The Policy Behind the Charter School Movement

The policy of permitting states to create charter schools for its students is gaining a great deal of momentum in academic circles. In fact, as of 2009, 44 states, including Virginia, have opened the door to allow charter schools to open within their boundaries. Virginia has only opened four charter schools to date, enrolling a mere 240 students. By comparison, neighboring North Carolina has opened almost 100 such institutions.

The idea behind charter schools started as a response to dissatisfaction with the current public school system. There was a school of thought that the public schools were failing for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, scarcity of money, under qualified teachers and archaic teaching methods. As concerned parents and officials of local jurisdictions began to analyze the problem, many questions surfaced. “Why should a child have to go to a failing school just because of his/her geographic location?” “What can be done to close the achievement gap between white students and minority students?” “If the existing school system is failing, can we do better?” From those questions were borne the outline of the charter school policy.

Generally, there was a feeling of helplessness as stakeholders felt separated from the process and felt like the legislative system in place would not be able to improve public education to a level of their liking. Not being able to find a suitable alternative policy, these stakeholders acted on the feeling that they needed to take matters into their own hands.

       Some general definitions of charter schools include the following:

·         Elementary/secondary schools that receive public money without having to adhere to public school rules and regulations

·         An alternative to other public schools, but without the ability to charge tuition

·         Magnet schools, or institutions that provide a specialized curriculum in a field, whether it is arts, science or math.

For the most part, charter schools are more prominent in urban school districts, such as Chicago and Washington, D.C. Some schools thrive, while others are struggling. New York City’s Promise Academy is an example of a charter school enjoying tremendous success by virtually erasing its achievement gap between black and white students.

However, the success of charter schools is a debatable topic, and this is probably the reason why the state of Virginia has been slow to push this policy of offering alternative education to students and parents who are unsatisfied with the state of their neighborhood school. In the recent gubernatorial campaign between Republican Bob McDonnell and Democrat Creigh Deeds it made for an interesting case study to see how each candidate planned on influencing and developing this policy.

Since election, McDonnell has tried to seize the opportunity. He is planning to loosen restrictions on new charter schools. Currently, the local school boards must approve potential new charter schools. Under McDonnell’s plan, charter school organizers may appeal to the Virginia Board of Education in the event of being rejected at the local level. This may help to resolve conflict at the lower level, as local school boards tend to resist competition, especially in the form of a charter school. In cases where a school division has one or more failing schools, the request for a charter school could be made directly to the state. While realizing that the charter school is not the only cure-all, the Republican nominee for Governor has been noted in a Virginian Pilot-Online editorial as at least putting considerable thought to the issue and developing a solution to the education problem, using charter schools as a viable alternative while keeping an eye on the 72 failing schools in the Old Dominion.

The same editorial criticized Democrat Deeds for not having a proactive solution about the charter school issue. This came in the wake of a statement by the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, wh warned states that resistance to charter schools could result in a reduction of incoming federal funds.

However, Deeds made the following comment on his http://www.deedsforvirginia.com/ website:

       “Like President Obama, I am in favor of innovative charter school programs that are held to appropriate standards of accountability. My opponent’s record, on the other hand, reveals his longstanding support for diverting needed funding from our public schools through voucher and tuition tax credit schemes.” – Creigh Deeds

In short, the main obstacles facing the development of charter schools in Virginia look to be the resistance of local school boards and the current state of the economy as local school systems look to overcome another round of budget cuts in 2012. The failing economy could also affect the financial situation of potential charter school founders.

Resources

Virginia Charter School Resource Center.  From http://www.virginiacharterschools.org/index.html. 

Editorial. Charting New Course for Charter Schools The Virginia Pilot. 10 July 2009. From

     http://www.pilotonline.com/

Holland, Robert. How About a Statewide Charter-School District for Virginia?  The Virginia Pilot.  12

     June 2009.  From http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/1434.shtml

Education Unsheltered. http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/opinion/editorials/article/ED-

     CHARTER12_20090611-184806/273283/

Dominic Goes To Hollywood – Part II – The Archbishop and the Wait

Upon further review, there are too many details about Dominic's Jeopardy game to lump together with this review of the L.A. trip. Therefore, an "executive" decision was made to extend this to a three-part series with Part III - The Game to post next Thursday.

After acquiring the services of grandparents Frankie and Louise to watch the three younger kids, Dominic and mother Gina prepared for the trip of a lifetime – a four-day trek to Hollywood, CA and CBS Studios, where the youngster would test his wits on Jeopardy against 14 other mentally accomplished pre-teens under the watchful eye of a studio audience, Alex Trebek and eventually, about seven million TV viewers.

Upon arrival, mother and son were escorted to their luxurious hotel, which turned out to be on the outskirts of CBS Studios. While many first-time visitors to La-La Land would have been interested in obtaining a “Map of the Stars” homes, Dominic had a clear idea of where his first destination in California would be. Church.

This choice might be surprising to some, but to know the young man from Bristow, VA is to know that it makes perfect sense. Dominic is a devout Catholic, a member of Holy Trinity Parish in Gainesville, VA, where he is active in church activities and has served for four years as an altar boy. He aspires to become a priest and was introduced as such to the Jeopardy audience.

As luck would have it, the nearest church to the hotel also happened to be the centerpiece of the Catholic community in Los Angeles – the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angeles. The Archdiocese of Los Angeles was in transition last February with the retirement of Cardinal Roger Mahony at age 75. In his place, Pope Benedict XVI named Archbishop Jose Gomez of   San Antonio, TX as his successor. In what can only be described as an amazing turn of fate, the Mass which the Oliveras attended at the Cathedral also happened to be the first Mass conducted by the newly appointed Archbishop Gomez. They were able to briefly meet with His Excellency after Mass.

There were other sights and sounds over the next couple of days to keep the trip entertaining. But the day of taping was approaching and it was time for Dominic to get into focus.

For the uninitiated, the routine at Jeopardy, like many other game shows, is to tape several episodes at a time. As 15 players evenly split into five games, the plan was to tape all five episodes on one day. After arriving to the studio at 8 AM, the players were brought together and sequestered, kept away from family and friends.

Now together as a group of 15, the producer called the names of three contestants to be sent to makeup. Dominic was not one of them. But he, like the others, was allowed to watch the game from a separate seating section in the studio.

After the first game, another three names were called, then another three. As morning turned into afternoon, Dominic remained among the waiting, an experience he described simply as “nerve-wracking.”Said Olivera, “I kept wondering, when am I going to be next?” The producers plan was to avoid giving the contestants’ time to think and work through the myriad of nerves and anxieties. With only minutes to mentally prepare for being onstage, each contestant had a level playing field.

After the fourth triad of players was called, Dominic knew that he would compete in the fifth and final game of the day. He also knew who his opponents would be – Tony Harkin, an 11-year old from New Milford, CT and Maddie Harrington, a 12-year old from Palm Beach Gardens, CA. After several days of activities with the group, Dominic was familiar with his opposition. “I was talking with Tony in the Green Room, and he was one of the smartest kids there.”

With the conclusion of the fourth game, Dominic, Tony and Maddie made their way to the makeup area, a process which Dominic said was “thankfully short.”

The players were led to the set, which is much smaller than it appears on TV. In fact, most of the applause which occurs throughout the show is not caused by several hundred viewers. Truth be told, there are only about 100 "very loud" spectators in the studio, many who are tourists that wait in line for tickets to see the live tapings.

Escorted to their podiums, the lineup for the final game was set. Tony to the left, Maddie in the middle and Dominic on the far right. As the familiar Jeopardy theme began to play, the voice of Johnny Gilbert went to work… “THIS…..IS…..JEOPARDY… Now entering the studio are our three contestants….”

It was Showtime!

NEXT THURSDAY – August 11 – The Game

Charter Schools in Virginia

       It is interesting to view an issue through the lens of different observers. What one person sees as a sensible argument may make no sense at all to several others. We see it in everyday life, especially in the op-ed columns and among the rants and raves of politicians. Gaining a consensus on any issue is tough to accomplish, unless the group involved is incredibly like-minded.

       The different lenses do not change when the topic is education. Just as there are 7-8 designated learning styles (at least, according to Mr. Gardner), there are also dozens of preferred methods on how to run the education business, both inside and outside of the classroom.

       In a paper for William and Mary , I introduced the two candidates for governor of Virginia in the 2010 election, Creigh Deeds and Bob McDonnell. Of course, as a Democrat and a Republican running for the same office, they had to disagree on some issues, if only for political purposes. I noted that they had some disagreements on charter schools. But who and what were making them disagree?

       It is no surprise that the two gubernatorial candidates didn’t necessarily see eye-to-eye on the subject of opening more. The topic is historically a “hot button” issue, especially in Virginia. Even the beginning of Virginia charter schools was noted for its controversy. Back in the early 1970’s, Arlington County became the first jurisdiction in the Commonwealth to open a charter school. Although the school did not mention the word ‘charter,’ the opening of H-B Woodlawn Alternative School was met with resistance from school choice critics. Because of its individualized, caring environment, coupled with the love and peace theme of the youth at that time, the Woodlawn project was quickly labeled “Hippie High.” In spite of the name-calling, the school was successful with its impressive number of participants for the AP exams. Woodlawn continues to flourish today, as an offshoot of Yorktown High School.

       Virginia’s problem is not unusual. In theory, many groups and individuals are proponents of individualism and free choice. The problem only arises when free choice takes money or power away from another individual or group.

       It is difficult to find an interest group that exists solely for the abolition of charter schools. However, there are many interest groups that support the development of charter schools and seem to agree on the common enemies.

       The first group of interest is the Atlantic Legal Foundation. This foundation is run by a group of attorneys who offer counseling and legal representation pro bono if the client is a charter school leader conducting school business. As noted in its mission statement:

       “Atlantic Legal believes that charter schools offer a necessary and viable alternative for parents and children locked into failing public schools.  Recognizing that entrenched special-interest groups are opposed to the charter schools concept and advised by a board of nationally prominent leaders in education, Atlantic Legal has established a program devoted to the protection and strengthening of charter schools.”

       According to the ALF website, http://www.defendcharterschools.org/, the enemies of the charter school are teacher unions and school districts, because of the money and power that each loses when a charter school opens.

       Another supporter of charter schools is an advocate group that calls itself Flow, Inc. Its president, Michael Strong, recently wrote a seven-part series on charter schools for the Heartland Institute website. His initial offering details the story of two charter schools - School A and School B. School A is started by an inept administrator who hired unqualified teachers and turned in its paperwork late on a routine basis during its first year. School B is an exceptional school, which moves into the top 200 public high schools in the U.S. in its second year and the top 100 in its third. Remarkably, they are both the same school.  Strong makes the argument that the government sees School A, while the charter school supporters look at School B. To Strong, it’s not about individuals in the government that act as the charter school enemy, but rather the body of government as a whole.

       A third group is the Reason Foundation. With “free minds and free markets” as a slogan, one can see that the organization is all about choice. The only note that might be considered disagreeable from the Reason Foundation is that they emphasize the importance of charter schools to underprivileged and minority students, rather than students looking for an alternative regardless of race or economic status. The foundation is successful and counts celebrities such as Drew Carey among its supporters.

       In conclusion, the areas of agreement among these three groups appear to be that charter schools make for a good policy because they offer choice to students who may not have had one in the past. They may also offer a more diverse environment and an individualized form of learning. In short, the advantage is in having an alternative choice in schools.

       The vague disagreement areas among these three groups may deal with identifying the most noteworthy enemy of the charter school movement. One group blames teacher unions and school districts; another blames the government at-large, while a third barely acknowledges any disapproving faction.

       One might argue that the motivation among these three groups is probably as simple as saying that each supports the charter school concept. I would offer the notion that ALF is interested in creating a charitable diversion for the lawyers who support their cause, as even the richest attorneys will do some pro bono work for the sake of their reputation. I suggest that Flow, Inc. is looking to be seen as an authority on the charter school issue, while the Reason Foundation draws in the charter school supporters to its website and materials to introduce them to its other causes.

Resources

A Tale of Two Charter Schools. From http://flowidealism.org/. Retrieved on July 29, 2009.

Education Unchartered. http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/opinion/editorials/article/ED-CHARTER12_20090611-184806/273283/  Retrieved 22 July, 2009

Holland, Robert. How About a Statewide Charter-School District for Virginia?  The Virginia Pilot.  12 June, 2009.  From http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/1434.shtml

Retrieved on July 24, 2009. 

Los Angeles Times. Who Do Charter Schools Educate? From http://reason.org/news/show/who-do-charters-educate. Retrieved on July 27, 2009.

Virginia Charter School Resource Center.  From http://www.virginiacharterschools.org/index.html .  Retrieved on July 23, 2009.

http://www.defendcharterschools.org/. Mission Statement. Retrieved on July 26, 2009.

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL? – A Reflective Analysis of the Desegregation Policy in Norfolk after Brown vs. the Board of Education (1953-1960)

     In 1954, a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door for equal rights in education. This decision came on the heels of several landmark events, such as Thurgood Marshall’s argument for school integration in front of the Supreme Court some ten years before. With the Brown v. Board of Education ruling, the justices hoped to level the educational playing field by allowing black students to begin attending the same schools as white students.

     The new policy was controversial and school districts had trouble adjusting. While some made adjustments within five years, others took 10, 15 years, and there are some who would suggest that segregation still exists at some level today. In fact, there is the basis for an argument that the policy may not have been reverted, but the numbers suggest that our students are being separated yet again. Therein lies the irony. For the sake of this article, the concentration will deal with one system in Hampton Roads  that fought the landmark decision with great resistance - the city of Norfolk.

     As would be expected, most of the changes in policy occurred between 1953 and 1960. In spite of its historical context, the policy does work as a good case study to show how a problematic policy gets implemented. In Norfolk,  the integration issue started before 1954 as an all-white parochial school, Blessed Sacrament, enrolled a black student in 1953, opening up the idea that integration was possible. Most of the opposition to Brown v. Board of Education came in the form of political action. Some acts, such as the “cool heads” approach and formation of a 32-member panel to discuss the effects of Brown v. Board of Education seemed sensible. Others, such as the declaration of Sen. Harry Flood Byrd to stop integration plans, was based more on emotion meant to rile up his political base.

     In Norfolk, resistance continued. The 1955 Brown II ruling placing policy implementation with the district courts caused the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority (NRHA) to begin redistricting neighborhoods in the hopes of keeping students separated, although now by neighborhood. But, by separating the black and white neighborhoods as districts, the effect was the same. Even after 233 black citizens signed a petition requesting that the Norfolk school board act in “good faith compliance,” the resistance continued. In spite of Governor Stanley’s claim that the state was acting in a righteous manner, behind the scenes, tempers were flaring. In early 1956, Sen. Byrd introduced the term “massive resistance” and introduced a set of laws designed to prevent desegregation. A month later 101 southern politicians signed the “Southern Manifesto,”  condemning the Supreme Court for interfering with states rights.  Two months later, the NAACP filed suit against the Norfolk school board to end segregation. This case would be decided and appealed several times. Three similar suits followed, one in Newport News. With the stir caused by the Rosa Parks incident in Alabama, the movement found its way to the forefront of the public eye, and by the end of 1956, the Virginia General Assembly convened for a hearing on public school segregation, at which notable black leaders from the NAACP were given the opportunity to be herd in a public forum. However, two weeks later, through the Pupil Placement Act, the General Assembly ordered all schools with black and white students attending to be closed.

     The first half of 1957 was left to the court system. Federal judge Walter Hoffman rendered an opinion on two separate, but related cases - Beckett v. School Board of the City of Norfolk and Adkins v. School Board of the City of Newport News. In both cases, Judge Hoffman declared the Pupil Placement Act to be unconstitutional and ordered integration. Later in 1957, the “Little Rock 9” began school in Arkansas and the ball was rolling.

     But the ball threatened to stop once and for all as the forces collided in the hardest possible way in 1958. Virginia had elected a new governor, J. Lindsay Almond, who rode the resistance wave into office. In spite of Judge Hoffman’s ruling that every application from a black student be handled fairly and promptly, the powers that be in Norfolk were not willing to give up. In 1958, they changed the rules. Their claim was that each student application to a school would be handled by the student’s proximity to the school, scholastic aptitude, availability of seats, and character of the student. Then, the School Board proceeded to reject all 151 applications from black students desiring to go to white schools. Hoffman ordered a review, reminding the members of the Board of their legal obligations. The Board took a week to ponder its options, then went back to work and found 17 students worthy of entrance. However, they requested that the 17 students be denied admission until September 1959. This request was denied; in fact, the beginning of school in Norfolk was delayed two weeks, to September 22, in order to allow the black students in.

     On September 27^th, Gov. Almond took over control of the Norfolk schools, and like he had done in other districts, ordered them closed, leaving black and white students out of school.

     At this point, the citizens and businesspeople of Norfolk took matters into their own hands and founded the “Committee for Public Schools.” Their letters and petitions were met with opposition from the Governor and local officials, but their efforts led to a legal challenge, which culminated in the 1959 decision of a federal court, finding the closing of schools to be unconstitutional and illegal. This brought attention not just to local media, but national as well. When Edward R.Murrow broadcast his “The Lost Class of ‘59” on the CBS National News, the negative backlash was enough to quiet the politicians and get the six closed schools reopened with little military, police or parental opposition.

     Gov. Almond made one last ditch effort in 1959 to provide for the safeguarding of all segregated schools, but in 1960 he realized it was a battle that would not be won. So, he ordered the integration of all schools in Virginia. Ironically, Norfolk was named an “All-American” city that year.

    

References

Brewbaker, John Joseph. Desegregation in the Norfolk Public Schools. Norfolk, VA: Southern Regional  

     Council, 1960. Retrieved on August 2, 2009.

Gruss, Mike and Philip Walzer. "Pioneers of Progress." (Series: Brown v. Board of Education: 1954-2004).

     The Virginian-Pilot, February 1, 2004. (Factiva). Retrieved on August 1, 2009

Nichols, James Andrew. The Turning of a City's Soul: Norfolk's Public School Integration Crisis, 1954-

     1959. M.A., History, VPI, 2003. (http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-09192003-

     125601/unrestricted/Nichols.pdf). Retrieved on July 30, 2009

Parramore, Thomas C. Norfolk: The First Four Centuries. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia,

     1994. (Chapter 25: A sojourn in the Byrd-cage, pp. 362-376) F234.N8P375 1994. Retrieved on

     August 2, 2009.

Virginian-Pilot. Fighting Massive Resistance. (Six part series running from 9/28/2008-10/3/2008)

     http://www.pilotonline.com/. Retrieved on August 1, 2009.

White, Forrest R. Pride and Prejudice: School Desegregation and Urban Renewal in Norfolk, 1950-1959.

     Westport, CT: Praeger, 1992. HT177.N66W45 1992. Retrieved on August 1, 2009

Dominic Goes To Jeopardy - Part One: The Process

For young Dominic Olivera, the journey toward playing “Jeopardy” in front of a national audience was nearly as interesting as the experience itself.

Every year, the Jeopardy producers at Sony Pictures Company look to line up 15 individuals for their annual “Kids Week.” The idea, according to the CBS press release, is to “celebrate youth and academic excellence with fifteen of the nation’s brightest 10-, 11- and 12-year olds competing.”

The winnowing process is long and brutal. While perhaps not American Idol-ish in its degree of difficulty, there is still a matter of entertaining tens of thousands of pre-teens who dream of bantering with host Alex Trebek right after nailing the Final Jeopardy answer to win thousands of dollars. For Kids Week, the winner of each of the five games was guaranteed a minimum of $15,000.

Gathering the potential contestants was easy enough. As the #1 rated quiz show on television, Jeopardy claims almost nine million loyal viewers on a daily basis and in most major markets, a slot at 7:30 PM, right after “Wheel of Fortune.”  Finding test takers is as easy as presenting a well-placed ad heading into a commercial break requesting applicants to take the Jeopardy “test.” Unlike “WoF,” it is imperative for the Jeopardy producers at Sony to find contestants who are generally brighter than the viewing audience. While “Fortune” viewers take delight in answering the puzzle before the players, most Jeopardy watchers are happy just to keep up.

The first test was online and over 40,000 kids signed on. The first hurdle toward making it on the show is to pass this exam and the number of successful applicants is not readily available. Upon registering for the online test, applicants are allowed to choose the city where they would like to audition, if they are selected. Being from Northern Virginia, Philadelphia was the closest city to the Oliveras.

Soon after completing the exam, young Dominic received word that his score was worthy of a passing grade and he received an invitation to attend the audition in Philly. There are two good reasons for the audition. First, the invitees are given another test. As noted by Dominic’s mother, Gina, it is “to ensure you have the intellectual chops and that Daddy didn’t take the (online) test for you.” In this case, Dominic’s father Mario accompanied his son to the audition while Gina stayed home to care for the other three children – Vincent, Anthony and the youngest, Sophia.

The other reason for the audition is to acquaint the potential contestants with the workings of Jeopardy and to identify the most personable contestants. The process includes an interview with a member of the production staff and a mock Jeopardy game complete with bells and buzzers. Personality, intellect and stage presence are key components for the typical Jeopardy contestant, regardless of age. Dominic was given the opportunity to wow the producers with stories from his other extracurricular activities, which include music (he plays a mean piano and has performed before large audiences in the past), Boy Scouts (getting ready to begin his Eagle Scout project and recently completed a five day, 50-mile canoe/whitewater venture) and church. Dominic is an active member of Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Gainesville, VA, where among other activities he has been an altar server for four years.

Leaving the audition in Philadelphia, the only promise Dominic received was that the producers would “be in touch” if selected.

Then the wait began….

After a couple of months, Gina admits that they had “kind of forgotten about it and just figured they were not going to call.”

Then one day, the news arrived. Dominic’s presence was requested at the Sony Pictures Television studio in Culver City, CA as one of the 15 contestants selected for Kids Jeopardy week. The taping was to take place in early March.

There was only one problem. Mario, a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force, was getting ready to ship out to Afghanistan and his departure date had been pushed back to just before the taping. In fact, the going away “open house” party, set for February 5^th, had been cancelled as it was now the day that he would leave.

What to do when you love your job…and it’s becoming obsolete

One of the hardest scenarios for a worker to accept is being in a job that is meaningful and rewarding, then having it pulled away as the skill or position becomes obsolete. In the advancing age of technology, this is becoming commonplace. While the loss of a loved job can be upsetting, there are certain things an employee can do to put oneself in an admirable position as the inevitable changes in a workplace begin to take shape.

Change is inevitable

By design, many of us are creatures of habit. We put our pants on a preferred leg first on a daily basis, brush our teeth using a familiar routine, drive to work using the same route, etc.

While many of us grow defensive at the prospect of change, it is also true that the more successful employees are those who maintain numerous skills and accept change as part of the changing workplace. This allows for a more stable transition when a change is made. In the case of a job becoming obsolete, one must be aware of the future prospects for the job. Staying informed to trends in one’s industry and company is a way to prepare for any pending change.

This ability to “see around the corner” is a great skill to develop whether one is a worker or manager. It is better to be prepared for future change ahead of one’s colleagues.

Stay Positive and Adaptable

Regardless of internal strife, it is always best to project a positive attitude. Instead of looking at your obsolete job as an inconvenience, view the situation as an opportunity for change, a chance to develop new skills and gain professional training. Taking advantage of training in the present may keep a worker employed in the future. Show a willingness to adapt and always keep a positive mindset. This can go a long way in separating a worker from negative colleagues, which is a trait that bodes well in the eyes of supervisors.

Gain New Skills

Having the ability to “look around the corner” also includes having the skills to predict which jobs will be desirable in the future. As an employee, one should take advantage of every opportunity to learn new skills, especially technology-based tasks. Staying a step ahead of co-workers leads to more chances to obtain future positions with the company. Engaging in professional training, especially on a voluntary basis, shows a willingness to improve, and completing skill-based courses makes a worker more valuable to a business during a period of change. It also opens doors for the worker whose job is becoming obsolete.

Network

As the adage says, it is “who you know.” Maintaining an open network of colleagues and co-workers can prove to be valuable when one’s job becomes obsolete. In order to possess the ability to “see around the corner,” one must keep in contact with present connections. This does not mean sharing office gossip, but rather an open exchange of ideas. Staying involved with professional associations and networking groups (i.e. LinkedIn) is a great way to see what others in one’s profession are doing, particularly during a period of job change.

Coming Soon!! Dominic Goes to Hollywood --- for "Kids Jeopardy"

Typically I prefer not to tease future articles, but today I have a good reason.

Last Friday evening (July 8th), Dominic Olivera, a 12-year old from Bristow, VA, competed on the fifth and final installment of Kids Jeopardy. Being lifetime friends with the family, we greatly anticipated the opportunity to watch the game, especially considering the frequent reminders coming from his mother, aunt and grandmother! Given the secretive workings of Jeopardy, we did not even bother to ask any of the relatives how Dominic might have done on the show. We assumed that he performed very well. Here's why.

There is one thing that my wife Elizabeth and I have noticed over the years - that is, Dominic is one of the most brilliant kids we have encountered; in fact, all four of Gina and Rio's kids are highly intelligent. For the sake of background, Gina is a former Air Force officer with a master's degree in public administration while Mario (aka Rio) is currently an Air Force lieutenant colonel stationed in Afghanistan. Legend has it that they met at the "O" club on base. Five years ago, they were stationed at Langley AFB and lived in Newport News. On a visit to their home near the shipyard, we were greatly entertained by the seven-year old Dominic, who kept us in stitches with his imitations of politicians, often quoting them verbatim. Three years later, after the Oliveras had graciously donated a room full of furniture to help us after a house fire, my U-Haul trip to Bristow (which is just southwest of Manassas) was brightened by young Dominic's renditions of "The Entertainer" and other ragtime tunes on the piano, which made the lugging of chairs and couches much easier.

To put this in current perspective, Dominic is about to begin work on his Eagle Scout project. Did I mention that he's 12?

Anyhow, we figured that he did well. After watching the game, which had a phenomenal ending, I had an opportunity to speak with Dominic and his mother. Although I have watched the game for 25 years, our 60-minute conversation enlightened me about the game of Jeopardy in ways that were previously unknown. No, I didn't learn any trade secrets (having grown up in a CIA family, even I am impressed by the shroud of secrecy surrounding the operation), but did gain some valuable insight into the process of getting on the show, the waiting game, the trip to Hollywood (a story in itself!), how the show works, how the buzzers work, how Alex Trebek works... etc...

It didn't take long to realize that I had enough information for a two-part article, and it wasn't going to get finished today :/

So, for the readers of the Wall, I welcome you to look forward to a two-part segment on Dominic Olivera's trip to Jeopardy with posts appearing on Thursday, July 21st and 28th. Of course, the regular educational pieces will be added on Monday July 18th and 25th. Thanks for the support to date. The rate of "hits" has doubled over the past two months and things are continuing to expand!   --- Jim