Moral Decay in Philadelphia Schools
For a human character to reveal truly exceptional qualities, one must have the good fortune to be able to observe its performance over a great many years. If this performance is devoid of all egoism, if its guiding motive is unparalleled generosity, if in the end of all things it is absolutely certain that there is no thought of recompense and that in addition, it has left its visible mark upon the earth, then there can be no mistake. This excerpt was taken from a book by Jean Giono titled aptly enough, The Man Who Planted Trees. It tells of Elezeard Bouffier, a simple shepherd who lived in southern France and lost his wife and his only son shortly before the outbreak of World War I. To abate the heaviness of his tragic loss, he became enamored of planting trees. Make no mistake. The story goes on to best describe the kind of children parents should be raising but instead, they are taught that the objects of success are measured ephemerally only in terms of riches and status is accorded far greater deference and respect than the nobilities of character and of deeds. Consequently, an alarming number of parents fail to inculcate any appreciable semblance of moral rectitude in their children and so our city’s schools have been torn asunder by a rising tide of moral decline comforted except perhaps until recently, by the umbral taint of Dr. Arlene Ackerman’s gospels of diversity and political correctness. She has spoken much but has said little oftentimes too quickly and without any great depth of thought.
As visceral as the violence has been, at issue is not one precipitated by race except perhaps tangentially but something far more primordial, the philosophy of progressive moral decline on a scale of unparalleled frequency, magnitude and permissiveness by parents and by the liberal cabal. As we have already seen in recent weeks, the effects are far reaching and far more insidious than even the most inveterate teachers at Southern or highest-ranking school officials could ever have imagined.
While Dr. Ackerman has, to her credit, augmented security at Southern by among other things, installing cameras and hiring more school police officers, the actions were far too long in coming. Given the cascading arrays of consequences, seem too reactive, too little and too late.
The superintendent is ultimately responsible for setting the tone in the schools. But simply put, rather than place the blame upon the students directly responsible for the violence pervading the school, she did little more than tacitly blame teachers. This operating philosophy is evident in an article by Kristen Graham titled “Ackerman seeking changes in Phila. teachers' contract” which published in The Philadelphia Inquirer on June 24, 2009, Dr. Ackerman was quoted as saying: “… she believes more [teachers] should be rated unsatisfactory, disciplined, or fired. She echoed that theme yesterday [on June 23, 2009]. ‘This is a system where there has been little to no accountability for adults. We're losing almost half of our kids. I'm not blaming the children. As professionals, we have to take responsibility for it…’" But why? No teacher (that we know of) ever ordered these children to quit school. They did so of their own volition. This line of thought evades the central question being begged, that being the extent of responsibility the students themselves bear for making poor decisions, ones which teachers are erroneously and unjustifiably held to account. Such morally relativistic thinking will not avail. Yet through it all, teachers are ever the hope. Staff attendance data for this term at Southern has shown that they come to work with alacrity and perform to the best of their ability as far as talent and conditions allow. Even in the midst of all of the depravity, never have they been content to justify their own shortcomings with those which can be found in others. Sadly, even through the silence of Jerry Jordan, President of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, such sentiments have gone largely unreported.
In closing, it will take far longer than the number of years our generation has remaining for time to normalize all of the trouble. Teachers cannot be expected to do it alone. City neighborhoods are still foundering in the seas of moral decline for many parents fail to inculcate within their children any semblance of moral rectitude. Consequently, they are relegated to the streets and are left vulnerable to disease, destitution and crime. Given their immaturity and almost utter lack of fortitude, they invariably choose to fall into these patterns of negativity. In time, all of this cascades into the classrooms in the form of behavioral aberrations of various sorts ever in increasing frequency and magnitude against which teachers by themselves, are powerless to prevail. Now with all of the decks stacked dead against them, students fail to achieve for which teachers are held to account.
It is regrettable and it need not be so. Dr. Ackerman would do well to look to Bouffier’s success more than 60 years ago. He derived it not by vacillating in the acquisition of that earthly dross which too often passes under the name of gold. His antecedent character was and remains unpolluted by any admixture of base metals but from diviner ones within him which he had from God: honor for himself, service to his community and its artifacts of growth and accomplishment for jobs well done. These are the ends of success which parents should teach their children to strive and to serve.
Bouffier’s greatness was measured by the world in all he did. Selfless acts of service whether they go altogether unnoticed or are as keenly felt as his, enable us to find joy in the tedium of our own labor, meaning in the tumult of our own lives and solace in the ubiquitous and despondent nature of the fragility in the human condition. These are the very keys which unlock the power, pride and purpose in who we are and in all that we do.
Submitted,
William Aitken, Philadelphia
Dean Coder, Philadelphia
Stephanie Sholl, Philadelphia
Jonathan Verlin, Philadelphia