How will AB 165 address this ?

And Don, disagreements aside, it is doubly wrong for you to personalize this debate by calling “shame.” This simply cheapens a legitimate policy question. Perhaps you shouldn’t be blogging at 1:21 a.m. and should wait until your thoughts are clearer.

For example, we have taken our science students to an amusement park each year to enrich their physics knowledge. They took measurements, did calculations, and had a good time doing so.

For this, students had to pay a deeply discounted ticket price. The few students who wished to go on the trip and who couldn’t afford it were discreetly allowed to go, their tickets usually paid for out of the teacher’s pockets.

Now, despite the veto, the word has come down that we cannot charge direct fees for anything. All we can do is fund-raise in general, and it is quite clear that any parent who wishes to pay nothing can do so and still expect their student to receive all the benefits funded by the paying parents.

The result is that our field trip has been cancelled. Teachers cannot take the risk of being left with a bill for thousands of dollars worth of tickets if parents fail to come up with the money. The students will now sit in their classroom and watch a video about roller coasters.

I hope that the proponents of this lawsuit and bill are proud of themselves. What they have done is guarantee that every student receives a basic level of education, and no more,

At recent AEP conference Milton Chen identified the “data stream” by which to assess: “Do students run IN to school, as fast as they run out?”

In the past, music students in Long Beach USD provided their own instruments for practice and instruction. Now, the instruments must be provided by the school. But of course, our schools barely have money for music instructors, let alone instruments for everybody. The result is that music instruction has been drastically curtailed to a bare minimum. Specifically: music is no longer available for third-grade students, only violin is available for fourth graders, and winds are only available to fifth graders.

I hope that my district will implement a voluntary program to collect money for instruments, so that instruction can be revived for our children.

At the elementary level a child’s mind is wide open to new ideas – much more at this time than when they reach middle or certainly at the high school. This is why there has always been greater participation at the elementary level. Elementary music has always been the “feeder program” for middle and high school music. Student participation is high when a music program is offered as curriculum. Offer it before or after school and a school districts sees a 95% or more drop in participation. That’s 5 out of 100 that would have participated in music if it were offered as curriculum. Participation is not enough to pay a teacher and it surely isn’t going to generate enough students for the middle or high school bands and orchestras.

In the short run, the net result of AB165 will be elementary teachers out of work and thousands young minds not exposed to the enjoyment of music. In the long run, middle and high school teachers will be let go due to lack of student participation. Not to mention music retailers that have supplied students will rental instruments and supplies. They too will be a part of history.

Many studies have been done relating music to successful achievement in school. I guess we can afford to hobble our students once again with this bill. Although AB165 makes sense on one level – it doesn’t on many others. It would have been nice if our representatives gave more thought to this bill before passing it.

But Wait! It’s not too late. All you rep’s have to do is pass an amendment to the law making it “OK to Play”….. Well – maybe not – that would be too easy!