Plato said: "The two most important questions for society are these: What will we teach our children? And who will teach them?"

I agree with that and, so, applaud Mr. Piscal. His schools are obviously in good hands.

More californian stupidity. The sort the leftists would have us all drowning under. Are we surprised? Math-who cares. Organic produce? THAT's important!

Seriously? Some doofus thinks growing lettuce is more imporatant than say... oh... learning to read?!
Good on Mr. Piscal for not allowing it to take over his schools. He definitely has his priorities straight.

Holy WTF Batman!

Are these people for real? I've been bitching for years about money going to support sports in school, which only benefits a small group of kids (and frankly, that money would be better spent on, oh, I don't know, BOOKS?) but gardening?

I weep for the future.

Ann, some of the very most important things I learned in life came from participating in sports, not during my time in classrooms or studying alone.

Money spent keeping kids physically active and participating in sports is not wasted, provided the experience is properly structured to promote the lessons we hope sports can impart.

...the American city whose name is synonymous with higher learning, as it is the home of one of the greatest universities in the world....

Oxford? Cambridge? Paris?

No...Berkeley.

WTF?

"an act of fate that will not only contribute to the creation of a permanent, uneducated underclass but will rob that group of the very force necessary to change it's fate"

A permanent underclass that will forever be dependent on welfare & Big Daddy Government, and will forever vote Democrat.

Conan: Berkeley is ranked # 39 in the world, so it's not that much of an exaggeration.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/Rankings2009-Top200.html

A lot of outstanding science & engineering research goes on there, believe it or not.

Spartee, I can see that. I cannot tell you how much I benefited from participating in sports and drama. And, in a way, I can see the benefit to having a garden. Learning how to grow and harvest food is a great skill. But... that should be an extra cirricular activity, not part of the cirriculum. Especially for a publicly funded school.

Conan: Berkeley is ranked # 39 in the world, so it's not that much of an exaggeration.

The use of superlatives is getting out of hand.

Being ranked 39th could be called being "world-class." But I think "one of the greatest universities in the world" should be reserved for the top 10, perhaps the top 20.

Berkeleyites might disagree.

A lot of outstanding science & engineering research goes on there, believe it or not.

I'm aware of the quality of Berkeley's science and research programs. I live near San Francisco and it's an almost-daily topic in the local papers.

My issue was with the use of the superlative "greatest," not with the quality of the University of California.

I think the author let her personal regard for the university color her language.

It was interesting in your list how many of the top 20 universities are located in the US.

The massive land beasts feeding on American fast food are going to be very threatened by this.

When I was a kid, we had a small veggie garden at home.
BF and I have a garden, now, too. Tomatoes and peppers, mostly, greenbeans, too. We've tried growing watermelon but that didn't work out too well. Maybe we'll try again, though. And I have flowers all over the yard in the spring and summer.

In kindergarten we did the grow-the-green-beans in the paper cup thing. Our school had a collective garden that was tended by the 7th and 8th graders, but that was part of our science grade, for biology. Our school had a vegetable garden, one of the others (Live Oaks, maybe?) had a gorgeous flower garden that was tended by the 7th and 8th graders, and that was part of their science grade. Not the whole grade, just part of it. We all made it to high school, and some of us even went on to college. But our whole academic career didn't revolve around that garden. Is that what this Alice Waters person is proposing, that this is all these kids learn about? Gardening? Because that's just idiocy.

*****Spartee, I can see that. I cannot tell you how much I benefited from participating in sports and drama. And, in a way, I can see the benefit to having a garden. Learning how to grow and harvest food is a great skill. But... that should be an extra cirricular activity, not part of the cirriculum. Especially for a publicly funded school.*****

This, exactly. I'm tired of my tax dollars going to the football team's new uniforms.

I think mandatory gym classes for ALL students would be a better way to spend that money.

The author makes some good points (about educational priorities) but this is not one of them:

...."the scope of her [garden] operation—which is fueled not only by the skill of its founder, but also by the weird, almost erotic power she wields over a certain kind of educated, professional-class, middle-aged woman (the same kind of woman who tends to light, midway through life’s journey, on school voluntarism as a locus of her fathomless energies..."

Why the need to sneer at the impulse prompting smart, hard-working women to donate some spare time to schools?

I just find it funny that conservatives blast illegal aliens, but when a proposal comes to get American kids in the fields suddenly it's "the horror, the horror". Make up your minds!

Crusader: We think that a garden club would be an AWESOME after school activity. Truly great. What we find idiotic is taking time away from reading (which many high school graduates can't do) and math (ditto) and science (second ditto) to make time for this. It's not necessary. Focus on the basic necessities first, then add in the fun stuff.

Oh please, y'all just want to hate on anything and everything liberal. Alice Waters is little nutty (if you aren't a foodie) but this is a great program. Read a little bit more about what the actual goals are before you just bash it. Momof4 what do you think science in elementary school is? Teaching kids about the natural world with a hands on project is a GOOD thing. It's how they learn.

My mom is a fifth grade teacher, and she had my father build a school garden for her school. It's been great for all her students.

FTA: >>"The only question in education reform that's worth anything is this: What are you doing to prepare these kids for college?"

I will counter that with "What are you doing to prepare these kids for real life?"

I hate the idea that all kids must be prepared to go to college. College is not for everyone. And in my opinion, college is not for even mostly everyone.

As for gardening, I don't mind little classroom experiments involving plants, but I think a full time garden is more a job for after-school. Classroom time becomes more and more valuable as districts desire more and more of teachers.

"Momof4 what do you think science in elementary school is?"

I remember looking at onion cells, and cheek cells, and my own blood (cut myself with a broken glass slide, and wanted to see what it looked like) in 4th grade with microscopes. There was a microscope for every kid in class. It was a public school, too, albeit in Cherry Creek district in Denver, which is a great school district. And we dissected frogs. So, while I'm not saying growing stuff is pointless, seeing something grow is a bit basic for science (or should be, after about kinder).

Besides, the article is about middle school. They should be waaaaaay past that, and the fact that they aren't is sad. Sad sad sad.

"This, exactly. I'm tired of my tax dollars going to the football team's new uniforms."

Do schools fund that, or do booster clubs. Also, gate receipts at games typically fund football programs in most schools I was familiar with. Those gate receipts also paid for other programs that did not pull in spectators.

My sense is you are kind of hating on sports a bit here, and not bothering with facts. Any particular reason why?

"I think mandatory gym classes for ALL students would be a better way to spend that money."

I hope that was a joke. Because it is even if you didn't intend it.

I get nailed for both property and a school income tax. We also have a "pay-to-play" in my district. $50 dollars for a season. But the "coach" is paid on top of his teaching salary.

They also tried to pass a 28 year "building improvement" tax last November.

I'm sorry, but how much do you expct me to cough up? I don't and won't have kids.

I'm single. Own my home (in mortgage of course), and hit for employment tax in my work location that doesn't offset my school employment tax. So 28% goes to fed, 1.x to where I work, 1% to my my school emloyment tax. Roughly 2.5% to property taxes.

Call it 32.0% -- 1/3 of my year is paying the government off.

Then to hear this shit. Can you see any reason for disgust?

momof4: >>"So, while I'm not saying growing stuff is pointless, seeing something grow is a bit basic for science (or should be, after about kinder).

Besides, the article is about middle school. They should be waaaaaay past that, and the fact that they aren't is sad. Sad sad sad."

Agree with you completely there. My friend teaches third grade. She told me straight out that she doesn't teach science and only brushes "social studies" with whatever she can relate from a reading assignment. (For example: they're learning how to read informational text these next few weeks, so she's got a few magazines with historical/cultural articles in the mix).

In our school system, for elementary kids it's all just reading, writing, and math. And teaching for the FCAT (which is our No Child Left Behind testing).

But I remember that, twenty years ago, when I was in elementary school, we learned the American Revolution, and got to borrow microscopes for a science lesson every once in a while. I wonder if her school even has microscopes...

Jim P, look at taxes as paying back your education, not paying for other people's kids. And the people in school now will pay their cost back in taxes someday (or would, if they were actually learning anything).

But yeah, taxes are too high and school admin takes way too much money. And sports should be either self-supporting or supported by those who play, but that's not always the case.

*****Do schools fund that, or do booster clubs. Also, gate receipts at games typically fund football programs in most schools I was familiar with. Those gate receipts also paid for other programs that did not pull in spectators.

My sense is you are kind of hating on sports a bit here, and not bothering with facts. Any particular reason why?

"I think mandatory gym classes for ALL students would be a better way to spend that money."

I hope that was a joke. Because it is even if you didn't intend it.*****

Why is it funny? Have you not heard of schools getting rid of phys ed?

And no, I don't hate on sports. I played soccer on a city league as a kid. Here's the problem with sports in school:

* Passing a kid who can't read because he's a on a sports team and the team "needs him".

* Regardless of how much boosters may or may not pay for sports-related stuff, I'm quite sure they don't fund the cost of lighting the field, caring for the grounds, etc. MY TAXES DO.

* Taking time away from LEARNING so the school can have an assembly to support the sports team.

And I'm with momof4 - self-supporting or pay to play. Not funded my my tax dollars at all. I'm all for an educated society, and will pay school taxes to support that, but not so Johnny can run for a touchdown.

I don't think any actual tax money goes for these programs. I'm a Master Gardener, and I've set up a school garden, long before Alice latched on to this.

As with many things, the results were mixed. For some kids, the anticipation was hard to bear--they'd want to pull up every little sprout to see if "it was done yet". Most kids were indifferent, until the carrots and radishes got big enough to pick.

But this was for first and second graders, not middle schoolers. Flanagan's dead right about the time wasted on fads in CA schools. That kids who can't read English are moping around the garden is foolish. Alice and her pals would be better off spending time tutoring those kids--but the teachers' union hates that stuff, too.

"Why is it funny? Have you not heard of schools getting rid of phys ed? "

Exactly. Schools in some states don't allow tag or dodgeball either, which is why we have so many porky kids now.

Ha. Most of the reason we have "porky" kids is their diet, but you all are still blasting this program, which aims to improve students' diets, among other things. Alice Water's program in Berkeley is based in elementary schools, even if this article interviewed a middle school principal. I disagree that the only scientific lesson to be learned in a garden is that plants grow from seeds. There's a lot more going on there (pollination, basic genetics, what effects soil quality, photosynthesis, plant reproduction, etc) and the lessons can mature with the students. I agree, of course, that learning to read should take priority over a gardening program.

I admit that I am heavily biased on this topic, as I firmly believe people (starting early in life) should know where their food comes from and how it gets to their kitchen. But I see benefits to school garden programs even if you disregard that belief.

"Ha. Most of the reason we have "porky" kids is their diet"

Then why did previous generations-who grew up having twinkies as snacks, and fatty meatloaf, with mashed potatoes loaded with butter, and whole milk to drink, not get fat? Cause they played outside all day.

I see it as more of the nanny state. Parents should be gardening with their kids. Teachers should be teaching math.

*****I see it as more of the nanny state. Parents should be gardening with their kids. Teachers should be teaching math. *****

Exactly, momof4. It only takes one quick look at Facebook to see the level of illiterate, uneducated, misinformed kids out there. Actually, if you want to see teh stoopid summed up nicely, go to lamebook.com. Good God.

I know there's some smart kids out there, but man, when you find a dumb one....

"IMAGINE THAT AS a young and desperately poor Mexican man, you had made the dangerous and illegal journey to California to work in the fields with other migrants. There, you performed stoop labor, picking lettuce and bell peppers and table grapes; what made such an existence bearable was the dream of a better life. You met a woman and had a child with her, and because that child was born in the U.S., he was made a citizen of this great country. He will lead a life entirely different from yours; he will be educated. Now that child is about to begin middle school in the American city whose name is synonymous with higher learning, as it is the home of one of the greatest universities in the world: Berkeley. On the first day of sixth grade, the boy walks though the imposing double doors of his new school, stows his backpack, and then heads out to the field, where he stoops under a hot sun and begins to pick lettuce. "

That paragraph contains so much stupidity it could only have been written by a republican. Is he seriously saying that having the kids tend to a 20'x20' plot in the schoolyard for a half hour or so a week is the same thing as working 12 hour days at a farm?