OPINION: 3 best practices for building strong non-traditional education programs

           

When President Obama in this year’s State of the Union
address called for every state to require students to stay in school until age
18, I, like many passionate believers in the power of public education,
considered it to be a significant gesture. I’m reminded of his call to action
as the country enters another graduation season.

            Certainly,
increasing the dropout age can play an integral role in addressing the nation’s
staggering dropout rate – a student leaves school by their own choice every 29
seconds in this country.

            But while
Mr. Obama endorsed a meaningful first step toward dropout reduction in his
January speech, the policy he wants to pursue would have no teeth unless it is
complimented by non-traditional programs that target student populations who
can’t find success in traditional classroom settings, whether they are 15 or 18
years old.

            Only by
bolstering dropout age requirements with innovative education programming that
engages at-risk students and secures their commitment to classroom success will
the country find its antidote to the dropout plague consuming its communities,
particularly those that are urban and low-income.

            So what does
a successful alternative program with the ability to reengage the most
disillusioned students look like?

            First, the
programs must offer unparalleled flexibility. Too often, dropout students have
the will to succeed but challenging personal circumstances have slammed the
door on their potential to achieve. For students who are teenage single
parents, working full time to support impoverished families, or in and out of
hospitals to battle serious illnesses, the 8 to 3 o’clock school day simply
does not work. If non-traditional programs are to prove successful in reaching
these kinds of students, they must remove the regimented framework that can
snuff out success, which can be done while still demanding consistent
participation and engagement on the part of the student.

            Second,
non-traditional programs should create learning environments that are separate
from the populations at a district’s traditional schools. At my organization,
Simon Youth Foundation, we partner with public school districts to build and
sustain alternative schools in shopping malls. Whatever the chosen site, the
effect of the classroom location must make students feel safe, promote
understanding, and operate with student-to-teacher ratios lower than 15 to 1.
This creates an environment where a student receives personalized attention and
can focus on the school work rather than the social structures and interactions
that often threaten or detract from performance.

            Third, alternative
education programs must work in concert, not competition, with local public
school districts. In the ongoing debate about how to best reform the country’s
public school systems, it is often lost on the most negative of commentators
that public school districts are serving the communities and populations that are most
in need and most at-risk. Programs that compete with public schools, and in
many cases siphon vital attention and fiscal resources in the process, further
impair districts’ abilities to serve their students, particularly those who are
most at risk for slipping through the cracks and dropping out. This is why
private, public, for-profit, and not-for-profit organizations must throw their
support behind and align with public school districts, bringing to bear their
organizational resources to help public schools develop and sustain novel
non-traditional programs that activate student potential. This approach will
ultimately improve not only the quality of life for students but the viability
of the communities that both the students and organizations call home by
helping secure the next generation of community-engaged professionals.

            While President
Obama’s public support of such measures is a welcomed development, an increase
of the student dropout age to 18 is certainly not the silver bullet that will
slay our nation’s dropout epidemic.

            As the
country celebrates another graduation season, I implore the nation’s
thought and policy leaders to consider pursuing non-traditional education
programs that operate in accord with public school districts and are flexible
in their teaching structures and unique in their locations. Committing to these
strategies will give more U.S.
families reason to celebrate in the graduation seasons to come.

J. Michael Durnil, Ph.D.

President and CEO

Simon Youth Foundation