Should Nova Become an Innovative School?
Recently staff and teachers have been having meetings and discussions on the subject of whether or not Nova should become an innovative school and what it would mean. Last week I got the opportunity to interview a Nova parent about her opinion on whether or not Nova should become an innovative school (IS).
What would be the pros and cons of an innovative school?
On paper it looks like ISs would allow for greater freedom with curriculum and staffing. However, because the designation appears to be a bureaucratic one, we may not see that much innovation in pedagogy. (See below for cons.)
What do you think should be changed about Nova?
If I could change one thing, it’s this: I’d wave a magic wand so that students would get to class and participate in their education! There is some reason that students and staff get burned out, and though it seems at a lesser rate than at other schools, I’d love to see less burn out and more sustained engagement, and that only happens if students come to class, well enough prepared. I think Nova students benefit when staff has reasonable but high expectations for them. Oh, and one more thing: I’d love to see Nova walk the social justice talk a bit more. For example, with the Innovation Schools policy I’d love to have students and staff look at the issues through the lens of the larger community, as opposed to one that focuses exclusively on potential benefits for Nova alone.
What Do You Like About Nova?
These are the things I like about Nova, and I’m sure it’s a partial list and more will come to me later: Respect for students as creative and intelligent beings; staff understanding of teen development and needs; freedom and flexibility; a deeply intelligent staff; the coordinating system and the strong relationships that are created between teachers and students; interesting course offerings and the ability to create independent study options; competency based learning (and no grades); the non-competitive environment; an open and accepting climate for all students, and especially for those grappling with issues of abuse, special education needs, gender and sexual identity, as well as with issues stemming from achievement pressure and competition in our culture. I like that Nova picks the right sort of things to tweak every semester or year (e.g. scheduling, social justice options, committees, etc.) but holds tight to the important things I just mentioned. In my experience this sets Nova apart from many other schools where they perpetually work to redefine themselves, never settling into anything solid.
In your opinion should Nova become an innovative school? Why?
From what I’ve learned thus far, I do not think Nova should be an Innovative School. The SPS [Seattle Public Schools] policy that is developing sounds like a bureaucratic construct to me, one being created to pull in more corporate dollars (which always brings with it more corporate control), by creating more STEM-like programs. We already have Cleveland as a science, tech, math option. The Innovation schools sound like charters to me, especially if they change aspects of collective bargaining. Supporting labor, I don’t want to see teachers’ unions weakened at all. While I understand that there are hiring issues at times, these are issues that ought to be dealt with between the district and the SEA [Seattle Education Association], so that ALL schools are able to hire teachers that are good fits for particular communities of students, staff, and families, not by granting preferential treatment to a few programs.
The Innovation Schools will need to meet district and common core standards, and agreed upon assessment. This calls into question how much actual control individual programs will have. There will likely be the need for reviews. What will happen to programs where students are not meeting AYP [Annual Yearly Progress]? Will the label be pulled? Will the program then collapse?
I heard a person from the district speak about Innovation Schools at the recent Alternative Schools Coalition. At one point in the discussion, when it was pointed out that the emphasis seemed to be on STEM [Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics] programing, he said that military schools had been tossed out as an example of what programming we might see. I think the writing is on the wall: If we have Innovation Schools, some will undoubtedly be thought to be desirable (likely in more affluent neighborhoods) while others (military academies?) may be plopped down in poorer areas, with disastrous segregating of our schools, much like we saw in Chicago under Arne Duncan. If Nova is going to walk the talk about social justice, we cannot support district policies that perpetuate or worsen inequality in educational access.
Historically, alternative schools have been “laboratory” schools — places where innovative teaching has been tried out. It would be great if innovation schools could fill this role, but I see nothing that indicates SPS’s definition of Innovative Schools would do so.
Other thoughts/words you would like to share?
I believe Nova is growing. I think it’s on an upswing. As the district curriculum is standardized (and tested) to death, more students (and their parents/guardians) will look for freedom from this repression. Nova would be wise to keep on course, with all that’s done well.
What is your opinion on innovative schools? Should Nova become one or do you like it the way it is? Share your thoughts by posting a comment or emailing Debbie@novaknows.com
Loading ...