Re “Selling Teachers on School Reform,” May 6:

Richard Lee Colvin’s Column One on union-led school reform efforts highlights the fact, rarely acknowledged until now, that teachers’ unions in cities around the country are leading players in the effort to improve our public schools. As mentioned in the article, the American Federation of Teachers was among the earliest to call for higher academic standards, accountable charter schools, tougher discipline standards and testing of new teachers.

Yet these reforms, and others that often meet with resistance, are not solely the responsibility of unions. A contract is a two-way street, and so should be the leadership on reform efforts, with school administrators and union leaders joining forces. Cooperation is not always easy, as Colvin makes clear, but in cities such as Chicago and Boston, where a commitment has been made to find common ground, genuine progress is underway. Test scores are up, dropout rates are down and more students are graduating and going to college.

SANDRA FELDMAN

President, AFT

Washington

*

Your excellent article missed the major problems in public education, which are simply the lack of qualified teachers (not addressed in reform efforts) and the lack of classrooms/space (similarly not addressed).

Because these essentials are missing I support a “voucher lite” program that would offer vouchers to low-income students to alleviate overcrowding (known as year-round schools). This is not the best solution, but lacking a better solution, such as reform, I believe it’s the best we can do. No teachers, no schools, no education.

ROBERT MATANO

Laguna Niguel

*

As a fifth-grade teacher in a local school district, I have just finished administering the Stanford 9 to 33 students. The main sections of the test seemed reasonable, but the STAR sections, focusing on the new language arts and math standards, were quite distressing. Beyond the fact that the present curriculum doesn’t even address many of items on these sections of the test, I question whether we as parents are ready to devote the time and energy required to get our elementary school students to master what I consider near high school-level concepts.

The fact is, many students already have difficulty mastering current standards. I’m sure team sports, childhood playtime and family obligations will take priority in many families over achieving mastery levels of the new standards. Do our children really need to be intelligent beyond their years at the expense of enjoying school and childhood in general?

DOUGLAS J. FORD

Covina