‘Punishing Dropouts’

“Punishing Dropouts” (editorial, June 10) was altogether predictable, at least to this veteran of 25 years in Los Angeles schools. When State Sen. Gary K. Hart’s (D-Santa Barbara)legislation in question was first reported in The Times my first thought was, “I wonder how long it’ll be before The Times will oppose it editorially.” It took longer than I expected.

Good homes continue to be the major factor in making good schools. Discipline is defined as: “Training that develops self-control, character, or orderliness and efficiency.” Children, including those with limited intellectual capacity, who get this at home tend to achieve far more in school than those who do not. In its editorial comments, The Times seems rather persistently to have dismissed this simple fact of life.

The Times assertion that “a dropout without a driver’s license is virtually unemployable” strikes me as just a little bit fatuous. I know a number of people, from domestics to financial institution officers, who get to work on the bus. But if we are to take this assertion seriously, it would seem more of an argument in favor of Hart’s proposal: Many of those students who need to will, in fact, begin to take their education more seriously. This seems quite clear from the discussions we’ve had in my classes.

Most students welcome discipline training as defined above. Unfortunately, our community “leaders” have permitted and even encouraged our schools to become the hostages of the relative few who are very spoiled, even wanton, very mean, or very disturbed.

Hart’s proposal is not perfect. It merely would help us begin to restore a little perspective, at least.

FRANK C. KIRBY

Redondo Beach