Dear Editor,

I am a teacher and I know the value of a good education, but if we get the at-risk youth in school, it is likely their education will be inadequate, or they will drop out.

It has less to do with the quality of teachers and more to do with a system that values money over people.

Generally, the high schools are overcrowded and cannot deal with students with serious academic deficiencies. In January 2019, teachers went on a strike in Los Angeles (LA) for a smaller class size and higher pay.

The class size in LA was 30 to 40 students. They put forward several academic research papers that support that small class size improves academic performance.

In addition, remedial services for under-performing students need to be funded, or else at-risk students’ chances of success are slim. It will cost a lot to fix the problem, but it will cost at least ten times as much to continue the status quo.

The public education system was designed for students with good parents who have control over their children, but my experience is that that is no longer the norm. Most parents seem to be their children’s friend. I have no problem with that, but the current system was not designed for that kind of society. Their expression of love for their children is permissive.

We can condemn that reality, but that is useless. It is best to adjust the education system to function with little parental support. Currently, it is designed for Utopia.

We can continue to wage war against our own people without providing an alternative. The best solution to crime is to prevent the criminal from being created. Aggressive policing to fight crime will not ensure that the next generation of criminals won’t be created; in fact, it just might increase the likelihood of more criminals being created.

Yours truly,
Brian E. Plummer