 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
You
are here:
Why Every Child in America Deserves a School Where
She/He is Known and Valued
My stepdaughter, Sarah, attended two personalized schools on her way to high school. One was a small, private parent co-op, where she spent the equivalent of third and fourth grades in a multiage class and worked with the same two teachers for two years. The other was a public middle school program that at that time included the equivalent of grades 4-8, with about 95 students and four teachers. Sarah participated in this multiage program for four years. She grew up from a child to a capable, thoughtful teen. All of her teachers knew her well, and one teacher became her mentor. Within a school program that focused on depth of relationship and honoring the students' interests, she developed academic knowledge and skills far beyond the average 8th grade expectations.
Both of these schools focused on personalization. Both focused on relationship, on emotional intelligence and interpersonal competence, on children learning from each other as well as from teachers. And, in a way integral with all of these person-centered goals, both schools focused on high academic standards and achievement.
The word paradigm has been overused in recent years and thus has lost some of its explanatory power. Nonetheless it is still precisely the right word to describe the transformation we need in American schooling. At the start of this new century, we need to acknowledge that, whatever its merits in 1910 or even 1960, the industrial paradigm of school is a disaster for many of our children today. Age grading is based on an erroneous understanding of human development. Giving a child a brand new teacher every year is enormously wasteful of the relationship that has grown between teacher and student and of the teacher's knowledge of the child's capacities and needs. Giving an adolescent five or six teachers who know almost nothing about her/him as a person is disrespectful and unproductive. Putting a thousand or two thousand or three thousand teens into the same school disconnects the majority of teens from any adults and leads to alienation and boredom and conflict. Why should a teenager respect a teacher who knows nothing about her/him?
A new paradigm for schools-given that for the first time in the history of our nation, we want every child to learn and succeed, and that we live in a culture in which many children from all social classes experience a shortage of relationships with caring, attentive, engaged adults - a new paradigm would build from personalization as the core principle. In personalized schools, every single child or teen is known and cared about as an individual by several teachers. Personalized schools are small schools, with 120 or 180 or even 240 students, but not too much more than this (or in some high schools, perhaps 400 or even 600 at most). Or personalized schools are small programs that function with a lot of independence and separateness within a larger school organization.
In personalized schools, students and teachers work together for more than one year: at least two years and sometimes three or four or even five years. Elementary schools often use multiage classrooms, while middle and high schools prefer looping, in which the same teachers teach students for two or more years in a row. Teachers and students build strong relationships, and teachers can help students learn more effectively because they know their students as individuals. Students also develop strong relationships with each other and learn a great deal from each other. In addition parents and teachers create stronger partnerships in personalized schools, because they have the time and opportunity to build trust and communication with each other.
Finally personalized schools are communities. Students, teachers, and parents know each other personally, and they work together to help young people to learn and succeed. In personalized schools, young people are cared for, nurtured, and supported. Because we already have examples of personalized schools in our society, we have a significant research record that supports the effectiveness and value of this paradigm. Here's a small sampling of that record.
Children and teens who attend personalized schools learn more and gain greater academic competence and success. Of 103 recent studies about half of them found student achievement in small, personalized schools to be superior to that in large schools. The other half found no difference in achievement between small and large schools. Not a single study found higher achievement in large schools. (Kathleen Cotton, 1996. "Close-Up #20. School Improvement Research Series." Northwest Regional Educational Lab. Portland OR) A national study confirmed that youngsters learn more in math, reading, history, and science in small schools than in large ones-especially disadvantaged students. (V. Lee and J. Smith, 1994. "Effects of High School Restructuring on Size and Achievement." National Center on the Organization and Restructuring of Schools. Madison WI) A New Jersey study found that school size had more influence on student achievement than any other factor controllable by educators, that small size correlated with higher achievement. (R. H. Heck and R. A. Mayor, 1993. Journal of Education Policy 8.) Findings about the impact of school size on student achievement appear to hold at all grade levels, with a tendency for school size to play a larger role as students grow older. (M. A. Raywid. "Small Schools: A Reform That Works." Educational Leadership. Jan 1998) Children do better in schools small enough that "the principal knows the name of each student." Schools with fewer than 300 students showed the best performance. (New York Times 9-21-94) Students in rural states such as Iowa, Kansas, and North Dakota probably score higher on the SAT and ACT not because they have fewer students of color, as some have argued, but because students in these states are more likely to attend small schools. (New York Times 9-21-94)
Disadvantaged children and teens who attend personalized schools learn more and gain greater academic competence and success. An Alaska study found that disadvantaged children in small schools significantly outperformed those in large schools on standardized tests of basic skills.(G. Huang and C. B. Howley, Winter 1993. Journal of Research in Rural Education 9.) Minority students in rural states who attend small schools outperform their counterparts in the rest of the nation. (New York Times 9-21-94) In small schools, at-risk students are much more likely to become involved, to make an effort, and to achieve. As a result such schools manage to reduce the negative effects of race and poverty on school success.(Raywid, 1998) Small schools tend to narrow the achievement gap between advantaged and disadvantaged youngsters by raising the achievement of the latter group. (Lee and Smith, 1994)
Children and teens who attend personalized schools have a higher rate of school attendance. Not only do students in smaller schools have higher attendance rates than students in large schools, but students who change from large to small schools generally exhibit improvement in attendance. (Cotton, 1996)
Children and teens who attend personalized secondary schools drop out at a lower rate than in large, impersonal schools. Measured either as dropout rates or graduation rates, the holding power of small schools is considerably greater than that of large schools. All of the ten studies that explore this topic reveal differences either favoring or greatly favoring small schools. (Cotton, 1996)
Children and teens who attend personalized schools display wiser and better behavior and get in less trouble. Small schools have lower rates of negative social behavior, including classroom disruptions, vandalism, fights, theft, substance abuse, and gang membership. (Cotton, 1996)The social behavior of students from low income families and students of color is even more positively impacted by small schools than that of other students. (Cotton, 1996)
Children and teens who attend personalized schools feel a sense of belonging to the school community and feel more positive about school and themselves. In 1997 the Seattle Public Schools conducted a climate survey of secondary schools. The schools in which students rated the school climate significantly above average were all small, personalized schools (New Options Middle School, African American Academy, Summit, Alternative School #1 (grades 6-8), NOVA, and Middle College). (Seattle Public Schools School Climate Survey, 1997) Investigators have found a much greater sense of belonging among students in small schools than in large ones. (Cotton, 1996) Researchers have found that students have a higher regard for themselves and for their academic studies in small schools. They have also found that students have more positive attitudes about their relationships with peers and adults in small schools. Students from low incomes families and students of color in particular have considerably more positive attitudes about school and learning in small schools. (Cotton, 1996) Students in small schools are much more likely to participate in extracurricular activities, which boost confidence levels. In a large high school, only a relatively few students get to take part. (New York Times, 9-21-94) Levels of extracurricular participation are significantly higher in small schools. Students in small schools are involved in a greater variety of activities, and they derive more satisfaction from their participation than do students in large schools. In small schools there were few students who did not participate in at least one activity. (Cotton, 1996)
Personalized schools are safer, and they foster resiliency and competence in children and youths. Research shows that students in small schools have lower levels of violent behavior. (Cotton, 1996) Many children who live in high risk environments do not develop problems in their school achievement or behavior when they attend personalized, small schools. They are resilient; they outlast, outmaneuver, outwit, outreach their adversity and are successful as young people and as adults. Personalized schools promote and support children's resiliency by increasing bonding between the child and adults who know and care about her/him and, thus, provide the child with caring, support, and positive models. Personalized schools also promote resiliency by setting high expectations for each child and by providing opportunities for meaningful participation to each and every child. (Nan Henderson. "Resiliency in Schools: Making It Happen." Principal. November 1997.)
Parents are more involved in the school when their child or teen attends a personalized school, and they have greater confidence in the school. An important advantage for smaller schools was the ability of parents to become involved in a significant way. In smaller schools teachers are more likely to communicate with parents. (New York Times, 9-21-94)
Some educators and politicians have argued that large schools are more cost-effective. But researchers have found this not to be true consistently. The Public Education Association of New York has found that "the premise that small schools are more expensive to operate has always been false." (Public Education Association, 1992. Small Schools Operating Costs.) Many small schools are operated very economically. In Seattle last year several small secondary schools (Summit, NOVA) cost less per student than several larger schools (Sealth and Rainier Beach High Schools).
Why do small, personalized schools work better for young people? In personalized schools, no one slips through the cracks of teacher attention. Every child and teen is known personally by several teachers. In personalized schools where teachers and students work together for two years or longer, teachers know students as individual learners, and because the relationships are stronger, teachers care more about each student's success. Students know teachers better as people; because they know them better, students trust and heed teachers more. And because students and teachers work together longer, parents and teachers get to know each other as people, not roles, and they learn to communicate better and trust each other more.
In small, personalized secondary schools, every youngster's participation is needed for clubs, student government, drama, and athletic programs to succeed. In such schools, nearly everyone participates in extracurricular activities and/or sports.
In small, personalized schools, the entire faculty can sit together around a table and talk, air views, make common decisions, and work together as a team. And teachers are more likely to teach together in the classroom and focus more directly on making learning for their students both personally meaningful and academically rigorous, again because teachers know their students as individuals and care deeply about their present and future success.
What about statewide academic standards and assessments based on those standards? Isn't that at the core of the new paradigm of school? After all every state is now committed to implementing some version of standards and statewide assessments.
Standards and assessments can be important elements in our effort to educate all young people at least to the extent that they can be successful in the society that we are creating in this new century-but not if we lose sight of the fundamental nature and value of our children. They are human beings with hearts and bodies as well as minds, with needs and capacities that extend far beyond economic life alone. School ought not to be just about preparing the young for their adult work lives. School is life for children, so we need to structure school experience in a way that honors this obvious truth. School life needs to be engaging and challenging and playful as well as serious and focused and rigorous. And we also need to prepare young people for democratic citizenship and effective collaboration with others and the ability to participate in our cultural life.
In a personalized school where each child is known and cared about, every child is more likely both to meet the academic standards and to grow and develop as a person, as a citizen, as a human being.
When my stepdaughter attended her personalized schools, I could see clearly when I visited her classrooms that her challenging academic learning was deeply grounded within a context of caring and personalization. And it was the integration of academics and relationship that made school for her into a place where she enjoyed her daily life, grew up as a person, and achieved high academic standards.
David Marshak teaches in the Master in Teaching Program in the School of Education at Seattle University. Over the years he has helped to start an alternative school, taught in a state prison and public high schools, developed learning skills curriculum and religious education materials, led staff development, assessment, and restructuring efforts in a public school district, and conducted a variety of studies focused on multiage elementary classrooms and high school block period teaching and learning. His most recent books include The Common Vision: Parenting and Educating for Wholeness (Peter Lang Publishing, 1997) and Encouraging Student Engagement in the Block Period (Eye on Education, 1999).You can reach David Marshak at dmarshak@seattleu.edu
Copyright © October 1999 New Horizons for Learning, all rights reserved.
http://www.newhorizons.org
E-mail: info@newhorizons.orgFor permission to redistribute, please go to:
New Horizons for Learning Copyright and Permission Information