Erasure and Survival: Creating a Future and Managing a past in a Restructuring High School

Abstract

Background/Context

With the growth of the small-school movement, many urban districts have restructured large underperforming high schools into new, small high schools or schools-within-a-school designed to engage adolescents in rigorous and meaningful learning along with strong teacher-student relationships. In the case of this study, the culmination of state and city school system regulation and support, the involvement of the teachers union and persistent community demands led to the closing of this comprehensive high school. Known for its persistent academic failure, it was reopened as a complex of several new schools and a phaseout school to better serve this multiracial, predominantly Latino, poor and working-class community.

Focus of Study

The study findings focus on the multiple dimensions of small-school restructuring, underscoring the fragile balance between creating a future and managing a past in a newly restructured former comprehensive urban high school.

Research Design

This was a qualitative, ethnographic study examining the first year of school restructuring.

Data Collection

Primary data collection methods were semistructured interviews, participant observation, and archival study. We interviewed community leaders, school system officials, and 36 individuals from a representative sample of teachers and parents. Additionally, we conducted six student focus groups.

Findings and Conclusions

Extending the literature on small schools, reconstitution, and organizational change, this study provides a close look at the dilemmas of the opening year of a restructuring high school. Noting how frequent acts of erasure were employed in response to many first-year challenges, we link these acts of erasure to the fundamental desire on the part of schools to survive their first year. Key to the conceptualization of erasure is its relationship with the intent on survival. We note a contradiction evident in our conceptualization: Although we underscore the immense potential for educational change through the process of restructuring, we also suggest that these processes of erasure and survival have the potential to suppress the kind of conflict and turbulence often necessary for productive institutional transformation. The phenomenon of erasure in relation to survival has troubling implications for efforts to preserve a community's legacy of struggle and a history of resistance toward distant, often antagonistic, educational bureaucracies. The study poses questions about the use of school closure in current school accountability policy enactments and, more broadly, emphasizes the complexity of the school restructuring process.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

, and Steinberg

(2004). Big buildings, small schools: Using a small schools strategy for high school reform. Boston: Jobs for the Future.

Ancess

(2003). Beating the odds: High schools as communities of commitment. New York: Teachers College Press.

Anyon

(1997). Ghetto schooling: A political economy of urban educational reform. New York: Teachers College Press.

Anyon

(2005). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education, and a new social movement. New York: Routledge.

Ayers

, and Klonsky

(2006). Chicago's Renaissance 2010: The small schools movement meets the ownership society. Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 453—457.

Berliner

D. C.

(2005, August 2). Our impoverished view of educational reform. Teachers College Record. Retrieved August 25, 2005, from http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=12106

Clinchy

(Ed.). (2000). Creating new schools: How small schools are changing American education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Cook

, and Tashlik

(2005). Standardizing small. Rethinking Schools, 19(4), 15—17.

Coser

(1956). The functions of social conflict. New York: The Free Press.

10.

DiMaggio

, and Powell

W. W.

(1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147—160.

11.

Elmore

R. F.

, Abelmann

C. H.

, and Fuhrman

S. H.

(1996). The new accountability in state education reform: From process to performance. In and and Ladd

H.F.

(Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65—98). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

12.

Fine

(2005). Not in our name: Reclaiming the democratic vision of small school reform. Rethinking Schools, 19(4), 11—14.

13.

Fine

, Galletta

, Roberts

, and Weseen Rosenbaum

(1996). Refusing to be deferred: An evaluation of the dream and the practice of New Vision Schools. Unpublished report to New Visions for Public Schools, New York.

14.

Fine

, and Somerville

J. I.

(Eds.). (1998). Small schools: BIG imaginations: A creative look at urban public schools. Chicago: Cross City Campaign for Urban School Reform.

15.

Fruchter

(2007). Urban schools, public will: Making education work for all our children. New York: Teachers College Press.

16.

Fullan

(2001). The NEW meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.

17.

Giroux

H. A.

, and McLaren

(1992). America 2000 and the politics of erasure: Democracy and cultural difference under siege. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1, 99—110.

18.

Goldstein

, Kelemen

, and Koski

W. S.

(1998, April). Reconstitution in theory and practice: The experience in San Francisco. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

19.

Hess

G. A.

(2003). Reconstitution–Three years later: Monitoring the effect of sanctions on Chicago high schools. Education and Urban Society, 35, 300—327.

20.

Lee

V. E.

, and Smith

J. B.

(1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociology of Education, 68, 241—270.

21.

Lipman

, and Haines

(2007). From accountability to privatization and African American exclusion: Chicago's “Renaissance 2010.” Educational Policy, 21, 471—502.

22.

Malen

, Croninger

, Redmond

, and Muncey

(1999, October). Uncovering the potential contradictions in reconstitution reforms: A working paper. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration, Minneapolis, MN.

23.

Marris

(1975). Loss and change. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

24.

Meyer

J. W.

, and Rowan

(1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340—363.

25.

Pettigrew

T. F.

(1986). The intergroup contact hypothesis revisited. In Hewstone

, and Brown

(Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 168—195). New York: Basil Blackwell.

26.

Raywid

M. A.

, and Schmerler

(2003). Not so easy going: The policy environments of small urban schools and schools-within-schools. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.

27.

Rice

J. K.

, and Malen

(2003). The human costs of education reform: The case of school reconstitution. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 635—666.

28.

Schechter

(2006). Doubting schoolwork: Exploring an emerging concept. Teachers College Record, 108, 2474—2496.

29.

Swanstrom

, Dreier

, Casey

, and Flack

(2006). Pulling apart: Economic segregation in suburbs and central cities in major metropolitan areas, 1980–2000. In Berube

, Katz

, and Lang

R.E.

(Eds.), Redefining urban and suburban America: Evidence from Census 2000 (pp. 143—165). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

30.

Toch

(2003). High schools on a human scale: How small schools can transform American education. Boston: Beacon Press.