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

•••

I read the letter to the editor "Post-pandemic school isn't working for kids, teachers," with fascination (Dec. 24). As a middle-school student, I experience this scenario on a daily basis. My peers and classmates are often disrespectful to the teachers, administrators and other staff. Students are disruptive to classes and have little to no regard for the teachers. Likewise, the profanity levels, while not unexpected for eighth-graders, are through the roof. It feels as if every fifth word from a student's mouth is the F-word. Swearing at and around teachers appears to be the norm.

Next, the social skills that my classmates possess range from lacking to nonexistent. I was in the midst of fifth grade when the pandemic first hit. It was March 2020, and everyone was optimistic about how we were going to power through. Fast forward a year, and we were all still in distance learning. Next year, we were in-person again, albeit with pieces of cloth covering our faces. This year seems to be somewhat "normal," and as we have adapted back into pre-pandemic school, I have noticed something. Half the class always has a screen two inches from their faces. No one does their work until the last minute, and if they have 20 missing assignments, well, it's no biggie, because it "doesn't matter yet." Others act as if there is no teacher, blatantly scrolling through their Instagram feeds. I could go on.

These educators are vital to our success in society. They are people too. The pandemic has changed us, but that doesn't define us. So here's my message to the disruptive kids. Your teachers are important. They matter. They are some of the most influential people we'll ever meet. To all who will read this: Thank your educators. Surely there must be one person who made an impact on who you are today. Now go do something because of them.

Anders Peterson, Eagan

•••

The list of awful student behaviors described by the teacher who chose to retire early also occurred before the pandemic. I remember clearly some students doing unbelievable things in the 1970s. Yes, there have always been some students and their parents who will behave badly, but levels of tolerance change over the years. The reason teachers keep doing the job is they can see past some bad people and understand kids in particular will push the limits. They see most of their students are decent people who can be reached in some way to make them better.

I taught for over 40 years, ending my career in 2017, and nothing in the list of post-pandemic wrongs mentioned is new or surprising to me. It's kids being kids. If you doubt this, watch "Rebel Without a Cause." They didn't have cellphones, though.

David Weinberg, Minnetonka

Peter Hutchinson's commentary "Writing on the wall: The kids can't read" (Opinion Exchange, Dec. 27) is so spot on, and I agree totally with his recommendation of starting over and restructuring the method used in teaching students how to read.

I experienced what Hutchinson described as the "whole language" approach years ago, working in a school district as a reading paraprofessional with children who didn't qualify for special education needs but were struggling to keep up.

The process of phonics was frowned upon and discouraged in helping these students learn. Many teachers I assisted in the classrooms did not like the whole language program nor feel it was an effective way of teaching reading, but their hands were tied to their main reading curriculum provided for them.

I found that the concerned teachers were able to creatively add a bit of phonics into the small group of students I worked with daily for 20-30 minutes, and this was definitely helpful.

I myself am a big proponent of teaching reading phonetically. Using pictorial clues and guessing are not logical ways of learning how to read.

Many wasted years of teaching time, in my opinion, on that whole-language program.

I wish the best for our present educators. It certainly appears challenging to all when we look at the yearly student test results!

Thanks for your wise words, Peter Hutchinson.

Deb Schaefgen, Maple Grove

The Dec. 23 commentary "Proposed Sanford-Fairview merger warrants skepticism" raised concerns the merger might not translate to benefit Minnesotans, but didn't consider adequately the University of Minnesota mission of medical education that produced 70% of the doctors in Minnesota.

The U medical school is again facing a financial threat that raises significant concerns. A Sanford-M Health merger is certainly an opportunity to sustain a multifaceted medical education mission that has benefited the entire state of Minnesota since 1888.

In the 1990s, appropriations from the state of Minnesota became inadequate and it has been necessary to respond in other ways for the school to remain viable. One option that could sustain the excellence of the medical school would be for the Legislature to provide sufficient funds for the education mission so that the affiliated patient care component would not have to provide so much of the necessary costs.

The Fairview-U merger also raised skepticism, but the agreement helped rescue vital parts of medical education by providing funds to "save the good stuff" in the medical school. It continues its mission to graduate a cadre of physicians for the future.

In my opinion, "M Health Sanford" is no more threatening than "M Health Fairview" was initially. It's a demonstration of cooperation with South Dakota and would back up other Sanford medical sites operating in outstate Minnesota to make expert specialty care available for patients from both Dakotas in need of in-person or telehealth consultation all the way to the Black Hills.

Jim House, Roseville

The writer is a professor emeritus of orthopedics and anatomy at the U.

•••

It seems to me that the health care providers that are merging to gain business efficiencies are slowly walking toward a system that resembles socialized medicine, but maintaining that we must not turn away from profit incentives. The hospitals that stood on their own have merged into ever-growing corporate entities, most of which are losing money, while leaders are being paid growing salaries and bonuses. For whose benefit is this system constructed? Their answer to unsustainable health care delivery is to merge into even larger affiliations while maintaining that "Medicare for All" would end the health care system they envision. The system is based on returning profits to a nonprofit entity by delivering a product. Manipulative insurance contracts set the bar on the flow of money.

My life is a product that has an established value. I had a broken leg in 2005 that has caused around half a million dollars to change hands over years. I guess I have been personally responsible for less than $20,000 of that amount. A complicated broken leg.

David Evans, Minneapolis

"In the shadow of a billion-dollar stadium, we couldn't get a port-a-potty," to quote the article about a Minneapolis homeless encampment ("Encampment's neighbors plead: 'Who is in charge?'" Dec. 20). Why not open the doors to that so-called "People's Stadium" and let the people in? Let them stay inside where it's warm and dry, where there are hundreds of clean, sanitary bathrooms, where they have running water to wash their hands and electric lights to help them find their way.

"People's Stadium"? What a misnomer. Call it what it is: "People's Boondoggle."

Norm Spilleth, Minneapolis