The U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity has been pressing for the adoption of a voucher plan. While there are many versions of the voucher plan, the basic idea is to give the children (or their parents) the money which the public schools now spend on their education and permit them to spend that money for education in public, private or parochial schools. Even though the adoption of such a plan would lead to the end of public education, it is supported by a powerful and rather peculiar alliance which consists of: parochial school interests continuing their drive for public funds; middle-class parents demanding tax dollars for their children's private (and usually segregated) education; Southern segregationists seeking to undo the Supreme Court's decision; separatist and nationalist Blacks who want to set up their own tax-supported training schools; "new left" educators in the universities who see this as a way of breaking down the "bureaucracy" ( despite the probability of its resulting in a larger, more complicated one); and taxpayer groups who see that giving parents a variety of packages to choose from in the private educational market will reduce pressure on government to spend for improvement of public schools. These are the "special-interests" pushing for vouchers; but, if the plan is adopted, it may be because of a popular demand that students and parents have some choice in the kind of education they will get. Last Wednesday, Chancellor Harvey Scribner, in an address to the UFT Delegate Assembly, urged that the threat of vouchers should lead those of us committed to the public schools to press for a variety of educational options within the public schools. One of the most attractive educational models is John Dewey High School.
John Dewey High School
The first thing a visitor to Dewey notices is that this is a high school where students, teachers, supervisors and parents like each other. In this period of conflict, such rapport is not, unfortunately, evident in all schools. The unique program of the school is responsible for the positive atmosphere.
First: The school has a longer workday and year for both teachers and students. Both teachers and students are in the school by choice. UFT negotiated appropriate compensations in salary and working conditions for the teachers and was involved from the beginning in planning the school's program.
Second: The school has a new semester every seven weeks. The school day is based on 20 minute periods, giving flexibility for double, triple, etc. periods of time scheduling.
Third: The students do not take mandatory pre-prescribed courses such as English I, English II, and the like, but have a choice of over eighty different seven-week courses in English, and similar choices in other subjects. A student who fails a course in Shakespeare need not fall into the failure syndrome since he is not required to repeat the course he has failed. He is able to take another comparable literature course. Much of the day is spent in independent study. During these periods teachers and paraprofessionals are available to help individual students with their homework; work missed when absent, or independent study.
Fourth: Students are encouraged to work on DISKs (Dewey Independent Study Kits). A DISK is an envelope, which leads a student through an entire course independently -- with individual help on hand during the independent study periods. When the DISK work is completed, the student is tested and, if the test is passed, it substitutes for attendance in the classroom course.
Fifth: The school maintains the same racial balance as the borough of Brooklyn in which it is situated. The success of the Dewey program is based on two major innovations: a large degree of free choice and the opportunity for students and teachers to get to know each other during individual instruction periods. Students feel good about the school because they chose to go there and they feel good about the courses because they chose to take them. During independent study they and their teachers have the rare opportunity to discuss problems on an individual basis, to know each other as people. After this close experience it is difficult for the student to see the teacher as a distant (and hostile) authority figure and for the teacher to see the student as one of a huge crowd to be controlled. John Dewey is one successful high school. It is not the only one. But the John Dewey model should be expanded to other boroughs. Not every student will want such a school; many parents will prefer a different program. Also, as every parent knows, working with children is both gratifying and exhausting -- the longer school day and year is not for every teacher. But surely there is room in New York City for several John Dewey High Schools in each borough.
Need for Building
Perhaps most basic to the John Dewey program is the fact that there is space in the school for all its activities. Unlike most high schools John Dewey is on single session. It is not plagued with the problem of hundreds of students coming in and going out each period. It does not face the question of which students should be in the lunchroom and which students in class. Our other high schools cannot become John Deweys. Many of them cannot even sustain a reasonable educational atmosphere in their present overcrowded state. Overcrowding leads to the need for certain controls to insure orderliness, and these are the very controls that are resented by students who want to be treated as young adults enjoying some autonomy. Overcrowding too often turns teachers into policemen -- a role they neither like nor want and for which they are not prepared (nor should they be).
The answer to overcrowding is simple: additional space. Murray Bergtraum, the president of the Board of Education, should be strongly supported in his fight to have more schools built. The proposal of the Planning Commission to build only six new schools should arouse a storm of protest, for we will not have any more John Deweys or any other schools in which teachers and students can work together unless we fight for them now. Letters in support of the full construction program should be sent to: Donald H. Elliott, Chairman, City Planning Commission, City Hall, New York, NY 10007.