Saturday letters: Student attendance doesn't guarantee learning; missing comics
Attendance doesn't mean students are learning
Far be it from me, with advanced degrees, to suggest that students should not continue to attend school. However, Elizabeth Tanner‘s contention that cajoling school attendance will result in improved academic performance is an untenable supposition ("RI needs business community's help in shaping future workforce," Commentary, Jan. 14). This is the classic mistake of calling an association cause-and-effect.
School attendance is a marker for those who are interested in education and are most likely to succeed by definition. Obviously one cannot achieve if one is not participating. But merely attending does not guarantee engagement in the process. Those who choose not to attend are unlikely to succeed and forcing them into the classroom is potentially disruptive to those who are truly interested. It is also a potential waste of academic teaching time and effort.
Rather than unleashing the truancy officer as if in a Little Rascals comedy, a review of the desires of the student and parent(s) can ascertain whether a less academic program based on other vocational skills is warranted. Youth success in any type of educational endeavor is tied much more to parental values than societal. An “it takes a village” approach will result in squandering assets better applied in a different direction.
Germany assesses, then directs, students toward more individually appropriate goals rather than the failed concept that all should get a college degree. In the mid to late 20th century such currently disparaged classes as auto mechanics, wood and metal shop, mechanical drawing and even home economics salvaged many a disaffected student. A modern version of these programs at the local level would be far more effective than all the tinkering by the Department of Education, the Governor’s office, #Attendance Matters, Learn365RI, etc., and likely more cost effective too.
Dr. Stephen E. Glinick, Barrington
Nothing funny about changing the comics
Concerning the recent changes in the comics lineup at The Providence Journal, I understand why it is a good idea to refresh things occasionally. I also understand that The Journal is likely beholden to decisions made by their parent company (since they are part of the USA Today network).
Which is why I am willing to give the new entries all the opportunities to win me over despite the disappointment I feel in seeing “Close to Home,” “Rhymes with Orange,” and “Mother Goose & Grimm” go.
However, it is inexplicable that a Rhode Island newspaper would cease publishing a comic (“Wallace the Brave”) that is based out of a fictional village in Rhode Island with all of its local references. How sad indeed.
Tommy D’Angelo, Smithfield
Editor's note: We heard from many of our readers regarding the "Wallace the Brave" comic strip, and we're pleased to say that it will return to our pages.
This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: Saturday letters
