education

LEA C.Schnoor

>
 * 1) In Texas School, Teachers Carry Books and Guns
 * 2) Packing heat at school (ABC - TV interview with David Thweatt)
 * 1) Dans une petite ville du Texas, les professeurs sont armés
 * 2) Down wiv school: children are best educated at home
 * 3) The American school where teachers carry a pen . ..
 * 4) Ces parents qui choisissent de faire l’école à la maison

**__ VERSION: __** In Texas School, Teachers Carry Books and Guns Rex Curry for The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/us/29texas.html  HARROLD, Tex. — Students in this tiny town of grain silos and ranch-style houses spent much of the first couple of days in school this week trying to guess which of their teachers were carrying pistols under their clothes. “We made fun of them,” said Eric Howard, a 16-year-old high school junior. “Everybody knows everybody here. We will find out. ” The school board in this impoverished rural hamlet in North  [|Texas]  has drawn national attention with its decision to let some teachers carry concealed weapons, a track no other school in the country has followed. The idea is to ward off a massacre along the lines of what happened at [|Columbine High School]  in Colorado in 1999. “Our people just don’t want their children to be fish in a bowl,” said David Thweatt, the schools superintendent and driving force behind the policy. “Country people are take-care-of-yourself people. They are not under the illusion that the police are there to protect them.” Even in Texas, with its tradition of lenient gun laws and frontier justice, the idea of teachers’ taking guns to class has rattled some people and sparked a fiery debate. Gun-control advocates are wringing their hands, while pro-gun groups are gleeful. Leaders of the state’s major teachers unions have expressed stunned outrage, while the conservative Republican governor, [|Rick Perry] , has endorsed the idea.In the center of the storm is Mr. Thweatt, a man who describes himself as “a contingency planner,” who believes Americans should be less afraid of protecting themselves and who thinks signs at schools saying “gun-free zone” make them targets for armed attacks. Mr. Thweatt maintains that having teachers carry guns is a rational response to a real threat. The county sheriff’s office is 17 miles away, he argues, and the district cannot afford to hire police officers, as urban schools in Dallas and Houston do. The school board decided that teachers with concealed guns were a better form of security than armed peace officers, since an attacker would not know whom to shoot first, Mr. Thweatt said. Teachers have received training from a private security consultant and will use special ammunition designed to prevent ricocheting, he added. Harrold, about 180 miles northwest of Dallas, is a far cry from the giant districts in major Texas cities, where gang violence is the main concern and most schools have their own police forces. Barely 100 students of all ages attend classes here in two brick buildings built more than 60 years ago. There are two dozen teachers, a handful of buses and a football field bordered by crops. Yet the town is not isolated in rustic peace, supporters of the plan point out. A four-lane highway runs through town, bringing with it a river of humanity, including criminals, they say. The police recently shut down a drug-producing laboratory in a ramshackle house near school property. Drifters sometimes sleep under the overpass. “I’m not exactly paranoid,” Mr. Thweatt said. “I like to consider myself prepared.” Some residents and parents, however, think Mr. Thweatt may be overstating the threat. Many say they rarely lock their doors, much less worry about random drifters with pistols running amok at the school. Longtime residents were hard-pressed to recall a single violent incident there. Others worry that introducing guns into the classroom might create more problems than it solved. A teacher tussling with a student could lose control of a weapon, or a gun might go off by accident, they said.“I don’t think there is a place in the school whatsoever for a gun unless you have a police officer in there,” said Bobby G. Brown, a farmer and former school board chairman whose two sons were educated at the school. “I don’t care how much training they have.”His wife, Diane Brown, added: “There are too many things that could happen. They are not trained to make life-and-death-situation judgments.” Mr. Thweatt declined to say how many teachers were armed, or who they were, on the theory that it would tip off the bad guys. He also declined to identify the private consultant who provided teachers with about 40 hours of weapons training.Most critics question whether teachers, even with extra training, are as qualified as police officers to take out an armed attacker. “We are trained to teach and to educate,” said Zeph Capo, the legislative director for the Houston Association of Teachers. “We are not trained to tame the Wild West.”

ABC clip: Packing heat at school http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=5587421&page=1

Dans une petite ville du Texas, les professeurs sont armés HARROLD, Texas - mardi 26 aout 2008 http://web.ifrance.com/actu/monde/227548

Les lycéens de la petite commune de Harrold, au Texas, ont repris lundi le chemin de l'école en se demandant quels professeurs étaient armés ou pas.

"C'est vraiment bizarre de savoir que certains professeurs portent des armes", a confié Adam Lira, 17 ans. "Je ne pense pas qu'ils devraient être" armés "parce que nous avons déjà des portes fermées et des caméras. Mais je ne me sens pas menacé" par le fait qu'ils le soient.

Le conseil d'administration de l'école a approuvé l'an dernier le port d'armes à feu sur le campus pour les employés. Mais plusieurs parents n'en ont été informés que récemment. Certains estiment que leur progéniture sera davantage en sécurité, mais d'autres s'opposent à cette initiative, qui constitue une première aux Etats-Unis.

"Les professeurs sont formés pour assurer l'instruction de mes enfants, et non pour porter une arme. Les officiers de police eux-mêmes ont besoin de plusieurs années de formation pour gérer les prises d'otages", lance Traci McKay, dont les trois enfants sont scolarisés à l'école de Harrold. "Je ne veux pas que mes enfants se retournent en se demandant qui est armé".

Mais, rappelle le commissaire de Harrold, David Thweatt, cette initiative avait été approuvée en octobre dernier lors d'une réunion publique. Il a ajouté que la décision avait été prise après près de deux années d'études sur les meilleurs moyens de sécuriser l'établissement, qui se trouve à une trentaine de minutes des bureaux du shérif.

"Lorsque vous interdisez les armes dans une certaine zone, les seules personnes qui s'y conforment sont les citoyens respectueux des lois", constate-t-il. Il a refusé de dire combien d'employés étaient armés, précisant que chaque volontaire avait été examiné en fonction de sa personnalité et de sa réaction à une crise.

En plus de recevoir une formation nécessaire pour l'obtention d'un permis de port d'armes, ils doivent également être formés à la gestion de crise. Le commissaire a noté que le conseil d'administration avait pris de nombreuses précautions, demandant aux employés d'utiliser des balles qui minimisent les risques de ricochet.

Le Centre Brady pour la prévention des violences avec arme à feu s'est opposé à cette initiative. Il souligne qu'elle va à l'encontre de la législation du Texas qui interdit le port d'armes à feu dans les écoles, sauf en cas d'autorisation écrite. "Il est injuste de demander aux enseignants d'assurer des fonctions supplémentaires en devenant officiers de police", s'insurge Paul Helmke, président de la campagne Brady.

Mais pour le gouverneur du Texas Rick Perry, il est nécessaire de soutenir cette politique "parce qu'il y a eu de nombreux incidents au cours desquels elle aurait pu sauver un certain nombre de vies". AP

=

=
==================== From    The Times     September 5, 2008 = Down wiv school: children are best educated at home =  James Bartholomew It is back-to-school this week. All over the country, stressed parents made last-minute dashes to the shops to force children to try on clumpy school shoes. Then they got up early, hurried their children into cars or on to buses, got stuck in jams, arrived later than intended and said a rushed goodbye. Then they found that the children had gone. Relief may have been mixed with melancholy, loss and a hope that the children were all right behind those high windows, told what to do by strangers. The return to school is a well-established part of the journey of life. It seems normal, right and inevitable. But actually it is none of these things. Yes, it is normal in the early 21st century. But if modern civilisation started about 10,000 years ago, this way of treating children has been “normal” only for the last 2 per cent of the time. It is a new, artificial construct designed to provide education at low cost. It certainly was not created to provide a pleasant or socialising experience for children. Schools are not clearly “right”, either. People tend to think that what everyone does and what they themselves experienced must be right. But there is nothing obviously ideal about delivering your children to other people who do not love them as you do, and who are likely to teach them things with which you may disagree. And sending children to school is not inevitable. Under the law, children must be educated. But they do not have to be educated at a school. There is another way. Home education is not for everyone - not even a large minority. It is a luxury in most cases. The parent who becomes a home teacher earns no money. There have to be savings, or partners, husbands or wives must be willing to pay the bills. But lots of well-educated wives do not work and could save money by home educating. For those who can find a way, home-educating is a glorious, liberating, empowering, profoundly fulfilling thing to do. Far more people should try it. At present it is estimated that about 50,000 children are taught this way. The number has jumped from a decade ago but is still very few compared with America. I have just finished two years of teaching my younger daughter, Alex, now 11. We have become very close. Many fathers see their children at supper time and a bit more at weekends. Alex and I were with each other all day, every weekday, in all sorts of places and circumstances. We knew and shared thoughts, ideas and feelings. I believe the closeness that we developed will benefit our relationship for the rest of our lives. We had enjoyable educational trips to France, Italy and China. Instead of learning about the eruptions of Mount Vesuvius from a text book, Alex and I climbed up to the rim and peered into the still-smoking crater. We visited Pompeii and Oplontis to see the parts of Roman civilisation that had been preserved by the most famous of its eruptions. One of the beauties of home education is that you can teach children things that you want them to know - some of which are not taught in most schools. I wanted Alex to know something of the origin of the Universe, and astronomy. We studied far more history than schools do, including overviews of Rome, China and Britain. We looked at the Second World War, using DVDs of the superb Channel 4 series on it. We started learning Italian. But all parents would have different ideas of what they want their children to know. You can go for whatever you think important. This is freedom, thrilling freedom. You don't have to teach just what some civil servant in Whitehall has lighted upon and stuck in the national curriculum. You may make an observation, or your child may see something and become interested in it. If that happens, you can encourage the interest. This is developing the ability to think and discuss. It is a big contrast with what happens at school where it is impossible in a class of 25 to chase the individual interests of everyone present or to enter separate conversations. It may even be the case that schools can damage a child's curiosity and enthusiasm for learning. I have seen children totally turned off education and making no attempt to hide how bored they are. The widespread concern is that a home-educated child misses out on “socialisation”. But I have never heard anyone offer any evidence for this. As far as I know, the evidence from America is rather the other way - home-educated children are better socialised. We know that young children left in inferior nurseries and not given much attention can get withdrawn or aggressive. It is possible, to put it no higher, that being left at school and not given much attention can, in some cases, have a similar, if milder, damaging effect on older children.

[|The American school where teachers carry a pen]

When teachers return for a new school term in the tiny Texas farming town of Harrold, they can bring a extra tool of the trade alongside books, pens and worksheets. To defend pupils from any gun-toting maniacs, they can carry loaded pistols into the classroom.

With barely 300 residents, the remote rural community in the state's northern dustbowl has appalled gun control advocates by becoming the first in the US to allow its teachers to bear concealed firearms.

Harrold's school board maintains that the move is necessary because the town is 25 miles from the nearest sheriff's office, making it hard to get swift help in an emergency. Its location just yards from a major highway, America's north-south interstate 287, makes it a potential "target" for armed maniacs.

"We are 30 minutes from law enforcement," Harrold's school superintendent, David Thweatt, told the Guardian. "How long do you think it would take to kill all 150 of us? It would be a bloodbath."

Carefully selected teachers are to be trained in crisis management including handling hostage situations. Thweatt said: "When you have good guys with guns, the bad guys do less damage."

More than a dozen mass shooting tragedies have hit US educational establishments over a decade, including the Columbine massacre which claimed 15 lives at a Colorado high school in 1999 and last year's Virginia Tech massacre which left 33 people dead. When pressed on such cases, the powerful pro-gun lobby often argues that Congress sent out a message of vulnerability in a 1990 law which banned guns in schools - although the law was declared unconstitutional and overturned by the Supreme Court five years later.

"We've had a very disturbing trend of school shootings in the US," said Thweatt. "It is my belief this is caused by making schools gun-free zones. When schools were made gun-free zones, they became targets for people who wanted to rack up the body count."

As is commonplace in America, Harrold's school already has tough security including card-swipe entry for rooms and screening for visitors. Armed teachers must get a state gun licence and will be required to use bullets of a type less liable to ricochet off walls or desks. But teachers' unions in Texas have expressed horror.

"It's a disaster waiting to happen," Gayle Fallon, president of the Houston Federation of Teachers said. She described it as the sort of manoeuvre that makes Texas a laughing stock: "It's up there with the worst ideas in the history of education."

Ken Trump, an Ohio-based specialist in advising school boards on security, suggested it would be more sensible to hire security guards than to give guns to "minimally supervised, minimally trained" teachers. "You could have a gun accidentally taken away, or a gun could be dislodged or discharged while a teacher's breaking up a fight in the cafeteria," said Trump.

While not quite in the wild west, Harrold can lay historical claim to be a frontier community. Named after a rancher called Ephraim Harrold, the town has its roots as a railway terminus - during the 1880s, it was the westernmost point of a line which eventually ran from the heart of Texas to Denver in Colorado's Rocky Mountains.

The town's school, which has 110 students from kindergarten up to the age of 18, offers courses with a farming bent such as agricultural metal fabrication, soil sciences and horticulture.

Harrold's gun policy was praised by the pro-gun nationwide Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Its chairman, Alan Gottlieb, said the town's school buildings would be safer: "Allowing armed staff and teachers will provide a last line of defence if other security measures at the school fail."

He argued that teachers would be able to respond faster to a classroom shooting than a security guard: "Officers can't be everywhere and in an emergency, every second counts."

Harrold's school board is unapologetic about the controversy. Thweatt said the thick brick walls of Harrold's school protected pupils from tornadoes - and the school authorities had a duty to protect children for human attacks.

"When you hear about these shootings, the reports always start out with 'this is a sleepy little place, nobody thought this would ever happen here'," said Thweatt. Background: Gun violence in US schools

April 1999 Students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold kill 12 students and a teacher at at Columbine high school in Littleton, Colorado, before shooting themselves

February 2000 Six-year-old Kayla Rolland is shot dead at Buell Elementary School near Flint, Michigan, by a a six-year-old boy

May 2000 13 year-old Nate Brazill shoots dead a teacher at Lake Worth school, Florida, after being sent home

March 2005 16-year-old Jeff Weise guns down five students, a teacher and a security guard at Red Lake High School in northern Minnesota before killing himself. He had also just killed his grandfather and his grandfather's companion

September 2006 15-year-old student kills his school principal in western Wisconsin

October 2006 Charles Roberts kills five girls at a one-classroom Pennsylvanian Amish school

April 2007 Cho Seung-hui, kills 32 students at Virginia Tech university

February 2008 Gunman kills five students at Northern Illinois University

Le Figaro 08/09.09.2007 Ces parents qui choisissent de faire l’école à la maison Anne-Noémie DORION http://appy.ecole.free.fr/articles/20070908a.htm http://www.lefigaro.fr/france/20070908.FIG000000916_ces_parents_qui_choisissent_de_faire_l_ecole_a_la_maison.html 14/10/2007 Ces parents qui choisissent de faire l'école à la maison

Entre 30 000 et 40 000 enfants seraient instruits à domicile. Les familles disent privilégier la “souplesse”.

PLUSIEURS milliers d'élèves n'ont pas repris le chemin de l'école com­me tout le monde cette semaine. Pour eux, la salle de classe est au bout du couloir.

Apprendre à la maison, c'est le choix qu'a fait Valérie pour ses six enfants. « L'un d'eux s'est mis à avoir des problèmes de dyslexie, de com­portement en cours, raconte la maman. J'ai commencé à envisager d'autres solutions. » Finalement, cette habitante de Boulogne, dans les Hauts-de-Seine, dont le mari dirige une entreprise de pompes funèbres, décide de faire cours elle-même à ses enfants. « Je consulte des livres, des méthodes pédagogiques et j'apprends parfois en même temps qu'eux ! » Enseignement académique ou méthodes plus informelles, Valérie diversifie les manières d'apprendre. « Ça permet une gran­de souplesse, un enseignement plus individualisé et motivant», estime Valérie. La famille a mis à profit son dernier voyage en camping-car pour étudier « la géographie et l'éco­nomie de visu. Les apprentissages transversaux sont mieux assimilés. »

À l'image de cette famille, les 6-16 ans seraient aujourd'hui entre 30 000 et 40 000, d'après les estima­tions des associations, à apprendre loin des bancs de l'école. Habitant pour la plupart en région parisien­ne, ces élèves déscolarisés résident aussi en grande partie dans le sud-est de la France. Parmi ces jeunes hors norme, environ 20 000 suivent les cours du Cned, organisme d'enseignement par correspondan­ce de l'Éducation nationale. Quel­que 7 000 lui préfèrent généralement les cours d'écoles privées, dont une petite dizaine est recon­nue par l'État. Mais, pour environ 3 000 enfants, les parents choisis­sent carrément d'établir eux-mê­mes le contenu et les méthodes d'enseignement. Dans certaines limites. Si elle est autorisée, l'ins­truction en famille est soigneuse­ment encadrée par la législation. D'après un texte de 1998, les familles qui souhaitent scolariser leur enfant à domicile doivent effectuer une déclaration à la mairie et à l'inspec­tion d'académie à chaque rentrée des classes. Après enquête d'une assistante sociale, un inspecteur d'académie se rend au domicile de la famille pour vérifier que le niveau d'instruction est conforme aux exi­gences de l'Éducation nationale.

Les raisons de ce choix parental sont aussi nombreuses que les familles concernées. Beaucoup de parents, en désaccord avec la péda­gogie, préfèrent aménager des solutions plus individualisées. Quand ils ne sont pas amenés à cette solution par les circonstances. « Face à la phobie scolaire, à l'échec, certains optent pour cette solution de la der­nière chance », explique-t-on à l'association Les Enfants d'abord.

Martine, qui habite près de Tou­louse, a décidé il y a deux ans de reti­rer sa fille de son collège pour lui « épargner l'éternelle pression scolai­re ». « Aujourd'hui, le milieu scolaire est une jungle. La violence touche même les établissements dits préser­vés. Les élèves sont écrasés par la sur­charge horaire, les profs focalisés sur les notes plutôt que sur le plaisir d'apprendre », déplore la maman. Elle a choisi d'inscrire Amélie au Cned. « Les cours sont très bien faits, structurés clairement pour les parents, estime l'ancienne infirmiè­re. Les enseignants poussent l'élève à la réussite en rédigeant des commen­taires toujours encourageants. »

Anne-Noémie Dorion.

Un précepteur pour ses enfants, une solution très tendance chez les VIP

A Paris, la Vladimir School propose les services de professeurs chevronnés aux grands patrons, diplomates ou artistes.

COSTUME de marque ajusté et cravate classique, Lionel Moutot, 37 ans, affiche une élégance sans faille. Et pour cause : comme ses 70 collègues de la Vladimir School, le professeur se doit de garder un aspect irréprochable, à la hauteur des familles chez lesquelles il ensei­gne depuis quatre ans.

Depuis 2003, le très sélect éta­blissement parisien propose une scolarisation complète de haut niveau, délivrée à domicile par une équipe de précepteurs particuliers. La méthode fait recette. Chefs d'entreprises cotées au CAC 40, leaders politiques, ambassadeurs, artistes, juristes renommés entre autres : les VIP français et étrangers se ruent sur la Rolls de l'enseigne­ment à domicile.

Capables de concurrencer le niveau des pensionnats suisses ou anglais les plus prisés, ces cours s'adaptent aux agendas complexes des parents sans les éloigner de leur progéniture. Le tout dans la plus grande confidentialité. Au départ à peine cinq, les enfants des grands de ce monde sont cette année 60 sur 120 postulants à bénéficier de ce cursus. Triés sur le volet, les précepteurs de la Vladi­mir School sont bardés de diplômes. À l'image de Lionel Moutot, titulaire de trois doctorats obtenus avec félicitations du jury en histoi­re, philosophie des sciences et his­toire de la psychiatrie. Parallèle­ment professeur dans le privé, fondateur d'une maison d'édition, organisateur de colloques à l'Unesco, Moutot cultive « les uni­vers multiples ».

Un parcours adapté à la philo­sophie de cet enseignement de prestige. Sur le modèle des précep­teurs d'antan, la Vladimir School n'en développe pas moins des pédagogies innovantes. Après un bilan de compétences, l'élève se voit attribuer un précepteur princi­pal, entouré d'une équipe d'ensei­gnants, pour un programme cousu main, condensé du meilleur des programmes français et internatio­naux. « La réalité n'est pas découpée en morceaux, assure l'enseignant. Il faut arrêter de cloisonner les savoirs pour comprendre la finalité des apprentissages. » Voir la dernière exposition Dali, écouter un opéra à la Bastille ou sillonner Rome avec un guide personnel aident sans nul doute à acquérir un bagage culturel solide. Histoire de développer un esprit sain dans un corps sain, les profs exhortent aussi à pratiquer collectivement un sport et une acti­vité artistique.

L'objectif : façonner un “hon­nête homme” version XXIe siècle. Un exercice parfois difficile. Cer­tains élèves sont loin d'être des forts en thème. Tel ce rejeton d'un chan­teur célèbre, désemparé en découvrant que Quatre-vingt-treize de Victor Hugo n'avait rien à voir avec le département du “9-3”. D'autres sont déstabilisés par l'univers hors normes de leurs parents. Comme cet enfant d'un diplomate français, qui après avoir vécu au Liban et en Angleterre, a oublié les bases de sa langue maternelle.

Les prix sont à l'image de ce régime d'exception. Les presta­tions sont de 33 000 euros au moins pour les écoliers et vont jusqu'à 70 000 pour les lycéens. L'excellen­ce a un prix. Pour le moins explici­te, la devise de l'école, duc in altum, “conduis au sommet”, semble d'ailleurs tenir ses promesses : 60 % des élèves obtiennent leur bacca­lauréat avec mention.

A.-N. D.