By Constancia Warren and Mindy Hernandez
Constancia Warren is a senior program officer and director of urban high school initiatives and Mindy Hernandez is a program associate in the education division at Carnegie Corporation of New York.
>Author’s Biographies
Audio Clips
Interview with Constancia Warren.
Transcripts included.
LISTEN[2 minute, 2 seconds] What do you mean by a portfolio of schools?
LISTEN[2 minute, 16 seconds]
What do districts have to do to create portfolios of schools?
LISTEN[2 minute, 24 seconds]
What are the challenges involved in creating and maintaining a portfolio?
To meet the goal of ensuring success for all students in their school systems, cities are developing portfolios of varied, high-quality schools based on values of excellence, equity, diversity, and choice.
In 2001, as part of the Schools for a
New Society initiative, Carnegie Corporation
helped launch a nationwide
high school reform movement by supporting
the efforts of seven cities1 to
transform the way their districts and
communities organized and supported
high schools. At the same time, New
York City, with support from Carnegie
Corporation, the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, and the Open Society
Institute, launched the New Century
High Schools initiative to transform the
city's lowest-performing high schools
into successful smaller schools. The core
challenge in both initiatives is to create
entire systems of excellent high schools.
Four years later, a powerful pattern
is emerging in New York City, the seven
Schools for a New Society cities, and
other cities around the country that
are experimenting with high school and
district reform. In different ways, each
city is creating an exciting variety of
high schools, most of them small learning
environments, and many involving
external community partners. Cities are
developing new small schools, dividingexisting large high schools into small
learning communities and small high
schools, granting charters for new
schools, and writing contracts with
community-based organizations that
operate educational programs where
youth can complete high school. In
this article, we attempt to position the
ambitious and promising work we see
in each of these cities within a strong
conceptual framework.
The term being used to describe
this diversification of organizational
format, educational approach, and
governance is portfolio of schools. In one
sense, this term evokes the financial
market, with the portfolio seen as a way
of organizing the investment of public
funds in the education of our children.
But it is also a concept drawn from
the arts, where the portfolio is an array
of work that demonstrates, in different
ways, the capacity of the creator in
this case, the school district and the
community. A portfolio of schools is
much more than a mix of schools
among which students choose. It is a
strategy for creating an entire system
of excellent high schools that uses
managed universal choice as a central
lever in a district change process.
Transforming high schools is
urgently needed if we are to ensure that today's
young people become capable
and confident young adults who are able
to participate effectively in postsecondary
education and training, secure economically
stable and personally rewarding
employment, and engage actively as
democratic citizens. Creating systems
of high-quality high schools that ensure
this kind of success for all students is
complex and daunting. But it is also
necessary and possible if we acknowledge
and confront in a systemic way
the structural inequalities that lie at
the center of our failing high schools.
Replacing the traditional residentially
zoned high school with a managed portfolio
of excellent schools is a promising
way to challenge the not-so-soft bigotry
of the "opportunity gap" that feeds and
fuels the stubborn gaps in achievement.
History and Emerging Practice
Small high schools already have a long
history. And we all know some individual
high schools large and small that
are successful in preparing most of their
students for success. To be sure,most
school districts have several types of highschools, including magnet schools and
alternatives for students at risk of dropping
out. But if we are serious in our
desire for a just and equitable society,
the real question is: How do we create, in
each of our communities, entire systems
of individually excellent high schools that
prepare all students for postsecondary
education and training, employment, and
citizenship and where excellence is the
product of everyday practice?
In Carnegie Corporation's vision,
all high schools in a portfolio share two
essential characteristics. First, all the
schools have a clear focus that serves to
galvanize teachers' and students' work.
One school might have an applied concentration,
like health sciences, while
another might offer a specific approach
to learning, such as experiential education.
Second, all schools in the portfolio
are driven by the same high expectations
for students' learning and provide both
a rigorous, standards-based collegepreparatory
curriculum and the academic
and social supports students need to
meet these high expectations. The portfolio
provides multiple pathways to success,
organized around a common core set of
standards and instructional practices.
While choice is a central mechanism,
the portfolio approach is not an unregulated
free market. Students can choose
from among a range of high schools
based on their own interests, needs, and
ambitions. Individual schools may be
operated by a variety of providers the
district itself will operate most of the
schools but careful accountability and
some degree of managed choice are
critical elements of the model. To be
effective, the portfolio of schools must
not be allowed to become a new form
of tracking that narrows rather than
expands the opportunities available for
students. A continual review of student
and teacher assignment and student
performance data is an essential component
of maintaining a balanced and
effective portfolio.
Finally, while the school district
will still play a leadership role, the portfolio
approach depends on building a
powerful partnership between the school
system and the community in which it
operates, both to bring to bear the variety
of resources that is needed for the
education of young people and to make
sure that all segments of the community
are treated equitably. Districts operating
portfolios of schools must work to overcome
the pressure to give preferential
treatment to one segment over another.
Core Values and
Operational Commitments
Four values are central to our vision of
a portfolio of schools: excellence, equity,
diversity, and choice.
How do we create entire systems
of individually excellent high schools
where excellence is the product of
everyday practice?
For the portfolio approach to deliver
the high schools we need, excellence must
be a core value. Whatever their focus or
format, every school within the portfolio
must be designed to help students meet
rigorous academic standards and to
prepare students for postsecondary
education and/or professional training.
But we also know that the portfolio
of schools cannot provide excellent
choices for all students without explicitly
addressing equity. The difficulties we
now face in urban school systems reflect
deeply embedded systemic inequities
in the distribution of resources, teachers,
students, and attention across the district.
These inequities mirror the differential
distribution of power and resources in the
larger society and undermine students'
access to excellent education. Breaking
up the system through the portfolio's
use of universal choice will disrupt
some patterns of inequality. But because
these inequities have a way of reappearing
in new forms, portfolios of schools
must be designed to include not only
strategies to reduce their impact, but also
monitoring and feedback strategies that
keep these inequities from emerging in
different ways.
At its core, the portfolio of schools
embraces the diversity of individual
aspirations and opportunities, learning
styles, and cultural identities. Based on
the findings from cognitive psychology
that individuals have varied learning
styles (see, for example, Gardner 1993;
Kolb 1984; Messick 1976), as well as
different interests, needs, and aspirations,
we know that different schools
are needed to provide a range of learning
settings for students. This also is
true for teachers. The portfolio capitalizes
on the diversity of teachers' interests
and talents and thereby increases the
probability that teachers will feel more
engaged by and committed to their
work than in the traditional comprehensive
high school model.
Choice has both intrinsic and instrumental
value within a portfolio of schools.
Choosing schools that respond to their
individual and community interests
and aspirations increases the likelihood
that students will feel engaged by their
school work, see its relevance to their
future, be more committed to participating
in the school as a community,
and strive to achieve academically. A
choice-based system also responds to
adolescents' developmental need to
explore different aspects of their emerging
identity by choosing different kinds
of schools and experiencing the consequences
of their choices. Young people
should help adults determine the range
of choices by working jointly to decide
what kinds of schools should be included
in the portfolio and the kind of supports
students and their communities
might need to make those decisions.
To be effective, the portfolio needs to tap the creativity of teachers,
students, and community members in everything from designing
courses to designing schools in order to reduce the number of
schools where too few children succeed.
At the same time, as parents and
students choose which schools to attend,
schools that are not serving students well
will feel the pressure to improve or will
be closed. To be effective, the portfolio
needs to tap the creativity of teachers,
students, and community members in
everything from designing courses to
designing schools in order to reduce
the number of schools where too few
children succeed.
These core values shape the operational
commitments for implementing
the portfolio. These commitments by
districts and communities anchor the
portfolio in city policy and community
expectations. A portfolio cannot succeed
without an ongoing substantial partnership
in these areas. The cities involved in
the Schools for a New Society and New
Century High Schools initiatives, along
with others, are beginning to put the
following commitments into place.
The school district commits to
playing the central role in creating,
managing, and sustaining a system
of individually excellent public high
schools and guaranteeing all students
access to these schools. In
Sacramento, the district leadership
divided large high schools into small
learning communities, started four
new small schools as independent
charters, and granted an independent
charter to a community-based
organization to divide a large high
school into six small schools.
The district, through its portfolio,
commits to promoting diversity of
students and programs both within
and between schools. Each school
includes a mix of students, providing
all with both academically challenging
work and the supports needed to
succeed. At the same time, the different
schools in the portfolio include
multiple options that address the
full range of students' learning styles,
interests, needs, and aspirations.
Providence has matched its school
options to students' diverse interests
and academic needs by creating
small schools, including a newcomer
academy, an ungraded school where
students progress through demonstrated
mastery, a school focused on
international studies, and another
focused on health sciences and technology.
In addition, Providence is
working to divide its large high schools
into small learning communities
organized around curricular themes.
The district, through its portfolio,
commits to serving a diverse constituency
of students, from those
who are able to accelerate learning
to those who are disconnected from
school. Boston is considering a flexible
promotion policy that would
allow students to progress through
high school as they complete course
requirements, rather than moving
from grade to grade. It also has created
a small school for older adolescents
who have not yet completed a high
school diploma.
The district, through its portfolio,
commits to applying universal standards
of excellence across schools and
to providing supports that enable
teachers and students to reach those
standards. Chattanooga is creating
a "single path" to graduation; the
school board adopted a policy eliminating
a two-track diploma and supporting
schools to implement the
change by expanding the use of literacy
coaches to increase reading skills
for all students.
The district, through its portfolio,
commits to providing and operationalizing
equitable choice. Districts
manage student choices by developing
a sufficient supply of excellent
options so that all students can find
a place in at least one of their top
choices. Districts also need to take
action to close schools that do not
serve students well and work closely
with community organizations and
personalinstitutions
to help guide students'
and families' decisions. At the same
time, the district must focus on eliminating
the ways that advantaged
families circumvent the studentallocation
process. In New York City,
the district tries to accomplish these
goals through programming that
assigns students to schools, taking
into consideration their choices and
the schools' different racial, ethnic,
gender, and academic composition.
The district, through its portfolio,
commits to engaging community
groups and youth in the portfolio
development and management
process.Worcester began its process
of high school redesign by engaging
cultural groups, community-based
organizations, youth-serving organizations,
and ethnic minority communities,
along with businesses
and higher-education institutions.
The community has maintained
its involvement through a citizens'
coalition, and each of the small
learning communities in Worcester
high schools has formed a community
advisory committee to produce
a formal process for community
engagement.
Designing the Car While
Driving: Emerging Lessons
and Opportunities for
Future Research
A portfolio of schools may well involve
some difficult trade-offs, and there is
much we are still learning about the
best way to implement this approach.
To learn as much as we can, it is important
to be transparent about what we
need to know so that we can be strategic
about where we focus our research and
attention. For example, abandoning
one-size-fits-all policies and replacing
them with ones that can respond effectively
to a diverse and dynamic mix of
school formats and governance arrangements
will likely increase the complexity
of delivering operational supports. It
may also create new opportunities for
the application of unequal political
power to gain educational advantages.
We also know that equitable choice
is dependent on an equal distribution
of accurate information. But there is
unequal distribution of information;
the neediest families have difficulty
using information to advocate for their
children. Our challenge is to provide
all students and families with reliable
information about their options and
with the help they need to use that
information. More research is therefore
needed to know how most students and
families are getting and using school
information; who the non-choosing
families are; and what constraints, priorities,
and sense of agency interact to limit
or shape their choices.
We are also concerned about
ensuring that smaller, more personalized schools have adequate resources
to offer all students the support and
extended learning activities they need
in order to thrive. If only some schools
in the portfolio have the capacity to
respond to special needs, hidden tracking
and segregation may well become
the unintended consequences of smaller
schools. It would be useful to know
what kinds of supports smaller schools
are currently able to provide, how small
schools and small learning communities
can work together to provide additional
supports for students, and how
smaller learning environments can
leverage community resources to offer
additional activities and classes.
Final Thoughts
Implementing a portfolio of schools
requires careful and watchful management
and requires the steady collection
and use of data to ensure that inequities
do not reemerge. It also requires districts
working closely with community partners
to take on some unfamiliar roles.
In particular, districts and their partners
will have to create a pipeline of new
schools to ensure a steady supply as
needs change, design and manage a
transparent and equitable guidance and
admissions process, build the capacity
of schools to excel for all students, and
provide operational supports to schools.
We believe the portfolio approaches
now emerging in urban school districts
offer benefits that outweigh their risks.
Remaining loyal to the core values that
underlie our concept of a portfolio of
schools excellence, equity, diversity,
and choice offers our best chance to
reap the benefits and minimize the risks.
We must continually measure our efforts
against those values to ensure that the
portfolios of schools being developed in
our cities continue to serve our young
people well.
----------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTE 1The Schools for a New Society cities are Boston,
Worcester (MA), Providence (RI), Hamilton
County/Chattanooga (TN), Houston, San Diego,
and Sacramento. >back to text
REFERENCES
Gardner, H. 1993. Frames of Mind: The Theory
of Multiple Intelligences, 10th anniversary edition.
New York: Basic Books.
Kolb, D. A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience
as the Source of Learning and Development. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Messick, S. 1976. Individuality in Learning.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.