Apparently, what had been submitted by at least one teacher and the guidance office called into question her ability to conduct college-level work. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

A couple of months later I received a sad letter from the student. Not only had she not been accepted into the elementary education program at the university, but the admissions office had accepted her only provisionally and had required her to take remedial courses before final review and acceptance. I could not believe it. I picked up the phone and called the admissions office. A representative from the admissions office reiterated what was in her letter. By this time my astonishment had passed and my anger was waxing.

Apparently, what had been submitted by at least one teacher and the guidance office called into question her ability to conduct college-level work. Nothing could have been further from the truth and I told the admissions officer so. Although identified as a "gifted and talented" student in her younger years, she had experienced some difficulty during the previous year because of a back ailment. Her frequent medical appointments had created a number of absences on her record and had affected her overall grades. But, I knew that she was college material. And if she was still experiencing health problems, she could easily arrange her course schedule around the appointments. The admissions officer seemed at a loss for words and said that he didn't know what to do, because his office had always had a "close relationship"with the guidance office of that particular high school. At that point I had to remind him that I was a faculty member of the university and that this applicant was one of my former students whom I judged to be capable of college-level work. Had the officer been told that she had been identified as "gifted and talented" in reading? If so, how could he justify requiring remedial reading courses? She was an avid reader. Furthermore, if her high school scores for the last year were below average—and I knew that they were—the school system had to share in the blame. Had he been told that? No, I didn't think so. I was the one who had requested a formal evaluation (PET) to assist her and so I related the entire story. During the year the student had told me that her other teachers were giving her a hard time because of her absences and not giving her enough time to make up her work. None of her other teachers had bothered to appear for the PET meeting that I had requested, even though attendance at such an appointment was a legal requirement. One of these teachers "explained" to me that the student was "making it all up," that it was "all in her head," that she had psychological and family problems. The fact that the student's physical therapist and doctor said otherwise had apparently not convinced her. The school, I pointed out clearly to the admissions officer, had not met the needs of this challenged student and had contributed to her difficulties. These difficulties could be overcome by a flexible college schedule.

The guidance officer should have been an advocate for this student, particularly since it was known among school representatives that she did not have any support at home for educational pursuits. If students cannot depend on guidance counselors and teachers to try to assist them, on whom can they rely?

In the end, I managed to reverse the requirement for remedial courses and to gain acceptance for her into the education program, but it
wasn't easy. It took several months, several letters and phone calls, and one angry visit to the high school to try to overcome the harm that had been done. But by that time, the student had despaired of going to college and decided not to attend.

Can you guess whom the student had unwittingly asked to write a letter of recommendation? Oh, yes, believe it. It was the very same teacher who had pronounced that the illness was imaginary. And this was the very same teacher in the second story whose character I considered to be deficient. Now you know one of the reasons why. But it gets better. Another of the recommendations came from the guidance office itself, from the chief guidance officer of the school. And when I paid him a visit, after driving several hours from the university to speak with him about this case, he could not offer any substantive defense of his damning recommendation other than to say that the teachers felt that she couldn't do the work. Obviously, he didn't give any credence to the findings of the health-care experts treating the student. And he most surely didn't review her entire scholastic record, a good portion of which was outstanding, before writing her recommendation. But far worse to me is the fact that he should have been an advocate for this student, particularly since it was known among school representatives that she did not have any support at home for educational pursuits. If students cannot depend on guidance counselors and teachers to try to assist them, on whom can they rely?

Next Page: Advice for Greek-Americans