Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I endorse Jane Harris' well-presented opinion on educational discipline ("Balanced discipline is part of an education," July 19). While it has been firmly established that racist attitudes have been and remain active in American society, discipline and consequences are a gift we give our children and adults. I worked with emotionally/behaviorally disturbed adolescents for nine years in a level-four school. I also worked for seven years with adolescents who sexually offended.

Discipline and punishment are two very different approaches to misbehavior. Consequences for hurtful behavior are intended to educate. Children and adolescents who have no external locus of control, no adult to put a stop to out-of-control behaviors, nourish anger in a child. Children and adolescents want loving, firm, caring adults who let them know they are safe but may, under no conditions, hurt themselves or others. Feeling internally out of control creates anxiety, and one symptom of anxiety is irritability and anger. This grows with no consequences. A child feels unsafe when no adult helps manage behaviors the child cannot or will not control.

While keeping an out-of-control child in a classroom seems to show concern and understanding for the child, it simply tells the child she is hopeless and cannot learn to manage herself. Learning responsibility for one's behavior is emotionally painful, difficult and critical to a civil society. We owe that to our children.

Dawn H. Strommen, Anoka

•••

I read with interest and appreciation for Harris' perspective. Her piece was a response to Myron Medcalf's July 16 column "Detention law gives small kids fairer start" and the July 4 article "Schools rethink discipline ahead of new laws." These relate to one of the new state statutes that was signed into law in May as part of a sweeping education bill.

As a former teacher, principal and, especially, parent, I agree that we need to address behavioral disruptions so that all students can secure an efficient education as it is promised in Article 13 of the state Constitution.

Some students take more resources than others to educate. In Minneapolis, for example, recent data that I reviewed said that it costs around $21,000 per student. Compare that to the over $40,000 to house a prison inmate, and I think we should be able to agree that providing an efficient education for all students is well worth the cost.

The present financial support for public education is flawed in that it does not account for the fact that some districts have to do more with less. Regional districts like Minneapolis, St. Paul, St. Cloud, Mankato, Rochester, Worthington, etc., have higher special education needs (think federal mandate without the funding), students of poverty and new immigrants. These will take more to educate. Each student should be provided extended learning times and opportunities to reach mandated state standards.

It is ironic, in my opinion, that some students are able to take postsecondary or advanced placement courses in high school, which is as it should be, thus getting a start on their post-high school plans, while other students, because of funding, are not able to complete high school because of artificial time constraints put on them and their schools.

Would it not be nice if each student, regardless of their ability, was put on a learning plan that included the student, their parent(s), an advocate and the state that provided the resources to have each student secure an efficient education?

In conclusion, I agree with Jane Harris that some disruptions need to be handled. I also agree with the intent of the new legislation regarding limits to disciplinary actions. In addition, however, give the teachers, principals and schools the resources to provide an efficient education for all students.

Patrick R. Mullen, St. Cloud

•••

Harris' counterpoint gets an "amen" from most teachers I know. I work in an inner-city school that is truly diverse (not majority one race or ethnicity, but a blend) and when classroom disruptions arise or there is violence, it needs to be immediately disciplined no matter who the perpetrator is. We cannot tell students implicitly that there are few to no consequences for violent actions in school and then send them into a world where there are very real consequences for such actions.

In the end, we need to stop talking about students as people of a race, ethnicity, etc. People are individuals. Teachers should discipline equally for all students based on the rules and basic structure of civilized society. Otherwise, we are entering a world where only Black teachers will discipline Black students and only white teachers white students, etc. Fairness, not fear, should rule the day for teachers and students, where they can come to school knowing there will be consequences if another student acts out, and the door remains open for the student struggling with behavior.

Jeffrey Boyle, Eden Prairie

A letter writer raises suspicions about excessive administrative costs at the University of Minnesota without knowledge of the facts ("Making admin costs go 'poof,'" Readers Write, July 15). For years, the HR system at the university has misclassified faculty members doing administrative work. I direct a research center, so I am listed as 100% administration even though I teach over 100 students annually, helped bring in over $6 million in research funding this year, lead a global research project and write articles and books, along with everything else expected of a senior faculty member. I actually spend about 20% of my time administering my center, and it is about time that the university's HR system properly classify the varied work that part-time administrators like me do.

Thomas Fisher, St. Paul

Regarding the article on page 4 of Tuesday's paper, "Trump seeking greater authority": As if we didn't know already, he has made it abundantly clear: He does not want to be the president, he wants to be a dictator.

Steve Bjelke, New Brighton

History will place a black mark next to the names of 70 GOP representatives who voted against all aid for Ukraine — including Minnesota's Pete Stauber, Brad Finstad and Michelle Fischbach. Apparently they would rather appease the MAGA, Vladimir Putin-loving isolationists than support a democracy fighting for its very life. And indeed, Ukrainians are fighting for their lives against brutal forces committing crimes against humanity. Today's "America First" GOP wing is perfectly in sync with a previous Minnesotan who turned a blind eye to fascism — Charles Lindbergh. Shame on all 70, and especially on Minnesotans who ignore our own past.

Pamela J. Snopl, Minneapolis

•••

While I'm not sure I totally agree with a July 17 letter that opines that the U.S. should send cluster bombs and rockets, missiles, artillery tanks, etc., to Ukraine ("Send everything, even cluster arms," Readers Write), I appreciate that the writer uses no euphemisms in discussing the war. Examples: "The way to [drive the Russian invaders out of the country] is to kill Russian soldiers." "[N]o one ever won a war by dying for their country; they won it by making the other guy die for his." "Give the Ukrainians what they need to kill as many Russian soldiers as necessary ... ."

This letter reminds me of books by native Minnesota author Tim O'Brien, who makes the case in "Dad's Maybe Book" for calling war, armor, conflict, etc., what it is — people-killing. We'd have the First World People-Killing, the Second World People-Killing, the Vietnam People-Killing and now the Ukrainian People-Killing. Servicemen (or women) would be called people-killing men (or women). Instead of thanking a veteran for his or her service, we would thank him for his people-killing.

Satiric, for sure, but true, for what is the basis of war but killing people? Hopefully, some day, the human race can rise above "the glory of people-killing."

Doug Berg, Excelsior