Growing Without Schooling 7

GROWING

WITHOUT

SCHOOLING

7 Many things have happened since you received GWS#6. Two un­ schoo ling families have won im­ portant rulings from state cou rts - more on this later. Time magazine, after talking at length with a number of unschoo1ing fam­ ilies, ran a fine story about this in their Dec. 4 '78 issue. Soon after, I was invited to appear, with Linda and Bob Ses­ sions and their children, on the Phil Donahue show in Chicago. In the four weeks since the first airing of the show (it goes out in different cities on different days), we received 2700 letters! Some of these sound only curious, but at least half sound really interested in our work. Needless to say, for the two of us to read and answer that much mail has been quite a task. And we expect another 1000 or so before we're through. If most of those who sound interested decide to sub­ scribe, it should be a great boost to us. The group subscription rec­ ord has moved West again, this time to Lincoln, Neb., where readers have taken out a 22X sub­ scription - and for 18 issues! At the same time, the pub­ lishers of my newest book (NEVER TOO LATE - De1acorte) said that they were very interested in a possible book about unschoo1ing. Much of the material for this would come from GWS, but I have already written 10-15,000 words of new material and have more stil l to write. All this action has delayed this i ss ue of GWS. But barring other avalanches of mail, we should have #8 out fair­ ly soon. GOOO NEWS

Since we wrote the story "Help Wanted" in this issue, a Massachusetts Superior Court has handed down a ruling favorable to the Perchem1ides family. It did not (as I did not think it would) say point blank to the School District, "Approve this family's program ." What it sai d was, in effect, "Take another look at this program, and this time, be reasonable." The family will probably have t o (and will be wise to) make a few small con­ cessions to the schoo ls , probably in the area of curriculum, though I have strongly urged that they not yie ld an inch in the crucial matter of testing and eva luation . But the effect of the ruling will al most certainly be that they will be able to teach their chi ldren at home.

The .:Judge's decision is long and intricate, and a very good lesson in how judges think. Since we are so late with this issue, I won't try to quote it or discuss it much here. (For $2, we will send you a copy of the complete ruling . ) But he made one novel and (to us) extremely important and useful point, that the Con­ stitution guarantees to citizens many implied rights, rights which it does not specifically name, and that the right of parents to control the education of their children is one such implied right. He did not put this right under the First Amendment, but under the Ninth, saying that the right to educate one's children can be seen as a logical part of a general right to privacy, the right to control one's private affairs. But he also said that the right of the states to oversee the education of the young was itself a constitutionally pro­ tected right, falling under the general heading of police powers. From this it follows that in this matter of education the rights of parents and the rights of states are competing rights, which must be balanced against each other. The schools, therefore, may not arbitrarily reject, as they did in this case, a proposed home teaching plan, without giving any reasons . They must give reasons, which must be compelling, and may not include such trivia as "the children will miss the social life," or "it will set a bad precedent. " This is the narrow line that we must try to (and I think can) persuade the courts to walk. Yes, the States may oversee the educa­ tion of the young, and Yes, to that end they may establish schools and even make them com­ pulsory, but at the same time, No, they may not establish a mon­ opoly of schools or even of meth­ ods of schooling (this is the meaning of Pierce and other cases), and~hey may not say that for people to educate their own children is in and of itself a crime, or arbitrarily and with­ out due process deny them the right to do so. HElP NEEDED

Mr. and Mrs. Perchemlides (GWS#4), when they told the local school board that they wanted to take their child out of school, were told by them to submit a home teaching program. They did ­ twenty pages long, detailed and thorough. The school board (as often happens) ca 11 ed it" i nade­ quate, " without giving any rea­ sons, or saying how they would have to change it to make it ade­ quate. In states where the law makes home instruction a legal alternative, such action by school boards can, I believe, be attacked in court on two grounds: 1) It denies due process 2) It sets aside the stated will of the legislature. As I have said, I do not think we should try to get courts to rule that compulsory schooling, or things done in and by schools, are un- Constitution­ al. All such arguments lead to the Supreme Court, which if they

hear such cases at all are for some time to come likely to rule against us. Beyond that, I think we would be unwise to make it part of our legal strategy to ask lo­ calor state courts to overrule school boards ~y specifically ap­ proving home teaching programs which the boards have turned down . In the first place, the legislatures have specifically given that task to the school boards. In the second place, the courts may very well say that they are not competent to make such decisions. In the third place , they may fear (with good reason) that if in a few cases they do rule in favor of parents and against the local school board, they will soon be swamped with such cases. Finally, there is no reason to expect that in matters of education most judges will be any more tolerant or en­ lightened than most school boards . But I do think we may be able to get many courts to say that if state law makes home in­ struction a legal option (and gives school boards the right to approve or disapprove such pro­ grams), these boards are legally obliged 1) to make public some explicit and reasonable standards which such programs must meet in order to be approved 2) to ap­ prove all programs which, meet such standards, and 3) where they claim that a given program does not meet them, to state ex­ plicitly in what respects it does not and how it would have to be changed in order to do so . Thi s, 1ega11y, is where the Perchemlides family is at the moment . They are trying to con­ vince the court that, in disap­ proving their program of home in­ struction, the local school board acted arbitrarily and unreasonab­ ly. To do that, they must per­ suade the court, not necessarily to overrule the school board by approving their program, but only to say that the program has enough intrinsic merit so that the board could not turn it down out of hand, without reasons. To help them, I have asked some Pro­ fessors of Education I know to look at their program, and if they think it is good, or at least equivaent to what is done in most schools, to say so i,n writing. So far, four have ag­ reed to do so, and I believe others will join them. Which brings me at last to the point of this particular art­ icle. It would be very helpful if we had, from all parts of the country, a list of professors of Education, and also, school ad­ ministrators - Superi,ntendents, Curriculum Supervisors, School Board Presidents or other offi­ cers and members - who would be wi 11 i ng from time to ti,me to look over proposed home instruction programs of unschoolers, and if they think they are adequate and/or equivalent to what local schoo1s provi de, to put this in writing. Will you, readers of GWS, please help us make such a list, either by ' asking any Pro­ fessors of Education, etc. you know if they would agree to be on such a li st, or, if you are a Professor of Education, etc., by

us your name. We would not publish these names in GWS (un­ less some people asked to have their names published). But we would send the list to unschoo1­ ers who asked for it, and they could get in touch with such Pro­ fessors, etc. directly. ~iYin~

A REMINDER

The label or address on your GWS (or envelope) will have on it a symbol like 1 07, 2 08, 3 12, etc. The first of these two nume­ rals tells us how many copies of each issue to send you. The sec­ ond numeral tells us, and you, the last issue of your present subscription. If your subscription ends with this issue of GWS, and if you wish to continue to sub­ scribe (we hope you do), please renew your subscription right away. Otherwise we will have to send you a renewal notice, which will take time and money we would much rather use to make a better magazine, help unschoo1ers, and find new readers. If for any rea­ son you have decided that you do not wish to receive GWS any more, it will be a great help to us if you will drop us a card telling us that. Thanks very much. RULING FROM IOWA

In the case of The State of Iowa, plaintiff, vs . Robert Ses­ sions and Linda Sessions, defend­ ants, the following excerpts from the recent ruling of the District Court of Iowa in and for Winne­ shiek County may be of great in­ terest to many GWS readers: "The above cases, i nvo1vi ng the filing of criminal charges and convictions thereon against Robert Sessions and Linda Ses­ sions in Magistrate Court, now come before the Court upon ap­ peals to District Court. The mat­ ters as criminal matters, as con­ templated by statute, were heard de novo by the Court on appeal. The Court, after reviewing the file, considering the evi­ dence, statements of counsel, and the briefs and arguments submit­ ted, now enters the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Robert Sessions and Linda Sessions were each charged under Section 299 . 1 in that each did unlawfully fail to have his or her 7-year-old son, Erik Ses­ sions, attend a public school and/or obtain equivalent instruc­ ti on elsewhere. 2. They were tried under that charge in Magistrate's Court. They were each found guil­ ty and were each sentenced to pay a fine of $50 and costs were as­ sessed against them .... Appeal was thereafter filed ... . 6. The defendants requested the board of directors of the De­ corah Community School District to approve their home teaching program. The board refused, and the matter was appealed to the State Department of Public In­ struction, and a decision was rendered by the board .. . sus­ taining the position of the Deco­ rah board and stating in sub­

stance, (a) that the Sessions met the first test, that is, of an equivalent ins t ruction program ... (b) The Sessions did not meet the second test, that is, the re­ quirement of 'providing instruct­ ion by a certified teacher.' ... 7. Thereafter, the Sessions filed a petition for declaratory ruling with the state board in which clarification and guidance or interpretat i on was asked in the following form: 'Precisely what must we do to comply with the "instruction by a certified teacher" clause of 299.1 of the 1977 Code of Iowa?' On May 10, 1978, the board answered the query in letter form [stating in substance] ... (c) ' ... the appropriate standard to be used to determine the amount of instruction required by a cer­ tified teacher is that portion of a normal day during which in­ struction occurs in the public school district of residence .... strongly imply the necessity of teacher presence or close proxim­ ity throughout the instructional process.' ... This letter and information reached the defend­ ants some time after their con­ viction. 8. Defendants assert the un­ constitutionality of the charge in that: (a) the law is vague on standards of public instruction. (b) It violates the 1st and 14th Amendments. (c) Denial of due process by the action of the De­ corah Community School District Board. The Court enters the fo110w­ ing: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 3. Defendants further assert unconstitutionality by virtue of alleged violations of the 1st and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Defendants in effect assert that their right to freedom of religion has been denied by denying the defendants their right to educate their child as they desire. The defend­ ants cite the compelling case of State of Wisconsin vs. Yoder, 406 US 205, 32 Lawyers Ed. 2d 15, 92 Supreme Court 1526, and other ci­ tations in substantiation of their position. ... The Court feels that under the very concept of the Wisconsin vs. Yoder case cited by the defendants, that adequate showing has not been made to put the defendants' op­ position on a religious plane. In the cited case the Court said in substance: ' ... a way of life, however virtuous and admirable, may not be inter posed as a bar­ rier to reasona ble state regula­ tion of education if it is based on purely secular considerations; to have the protection of the re­ ligious clauses of the 1st Amend­ ment, the claims must be rooted in re1ijiOUS belief.... ' (Ed. italics ... This is not to sayan indiv­ idual or individuals must be a part of an organized religion to come under the concept of the ci­ ted case. But rather under the record in this case the defend­ ants have not presented to the Court sufficient evidence to sus­ tain their argument under the 1st Amendment. 6. Defendants urge the pos­ ition that truancy violation, be­

ing a criminal charge, that the burden is on the plaintiff [sic] to prove all of the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This proposition is surely an accurate statement of the law. Applying this to the case before the Court, the burden would be on the State to show each of the following elements: (1) That the defendants failed to have their child attend school in a public school district; and (2) Failing to have the child attend public school, they did not cause said child to attend upon equivalent instruction by a certified teach­ er e1 sewhere. The first element was proved. As to the second element, the State held that the parents did procure a program indicating an equivalent education. The query remaining then: Was the equivalent instruction provided by a certified teacher elsewhere? ... The Court's ruling in this case is not to be construed as the Court's passing upon the quality of education in the De­ corah school system.... The Court's function is essentially to determine whether or not the defendants have committed the crime alleged and are guilty thereof. 7. Fi na lly the Court 1ega lly concludes that the burden is above set forth under the second element, 'failing to have child attend public school, did they cause said child to attend upon e9uiva1ent instruction by a cer­ tlfied teacher elsewhere?' In this connection the Court must conclude that based upon the en­ tire record, the State has failed to prove the alternate or second element, that is, that the schooling for Erik is not the equivalent by a certified teacher elsewhere [sic]. The Court con­ cludes that there is a reasonable doubt as to the question of the certified teacher, and that as a consequence the defendants should be acquitted of the criminal charge. In so ruling the Court has considered of reat si nificance the element of e uiva1enc Ed. italics, the sincere effort on the part of the defendants to comply, the difficulties and long delay in their getting a response to their query on a certified teacher (in fact no response was received until after their con­ viction), the inherent nature of the statutes contemplating a pri­ vate tutorial situation as an al­ ternate [sic] to public school attendance (Ed. italics), and fi­ nally the conclusion that the legislature created a public school requirement with alterna­ tives. These alternatives may not be arbitrarily denied (Ed. ital­ ics), but if the statute is to have a viable Constitutional as­ pect of validity, it must be a determinable, workable statute with the opportunity for a legit­ imate exception. The Court can understand the concern over the propriety of 'opening the door' for many at­ tempted exceptions (Ed. note ­ the State made much of this point in all its dealings with the Sessions). However, the Court feels that this is not a real threat under the statute and rea­ sonably within the spirit of the

statute. Exception as contempla­ ted by the statute adds strength, not weakness, to the law. 8. Finally the Court merely concludes that the second and al­ ternate element of the crime has not been proven beyond a reason­ able doubt. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE COURT: 1. The judgment and sentence of the Magistrate is reversed. 2. The defendants are hereby acquitted of the charges filed against them. 3. Costs are assessed to the plaintiff. Frank D. Elwood, Judge First Judicial District, Iowa. A LANDMARK CASE

This seems to me an extreme­ ly important decision, in some ways the most important decision on compulsory schooling that has yet appeared. To be sure, the court made its ruling on very narrow grounds. But that is why the ruling is so important. There is very little in it that most judges, whatever might be their views on compulsory schooling, would be likely to disagree with. It is, in short, a decision which we can expect many courts, at least in states where the law provides specifically for alter­ natives to schooling, to accept as a reasonable precedent. What it boils down to is this. In all such cases 1) the burden of proof is on the schools 2) to show beyond reasonable doubt 3) that what the parents propose to do at home will be worse than what the schools are actually doing (not just talking about doing). There are very few school systems which will in fact be able to show this, either to a judge or a jury. This gives us very good reason to believe that in most jurisdictions, in states whose laws provide for an alternative to schooling (unlike, say, NH, which does not), any parents who prepare and present their case thoroughly and wisely can probab­ ly win a favorable ruling from a court. It is worth noting, too, that Judge Elwood in Iowa held it very much against the State (i.e. the schools) that they did not cooperate with the Sessions in their efforts to find out precisely what the schools would accept as "equivalent." This means that when we ask schools what we must do to make our pro­ gram equivalent, they have to answer. If we then do what they tell us we have to do, they are not likely to be able to show beyond a reasonable doubt that our program is not equivalent. Not only will these argu­ ments probably seem weighty to other courts, or juries, but they may well convince a good many school boards and their attorneys that bringing unschoo1ers to court will be far more trouble than it is worth. As a genera 1 rule, lawyers do not advise their clients to go to court unless they think they have an excellent

chance to win. Bob Sessions, writing about the decision in the North Country Anvil (a good publication, $7.50 1OrI5 issues, Box 37, Millville MN 55957), says, "Judge Elwood . .. ruled in our favor on two counts: 1) he does not thi nk the state proved our guilt beyond a reasonable doubt because they of­ fered no good arguments that 'certified instruction' requires the identical number of hours of contact found in local schools, and 2) he believes that our pro­ viding an equivalent education to that to be got in schools satis- " fies the intent of Iowa law (Ed. italics). His decision does not specify how much certified in­ struction is adequate (Ed. note ­ thank goodness that question is left open) nor does he say that anyone with a program like ours should be exempted (Ed. note ­ but thanks to his ruling, most will be). The Iowa Department of Public Instruction still has re­ view power regarding the adequacy of anyone's program, and all such programs must have 'significant' involvement of a certified instructor." Later he says, "The county attorney has filed a motion for a re-hearing with the district judge, and he has said publicly that he is strongly predisposed to appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court. We have good reason to be­ lieve his motion for are-hearing will be rejected, and· we're also convinced that he will appeal. To date we have spent about $3,000 on this case, $700 of which came in the form of mostly small donations from people like yourselves. Our reserves have been exhausted, and although working through the Supreme Court takes much time (a year to a year and a half), consequently allow­ ing us to again save some money, it is also much more costly .... the only way we will be able to continue is through support from you. " I hope any GWS readers in a position to do so will give some of this support. (Rob't Sessions, Rt. 2, Decorah, IA 52101) LEGAL STRATEGIES

A few general observations. Judges, in making their rulings, take into account a number of things - legal principle, legal precedent, the will of the legis­ lature, and the possible or prob­ able social effect of their ruling. Thus, parents who have sued the schools for damages be­ cause their chIldren did not learn anything there have so far been turned down by the courts, on the grounds that this would lead to a rash of lawsuits that would bankrupt the schools. We may take it as certain that the courts will not in any foresee­ able future make rulings which they think may lead to the speedy destruction of the public schools or the overturn of com­ pulsory schooling. If we ask for such broad rulings, we will be turned down. But beyond that, either in asking for narrow ru­ lings, or speaking of any we may be able to win, we must be care­ ful not to make large public growing without schooltng 17

boasts and outcries to the effect that "this means the end of com­ pulsory schooling." Judge El­ wood's ruling mayor may not be upheld by the Iowa Supreme Court. Almost certainly, it would not be if it had said that anyone with a program like the Sessions should be exempted from compulsory school ing, or that the Iowa Dep­ artment of Public Instruction shou l d not have the power to re­ view such programs. The fact that the Sessions are willing to go to such troub le and expense to teach their chi ld at home will be seen by the courts as part of the proof they must have that the Sessions will be serious and conscientious teachers. The courts may be ready to give the same permi ss ion to any others who can show that they too are will­ ing to go to this amount of trouble. But they are probably not yet ready to give blanket permission to anyone just be­ cause they can put the right words down on a piece of paper. In GWS #6, in a short piece entitled "Equiva lent, " we told about an injured boy, unable to go to schoo l, to whom the schools sent a tutor - for an hour and a half a week! This was all he needed to keep up with his stud­ ies. We didn't print that just to make one more joke aga inst the schoo ls. The Iowa case shows that this matter of equivalency is crucial. Any parents who are con­ sidering a court battle against the schoo l s need to find out ex­ actly what the schools are doing, including what they are doing about sick and/or injured child­ ren. How much home instruction by a certified instructor do the schoo l s themselves provide? Are all tutors used by the schoo~in fact certified? Ask the schools, and the State Department of Pub­ lic Instruction. But also, check up on their answers. People who work in large organizations may not know what is actually going on, and even when they do, may not always tell the truth about it. In GWS#4, in the article "Testing The Schools," we sug­ gested a number of questions that parents might ask schools. (We will add more questions soon). We don 't suggest these questions as a kind of school-baiting. They are seri ous, an d have to do with the matter of equivalency. Furthermore, when you ask these questions, or any others you may think of, put them in writing . Se nd copies to all mem­ bers of the school board, to the school's attorneys, to all top admini strators, curriculum plan­ ners, etc. If the school board has recently won, or is facing, a cl ose election, send copies of these questions to their oppo­ nents. The idea is not to spring these questions on the schools in the midst of a co urt battle. Ask the questions well in advance, and to as many people as possi­ ble. Give them plenty of time to answer. For they have no answers! In almost all sc hools, good or bad, the children who are behind grade level, in reading, math, or whatever, never catch up, but fall further behind. And the growing w1thout schooling 17

number of those who have fallen behind rises every year . At the high-powered boarding school I went to, C students did not be­ come B and A students; they be­ came D students. It's the same story everywhere. FRACTIONS

Theo Giesy tells us a nice story: "When Dani1e was 6 or 7, she was lying in my bed thinking about money and wondered how $1 would divide among 3 children. She thought about it awhile and sai d, 'You cou1 d break it into dimes and give each one 3, that leaves 1 dime, you break that into pennies and give each one 3, and I get the extra penny.' That was all her own, I made no com­ ments or suggestions. " When I first taught fifth grade, before I had "taught" the children anything about fract­ ions, or even mentioned the word, I used to ask them questions like this: "If you had three candy bars, and wanted to divide them evenly among five people, how would you do it?" Most of them could think of one or more ways to do this. But after they had "had" fractions, and had learned to think of this as a problem that you had to use fractions to solve, most of them couldn't do it . Ins tead of reality, and thei r own common sense and ingenuity, they now had "rul es, " whi ch they could never keep straight or re­ member how to apply. THE SOCIAL LIFE

Many people write that they would like to take their children out of school, but worry that this may hurt their social life, or social development . About this, a reader writes: ".. . My mother tells me that after the first day in kindergar­ ten I told her that I didn't need to go to school any more because I knew everything already. Great arrogance? Not really. I knew how to be quiet, how to listen to children's stories, and how to sing. I wanted to learn about the adult world but was restricted to a world which adults believed children wanted. My great pre­ school enthus iasm died an early death .... Shame was one of the first lessons that I learned. In the first grade I was told to color a picture of a mother and daughter working in a kitchen. It struck me that if I were to color the entire picture yellow, then it would be different from all the other pictures. When I handed it in to the teacher I expected her to be pleased, if not genuinely excited . She, instead, glared at me for what seemed to be a long time and caused me to feel the deepest shame and self-contempt. ... I was six years old. Since spontaneity was dan­ gerous - it conflicted with the teacher's view of how children should act - lying was a valu­ able survival technique ... In

first grade, the class was sent to the kindergarten room to do some work without supervision. I used this opportunity to take a plasti c doll and stick the head into a plastic toilet in one of the furnished doll houses in the room. No one was sure who did it, but everyone thought it was amu­ sing - except the teacher. She was red with anger (she was a nun, and working class Catholic schools in the early 1960's were not the most humane institutions) and I feared a severe beating. Suspicion was eventually focused on me and I lied with complete success, at least for me; another boy was blamed for the incident. I wish that I had said, 'Yes, I did it, so what.' But I was afraid ... Other incidents occurred to other people and were much more serious. I saw a boy of thirteen, seventh grade, try to explain why he did not have an assignment. His crime was that he spoke with indignation. Before he said three words the teacher stopped him and with a who-the-he11-do-you­ think-you-are tone of voice called him to the desk and slap­ ped him across the face with a rubber strap which was about 6 to 8 inches long and 1/4 inch thick. He cried; they always did when it was in the face. He never did get the chance to explain why he did not have the assignment. I'm not so sure that he didn't have it. It may have been that he could not find it quickly enough. ... This teacher, the principal, was a te xtbook authoritarian. Every violation of her largely unwritten rules would lead her to deliver the same angry statement : 'Don 't challenge me.' She saw challenges in virtually every­ thing even though we would never have cha 11 enged her. I'll just give two of her biggest challen­ ges. Challenge number one invol­ ved misbehavior which the teach­ er present did not see, but the pri nci pa 1 1ooki ng into the foom did. The fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth grades (it was a small school) were in this room to practice singing. She was furi­ ous, talked about challenges, and scolded the student vehemently. Then she proceeded to slap hi~ halfway across the room. She gave him about eight or ten real hay­ maker slaps . I was standing only a few feet away at the time . . .. One fact about this event showed how much in awe of authority we were: the victi m of this violence did not raise his hands to pro­ tect his face . When it was over, a11 I cou1d hea r was the boy c;-y­ ing and 'my own heart beating. Challenge number two i,nvol­ ved the same boy . This time he urinated, or defecated, or both, in hi s pants. Perhaps he was ill or maybe he had a mental problem (Ed. note - Or perhaps he had merely been denied permission to go to the bathroom, which happens quite often in school), He didn't do this regularly. He was about twelve years old. Naturally this called for punishment. He was forced to stand in front of each class in the school while the teacher explained to the class his crime. When he came to our classroom the principal named him the schoo l' s stinker and told us

why. But what I remember most clearly is the pained smile (Ed. ita1i cs - thi s i,s scarYJOn hi s face. There were many incidents of fear and humiliation. Even though there were not many savage beatings, the point is that we lived in an environment where this could happen anytime. And we knew that. I had no clear idea that there was anything wrong with the school; I only had a vague feeling that things didn't have to be the way they were. I wasn't a noble child resisting tyrannical teachers. No, I loved the game of fear and humiliation and played like the masters. 'We can hardly wait to make someone pay for our humiliation, yield to us as we were once made to yield.' (FREEDOM AND BEYOND, p. 114)

I'm not sure when it start­ ed, but in the eighth grade a number of us would terrorize some of the timid boys in the school. We would push the victim around, ridicule him, pull his shirt out, spin him around, dust the chalk erasers on his clothes, mess up his hair, and chase him on the playground . It was easy to be friends with these boys when I was alone with them . But when there was a group of us the teas­ ing would begin. Since we were always .i.!!. ~ ~ita1ics), the teasing-orthese boys, two in particular, was nearly unend­ ing. On the playground they had to avoid being seen. One of the boys would go home for lunch and not return until the last minute of recess. We did it without thought and it seemed to be only boyish pranks. It was sadism and I found it to be almost irresist­ ible. We then started to turn on the group members and practice our arts on the selected victim. I remember coming home with sore sides from laughing so hard at another's humiliation, but I felt empty and actually unhappy. The next day I would do it again. This only stopped when I became the victim. It was pure hell. Everyone you knew devoted all his time to your being humiliated. Anyone act was insignificant: slapping an unaware student in the back of the head was popular. But it happened all day long in a multitude of ways. Christmas va­ cation came and one of my prime torturers transferred to another school. Things cooled off for me, but not for the timid boys or the younger children in the school. We almost had serious violence with the male students several years younger than us. I don't remember the begin­ ning or the end of this sadistic behavior. I know that I didn't act this way before my last two years in grade school or since then. I believe that I was lucky in not turning out to be an igno­ rant brutal person who delights in being such a person. My last two years in grade school show that I could have been. Fortu­ nately, I had asthma and was able to stay home a great deal. While at home I would spend all day reading an encyclopedia for children. This gave me a love of l earning which I never would have acquired at school. In my last