First, thanks for posting this great article.

I went to public schools, and U.S. Army schools in Europe (public, not private), and some of them were ugly, and some of the teachers were inept. But, by golly, I learned to read and do my sums from the many devoted teachers who were in my life as I was growing up. My first grade teacher used the old Dick and Jane and "Run, Spot, Run" methodology to teach reading. I later learned phonics, and once I learned to read well, my life was my own. I could learn anything I wanted because I could read words on a page, and understand what they meant.

A third-grade teacher showed me that I could write poetry (it was deathless third-grade poetry), and that I could get a laugh from others by clowning around in a penguin suit. When I left that classroom in New York to return to New Mexico, I looked up and saw her at the window, waving and wiping away tears as my father pulled the car away.

In 11th grade, a chemistry teacher would not give up on me until I finally got the concept of valences. She was the soul of patience and kindness, and she helped me believe in myself.

I was a top student through high school, but was given to understand by my mother that a college education was not for me -- I would "just get married, anyway." It took a lot of years to develop the Chutzpah to start taking classes at a community college in California.

But, California: It was another issue when, in the 1970s, I began dealing with the LA school system. I remember some little boys in my neighborhood talking about their private school with pride and privately thinking "What snobbery." The day came when I put my daughter in that same private school. I always believed in the principle of public education but I wanted my daughter to learn to read and do *her* sums, just as I had learned those things.

Over time, I had my daughter in several schools, some public, some private. It was a mixed bag in all cases. My daughter's second-grade teacher in the first private school did not spell well, and did not appreciate a parent pointing it out. And she accused me of writing a short essay assigned to my daughter. The essay was perfect. I did look it over, but not one change was made.

Over time, I encountered several teachers, some of them my daughter's teachers, two of them neighbors/friends who were teachers. I had occasion to help one with her resume, and to see something written by the other, and I was appalled. There were glaring spelling errors and grammatical mistakes, and these were the people who were teaching English to our young people.

I work as an editor in the legal field, and I train people to do what I do. I have seen many writing samples from trained teachers, both for the lower grades, and at college level, which are just pathetic.

So, please, do not look at this as an attack on teachers. In every profession, there are those who do not excel, and do not even meet minimum standards. But teachers who lack basic skills need to be weeded out so that the many, many talented, devoted, and loving teachers who have much to offer can be the ones who educate our people.

I can't speak to the politics of all this. I just know that it isn't "rocket science" to take a small piece of a large subject and break it down so that children can grasp it. That is ... if those children are not dealing with problems at home, violence on their campuses, poor nutrition, and dedicated but exhausted teachers who are serving more as wardens, trying to keep peace, than teachers.

For only two years, I had my daughter in a Waldorf school. She credits that experience with making her the artist she is today. That system is very like the Finnish scenario described in your article. The children line up at the door and shake the teacher's hand and say "Good morning," before they enter the classroom. There are always flowers in the room, and there is a routine of taking a few quiet minutes to settle before the teacher begins her lessons.

The children play at recess on grassy fields, rather than asphalt. They learn to knit; they carve wooden spoons; they participate in working in their class garden. There are art lessons and music lessons.

Are these little darlings in private school perfect angels? Not by a long shot. But they know they are valued, and they know that they are expected to respect teachers and other students. And if they fail in that, they are called on the carpet and given appropriate discipline.

For financial reasons, I had to take my daughter out of the Waldorf school and put her back in public school. She at least got to be there for preschool, and third and fourth grades.

Going back to public school was not easy for my daughter. Class size was was double, the kids were much more rowdy, the classrooms were lacking the flowers and cushions and other little comforts she was used to. And the teachers were hassled, and not always able to give attention that my daughter had grown used to in the small haven of her Waldorf school.

But, she soldiered on, left high school early because she could not stand the inhospitable atmosphere and the dumbed-down learning environment. She went to a community college for a time, then to a private art school in Laguna Beach (for which she will be paying for the rest of her days). The art school was highly reminiscent of her days in the Waldorf school, and she did well.

Looking back at all of this, I remember how often I would drive by a public school in Los Angeles, see the children playing out on an asphalt playground in the heat of summer, and think, It doesn't have to be this way. Why not plow up the asphalt and plant grass? Okay, so it will get traumatized by little pounding feet. But it's a live thing.

And why could not each school have a garden area, and why could not children be taught knitting along with reading and music?

And why could they not remove candy and Coke machines, and see that nutritional meals are served. And why not ban bringing candy to school in lunch boxes?

It has always seemed ludicrous to me that to achieve those very simple, ordinary things which used to be a part of public education in America, and especially in Europe, it boils down to money. In order to have soul, you have to pay. And those who can't pay have to make it in a too hostile world, all too often. Teachers who want to help are just spread too thin.

But coming back to my concerns above, it is simply a fact that our teacher training programs are turning out "teachers" who lack basic English and math skills. They are taught to teach, but they lack the necessary knowledge to do so in too many cases. I am not an educational expert. I don't know what all the problems are. And I am not bashing teachers in a general way at all. I have felt that a good teacher is "a thing of beauty, and a joy forever." I still remember my teacher waving and crying at the window because we had formed a bond, and she taught me some stuff: The three R's, but also that there are caring people in the world. Her lessons go on forever. I've told this story to my daughter many times.

I think the important issue in the article about Finland is that their teachers are *highly educated*! I don't know what goes into the mix of hiring a teacher in this country who lacks English skills or math skills, and then letting them stay on for the duration -- whatever that is -- and thereby having an adverse effect on a generation of young people. With kindness, such teachers need to be removed. But I want to end this on a happy note: For those teachers who do possess the requisite skills and the proper sentiments about their profession -- let them be elevated, in their numbers, to a position of respect in this country that they do not currently enjoy. And let them be saved from corporate "sausage making" that is spreading across our land in the guise of "education."

Every school should be a Finnish school, a Waldorf school -- in spirit.