Ms. Ghaleb wants us to believe the job is 70% family court, but it’s just not true.  For example, in county court during a given week there may be 5 family court matters.  One a day for the week.  In that same week there could be one trial in criminal court.  That one trial could take the entire week (usually longer).  There are also several steps to a criminal trial that need to take place outside of the court room as well.

So, as far as Ms. Ghaleb’s statistics are concerned,  the above scenario would count as 5 family court cases and 1 criminal court case – While the number of family court cases may show a number at or around 70%, the time it takes to run a single criminal trial is actually much longer.

If Ms. Ghaleb’s numbers were true then Otsego County would probably have its own Family Court Judge like many other surrounding counties.  Also, if the criminal court aspect was less than 15-20%, then Otsego County would not need a full time district attorney and 4 assistants to handle the case load.”

I’d contend that the numbers are true, just that Ms. Ghaleb hasn’t been clear about the meaning of those numbers. I’ve found her commitment to statistics favorable to her to be disingenuous.

111th NY Assembly District, William Magee [D], unopposed

Though William Magee is running unopposed, I will not vote for him.

I don’t know Assemblyman Magee personally, but he seems like a delightful guy. Unfortunately, Magee could be the posterboy for the philosophy that has turned Central New York into a stale, atrophying wreck.

Check Magee’s questionnaire for the Observer-Dispatch – including his answer of “Yes.” to whether the state Legislature could reduce property tax burdens.

Magee is all over the board philosophically with little for substantial plans. Property tax cuts, yes – school funding from the state? Yes as well, though that tax money has to come from somewhere Magee hasn’t disclosed. He’d like to stop the ‘brain-drain’ but thinks that making New York a “mecca of green” and pushing an ad campaign for hiking and biking will do the trick.

Bill Magee, your platform could be held responsible for 111th District New Yorkers under the age of 35 being damned miserable. I don’t care that you’re unopposed – I won’t give you a vote. It might not be your fault personally, but what you stand for is a problem.

And if I’d known sooner that the Republicans didn’t have a candidate to run against you, I would’ve run against you myself. I thank Assemblyman Magee for his many years of service, but I’d like to see him move along in 2010.

My vote for the 111th NY Assembly District is for no one, despite William Magee running unopposed.

51st NY Senate District, Jim Seward [R] vs. Don Barber [D]

I attended the 90 minute Seward/Barber debate in Oneonta last Monday. It was a clear victory for Jim Seward, who is one of the finest, most benevolent politicians in New York State. I think if Seward moved to Park Slope, even those folks would drop their arugula and pick up an “Another Family for Seward” sign.

Don Barber comes off as a sneaky, dishonest leftist – not to be confused with a liberal. As I wrote about Barber’s school funding ideas, he’s comfortable with a bait’n'switch on taxes and state healthcare.

I like openness and honesty, and it’s why Barber received the lowest grade [D+] of any profiled candidates who submitted an answer.

I sincerely believe what Barber says about wanting universal healthcare for New Yorkers, and in a way, this race will gauge the 51st District’s interest in and support for that issue. Barber does not, however, address the issue honestly in terms of how the fiscal ramifications will impact New Yorkers.

Seward has exercised excellent judgment during his tenure and has balanced well the interests of our District’s businesses and citizens. Seward is responsible, responsive and has progressive ideas for how to keep Central New York’s talented younger generation in New York – like tax credits to forgive student loans over a 10-year period for those who take up residence. I can’t imagine where Central New York would be right now if it wasn’t for the work of Seward and friends.

In this case, I want more of the same – not a shifty leftist bent on bankrupting our businesses to fulfill the agenda of the Democratic party’s social engineers.

My vote for the 51st NY Senate District is for Jim Seward.

I’m not a secretive voter, either. I don’t mind telling anyone how I vote or why I do it.

There are two races on which I’ll vote tomorrow that have national significance:

• House of Representativess, 24th District, Michael Arcuri [D] vs. Richard Hanna [R]
• President of the United States, John McCain [R] vs. Barack Obama [D]

House of Representatives, 24th District, Michael Arcuri [D] vs. Richard Hanna [R]

Richard Hanna is a breath of fresh air in Central New York. He’s a businessman, not a career politician. If he’s not silver-tongued like his opponent, it’s to his credit. I’ll take a genuine guy over a weasel of a politician any day.

Michael Arcuri is a shill for his party – he’s a Blue Dog on paper only. As late as September, over 80% of his campaign contributions had come from outside our district. Arcuri serves his party nationwide and in Washington more than he serves the 24th Congressional District. They might love him for it. I don’t.

Richard Hanna didn’t have $5,000/plate breakfasts held hundreds of miles from his district. If he’s a shill, it’s for people in Upstate New York – and that’s exactly the type of shill I want.

Their stances on the large, looming national issues are fairly predictable given their respective parties. They did differ a great deal on education funding, as I wrote last week, and on their understanding of public education. Hanna not only gets how we deliver, monitor and improve public education, but he understands how it relates to that ‘brain-drain’ we’ve got in Upstate NY.

After two years of Michael Arcuri’s impotent representation, Richard Hanna is a welcome alternative.

My vote for the 24th Congressional District of New York is for Richard Hanna.

President of the United States, John McCain [R] vs. Barack Obama [D]

I’m a simple guy. The government’s got two main functions: to keep me safe and to stay out of my way. Senator John McCain will be better than his opponent at both.

My vote for the President of the United States is for John McCain.

The New York 24th District of the United States House of Representatives covers parts or all of 11 counties in Central New York State. Incumbent Michael Arcuri [D] is being challenged by Richard Hanna [R].

The O-D asked candidates in some state and federal races about their proposals for education funding. Here are their answers:

Michael Arcuri, D-Utica

Education funding is a state issue, but if the federal government wants to regulate it, it cannot keep passing down unfunded mandates to states and localities.

Although the No Child Left Behind program has a role in creating standards to help students, it is woefully underfunded, which hurts local schools. No Child Left Behind takes away educators’ incentive for creativity and development of new methodologies for teaching children, and assumes that all children learn at the same pace.

NCLB’s cookie-cutter approach is also detrimental to school districts like Utica where many languages are spoken. I hope to see legislation reforming the No Child Left Behind program to encourage teacher creativity, so innovative programs created here in Utica can be shared with Auburn and Binghamton, and students aren’t just taught to the test.

I also believe the federal government must finally step up to the plate and fund programs like NCLB and IDEA sufficiently.

Grade: C-. Congressman Arcuri knows so little about education at both the local and federal levels that he repeats meaningless criticism and offers no plan for future development. Arcuri’s answer says little and means even less. His ignorance of education and education funding – both important issues to saving what’s left of a Central New York economy suffering from rapid atrophy – is apparent. That, and it expresses a near-total misunderstanding of No Child Left Behind.

On a positive note, Arcuri’s particular strain of ignorance is cheaper than most.

News to Rep. Arcuri: Education funding has been a federal issue since President Lyndon Johnson’s Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 [which he followed with the Higher Education Act in the same year]. A not insignificant number of schools in the 24th District – the district in which Arcuri has lived for years and has represented in Congress for two – rely on the Title 1 funds from that 43-year old legislation. To say education funding is wholly a “state issue” is disingenuous. As every taxpayer, politician and bake-saler knows, we fund our schools from the top down and the bottom up.

Arcuri’s line about No Child Left Behind taking away a teacher’s “incentive for creativity and development of new methodologies for teaching children” will tickle the unions’ fancies and play well with compassionate voters. Unfortunately, his criticism is baseless and misleading. Had he examples of how average teachers developed “new methodologies” for teaching children before NCLB, he might have an interesting point. But the evidence of 20 years of stagnant, unimpressive performance in Central New York schools renders Arcuri’s objections moot.

The truth is that Central New York’s teachers are not innovative researchers held down by NCLB. Blaming NCLB for our uninspiring performance is scapegoating; reducing the legislation to a barrage of tests to which teachers must submit ignores both the purpose of the Act and the failure of teachers/administrators to implement it properly. That some teachers “teach to the test” is the fault of district leaders and administrators, not No Child Left Behind.

Arcuri’s argument about NCLB being underfunded is sound, and his point about urban, multi-lingual districts resonates. But instead of parroting victimization and offering no plan for how to rectify NCLB’s shortcomings, a responsible Congressman should encourage districts to meet legislation halfway as they lobby for better funding that could lead to the successful implementation of education reforms.

We’d like our schools to be efficient, productive and cost-effective in Central New York. If we are to see those results, both sides have to accept responsibility – and our Congressman needs to facilitate that shared effort. Until then, we will continue to lose our most talented graduates and the jobs that come with our most promising businesses.

Central New York suffers from an economic wasting disease. Congressman Arcuri’s thoughts on education funding offer hollow moans and no solutions.

Richard Hanna, Republican

Current educational policy pits the property owner against the educational system. If we are to compete in the new global economy, it will be through the value- added nature of education.

We need a less adversarial way to pay for our public schools. New York state’s universities produce some of the finest students in the world – we must stop the brain drain.

Rebuilding our economy will help offer opportunities for these people to build their lives here. Tough economic times call for hard decisions, but education funding should be the last thing we cut. We must, however, spend our money more wisely and understand that more money does not necessarily mean a better education or produce better outcomes.

Many improvements could be made to the No Child Left Behind Act. It has not produced the outcomes it was expected to. Testing and accountability issues must be addressed.

Grade: A-. Hanna’s answer is short on specifics, but he’s got his eye on the right issues.

Property taxes weighed on Central New Yorkers even before the economy and fuel prices caused their own strains. Hostility between taxpayers and schools is building and Central New York can’t afford the tension.

Education is Central New York’s best bet for attracting employers and encouraging our brightest to stay in the area – or, as Hanna put it, to “stop the brain drain.” Cutting education funding straightaway should be our last resort. We will only begin to address our place in the global economy if we align our schools with successful education reform efforts and the needs of the economy while funding those efforts adequately.

Spending money “wisely” and looking at the results, including using “value-added” measures, will alleviate  tension between taxpayers and public schools while strengthening our local economy. We can’t just throw money at the problem – thankfully, both Hanna and Arcuri seem to agree there.

Hearing that Hanna seeks “improvements” to NCLB is welcome. The Act is flawed, especially with its implementation and support – its outcomes are, as Hanna states, different than what we expected. Testing, accountability, funding and implementation are critical issues for reforming and reauthorizing NCLB.

I wish that Hanna had mentioned explicitly that most important issue to education reform – teacher quality, and specifically, how we might improve teacher quality, hiring and retention in Central New York. Then again, I wish that any candidate in Central New York had spoken about teacher quality.

On the question of education funding, the advantage goes to Richard Hanna.

The 51st District of the New York State Senate covers Otsego, Tompkins, Cortland, Chenango, Herkimer, Schoharie and Greene Counties. Incumbent James Seward {R] is being challenged by Don Barber [D].

The O-D asked candidates in some state and federal races about their proposals for education funding. Here are their answers:

James Seward, R-Milford

As the state works toward a more sound fiscal plan, there are several items that need to be considered, and no doubt education funding will come under the microscope. We must avoid, however, cost shifts and new pressure on property taxes. People are already struggling to pay their school tax bills. Many area school districts are under pressure to keep up with education mandates, particularly rural, low-wealth districts in our area. I have already fought for pension cost relief, and energy savings for schools. I am also calling for an end to unfunded mandates, and encouraging school consolidation and superintendent sharing where it makes sense.

We need to continue to improve accountability in our schools, and also make sure students are getting every advantage possible to keep up with our ever changing world.

Grade: A-. Seward’s concise answer nails several key issues and how he will deal with them. Controlling property taxes while maintaining the effectiveness of current education funding resonates with many in his District. The real specifics of school budgets – pensions and energy are two elements spiraling out of control – must be addressed. Though an end to unfunded mandates may be the pipe dream of all candidates, consolidation, sharing resources and an eye on the future make up for it.

Don Barber, Democrat

We must continue to shift funding for education from the property tax and fund it through the state. Funding would be based on a fairer state tax system, including a millionaire’s tax that would only affect the top 1 percent of earners. The state must take over the 97 underfunded mandates that don’t affect the student-teacher relationship.

Finally, we need publicly funded, privately delivered, quality, universal health care. Currently, the school budget is driven by the exorbitant cost of private health care to such an extent that the benefits para-professionals receive exceed their entire salaries.

Most school professionals receive this expensive health care benefit in retirement. If we remove employer responsibility for providing health insurance, we can finance universal health care through a payroll tax similar to Medicare’s. School budgets would decrease by a huge margin under this plan.

Grade: D+. There’s no denying that Barber is a thinker. The problem is his uncommon mixture of good-faith lack of clarity and deliberate smoke and mirrors.

Barber’s idea to “shift funding… from the property tax” to the state conveniently forgets from whom state funds are derived: taxpayers. Barber cites a “fairer state tax system” which is unclear aside from it being an income tax on the very top earners [to an extent unexplained]. And when Barber figures out mandates as they relate to the mysterious “student-teacher relationship,” I’ll be glad to talk over how to deal with those expenditures. Until then, it’s rhetoric that will get coos from the teachers’ unions and a blank stare from me.

Barber’s proposition on health care is unique among Central NY candidates’ education funding solutions. Unfortunately, it’s dishonest.

He is right that school budgets, and therefore school funding, will go down if NY adopts a system of universal healthcare. Healthcare costs, including what is drawn by pensioners, simply won’t be a part of the school budget.

And again, Barber fails to point out that the tax money has to come from somewhere. When “the state” absorbs or creates a new program, the state bills us through taxes.

Barber’s agenda is clear: universal health care and more taxes on the wealthy. That’s fine for a campaign platform, but it doesn’t address education funding – and we should raise an eyebrow at the bait-and-switch.

On the question of education funding, the advantage goes to James Seward.

You know that old saw? That one about ‘those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it?’ [Hint: It was a chart-topper for George Santayana in 1904 or so.]

Not everyone does.

Remembering history has other benefits, too – when you recall the past, you avoid hyperbole that makes you look like a fool.

The issue at hand is the LPGA Tour’s new requirement that all athletes be proficient English-speakers. Not an unreasonable request, but the LPGA’s mandate could have been formatted, communicated and implement better.

But that’s neither here nor there – this is an education site, so we’ll focus on history.

Roy S. Johnson calls it the “Dumbest Rule Ever.”

Dear Roy,

Dumbest rule ever? Really? Dumber than mandating that all players be white? If I had some cash to waste, I’d invite you to speak to a few of the surviving Negro League players who visit the Hall of Fame here in Cooperstown – provided that you explained to them how requiring players to learn English is truly the dumbest rule ever.

As far as indignities in professional sport go, this one isn’t in the top 10. Get thee some historical perspective post haste, Roy. And if your editor, and not you, wrote the title, give him/her hell for it.

Linda Lowen, who writes the About.com Guide to Women’s Issues, calls it “Racism, Nationalism, Sexism.” The case for racism is misguided, but one has to understand that she argues it because of the high number of Korean-speaking golfers on the LPGA Tour, who represent the bulk of those affected by the ruling. Requiring those who grew up in Korea and who don’t know English fluently to become proficient with the language is different than racism.

Nationalism? Well, the LPGA just wants its athletes to communicate with the English-speaking, English-driven American market. I can understand that request. It has nothing to do with the United States and everything to do with the LPGA’s economic sustainability. That’s different than nationalism.

Sexism? Oddly enough, she doesn’t mention sex in the article – she just quotes an unhinged, illogical Bob Ford [not the one who shot Jesse James] who sees this as a slippery slope:

“Will there be a required physique for the tour? Will there be a sexual-orientation requirement to appease those lusty sponsors? Why not? You get the impression the LPGA would dress them all like Olympic beach volleyball players and have them drive the beer wagons during the pro-ams if possible….

An organization dedicated to women that perpetuates the stereotype that how a woman talks and how she looks is more important than what she accomplishes has lost its bearings.”

Relax, Chicken Little. I’ll let you fire a few neurons and figure out why this language requirement isn’t sexism. Even Ford’s characterization of golfers as cigar-smoking old boys has historical counters, like the PGA’s reception to Babe Didrikson-Zaharias – the other The Babe – all the way back in the 1940s.

The LPGA pretty much wants to make sure the athletes can do things like… conduct interviews easily. If you want to make a solid argument over this issue, argue that the LPGA was irresponsible by mandating before it had implemented a voluntary, well-supported effort to give its athletes the resources they needed to learn English. That’s a fair, reasonable argument. Freakouts about racism, nationalism and sexism are not.

Sportswriters are notoriously awful at two things: statistics and history outside the sports they cover. They’re probably hopeless with the former, but they could at least pretend to work on the latter.

The title of this post is what it really boils down to – but there’s more to the story than apathy.

In “How Our Culture Keeps Students Out of Science,” Peter Wood argues that our dependence on foreign STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering, Math] students, including Bill Gates’ 2008 call for the extension of H-1B visas to these graduates, shows how poorly the United States develops its own STEMmies. Actually, we don’t develop too many – we just cross our fingers and hope that kids have their priorities straight and the resources they need:

“Success in the sciences unquestionably takes a lot of hard work, sustained over many years. Students usually have to catch the science bug in grade school and stick with it to develop the competencies in math and the mastery of complex theories they need to progress up the ladder. Those who succeed at the level where they can eventually pursue graduate degrees must have not only abundant intellectual talent but also a powerful interest in sticking to a long course of cumulative study. [...]

“It [contemporary American education] begins by treating children as psychologically fragile beings who will fail to learn — and worse, fail to develop as “whole persons” — if not constantly praised. The self-esteem movement may have its merits, but preparing students for arduous intellectual ascents aren’t among them. What the movement most commonly yields is a surfeit of college freshmen who “feel good” about themselves for no discernible reason and who grossly overrate their meager attainments.”

That isn’t terribly conducive to the study of science, math and its brethren. If you needed one line to sum up Wood’s argument, here it is:

“The intellectual lassitude we breed in students, their unearned and inflated self-confidence, undercuts both the self-discipline and the intellectual modesty that is needed for the apprentice years in the sciences.”

At PhiBetaCons, Mr. Leef beat me to a point Wood didn’t make:

“I think that a significant part of this problem is that to do science you need to be good at math. Sadly, as this recent NCTQ study found, math is often poorly taught in elementary schools because many of the teachers are weak in math themselves and ill-prepared to teach it.”

Not only are they ill-prepared to teach it, they don’t know it in the first place.

Elementary school teachers have a tenuous grasp of the most basic mathematics – and that isn’t an understatement.

Our elementary teachers score about 521 [out of 800] on the Quantitative section of the GRE, a subset of the test that examines algebra, geometry and basic statistical reasoning skills. A score of 520 is not only well below the national mean of 584; it’s around the 31st percentile of all test-takers. In other words, 7 out of 10 test-takers with undergraduate degrees score better on a basic math skills test than elementary teachers en route to graduate school [pages 13 and 18, available for download, 4.1mb Adobe PDF].

Our high school teachers fare little better. They pull in at 576 – about the 42nd percentile of all test-takers.

And these aren’t just statistics, they’re personified in communities everywhere. When I was in high school, I chose not to take AP Calculus because the teacher was such a useless dolt – he just plain didn’t know math [he still teaches at my alma mater, so if he's reading this, Hi!]. I waited and took calculus with the engineering students in my first semester of college.

K-12 teachers don’t know much about even the most foundational mathematics. That our schools don’t cultivate students interested in STEM careers shouldn’t surprise anyone.

Well, I’m glad we got the FOIL request cleared up. Mr. Jacob of the NYC DoE sent along the data in question about 24 hours after receiving my FOIL e-mail:

Hi Matthew,
Attached are the scale scores by race and ethnicity that you requested.
Andy

Andrew Jacob
Office of Communications and Media Relations
NYC Department of Education
52 Chambers St. | New York, NY 10007
212-374-7840 | AJacob@schools.nyc.gov

Thanks again, Mr. Jacob – and to interested parties, that data is available for download. [And yes, as I type this, I'm wearing my new cape - it's dashing!] Eduwonkette has done some analysis already, too.

Mr. Cantor is a busy guy. So busy, in fact, that he wasn’t able to e-mail me himself or acknowledge the receipt of my FOIL request. Hours after my request – rather than fulfilling that request so the data could be made available, which consisted of hitting ‘reply’ and attaching a 30kb Excel spreadsheet – at 9.49pm he wrote on Eduwonkette’s site:

Hey, Eduwonkette, this is weird and untrue. You know we’ve been giving this out, yet you write:”Sadly, this is what it’s come to in New York City – the Department of Education is denying all of us access to data that rightfully belong in the public domain.”

The data does belong in the public domain, and we haven’t denied anyone access, including you. I find it distasteful that you sell your anonymity as martyrdom.

David Cantor
Press Secretary
NYC Dept of Education

Mr. Cantor, you denied Eduwonkette access and specifically cited her anonymity as justification. Please – less Truth Squad, more truth.

Since you’re so busy, I decided to write a letter of apology for you – all you’ve got to do is sign it.

Dear New Yorkers,

This last Sunday I denied a public information request inappropriately. When one is overcome with a bitter, “them vs. us” attitude on top of a penchant for political game-playing and a disinterest in public communication, surely you understand how these things happen. If not for that charming, good-looking scamp at Education for the Aughts, I’d have never seen the error of my ways.

Thanks to Mr. Tabor’s link to the state-funded Committee on Open Government website, I’ve learned a lot about New York State’s Freedom of Information Laws since Monday’s embarrassment. For example, I initially denied Eduwonkette’s request because she was an anonymous blogger. Now I realize that FOIL statutes are in place for the benefit of the public and its independent media. It hadn’t occurred to me that Eduwonkette, though anonymous, was clearly a representative of the media outlet Education Week, which is justification enough to honor her request. Though providing one’s identity makes the Department of Education feel better about fulfilling information requests in a timely fashion, that information just isn’t necessary for us to follow the law.

I understand as well as anybody – perhaps better than anybody – that New York’s FOIL statutes are laws without teeth. Hell, I can stonewall even the most earnest, legitimate request for 20 or 30 business days, and then giggle with sinister glee when their §89(4)(a) Appeal crosses my desk – all while being in full compliance with the Law! Don’t tell the Committee on Open Government, but here at the NYC Department of Education, FOIL stands for “Freedom of Information? LOLLLLL!”

But I have to warn you, New Yorkers: don’t get too comfortable with this little victory. Unless principled, independent/public media keep on us, we’ll stiff-arm you peons until the cows come home [You "folks" say that upstate, right? I've never been north of Westchester, so just checking].

So, in a word: Sorry. I blew it. I played the gatekeeping game instead of doing my job, and it won’t happen again [unless, of course, New Yorkers let me!].

I do have to thank those of you who were on my case, especially those who pointed out my skill with gameplaying. I’ve been wasting so much time on playing the blog comment game instead of doing my job that I realized I should probably switch careers anyway. I read in the NY Post that Jorge Posada is out for the season – so professional baseball, here I come! See, if I’m a baseball player, I can strike out 70% of the time and New Yorkers still might love me [and if I'm really good at my job, I'll end up meeting Mr. Tabor in Cooperstown!].

Humbly Yours,

[awaiting signature]

UPDATE at 10.20pm, July 30:

Sorry, DC – looks like the Yanks have already crushed your dream.

Dear Mr. Cantor,

Please consider this a formal FOIL request for scale scores by race/ethnicity referenced in the following document:

http://www.eduwonk.com/2008/07/from-chris-cerf.html

Hard copies are not necessary; electronic copies of the scores for 2003-2008 will suffice. You can e-mail those to mktabor@gmail.com. In your comment to Mr. Stern, you suggested that the data were freely available; you should, then, have no trouble fulfilling my request with all deliberate speed – and certainly within the five business day limit stated in our State’s FOIL statute. If the requested records cannot be emailed to me due to their volume, please indicate the actual cost of copying all records onto media convenient for your Office.

I understand the concern you expressed to Eduwonkette, the inimitable – if anonymous – education blogger, regarding the data’s availability. After all, we can’t be sure that Ms. Eduwonkette is an American citizen [and thus a member of the "public"], let alone a New York State resident. You said:

“I’ve thought about it and decided i don’t want to give out information to someone asking anonymously.”

You need not worry about my identity or my citizenship.

And whereas I appreciate such earnest gatekeeping, undoubtedly in the interests of our State’s security and well-being [such data in the hands of our enemies from within or without, or on the desktop of one whose GRE scores have 500 or 600 points on the mean score of your teachers, might yield unpalatable, unpredictable conclusions], I am reminded of a passage in that FOIL statute:

“The legislature therefore declares that government is the public’s business and that the public, individually and collectively and represented by a free press, should have access to the records of government in accordance with the provisions of this article.”

Though your office may keep the gate, you don’t make the rules. Fear not: New York City’s Department of Education would do well to remember that the next time a blogger, or any member of that ‘free press,’ makes a request for information, you can grant that request with less hand-wringing and heartburn. There was no legitimate reason to deny Eduwonkette’s request; there are no reasons – legitimate or otherwise – to deny mine.

I do apologize that this request was made on a public website rather than via e-mail; as it is in the wee hours of Monday, I felt that it was inappropriate to call you, and your e-mail address was not at the ready [My Rolodex is less fertile than Mr. Stern's or Eduwonkette's]. A Google search of “david cantor NYC department of education” yields little of value, and your listings on the DoE website provide nothing in the way of electronic communication. A curious decision, but understandable when one considers that penchant for gatekeeping.

Many thanks to your and your Office in advance. If you need any additional information – though you shouldn’t, as referring to these data as “them” in the discussion on Mr. Rotherham’s website shows that we’re both entirely clear on the data in question – feel free to contact me at the phone number or e-mail address below.

Sincerely,

Matthew K. Tabor
e: mktabor@gmail.com
w: www.matthewktabor.com
p: 607.821.1752
Cooperstown, New York

UPDATE at 4.24pm, July 28:

For any interested parties, Mr. Cantor’s e-mail address is DCantor@schools.nyc.gov – God knows you won’t find it easily on the DoE website. Now that this post is the first entry for a relevant Google search, no one should have any trouble locating the e-mail address they need.

UPDATE at 10.07pm, July 29:

Mr. Andrew Jacob, to whom the above e-mail was copied, sent along the requested data this afternoon. It is available for download here:

http://matthewktabor.com/downloads/scale_scores_by_ethn_2.xls

This isn’t really my fight, but one thing I don’t stand for is intellectual irresponsibility.

The issue at hand is part history, part scholarship, part old-fashioned common sense. It’s about Dewey, movements, petty partisan politics and modern education theory.

And K. Carey is still out of his element. He responded: