Parents who rush to hire tutors may be part of the problem

The Daily Pilot’s recent report (“Effort to alter Corona del Mar High grades detailed,” Jan 29) revealing newly disclosed details regarding the Corona del Mar High School cheating scandal underscores many troubling aspects to the case.

The excellent, well-researched article by staff writer Hannah Fry showed that tutor Timothy Lance Lai’s alleged scheme to change grades was conceived well in advance, orchestrated with clear intent and brazenly executed by Lai and a group of students.

According to student statements, the plan apparently involved sworn secrecy, the use of high-tech devices, a late-night break-in at the school’s Eastbluff campus, a getaway driver and code words.

Yet as shocking as this case remains more than a year after the public first learned of it in December 2013, these new disclosures also highlight two other relevant, but less-discussed, issues.

The first is the unfortunate response by some school officials, who sound as if they’ve been coached by a committee of lawyers and publicists.

Consider CdM Principal Kathy Scott’s email to staff after Lai’s arrest last fall, in which she made it clear that the cheating was not to be a topic of discussion.

“We do not need to revisit the past and we do not need to engage ourselves in serving as the judge and jury for this case,” she reportedly wrote. “Our top priority is maintaining a positive and safe learning environment for all students and any discussion with anyone, including the media, has the potential to become disruptive, divisive and counterproductive.”

Well, good luck with that.

I should point out that Scott had the misfortune of having to deal with the scandal in her first year on the job at the high school, and that I’ve heard nothing but glowing reviews from parents regarding her leadership. It’s hardly surprising that she and other district officials wish the negative attention would just go away.

Nonetheless, a circle-the-bandwagons approach to managing a crisis threatens to be counterproductive, and at the least will do nothing to stanch divisiveness.

Yes, the district has its own legal position to consider. But people will talk regardless, and it’s disingenuous for administrators to suggest that they’re only trying to put a lid on discussion out of concern for the kids.

Indeed, it’s particularly during times of crisis that open and honest communication is needed, and students would actually benefit from continued dialogue and consideration of some pertinent questions, such as: How should cheating be punished? Is all cheating the same? How can we work together to create a healthier environment in which cheating is rare?

And that leads me to another facet of this case that bears examination: the over-reliance on outside tutors in affluent areas.

It’s easy to understand how this happens. At schools like CdM, where many parents have an abundance of disposable income and an almost irrational fear that their kids won’t excel in an intensely competitive academic environment, the temptation is great to use every means available to get that extra edge.

Parents get sucked into the idea that they must send their children to a posse of private tutors, who typically charge anywhere from $35 to $100 an hour or more. They unhesitatingly pay these steep fees, even when the subjects covered aren’t ones that their students necessarily struggle with. For any Advanced Placement class, private tutoring is considered practically essential. And of course, tutoring for SAT and ACT prep also goes without saying. I’ve done it. So have all my friends.

Just recently a neighbor whose son attends CdM questioned me about this phenomenon. As far as she could tell, her son was the only student among his peers who didn’t have any tutors, and she was beginning to second-guess herself.

“Am I missing something?” she asked. “Am I a bad mother?”

Quite the contrary. She’s a terrific mom, and her son is a fine young man with a bright future ahead, his lack of tutoring notwithstanding.

The uncomfortable truth for many of us is that, while many tutors provide outstanding services, much of the extra-hours coaching and prepping is simply unnecessary. In many cases, students would do better to just study the materials provided, do homework on their own and speak to their teachers if they have questions.

Certainly, there are plenty of instances when tutoring is warranted if a subject is particularly rigorous or if students have trouble grasping certain subjects without a little extra guidance. But many times parents jump immediately to tutors without first giving kids a chance at self-discovery, an opportunity to grow by tackling something challenging and figuring it out themselves.

By automatically assuming they need help, aren’t we teaching our kids to be dependent on crutches? Is that the example we want to set?

Lai was reportedly popular with families at the school and had worked with possibly hundreds of students over many years.

The details emerging paint a disturbing picture of a highly unethical man that parents unwittingly put their faith in, one who held a discomfiting sway over students. His alleged betrayal of their trust might unfairly tarnish other honest, conscientious tutors, and that’s a shame.

But perhaps it’s also a signal for parents to reexamine what’s come to be a given at schools like CdM: The more tutors, the better. Sometimes less is just the right amount.

PATRICE APODACA is a former Newport-Mesa public school parent and former Los Angeles Times staff writer. She lives in Newport Beach.