Teachers Against Militarized Education—TAME the Beast!

Decommission Public Military Academies

A National Call to Action

As military recruiters across the nation fall short of their enlistment goals and the number of African Americans enlistees continue to decline, the Department of the Defense (DOD) has partnered with the Department of Education and city governments to sell its “brand” to young people.

Today, Chicago has the most military-branded public school system in the nation. When an Air Force high school opens in 2009 it will be the only city in the United States to have public academies representing all branches of the military.

This recruitment tactic is effective: Nearly half of the students participating in public military schools and JROTC programs, according to the DOD’s own reports, enlist after graduation.

Six reasons all citizens should oppose public military schools and programs.

1. Public education is a civilian, not a military, system.
Public education in a democracy aims to broadly prepare youth for full participation in civil society so that they can make informed decisions about their lives and become full and active participants in civil society. The DOD has a dramatically more constrained goal in our schools: influencing students to “choose” a military career.

2. Military programs and schools offer a substandard education.
Instead of receiving a well-rounded education, students study subjects like “Military Science” and “Army Customs and Courtesies.” With that kind of preparation, it is no surprise that at Chicago’s Carver Military Academy only 49% of its seniors graduated in 2007.

3. Military programs and schools target low-income youth of color.
The Chicago Board of Education targets low-income, primarily African American, communities for military-themed high schools, while upper-income white communities are offered gifted, magnet, and college prep schools and programs. This reinforces a negative and unfortunately familiar message: poor youth of color merit second-class education.

4. Military schools and programs promote obedience and conformity.
Confusing obedience with self-direction, and conformity with independence, Mayor Daley has claimed that military programs promote discipline and leadership. An authentic commitment to youth development would start by offering all students what the most privileged youngsters receive: art education, dance and music instruction, theater and performance, sports and physical education, clubs and games, after-school opportunities, science and math labs, lower teacher-student ratios, smaller schools, curriculum that promotes critical thinking, and more.

5. Military schools are a last resort, not a real choice.
The rhetoric of “choice” absolves CPS officials and politicians of leadership responsibilities. Because most CPS students have been denied a first-rate public school education, they are not able to test into the best public high schools. Instead, they are urged to “choose” from among the high schools that will accept them. Better-funded military schools or decaying neighborhood schools—which would you choose?

6. Military schools and programs practice double standards and discrimination.
Although the Chicago Board of Education, City of Chicago, Cook County, and the State of Illinois all prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, the United States Military condones discrimination against lesbians, bisexuals, and gay men. Military schools and programs willfully ignore the fact that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) students can’t access military college benefits or employment possibilities, and that LGBT teachers can’t be hired to serve as JROTC instructors in these schools. This double standard should not be tolerated.

Call to Action
Let’s bring our schools home! Join TAME in this call for a moratorium on any new military-themed public schools or programs.

Email me your name at tquinn@saic.edu to add to this Call to Action.
Email Mayor Daley at MayorDaley@cityofchicago.org and tell him to keep our public schools military-free.

Chicago Schools—Military In; San Francisco Schools—Military Out

On Nov. 6, 2006, Arne Duncan announced his support for 19 new schools for Chicago’s students. Twelve of the 19 will be charter schools; another three will be “contract” schools. In other words, 15 of the 19 schools will operate outside the Chicago Teachers Union and outside the community guidance of Local School Councils.

One of the planned schools is the Marine Military Academy, scheduled to open in 2007, at 145 S. Campbell. The press release announcing Duncan’s plans describes the school as “the first public Marine Junior Reserved Officer Training Corps (JROTC) high school in the nation.” In contrast, on Nov. 14, San Francisco’s Board of Education voted to eliminate JROTC programs from its schools, through a two-year phase-out. Board member Dan Kelly, who voted to remove JROTC, described it as, "basically a branding program, or a recruiting program for the military.”

The military’s discrimination against LGBT people was also a factor in the decision to ditch the program. In an opinion piece in the Chronicle, board members Kelly and Mark Sanchez explain, “The U.S. military's ‘don't ask, don't tell’ policy toward gays and lesbians prevents JROTC from employing openly gay instructors and bars openly gay students from the preferential enlistment opportunities that are among JROTC's touted benefits.”

Supporters have claimed that JROTC is popular is San Francisco. Kelly and Sanchez point out that popularity shouldn’t be the only or even primary factor in deciding what programs schools offer—the bigger pictures—equity, fairness, justice—also have to be considered. Popular doesn’t equal appropriate, they say.

The claim of popularity may be more hyperbole than truth—San Francisco students formed an independent movement to oust JROTC from their high schools this year, and gathered more than 800 signatures on a petition supporting their position.

What do JROTC programs offer students? Spiffy uniforms, structure, a group, and the promise of help getting through college (if you aren’t queer). San Francisco plans to develop and pilot new programs next year, to address what the city’s families and students will miss when JROTC is gone.

I encourage the city to consider these ideas for its schools:

--Have students design their own uniforms, after exploring the forms and functions of uniforms from the past and present (this idea from fabulous SAIC art educator Maya Escobar; look at uniforms by artist Andrea Zittel and the exhibit RN by Mark Dion and J. Morgan Puett).

--Develop some “secret” clubs that are, conversely, open to all. These should have handshakes, special names (the blue-birds? the spiders?), marching bands and songs, drill teams with pink batons (this idea from every gay pride parade I’ve attended), and weekly meetings with games and snacks.

--Stock every school with art supplies, from kilns and clay and easels and paint, to design software and computers, and keep all the art rooms open and staffed until 9:00 PM.

--Offer scholarships to all students who want post-secondary education.

That would probably end any remaining JROTC-lust in our schools.

Now the question is—can Chicagoans follow the lead of San Franciscans and excise the military from our public schools? Our students need a chance to develop their creativity and critical thinking, not their obedience. And they need to know they can go on to college.

The Chicagoland Coalition Opposing Militarization of Youth has formed a working group to begin exploring the possibilities for opposing the planned Marine Academy. If you are interested in helping with this, contact Neal at NealBetty@aol.com.

Public Military Schools or Jazz in Every Auditorium

Last year this letter objecting to the imposition of a naval academy on a public high school, signed by more than 50 area faculty of education, was sent to Arne Duncan (CEO of CPS), Daley (Mayor of Chicago), and the Chicago Board of Education. No answer to date.

Chicago already has the most militarized public school system in the nation, perhaps the world--10,000 students from middle school through high school participate in some form of military-focused education. And the city is planning more links between the military and the Chicago Public Schools. Daley and Duncan use "choice" as a mantra when talking about military schools, but what meaning does choice have in a school system built around "good" selective admission schools that accept only the smallest % of applicants and military schools that market themselves, and are marketed by CPS, as options for those rejected by their first choice schools.

As to the "military schools provide discipline" pitch--so would true engagement in the visual arts, literature, music and the sciences. And the kind of discipline developed through the humanities, arts and sciences is a different kind than the military develops or wants. Writers and other artists grow toward self-discipline and self-motivation; they learn to be inspired by their own curiosities, intuition, and observations. Ditto scientists. In contrast, what the military aims to foster is obedience.

When Daley offers military schools and uniforms, let's ask for arts academies and sewing machines (the students can design and sew their own uniforms!). The best schools in the world are Finnish, according to The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Finnish elementary school students learn to sew and knit in their art classes.

When Duncan says our children need the routine and order of JROTC drills, let's ask for trumpets, drums, flutes, clarinets, and pianos, and a jazz band for every school. School band practice is at least as disciplinary as military marching, and less damaging world-wide.

February 4, 2005

Dear Arne Duncan, Mayor Daley, and Members of the Chicago Board of Education:

On December 15th 2004 Chicago’s Board of Education voted to approve the establishment of a “Naval Academy” in Senn High School located in Chicago’s Edgewater community. One of Chicago’s most diverse schools, Senn is home to 1,700 students from more than 65 countries. Good things have been happening at this neighborhood institution—Senn has a successful International Baccalaureate Diploma Program, was recently awarded a five-year $1.2 million grant from the Lloyd A. Fry Foundation to provide development and support services to freshmen and sophomores, and was selected as one of only 16 National Service-Learning Leader Schools.

Despite these and other successes, against the wishes of many Senn teachers, students, and parents, and without a process for community consultation, you decided to install a Naval Academy at Senn High School in fall 2005.

There are many reasons to oppose this decision. The lack of neighborhood involvement is one: It is simply wrong to remake this school without considering community voices and vision. The apparent hypocrisy of city leaders is another: How can the city endorse the military for Chicago Public School students when the Chicago City Council has declared the city a Nuclear Weapon Free Zone and voted to reject the invasion of Iraq and the U.S. Patriot Act? And, as educators, we oppose the proposed Naval Academy, because it and other military academies offer:

--Bad education
The evidence is overwhelming that urban military-themed schools fail to provide a high quality education that prepares youth to graduate high school and enter college. Instead of receiving a well-rounded education, students study subjects like “Military Science” and “Army Customs and Courtesies.” With that kind of preparation, is it a surprise that at Chicago’s Carver Military Academy, similar in structure to the proposed Naval Academy, only 54% of students graduate high school, and only 34% of graduating seniors enter college?

--Racial targeting
The pattern is clear: The Chicago Board of Education targets low-income, primarily African American, communities for military-themed high schools. Schools for the elite, such as Northside College Prep, are not forced to house military programs. Instead, these schools and their upper-income white communities are offered gifted, magnet, and college prep schools and programs. Imposing a Naval Academy at Senn will reinforce this negative and unfortunately familiar message: poor youth of color merit substandard education.

--Sanctioned discrimination
“Don’t ask, don’t tell” is not acceptable for Chicago’s gay, lesbian. bisexual and transgendered youth. Although the Chicago Board of Education, City of Chicago, Cook County, and the State of Illinois all prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, the United States Military condones discrimination against sexual minorities. Military schools are partnerships between the United States Armed Services and Chicago Public Schools; like San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, Chicago should refuse to allow the military to recruit in its public schools, and refuse to do business with organizations that discriminate against its citizens.

Chicago must provide high quality education equally to all its youth and communities. The racially targeted establishment of military-themed schools is wrong in every case. But in a time of seemingly boundless budgets for endless war it is especially fraught to tell poor kids, “The best education we can offer you is one linked to combat.” This is not a “choice,” as Arne Duncan has referred to the proposed Naval Academy, it is a tragedy.

As faculty in colleges and programs of education across Chicago, we know this city can do better. And it must.

Sincerely,

1. Ken Addison, Northeastern Illinois University; 2. William Ayers, University of Illinois at Chicago; 3. Megan Bangs, Northwestern University; 4. Paula Baron, Northeastern Illinois University; 5. Amy Blumenthal, Oakton Community College; 6. Bonnie Chauncey, Northeastern Illinois University; 7. Pauline Clardy, National-Louis University; 8. Nell Cobb, DePaul University; 9. Jennifer Cohen, DePaul University; 10. Chuck Cole, University of Illinois at Chicago; 11. Dionne Danns, University of Illinois at Chicago; 12. Steve Dundis, Northeastern Illinois University; 13. Sarah Efron, National-Louis University; 14. Michael Fagen, Northeastern Illinois University; 15. Susan Gabel, National-Louis University; 16. Joby Gardner, DePaul University; 17. Artin Göncü, University of Illinois at Chicagol 18. Eric (Rico) Gutstein, University of Illinois at Chicago; 19. Lisa Hochtritt, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago; 20. Stacey Horn, University of Illinois at Chicago; 21. Ed Hunt, Northeastern Illinois University; 22. Sue Jungck, National-Louis University; 23. Sy Karlin, National-Louis University; 24. Jeffrey Kuzmic, DePaul University; 25. Eva Lam, Northwestern University; 26. Pauline Lipman, DePaul University; 27. Norma Lopez-Reyna, University of Illinois at Chicago; 28. Sharon McNeely, Northeastern Illinois University; 29. Erica Meiners, Northeastern Illinois University; 30. Gregory Michie, National-Louis University; 31. Karen Monkman, DePaul University; 32. Christopher Murray, DePaul University; 33. April Nauman, Northeastern Illinois University; 34. Irma Olmedo, University of Illinois at Chicago; 35. Roger Passman, Northeastern Illinois University; 36. Patricia Pelletier, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago; 37. Jan Perney, National-Louis University; 38. John Ploof, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago; 39. Todd Price, National-Louis University; 40. Therese Quinn, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago; 41. Patrick Roberts, National-Louis University; 42. tammy ko robinson, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago; 43. Kenneth Saltman, DePaul University; 44. Bill Schubert, University of Illinois at Chicago; 45. Brian Schultz, National-Louis University; 46. Katherine Schuster, Oakton Community College; 47. Katy Smith, Northeastern Illinois University; 48. Terry Stirling, Northeastern Illinois University; 49. David Stovall, University of Illinois at Chicago; 50. Joaquim Villegas, Northeastern Illinois University; 51. Pat Walsh, Northeastern Illinois University; 52. Steve Wolk, Northeastern Illinois University; 53. Christopher Worthman, DePaul University