This is Your Commencement. This is Your Commencement on Crack.
I read a 20 year-old Somerville native's "The Graduation Speech You'll Never Hear" in last Sunday's Globe, and The Parents Forum founder's gentle rebuttal in this Sunday's.
She said, ever so sweetly, what I was thinking as I read the speech: "I wonder if we are asking school staff to take on parents' responsibilities."
In his speech the young fellow never mentions the words “parents” or “family,” which is telling. Instead, he rails against "society": about the time teens hit high school, he says, "society starts to put limits on our once limitless possibilities. We are told that 'you can't do this because you're not smart enough, not fast enough. Maybe you should settle for less.'"
That, dear man, is called reality. But never mind.
He then rages against his public high school:
When I attended Somerville High School I witnessed kids who had a lack of dreams remain uninspired and unsure of their future. I witnessed kids with dreams told that they weren't college material and to go into the trade program regardless of their own interests.... I myself dropped out of SHS in my sophomore year, feeling that school was just preparing me for a job I didn't want so my time there was useless. When I left school there was no attempt to get me to stay.Well, of course not.
As a teacher with some experience teaching high school (though, mercifully, many years ago now), I can tell you that when you are dealing with a ratio like one teacher to forty students, and four of your forty are antisocial, battling drugs or psychological problems, you might wish you could do something more for them—and you might have the option of referring them to the school psychologist or a counselor—but you don't mind seeing them go. Because it means less distraction for those students who are in a place where they can learn whatever you’re there to teach them.
Sad as it is, teachers aren't there, aren’t paid, and aren’t qualified to deal with the intractable problems of drug addiction, and the social and psychological fall-out from them.
Teachers are not there to solve all of society's problems. They are there, as the name suggests, to teach. To teach English, or French, or math, or biology.
And they are human. They choose their battles. They see a bright kid who's engaged and has explicit, achievable goals, they give more. Because they get more back. Everybody gets more back—it’s win-win.
On the other hand you've got the energy vampire at the back of the room. A good teacher will try to engage him, but particularly where there are drugs or psychological problems involved, they often aren't in a place where they can be reached but with an enormous amount of time and energy. They need more one-on-one time than a teacher can afford to spare, and special training to deal with the behavior besides.
So, no, it absolutely does not surprise me that no one shed a tear when this fellow took that giant chip on his shoulder and left the building for good.
He found Just A Start by doing so, and that's the kind of place he needed. If anything, the state should look into more funding for developing teenage rehab/instructional facilities like it.
But you can bet that if a guidance counselor had suggested he go to such a place, he would have seen it as more attempts by "society" and the school system to segregate him and squash his dreams.
I have taught at vocational schools in the past, too, back in Indiana, and my impression was that the students were on the whole happier in their element there than they would be sitting in a classroom (the vocational school was on the same campus and vocational ed students had traditional classes as well). The teacher-student ratio was more reasonable than in the regular high school, and teachers were freer to address other issues through the Zen of whatever it was they were helping the students master.
The problem was not that this hands-on style of teaching/learning was not well-suited to these teachers and students, nor was there any question that the education they received would be more useful to them than airy-fairy dreams of being the next Snoop Dog or Kelly Clarkson. The problem is that education in a trade is stigmatized in our popular culture.
Kids like the one who wrote the speech here have some strange ideas about “college.” But like their “dreams” these ideas have little substance.
When “dreams” consist mainly of “I want a high-paying job,” or “I want to live in a big house in the suburbs,” or just “I want to get out of Slummerville!” they are of a different nature altogether than “I want to be a molecular biologist,” or a Civil Engineer or an Art Historian.
His teachers were probably right that he was ill-prepared for college. They probably meant in his academic habits and emotional maturity, both of which were likely hindered by a high-stress home and social environment not particularly well-suited for learning. Neither of which were the teachers' fault.
What he may be picking up on, but is not yet able to articulate, is the class aspect of this claim. There are many and varied collegiate “cultures,” but all share some basic expectations in principle if not in practice. You have to be “acculturated” to an academic setting. Even so, there are degrees. We are seeing college campuses look less and less like the “ivory towers” of old, and more and more like microcosms of society.
Still, there are minimum standards, not just academic, but in habits and behaviors, that students have to develop before they enter. When the standards are ignored—in the extreme—you get BU.
No, just kidding.
But seriously: substance abuse, addiction, and psychological problems have to be tackled before productive learning can take place. And here our speechifier’s got the egg confused with the chicken. He blames the despair of substance abuse on teachers for not adequately encouraging their students' “dreams.”
He has puzzled over this: “I've spent a lot of my time wondering what causes teens to throw their lives away to drugs. It seems to start around the time when young kids approach high school and begin to enter the adult world.” And it seems to be because that’s when “society starts to put limits on our once limitless possibilities.”
Or, to put it in less poetic terms, it may be because that’s when their parents have utterly lost what minimal interest and/or control they had, and finally unleash the monsters on the world. And unsupervised outside of school, and disruptive when they’re there, heads filled with MTV "dreams" of fame and easy money, bored and drifting in homes and neighborhoods that look nothing like what you see on Wisteria Lane, where drugs are the means of income for the last generation of high school drop-outs who prey on the next, they fall victim to a tangle of social and economic problems we have not begun to acknowledge much less elucidate and take serious steps towards addressing.
But blaming the teachers is a start.
Our not so friendly author makes a number of assumptions about Mark McLaughlin, author of "The Graduation Speech You'll Never Hear." First and foremost is that his speech, delivered at a Teen Empowerment Peace Conference, was unadulterated. Many of the topics that our blogger raises were covered in Mark's original speech but were removed due both to time constraints and because the focus of the conference was peace and a positive learning environment within our public schools. I know this because I read the original version.
Secondly, you assume that this is some stupid punk townie with a gigantic chip on his shoulder ranting and raving about events that are his own fault. I recommend you write only about things you KNOW and not what you surmise. I would hazard a guess that you have never stepped in Somerville High, and your prior teaching experience gives away the fact that your attitude towards the profession is sorely misguided.
I am a teacher and a coach. I grew up in inner-city Boston. I have taught in some of the worst inner city schools this country has to offer (New Orleans), before family constraints forced my return back home to Boston.
You write
"Teachers are not there to solve all of society's problems. They are there, as the name suggests, to teach. To teach English, or French, or math, or biology."
Outside of the first sentence I have never laid eyes upon a more misguided and depressing statement in all my life. Are you suggesting that teachers should not devote themselves to the personal development of their students because they should only be focusing on teaching subject matter? Are you suggesting that teachers should not encourage study habits, critical thinking, athletic participation, involvement in the arts? Are you suggesting that teachers should not keep a sharp eye out for developments at home and on the street that must guide the child in the wrong direction and squash his possibilities in a haze of drug abuse and violence? You may be able to separate all of this from your job as a teacher, but I cannot, because I look at every kid I see struggling to find his place, struggling against a violent home, struggling against drug using peers, struggling against a system that does not desire his success, as myself.
I know firsthand that teachers have a tough job. But that does not excuse them from the responsibility of effort. Yes, having 40 kids in a classroom makes it difficult to reach each one, and yes some will fall through the cracks, but this is no excuse to encourage drop outs, which many teachers in our public schools do whether you care to admit it or not. Does the responsibility lie on the child? Absolutely, teaching and learning is a shared activity that both parties must invest in, but it is the responsibility of the teacher to make the first move, to invest the student in the learning process, and to demonstrate that education will allow for the realization of potential.
Just sayin'.
Coach Q
Reply to this
I am always flattered when people take the time to respond at length to a post.
A few points:
1) If Coach Q had special access to an "unadulterated" version of Mark McLaughlin's speech, I'm happy to hear it. Unfortunately, the rest of us didn't. You should have seen my original blog post, where I praised Mark extensively for all of his hard work, effort, and valuable insights into the education crisis. Due to time constraints and because my focus was on the absence of families and parents anywhere in the speech as presented, such references were removed.
We can't respond to rough drafts. So, moot point, Coach.
2) "Stupid punk townie...ranting and raving": your words, most certainly not mine. I grew up in a blue color family in a blue color neighborhood myself. "Not my fault" didn't work in my family. No way, no how. My parents taught me that I was responsible for who I was in the end.
3) But then, again, have these people heard of parents and families? No mention of any in McLaughlin's printed speech--the one made available to the public, not the mysterious "unadulterated" one--and no mention of them in Coach Q's respose to my post, either. That's what I find interesting.
4) Coach Q correctly surmised that I have not stepped foot in Somerville High. And I have no plans of doing so. Are you kidding? I don't doubt that Coach Q is a dedicated teacher devoted to each and every one of his students, nurturing their dreams and providing sage guidance to all alike. Lucky for them that he has chosen a profession which suits him so well and for which he is so well-suited. And equally lucky for them that I have done the same. That's not being misguided, Coach Q. Quite the opposite.
I am constantly learning from my students. And am very happy with my job. Adult education has proven a fruitful place...
I make no apologies for choosing my professional path, which has led to adult ed. My students and I share a lot of life lessons as we explore our subject matter, but what brings us together is that subject matter. It is perfectly legitimate to state that "teachers are not there to solve all of society's problems. They are there, as the name suggests, to teach. To teach English, or French, or math, or biology." It is through a teacher's love of his subject and his or her earnest enthusiasm in passing on his or her knowledge of it that is The Life Lesson.
So cut the histrionics, Coach. "I have never laid eyes upon a more misguided and depressing statement in all my life." Polease. A tad sentimental are we? Maybe Cher can play you in the inspirational movie about you.
"Are you suggesting that teachers should not encourage study habits, critical thinking, athletic participation, involvement in the arts?"
And now you're just being stupid.
The larger point lost on you was in the paragraph before the one you chose to highlight: "Sad as it is, teachers aren't there, aren’t paid, and aren’t qualified to deal with the intractable problems of drug addiction, and the social and psychological fall-out from them."
This is not controversial. And if you think you're making a point by suggesting I'm wrong-headed or a lousy teacher, or whatever, you're barking up the wrong tree. Because it's not about me, Coach.
The fact is, students with serious substance abuse or psychological issues SHOULD NOT BE IN THE CLASSROOM, period. We are not doing right by them or the students around them by keeping them there, and it may flatter your sentimental fancy to think that you're helping them out by insisting that they remain in an environment where they're not getting the professional help they really need, but the truth is you are not only hindering their progress, but the progress of all of your students.
If there were a Hippocratic Oath for teachers, you'd be in violation of it.
I am happy that Mark McLaughlin found Just a Start, as I said in the post, an organization which provided him with the kind of fruitful experience he clearly was not getting at Somerville High.
I think we should start taking substance abuse and mental health of children and teens more seriously. I don't think teachers are qualified or should be forced by policy or budget constraints to try to "treat" children and teens dealing with substance abuse or mental health issues. Schools should have more resources for this specific purpose, more personnel trained for this specific purpose, and their services readily and abudantly available to at-risk students (and teachers).
Period. No apologies.
5) I'm actually about a 7 on The Friendliness Scale. http://www.allthetests.com/quiz13/quizpu.php?testid=1113627694&katname=
Save the sentimental bull about what teachers should be capable of in the classroom for the movies, Coach.
Reply to this