College guide offers a lot more than just a score
We at U.S. News & World Report are well-acquainted with criticism of our annual America's Best Colleges publication. We take our lumps without complaint or protest -- to a point.
But in his column "Publications still pull rank on colleges" (Oct. 16), Mike Bowler writes that U.S. News "cloaks its annual survey in science" and that he finds it "astonishing" that people take the rankings so seriously. In this case, a response is in order.
Why pay attention to the rankings, Mr. Bowler wonders, when "most" of the information is available elsewhere? We respectfully disagree.
Inside the 320 pages of America's Best Colleges, you will find a step-by-step guide to the admissions process, along with category-by-category rankings of every accredited four-year college and university in the United States, diversity information, best values tables, debt load figures and rankings of undergraduate business and engineering programs. The directory of colleges and universities alone is nearly 200 pages long.
But the crux of Mr. Bowler's opposition to U.S. News' rankings seems to be that we assign numerical placements. This is not a new criticism.
Quite simply, U.S. News believes that to survey educators about whom they consider best in their field, gather objective data, and then not report a score would be a cop-out. That said, U.S. News has long maintained that a ranking -- ours or anyone else's -- is no way to pick a school.
That's why we don't just give a score. We also provide the statistical information on which the rankings are based, including test scores, graduation rates and faculty resources.
America's Best Colleges is not a horse race. It's about finding the best school for you.
But on one point, we are in whole-hearted agreement with Mr. Bowler: Colleges make too much of rankings. Schools fuss and fidget over every number, pining for ways to boost scores a point or two.
A little perspective wouldn't hurt.
Richard Folkers
Washington
The writer is director of media relations for U.S. News & World Report.
Sparing the rod can save the child
In response to the letter "Spanking can help children learn" (Oct. 19), I would note that spanking is most certainly hitting, and the only thing hitting teaches a child is that it is all right to hurt someone who is smaller or weaker.
The letter-writer's technique of correcting children with a rod followed by a loving hug seems to me a recipe for future domestic violence. "I only hit you because I love you" is the classic defense of abusers.
Instead of the Book of Proverbs, I suggest the writer look to the New Testament for a kinder model of child-rearing. One can do no better than the words of Jesus: "Love one another as I have loved you" (John 15:12).
Our goal as parents is to raise happy, loving, respectful, caring individuals. We do this by being happy, loving, respectful, caring parents.
It is not difficult to raise well-behaved children without spanking. There is a vast ocean of child-rearing techniques between sparing the rod and spoiling the child.
My 13-year-old daughter was appalled by the video of the mother hitting her child. And it is inconceivable to her that a mother could smack a child she loves with a wooden spoon or dowel.
Just think what a peaceful, loving world it would be if all children could say the same thing.
Margaret Abed
Severna Park
All of the reasons given by the writer of the letter "Spanking can help children learn" to justify the use of physical discipline are myths or falsehoods, beginning with her statement that spanking is not hitting. It is. Period.
Maybe Proverbs does say, "Spare the rod." But Jesus was against violence of any kind. I think any good Christian should follow that teaching first and foremost. And spanking is physical violence.
I am the parent of a 15-year-old and a 19-year-old. My children are good students and law-abiding citizens. Their father and I never spanked.
Our children do what we ask because they know it is expected, not because they are afraid to get hit.
Does this mean they are perfect? Of course not. But we use other methods to teach them how to behave.
And does this mean we have never wanted to hit our children? Of course not. But we acted like adults and used restraint.
Leah Donovan
Columbia
NRA blocks efforts to stem the violence
I agree with the writers of the letters "Don't use sniper to attack NRA" (Oct. 19) that the National Rifle Association (NRA) may well promote gun safety and individuals may well join for sound personal reasons. However, the NRA, through its obstruction of the passage of reasonable gun laws, also contributes in a significant way to this country's appalling gun violence.
No other developed country in the world has anything approaching the rate of gun murders that we experience, and have experienced for decades, in the United States. Is this because people in the United State are inherently more violent than people in, for example, Japan, France, England, Sweden or Germany? There is no evidence to suggest that this is the case.
We have the highest degree of gun availability in the developed world and we have the highest rate of gun murders.
No other developed country in the world has to deal with a powerful gun lobby like the NRA, and no other developed country in the world tolerates such a high rate of murder year after year after year.
The lessons from abroad are clear. National laws that limit access to guns are an essential component of a public policy that can limit murders and gun crimes. It is not the case that criminals always find a way to obtain guns.
And I am not convinced that our Constitution prevents decisive action to protect civilians from gun crime. The Second Amendment puts the "right to bear arms" in the context of a "well-regulated militia." And the availability of guns in this country goes way beyond the needs of a "well-regulated militia."
Yet every sensible attempt to change this outrageous situation is strongly opposed by the NRA.
Mike Lane's editorial cartoons are right on target.
Gregory Ball
Baltimore
Belafonte merits much more respect
As a longtime admirer of Secretary of State Colin Powell's and a friend of Harry Belafonte's, I am disappointed by the recent disparaging comments Sun columnists Gregory Kane ("Belafonte's dissing of Powell is unfair -- and unhistorical," Oct. 16) and Clarence Page ("Belafonte's disappointing new song," Opinion
Commentary, Oct. 21) directed toward Mr. Belafonte.
While Mr. Belafonte's choice of words about Mr. Powell during a local radio interview may be objectionable to some, it is important to put his views of the current administration and the United Nations into perspective.
During the past 50 years, Mr. Belafonte has made major contributions to music, theater, television and film. In the entertainment industry, he helped to break many racial barriers and made it much easier for minorities to achieve success. But these achievements have been dwarfed by his humanitarian work.
Mr. Belafonte was born of Jamaican parents in Harlem 75 years ago. He experienced the despair of the ghetto. He saw oppression all around him, but he believed strongly in peaceful resistance to create social change, as did his friend, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
Through his donations of large amounts of money and time, he helped to support the Freedom Rides and voter registration drives, the 1958 Youth March for Integrated Schools from New York to Washington and the 1963 March on Washington. He was a vocal opponent of the Jim Crow laws.
Mr. Belafonte also strongly believes in the need for the United States to support the United Nations.
For many years he has used his talent and time to fight for the U.N.'s principles by working for human rights and justice. In 1987 he was appointed as a UNICEF goodwill ambassador, and he has traveled the world on behalf of children's welfare as well as the causes of education, freedom and the eradication of poverty.
He was very upset with the Bush administration's decision to boycott the U.N.-supported World Conference on Racism in South Africa. He has also objected to the Bush administration's bullying of the United Nations to declare war on Iraq.
I sincerely hope that Mr. Kane and Mr. Page are able to accomplish a fraction of what Mr. Belafonte has done on behalf of the global society during the past 50 years.
Dr. Roger S. Blumenthal
Baltimore
The writer is president of the Johns Hopkins University's Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease.
Transitional services pay huge dividends
I am deeply appreciative of the concerns Mayor Martin O'Malley's expressed in his letter "Aiding ex-convicts" (Oct. 12).
I have long pleaded that if we did not alter our correctional system, we would find ourselves paying taxes not for health, housing or education, but for prisons. Today, the day I have dreaded is here.
Maryland alone spends more than $982 million on corrections each year. And as a nation, we hold nearly 1 percent of Americans behind bars.
Nonprofits across the country have shown that providing transitional services both before and after prisoners are released decreases the likelihood that they will engage in future criminal activity.
And my Baltimore-based organization, Alternative Directions Inc., which has provided transitional services to women coming out of prison for more than 20 years, has found that the same is true for our programs here in Baltimore.
But my group is at the mercy of private funders (which are overwhelmed with grant applications and have priorities that change often). And the Division of Corrections can only provide transitional services while a person is still in their custody.
Legislators need to invest money in agencies that have a successful track record in reintegrating ex-offenders into our community.
Mary Joel Davis
Baltimore
The writer is executive director of Alternative Directions Inc.
Hunting can sustain natural habitats
The writer of the letter "Wildlife refuge isn't the place for hunting" (Oct. 17) said, "Management of wildlife refuges should emphasize wildlife preservation and habitat restoration and protection."
But the nation's premier institutions of agricultural learning and wildlife management recognize that an overabundance of whitetail deer leads to destruction of the habitat that supports the deer and countless other species, and threatens the existence of the forest itself.
Whitetail deer in Maryland and Pennsylvania have over-grazed the forests to such an extent that future generations may never see the majestic oak forests that many of us know and love. And part of the reason for this is that areas such as the Patuxent Wildlife Refuge have closed their borders to hunting for so long.
In the wild, animal population levels are kept in check by predation. But because predators such as coyotes, black bear, bobcats and panthers are no longer part of the ecosystem in the Patuxent area, control of the population of whitetail deer is left to one option -- hunting.
Hunting in such areas will not harm endangered species and will result in a healthier habitat and ecosystem as the deer herd is reduced to a level more compatible with what the habitat can sustain over the long term.
Joe Ferrari
Millersville
Pay heed to voices dedicated to peace
I had the privilege of attending the peace rally in Washington on Oct. 26. The next day's coverage in The Sun included a photo on the front page and a half-page article on Page 3 ("No war with Iraq,' chant thousands in Washington," Oct. 27). Although the article attempted to cover the basic atmosphere of the march, so much more could have been said.
I stood on the corner of G Street and Pennsylvania Avenue for several hours and saw thousands of people representing various national and international cultures, people of all ages, people connecting passages from the Bible to peace, people from high schools and colleges.
I saw veterans waving flags, families representing three generations, people holding hands and people holding signs demanding that the United States not instigate a war with Iraq along with signs simply asking for peace.
I also met many generous and kind people who sincerely believe that a war with Iraq is unethical and totally wrong.
What I saw and heard that day was the voice of the people, a voice against military intervention in Iraq, a voice for peace.
During a time in which so much of the news in The Sun is devoted to the political maneuvering regarding the anticipated war in Iraq and to the serial sniper, why isn't more coverage devoted to events and efforts channeled toward peace?
David A. Leiter
Linthicum
Divisive rhetoric blocks Mideast peace
The Oct. 18 columns by Steven Lubet ("Anti-Semitism unleashed?" Opinion
Commentary) and Sherri Muzher ("Targeting pocketbook might end rights abuses," Opinion
Commentary) on divestiture from Israel demonstrate precisely and depressingly why political strategies aimed at pressuring Israelis and Palestinians to resolve their conflict are so desperately needed, yet so likely to fail.
Such actions are cast by both proponents and opponents in an inflammatory context that destroys all hope of mobilizing the vast majority of American Jews -- and, until recently, Israelis and Palestinians -- who wish to enable both peoples to live in peace.
According to Mr. Lubet, support for economic pressure on Israel to cease its human rights violations and return to the negotiation table lends legitimacy to Sept. 11 Jewish conspiracy theories and violent anti-Semitism. But, in fact, such avenues of peaceful protest are precisely what could give voice to moderate frustration before it turns into extremist intransigence.
Mr. Lubet should oppose the divestiture campaign with reasoned argument, not irresponsible and morally reprehensible leaps of logic.
And it is simply depressing to observe how arguments such as Ms. Muzher's undermine any support the divestiture campaign might build among moderate Jews.
Her arguments for divestment as an effective political strategy are sound. But I fear that her approach -- which, rather than providing a nuanced comparison, simplistically conflates Israel with apartheid-era South Africa -- only alienates the very constituencies the divestiture campaign needs to be successful.
While Mr. Lubet's argument is more offensive, Ms. Muzher's fails most egregiously by sabotaging its own purpose.
Julie Marx
Baltimore
Brodie's zest for life was an inspiration
Some people inspire others because of the vitality with which they embrace life. Georgene Brodie was one of those people ("Georgene Ann Brodie, 67, teacher, Crab Line owner," Oct. 26).
How many of us can say that our presence in a community was a catalyst that inspired change?
Or that, despite facing terminal illness, our zest for life and our desire to make a difference was heightened?
Ms. Brodie was one of those people.
All of us knew her days were numbered because of her ALS. But we never expected her to pass on this soon.
We saw her just the other day at the Fall Festival at the Greenmount School. She spoke to us through her computer-assisted device, asking about our children's music lessons and laughing about this and that -- never wasting a moment to reflect on her situation, unless asked, and then reluctantly sharing a challenge.
Reflecting back on that, we realized how thin and frail she had become. But Ms. Brodie inspired us with her bravery and compassion then, and every time we saw her.
Perhaps we should be feeling a sense of relief that Ms. Brodie cheated her disease out of its inevitable disparaging end. And we do. But we also feel we lost her too soon. There were many smiles left in her.
But she taught us a lesson: that disease -- and the way it pushes our inevitable end closer and closer -- doesn't have to become the center of one's life.
She showed us that one can always give back and care for others, even in the toughest times. She reminded us at every turn of all the wonders of our great city.
In her memory, we would urge others to support research into the causes and cures for muscular disease and of other illnesses that rob us of such gifted people.
Debra Evans
Deborah Briggs
Baltimore
Take responsibility for city's violence
The Dawson family tragedy is one of the saddest days in our city, our state, our country.
A woman was trying to build a home and keep that home safe for her family. She was trying to keep the streets around her safe for her family. It wasn't the best of neighborhoods, but she took on thugs and the criminals and the drug dealers to try to keep her home and her family safe.
Those same thugs and criminals and drug dealers apparently burned her home down, killing seven people.
The Sun's article "'Scared to speak up' against the drug trade" (Oct. 20) quoted a woman who said: "[The drug dealers are] just trying to put bread and butter on the table. That's why they're hustling, not because they want to. There's no jobs out there."
That is the most delusional statement I have ever heard.
People are selling dope because they make more money at it than they do flipping burgers at McDonald's or dropping chicken at the Kentucky Fried Chicken.
They're selling dope because it makes them seem tough and bad and hard like the thugs they watch in TV shows, movies and music videos. They're selling dope because they didn't go to school and it's all they know.
To think that they're selling dope because they're trying to feed their families or because there are no jobs out there or because the economy's bad is ludicrous and delusional.
To use that excuse and to spread that kind of reasoning is more incendiary than the gasoline used to start the fire.
Richard Barnett
Baltimore
The horrible deaths of the Dawson family did not occur because a mayor who was elected three years ago is or is not doing his job ("At rally, fear turns to anger," Oct. 21).
Anyone who thinks it's that simple belongs in a category way beyond "nitwit." The lawlessness on Baltimore's streets began decades ago.
The Dawsons died because we don't have enough police in this city. The Dawsons died because they were brave but the people around them were scared.
The Dawsons died because they lived in a culture that glorifies cruel and malignant thuggishness and disparages education and civility as weak. The Dawsons died because there are no good middle-class jobs and drugs are the only way to make a living on too many streets in this town.
Certainly, the Dawson family's death puts the onus on our officials to do more. But it also puts the onus on me.
I have to do more to help save this city. You have to do more to help save this city. The disk jockeys and the letter-writers and everyone who's been quick to point the blame at others - all of us have to do more to help save this city.
The way to honor the Dawsons' memory is not to indulge in shallow, simplistic finger-pointing but to take responsibility ourselves - just as they did - for fixing our city.
Mary MacDonald
Baltimore
I ask those expressing righteous indignation that the city didn't do enough to help the Dawson family: What did you do to help ("Mayor not doing enough to make Baltimore safe," letters, Oct. 23)?
Where was the community when the Dawson family needed support in their brave war against drugs? Where were the church leaders, the activists, the neighbors?
The city government - or any government, for that matter - is only as good as the partnership it has with its citizens.
And if we really want to do something about improving Baltimore, we can't sit by and let tragedies like the Dawsons' murder give us a "wake-up call." We should be actively pursuing solutions to prevent such awful crimes.
Stephen Gearhart
Baltimore
While it was heartwarming to see all of the people coming out to rallies for the Dawson family, where will they be when the fuss is all over?
Why don't these same people and the ministers (who seem to have so much to say to a crowd during the day) go back every night and stand on those same corners and defy the drug dealers?
If people would start standing up to the drug dealers and the police were there to arrest the dealers, maybe we could start getting them off our streets.
Everyone has to work together to stop this violence and stop our children from becoming part of the drug scene.
Kathy Riley
Baltimore