Wednesday, July 16, 2008

A Reflection on Small Schools

The South Bronx building in which I currently teach once housed William Howard Taft High School, a school mentioned by Jonathan Kozol in Amazing Grace, his book on racial inequalities in New York City Schools. Kozol writes that "[at Taft] one of the grimmest schools in the United States, the self-esteem of children has been crushed to the degree that students ridicule them selves, as David Washington has told me, by making a bitter joke out of the letters of the school's name. 'Taft,' they say, means 'Training Animals For Tomorrow.' The area around the school is heavily patrolled so students can get from the subway to the school unharmed. (Kozol 1995). Were Kozol to visit the building today he would be greeted by an entirely different scene. Thanks to the "small schools" trend in the Department of Education spearheaded by the New Visions organization, the building that was once Taft now houses 6 smaller schools. Those who knew the school when Kozol visited say they have witnessed marked improvement.
Small schools were born in order to combat the chaos that can exist in a large inner-city high school. According to New Visions "between 1993 and 1998, thousands of parents, teachers, administrators, cultural groups and civic and educational institutions engaged in a collaborative process that resulted in the creation of small, theme-based schools focusing on innovative, student-centered instructional practices." In the former Taft building, for example each of the schools embodies a different philosophy and academic focus. One school prepares students for medical careers, and another law. The Department of Education designed these schools so that ideally the would "grow from their communities and are invested from the start with the creativity, support and the ongoing involvement of local stakeholders (New Visions)." Instead of treating students as only ID numbers and possible criminals, the New Visions small schools movement stressed the recognition of the individual student.

Small schools have shown some promising results. A recent New York Times article "Attention Goes a Long Way at a School, Small by Design" explores how small schools under strong leadership are able to give students academic attention that was once reserved only for students in private schools. As a result we are witnessing excellent graduation rates in extremely economically disadvantaged neighborhoods, in schools, like the former Taft, that have historically struggled. In my (albeit limited) experience I have had the opportunity to really get to know and appreciate my students by virtue of the amount of time I spend with them in small groups. The specific focuses of the small schools are also and advantage for students as instead of being assigned to a monolithic high school they can choose whether to study law or medicine, go to a single sex school, and what kind of philosophy their school espouses.

One of the downsides to small schools that has been mentioned in recent articles and that I have witnessed firsthand is competition for space within the campus. When these buildings housed only one large school use of its facilities could be more flexible. With more schools in the building comes increased demand for physical resources. For example, if only one school is to use the cafeteria during a given class period, another school may have to assign students to eat their lunch very early in the day. The same scenario holds true for fields, gymnasiums, and auditoriums. An additional pitfall that small schools face is redundancy of resources. Since the schools do not necessarily share resources, there exists the possibility that money is spent on equipment and supplies that are unused elsewhere on the campus. The transition to small schools has been uneven, overcrowding schools that have not been divided with the overflow from the small schools, which have very strict enrollment quotas ("In Push for Small Schools, Other Schools Suffer").
Ultimately I believe any philosophy that encourages and allows better student engagement is a worthwhile one and that the difficulties arising from the implementation of small schools have been largely logistical. However, logistical problems can have very real effects for students despite the underlying ideology. There is also the problem of competition for education. The logistical problems in small schools encourage competition for resources within the campus and among potential students and are antithetical to learning. However the philosophy behind the movement has allowed for the creativity and passion of teachers and administrators to be effectively freed to the great benefit of New York City students.

References:

Bosman, J. (30, June 2007). Small Schools Are Ahead in Graduation. New York Times. Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/30/nyregion/30grads.html?scp=2&sq=%22small+schools%22+education&st=nyt

Freedman, S. (23, June 2004). Some Pupils Feel Squeezed Out By City's Small-Schools Program. New York Times. Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CEEDB1039F930A15755C0A9629C8B63&scp=2sq=education%20small%20schools&st=cse

Herszenhorn, D. (14, March 2005). In Push for Small Schools, Other Schools Suffer. New York Times. Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A06E2DC1438F937A25752C0A9639C8B63&scp=8&sq="small schools&st=cse

Kozol, J. (1995). Amazing grace: The lives of children and the conscience of a nation. New York: Crown

Medina, J. (30, June 2008). Attention Goes a Long Way at a School, Small by Design. New York Times. Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/education/30school.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=attention%20goes&st=cse&oref=login

New Visions for Public Schools: New Visions Schools. Overview. Retrieved July 13, 2008, from newvisions.org website:http://www.newvisions.org/schools/nvs/index.asp

No comments: