A reader lauds the Allegheny Institute for its recent Policy Brief (Vol. 25, No. 2) and supporting op-ed (as published in the Tribune-Review on Jan. 18) detailing the crisis that is the chronic absenteeism rate in Pittsburgh Public Schools.
Our correspondent notes that, while “shocking to some … we aren’t shocked as much, perhaps as a retired teacher and brother of a retired PPS administrator, who saw the absenteeism firsthand.”
“But this should shock the general public, taxpayers, even as our feckless politicians were well aware of this,” he writes.
“Yet the purpose of our letter is to pose the question: ‘What were they thinking?’ i.e., the ‘they’ being PPS leaders.”
Opined our letter-writer:
“It would be low-hanging fruit to explain [away] absenteeism on outright sloth, access to the public welfare trough; so no need for school.
“And then, by some in response, the old standby cries of racism, legacy of racism, institutional marginalization of the lower class, white and black, our own ‘Hillbilly Elegy.’
“Without writing off completely these explanations — although we think they need to be shelved except for more esoteric, removed individuals, i.e., pious liberals to ruminate ‘What were they thinking?’ about this ongoing, relentless, chronic absenteeism crisis — we need answers, solutions. And dump the above trite, irrelevant answers.
“We, as retired teachers, don’t have any answers and must rely on serious sources to respond: Who, what, when, where, why and how — basic questions about the absentees.
Concludes our correspondent:
“The bigger issue: Two ways to ensure poverty, economic minimal [subsistence], are single mothers, absentee, unacknowledged fathers and no, or insignificant, education.
“How much of the first affects school absenteeism? We already know the consequences of the second!”
Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).
