Letters to the Valley Edition : Judging Graduation in a New Light
* My wife and I graduated from Cal State Northridge in 1967. We did not go through the graduation ceremony.
It was not a thing for politically active students on the left to do then. We were concerned about the spreading war in Vietnam, opposed to silly rituals and determined to make America a true democracy responsive to the needs of minorities and ordinary people everywhere.
People do change over time. Twenty-six years later, I found myself sitting through a graduation ceremony at Cal State Northridge for my two oldest daughters, Regina and Stephanie.
I did not think it was a silly exercise. I was excited to be there to share the experience with my family and friends. I watched, listened, took pictures and reflected on many things including what my daughters had achieved.
During the first five years it took Regina and Stephanie to complete their studies, both had worked in various jobs averaging about 20 hours a week to help pay for their education. My wife and I estimated that we had contributed $75,000 in tuition, books, rent, cars, insurance, medical expenses and assorted items to keep them going. Every dollar we spent was worth it. The cost would have been double in a private university. Both had received a good education, were articulate, assertive, very literate and deeply committed to improving the world in which they lived. I was proud as punch.
The changes America had undergone in a generation could be seen at the graduation.
An African-American woman named Blenda Wilson was president of the university. She orchestrated the commencement with grace and confidence, and greeted every graduating student with a good deal of warmth.
More women seemed to be graduating than men. There were no war protesters, but Chicano students carried Mexican flags as if to announce that it was their turn after blacks and women to claim their rightful place in American society. It pleased me to see that the civil rights movement, which had dominated the ‘60s, was still alive and well in the ‘90s. The promotion of multiculturalism and ethnic diversity had to remain near the center of America’s hope for continued renewal and sustained greatness into the 21st Century.
Every 10th person in the audience had a video camera. The impact of the technological revolution could be seen all around. Almost every graduating student was computer literate and aware of the explosion of information in their midst.
In 1967 I never thought about having a home computer, a video camera, fax machine or watching a war being reported live on CNN. Who would have ever believed that a man could announce he would run for president of the United States on a TV talk show and then make a credible showing, or that television pictures would dictate the making of foreign policy?
Stephanie danced on the stage when she received her diploma and shook President Wilson’s hand. Regina was more reserved but equally jubilant. My wife’s eyes filled with tears. I scratched my gray beard. My spirits lifted high into the blue sky and white clouds above. I thanked God for my daughters, their university educations, their professors, my family, Cal State Northridge and for the kind of America that could accept Chicano students carrying Mexican flags at a college graduation ceremony held in a mostly white, middle-class suburb of Los Angeles County.
RICHARD RIOUX
Stevenson Ranch
Taking Creative Approach to Jobs
* How disheartening it is to be embarking upon a “new era” in Los Angeles, and at the same time have just heard from our mayoral candidates an abundance of ill-defined plans, immaterial issues and gobbledygook.
So let’s get down to what really matters and spell it out. Jobs! Before we can “Rebuild L. A.,” we must first “build our people.”
What about an idea whereby you get several leading retail and manufacturing corporations to participate in a program where thousands of unskilled or under-skilled individuals learn basic trades, vocational competency and technological literacy?
This can be as simple as learning to plumb a bathroom, put on a roof, replace a light fixture, paint a building, repair a sidewalk, prune a tree or use a computer.
Let’s--for the sake of conversation--call such a place the Los Angeles Center of Technology and Occupational Training.
Now let’s think of a venue that is not only well-suited given its size and proximity but is also ideally suited given its stature as a site where numerous jobs once existed but now are gone. How about the General Motors plant in Van Nuys?
Wouldn’t it be something if the GM plant--a facility that was once viewed as the cornerstone of the automotive industry’s global strength--were resurrected as a learning center where vocational and technological skills were taught to thousands of people each year?
Think about it. How can we really rebuild L. A. when we have evolved into a society that is focused more upon providing services than in producing goods and improving our infrastructure?
What if our new mayor could harness not only General Motors but such other major companies as Weyerhaeuser, Sears, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Du Pont and countless others that have an economic interest in Los Angeles to contribute tools, materials, supplies and the human resources necessary to teach a myriad of necessary crafts?
We would see a group, comprised largely of minorities and individuals dependent upon social services, emerge with skills, talents and information on how to make a contribution to our community.
Face it, employers do not hire people who are not assets to their businesses. They do not hire individuals whose lack of experience makes them a danger in a given workplace. And no amount of tax incentive or community spirit will replace job competency in a worker.
Whether we’re talking homelessness, drugs, prostitution, carjacking or anything else that has had such an adverse effect on tourism, business growth and the other factors needed to turn L. A. around, you have to start with changing attitudes and creating opportunity.
It all starts with an idea.
BRUCE H. DARIAN
Malibu
Officer Erred in Citing Samaritan
* In response to “Good Samaritan’s Driving Ticket Dismissed” (June 17), I think the actions of Officer Bartholome are shameful and he should have been punished for such an abuse of his position.
In the wake of all the social unrest in Los Angeles and the prevailing feeling that law enforcement cannot be trusted, Officer Bartholome showed poor, if not a complete lack of, judgment in citing Ms. Peterson while she was committing a sorely needed act of charity by giving a homeless man $4 on a freeway ramp.
The onus of good public relations is the burden of every law enforcement officer. Police officers themselves are now responsible for the lack of public confidence. This story punctuates once again, that other facets of city government (this time, Police Commission member Eugene Moutes) have the burden to make right the ill doings of errant police officers while the officers walk off “without comment” and without accountability. We, as a city, will never heal as long as law enforcement officers have no respect or tolerance for the people they serve (not rule).
KEVIN RUNYON
Los Angeles
English Immersion Also Beneficial
* Your editorial “2-Way Language Learning Pays Off” (June 13) commends the Spanish immersion model as an effective approach for teaching a second language to English-speaking students at Hamlin Elementary School.
It is unfortunate that Spanish-speaking kindergarten students in the Los Angeles schools do not have the same opportunity to be part of an English immersion program.
The bilingual master plan mandated by the Los Angeles school district requires that instruction for Spanish-speaking kindergarten students be in their home language. There is no freedom to try alternative approaches like English immersion. The result is students who speak, read and write only in Spanish well into the fourth grade.
However, the problem is not the 10-year-old child who speaks Spanish. It’s the 10-year-old who hasn’t had an equal opportunity to learn English.
MARJORY WOOLF
Woodland Hills
* Your editorial “2-Way Language Learning Pays Off” (June 13) rhapsodizes over the advantages of immersing Anglo children in Spanish-speaking programs at the Hamlin Street school in Canoga Park.
It is understood that this is a voluntary program for kindergarten and first grade only.
Is there a similar program for Hispanic children to be immersed in English language programs?
If this “immersion” technique is advantageous for Anglo children, I would suggest that it should be mandatory for Hispanic children to be immersed in English language programs.
This is still basically an English-speaking country and unless these children become proficient in English they will remain at the bottom of the economic ladder.
ERNEST H. BROUDY
Sherman Oaks
