Letters to the Editor

Cover, Oct. 15: “Stomp”

Crushed Foundation

Higher education in general ought to be viewed as an elaborate pyramid game. Numerous reports examine the exploitation of adjuncts who, in their thousands, occupy the base of the pyramids. But who considers the upper levels in the game?

Regular faculty deserve equal scrutiny now. And then there's the administrator class, typified by fat-cat Randy Grissom, with his glib platitudes about how the game isn't rigged. Many regular faculty members (especially department chairs) never work one day in their lives as adjuncts. Once those chosen few are anointed with their jobs-for-life, their sweet careers amount to departmental daisy chains of mutual pleasuring.

It's a study of clique formations: elite in-groups circling their wagons to exclude all those adjuncts—who do the vast majority of the work of teaching, who produce the bulk of institutional profits, who fund the substantial salaries of regular faculty and administrators and who come to realize they have wasted their time, energy, money and lives, deluded into thinking that one day, some day, their turn will come. But it never will. The result is a class of highly educated and very pissed-off Tom Joads.

Marc Sills
Madrid

Tenure Trepidation

The article unfortunately tells only half the story. The financial burden on this college, as well as most other educational institutions, derives from the fact that every professor who is granted tenure requires the institution to encumber a sizable financial debt that endures along with health insurance costs until death. No other workers in any field enjoy job protection and benefits as outlandish as these.

The entire concept of providing assurance of lifetime employment after only six years is an outmoded system, which by itself forces most colleges and universities for financial reasons alone to rely heavily on adjunct faculty. There are efforts in Colorado and many other states to abolish tenure as an unjustified system that protects bad teachers and limits the opportunities to bring in new ones. A better system would be based on renewable five-year agreements that would avoid the lifelong sinecures now in place.

Craig Campbell
Santa Fe

News, Oct. 15: “Naughty Box”

PTA Sanctioned Taxi

The Chaparral Elementary PTA leadership would like to set the record straight regarding one of the accusations leveled against the principal of our school, Michael Granado. We are very disappointed that the NEA-SF president, Grace Mayer, did not talk to the Chaparral Elementary PTA to get the facts prior to sharing her statements with the public.

Fundraising is an absolute necessity for any school these days, and when someone chooses to misrepresent a fundraising incentive as evidence of inappropriate behavior within a school, it negatively impacts everyone. We raise money so that students can have additional materials in their classrooms, for field trips, science fair, special guest presentations, literacy events and many other activities. The best way to raise money is to get everyone involved. Using the principal is especially helpful. Being chosen to participate in a fun activity with the principal is a great honor for an elementary student.

Mayer criticized Granado for "making poor choices about what he sees as fun." Mayer should know that this was not a reward devised by Granado. The "Principal Taxi" was an incentive suggested by our fundraising partner and is used in schools across the country. Posters were up around the school advertising the incentive, and announcements were made nearly every day during the fundraising period. Students who sold at least 10 items from a fundraising catalog had their names placed in a drawing. Students whose names were drawn were given a ride in the "Principal's Taxi" one day at the end of the fundraising period. We are grateful that our principal was willing to participate in this silly and fun activity to increase sales.

Geri Glover
Submitted on behalf of the
Chaparral Elementary PTA Leadership

Shame Works

I don't know anything about this principal or this school. But I disagree with the idea that humiliation or shame is ineffective. I remember once in third grade being called out by the principal for disrespecting a lunch lady at my school. (I was being snarky about the food to make my friends laugh.) He told me this woman was doing her job, was serving the school and I should be ashamed of myself. I felt so small­—still cringe thinking about it. Sure, I acted like it didn't matter. But the words stung and I learned my lesson. If someone does something shameful, they should be made to feel shame. Is it the school's job to make their students feel good, no matter what they are doing? That's just wrong.

Julie Murray
SFReporter.com

Letters, Oct. 15: “Just a Fluke”

Cry to Mama

It's a well-known fact in Santa Fe (or at least should be to someone running a restaurant) that once your review appears in the New Mexican, everyone is going to want to check it out and it's going to be jammed the next couple days (especially the day of the review). I do not own a restaurant, have never been in the restaurant business, but I've seen this happen in Santa Fe all the time. When a review comes out in the newspaper, we think to ourselves, that will be a good place to check out next week, once all the fuss dies down.

Especially after practically begging for media attention (from what it sounds like), I find it a little hard to sympathize [with the owner of M.A.M.A.S World Take-Out] and the fact that customers materialized and they weren't ready for it. Bad day to be out of town...

Doug North
SFReporter.com

News, Oct. 22: “License to Spy”

Subtlety, Anyone?

Holy crap. These freaks think they're invincible! They don't even try to be sneaky about it.

Rogi Riverstone
via Facebook

Santa Fe Reporter