Hi Rob,
I could not agree more that all activities besides the 3-R's should be
after school. But, as I indicated in a previous e-mail, a lot of
parents of public school children view JROTC not as just another
activity, but as a tool for their kids' self preservation.
I look forward to the next LPSF meeting and a final vote on this subject!
Marcy
Mr. Lum's article is more than a tad bit misleading. The number we
should be worried about is not "enlistment" but rather how many went on
to join ROTC in college -- that's a far more important, and larger,
number.
I reiterate -- the big problem for me is that joining a youth
version of
the U.S. Military's Reserve Officers Training Corps is something that
earns course credit in high school. If we had for-credit high school
classes on doing or joining anything else even half as controversial
the
U.S. Military, there would be outrage. Religious kids, gay kids,
political kids -- all of them have to meet with their affinity groups
before or after school and without course credit. But militaristic
kids
-- they not only get to meet during school hours, with course credit,
but also with special teachers hired specifically for that function
(the
flip-side of the federal government paying half the salary is that SF
taxpayers are paying the other half of the salary, but if these kids
were simply absorbed into the existing P.E. classes, and the JROTC
teaching positions were eliminated, SF taxpayers would save money).Anyway, given the divisions on this one, I think we're all going to
have
to settle for "No Recommendation" next month -- I don't see either side
getting a majority.Rob
Marcy Berry wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> I think the answer to your question is because the parents/students
> want it so. I looked for some numbers of how many families wanted
> JROTC as a P.E. credit course and how many did not, but could not
find
> any. The best I could find to support my initial assessment is the
> article cut and pasted below.
>
> According to the article parents, students, and teachers are in favor
> of the JROTC; I would wager for the same reason I am, discipline and
> good training. Perhaps they do not feel the same way about the other
> student activities you mention.
>
> AsianWeek
>
> The Voice Of Asian America
> Save JROTC In The San Francisco Schools
> By: Nelson Lum, Jun 16, 2008
>
>
> In November 2006, the commissioners of San Franciscoâs Board of
> Education attempted to eliminate the popular Junior Reserve Officers
> Training Corp program from the cityâs high schools. The resolution
> directed the program to be phrased out in two years and called for
the
> creation of a task force to find a comparable replacement program. It
> passed despite overwhelming opposition from parents and students.
> Since then, the task force has not been able to find anything that
can
> compare favorably with JROTC, and last December, the
commissioners, by
> a 5 to 2 vote, extended the program until June 2009.
>
> JROTC is a program supported by all principals of the affected
> schools, all alumni associations, all parents and teachers
> associations, and all student body associations. Asians comprise more
> than 70 percent of the program, and minorities comprise 90
percent. It
> requires participants to perform community services and is strictly
> voluntary. In 2007, JROTC cadet seniors had a 100 percent graduation
> rate, while their non-JROTC counterparts had a rate of approximately
> 90 percent. Commissioner Eric Mar, who voted to eliminate and to not
> extend the program, has consistently praised the program for its
> effectiveness in developing leadership, discipline and character for
> the cadets.
>
> Mar has stated many times that his main objection to the program is
> his belief that it is being used as a recruitment tool for the
> military. A closer look at the facts simply does not support
> Commissioner Marâs contention.
>
> At the end of the 2007 school year, only two out of 1,465 cadets in
> the JROTC program enlisted in the military. The percentage of
> enlistment into the military by non-JROTC students was and has been
> higher than JROTC cadets. In fact, JROTCâs policy prohibits
> instructors from recruiting.
>
> As we all know, the school district is experiencing a budget crisis.
> Half of the JROTC instructorsâ salary is subsidized by the federal
> government (approximately $586,000 for 2007), which also pays for all
> instructional materials such as computers and uniforms. If this
> program is eliminated, additional teachers will have to be hired at
> full cost, something the district does not have funding for.
>
> It would be detrimental â" both fiscally and socially â" to the
schools
> if this program was eliminated. JROTC has proven to help students
> develop leadership skills, discipline, assertiveness and, most
> importantly, self-esteem. High schools must find ways to facilitate
> these young men and women who, had they not found a social group to
> belong to, would likely have experienced a negative affect on their
> social development.
>
> A group of parents, educators, veterans and concerned citizens formed
> a committee to fight for the reinstatement of this program. They
> recognize the value of JROTC for our youngsters and are aware
that, if
> the program is eliminated, San Francisco will most likely never be
> able to reintroduce it again. There are currently over 700 school
> districts on the waiting list for JROTC. San Franciscans should feel
> fortunate that this program is established in their school district
> and available to their students. The members of the committee have
> chosen âChoice for Studentsâ as their slogan to get a ballot
measure