>>
epitaph for
an era >>
- HARLEM
HOLDS UP A FREE-MARKET
- LESSON
FOR BRITISH SCHOOLS
The
Sunday Times (London) July 15 1990
Brian
Deer reports from New York on a scheme that has
extended choice and reduced failure
It is a sunny Friday morning, and outside New
York's Central Park East school, a water main has
burst. For the school's children and staff it is a
minor inconvenience. This is East Harlem, where
public service failures are an accepted part of life.
More than a third of residents receive welfare
payments, 25% of building lots are derelict or
vacant, and a quarter of local housing is classified
as tenements.
Despite
its legendary violence and drug problems, it is the
sort of minorities-dominated community that parts of
Britain are getting to know. African-and
Hispanic-Americans make up 85% of the 113,000
population. More than half of all households are
headed by single women.
Given
its position, Central Park East school was almost
predetermined to fail. Forced to confront the social
ills of its neighbourhood, the problems of teaching
students in English who often speak another language
at home, and the depressing effect of the "white
flight" retreat of Anglo-Americans to private
schools, it is not the sort of place you would expect
to find academic success.
But
over the past 10 years, this and other East Harlem
schools have been transformed. In 1974, East Harlem
ranked worst in reading and maths scores of all New
York's 32 school districts, and only a quarter of
children could read above the level for their grade.
Today, it ranks middle for the city, and two thirds
of the pupils are better than average readers.
Some
schools have shown even more dramatic results -
including one where graduation rates have risen by
900%. Almost twice as many of the district's pupils
now go on to attend one of New York's most coveted
"centre of excellence" high schools than do
children from the city as a whole.
These
startling gains have made East Harlem - Manhattan's
school district four - something of a tourist
attraction. Among its visitors has been Professor
Brian Griffiths, one of Margaret Thatcher's most
influential advisers.How the schools and their
children broke the cycle of failure that afflicts
places such as Harlem is one of the most important
stories in American education. And because it is here
that many of Britain's school reforms find their
inspiration, it is here that you can see the future
and decide if it works or not.
*****
In
Central Park East's pre-kindergarten class, 20
four-year-olds are settling in a square for their
daily decisions meeting. It takes a few minutes for
Yvonne Smith, the teacher, to round everybody up.
"Okay,
let me say 'choices' now," says Smith, in a
slow, clear voice, when she has everyone's attention.
"Blockroom, making silhouettes, collage,
writing, cooking, painting..." After listing a
dozen choices, she asks what each pupil would like to
do. They are planning the first hour of their day,
and they take it seriously.
For
the next period, the class fans out across the room.
Two boys cook walnut-sized peanut-butter-and-honey
cakes, which everyone later eats. Others build street
plans and 5ft towers of blocks. Everywhere there is
activity, until Smith flicks the light switch to tell
the children that time is up.
But
they are not just having fun, and the period does not
end there. After everything is packed away, the class
again settles in the square to review what is has
done. By the time Smith leads the children out into
the playground, they have planned, executed and
evaluated their hour in an enjoyable, but
businesslike, way.
That
even four-year-olds can take decisions is at the root
of the district's thinking. The philosophy extends up
through the school - which spans the age range of
Britain's primary and secondary education - to the
point where, in the senior classes, students have an
important say in course content and teaching methods.
Although
Central Park East follows the outline of New York's
curriculum, there is great flexibility over what goes
on in class. Individual projects and cross-subject
themes are more strongly emphasised than in British
schools. And the absorption of an agreed body of
facts is given a lower priority than developing
judgement skills.
This
is not the only approach in east Harlem's schools.
Just as progressive ideas have lost ground in Britain
in recent years, many parents want something more
formal in their children's education. Some think that
discipline, moral standards and an agreed body of
fact are higher priorities. At the heart of the
district's plan is that parents can also choose
these.
Central
Park East is only one of 52 schools in the district,
and many have more structured curricula and different
teaching strategies. Just as the four-year-olds in
Yvonne Smith's class make choices about their day,
parents have near-complete choice about where and how
their children are taught.
The
strategy assumes that by allowing parents and
children to act freely as consumers, schools are
obliged to make themselves attractive and efficient.
Because teachers and principals have the power to
shape their institutions, the public is able to shop
around.
Fears
that choice allows "good" schools to select
the brightest pupils have not proved justified. Apart
from quotas to maintain a good racial mix, schools
are barred from picking their students on the basis
of ability. Moreover, units are small - Central Park
East has only 200 pupils - so that popular demand can
close "dustbin" institutions.
*****
Despite
East Harlem's success, which has caused many parents
from other parts of the city to choose its schools,
the great majority of America's children are denied
any meaningful choice. Similar systems are being set
up in 12 states, but progress is painfully slow.
Some
British educationists are also edging in this
direction. Choice is a key element in the rhetoric
surrounding the 1988 Education Reform Act. From
September, schools will be encouraged to compete for
students - without geographical bars - and will be
able to take as many pupils as their buildings can
physically hold.
These
plans, however, are a long way from the
accomplishments of schools such as Central Park East.
And whether the education establishment in local
government is capable of delivering effective choice
in either America or Britain is now an international
debate.
Even
as East Harlem chalked up its victories, the rest of
the United States has been gripped by an education
alarm. Like Britain, America has found that schools
are not turning out enough young people with the
skills to satisfy the growing needs of technology and
business. National verbal and maths measurements show
that America is on the slide.
The
definitive voice of concern was sounded way back in
1983 by a national commission of education, appointed
by Ronald Reagan. "Our nation is at risk,"
it warned. "The educational foundations of our
society are being eroded by a rising tide of
mediocrity."
With
its eyes on Japan and Germany, the commission said
urgent action was needed for long term prosperity.
"Our once unchallenged re-eminence in commerce,
industry, science and technological innovation is
being overtaken by competitors throughout the
world."
The
most concentrated period of education reform has
followed. Spending has jumped 20% in real terms per
pupil. Higher standards have been laid down for
student achievement, along with more exams. Teachers'
pay and training have improved. Some states have
launched plans to devolve more management
responsibility to local school staff. George Bush has
declared himself "the education president".
But
still the fundamental problems remain unresolved.
Scholastic aptitude tests - a national system of
measuring written and maths skills - are revealing a
fall in abilities. A recent national survey found
that young people know less about current affairs
than any generation in half a century.
Seven
years after America launched its reform programme,
New York City's school board revealed the extent of
the learning crisis. Last month, it announced that
because pupils were finding it hard to get through
their grades on time, it might have to reduce the
number of courses taught.
While
children are failing to learn, the administration of
teaching is a shambles. In May, a 16-month
investigation ordered by New York's mayor revealed
mismanagement and waste on a vast scale. It said only
12 of the city's 65,000 teachers were fired last
year, and alleged "serious corruption or
impropriety" almost everywhere it looked.
From
East Harlem, the crisis in the system appears even
worse. Despite their remarkable service to the urban
poor, schools such as Central park East have
encountered what one educationist calls "at best
indifference and at worst hostility" among the
city administration.
Joe
Nathan, a senior fellow at the University of
Minnesota, is one of many who say that nagging
bureaucratic obstruction from New York's central
school board, which employs 7,000 officials, is proof
that administrators will never through their weight
behind pupil and parent choice.
A new
10-year research report published last month by the
influential Brookings Institution in Washington takes
this argument an extra step. Praising district four
as the best example of parental choice in America, it
concludes that the only way the public can have its
say is if official controls are scrapped.
Under
the Brookings plan, all young people going into
education would have "scholarships"
attached to them, which could be taken to any school
chosen, state or independent. It would be like a
voucher system, although the authors avoid this
controversial term.
The
failure of administrators to back parental choice has
prompted free-market ideas that may be the only route
to beat the bureaucrats and improve teaching
standards. If they are right, it is a potent warning
for Britain's education authorities. The 1988 reform
act only sketched out choice as an aspiration. If
progress does not come quickly - as it has not in
America - a future Conservative government might feel
it has no choice but to press forward voucher ideas
that are perennially up for debate.
Yet
educationists believe there are other lessons to be
learnt from schools such as Central Park East. East
Harlem's philosophy rests crucially on its schools
being able to exercise their own choices and vary the
content and emphases in the courses they offer.
Britain's
new act could make this kind of variety more
difficult than before. Despite new city technology
colleges and magnet schools, the national curriculum
combined with more standardised tests may mean
ordinary schools will offer essentially the same
courses, taught in near-identical ways.
Although
American educationists want curricula to be more
defined than now, most believe Britain has gone too
far. "If you have a national curriculum that is
very rigid and doesn't allow innovation at the local
level, it runs counter to choice," says Raymond
Domanico, who directs education research at the
Manhattan Institute.
Without
variety in the curriculum, moreover, schools may
merely compete on exam results, opening the way to
pupils being picked by staff on past academic
attainment. This could produce the kind of
selectivity that leaves some children dumped in
"bad" schools, undermining the economic and
social goals of raising the learning level of all.
Seen
from East Harlem - America's undisputed success story
- that would be the worst of all worlds.
Copyright,
Times Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved. No portion
of this article on Central Park East and New York
school reform may be copied, retransmitted, reposted,
duplicated or otherwise used without the express
written approval of the copyright owner. Responses,
information and other feedback are appreciated - via
Brian Deer's homepage.
