Communities as Curricula.

Abstract

Efforts to prepare students for the real world shouldn't ignore the learning environment that lies just beyond the schoolhouse gate. In The Rise and Fall of the American Teenager, Thomas Hine argues that the educational format found in most U.S. high schools contributes to the malaise so widespread among teenagers today. [1] In a bold statement, Hine contends that James Bryant Conant's archetypal high school, outlined in 1959 and copied widely thereafter, was a huge societal mistake. [2] This high school, Hine argues, effectively condemns adolescents to an extended period of uselessness in terms of their connection to society. With no effective way to make a contribution to others, high school students turn inward, ceaselessly brooding about themselves and contributing to what Christopher Lasch referred to as the culture of narcissism. If Hine's analysis is even partially correct, the American school system is in need of serious rethinking. Taken by himself, of course, Hine is simply a minor critic of the status quo. But his analysis resonates with a growing academic movement in this country that comes together under the loose heading communitarianism. Put simply, scholars from a range of disciplines are asking what their subject of study might look like if community were substituted for economic gain as the primary human motive. For instance, what would our political theory look like if we valued community more than profit? What about our economic theory? Or our educational theory? [3] While putting community ahead of profit, of course, would necessitate great changes in all of these arenas, our interest is in education. Most Americans accept as a given that schools are designed to help children acquire the knowledge and skills required for future employment. [4] This, however, is a far cry from the schools' original purpose. When free schools were established in this country, the goal was to provide a common education so that the people could effectively wield the power that was theirs by virtue of living in a democracy. In other words, schooling was about improving life, not by enabling individual acquisition in the marketplace, but by setting up better deliberation in the policy arena. Students as Citizens Happily, evidence suggests that attention to this earlier purpose is on the rise. The professional literature, for instance, is full of references to character education. Likewise, large cities everywhere are trying to bring back the neighborhood school. The idea behind both of these developments is that fostering attention to others, cultivating an ethic of being of service to others, especially to those who share a place, or a community, ought to be a high priority of education today. Nonetheless, the literature is also replete with schemes for doing what we have been doing for the past century and doing it with more intensity or fervor. The current manifestations of such schemes are standards, vouchers, charter schools, and still more standardized testing. But there are enough compelling arguments to convince policymakers to rethink some basic premises. At a minimum, they should ask themselves whether statehouse decisions on public education tend to build up or tear apart communities. School consolidation provides a classic example. Taking their cues-or their legitimation--from Conant's pronouncements that high schools should be no smaller than 100 kids per grade, legislators in virtually all states have closed down small rural community schools, condemning these places to a hopelessness about their vitality--present and future. We have sent the message--via our policy choices-- that community is unimportant. In its place has come the message that life is about getting ahead, keeping up with the Jones's or having things your way. It should be no surprise then, given the pervasiveness of such messages, that character is in short supply in our society. …