Rethinking High School - A Concept Paper Steve Zemelman, Marilyn Bizar and Harvey Daniels Center for City Schools, National-Louis University November, 1999 The Challenge. It is no secret that America's high schools are struggling. In our urban centers, with the exception of a few elite magnet schools and scattered innovative programs, student performance is disappointing on a dozen different measures. Most widely bemoaned are standardized test scores, which led Chicago Board of Education officials to place more than half the city's high schools on probation. But equally disturbing are low attendance and high drop-out rates. Kids can't learn if they're not in school. And schools that don't educate and graduate students serve as little more than warehouses. With funding problems, societal shifts, and increasing diversity, suburban high schools face many of the same difficulties. Even those with significant numbers of high-performing students are often wedded to approaches that prize a small cohort of star students, leaving "regular" kids unknown, uncared for, and unmotivated. Poor attendance and dropping out may reflect many social and family problems, but they also suggest that high school is simply not appealing or engaging to many young people. Too often, high schools have a coercive, depersonalized atmosphere and seem to exclude, rather than invite, students' interests. Students who are struggling, or who are from disadvantaged families, have difficulty envisioning a promising future for themselves; and too few high schools help to supply that missing vision, not to mention the skills to make it come true. Yet, we also find that most high school teachers and administrators are people with knowledge and good will. One underlying problem is that their efforts are guided and limited by an outmoded "factory model" of school inherited from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. High schools are in fact designed to fail. According to George Wood (1998), "We have . . . a high school structure that often simply 'spends' our kids' time rather than using it . . . It is this wasting of the five thousand hours that every American teenager spends in high school that should concern us." The large, impersonal high school that divides teachers by departments and grinds students through short, disconnected classes each day simply doesn't permit the adults in the system to provide the kinds of attention needed to help young people develop. School structures must be developed that place kids and teaching, rather than subjects, at the center of the work. Learning About High Schools By Starting One. As the faculty of the Center for City Schools, we've had the privilege - and hard-knocks lessons - of helping to start a new, innovative high school in Chicago, with the aim of finding a better way. Best Practice High School is a small school focused on high quality learning for an ordinary range of city kids, operating on the same per-student budget as the rest of Chicago's high schools. While many aspects of BPHS are still evolving, the first five years of work has allowed us to face firsthand the complexities of creating a more effective curriculum and a more supportive atmosphere. We've been learning from our 450 students what connects young people to school, what invites them to make the commitment to study hard and learn. We recognize that most of what we shall outline is not new. We've developed our own model with an obvious debt to the research and pathfinding of Ernest Boyer, Deborah Meier, Theodore Sizer's Coalition of Essential Schools, and other high school reform efforts. We've studied with great interest the reports from the New American High Schools project. However, we also know that the unique combination of strategies we describe below has rarely been implemented deeply and coherently. And these ideas are generally not introduced in such a way that teachers and administrators in an existing large high school could grow into them with energy and commitment. At the core of our thinking has always been the ideal of a student-centered school (Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde, 1998). Now, we know that every school reformer in America, spanning the political spectrum from privatizer to progressive, lays claim to being "student-centered." Indeed, we've met a few "student-centered" school people who seem to think the term means: "I will decide what kids need to learn and then stuff it down the center of their throats." We've been trying to come up with a more rigorous, democratic, and practical definition. So at all stages of planning, developing, designing, opening, and now running Best Practice High School, we have been asking: if a school were really centered upon young people and their interests, and intent on helping students learn, what structures would it adopt? Designs for Student-Centeredness. While we obviously believe that the remarkable individual people working at BPHS have been one key to our success, the school has also adopted, tested, and helped us understand a set of specific design features -- structures and principles that have come to guide all of our efforts. Naturally, we have made highly localized adaptations of each of these features, to suit our location, student body and moment in time. But we think that our list of design considerations may be equally useful to any school -- big or small, urban, rural, or suburban -- that is asking the same questions we are: How would a genuinely student-centered high school work to deliver a high quality education to a broad range of students? How can we teach students as well as content? Here is our list: 1. Size. High schools should either be small or feel small. Every young person must be a valued member of the community. Larger as well as small schools can do this by: • Placing teachers in grade-level interdisciplinary teams, instead of subject-area departments, so they share information on kids' needs and integrate content. • Using daily, small advisories to serve as students' academic and emotional home. 2. Climate. Every student is known, appreciated, and included in a diverse, collaborative community. • Approach learning primarily as a collaborative, not adversarial, effort. • Take time to observe individual students, diagnose academic strengths and needs. • View difference as a strength, through de-tracking, full-inclusion special education, and workshop-style classrooms. • • Promote interdependence and understanding through advisories, peer mediation, and big-brother/sister programs. 3. Voice. Democratic decision-making gives voice to both students and teachers. • Students choose inquiry topics and participate actively in all classes. • Student committees participate in essential activities, including hiring of teachers. • Interdisciplinary teacher teams have autonomy to plan and teach new curriculum. • Larger teams (teachers, administrators, parents) participate in policy decisions. 4. Curriculum and Assessment. With their teachers, young people create authentic curriculum on topics that matter to them. • Topics are authentic - based on concerns of students and real-world issues, and organized in thematic, integrative projects not by narrow subject areas. • Studies are "backmapped" to curriculum standards to insure external mandates are met. • Assessments involve student self-monitoring, authentic applications of learning: e.g. exhibitions, performances, portfolios. 5. Teaching. In experiential, workshop-style classrooms, teachers model, guide, and mentor their students. • Students pursue individual or team projects while teachers conduct one-on-one and small-group coaching. • Students regularly work in small collaborative groups for discussion and inquiry. • Students represent learning in many modes - writing, art, drama, presentations, movement, websites, etc.; increased student participation, less teacher lecture. • Reflective assessment of a full range of skills and knowledge taught. 6. Scheduling. The school day and calendar are flexible and adjustable, providing variable blocks of learning time. • Combine "block" schedule for extended periods with traditional periods, and longer sessions for special activities; teacher teams control this scheduling. • Make the school calendar flexible from week to week. 7. Community Participation. All students have ongoing immersion in the life of the community and the world of work. • Real-world experiences in businesses, community institutions, service agencies. • Involve students in inquiry in the community and natural surroundings. • The school doors open both in and out - adults in many fields connect with kids. 8. Space and Materials. Schools are attractive, stimulating, and equipped for active learning. • Classrooms have couches for reading, corners for conferencing, tables for groups. • Teachers personalize their own work space; avoid teachers' room-to-room travel. • Classroom libraries make engaging materials easily available. 9. Technology. Students use technology as a tool of investigation and creation. • Technology is integrated into all subjects, co-ordinated across the curriculum. • Students use computers for the same purposes they serve outside of school: information-gathering, data manipulation, and authoring. • Involve other technologies as well - filming and editing videos, teleconferencing. 10. Relationships. Schools cultivate genuine partnerships with families and community institutions. • Give parents a voice - on planning committees and in faculty workshops. • Create business and community partnerships that provide a knowledge of students and a stake in the school, and that give students real-world contacts. • Use universities as resources for professional development and innovation. • Strategies for Change. While the above list reflects the ideas of other high school reform efforts, it also differs from them in several important ways. It addresses structural elements of high schools that have limited their ability to help all students effectively; and at the same time, it focuses on the need to transform instruction. To begin on these twin aspects of change, we've found that re-organizing learning around interdisciplinary teacher teams is a powerful place to start. It both helps to revitalize teaching and offers a lever for wider change within a school. It unleashes teacher initiative and professionalism, gets teachers working together, breaks down the egg-crate departmental structure of a school, and provides a focus for galvanizing teacher and student leadership. As teachers begin to relate classroom activities to particular themes and projects, they learn to use time more flexibly and effectively, so that the school day makes more sense to students. Interdisciplinary teacher teams allow a whole group of adults to focus on the same set of students, so that kids are less likely to fall between the cracks. As a result, it also reduces the need for tracking. All of this adds up to move a school toward student-centered, "best practice" instruction. Surrounding an interdisciplinary team focus, however, there must also be an array of supports that promote change. For the past five years, we've worked on and observed these in a network of Chicago schools and in professional development workshops held for teachers visiting the Best Practice High School. As a result, we've learned some helpful lessons about the many steps and strategies that are needed to be successful. Leadership. As we compare schools that have improved with those that have remained stagnant, we've seen how crucial it is that administrators deeply understand and consistently support changes being made. The leader must build trust and support with teachers, rather than foisting a program upon them. Smart principals provide teachers with time to learn and plan, with materials needed for improved instruction, and with the understanding that change is challenging. They become instructional leaders who demonstrate knowledge of new curricular ideas, and support them without being arbitrary or dictatorial. Staff Development. Because the day-to-day teaching in so many high schools is unengaging, and below the level mandated by contemporary national standards reports, powerful staff development is essential. Many of the student-centered practices needed for school improvement can be effectively demonstrated in workshops and inservice sessions. But group presentations are not sufficient to "install" whole new ways of organizing time, space, materials, and people. Teachers need supportive in-classroom consulting to help them implement new instructional techniques. Visiting professionals must work patiently over time, entering classrooms respectfully, observing, learning individual teachers' strengths and interests as well as their needs, and introducing new strategies as teachers are ready for them. Observation. We've also found, in conducting teacher visitations and workshops at our high school, that teachers are strongly influenced by observing classrooms where new strategies are being used effectively, in settings similar to their own (most tell us they've not had such opportunities since their student teaching - if then). Then they need time to talk informally among themselves and with teachers experienced in the new approaches, in order to problem-solve, build confidence, and refine their efforts. Step-by-Step Implementation. As teachers gain more responsibility, they become more engaged and positive about working in planning groups to institute larger structural changes in their school. For strategies such as block scheduling to be instituted effectively, rather than just having administrators mandate them into existence, we've seen how teachers must be able to meet regularly to solve problems and adjust the structure as they see what works and what complications must be addressed. School Climate. Throughout this effort, the building of a supportive, positive climate is essential. Significant changes can only be carried out through close co-operation of the participating staff. Dialogue, respect for teachers' professional roles, and a positive - rather than blaming - atmosphere is key. Teachers and students both must ultimately become agents for change, working as responsible partners to improve the climate for learning in the school. In the schools that have seriously implemented both the new classroom approaches and the kinds of change strategies we've described, we've seen striking improvement in the atmosphere of the school, the quality of the teaching, and the achievement of the students. An effective process for implementing change is just as important as dreaming of the model for a revitalized high school. That means a coordinated set of change strategies must be carried on at several levels over an extended time period: • Improve instruction through in-classroom support, using small cross-disciplinary teams. * Form teacher "cohorts," small cross-disciplinary groups who adopt new strategies, using one teacher's classroom as a laboratory where the others observe and co-teach to learn how to make the new approach work. Cohorts become the basis for grade-level teacher teams. * Provide in-classroom support to teams by high-quality teacher consultants who demonstrate new ideas, co-teach, encourage, gather resources, co-plan integrated learning units, document successes (using video), and involve students as well, as change agents. • Build staff's in-depth knowledge of ways to improve instruction, climate, and school structure. * Teachers and administrators attend workshops that use active participation to explore features of a revitalized high school and plan applications to their own setting. * Provide carefully structured visits to a model site, that include observation, conferences with on-site teachers, and time for reflection and planning to apply strategies observed. * Organize teacher study groups where teachers read, discuss, and evaluate ideas from current professional literature. * Stress teachers' thinking, initiative, and leadership in all professional development activities. • Insure in-depth administrative support for the new initiatives. This includes activities such as the following: * Require administrative agreement to support new approaches and structures before consenting to work with a school. * Include school leaders in all professional development activities. * Use networking meetings to help administrators and teachers from diverse schools and settings to get beyond the limitations of their own situations. Pair urban and suburban schools. • Implement structural changes (such as size and scheduling) systematically, one at a time. * Implement new structures first with subgroups in the school (particular interdisciplinary teams, or grade levels). Focus first on those features that the participants are most committed to, and on the teachers with the greatest commitment. * Teachers and administrators share equal responsibility in planning and decision-making. Experienced teacher consultants help guide planning groups. * Budget sufficient time and resources for each structural change, to plan carefully, consult with all parties, and provide professional development. * Involve a wide range of teachers from the start, seeking input and keeping everyone well informed. One good strategy is to schedule in-building observation of innovations for less involved teachers. • Create community support for new approaches. Because education is a highly politicized aspect of our communal life, it is essential to build broader support for major changes in high schools. * Form parent advisory committees and participatory workshops. * Include parents and school board members in professional development training and visits to model schools. * Communicate regularly with the community through newsletters, web pages, informational meetings. Instructional Approach. We want to return now to expand on the needs directly in the classroom, and to explain what is being called for in the standards documents from subject-area educational groups and school reform agencies. We emphasize this aspect of high school because in too many cases, schools make organizational changes but leave the basic classroom experience of students, where real learning must occur, essentially unchanged. In too many ways, the experience of high school students is little different now than the classrooms of twenty-five or even fifty years ago. Organizational changes may open the door to newer and more effective ways of teaching and learning, but they don't guarantee that these will actually happen. All of the standards point toward a consistent set of characteristics that lead to meaningful teaching and strong student achievement in school and in the adult world beyond. They call for authentic learning - learning that begins with young people's real interests, that is active and experiential, and that focuses on whole ideas and rich contexts, rather than dividing knowledge into isolated, unrelated bits and pieces. They call for students to work collaboratively, to learn from one another, to have opportunities to express their learning in a variety of ways, and to become active participants in a democracy. And they call for challenging learning that involves reflection, higher level thinking, and constructing of ideas, rather than just memorizing facts. In our other writings, it is this set of principles that we've called "best practice." But if these principles describe what a good education should involve, they don't tell teachers how to make it happen. Teachers can enact this high quality teaching and learning through a number of key approaches that make classrooms more effective, more efficient, and more engaging. We call these the "methods that matter" (Daniels and Bizar, 1998) and we include them as essential elements among the features of a revitalized high school. They include: • integrating curriculum - connecting subjects together in the study of whole, large issues and questions • focusing on authentic topics, the big ideas and issues that individuals and societies struggle with, and that impact on students' lives • using small group activities to ensure students engage in active inquiry, learn to work together, and learn from one another • organizing classrooms as workshops where students make individual choices, get one-on-one help from teachers, and engage in self-monitoring and assessment • helping students represent ideas in a variety of modes and media, so that they actively develop thinking skills and construct, re-work, and communicate ideas • using assessment that supports good instruction, focuses on performance of meaningful, in-depth learning activities, encourages and reflects learning over time, and involves students in the process. Much educational research and our own experience shows that when students are involved in this kind of learning they become more engaged, more willing to persevere, and more successful in their studies. The features that we've recommended for improved high schools, and strategies for achieving these, are all aimed at helping high schools to become filled with classrooms built around these principles and approaches. Measuring Outcomes. We recognize that the public, politicians, and news media measure school success by standardized test scores, and high school improvement projects will certainly be expected to track these and seek significant improvement in them. However, the community should also attend to other, more significant measures as well, including a reduction in drop-out rate, increase in daily attendance, improvement on more authentic assessments in subject areas, increase in rates of passing courses, increase in graduation rate, and improvement in student attitudes toward school. From past experience in schools where we've helped with successful reform efforts, we expect that some of these improvements will take place gradually, particularly in the first several years, since teachers need time to become confident with the new strategies they adopt. No doubt there are other positive ways to approach the revitalization of high schools. But when we watch Best Practice High School students proudly take new families on tours of the school, or explain cogently to a visitor what they're doing in class and why, or observe as the teachers thoughtfully but efficiently deliberate over a problem or new idea for the school, we know that an authentically student-centered approach works. Page 11