Writer’s arguments seem to be exaggerated

Dear Editor:

I am writing in response to Dean Livesberger’s letter regarding education majors versus non-education majors as substitute teachers in the school system. While I think Livesberger makes some valid arguments, I feel that his other arguments have not been thoroughly considered. Though he claims to care about our children’s futures — and I don’t doubt that he does — his letter argues for his own interests rather than our students’.

His principal argument — that non-education majors are not qualified to teach — is a generalization. Someone who holds a bachelor’s or a master’s in math would certainly be qualified to be a full-time K-12 math teacher, let alone a substitute for a math class for a day. In fact, it could be argued that someone who majors in a particular field is better qualified to teach in that field than someone who majored in education, as the education major does not have specialized knowledge of that area. However, it must be noted the education major holds the advantage of knowing how to teach, which can be just as important as knowing the material itself.

Livesberger’s second argument concerns the surplus of substitutes registered to work. While this surplus may exist, I suspect that he is overestimating the number of substitutes available at any given time. While Livesberger says “on the average day 20 to 25 percent of subs on the list are called,” this assumes that 100 percent of the list is available at all times. This presumes that none of the substitutes are sick on that day or have otherwise designated themselves as being unavailable. It is in the interest of the school system to have a surplus of substitutes in order to ensure back-up teachers for their back-up teachers.

Finally, Livesberger cites favoritism as a problem within the substituting system, with those who have connections in the administration receiving more calls than others. Although I agree this is a problem, it is one that can also occur among a group consisting exclusively of education majors. That is, the issue is irrelevant to the debate of education versus non-education majors.

Andie Ho

Graduate translation major

Too many ‘Staters’ litter campus, waste trees

Dear Editor:

This is an open letter to the Daily Kent Stater management responsible for the printing of the Stater. It is written on behalf of all the forests, everyone who picks up a Stater off the floor, table, desk or ground, and all those involved in the recycling or disposal of the Stater. While I have not surveyed the whole campus, I know that in at least a few buildings there are about four Staters put out daily for every one person who reads them, and that is not counting the possibility of sharing the same Stater among several people. Regardless of what one thinks of the value of the Stater (I often read it), the question must be asked as to why so many Staters literally litter our campus?

Walter E. Davis

Associate Professor

More Churchills might lead to more terrorism

Dear Editor:

I read in a recent edition of your newspaper that two of your intellectual morons, Ted Bowen and Assad Pino, think we need more Churchills. They better hope and pray that none of his nut cake followers take him seriously and commit an act of terrorism. Remember the Weather Underground?

Everitt W. Simpson

Korean War Vet (USAF)

Golden, Colorado