ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Plum school board needs to rethink harmful academic cuts

| Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2018, 3:30 p.m.
Plum School District.
Tribune-Review
Plum School District.

I have written this letter to join the voices of other parents expressing concern to the Plum School Board that proposed budget cuts will jeopardize the educational success of our children.

Cutting foreign language programs is a proposal that puts our students' success at risk since most universities now require three years of foreign language for admission. Substituting online foreign language classes is ludicrous. As a professor at the University of Pittsburgh who has both participated in and implemented online learning, I believe that this option will fail our students. While many will be able to score well enough on online tests to receive passing grades, few will actually learn foreign languages. One must certainly converse in a language to truly learn it.

If the prospect of failing our students is not enough to make us rethink this proposal, we should consider how reducing our commitment to education would affect property values. An educational plan that does not meet college admissions criteria may prevent housing and economic growth, as young families may opt for school districts with better promises of academic success. We are still reeling from negative public perceptions. Do we really want to give families considering a move to Plum one more reason to choose another school district?

I appreciate that the school board has a very difficult task ahead. However, you ran on the promise that you will put our children's needs first. You must keep that promise. You must do better.

Mary Hawk

Plum

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me