The New American Academy

Horace Mann, the American statesmen, is widely credited as the father of the American school system in America. Throughout his storied career in public office, Mann sought to implement a system of public schooling in the States. Mann’s efforts constituted the first attempt to create a system of public education in America. In turn, Mann sought inspiration abroad, where such systems had already been established. As part of that endeavor, Mann embarked on an extensive trip to Europe in 1843 to examine an array of school models. In the spring of 1843 Horace Mann, acting as Secretary of the State Board of Education for Massachusetts, partook on a short trip to Europe, and visited schools in England, Ireland, Scotland, Prussia, Saxony, the south German States, Holland and Belgium. Mann took particular interest in the education system in Prussia. Horace Mann noted:

'Among the nations of Europe, Prussia has long enjoyed the most distinguished reputation for the excellence of its schools. In reviews, in speeches, in tracts, and even in graver works devoted to the cause of education, its schools have been exhibited as models for the imitation of the rest of Christendom. For many years, scarce a suspicion was breathed that the general plan of education in that kingdom was not sound in theory and most beneficial in practice.'

The system within Prussia had been commissioned in 1779 by Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, who desired a system that would teach Prussian citizens basic skills. The model had one teacher classrooms and a strict hierarchy of power. Mann felt this education system would be ideal to service the millions of young Americans who required an education because it would be efficient and cheap to implement.

This model, though, possessed serious limitations - and Mann explicitly acknowledged these criticisms. Mann commented:

'Recently, however, grave charges have been preferred against it [the Prussian model] by high authority. The popular traveler, Laing, has devoted several chapters of his large work on Prussia to the disparagement of its school system … in 1843, numerous tracts we reissued from the English press, not merely calling in question, but strongly denouncing, the whole plan of education in Prussia, as being not only designed to produce, but as actually producing, a spirit of blind acquiescence to arbitrary power, in things spiritual as well as temporal - as being in fine, a system of education adapted to enslave, and not to enfranchise, the human mind.

Despite these misgivings, Mann concluded that the benefits of the system outweighed the potential problems. In turn, Mann catalyzed the implementation of the public school system along the lines of the Prussian model

This model has endured, remarkably unchanged, through modern American schools: compulsory schooling, separation of children into grades by age, standardized marks, rote learning, separation of subject matters, training centers for teachers, teacher/principal/ superintendent/board hierarchy.

Since its implementation, the system itself has rarely been challenged. Instead the primary thrust of reform has been that of change within the system. For example, at the turn of the century, the following generation of educators attempted to adapt the system of Prussian model to the industrial age. Prominent among those educators was Ellwood P. Cubberley, an American educator and author, who later became the Dean of the School of Education at Stanford. Cubberley, in his work and writing, sought to improve upon the Prussian model by applying scientific management. He believed that, armed with the tools of scientific management, the education system could be utilized as a tool of social engineering. Cubberley, in 1917, wrote cheerfully of the mission of American schools:

'Our schools are, in a sense, factories in which the raw products (children) are to be shaped and fashioned into products to meet the various demands of life. The specifications for manufacturing come from the demands of twentieth‐century civilization, and it is the business of the school to build its pupils according to the specifications laid down. This demands good tools, specialized machinery, continuous measurement of production to see if it according to specifications, the elimination of waste in manufacture, and a large variety in the output.'

In a word, Cubberley hoped to adjust the education system to the peculiar demands of the industrial age - and he did so with great success.

The “factory” model of school education that followed was useful for the industrial age. It produced a great many workers for our factories. It enabled assimilation of millions of immigrants to a common language and allowed them to enter the workforce with enough reading, writing and arithmetic to be useful to the United States. This generation of children, however, must be equipped for a new age in order to face new challenges and demands.

This argument, though, is not unfamiliar - nor is it novel. The concerns raised in this post have been detailed in a number of the articles that we have studied and in many other forums as well. I submit this post, therefore, not to raise attention to these concerns - but rather to direct the attention of the class to a particular vision of a solution these problems that has come to my own attention.

That is, I would like to introduce the class to The New American Academy. The New American Academy is a school in New York City (p.s. 770). It is a public school with a side contract with the New York City Department of Education and the United Federation of Teachers. And it is a bold attempt to reformulate the way education looks in the States.

The New American Academy is innovative in a number of ways. The most striking aspect of that innovation is the set up of the classroom. As opposed to present model whereby one teacher has a class of (around) thirty students, at the New American Academy there are sixty students and four teachers in every classroom. In order to avoid the risk of describing the school in terms that its leadership would not condone, instead of further detailing the model, I direct the reader to the New American Academy site.

The following link offers the stated ‘vision’ of the school - http://www.thenewamericanacademy.org/#/our-vision/4538197742

And the subsequent link is to the brochure that is given to parents of prospective students - http://www.thenewamericanacademy.org/#/parents-brochure/4537941261

As these links will indicate, the model is nothing if not bold. And I use that term (e.g. bold) with all due deliberateness. That is to say, the New American Academy is a courageous attempt…but it is also rather risky. It has decided potential to be a revelation in education… or just another failed experiment.

In this forum, I would like to inquire about the reader’s perspective (i.e you!). That is, what do you think? Are you inclined to think that this model will be successful? Or are you inclined to think otherwise? Is there anything in your experience in the classroom that influences that inclination? If so, what experience?

I ask these questions - without an answer of my own. I am very much intrigued by the idea…but very uncertain as to what I feel about it. I am eager to hear all of your perspectives.

Post-Note:

I would like to direct the reader’s attention to a number of resources that may help us come to a better understanding of the model proposed by the New American Academy and how it has worked in practice.

The school has received a considerable amount of press and I will direct the reader to two examples of that journalism.

The first example is an article written in the New York Post, which has a relatively favorable impression of the school. It can be accesed at the following link: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/school_in_class_by_itself_WJtdjd3565wlFg59YCefDL

The second example is an article written in the New York Times, which has a decidely less favorable impression: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/education/11class.html

In addition, for those who are interested, there is a considerable amount of press upon the headmaster of that school, the architect of that model.

The headmaster is Shimon Waronker.He is a graduate of the first cohort of the NYC Leadership Academy after serving as a middle school teacher for three years. He was then assigned as Principal of Jordan L. Mott, Junior High School 22, in the South Bronx - one of the 12 most violent schools in New York City and helped turn it around. He was featured on the front page of the NY Times as well as the Today Show, CNN, and numerous other media outlets for his work in the school. He was awarded two fellowships: a Cahn Fellowship at Teacher's College, Columbia University and a Presidential Fellowship at Harvard University. He holds two bachelor’s degrees, two master’s degrees and is currently a doctoral student at Harvard University. Numerous awards include: a Knighthood from the Government of France (Chevalier dans l'Ordre Palmes Academiques), the Humanitarian Lamplighter award, the National Urban Alliance Educational Leadership Award, as well as awards from the Brooklyn Borough President, the Bronx Borough Judges and a New York State Assemblyman.

He is profiled in the following article in the New York Times - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/nyregion/08principal.html

And in the accompanying video - http://video.nytimes.com/video/2008/02/07/nyregion/1194817091947/a-bronx-school-revives.html.

Moreover, the following links are to interviews that he has given:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUIdkXqNS9k&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKnRumG-GME&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi2XW00u5NM

Looking forward to hearing from y'all!

Zach Z