New School Year — “Old School” Views

Even though a new school year has just commenced in Hillsborough County, I hadn’t planned on addressing education in this column. Not yet. The old school year, it seems, just ended.

Anyhow, some other screedable topics beckoned. Besides, writing on education around here inevitably leads this columnist to bashing FCATs, criticizing criteria for A and F schools, questioning the “gifted” label on bright kids and parodying school-choice scenarios. I needed a break from me as well.

But a funny thing happened on the way to chronicling the county commission’s “laughingstock” status and Emmy Acton’s accountability and curiously nuanced memos on “transitional issues.”

I received an invitation to participate in a media workshop at a gathering of the Safe Schools/Healthy Students Communications Institute in San Francisco. SS/HS is really a number of federally-funded programs across the country, including Florida (but not Hillsborough County), where counties and schools partner with the U.S. Departments of Education, Justice and Health and Human Services.

There’s a lot of emphasis on school-based mental health, social work, mentoring, after-school programs and the like. It’s part of the post-Columbine reaction to violent student behavior and parental cluelessness. As a result, early childhood programs aimed at promoting school readiness and preventing youth violence are bedrock elements.

I was to offer insights to federal grantees about getting their word out to the public. The more awareness, the more support. Call it “No Media Opportunity Left Behind.”

And I did, and the participants seemed satisfied about tips on “human interest” hooks, media “targeting,” “Op-Ed”-page opportunities and collateral support and press-release quotes from prominent officials — especially during an election year. No one doesn’t want to be on the side of safe schools, whatever the details.

But then I wandered off the bureaucratic reservation. I had a captive audience of folks trying to do good things for kids at risk. But I really felt that any federal grant help was necessarily limited — if not compromised — by certain elements of the educational culture, if you will. So I added a postscript comprised of last-minute thoughts I had jotted down on the Denver-to-San Francisco leg of the flight from Tampa. I got the distinct impression such things weren’t typically said where the educational and governmental sets gathered.

Moreover, two days later, back in Tampa, I repeated the refrain as part of a breakfast address to the Rotary Club of Tampa Bay. Even more heads nodded assent this time. A few requests were made for a copy. Here it is.

*A serious dress code should be mandatory. It’s all about a uniform environment for learning — not about increasing polarization and distractions. Students are to dress for school — not an MTV or BET casting call.

*Adults are in charge and need to act like it. Everybody else is a kid. Columbine was a massive dereliction of duty by all the front-line adults, including parents.

*School officials must listen to students and parents and solicit their input. But they don’t have to grant veto power. Siring children doesn’t make one an expert on anything else.

*Be realistic about the popular culture. We have to live with it, even accommodate it. But we don’t have to surrender to it.

*Close open campuses. Even for “good kids” in “good schools.” Help them stay that way. As a teacher, I always knew when my students were coming from PE class or lunch. I certainly didn’t want them coming directly from the mall or a house where no parent was home, which is most homes these days.

*Don’t adopt zero tolerance policies for anything — whether weapons, bullying or drugs. It inevitably leads to zero tolerance for flexibility and common sense. Sure enough, the honor student with the nail file in her open purse in her car is the first one expelled. Followed by the advanced-placement student with a Christmas present of wine for his French teacher. He was trying to brown-nose — not sneak a buzz.

*Schools shouldn’t be in the business of promoting and promulgating a self-esteem curriculum. Self-esteem is a byproduct of accomplishment. Of having learned something. And having proven it.

*And let me add one more. The concept of “student athlete” is probably oxymoronic beyond redemption at the collegiate level. Specifically, bottom line-directed, major school basketball and football where — at the very least — the best players are mostly mercenaries prepping for the pros. But the insidious roots of this sham are, too often, in middle school.

That’s where the double standard for athletes starts manifesting itself. By high school the entitlement attitude has begun to metastasize. By college, vested interests look the other way so as not to turn off the pipeline of blue-chip prospects with cow-chip values. The sources: fawning adults, whether enabling teachers, accommodating administrators or stargazing coaches.

There’s also the deportment department, largely the coaches’ province.

Granted, it’s not easy when “trash talking” is condoned and rationalized as a colorful sign of confidence, gamesmanship and enthusiasm by the professionals. Lamentably, such boorish behavior is now a marketing staple with the NFL and the NBA. But in our schools, at least, let’s call it what it is: arrogant and classless.

The dysfunctional-culture genie is not about to be rebottled by the NFL and the NBA. Indeed, it’s celebrated. Ditto for the marquee college programs.

But we don’t have to give up in our middle and high schools, however formidable the challenge, however tempting the win-at-all-cost ethic.

Senior Rite Of Passage: Handing Over The Keys

It’s something we all will face — if we live long enough.

That moment of truth when we are asked to hand over our car keys — and surrender the sense of independence that those keys embody.

Understandably, the issue is emotionally charged.

For the senior motorist there’s already the calendar and the mirror. Now this: society’s signpost that the end is officially near. “Senior moments” work as self-effacing humor — but they’re not funny behind the wheel.

But no one, of course, wants to play the grim reaper to seniors who clutch that driver’s license like a personal touchstone — one that reaffirms their participation in a society that seems to increasingly marginalize them from its mainstream.

But there are other, less sentimental, reasons for such reluctance.

There’s the touchy area of age discrimination. And then the considerable influence of AARP, the advocacy group that has a history of stonewalling any age-based restrictions on older drivers.

As a result, those driver’s licenses of older Americans that are turned in are typically at the initiative of family members doing the right, however demeaning and depressing, thing. That’s because there are no additional restrictions on older drivers. None. No matter how old. And licenses can be renewed twice by mail or online without a vision test. Had Strom Thurmond been a Florida resident, he could have taken his driver’s license to the grave with him.

But the fact that older drivers are more at risk for impaired vision, hearing and/or reflexes is no mere family matter. It’s a legitimate public safety issue.

To this end, there’s legislation awaiting Gov. Jeb Bush’s signature that would require the state to accept more responsibility in the licensing of older motorists. It would require those 80 and above to pass a vision test before their license is renewed. It has the support of the AARP, and it would begin January 1.

If the object of this bill were to be too little, too late in life, this effort would already be a success. Even though there are more than 700,000 Florida drivers who would be impacted by such a law, 80 is unacceptably high as a meaningful cut-off. A range of 70 to 75 would be a practicable — and necessarily arbitrary — alternative. And vision as the sole criterion would fly in the face of what any neurologist would tell you generally about octogenarians.

Monitoring and licensing our elderly drivers is not a matter of governmental intrusion, nor is it a function of age bias. It’s common sense in behalf of the common good. Especially in this demographically skewed state.

Helping older drivers stay safe, while looking out for everyone else, should be the goal. A physical, a vision test and a field test should be part of any relevant licensing procedure.

There are worst scenarios than taking a senior’s keys, many of them tragic. Merely adding a vision test at age 80 is to be blinded to that reality.

Affirmative Semantics From S.D. O’Connor

The usual spin from the usual suspects followed the Supreme Court’s recent decision that race still matters in college admissions. For example, U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek — of governor’s office sit-in fame — called on Jeb Bush to now correct the “mistake with One Florida.”

Four points:

*The Court’s decision on the University of Michigan Law School case reaffirms that affirmative action is permitted. But it’s not mandated.

*Back to Bakke. What wasn’t settled 25 years ago remains unsettled today. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor advises waiting to see how the landscape looks in 2028. Chances are, no different.

*Dwight Eisenhower had no idea what he was getting in Earl Warren. Ronald Reagan’s legacy now includes Justice O’Connor, the diversity diva.

*Semantics rule. Strategic word choice has always been a vital part of selling social agendas — as well as creating effective push polls. To wit: the connotations of “the homeless” as opposed to “vagrants.” Or “standards” and “censorship.” Or “pro-choice” and “pro-life” instead of “pro-abortion” and “anti-abortion.” On “affirmative action,” itself a benign enough term, polled Americans consistently have favored “equal opportunity.” Not so, however, when it’s referenced as “racial preference” — let alone “reverse discrimination” and “racial quotas.”

And word has it none of this linguistic legerdemain is about to change. Anyone hear an affirmative action celebrant crowing: “Yea, we won. Lower standards stay”?

Strike Up The Ban; Castro Marches On

It’s not been a good fortnight for Fidel Castro.

Apparently the Cuban president was duped recently by a couple of Cuban-American disc jockeys in Miami. The WXDJ-FM radio announcers got through Castro’s gatekeepers to get him on a phone prank — using the guise of an incoming call from his new best buddy, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The “call” was actually snippets of a tape recording of Chavez.

Castro responded for a few minutes before catching on. That’s when the “conversation” turned obscene and Castro was called an “assassin,” which is no joke.

The phony call, however, was merely embarrassing. Earlier, Castro fell victim to his own hubris and Fidelismo, the results of which could be downright disastrous.

That’s when Cuba took control of the Spanish Embassy’s cultural center in downtown Havana. The government said the Iberian showcase had been used to aid anti-Castro dissidents.

The take-over came just two days after Castro had reprised The Music Man by leading hundreds of thousands of Cubans on marches to the Spanish and Italian embassies. The lemming-like conga lines were to protest European alignment with U.S. policies supporting Cuba’s pro-democracy dissidents.

Fidel’s folly was his personal response to the European Union’s announcement that it would be reviewing its relationship with Cuba in the aftermath of the dissident crackdown and the execution of those who tried to hijack a ferry to Florida.

It’s one thing to rally the usual bussed-in extras to demonstrate against the U.S. — Uncle Scapegoat. But this is Europe. Even the appeasement crowd has its limits. Cuba’s fragile, post-Soviet-subsidy economy is now dependent on tourists. A lot of them are European.

Moreover, the lion’s share of tourism-related joint ventures are with Europeans. The Spaniards and the Italians are prominent, especially the former.

But Castro remains Castro. His knee-jerk reaction to affronts is to play Professor Harold Hill and rally the home front with a march. This diverts attention from the real issue; in this case, those with the temerity and courage to question his failed, 40-something regime.

Castro, the ultimate CIA assassination survivor, seemingly never runs out of lives. But he may be running out of feet to shoot.

Fidel’s European Folly

It’s not been a good fortnight for Fidel.

Apparently the Cuban president has been duped by a couple of Cuban-American disc jockeys in Miami. The WXDJ-FM radio announcers, Joe Ferrero and Enrique Santos, got through Castro’s gatekeepers to get Castro on a phone prank — using the guise of an incoming call from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The “Chavez call” was actually snippets of a tape recording of Chavez, a friend of Fidel’s.

Castro responds for a few minutes before catching on. That’s when the conversation turned obscene and Castro was called an assassin.

The phony call, however, was merely embarrassing. Earlier, Castro fell victim to his own hubris and Fidelisimo, the result of which could be disastrous.

That’s when Cuba took control of the Spanish Embassy’s cultural center in downtown Havana. Cuba says the Iberian showcase had been used to aid anti-Castro dissidents.

The take-over came just two days after Castro had led hundreds of thousands of Cubans on marches to the Spanish and Italian embassies. The marches were to protest European alignment with U.S. policies supporting Cuba’s pro-democracy dissidents.

The Fidel-led marches were Castro’s personal response to the European Union’s announcement that it would be reviewing its relationship with Cuba in the aftermath of the dissident crackdown and the execution of those who tried to hijack a ferry to Florida.

It’s one thing to rally the usual bussed-in extras to demonstrate against the U.S. — Uncle Scapegoat. But this is Europe. Cuba’s fragile, post-Soviet economy is now dependent on tourists. A lot of them are European.

More to the point, the lion’s share of tourism-related joint ventures are with Europeans. The Spaniards and the Italians are prominent, especially the former.

But Castro is Castro. His knee-jerk reaction to affronts is to rally the home front. This diverts attention from the real issue; in this case, those with the temerity and courage to question his failed, 40-something regime.

Castro, the ultimate CIA survivor, seemingly never runs out of lives. But he may be running out of feet to shoot.

Sen. Graham: Mantra Material In “BobCat” Pitch

In his e-mail solicitations, Sen. Bob Graham asks voters to help offset all the “fat-cat” contributors supporting President George W. Bush by signing on as a “BobCat.” In the pitch, Graham rolls out some language we will — or surely should — be seeing again — and again — from the Florida Democrat.

Graham skewers the president over what he characterizes as Bush’s “Agenda for Two Americas.” That is: “Tax cuts for those who have and spending cuts for those who have not.”

If Graham is looking for mantra material, that’s it.

If he says it enough, it might deter folks from focusing on the fact that he co-wrote the controversial USA Patriot Act. Such co-authorship compromises his criticism of the president’s antiterrorism strategy.

Sen. Graham has a national security comfort zone and unique expertise, but his Patriot Act involvement undermines that approach. Presidentially speaking, it’s still the economy.

And when you’re such a long shot, why not play the class-warfare card? It helped get Al Gore more votes than George W. Bush.

Hillary Hypes ’08 Campaign

Sen. Hillary Clinton has already banked $2.85 million in advance for her White House years’ spinography, “Living History.” The deal with Simon & Schuster is worth $8 million.

But she’s banking on more.

This is a campaign book: Hillary in ’08: “History Will Absolve Me.”

She’s not about to challenge a popular incumbent, so an ’04 run against President George W. Bush is out. Moreover, the timing of her book relegates the announced Democratic candidates to a publicity gulag and further diminishes their stature — and chances.

Sen. Clinton’s game plan is transparently pragmatic. She can continue to earn a hard-working reputation in the Senate, earn more chits as the Democratic Party’s top elected fund-raiser and look to be re-elected senator from New York in ’06. In ’08, the Clinton White House years’ focus is likely to be more on economic nostalgia than scandals, and there will be no incumbent to encumber her.

Plus, she now gets a chance to get all the seamier parts of the Clinton years out of the way — on her own terms. A little Whitewater whitewash, some victimization over Monica and a lot of humanizing for an otherwise calculating ideologue. She can spin it in the finest tradition of memoir bias.

Down the road, inevitably uncomfortable questions can be dismissed with a “that-was-then-this-is-now” refrain. She can underscore that with: “I’ve already dealt with that in my book.”

The woman is smart, tough, wealthy and increasingly viable as a presidential candidate in ’08. She’s doing it her way, with a little help and a lot of money from “Living Herstory.”

No Diversity In Groupthink Higher Education

Thanks to the University of Michigan’s son-of-Bakke case, the Supreme Court is again weighing the value of — and means to achieve — diversity in higher education. But no matter the outcome, no matter which way Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s vote swings, we are assured of this much. Truly meaningful diversity won’t result, because it’s defined too narrowly.

Studies show that the most underrepresented group in the nation’s top universities and colleges is not Hispanics or blacks but those from low-income families. Class-based affirmative action is still eclipsed by the race-based version. That won’t change regardless of how the Supremes vote.

More to the point, diversity as a function of ideology will remain a higher education oxymoron. Ironically and appallingly, diversity of thought isn’t even an implicit goal. Largely liberal groupthink is the norm among students, irrespective of color. But it’s practically a job requirement for faculty

Davis: Cuban Embargo Is Leverage For Change

Given U.S. Rep. Jim Davis’ recent “fact-finding” sortie to Cuba, it only seemed appropriate to meet over café con leche at Tampa’s El Pilon.

The Tampa congressman is an acknowledged rookie on this still volatile subject and clearly doesn’t want to make ideological or political enemies. The upshot is that he likely won’t make much of a difference either.

Certainly not in the short term. Not someone who “supports change in the (U.S.-Cuba) relationship” while still staunchly supporting the embargo.

“We shouldn’t unilaterally give it up,” states Davis, who considers the embargo as leverage. He has previously noted that it would take a “sea-change in the Cuban government” before bilateral relations could actually be normalized.

“My (5-day) trip was a foundation for dialogue,” he said.

To be fair, Davis, who’s the first member of Florida’s congressional delegation to formally visit communist Cuba, is not satisfied with the status quo and would like to see a more pro-active Administration. That’s why he encourages the Port of Tampa to get involved with legal trade with Cuba as part of “preparing for a Cuba after Castro.” It’s why he supported recent amendments to lift restrictions on the sale of food and medicines to Cuba. His focus, he said, is on “helping the Cuban people.”

He’s also a proponent of change “from within” Cuba. He’s hardly alone.

Even the hard-line Cuban American National Foundation, which has been searching for a post-Elian agenda, now realizes that the best chance for change is from emboldened dissidents — not exile bombast or bombs. In fact, CANF helped set Davis up with some dissident interviews on his visit. (His trip itself was organized by Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington think tank with a dim view of the embargo.)

Davis came away especially impressed with Oswaldo Paya, the leader of the Varela Project, a movement that is seeking a referendum on democratic change. Paya was recently nominated for the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize by former Czech President Vaclav Havel. More exiles are beginning to see Paya as the embodiment of a viable internal opposition, heretofore unheard of under Fidel Castro.

“He’s a remarkable person,” said Davis of Paja. “This is not about him. You can see he has a steely resolve to see it (Varela Project) through. He’s inspired over 20,000 Cuban people to stand up and be counted. And they’re still signing. It’s a unifying event. What’s important is that he has engaged the government. Change has to come from within; that’s why Paja is so important.

“Only the Cuban people can plant the seeds of change in Cuba,” stressed Davis, “but we can help these efforts grow. Congress can and should support reform efforts.

“Congress has been taking some steps, but the Administration is doing the opposite — tightening the reins,” Davis said. “We need to try to reframe the debate. Timing is critical. I can play a part. I intend to move forward.”

His first move will be to find out why the medical exemption to the embargo is apparently not working. That was the message he heard in a visit to Faustino Perez University Hospital in Matanzas. Medical supplies and prescription drugs, he was told, were in extremely short supply.

“I will work with my colleagues in Congress and others to give the Cuban people the ability to buy the supplies and drugs they so desperately need,” promised Davis.

Ultimately, of course, significant, across-the-board progress isn’t likely to happen while Castro, 76, remains alive. Even the Cuban people, in moments of mordant candor, will tell you that only the “biological solution” will herald meaningful change.

Meanwhile, more politicians will make “fact-finding” visits, with incremental changes resulting: a few more exchanges, a few more exemptions. Each side holds its own perverse trump card. For the U.S., it’s the 40-something embargo; for Cuba, it’s the 70-something Castro.

Davis More Vigilant Amid Tightened Security

Sept. 11 and the attack on Iraq mean that the color orange is an all-too-familiar alert hue. Nowhere is it brighter than in Washington. Recently U.S. Capitol Police Chief Terry Gainer warned House members to be on the lookout for assassins. It doesn’t get any redder than that.

Congressman Jim Davis, D-Fla., said the threat hadn’t appreciably changed his habits, although it certainly helps that his family, especially his two kids, are in Tampa “developing roots.”

“I would say I’m more vigilant, more patient,” acknowledged Davis, “but I honestly haven’t changed a lot. I stayed there (Capitol Hill) after 9/11. Is there great security there? Yes. The Capitol is heavily fortified.”