Fixin' Supper

Oh my gosh. I’m not even sure what to say. But remember my previous post, where I blasted MNPS for its propaganda in favor of school uniforms, which MNPS’ spokespeople have crowed about in the last couple days, saying uniforms will prevent incidents like the one this week, where a Jere Baxter student was arrested for concealing a rifle in his pants??

Get this:

JERE BAXTER ALREADY HAS A UNIFORM POLICY!!

The specifications are even more restrictive than the proposed policy for all of Metro next year: J.B. allows white polos with khaki or dark pants, no blue jeans. And yet, oh the irony is killing me, and yet, a Jere Baxter student hid a rifle in his pants on the way to school.

I’ll leave you to think about that one.

I am not surprised at the misinformation being spread by MNPS about its still-not-final uniform policy for the 2007-2008 school year. It’s become clearer and clearer that the administration decided a long time ago [who knows why] that it would be implementing uniforms, come hell or high water. So quotes like these fail to raise my eyebrows any longer:

From the City Paper, Friday, May 4:

Ralph Thompson, the district’s assistant superintendent for student
services, said although the new policy cannot prevent all weapons from
making it into a Metro school, it will decrease the number of
gun-related violations.

“Standard school attire is going to be
great on that,” Thompson said. “It’s going to help and I think it’s the
classic case of that wouldn’t have happened and could he have possibly
had a smaller handgun — yeah, maybe, but maybe not. The pockets are
only so large.”

From the City Paper, Thursday May 3:

Metro Schools’ spokesman Woody McMillin said this is just another
example of why the district will benefit from the upcoming standard
school attire policy that will be implemented beginning this school
year.

“I think this is probably another example of how standard
school attire will be effective next year,” McMillin said. “Children
won’t be able to hide a rifle in their pants. The fact that you even
have to deal with that is unfortunate, but that’s something that will
help with situations like that next year.”

Those of you who’ve been here longer than a couple days already know what I know: The EXISTING school dress code doesn’t allow baggy clothes. And that didn’t stop the student charged this week with hiding a rifle in his pants….nor will the new dress code, especially since he was arrested for having the gun on a Metro bus on the way to school. Or is MNPS planning to enlist Metro bus drivers, employees of an entirely different agency, responsible for enforcing the school uniform policy? Give me a break.

This is propaganda, pure and simple.

But here’s what bothers me about it:
The City Paper has covered this story diligently, if partially, since SSA emerged as an issue several weeks ago. So shouldn’t part of the reporter’s background check be to KNOW the existing dress code? And the details of the new one? And to hold MNPS’ feet to the fire when they make such ludicrous statements? As is stands, the City Paper is functioning as the PR agency for MNPS. While I’ve long loved the City Paper and recommended it to others, this laughable attempt at "reporting" has me rethinking that.

Journalists: It’s not your job to help out the government. It’s your job to get to the truth.

Hey, I figured some of y’all would be interested in this shopping research by my friend, Diane Willard. Like me, she’s mystified at Metro Schools’ promotion of the sales tax holiday this weekend as an opportunity to purchase clothing for next fall meeting the new uniform requirements, since the new uniform requirements haven’t been officially released yet [and won't be until sometime in early May]. Nonetheless, she has checked out some local stores using the proposed policy as a guide. What she found isn’t encouraging:

I decided to go check the stores out to see what
selection I would have should I be one of those parents that does back
to school shopping in April. I went to K-Mart, Wal-Mart, Target, and
our neighborhood thrift store since I would assume these would be the
stores the majority of parents in our district would shop. At K-Mart,
there were polos on sale for teen girls and about 5 pairs of khakis
that may or may not be dress-code appropriate–the cut looked a
little too flared for me. Most of the capris had drawstrings, making
them useless as well. In the younger girls department, there was not one item
that I could find that would meet the code, no polos, no skirts,
nothing. A quick glance at the young boys department didn’t yield polos, but
they did have elastic-waisted khakis.

Wal-Mart was not much different and once again, absolutely NOTHING for girls in sizes 6 to 14.

Target did have $20 khakis that could work for teen girls, but
none under size 12. Polo shirts were $10 but they did not have any navy
blue. Shorts were $18, but to be honest, I wasn’t sure a lot of them
were long enough to make the new code. Young girls made out slightly
better if they were sizes 2 to 6x as they did have a rack of shorts
that would work–they were $15, I believe. Once again though, for most
elementary girls there was nothing! Young boys had khakis, I didn’t see
polos and for teen boys there were khakis, but no polos.

The thrift store yielded absolutely nothing for young girls or
teens, but there were khakis for boys. I didn’t check for polos there.

I realize the retailers haven’t had a reason to stock this stuff
before now, but it makes me wonder about the fall. I’ve never worked in
clothing retail so I’m not sure when they would even need to place
their orders for the fall, but I would think it would be pretty far in
advance. I’m really curious how they plan to handle things if people
can’t find the "proper" attire.

While I’m certainly not going to be buying my child clothes this weekend [she has plenty in her closet that still fit and that she likes, nary a khaki or polo in the lot], I’m dumbfounded by this:

• $20 khakis??
• $18 shorts??
• $15 shorts for little girls??

These were Target clothes. Good grief, I can’t afford that and my child is nowhere near qualifying for reduced lunch. The 7yo has a closet full of clothing items that cost on average, around $10. I have no idea who could AFFORD to buy compliant clothing. Assuming they could find it.

Thanks to Diane for shedding more light on the problems with school uniforms in Metro.

So, I read this morning in the City Paper that the school board’s uniform committee still isn’t finished with the policy, but they are sure they AREN’T including an opt out provision. Somewhere, I’ve missed something. Because without an opt out, they’re violating students’ civil rights, including their right to a free public education. And all the school districts that this committee cites as their models — like Long Beach and Memphis — DO include an opt out.

I know this sounds crazy if you haven’t been in the middle of this for weeks like I have, but I am starting to think this committee really believes that making kids dress the same will erase the disparities they bring to school with them. They’re bound to have some good intent, right?? But wearing baggy or sloppy clothes isn’t what’s stopping some kids in Metro from learning. Let’s talk about the kids who come to school hungry. Who don’t have a parent at home. Whose parents are at home, strung out on drugs. Who struggle with learning disabilities. Who don’t have money to buy school supplies. Who are being abused. Whose parents are getting divorced. Who dodge bullets in their own front yards.

The school uniforms won’t shield kids from those problems. They won’t make more fortunate kids feel empathy. They won’t create active PTOs at schools that haven’t had them. They won’t erase the differences between the so-called haves and the have-nots.

Bottom line: They will get the school district sued, and your tax dollars will be used to defend a policy that’s been proven in an academic study to be ineffective. Talk about a waste.

Here’s the letter I sent this a.m. to the seven school board members who voted for school uniforms. Separately, I thanked David Fox and Mark North, who were exceptional in their opposition to this ill-conceived policy.

Members of the Board of Education Who Voted for SSA,

I am horrified at your vote in favor of school uniforms last night for
many reasons, but none more important than the fact that you ignored
existing scholarly research to do so. It’s irrelevant which principals
or administrators want standard attire; the research already says it
doesn’t improve safety or achievement. Period. Grasping at straws is
NOT a legitimate reason to violate my daughter’s, and 74,000 other
Metro students’, civil rights. If I cannot count on the school board to
understand the value of academic research, I seriously question your
ability to meet my daughter’s, and 74,000 other students’, educational
needs.

I do see that some of our principals seem desperate for measures that
will work to ensure student safety and increase achievement. Super. Why
can’t we help them find such measures, instead of implementing one
thing that’s been proven not to work? [Incidentally, since
they already had the ability to implement SSA, why haven't
they?? Weren't you the least bit curious??]

You can wish, hope and believe that school uniforms don’t violate
anyone’s civil rights, but that doesn’t make it so. You can believe
with all your heart that students won’t tease each other any more, and
that dressing up will make them take school seriously. None of the
research bears out these opinions. I’d like to speak up as a person
whose professional job depends not on my conformity, but on my
creativity and free expression, both of which were nurtured by the
public schools I attended in West Tennessee. Last night, you did an
unconscionable disservice to students of all backgrounds seeking to
become productive adults whose opinions are valued.

Finally, the verbal treatment several of you gave to magnet schools,
students and parents is reprehensible to me. I was shocked to hear
magnets referred to as "haves" and all other schools as "have nots."
Clearly some of you have not visited Metro’s magnet schools. The only
"have" possessed by many, many students in my daughter’s school is the
fact that they attend Lockeland, and I thank you for their opportunity.
Students at our school come from all economic and family educational
backgrounds. The very idea that you would class all these students
together — or consider all students at nonmagnet schools as "have
nots" — is an insult to all students and to many schools. As part of
our process in placing my daughter in kindergarten three years ago, we
visited several Metro and private schools. I did not find a Metro
elementary school I would have been sorry to send her to. Shame on you
for promoting divisions in the school system. If there are problems at
some of our nonmagnet schools — and graduation rates would suggest
there are — heaven forbid we work with those communities to provide
the unique opportunities they need, and unique solutions to their
unique challenges.

But don’t for one more minute insult my, or 74,000 students’
intelligence, by suggesting that khaki pants and polo shirts are the
solution we need.

Since the Tivo option didn’t work out, I thought you [or at least 2-3 of you] would like to see what I said. This is pretty close….I just varied a word or two here and there from what I prepared. The great thing was, across all anti-SSA speakers, without any planning, we covered all the bases. So what I didn’t say here was said by others.

My name is Laura Creekmore. I’m the single mother of a 2nd grader at Lockeland Elementary and a toddler who will one day go to Rosebank or Lockeland.

I’ve lived in Nashville since 1989. When I moved here, it was hard to find anyone with something good to say about public schools. Happily, that has changed, but I think we’d all agree we see the need for continued improvement in many areas. Unfortunately, the proposed policy doesn’t address those areas.

A couple of my problems ought to be immediate dealbreakers for those of you on the board who are charged with fiscal responsibility and the authority to direct our children’s education.

1.    There has already been national research on the subject of school uniforms, also known as standard attire. Dr. David Brunsma’s study – not an opinion survey, but an academic study focusing on outcomes – proves that standard dress has NO effect on student achievement or student behavior. No effect.
2.    This proposed policy has already failed one legal review, and it will open Metro up to legal liability. The U.S. Supreme Court said in Tinker v. Des Moines – almost 40 years ago – that public schools cannot prohibit clothing unless it’s been proven, or is reasonably expected, to cause disruption to the educational process. Blue jeans don’t disrupt anyone’s education. T-shirts with no collars don’t stop you from reading. A drawstring or cuff on your pants doesn’t threaten anyone’s safety, or stop kids from completing their math assignments.

So what I want to know is, how are you going to make up for the fact that my daughter’s teachers and her principal will have to take away from instructional time to send students home for belts? Or spend time writing up a student who arrived with no collar on her dress, or no buttons on her polo shirt? This policy is a waste of time and it steals valuable school time from our students.

I also want to know, where have you budgeted the money to pay for the lawsuits that will come from this ill-conceived policy? They WILL come – this policy infringes on students’ rights of expression. The U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court settled that a long time ago. I saw Mrs. Warden quoted in the paper discussing the probable loss of custodians in next year’s budget. How many more are there to cut?

Maybe instead you can start with the salaries of the administrators who spent lots of time last week visiting schools to check on whether shirts were tucked in. If you think that’s the best use of their time, I know high-school students reading at elementary levels who will disagree. I know gifted and special ed kids who already aren’t being served according to their educational needs.

Drop this policy and focus on the education of our children, not their style of dress.

Too bad I didn’t have money riding on this vote, because at least I could have made some cash on the outcome. I thought this afternoon, we’re looking at a 7-2 vote, and darn if I wasn’t dead on. Seven in favor of SSA, that is.

The public comment period lasted for more than two hours, with each speaker alloted three minutes. Nashville Sister says I was the most articulate speaker. She’s flattering me, but I thanked her anyway. Our attempts to Tivo this were unsuccessful due to the lack of start and end times for the program on Channel 3.

A large thanks to Metro School Board members David Fox and Mark North, who argued adamantly and eloquently against this policy, for a number of reasons that I found very compelling. Too bad I didn’t have a vote.

What I found most disturbing: Principals, administrators and school board members who argued in favor of the policy, saying they believed this would affect student achievement and behavior, many of whom even acknowledged that research says it does not. Research saying this does not work is certainly not a clear and compelling reason to violate my daughter’s constitutional rights. Your deeply held beliefs are not a clear and compelling reason to violate my daughter’s constitutional rights.

Way to take a great student, who will do nothing but pump up your test scores for the next 10 years, should I choose to leave her in public schools, and piss her off. Make her hate school. And for what? So you can feel better about the way students look.

I hate to be the one to tell you, but gang members will adapt. We had a student demonstrate tonight at the board meeting how easily weapons could be concealed inside clothing meeting the uniform policy. Their uniforms won’t be feeding any students breakfast or protecting them from gunshots outside their bedroom windows. Those problems don’t rightfully belong to the schools, but schools certainly deal with the consequences. And now, in a misguided attempt to "help," Metro Schools have taken an authoritarian stance that would have been welcomed in Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia. We may not like the fact that other people have freedom of expression, but every American citizen does, from birth on up. Without a clear and compelling reason in its favor, this policy is rotten to the core.

Live in Davidson County? Have cable??

See me on TV tonight! I’m one of the dozens of people slated to address the school board about standard attire. The meeting starts at 5 p.m. and I think I’ll get to speak sometime between 5:30 and 6:30.

The Metro Board of Education votes on the proposed standard school attire policy (PDF) at its April 10 meeting. Just under five days left, and lots to do.

First, take note of these items:

• Read Metro’s proposed policy (PDF). It’s six pages long and very specific.
• Standard attire has been well researched by academics following recognized research practices. Unfortunately, in its report to the board, the SSA committee appointed by Metro misrepresented the results of Dr. David Brunsma’s study. Brunsma’s study proves that standard attire has no effect on achievement or behavior (PDF).
• Metro has made a big deal out of its parent survey related to SSA. The SSA committee–and several board members–are placing faulty significance on the results of this telephone survey. The survey was completed BEFORE Metro’s committee released the actual policy. Not one person voted for the proposed policy, since it wasn’t out yet. So don’t believe anyone who tells you that a majority of parents are in favor of the policy.
• Finally, the Tennessee ACLU completed a legal analysis (PDF) of the proposed policy. The policy opens Metro up to several litigation liabilities.

None of this makes any sense. Our Metro Board of Education is considering implementation of a policy that’s already been proven to have no impact on education or student behavior. Why?

I know it’s not because some in the community would rather see students dressed neatly than teach them to read. ["Look, all dressed alike! They're all so cute."]

I know it’s not because anyone really thinks wearing a polo and khakis will stop a student from bringing a weapon to school. ["Oops! No more hoodies....wherever will I hide my handgun??"]

Certainly it’s not because banning jeans will stop kids from teasing and bullying. ["I used to make fun of you, but now that we're both wearing khakis, let's just be friends."]

Perhaps it is because, even subconsciously, implementing this policy can make us feel successful as a community.

And perhaps it is because we can. Adults can often impose their will on children. However, I don’t see many adults advocating similar policies that would affect them. ["Let's make all homeowners in Metro plant red geraniums in the front yard, and keep their yards mowed to 1.5" exactly. That will make the neighborhoods look nice, and criminals will be motivated to become productive citizens."] Not only is that ridiculous on its face, it’s the same argument being used by proponents of SSA. Dress the children up, dress them alike, and school will be better.

Clothes won’t make students study. Clothes won’t feed a child breakfast before school or dinner at night. Clothes won’t help with homework. Clothes won’t make kids like each other or be nice to the short kids. Clothes won’t get parents to the PTO meeting. Clothes won’t teach a child to read or stop the gunfire outside the bedroom window at night. Clothes won’t stop your parents from divorcing or your grandmother from dying or get your mom off drugs.

Maybe it’s just me, but here’s what I want to happen Tuesday night. I’d like the school board to address this frivolity for the waste of time and resources that it is. I’d like them to say to the 74,000 students in their care:

We’re not going to allow anyone to waste further time on policies that feel good but don’t make a difference. We’re not going to allow adults to trample on your rights as American citizens, either. We know you don’t have a lot of time: In a few short years, even today’s kindergarteners will be on their own.

So we’re going to devote every bit of energy, every resource and every dollar this board controls to ensuring you receive the best education we can humanly provide. We’re going to ensure you can read, write, calculate and think critically. We’re going to ensure you are prepared for further study or for training in your chosen profession. We’re going to make sure your school building is safe, with working heat and air and clean water. We’re going to get the smartest, most caring teachers anywhere, and we’re going to give you enough of them so you get the attention you deserve.

When you need a reading tutor or study help for your AP exam, you’re going to get it. When you need advice on college applications, you’re going to get it. When you struggle with a learning disability or have trouble fitting in, we’re going to be there. When you need help with family issues, health problems or anything else that interferes with your education, we’ll find a way to help. Because our covenant with the children of this city says that we’ll prepare you for the complex world we live in. We know that’s possible, and we believe each of you–all 74,000 of you–brings unique talents and experiences to this world that we will need in the future. We know you don’t have time to waste, and our city can’t afford for you to be less than your best.

I get that I’m an idealist on such matters. But if we can’t think big when it comes to education, there’s not much point in bothering, is there? Education is about striving for an ideal. So, come on, school board. Meet me in the middle. Throw out this policy and let’s educate our children.

What to do: Contact the school board members now.

Note: Contact all school board members today to say, No to SSA! The board votes on the proposed policy at its Tuesday, April 10 meeting.

I am so not a lawyer. But when I read the proposed standard school attire produced by the Metro Schools’ committee, I thought I saw several legal liabilities for Metro that would be created if this policy were adopted. See my earlier post.

Turns out the local ACLU agrees (in a much more meaningful assessment than my off-the-cuff comments) in this PDF of a letter it sent to all Metro school board members, detailing specifically several areas in which the proposed policy is legally unsound. Never mind that the proposed SSA policy is based on faulty research [No empirical evidence exists to indicate that standard attire promotes student achievement or positive behavior--get the history here], but if this policy is adopted, taxpayers could be on the hook, defending lawsuits against this poorly conceived idea.

P.S. Whatever your politics, I stand by the assessment of the ACLU by Michael Douglas’ character in The American President: "This is an organization whose sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights." I think I need to renew my own membership, come to think of it. Done.