A Look Into KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program) Culture Through the Prism of Progressive Schools

• In Event: Roundtable Session 66
  In Roundtable Session: “Schools of Tomorrow,” Schools of Today Revisited: Histories of Five Contemporary Progressive Schools

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide a historical case study of Central Park East Elementary School, a school that would eventually become the feeder school to the famous Central Park East Secondary School. Founded by Deborah Meier under the direction of Anthony Alvarado, the elementary school continues to exist as a progressive school, however, the secondary school no longer exists in its former progressive form. In the 1970s, a number of schools in NYC were created as “schools within schools”. Central Park East (or CPE) was one of the earliest of these schools, started in 1974 in East Harlem, an immigrant neighborhood with large pockets of poverty. The school started with six teachers who were all committed to project-based curriculum and to a school model in which teachers created their own curriculums and made governance decisions for the school collectively. They shared a belief that a school is a place for teachers to learn as well as children; they assumed that if teachers stopped learning, the children would not be far behind. They also believed that a school is more than a collection of classrooms but rather a community of teachers, children, and their families. This paper traces the development of the elementary school from its founding to present and examines how the school has managed to retain its progressive, child centered practices in the face of the accountability movement, when its secondary school failed to do this and closed.

Perspectives: This paper uses the perspective summarized in the Paedagogica Historica special issue on ISCHE 30, which argues for the use of both historical and sociological analyses to examine education and inequality. The paper provides a sociological analysis of the history of the school through an examination of the evolution of its curriculum and pedagogy, its changes and leadership, its problems with sustainability and its effectiveness in serving a diverse student population.

3. Methods: The paper uses historical methods, including archival research, oral histories with living administrators and teachers, and qualitative sociological methods, including interviews with current teachers and administrators and ethnographic observations of the school.

4. Data sources: The paper analyzes archival documents, including memos, letters, newspapers, and planning documents, as well as interviews with former and current teachers and administrators.

5. Conclusions: The paper argues that the school has undergone a number of changes in its long history as it struggles to adapt to changing market and educational conditions. It explores how changes in leadership have been a key component of stability, change and sustainability. Finally, it argues that the school has been effective in balancing these conditions with admitting and serving a diverse student population.

6. Significance: The paper provides an important contribution to the literature on the history of progressive education through the analysis of a significant urban district school.

Author

• Andrew Robert Ratner, City College of New York - CUNY