Many educational leaders, including the past U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley, recommend that high schools not exceed 600 students. That solution is not feasible for this district, given the existence of City High and West High. Therefore, the board recommends approaching these additions with the goal of creating a "schools-within-a-school" configuration, popularly regarded as the most effective way to create safer, more inclusive education delivery systems for adolescent learners. The "schools-within-a school" model breaks down the large population of the high school into smaller "houses," each with its own identity.

Meanwhile, the board strongly encourages the administration of the high schools to consider common remedies to high school overcrowding that simultaneously offer wider educational opportunities. These might include split schedules, job shadows, service learning programs, and greater school-to-work initiatives. All would serve to pull students out of the buildings for part of the school day, lessening the traffic in the classrooms and hallways. Given the enormous opportunities for extended research and learning provided by the University of Iowa as well as the local business community, collaborations between institutions could serve to lessen overcrowding, expedite learning and build community.

Executive Summary: This paper is an easy, quick read. But if you want an even quicker once-over try reading the Introduction, Summary and Conclusion, and then coming back to the Contents where you can click on any section you'd like to explore further.
 
 

Although most of the focus of the ICCSD Board, Administration and various committees has been on the impact of  the District's shifting demographics on the "boundaries and educational opportunities" of its elementary schools, there are also general renovation and expansion proposals for the high schools.

As the quote above indicates, the Board is offering a vision and encouraging innovative, creative solutions to problems of high school crowding, and improved quality of education.

Meanwhile, the Administration has brought in an engineering/architectural firm, Shive Hattery, to consult with them in exploring some of the options suggested by the Board and other opportunities for improvements in the District's high school educational program.

Some of the proposed physical changes involve repair or renovation of the present facilities. But others involve expansions to deal with projected increases in high school enrollment.

This paper, to the extent it deals with physical changes, is primarily focused on expansions, not repairs.

Many well-tested and widely-practiced innovations in high school education actually take less building space per student rather than more. To the extent those hold any prospect of being adopted within this District they obviously have an enormous potential impact not only on the details of any architectural designs, but on whether any expansion is warranted. (A very brief version of some of these points was earlier published by the author in a co-authored piece entitled, "Crowding in the Schools? It Calls for Creative Solutions," Iowa City Gazette, Dec. 1, 1999, p. 4A <https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/SchBoard-2/Other/cr991201.html>.)

It is no secret that this District's stakeholders are resistant to change of any kind. Many of the innovative suggestions from the Board and Administration regarding elementary schools were simply beaten down. The same may well happen with regard to proposals for innovative improvements in the District's secondary school educational offerings.

Prior to the current rethinking of "boundaries and educational opportunities" the only price paid by stakeholders for their intransigence was the resulting deprivation of the District's students of an improved quality of education. Now, to that price must be added the elemenaries' and high schools' share of a proposed $30-40-million bond issue or 20 percent hike in the local sales tax. If the District's stakeholders are willing to pay that price for the opportunity to continue their conventional high schools, "local control of education" means they have the right to do so. But they should at least be aware that while they were away from the table the ante in this poker game has substantially upped the stakes.

This paper is an attempt to contribute to the dialogue regarding some of the high school aspects of the Board's proposal -- elements that have not received as much attention as those affecting the elementary schools -- and the available options that can have a significant impact on building design and costs.

It is premised on the Board's and Administration's assumptions that (a) program should precede, and drive, building plans rather than the other way around, and on the suspicion that (b) if even a few of the more obvious innovations were undertaken there would no longer be the projected overcrowding of either high school.

It is expressly not the purpose of this paper to propose a specific, single plan for District adoption. It is, rather, an effort to provide some examples of how education professionals in other districts have been thinking outside the boxes in which we currently house students.

The available options fall into a number of categories.

Space survey. It's a rare building or room that is being utilized in the most efficient way, whether the basement and attic of a home, or an entire high school. It would be extraordinary if a thorough inventory of the District's current utilization of space in the high schools could not free up some space at some times during the week. Moreover, once various high school innovations are thought through, and accepted or rejected, they will carry implications for space utilization. Some will require more and different space. Others will require less. All usage obviously turns on what one is trying to accomplish with the high school, its curriculum and other programs.

Schools-within-schools. The schools-within-schools model, mentioned by the Board in the quote above, has obvious implications for architectural design and remodeling. Whether the District intends to pursue this model or not it is essential that the decision be made before any architect sets pen to pad. There are many possible variations within the schools-within-schools model. Some are discussed below.

Scheduling. "Split schedules," mentioned by the Board in the quote above, is but one of many "creative scheduling" solutions to high school overcrowding -- any one of which would essentially eliminate any need for additional space.

Out-of-school education. The Board mentions a number of things that "would serve to pull students out of the buildings for part of the school day, lessening the traffic in the classrooms and hallways." There are many more, including earlier entry into university or community college courses.

Computer-assisted education. Although there are some successful "distance education" high schools already in existence, few would today recommend the total substitution of computer-assisted education for high school attendance and teacher-assisted education. However, used as a supplement, or a part of that traditional instruction, computer-assisted education can free up teachers' time for smaller class sizes and even additional one-on-one tutoring when appropriate. Because computers with Internet access are increasingly ubiquitous in homes, libraries and universities this could become, in part, another form of out-of-school education.

Alternative high school. A centerpiece of the Board's proposal is the creation of a 200-student alternative high school. The need for and function of an alternative high school is fully explained in the Board's proposal and the report of its alternative high school advisory committee. [Old Link: http://www.iowa-city.k12.ia.us/Board/01-02/0219/boundary.htm] It need not be repeated or further discussed in the context of this paper, except to note that the 200 students in this new, third high school, who would otherwise be attending City or West High, will further reduce the need for additional space in the two traditional high schools.

A space survey involves (a) a factual report of how and when each individual room and office in each high school is now being used, (b) a speculative set of options regarding how the current mission might be accomplished with a more efficient and effective use of that space during those and other times, followed by (c) a speculative set of alternative uses regarding how that space might be used under various options for alternative missions.

Space is expensive -- renovation often even more than newly constructed space. Even if the ultimate conclusion is that more space is needed in either or both high schools, there is no excuse for not using what the District has in as efficient a manner as possible. There is no better time to do such a survey than when new construction and programs are being considered.

Obviously, it would be wise to have such surveys done by professionals in space utilization who do not have a vested interest in either the current ways in which the space is used or the profit to be made from new construction.

I have not done such a space survey, so this must remain a process, rather than a substantive, suggestion. One can, however, imagine what some hypothetical implications might be. Here are a couple of examples.

(1) Any number of possible programs could create a need for a lot of more very small rooms:

• an emphasis on writing that provides more free time for language arts teachers to do one-on-one student conferences (see Nicholas Johnson, "Let's Focus Efforts and Resources," Iowa City Press-Citizen, Dec. 7, 1999, p. 13A <https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/SchBoard-2/Other/ic991207.html>)
• greater integration of social services, and an increased role for guidance counselors, for one-on-one meetings
• greater involvement with the business community and university, bringing individuals into the school for teaching or counseling who would need office space
• a finding that individual offices for teachers would improve the quality of their work while enabling a more efficient use of classroom space

A nearby example of such a transformation occurred at Washington High School in Cedar Rapids. Short of classrooms and assuming the only solution was new construction, administrators looked around the building and realized the vocational space was not being used efficiently. They ultimately converted this high-ceiling space into two floors with four new classrooms! Whether this District would want to follow that specific approach or not, there are likely comparable opportunities.

Again, to emphasize, none of this is being proposed. It is merely intended to stimulate thinking and awareness of the interrelationship between program and building design, and why the Board and Administration are right to say that the former must be done before the latter.

The Board has identified the characteristics, and advantages, of the schools-within-schools model.

As noted above, if the Administration follows the Board's suggestion, it will have "obvious implications for architectural design and remodeling."

As the Board has said, the schools-within-schools model is "popularly regarded as the most effective way to create safer, more inclusive education delivery systems for adolescent learners. The 'schools-within-a school' model breaks down the large population of the high school into smaller 'houses,' each with its own identity."

The concept envisions, say, four separate "houses" within each of the District's high school buildings. There would continue to be shared common areas among all four houses (areas such as the media center, gym, performing arts areas, and lunchroom). The four houses could continue to combine, for example, their most athletically gifted students into a single football or basketball team. But each house would be in a separate area of the building, with its own classrooms and smaller common areas.

What is done beyond that is limited only by one's imagination. Each house could have its own name, traditions, source of pride, or colors. There could be intramural athletic contests between the four houses -- contests in which, by definition, a far greater number of students would be able to participate as athletes.

An individual house could choose a "theme," such as art, science, music or a foreign language. It would not mean that the selected focus would not be offered in the other houses -- or that other subjects would not be covered by the house with the theme -- it would simply be the emphasis in all of its subjects as a way of increasing student interest in their academics.

There could be total, or some, or no, self-selection of houses by students.

If students were assigned there are many ways they could be selected and grouped. There could be two houses that combined 9th and 10th graders, and two houses that combined 11th and 12th graders. There could be three houses that combined 9th through 11th graders, and one for seniors. There could be one for 9th graders and three that housed the 10th through 12th graders.

The choices would be affected, among other things, by the curriculum and goals. For example, if many seniors will be out of the building attending post-secondary classes, working on seniors' projects, or doing internships or community service, that would need to be taken into account.

And, of course, if the schools-within-schools concept were adopted in conjunction with more creative scheduling, the saving of space while improving the quality of education could be even greater. For example, a high school might be physically divided into three areas, but six houses would be created. Three would attend from 7:30 to 1:30, and the other three from 2:00 until 8:00 p.m.

Creative scheduling offers the greatest opportunity for freeing up space -- and thereby reducing, or eliminating, the need for new construction. It offers many other benefits in quality of education, and teachers' collaborative efforts.

At seven hours a day for approximately 180 days, the traditional high school is fully utilized for only 1260 of the 8760 hours in every year. Of course, other uses are made of the building at other hours, and no one would suggest the school be open 24 hours a day 365 days a year. But a more creative use of the available time and space can do wonders in reducing overcrowding.

Once again, limits on human imagination are the only limitation to the possible range of alternative scheduling.

The three main categories, however, would be (1) year-round schools, (2) all-day (and evening) and split-schedule schools, and (3) team teaching and block scheduling. ("Out-of-school education" could be thought of as a form of alternative scheduling, but is treated as a separate topic, below.)

(1) Year-round schools, as the name suggests, refer to the additional use of months and days, rather than hours of the day (although, of course, year-round schools could also be run on a split-schedule). One of the oft-citied educational advantages of this approach is that there is much less forgetting, and resulting need for re-learning, with shorter breaks between terms. And even if students do take an entire term off, spreading the same number of students over more terms reduces crowding and the need for additional facilities.

(2) Some high schools choose to open at 6:30 or 7:00 in the morning and stay open until 10:00 at night. Many students welcome this range of choice in scheduling. Obviously, it also has a significant impact on crowding and building utilization.

Split scheduling merely formalizes the process. Half of the students might attend from 8:00 to 2:00 and the other half from 2:00 to 8:00 p.m. Or, there could be an overlap: one group attending from 8:00 to 2:00 and the other attending from 12:00 to 6:00 p.m. One might even plan a third group from 10:00 to 4:00 that would overlap with both the 8:00 to 2:00 and the 2:00 to 8:00 p.m. groups.

Obviously the week could be what was split: longer school days, but one group would attend Monday-Wednesday and another group Thursday-Saturday. If that was too much for the 9th and 10th graders, they could stick to the conventional schedule. A split week could be particularly advantageous for seniors working on projects or otherwise outside of the building -- if that is a direction the school decides to take.

(3) Block scheduling and team teaching, combining subjects and teams of teachers, are used in many schools throughout the country. While they would not necessarily save on space, ideally they would require a different architectural design.

Consider Central Park East in New York City. It uses teams and block scheduling. Each team has a half-day a week to plan together while their students are out of the building on a community project. They also have early dismissal one day a week for staff meetings.

Almost any combination of subjects is possible: social studies and language arts, or science and math are among the most common. But it is also possible to combine art with science and math; music, art and performing arts; or physical education with science and math.

Teachers within a block are able to schedule within their own block to allow for large group activities, smaller group meetings, or even one-on-one sessions with students. This flexibility is welcomed by teachers and students alike in dealing with the "class size" problem.

A caveat: This is not something to jump into. There are trainers in team teaching and block scheduling who can walk the District's teachers and administrators through the process if this option is chosen.

"In the agricultural age, postsecondary education was a pipe dream for most Americans. In the industrial age it was the birthright of only a few. By the space age, it became common for many. Today, it is just common sense for all."

-- National Commission on the High School Senior Year (2001)

The Commission identifies many of the reasons why the high school senior year is, for most seniors, not all it could be. Indeed, the President of Bard College (among others) has recommended that the last two years of high school be abolished! Id. p. 31. The Commission does not go so far.

It is, of course, impossible briefly to summarize such a report. The bottom line is that (1) the Commission finds that there are many things high school seniors can be doing outside of their high school buildings that will make a greater contribution to their education than what they are doing inside them, and (2) rather obviously, every senior who is not in school is one less student to contribute to crowding and the need for additional space.

The Board obviously recognizes these advantages when it refers, in the quotation at the top of this paper, to "job shadows, service learning programs, and greater school-to-work initiatives" and notes "the enormous opportunities for extended research and learning provided by the University of Iowa as well as the local business community."

The Commission identifies what it calls "senioritis" and reports in its findings that "there is little sense of the final year as a time to strengthen skills, enhance preparation for postsecondary programs, broaden experiences to include service or demanding work-based learning, or culminate earlier classroom experience in a senior project." Id. p. 28.

As will not be surprising, given the quote with which this sub-section begins, the Commission believes that students should be provided a college-prep curriculum whether or not they are headed for college, and that many more high school juniors and seniors than are should be taking college courses either as a substitute, or a supplement, to their senior year. (It also notes that "High-quality career programs that integrate academic standards with challenging technical content serve many students well." Id. p. 32.)

Not incidentally, the Commission also recommends a number of other ideas discussed in this paper, including, for example, "'virtual high schools' that employ distance-learning techniques," and "alternative ways to use and schedule time, including block schedules, to provide the flexibility needed to explore complex subjects in depth and complete rigorous projects." Id. p. 33.

Although outside the scope of this paper, high school students earlier use of more college courses touches on another subject that can impact space needs. If and as more advanced placement and other high school courses come to be provided by Kirkwood or the University of Iowa, this not only reduces crowding in classrooms and hallways by removing students, it also frees up some classroom space formerly used for those classes. The curricular and activities offerings of some high schools are so extensive that they are disparagingly referred to as "shopping mall high schools." Obviously, to the extent the District's high schools would be willing to do it, any efforts to review, concentrate and focus their course offerings could have a very significant impact on space needs -- while, some would argue, improving the quality and utility of the education those schools provide.

There are now "virtual high schools" that are totally online. A recently-released report indicates that one-half of the nation's high schools now offer at least some online instruction for students. Do ours? I don't know.

What is clear is that there have been enormous improvements in computer-assisted materials, both those that are Internet Web-based and those on CD-ROM and DVD.

And, as indicated in the summary with which this paper began, used as a supplement, or a part of traditional instruction, computer-assisted education can free up teachers' time for smaller class sizes and even additional one-on-one tutoring when appropriate.

As a part of every student's individualized education plan (another recommendation of the National Commission mentioned above) computer-assisted education can be part of a regularly-reviewed K-12 and lifelong self-study plan, one that students can pursue on their own in parallel with their in-classroom instruction.

As computers with Internet access are increasingly common in students' homes and public locations this can be yet one more means of improving the quality of education. Moreover, when viewed by students as "fun" as well, it can provide an added incentive for students to put in extra hours of studying. Since at least some of that instruction takes place outside of the high school building, it is yet one more way to reduce crowding and the need for additional construction.

(For more on this subject, see Nicholas Johnson, "How Should We Use Computers?," Iowa City Press-Citizen, Aug. 1, 2000, p. 11A <https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/SchBoard-2/Other/ic000801.html>, "We Have a 'New World Disorder,'" Iowa City Press-Citizen, January 16, 2001, p. 7A <https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/SchBoard-2/Other/ic010116.html>, and "Net Programs Aid Test Preparation," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 17, 2001, p. 9A <https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/SchBoard-2/Other/ic010717.html>.)

As the Summary explains, the need for and function of an alternative high school is fully explained in the Board's proposal and the report of its alternative high school advisory committee. [Old Link: http://www.iowa-city.k12.ia.us/Board/01-02/0219/boundary.htm#District Committee and Other Reports] It need not be repeated here.

The impact of a new alternative high school on crowding and the need for the construction of additional space in the two traditional high schools is obvious. Most if not all of the 200 students in this new, third high school would otherwise be crowding the classrooms and hallways of City or West High.

Thus, the mere existence of the alternative high school will constitute a roughly 7 percent reduction in the traditional high schools' enrollment -- alone enough to virtually eliminate the need for additional space.

Although beyond the scope of this paper, it should be noted in passing that there are many practices of alternative high schools that could be, and many would argue should be, provided within traditional high schools as well. (For examples see Nicholas Johnson, "Learn from Alternative Schools," Iowa City Press-Citizen, May 22, 2001, p. 9A <https://www.nicholasjohnson.org/SchBoard-2/Other/ic010522.html>.)

This paper endeavors to make a number of points.

1. This District can be proud of the accomplishments of its high schools. But it would be folly to believe they could not become even better still. There is a rich literature, lots of data, best practices, and reports of what's wrong, and what works, in our nation's high schools.

2. There are few opportunities for a school district to draw upon that body of knowledge and totally rethink what it is doing with its secondary education program, and why. This is such a time for the ICCSD, and it would be a real tragedy to waste it.

3. It is essential -- as a matter of sound management as well as stakeholder relations -- that the Board or Administration go on record, in writing, as to which high school innovative changes it intends to implement. If none, that can be declared and explained. Stakeholders deserve to know. Architects need to know. Fortunately, there seems to be agreement that it makes no sense even to begin the process of designing expansions and renovations without firm decisions as to how the space is going to be used and why.

4. Even if no major innovative curricular or programmatic changes are going to be made, the Board and Administration will still need to thoroughly consider the possible impact on building occupancy from such things as the alternative school, creative scheduling, out-of-school education, and other proposals of the National Commission on the High School Senior Year.

5. Bottom line, building repairs aside, it is not at all clear to this observer -- especially if the traditional past practices are to be retained unchanged -- that there has been, yet, a demonstration that additional space is needed in either high school.