To protect teachers' rights and public interest, introduce binding arbitration

No matter which side you believe is right in the labor dispute between Kent's teachers and their district's management, we can all agree teachers should receive fair contracts and a teachers strike is never in the public interest. So when negotiations reach an impasse, how can they be resolved without teachers applying the pressure of a strike?

The answer is simple: Give both sides the right to request binding arbitration when contract negotiations on a particular issue have stalled.

State law does not guarantee or prohibit a right to strike for teachers, but state courts have always granted injunctions against teachers that choose to strike because of the "irreparable harm" a long strike would potentially cause.

State law specifically bars police and firemen from striking, but the law gives them the right to binding arbitration when they hit an impasse in bargaining to preserve some semblance of a level playing field during bargaining. If teachers can be forced to work by the courts even when they do not have a labor agreement, they absolutely need the ability to bring in a fair and neutral arbitrator during bargaining to help them ensure disputes over contract provisions can be resolved quickly and fairly.

This simple reform would dramatically streamline negotiations, thereby saving taxpayers and unions a lot of money and completely eliminating the annual ritual of looming strikes in Washington schools every September.

The Washington Education Association should organize a ballot initiative to change the law in Washington state to specifically provide the right for arbitration wherever state law will not provide the right to strike.

-- Pat Mead, Maple Valley

Fine striking teachers, cut administrators' positions, salaries

Each and every one of Kent School District's striking teachers should be fired or at the very least fined at least $500 per day retroactive to the first day of the strike. In addition, they should work the full 180 days but receive no pay for the days on strike.

If class size is the issue, then teachers should give up any pay raise and give money back so the district can hire new teachers.

However, on the other side, the district needs to rid itself of half the administrators and reduce salaries. What they make for what they do is downright obscene.

-- Lynn Folsom, Issaquah

Think the strike is bad? Try being a teacher

As a former high-school English teacher and football coach, I understand the Kent Teachers' Association's position and support their strike. The attitude of some members of the public and the Kent administrators needs adjustment.

They want and expect teachers to go into classrooms with 30-plus kids, and within a 55-minute period, correct their disruptive behavior, observe them for signs of abuse, monitor their dress habits, censor their T-shirt messages and instill in them a love for learning. They want and expect teachers to check the kids' backpacks for weapons, counsel them on drugs and sexually transmitted diseases and raise their sense of self-esteem and personal pride. They want and expect teachers to teach kids patriotism and good citizenship; sportsmanship and fair play; and how to register to vote, balance a checkbook and apply for a job.

They want and expect teachers to recognize signs of anti-social behavior, and make sure the kids all pass the final exams. They want and expect teachers to provide an equal education regardless of the kids' disabilities while communicating regularly with parents in English, Spanish or any other language by letter, telephone, e-mail, newsletter and report card. And they want and expect teachers to do all that and more with a piece of chalk, a blackboard, a bulletin board, a few books and a big smile.

All that and more is expected of teachers on a salary that qualifies most of them for food stamps. Yet teachers are castigated for striking for smaller classroom sizes, more time with their students and a pittance of a raise in salary.

-- Patrick Watson, Federal Way

Teachers are fighting for the quality of education

My wife and I have wisely decided to have only one child. The reason is not because we don't like children, but because it is much easier for us to manage if we only have one rascal than to have more than one.

My heart goes out to Kent School District teachers on strike, and I give them 100 percent of my support for their sad plight.

If I whine because it is tough to manage one child in my household, how much worse would it be if your job is to manage around 30 students in a single class by yourself at least six hours a day everyday? That is a mountainous job.

I don't blame teachers for their courage to go against the court injunction to go back to school to teach. Disobeying the court order doesn't mean teachers don't have regard for our court of law. It does mean that if they decide to go back to work against their consciences, the quality of education will certainly be affected.

Picture yourself as a teacher with 32 students of different ethnicities, traits, characters, idiosyncrasies, likes and dislikes. Do you think it's easy to manage that big of a class? I bet it would drive you nuts!

-- Warlie Villasencio, Kent

Teachers need time in detention

While I'm sympathetic to the goals of Kent School District's striking teachers and value the bargaining process, the teachers' decision to defy a court order is not OK.

They are teaching now in a very dramatic and visible way, as all adults do by their actions, that the judicial system doesn't apply to them -- only everyone else, I guess.

Will students respect guidance from teachers expecting rules to mean something when those expecting to be respected have publicly violated what a judge says? Will students feel respect for teachers who ignore the law, and instead of doing their job while continuing to negotiate, as professionals, have treated a court order the same way a hoodlum would?

This isn't OK. Kent teachers need to go to detention.

-- Kevin Grossman, Shoreline

Strike illegal, but will teachers face consequences?

For being educated people, striking Kent teachers don't seem to understand their strike is illegal, yet they still serve no consequence for their action. ["Kent teachers delay decision on whether to stay on strike," page one, Sept. 4.]

Kent teachers point their fingers at other school districts when they talk about money and class sizes, so why don't they leave the Kent District and go to those other districts?
The teachers' strike has caused the rescheduling of the start of classes, so why don't the students, parents and taxpayers insist the teachers' union pay the district's expenses for the period of time the strikes cost?

-- H. Lontz, Kent

A history lesson in strikes from the Boston Tea Party

Is there ever a right time to strike? A right time to break the law?

Some of my ancestors believed strongly it was right to remain loyal to the crown, so they moved to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada; others thought the law bad, so they disguised themselves as Native Americans and threw tea into Boston Harbor to protest.

These Americans thought they had an inalienable right to break a bad law.

I taught for 31 years, and I am sure there's more to the Kent teachers' strike than is on the surface. I say, "Throw the tea in the harbor."

-- Delbert O. Lawrence, Bellevue

Individual attention important to future success

Editor, The Times:

I am a 2003 graduate of the Washington state public school system now working in Portland. I've remained friends with several fantastic, supportive and inspiring teachers from my past, including several that are now working in the Kent School District.

As my K-12 school memories fade further into nostalgia and my agenda focuses more and more on my future theoretical children, the issues that the Kent teachers are fighting to amend ["Kent teachers vote to strike as talks go on," page one, Aug. 27] have a new sense of importance and urgency. We can't afford to let our kids suffer in large, anonymous classrooms and become nothing but a number in a district database. Not in a recession, not in a rebound, not ever.

Teachers and education are institutions that stay with us past high school, past college, into our daily lives to create successful and contributing adults. With attention and guidance from a young age, they teach us how to behave well and listen to others in classrooms and future board meetings. They teach us to respect each other and stop gossiping on the playground and around the coffee pot. They help us find how we learn and work best, so we can get our homework and our business proposals done.

Lessons like these, begun in the home and nurtured in the classroom, are much too important to compromise. It is with all this in mind, and at stake, that I put all my support behind the Kent teacher's strike.

-- Tabitha Blankenbiller, Wilsonville, Ore.

Teachers' raise a little relief in tough times

Let me get this straight. Many teachers have lost their jobs this fall due the financial meltdown of the marketplace. Those teachers who still have a job are facing higher classroom sizes due to the loss of their colleagues.

They will be working longer hours each day to keep up with their added responsibilities. The Legislature gave them a 0.6 percent pay cut by reducing the number of days they work by one day this year. And teachers' out-of-pocket expenses for family medical premiums will increase by around $100 per month more than the hundreds of dollars they already pay. And your Aug. 24 editorial ["Merit pay for teachers would end fight on pay," Opinion] complains because Seattle teachers got a 1 percent pay raise this year.

Don't you realize this 1 percent raise won't even cover the loss of state pay and the rise in monthly medical premiums? It's not like teachers' lives are getting any easier. If fact, this year will be extremely difficult for most workers in our state.

If you need to complain about pay raises or bonuses this year, then you should spend your time complaining about the outrageous raises and bonuses financial people on Wall Street and executives in board rooms are making this year. They are getting pay raises while teachers are taking an overall pay cut.

Stop blaming the average worker for trying to maintain their working wages in this economy, and demand financial institutions stop giving outrageous salaries to the very people who tanked our economy in the first place.

-- Peter G. Mohn, Bothell

Merit pay not a quick fix at all for improved education

The depth and breadth of the editorial board's ignorance of our educational system and of teachers' concerns and motivations took my breath away when I read the editorial on merit pay for teachers that appeared in The Times Aug. 24. In good conscience, I cannot let such a blatantly misleading portrayal of the situation stand unopposed by the facts.

The author states that, "Teachers are professionals who deserve strong compensation," immediately after an unveiled dig at the teachers' union for negotiating a 1 percent raise for its members "despite a recession meting out few raises anywhere."

Does the author support strong compensation for teachers or not? The snide remarks about teacher strikes being illegal further undermined my belief in the board's genuine support for teachers. By the way, if you were paying attention, you know that teachers in Bellevue felt compelled to strike because of detrimental teaching practices that had been foisted on them. Salary concerns were a secondary issue.

Merit pay is offensive to many teachers who, like me, bridle at the assumption that I would work harder to do a good job of educating my students if you paid me more. I wouldn't.

I work as hard as I can right now because I am a dedicated professional, and I have a very challenging job. Public education functions fundamentally differently from private industry, in which incentives like pay raises for increased productivity make sense.

People want educational reform because they want improved teaching and learning. Hallelujah! That takes a concerted effort over the long term with a significant investment of energy, research and resources.

If you'd like to know how it can be done, read the thoughtful article published in The Times about Finland. The Finns did it. It just took a commitment and plenty of money, a lot more than a futile quick fix like merit pay.

-- Marianne Clarke, Seattle

A stark picture made worse by merit pay in rough schools

It sounds so logical to tie student achievement to teacher's employment and or pay.
Teacher merit pay, based on a child's progress from A to Z, is inherently flawed and demeaning to teachers. You need only to teach or sub -- not just visit -- in the Seattle School District's "extremes" to be startled at the push for performance pay.

In the so-called failing schools, a teacher using all effort and resources may move a student only one bump on a progress chart. This hardly measurable step represents the best and deserves recognition.

In these poor achieving schools:

Income issues dominate family life, and one parent, grandparent or foster family are all too often the home life of many students. Parent involvement is minimal and adults at home are frequently victims of school failure while serious language and cultural issues run deep.

Class sizes can't be reduced but school aids are. Volunteers are few and far between. Discipline is complicated and daily disruptions rob children of learning.

Contrast this picture with "high performing" schools, which operate under the other side of all the negatives.

Contrary to the unchallenged mantra, we don't need to find and place the best teachers in our "failing" schools -- they are already there. We only need to honestly support them.

-- Michael McCullough, Seattle

In alternative schools, creativity thrives

Kudos to Lynne Varner for describing alternative public schools in Seattle as "models of creativity" ["State needs to hone its game in fight for education dollars," Opinion, column, Aug. 26]. Thanks also to Gov. Chris Gregoire, who also recognized that our programs can hold their own against the ever-popular charters: "The secretary was clear, that's what they're looking for -- nontraditional schools that allow students to excel," Gregoire told The Los Angeles Times. "I would like to show him some of our alternative schools and get his feedback."

As a parent of two children in public alternative programs, I have been disappointed that local leadership has been unable to recognize what alternative schools offer. The nonsupport we have become accustomed to over the last several administrations has turned into action that directly harms our programs under Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson, including school closures, forced relocations and the loss of autonomy so central to the charter model.

We hope the district's alternative-school audit, scheduled for September, will highlight the innovation that has been happening in our district for decades. Otherwise, alternatives will be out, and we will be stuck with charters, which were recently shown in a national study to offer little improvement over traditional public schools.

-- Chris Stewart, Seattle

With merit pay, no way to determine who merits the money

Editor, The Times:

I see you've jumped onto the ever popular merit-pay bandwagon ["Merit pay for teachers would end fight on pay," Opinion, editorial, Aug. 24]. It sounds so good on paper.

But you argue it would take the steam out of salary negotiations? How? By paying a few teachers a little better but the majority less? The idea of rewarding the best teachers is appealing.

But no one, and I mean no one, has figured out an objective way to quantify best teaching. Many merit-pay plans have emerged. They are all deeply flawed. Principals get into most classrooms once or twice a year. Evaluations by students and parents can be manipulated and are not objective in any way.

Some of the most effective teachers are not the most popular. After all, they push students hard and don't always hand out the grades students and parents want. Every kid and every classroom is different. There are huge problems with performance testing. Any educator can tell you what they are.

Every fall, like clockwork, your editors turn the guns on those greedy teachers who dare to disrupt the beginning of school with their unreasonable demands. It's an easy story to sell. Fact is, it's a lot easier to blame teachers and spout simpleminded solutions than to dig a little deeper into the problems facing education in this state and report them.

-- Dan Reeder, Seattle

Education a collaborative effort that's too hard to put price tag on

The difficulty with merit pay is that it doesn't recognize the collaborative effort in building a student's skills.

I am a resource teacher, and I traditionally work with students who receive special-education services. However, due to the increasing demands of No Child Left Behind and Annual Yearly Progress, any student who struggles in school -- be it due to English-language acquisition, poverty or illness -- will likely receive reading, math and/or writing instruction from a resource teacher.

I had a student who could not read English in January; in June, he was reading nearly 100 words per minute, yet was considered to have not met the standard as his score was below grade level. Another student more than doubled her reading rate; again, since her June score was slightly below grade level, she did not meet the set standard.

If merit pay were in place, who would get the salary increase? The student's classroom teacher, who sees the child only for social studies and science? The resource specialist, who teaches the child reading two hours a day? The instructional assistant who works with the student in the before-school reading lab? The AmeriCorps volunteer the student receives math tutoring from? How about merit pay for the parent who makes the effort to get the child to school fed, clothed appropriately, on time and prepared to learn?

The trouble with merit pay is it assumes only one person is responsible for a student's achievement, and it fails to recognize the collaborative efforts necessary for a student's success.

-- Martha de Carbonel Patterson, Silverdale

With multiple evaluations, merit pay will work

Effective teachers should be rewarded for the work they do to help improve students' performance. Pay increases should be awarded based on a variety of different components, not just test scores.

Take, for example, the Denver Public Schools' ProComp system. Teachers earn bonuses based on four components: market incentives like teaching in challenging schools or hard-to-fill positions; student growth including, but not limited to, test scores; knowledge and skills like advanced degrees, national certification and professional development; and professional evaluations like satisfactory ratings from administrators.

The Kent School District recently sent a letter to community members stating that the Kent teacher's union had rejected its proposed pay increases. What the district failed to mention is that those pay increases would be tied directly to teachers' yearly performance evaluations and their students' WASL scores.

Though I support a form of merit pay, as a special-education teacher in a Title I school, I cannot support a pay increase that is based on whether or not my students pass the state test. There are far too many factors out of my control that impact my students' test-taking abilities. Did my students eat breakfast? Did they have a safe place to sleep the night before? Will there be food on the table for dinner?

Before teacher unions can agree to merit pay or a pay increase proposal in the case of Kent School District, fair and reasonable systems need to be developed that do not penalize teachers for factors out of their control.

-- Allison Wegg, Seattle

Listening to math experts won't help select a textbook

Which statement is most absurd: Each school district should choose its math book, or "math people" -- engineers, mathematicians and scientists -- enjoy practicing their math skills with drills?

I wouldn't be surprised if the countries that do well in math education use the same book nationwide. Perhaps we should choose one of those and have it translated.

One thing I am sure of: We must avoid listening to those "math people" who rely on their education in math to qualify for and, often, to practice their profession.

-- Mickey Walker, Redmond

Does math really need such attention?

The article on math textbooks ["Which math book to use? A passionate debate rages," page one, Aug. 16] includes the following semiarticulate comment from Issaquah School Superintendent Steve Rasmussen: "All of our kids want to go, and we want them to go, to college, and math is the gatekeeping course."

It seems to me that Rasmussen might have benefited from greater focus on communication skills during his college years. I've long wondered why math is required of all U.S. college students. There are many otherwise capable students who simply cannot master higher math, regardless of the curriculum used.

Why should they be barred from attaining an academic degree if they have college-level talents in the liberal arts, for example? In the United Kingdom, and numerous other countries, the typical undergrad studies only one subject, allowing them to gain a deeper grasp of the material and emerge truly well-educated in the field of their choice.

Not everyone needs to be a scientist or mathematician.

-- Richard Schafer, Bothell

Debate centralizes on preparing for tests, not teaching math

The math-textbook debate is really about which text will best prepare students for the math exam. It is not about teaching math.

Education is a process not a product. Teaching to the math test is not teaching math -- it is simply teaching the math test.

In fact, much of our innumeracy is due to such nonteaching of mathematics. Let's pay more attention to teaching math and less to testing and the textbook industry.

-- Don Pollock, New York City, N.Y.

Encouraging calculator use will help aid math education

I am the parent who testified in favor of the Math Adoption Committee's recommendation of the Discovering series on the night the Seattle School Board voted to support the adoption.

In my testimony, I referenced new research from the Education Research Centre at St. Patrick's College that found that calculator use by students raised both conceptual understanding and achievement.

In fact, in rigorous final exams, so-called ordinary-level students using calculators performed as well as higher-level students who did not use them. The conclusion is that not only do calculators not hinder learning, they actually enhance it.

The benefits are across the board, but, in addition, the researchers conclude calculators may be of particular advantage to the student who previously may have become disenchanted or fearful of math, as the use of the calculator deepened understanding and buoyed confidence.

It is ironic to me then to find, in a supposedly technologically advanced metropolitan region such at Seattle, this gigantic Neanderthal fear of the humble and effective calculator in the classroom.

Sophisticated textbook series like Discovering, which encourage calculator use, are the way to go for today's students. Mathematics instruction is not just about teaching a progressive set of skills; it is also about understanding what enhances learning.

Calculators do just that.

-- Catherine Costello, Seattle

With reform stumbling, an honest assessment is needed

The page-one article ["WASL scores level, but more schools in federal trouble," Aug. 15] regarding 2009 Washington Assessment of Student Learning results, sounded an all-too-familiar refrain.

"We are puzzled, No Child Left Behind is at fault and so is the WASL." The sad fact is, that 17 years after education reform was started in Washington state, a consistently high number of public high-school graduates in this state who enter community college or a university must take remedial math, English, reading or a combination of those. What does this say about those who don't go on or the 30 percent that drop out? These are dismal statistics.

It is never one issue in education. While the curriculum (particularly in math), graduation requirements, teacher qualifications and school districts all own a significant share of our plight, parent involvement, proper funding and other factors play a role. You can never generalize about these things, and, for sure, there are some exceptional teachers, principles, individual schools and committed parents.

A first step toward improvement is an honest assessment of where we really are. Then we must do whatever is necessary to address the issues. Otherwise the future will be pretty bleak, especially for our children.

-- Charlie Liekweg, Kirkland

Hunter, Jarrett failing education

House Rep. Ross Hunter and Sen. Fred Jarrett failed Washington public-school students and employees this past legislative session. They wasted most of their time promoting an education-reform bill that has little chance of ever helping students.

Additionally, they didn't increase the levy-cap limit despite the will of local voters. As a result, hundreds of Washington state teachers lost their jobs unnecessarily, which will lead to higher class sizes for all students this fall.

Hunter and Jarrett have always told voters public education was one of their top priorities. Given their F grade from last session regarding public schools, the voters need to return Hunter and Jarrett to Olympia in hopes they will fulfill their promises to help public schools.

This is just one reason why Eastside teachers and Washington Education Association members are endorsing Dow Constantine and Larry Phillips for King County executive.

-- Stephen Miller, Bellevue

In recession, remember to look out for special education

It is time that some of the inequities pressed onto special-education families are being rectified ["Fair play on special-ed," Opinion, editorial, July 5]. Maybe this ruling will force districts to seriously contend with the issue of truly educating these students to their full potential. This is one victory for parents, and we hope, the first of many more.

As parents of a student with Aspergers, a form of autism, who was forced to graduate earlier than he deserved, we know personally how poor services are after school ends. Let us take the tenets of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act seriously, which defines education as academic and functional achievement to allow that student movement to post-school life. For us, neither of these was achieved. So we struggle, like many others, to define a meaningful life for our son.

Yet, concurrent with the windfall of stimulus money dedicated to special education, some districts will be using part of those funds to patch shortfalls within their budgets. Since special education has never been fully funded, this seems particularly cruel. The unemployment rate for autistic young adults is 92 percent. We need a paradigm shift in which the educational system produces winners, not losers.

The opportunity to provide lifelong learning options for this population will benefit all of us as a community.

-- Valerie Brenner, Tacoma

Not everyone is fit for higher education

In the guest column ["Preparing all students for the next step in life," Opinion, June 16] Maria L. Goodloe-Johnson asks the question, "If college-ready education for all students is the goal, how do we get there?"

Another important question might be: Is college education a realistic goal for all students? When almost four of 10 students in Seattle don't graduate on time and 25.3 percent drop out of high school, how will the college-prep program help them?

Not every student is capable of attaining these laudable levels of higher education. The alternative path that is offered in Great Britain might be worth studying. Teachers have, can and would identify students early on who don't perform well in the standard classroom.

"Raising the bar" for these students will only reinforce failure. Taxpayers will inherit the burden of supporting the future of those without education or training. The state constitution requires that all students have a paramount right to a successful education. The primary goal is a high-school diploma.

In order to ensure these students benefit from this law, the educational system must provide alternative programs that will prepare them for all that life can offer just as equally as the college-prep students. Alternative programs or schools would also "ensure that all students are challenged and supported every step of the way so they graduate" with pride and the potential of becoming viable, contributing members of society.

Goodloe-Johnson should update the public on the current alternative programs and future plans to provide a successful path to high-school graduation for all students -- whether or not they are going to college.

-- Jody Greger, Redmond

Education aid should be race-blind

I read with interest your story ["Program reaps first crop of scholars," page one, June 16] about the Rainier Scholars program. It looks like a great program that is having significant success giving disadvantaged young people opportunities for an education that might otherwise be out of reach. Clearly this program is well-run and effective.

However, it concerns me that such a program uses what amounts to a racial-litmus test instead of being an inclusive program available to anyone from a disadvantaged background. Why is this program not using a race-blind selection process based on economic background, neighborhood and other such factors? Do we not care about giving white kids who are poor or otherwise at risk, yet have academic potential, assistance through this program?

I find it puzzling that on one hand our society strives to eliminate racial discrimination, yet on the other hand we still actively use race to give advantages to some kids and not others.

-- Christopher A. Flaat, Redmond

Better education comes with less bureaucracy

Charter schools are publicly financed, privately managed schools that are models of innovation and reform. They sit in stark contrast to the outdated 19th-century model of traditional public education that is the norm in our state. Forty-one states and the District of Columbia have charter-school laws -- but don't count Washington among them.

The Washington Legislature passed a charter-school law in March 2004, but eight months later it was repealed by the voters due in large part to an anti-charter coalition led by the state's largest teachers union. Opponents charged that there was not enough evidence that showed student achievement was any better at a charter school versus a traditional public school.

In the five years since Washington voted against charter schools, there have been numerous studies and reports that point to an abundance of successes, especially among the low-income and underserved populations our legislation would have targeted. Jerry Large's column ["Zeroed in on zone for success," NWMonday, June 15] introduced Geoffrey Canada's Harlem Children's Zone as a model of success.

A key part of Canada's successful formula is freedom from traditional public-school bureaucracy. It is time to reconsider Washington's opposition to charter schools.

-- Pamela S. Home, Bothell

Grades, not standardized tests, should measure progress

In response to the story "Schools chief plans WASL replacement by 2010" [front page, Jan. 22], I agree with the idea of at least replacing the WASL test. However, it would be more convenient and significant to completely dispose of the standardized test. Officials continue to state how the test allows them to study how students' learning is progressing.

This isn't the case; grades in classes show the true achievement and success of the students, not their scores on a standardized test.

I also disagree with the manner in which the chief of the schools is handling the situation. Stating that he will make these changes as if the state and Legislature have no vote toward the cause is extremely asinine and unprofessional. He should provide the public with the facts and the probability of his plan being finished. That would be the manner and attitude in which to attack this situation. Although I disagree with the chief's techniques, I believe the change of the test at least to another form is in the best interest of every student body in respect to their success.

-- Kevin Sprague, Granite Falls

AP success, though not proven, is evident

In your editorial ["Bellevue, Seattle schools at the head of the class," editorial, June 11], you cited Department of Education studies allegedly proving that taking Advanced Placement classes improves college performance because "students who took [AP] courses but scored low on the end exam tended to do better [in college] than students who didn't take the courses." However, the department Web site clearly states that "difference in college outcomes between the groups cannot be attributed with confidence to the effect of AP participation."

As a Bellevue AP student, I understand the fallacy behind your reasoning. Simply consider that the average student of an AP class is much more motivated to work and study than one in a non-AP classes.

This study only confirms what I hope is well known -- that hard work and good study habits will lead to success in college. I applaud the Bellevue and Seattle school districts for encouraging students to take challenging coursework, but there is no proven causation between students taking AP classes and college success.

-- Nick Rogstad, Bellevue

Budget cuts kill newest jobs

As a music teacher with my job on the line ["Education cuts mean layoffs of newest teachers," NWWednesday, April 19], I think many people -- especially younger teachers -- feel the same way I do.

Low on the Totem Pole
There's no way to tell for certain
If I'm coming back next year.
They might just close the curtain
On my entire career.

Sure, I hardly get paid a dime,
That's less than most of my peers.
But I guess my only crime
Has been working only three years.

I'm low on the totem pole
But not the lowest -- that's really swell.
I think of all those lowly souls
Who don't stand a blessed chance in ... teaching.

There's no way to tell for certain
If I'm coming back next year.
But if I must change my profession,
I'm going to be a political engineer.

-- Justin Galicic, Federal Way

Basics need funding before reform

It is a difficult time for many of us. As a local educator, I feel fortunate that I both enjoy and, even more importantly, have a job that is secure. Many of you reading this, including local educators, aren't as fortunate as I am. You have already lost your jobs or there is a real possibility that you will be receiving a layoff notice in the near future. It is for this reason that I am baffled that our Senate has approved an educational-reform bill at a time when there is no funding to support it ["Legislature redefines a basic education," NW Tuesday, April 21].

As a member of the Washington Education Association and the Edmonds Education Association, I am fully invested in how our schools are funded. If this Legislature and Gov. Chris Gregoire approve the education-reform bill, my district alone will have a $13 million funding deficit.

It is very difficult for me to understand why the Legislature is entertaining new reform when there is no money in our state budget to fund the basics of education. I support the suspension of educator raises and lower class sizes, especially if it means that one or more of my colleagues will remain employed.

I cannot support a legislative measure that further burdens a public-education system that is already bailing water. I certainly cannot vote for any politician who is in support of further burdening our state's public schools.

-- Betsy McGregor, dean of students, Edmonds School District #15

Teachers deserve Legislature that will support work

While expounding in favor of education reform, The Times begrudges wages paid to those educating ["Teacher-pay promise may be difficult to keep," Opinion, editorial, April 23].

Even though the Legislature cannot bind future legislators, The Times urged support of an education-reform bill that, laughably, would not be implemented until 2018 ["Laying the groundwork for education reform," Opinion, editorial, April 16].

Incongruously, The Times then criticizes legislators for "putting off until tomorrow what it cannot do today" by, in suspending Initiative 732's requirement for annual wage cost-of-living-adjustments (COLA) for K-12 education personnel, promising to provide the suspended wage increases by 2014-15.

I did not vote for either the education-reform bill's hollow promises or to thwart the will of the 63 percent of Washington voters who adopted I-732. However, I hardly think it unreasonable to give those teaching our children, including my kindergartner, the hope of a brighter future and a more courageous future Legislature willing to support their work.

The last time education reform was adopted, in the 1990s, teachers only received two COLAs over six years. They will now go at least two years without COLAs. The gainsharing-pension promise made to them was broken in 2007. Surely morale will not improve if the beatings continue.

-- Rep. Brendan W. Williams, 22nd Legislative District, Olympia

School cuts make U.S. less competitive

I am saddened to read that the state Legislature and governor have revealed their true priorities within just the last few days.

Earlier this week they passed a law redefining the state's responsibilities to fund education, expanding that definition to be more in line with today's expectations. Wednesday, their accomplishments included cutting educational spending by $800 million while the House approved $4.3 billion to replace the antiquated viaduct ["Schools take hit in state budget," NW Friday, April 24]. Yes, some of those billions will be federal dollars that "don't count," but billions will still come from state coffers and taxpayers.

Luckily, history teaches us that the viaduct work will be delayed year after year. Today we import engineering talent because not enough is homegrown here in the U.S.

Therefore, by the time the expertise is needed, we Americans should be very practiced in contracting our engineering work to India or China. In those countries, extreme competition for obtaining the "good life," as is lived in the USA, provides the needed focus on education, both by the state and by the students.

-- William Manganaro, Issaquah

It starts at home

As a retired public-school teacher, I am getting sick and tired of the Chris Waldorfs of this world who believe the key to improving our schools is to get tough with teachers unions ["Education reform: push past teachers unions that block it," Northwest Voices, April 3]. I would suggest that nothing we do to reform our education system will work until parents send their children to school physically and mentally ready to learn.

What does that mean? It means taking their cellphones away so they have time to study rather than text-messaging. It means controlling the amount of time they spend "tweeting" on the Internet. It means limiting their TV and video-game time.

In other words, it means developing a culture at home that views education as the bridge to their children's future, not just an inconvenience that needs to be fit in around the hedonistic pleasures of life. It requires self-discipline and the adoption of a long-term perspective, something Americans find extraordinarily difficult.

If parents can't accomplish this, then reform measures will be little more than whistling in
the wind.

-- Dick Schwartz, Seattle

Wait until we have money to pay for it

Sunday's Seattle Times editorial urges passage of the education-reform measure, despite the horrendous economic problems the state faces ["Waiting on reform," Opinion, editorial, April 5]. Bad idea.

We are entangled in the worst economic recession in generations. Washington will bring in nearly as much revenue in the next biennium as from the last. But we have added programs and expenses over the years that create a $9 billion gap. That requires our full attention

Two things should be noted about the reform legislation. One, it is written as an omnibus bill; all components are included in the bill. Many of these components are complex and controversial topics. But under the current proposal, we must vote up or down on all.

Second, for some unknown reason, the House majority leadership has seen fit not to schedule this legislation into the House Education Committee. That's right, the committee charged with hearing, debating and voting on state education policy has not even seen the bill. Instead, the reform measure, which contains absolutely no money allocations, was sent to House Education Appropriations. These two facts combine to create a dangerous situation.

The Yakima Herald Republic has the right idea: "This is certainly not the time to require more giant fiscal commitments for the state. There will be time enough to focus on how we fund education when we actually have money to pay for it."

-- Kenneth A. Mortland, Bothell

Reform should include early learning

I applaud the recent Times editorial for stressing the importance of early learning.

In terms of redefining basic education, the real question is, does our current definition uphold our constitutional mandate of "ample provision for the education of all children ..."? There is much discussion exploring the question of "ample" in terms of financial responsibility. The question of adequate funding is difficult and relatively subjective.

Another question to ask is whether this state meets the constitutional mandate of "all." I would suggest that an objective response to this, simply put, is no. Scientific evidence has proved that a child's early experiences directly influence his or her later ability to learn. It's more than just a good investment. Learning begins at birth, yet our current definition of basic education explicitly excludes children under age 5.

Including early learning in a definition of basic education would be costly, especially if it covered all of our youngest citizens, not just a targeted group. However, it would not make sense to make major education reforms and not resolve the question of this state's constitutional responsibility to early learning while trying to establish viable funding formulas for the future.

-- Mike Sheehan, Shoreline

Memo to Bill Gates

Bill, stop hammering teachers and become one ["The Bill Gates school-repair plan," Opinion, March 31].

The sobering reality you'll face during that year -- the reality you don't get visiting a school or presenting your ideas to fawning crowds at symposiums -- will startle you.

The first thing that will startle you is how hard you work. The second is how little you're supported. The last thing that will startle you is the satisfying fatigue at the end of the day, knowing you've left everything in that classroom and changed lives.

Bill, teachers are not in charge of keeping kids out of poverty or making sure their parents attended college. Fix those two issues, and we teachers could work miracles.

Like senior employees at Microsoft are amply rewarded for their effective service, so should senior teachers be rewarded. Bill, the best teachers don't leave in their fifth year because the money isn't equivalent to the private sector. They leave because they realized that they just signed on to one of the most arduous jobs on the planet, and they couldn't cut it.

The long-serving teachers you've described with such disdain stuck it out because they're drawn to the payment that transcends the monetary world -- a spark.

-- Jon VandeMoortel, Seattle

Merit pay only makes sense based on teacher's performance

To the layman, merit pay for teachers based on student performance sounds like a swell idea ["Is Wall Street best model for fixing our schools?" Local News, March 22]. But it makes about as much sense as merit pay for doctors based on patient performance.

Does a highly educated, highly skilled physician always have a 100 percent success rate with each patient? Are there ever extenuating circumstances, beyond the doctor's control, that make it impossible for all patients to survive?

If a patient should perform poorly by dying, after the physician has tried every intervention possible, is the doctor a failure and does the doctor receive a reduced fee for the services rendered?

Doctors educate patients on how to lower blood pressure and cholesterol by telling them to watch their diets and exercise daily. If patients continue to have high blood pressure and cholesterol because they didn't follow the doctor's prescription, does that mean the doctor failed?

At least doctors have little pills they can give to patients to counteract the patients' inability to follow directions. There aren't any pills for teachers to dispense, and even if there were, it is unlikely that our Legislature would be willing or able to provide the funding for them anyway.

The advantage doctors have over teachers is that they can refuse to treat a patient who doesn't cooperate, but teachers have to keep every student that is placed in their classroom.

I'm not against merit and performance pay if it is actually based on the merits and performance of the teacher and not on the merits and performance of the students.

-- Elaine Inaba, Renton

Senate needs a reality check on higher education

I agree with University of Washington President Mark Emmert in the sense that the Senate's budget cut proposal is nasty ["How 4 key areas would be affected: higher education," News, March 31].

As a college student, it is difficult to see tuition being increased, classes being cut and fewer students accepted, especially when Senate Bill 6116 is being considered.

I can't help but wonder why the state would consider giving Husky Stadium a remodel at the price of $1,500,000 while the funding of state universities and community colleges is being cut by $513,000,000 over two years.

The Senate desperately needs a reality check. While sports programs do generate large amounts of money for schools, the No. 1 priority of any academic institution should be academics.

An estimated 1,000 employees of the University of Washington will be unemployed at the expense of a remodel for a football stadium for a losing team. It is time to rethink the budget proposals for the universities with the students in mind.

-- Jamie Matous, Seattle

Divert wasted tax dollars to education

A bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate recently to establish a commission to examine the nation's criminal-justice system. The commission would be charged with a top-to-bottom review of the entire criminal-justice system and with offering concrete recommendations for reform.

Any comprehensive reform would certainly eliminate mandatory minimum-sentencing laws that are filling the prisons with those who perpetrate low-level offenses and are serving sentences that do not fit the crimes. Courts should determine every individual's prison sentence, not one-size-fits-all laws.

A poll taken in 2008 found that 59 percent of those polled opposed mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent offenses while fully 78 percent think that the courts should make the decisions.

Wouldn't it be great to divert some of those wasted tax dollars to education?

-- Moira Hennings O'Crotty, Tacoma

Erika Schultz / The Seattle Times

Matthew Gillis of Sacajawea Middle School traveled with his mother and siblings to push for education reforms during the PTA Focus Day 2009. Hundreds of PTA activists joined with the League of Education Voters and politicians at a rally on the steps of the Legislative Building. Basic education funding, increased graduation requirements and teacher compensation were just a few of the topics stressed at the rally.

Push past teachers unions that block it

Editor, The Times:

Huge kudos go to Bill Gates and many others who are tackling education reform in this country ["The Bill Gates school-repair plan," Times, Opinion, March 31]. If there is a single area outside of parental love that has the biggest impact on the future of our children, it is education.

Unfortunately, the current state of our education system is nowhere near what it could be. A large portion of schools, particularly in urban areas, are falling well short of preparing children to thrive in an increasingly competitive world.

Amazingly, teachers unions have been blocking reform whenever there is a hint of change, as The Washington Post commentary by Fred Hiatt points out multiple times. The time is now to start asserting ourselves against the backward and oppressive teachers unions and to actively push for choice and reform in public education.

-- Chris Waldorf, Seattle

How is it determined?

Isabel D'Ambrosio ["Performance pay for teachers: a basic way to reward success," Northwest4 Voices, March 24] and others seem to favor merit pay for teachers. But they never once, even by accident, suggest how to determine "merit."

Is a teacher with more degrees worth more? Is a bad science or math teacher better than a great history teacher? Do you judge the teacher by the school -- i.e. good school equals good teacher? Do you test the students in every subject twice a year to see if the teacher merits more or less pay?

D'Ambrosio says teachers must "accept being evaluated." Just to set the record straight, teachers are formally evaluated by their supervisor twice each year. I have a drawer full of positive evaluations ... suppose next year I have a different evaluator: Should my pay be cut if the new evaluator likes a different style of teaching?

Please people, if you have suggestions that include some kind of knowledge of the subject and realistic, pragmatic and descriptive suggestions for judging merit, have the courtesy to explain them and leave off the vague, normative or utopian prescription.

-- Robert DuChaine, Buckley

The real reason Massachusetts' schools are better

Clearly, Christopher Eide ["State should't hide from WASL math test," guest commentary, March 18] is a graduate of a Washington school, not of the Massachusetts system he touts for its public/private competition. Like many propagandists, he tries to use a selective set of statistics, mainly WASL scores, as a lever to boost charter and parochial schools that drain money out of the public system.

But let's compare apples to apples. What he neglects to mention: Massachusetts is ranked eighth versus Washington's 38th in per child spending on public education. This is the No. 1 reason why Massachusetts has outpaced Washington in K-12 test scores. I graduated from the No. 4 public school district in the country, and there were two reasons for our ranking: We were one of the richest districts in "Taxachusetts," a state where almost one-third more tax dollars per student go to schools than in Washington; and more shamefully, my school pushed into vocational school (or expelled) anyone who looked like they might fail before graduation and therefor throw off the statistics!

Our high score had absolutely nothing to do with adjusting the curriculum to standardized tests -- it had to do with a large majority of highly educated parents and a well-funded system that supported kids to think critically. In a very snobbish district, parochial schools were only chosen by a few for the sake of status.

When I compare notes with my native Washingtonian friends, it's blatantly clear how much more empowered my teachers were, and therefore how much more creative and empowering my education was. My parents, griping as they did about taxes, were nonetheless happy for their investment returns. I stopped taking math after my 10th-grade statistics class, but I hope that Massachusetts' Harvard University teaches Sammamish High's Mr. Eide a little bit more about statistical analysis before they award him a master's degree.

-- Krista Rose, Seattle

Testing cannot measure it all

David Brooks wrote last week about President Obama's vision for education ["President Obama's speech signals a serious approach to education," syndicated column, March 14]. He used the story of Obama's mom waking him up early as a boy for extra tutoring to illustrate the "two traits necessary for academic success: relationships and rigor."

Brooks talks about using test scores to measure progress, including "which students had which teachers so we can assess what's working and what's not." In an apparent contradiction, he also talks about an Obama plan to give merit pay to "good teachers (the ones who develop emotional bonds with students)" and fire the "bad teachers (the ones who treat students like cattle to be processed)."

I've never heard of any quantitative way to measure emotional bonds, so instead we measure test scores. Our assessment system does exactly what Obama suggests we must not do: treat students like cattle. Students who pass the test are allowed to move on; those who don't are sent back to the mill for more "processing."

Furthermore, I believe that measuring the success of students, teachers and schools based on test scores alone is simply wrong! The purpose of education is, I believe, to help create adults who can read, write and compute, think creatively to solve problems, feel the joy of discovery, see the beauty in a musical composition or work of art, and who are prepared to live, work and get along in a complex world. Most of that cannot be measured on any standardized test.

The losers in all this are the students themselves, whose curriculum is being reduced to only those subjects that are on the test. How about we measure successful schools based on the opportunities they offer kids to explore art, music, literature, history, science and the whole myriad endeavors that make up the human experience? Which schools would pass muster then?

-- Daniel Haeck (teacher), Federal Way

Don't forget female students

On Tuesday, President Obama proposed changes to our educational system to give our nation's students a competitive advantage over students from other countries ["Obama presses for longer school year," News, March 11]. Here's how we can really blow away the competition: Encourage girls to excel in science and math.

Girls today hold unlimited potential for solving the world's greatest problems, from harnessing alternative energy sources to finding a cure for cancer. Yet women continue to be underrepresented in these vital career fields. Women constitute 46 percent of the U.S. work force but hold only 27 percent of science and engineering jobs. Girls excel in math and science courses and continue to make historic gains, yet few pursue careers in these fields.

As Obama stated, top-notch teachers are key to our nation's academic success. But programs beyond the traditional scope of the classroom also are essential for our students, especially girls, to shine. One such program is Expanding Your Horizons (EYH). On Saturday (March 14), 410 middle-school girls will gather at Seattle University for the 21st annual Seattle EYH conference. They will participate in fun, hands-on workshops taught by female professionals working in science- and math-based careers.

The conference will spark girls' curiosity, show them something they won't learn in school, and plant the seed for achievement in math and science for many years to come. Someday, one of these girls may solve our nation's energy crisis, win the Nobel Prize, or encourage a new generation of girls to be world-class scientists and mathematicians. That's a competitive advantage indeed.

-- Ann McNally and Emeline Cokelet Meneken,
Seattle Expanding Your Horizons

Need is there; money is not

If what you wish the Legislature to support is all-day kindergarten, 21st-century technology, a six-period high-school schedule and measure student achievement, you have my support, too. ["Legislators need the political will to reshape Washington's schools," Lynne K. Varner column, Opinion, March 11.]

Expanding the school day will take money, now, not at some unspecified future date. Measuring student achievement is being done now, though we seem to be at loose ends as to how to continue.

I can't support performance pay without seeing the specifics of the performance criteria. I have seen many "merit pay" schemes in the past 39 years. Most have been useless for improving the delivery system of education and all have withered on the vine for lack of continued financial support. With that as a history of performance pay in Washington state, I would oppose it.

All of this is an exercise in futility. There's no money to do anything. We're going to be cutting the daylights out of most everything in order to survive the decline in revenue. Putting it all on the back burner for now is not a failure of leadership; it's just plain prudent conservatism.

-- Kenneth A. Mortland, Bothell

Clutching at straws

As a parent and former teacher, I would like to applaud Bellevue, Issaquah, Northshore, Renton, Spokane and Seattle school boards for endorsing Senate Bill 5444 and House Bill 1410. These bills are products of study from the Basic Education Task Force and, if passed, will dramatically update the education system in Washington state.

Despite Washington's Constitution, which states it is the paramount duty of the state to amply fund basic education, no child within the borders is receiving the education they deserve. Districts are left clutching at straws, trying to cover all the needs unfunded by the state. There is no way to make the money stretch far enough.

These bills lay groundwork for a system in which all children can succeed, no matter the school they attend. With early learning, full-day kindergarten and increased graduation requirements, the bills will allow children to succeed and compete in the 21st century.

We need to stop educating children as we did 30 years ago when we last discussed the definition of "basic education." The current system is clearly failing students when they graduate -- if they graduate.

While it's natural to fear something new, to continue to throw money into a broken system doesn't make sense. Without a broad change to the nature of public education and the definition of what we demand for our children, we cannot expect real change to take place. We need to recognize that what worked 30 years ago doesn't work now.

-- Carol Porkka, Bellevue

Giving away the funds we have

Again we reward people who don't respect our laws ["Controversial student-aid bill," Local News, Feb. 12].

With so many Americans loosing their jobs daily, the state is giving our funds to illegal citizens. We should be supporting citizens who need education to get jobs, not people who came here illegally.

When our country and economy are in such bad shape, you'd think our representatives would get it. Instead, they want to give away our country and the people who elected them. I, for one, am totally disgusted!

-- Kathleen Bukoskey, Everett

Go on, build the barrier

Editor, The Times:

Rep. Dave Quall, D-Mt. Vernon, said, "Education should have no borders" ["Controversial student-aid bill," Times, Local News, Feb. 12]. Of course it should. The border should separate students who are here legally from those who aren't.

Why must hardworking, taxpaying American families, struggling through the worst economy in 80 years, subsidize students who are here illegally?

Quall complains that because illegal students have been able to take advantage of our free-education system and get through high school, we should then roll over and pay for college too.

He calls the lack of tuition assistance for illegal immigrants a "huge barrier." Isn't this the whole idea? Illegal immigrants are not entitled to a free education.

I guess this is what it comes down to for Rep. Quall and the rest of the tax-and-spend crowd in Olympia: Everybody is entitled, whether they've earned it or not. Incredible.

-- Craig Torstenbo, Poulsbo

Forget about fear

Why do arguments for school reform always have to begin by hand-wringing about how awful our education system is? A tone of terror runs through the entirety of state Board of Education Chairman Mary Jean Ryan's oped ["Let's pull this state out of education cellar," guest column, Feb. 12].

She moans that Washington is 35th in high-school graduation requirements. Where does this statistic come from and, really, who cares?

She also laments that Washington is 44th in total expenditures per student. In fact, she wants to pass legislation so that "Washington's children can move out of the cellar and into the forefront of states." Yet, if one examines the 2007 scores for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading and math for grades four and eight, one finds Washington outscores the nation in both subjects at both grades. The difference amounts to about a third of a year in achievement.

And, few states have a higher proportion of students scoring at the "advanced" level on the NAEP tests. Those that do are mostly states that have the highest proportions of parents with college degrees like Massachusetts and Minnesota.

The Joint Task Force on Basic Education Finance's work might have been grand and the bills might be fine. And as one who thinks money makes a difference, if it didn't, why do wealthy districts spend so much of it.

Why do we have to make our case playing to fear? It's never been the right approach or even accurate.

Many of the things Ryan wants are deserving: more early learning, more time for teachers to plan and more arts, for example. But we should provide funds for these items on the basis of pride and appreciation, not fear.

It should be to move Washington education more to the forefront, not getting it out of the cellar.

-- Gerald Bracey, Port Townsend

Statistical flub-up

A false generalization of research findings has led Washington state legislators to craft a bill that could substantially set back science and mathematics education in this state.

It appears, after misinterpreting a result in the December 2007 "Report to the Joint Task Force on Basic Education Finance: School employee compensation and student outcomes," legislators wrote House Bill 1410. Part of that bill (Section 204) stipulates that a new teacher-salary scale "shall not provide increased salaries based on continuing education credits or academic degrees."

It seems legislators wrongly based a decision to remove salary incentives on "averaged" meta-analysis results of the effects of graduate degrees on student academic performance. Even the report's researchers cautioned about the lack of refinement in their preliminary findings, stating, "A relevant question is whether infield or mathematics and science graduate degrees improve the effectiveness of teachers in particular fields."

While it is true teaching ability is not solely based on content knowledge, respected mathematics-education research clearly links this kind of knowledge to teacher effectiveness. Certainly, common sense dictates this to be the case also.

Perhaps this flub-up begs for better science and mathematics training, especially where high-stakes decisions depend on statistical studies.

As Washington state continues to struggle with ways to raise mathematics and science achievement, please tell me the Legislature will not cut out incentives for teachers to learn. Instead, let's look to those degrees and continuing-education programs that are tied to student performance.

-- Associate professor of mathematics Michael Lundin, Central Washington University, Ellensburg

Competing with an anti-intellectual culture

From what I read and hear, all we need to improve education is "better teachers" and more money for schools. This would help, but the problem is much larger than this.

The abominable educational standing of our young people when compared with other nations, many much less wealthy than the U.S., jeopardizes the future of our nation. I firmly believe the low-educational attainments of our children can be traced to parents and a popular culture that is strongly anti-intellectual.

A good place to see the effects of parents who value and support education can be found in our many immigrant students, who have done remarkably well since their arrival in our country. Many came as recently as their early junior-high years, not speaking English. And yet, by the end of high school, they were honor students -- in schools that were or are considered "failing."

The difference is they have strong support from parents who value education.

However, in Washington state, it is the parents who are complaining about the dreaded Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) and who want the standards reduced. They do not want their children to have to work.

It is the parents who threaten or sue school administrators who take action to corral disruptive students, who are stealing from the teacher's time.

It is indifferent parents who neglect their children, who have turned our schools into social agencies, which, therefore, cuts down teaching time and resources.

It is parents who do not want their kids to have homework. They do not want the responsibility of seeing that their children do their homework, turning off the blaring TV so they can concentrate.

Why is there not a single politician with the courage to even intimate that parents might be part of the problem?

We need to look further to something even harder to correct: our anti-intellectual popular culture.

Maybe it would be possible to find a teacher with the ability to captivate students and provide the incentive to learn, despite such obstacles, but how many could be found? Would they be willing to work the long hours? How much would we have to pay someone with this ability? When teachers have to compete with popular culture, they are competing with very highly-paid entertainers.

-- George Hoke, Bellevue

Don't tip the unemployment glass

Thank you for the good coverage of the emergency-stimulus package ["A day of trillions to fix economy," Times, Feb. 11]. I was pleased to see the $648 million to the state for education and other services. While some would say this is not enough, it is still very welcome.

There will be competing interests for this money, even within education. There are some who want a great deal for construction of new facilities, others who want money for research at our universities and others who want the money to go to students to help pay their tuition.

Perhaps most critical of all, our community colleges and other education institutions, in the face of proposed cuts, are currently considering laying off all part-time instructors and even some tenured faculty.

We cannot allow this to happen.

It would break the fabric of our system and deny quality classes to the very students we are trying to provide an education. And, it would directly swell the ranks of the unemployed.

We trust our state government to prevent cutting faculty while balancing other legitimate interests.

-- Leonard Goodisman, Bothell

Translating the dollar signs, or lack thereof

Our state legislators are once again looking to trim money from the education budget. Of course, this means cutting money from an already inadequate budget.

I think of my 6-year-old great nephew going to school in a small rural town in Wisconsin. Part way through first grade and he's already a phenomenal reader. It probably helped that he's already had a year of 4-year-old kindergarten and a year of full-day, regular kindergarten. Plus, he is guaranteed a class size of no more the 15 students through the third grade.

Then I think of my two cousins who teach in small towns in Mississippi, where they also provide publicly funded 4-year-old kindergarten and all-day regular kindergarten.

Next, I look around this region and see people living in their mansions and mini-mansions.

Yet, we have allowed Washington state to become 45th in the nation in per-pupil funding
and have accepted ridiculously large class sizes.

What does this all mean? Could it be that the people of Wisconsin and Mississippi just love their kids more than we love our children?

-- Mary Ann Timeus, Kirkland

Due for a history lesson

Your editorial, "Use education money to stimulate reform" [Feb. 4], and Bruce Ramsey's column, "Debt is what got us into this mess" [Feb. 4], were at odds.

As Ramsey correctly points out, "the economy" is not a mechanism; it is people. It is biological. It moves when it decides to -- when it is confident.

Likewise, school reform cannot be purchased like a commodity. School reform requires people working together to achieve learning objectives.

You might recall, years ago, the U.S. sent tractors to African villagers and said, "Use them for farming." Africans didn't use the tractors. Perhaps tractors were not part of their everyday experience. Years later, microloans providing access to goats worked. Villagers were confident they could use a goat.

There might be a "lesson plan" in this story for U.S. schools. Are they confident that they could use an injection of taxpayers funds?

Please have a look at www.schoolchange.org where Tony Wagner, a Harvard consultant, describes sensible school reforms based on research.

-- Richard Morris, Redmond