Military recruiters in Orange County schools

I'm still creeped out by how often I get solicited for military service. I've opted out of being contacted a number of times now, usually accompanied by an angry email about how ignoring my previously stated request not be contacted essentially makes new contacts unsolicited spam, and that I consider the fact that they keep tracking me down to be a privacy concern. It's not an opposition to national service that bothers me, but then, I've yet to be boldly accosted by an Americorps recruiting officer.

This seems like the kind of situation that our School Board ought to be taking a position on. Or rather, I'm curious why we don't already have a stated policy that makes pacifists feel a little less like delinquents.

I would never attempt to justify the principal's decision to send the students to the in-school suspension room because that's where he had supervisory staff support, or his decision on how to administer the test. But I do have problems with seeing this as the military's "insidious creep" into our schools. Schools make the testing decisions, not the military.

What always seems to get lost in this debate is the need. When this test started in 1968, we still had the draft. In it's 40 year history, many believe that it has become the most respected assessment tool on the market and the school districts do not pay for it directly. We have seen the the results of asking the recruiters of the various services to meet their goals in an environment that is downright hostile in some communities. Without debating the why, suffice it to say that just like recognizing that our water is not an unlimited resource, so too is our freedom that some take for granted. Like water, some just want to assume it will always be there.

I would love to see people in this community get fired up about the fact that we have kids in our "top rated" schools who can't get a passing score of 31 on the ASVAB. We seem proud that 91% of our graduates go to college, but has anyone told you how many graduate in five, six, or even seven years? Some wasted their time and money going straight to college; they had no idea what they wanted to do. Studies have shown that a significantly high percentage of people who take the test better understand themselves after they are counseled on the results. Many who serve first and then go to college report that they are more successful students.

What about the 9% who don't go to college? What testing do they receive to help them understand their skills and abilities? Yes, taking the test does have costs - recruiters contact you until you ask them to stop. Most recruiters will tell you that many of the young folks that they are in contact with may want to consider the military but are afraid of the reaction of their parent(s). That's why recruiters continue to contact kids AND try to talk with the parents. There is no excuse for abusive recruiting practices, and those who engage in them are punished.

So, as I said, we are really upset because kids are "forced" to take a test, but when will we get really upset because too many of our kids can't pass it? And when will we realize that it's in this nation's best interest to have "our" kids volunteering to help to defend our nation for a couple of years? Funny how this is so much like the landfill issue: let some other community have their kids do it!

PS: I am not in favor of a draft - been there and done that - and it's not in our best interest at this time. We can do what we need with quality volunteers.

I'm in the apparent minority of those who see good reasons for holding students to standards that must, on occasion, be tested.  And like Fred, I am more than a little concerned about how academic ability has not been as well served in this state as it could/should be -- for a large and intricately woven fabric of reasons.

So note that PSATs, SATs, etc., aren't true "aptitude" tests nor are they diagnostic in any true sense.  Despite their names, they test absorption of a certain knowledge base and set of academic skills.  Although their predictive ability has been challenged, they do provide one yardstick for kids, counselors, admissions people, and even parents in the whole pre-college process -- with no other purpose than that. 

 However, my take about the ASVAB from the media and this discussion, althought I haven't seen the test itself, is that it purports to be a diagnostic tool.  Such a test can be useful as well, if.... if it is administered by and reported only to those involved in a student's academic life (schools, parents, student).  These tests are designed for military purposes, provided by the military, and reported to the military -- which is still fine if ... if those taking the test want the military to be part of their thinking about their future and are quite happy to have the results known to the military.    But if not, and if the test is presented as somehow other than optional for students, it is certainly worrisome in an era when (among other things) the lines between foreign and domestic intelligence are blurred beyond reclamation. 

In this case, it does seem that the principal made a ?tactical? error in sending opt-out students to a room associated with punishment, which -- of course -- implied something negative about opting not to take the test. I can't imagine publicly segregating students who opted not to take an SAT in a detention room -- can you imagine the outcry and the interpretations of such an action?!

Think it's possible to overestimate the menace from the principal here, but I do give students credit for thinking about the implications of their taking the test and making choices of conscience.   Meanwhile, it's certainly worth questioning whether the test meets a significant need with no other way to meet it, or whether the test is more appropriately administered elsewhere under other auspices.  And it would indeed be preferable to have an opt-in arrangement instead of the current opt-out system.

This whole thing makes me sick. They want kids to have the opportunity to "opt out" of sex education, "opt out" of reading books with cursing, but this is okay.

I think Mark's original thoughts on this were dead on.

Of course, I did go to a school studied by Philip Morris (without any consent) to see how many of us would start smoking, so I am not surprised by any of this.

As for the tests, if I had listened to those: I would have been an auto mechanic. Given my history with cars, that would have been very bad for society...

At every level, this just makes me physically ill.

--Freedom is not just another word