Art, not software

Dear Editor,

Sometimes we just have to scratch our heads. On what basis would the Gazette assume a computer program would make the slightest difference in helping low achieving students catch up in core studies?

Does the Gazette have access to independently verified performance data? Otherwise, the school board is left with the unsubstantiated claims of the people selling the software and the wants and wishes of administrators who habitually develop short-term enthusiasms for gimmickry.

Is there no institutional memory of the last few expensive solutions to McCook's problems? The reading program that was supposed to raise reading scores on district nationally normed achievement tests, but has instead lowered scores in nearly every grade level? Anybody remember that one? Or the hundreds of thousands in district funds and the thousands of teacher hours spent in its adoption?

Anyone remember the last two major software purchases, neither of which was the equal of the MacSchool program they supplanted?

Anyone remember when the LIFT program was ballyhooed as the answer to underperforming students? Now anyone with a pulse can slouch through school, fail miserably in every class, and in a few short weeks receive a diploma.

If the LIFT program isn't doing the job with the current staff, then perhaps the staff should be replaced with more competent people.

The targeted students have managed to fail multiple classes in a school system with a well-earned reputation for lax academic standards. New software will not motivate these students. If it were that simple all classroom teachers should be replaced by computer labs manned by para professionals.

Every study of our school system in the last fifteen years has identified the lack of an elementary art program as a glaring deficiency. Any elementary student in any other school in the state of Nebraska has more access to art training than the kids who attend McCook Public Schools, Where are the suggestions from administrators that McCook hire art instructors? A school that spent three quarters of a million dollars on tennis courts could surely find funding for an elementary art program, unless, of course, the money is wasted on RI advised software purchases.

Kudos to Mrs. Lyons, Mr. Shields and Mr. Messersmith for not jumping on yet another expensive "solution" to a self-induced problem. Shame on the Gazette for being so gullible.

Winifred Jankovitz,

Culbertson