There is no entry in the index of our textbook – Foundations of American Education – for alternative/transfer schools or alternative education. By alternative schools, I do not mean charter schools, magnet schools, Montessori schools, or the Milford Academy (where children are neither seen nor heard). Alternative/transfer schools in New York City are in the empowerment zone, which makes it sound as though we are molding superheroes of the future. We are. Ideally, alternative schools in the empowerment zone offer an opportunity to students who have had trouble succeeding in the traditional school setting. Under No Child Left Behind, however, alternative schools are held to the same standards as traditional schools. Alternative schools have had a difficult time balancing their students’ needs with the Department of Education’s wants. Alternative schools begin to mirror traditional schools in their pursuit of passing Regents scores, high attendance, enrollment, and graduation rates. If these schools can show the Department of Education that they are “functional” in the traditional sense, they receive funding. If not? We know what happens.
Alternatives schools are often seen as dumping grounds, or where a student goes when they can’t possibly mess up anymore. Students push through the doors of the school already feeling as though they have failed. Alternative/transfer schools are often the last chance for a student. The truth is these students are different: they support themselves. They have child care responsibilities. Some have been jailed. All have struggled. An alternative system should respect and build upon the life experience these students have already gained. Kim and Taylor (2008) state that a “school program that is beneficial to students when it provides content, processes, rigor, and concepts that [students] need to develop and realize their future goals. A school program that is beneficial to students engages them and leads them through varying processes to critical thinking and synthesis of the concepts and content” (Kim & Taylor, 2008, 208). The alternative student is not the easiest student to reach. Teachers and administration must be creative in their approaches in order to instill critical thinking skills.
In the past year, I have had the opportunity to work at an alternative/transfer school. The particular school is a tale of two sites. One site, located in the West Village neighborhood, seemed to function better as an alternative school than the main site, located in Midtown. Both sites, however, could use some revamping in order to truly serve their populations.
The Village campus is small; there are eight teachers and 120 students. The school itself takes up half of a floor in a building that houses four other schools. The classrooms are large and sunny. Each class usually has no more than fifteen students each. The teachers and administration get to know each of the students. Students feel as though the teachers really care about whether they learn or not. Students feel as though the teachers present things that they are interested in. Some of the classes offered are Forensics, Chinese, Photoshop and Creative Writing. Each teacher at the Village campus either has advanced degrees in their field of specialty or more than five years teaching experience.
The Midtown campus is much larger. The school occupies the first floor of a building on a busy street. Upon entering the school, one realizes that there are very few windows, giving the school a closed-in feeling. There are 300 students in attendance at the Midtown site. The classrooms are much smaller, nearly two-thirds the size of the Village campus classrooms, and completely windowless. There is a cafeteria, but no gym. The library is a student refuge. The teachers at the Midtown campus are knowledgeable, but stretched too thin. The class sizes are usually twenty to twenty-five students. Unlike the Village campus where every teacher knows every student, there are too many students at the Midtown campus for every teacher to know each student’s name.
One of the main differences between the two campuses is the location of administrative offices. The Midtown campus hosts 1 principal, 2 assistant principles, 4 guidance counselors, and other administrative staff. Despite the fact that most of the administration resides at the Midtown campus, discipline issues are far worse there than at the Village campus. Students noisily roam the halls without being reprimanded by the principal or the assistant principals. Student caught with drug paraphernalia are not punished. Students who create disturbances in class are not penalized. Teachers do not have a lot of support in disciplining the students. This does not help create an atmosphere of learning.
The Midtown campus also focuses more on Quality Review results and Regents scores than the Village campus. The Midtown campus is concerned with numbers – enrollment, attendance, and grades – as those things will insure a score of Proficient on the Quality Review. Funding for the school is tied to Department of Education report cards and quality reviews as well as enrollment numbers. The Village campus is also concerned with enrollment and attendance issues as it depends on these numbers to stay open. McKee and Conner (2007) state that “some criteria that works well for the traditional school model, such as graduation and attendance rates, cannot be mechanically applied to alternative schools” (McKee & Conner, 2007, 49).
Looking at the examples of both campuses of an alternative school, it is clear to see how difficult it must be to serve a certain population but receive no support from the Department of Education. The NYS Department of Education seems to restrict the growth of the alternative schools by mandating traditional standards. Alternative school students benefit from smaller schools and smaller class sizes. A caring and creative community is fostered when each teacher is able to get to know each student. Since these students have “fallen through the cracks” of the traditional system, why mandate that alternative schools must have an enrollment of 300+ students? If students feel as though no one will notice their absence, they are more likely to fall into the same pattern of truancy that got them to the alternative school in the first place.
Students are often frustrated by the classroom model of learning. Many of the students in attendance at this particular alternative school suffer from undiagnosed or diagnosed learning disabilities or emotional/behavioral disorders. These students don’t connect to classroom learning as they cannot understand the content relevance to their own lives. Ivan Illich (1971) notes that “most people acquire most of their knowledge outside of school” (Illich; Schultz, 2001, 97). Herbert Kohl (1969) also discusses the value of learning experiences outside of the classroom. “The whole community ought to be the school, and the classroom a home base for the teachers and kids, a place where they can talk and rest and learn together, but not the sole place of learning” (Kohl; Schultz, 2001, 109). The Village and Midtown campuses are connected to a vocational school and sometimes allow the occasional field trip, but this is not enough “outside” experience. Apprenticeships and internships are considered a last resort to this particular school. Field trips are not always approved. Since it may take a while for alternative schools to see the value of taking the students outside the classroom, Herbert Kohl (1969) states that “it is always a good idea to bring as many non-teachers into [the] classroom […] [as] all have valuable experience to offer young people that teachers don’t have” (Kohl; Schultz, 2001, 109).
In order to be a truly alternative educational experience, alternative schools should offer flexible hours to accommodate students’ work schedules, day care facilities, high-interest classes as well as credit recovery programs, advisory groups and counseling, and outside classroom experiences, such as internships, apprenticeships, and field trips. Alternative schools should be held to the same accountability standards, but should be allowed room for creative teaching practices. For these ideas to come to fruition, however, the whole educational system of New York State would have to be revamped, re-trained, and re-budgeted. Maybe I do get to start my riot. Who’s with me?
References
Freire, P. (1970). “Pedagogy of the oppressed.” In Schultz, F (Ed.), SOURCES: notable
selections in education (3rd ed.) (pp. 87-94). Guilford, Connecticut: McGraw-
Hill/Dushkin.
selections in education (3rd ed.) (pp. 95-102). Guilford, Connecticut: McGraw-
Hill/Dushkin.
Kim, J. and Taylor, K. (2008). “Rethinking alternative education to break the cycle of
educational inequality and inequity.” The journal of educational research, 101(4), 207-219.
education (3rd ed.) (pp. 105-109). Guilford, Connecticut: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin.
Leadership, 8 (4), 44-49.
No comments:
Post a Comment