Question an assault on integrity of our police
To the editor:
The Scott family attorney's endless badgering of our police is creating an unfortunate flurry of discussion and writing that amount to an assault on the integrity of our law enforcement officers.
In Sunday's Review-Journal article, the question is again asked: Why not test the involved officers for substance abuse when there is a shooting? And again, the question is not given the answer that is needed. The reason it is not appropriate to test the officers every time is that there is no reasonable suspicion the officers did anything wrong.
The Scott attorney has managed to remove two key terms from the discussion -- police officer and criminal suspect -- thereby implying that they are equally suspicious in this event.
By any standards, the random testing of officers is statistically intense over substantial time and the numbers on abuse are minuscule. The subject of mandatory testing may have been an appropriate talking point during contract talks, but to place it under consideration in the face of this attorney's braying is insulting to the officers. I have always felt that Sheriff Doug Gillespie has been even-handed and appropriate in his management of officer conduct -- but in this case, he is selling them short.
Political sensitivity on this matter in this instance is a disservice to the officers. Further, Sheriff Gillespie's stance of "under review" will come back to haunt him when this attorney gets his civil lawsuit under way. This stance is becoming a boulder in the nuisance lawsuit box of rocks being created for a "settlement" down the road.
Jim Cassidy
Henderson
Remedial math
To the editor:
In his Sunday essay, "The test scores from hell," Vin Suprynowicz wonders why so many kids pass algebra even though they cannot demonstrate the same math skills on a standardized test. He observes that kids can get help on homework but not on standardized tests. I can assure Mr. Suprynowicz that the answer has more to do with cheating than with getting help on homework.
This applies to teachers also.
For example, I knew one algebra teacher who never recorded an exam score less than 50 percent for students in his class. When I asked him about this, he said that it would be impossible for some students to pass if he recorded the true scores.
I sat in Algebra I classes in Las Vegas schools over a four-year period as part of a federally funded tutoring program, and never once saw a teacher "go back to teaching remedial elementary mathematics." What I observed is that, even if only two or three students in the class can follow, the teacher keeps talking about algebra anyway. To break the monotony, the teacher will occasionally stop at points where an elementary arithmetical calculation is required, and ask the students for the answer.
If high school algebra teachers were actually allowed to use some of their class time to teach remedial math, it might do wonders for morale. Students might put away their iPods and become engaged in the classroom experience.
Steve Jones
Henderson
Getting worse
To the editor:
Vin Suprynowicz is right ("The test scores from hell," Sunday Review-Journal). I've been disappointed with the Clark County School District for years. My seventh-grader is taking "accelerated" math. Last week she was struggling to get her homework done -- a page of subtraction problems.
You don't need formal testing to discover your kids are not learning. You can test your children yourself. Ask your child if she can spell "responsibility" or "seriously." If she can't, ask her if she can find those words in a dictionary. Ask her if she can pluralize responsibility. Ask her if she can write a capital "I" in cursive.
Last week, I gave my daughter the task of writing "I will take my responsibilities seriously" in cursive. She was simply incapable. Yet the school district has decided all her classes should be labeled "accelerated." In my opinion, those classes should be labeled "remedial" because she has not learned the things she should know at this age.
We cannot afford to have so many uneducated people in our society. If a person can't do a simple arithmetic problem, then how can he decide if he makes enough money to afford a jumbo mortgage?
If a teacher can't teach, she should be fired. If a student doesn't learn, she should be held back, even if it hurts her precious self-esteem.
Our society is in real trouble, and things are getting worse. Let's get rid of "everybody gets a trophy" day, and start rewarding actual achievement and allowing consequences for lack of achievement.
It's the right way to do things, and we shouldn't let the education establishment tell us otherwise.
Diana Gruber
Las Vegas
Tax policy
To the editor:
In regard to the Bush tax cuts that are about to expire:
President Barack Obama wants to extend them for individuals making up to $200,000 a year, and married couples making up to $250,000 a year -- remember, this is the middle class. Republicans want to extend the cuts to billionaires even though that will add trillions to the deficit. The Republican argument is that the rich will invest it (yeah, in offshore accounts so they don't have taxes on it), or that they will create jobs (yeah, in China and India -- anywhere but here, where they have to respect worker rights).
The Republicans recently defeated a bill that would stop companies from receiving tax credits for sending jobs overseas.
The Republicans are very successful at turning the United States into a Third-World country while they perch in their ivory towers high above we the peons.
Carolyn Brandom
Las Vegas
