Smarter Planning For Schools and Communities in New Jersey
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Session:Planning for PUblic Schools, Part I (March 11, 1:00pm)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Smarter Planning For Schools and Communities in New Jersey
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Session:Planning for PUblic Schools, Part I (March 11, 1:00pm) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Abstract: This paper is in two parts. The first provides background on New Jersey’s $12 billion school construction program, and the Office of State Planning’s (OSP) campaign to encourage creative thinking about the new schools and how they might fit into the State’s communities. The second part considers six broadly endorsed design guidelines for community-centered schools, in terms of projects already underway in new Jersey as well as a framework for investigating new issues and problems that might arise.
*This paper does not necessarily represent the opinion of the Office of State Planning
In a move as momentous as the start of the new millennium, New Jersey is launching the largest, most comprehensive school construction program the nation. Governor Whitman initiated this $12 billion public works program when she signed into law the Educational Facilities Construction and Financing Act on July 18, 2000. This program presents New Jersey residents with an unprecedented opportunity to leverage capital spending on school facilities to stimulate broader community development. The New Jersey Office of State Planning (OSP) has launched a major campaign to raise public awareness about this opportunity, which represents a key strategy to achieve the goals of the State Development and Redevelopment Plan (SDRP)–New Jersey’s guide for smart growth. The purpose of this OSP working paper is to stimulate a conversation about an expanded vision of public schools for the 21st century. After all, to be smart means to look at the big picture. The school construction program will have enormous impact on the state’s future physical and social landscape. An examination of the choices this program might engage is crucial to such a significant public effort. This paper is in two parts. The first provides background on the school construction program and the OSP campaign to encourage creative thinking about the new schools and how they might fit into the State’s communities. The second part outlines planning and design considerations in building community-centered schools. An appendix lists resources for groups interested in creating community-based schools in their own neighborhoods. School Construction and Finance in New JerseyNew Jersey’s school construction program has its origins in the State Supreme Court's rulings in the landmark Abbott vs. Burke case. The Court directed the State to provide facilities for public school children in the 30 Abbott/special needs districts–which are the poorest in the state and primarily urban–"that will be sufficient to enable these students to achieve the substantive standards that now define a thorough and efficient education and the quality of the facilities cannot depend on the district's willingness or ability to raise taxes or to incur debt." After nearly two years of debate, the Legislature enacted a bill that provides for an expanded schools construction program including aid–at least 40% of eligible costs–for all 618 districts in the state. The State will pay for this $12 billion effort by raising $8.6 billion through the issuance of bonds, with the rest financed by local districts, and other annual appropriations of the State legislature. This bill fundamentally restructures the way in which public school facilities projects are planned, managed, and financed in New Jersey. New Jersey’s approach to provide equal educational opportunities for all children also goes well beyond court ordered measures to end disparities in school financing among rich and poor towns in Vermont and New York. In addition to the construction program, the New Jersey Supreme Court mandated ordered the implementation of "whole school reform" in all elementary schools in the Abbott districts. Whole school reform involves a systematic restructuring of an entire school engaging the participation of the schools faculty, administration, students, parents and other community stakeholders–which "must be implemented as interrelated parts of a comprehensive program." The wide consensus about the effectiveness of whole school reform is closely aligned with the consensus forming around the concept of community-based schools. There are two ways a school can serve as a center of community: "either by serving a more integral role within the context of the whole community, or by extending the learning environment to take advantage of the full range of the community's resources. Indeed, the most successful schools of the future will be integrated learning communities, which accommodate the needs of all of the community's stakeholders." Either way, the concept of schools that serve as centers of communities represents a key strategy for achieving the goals of the SDRP, essentially: to support the revitalization of existing cities and towns; and to encourage new suburban growth, where necessary, in compact patterns, in order to curb sprawl and conserve scarce open space. The Goals of the New Jersey’s State Development and Redevelopment Plan provide a context for policy initiatives in a broad array of substantive areas, including Infrastructure Investments, which encourage municipalities to: Make the most effective use of existing school facilities; plan and construct new facilities to serve as community centers; and locate new school facilities to serve as focal points for existing and new development. Integrate school facilities planning with neighborhood and community wide planning and development. As well as to: Use the capacity of school facilities, roads, transit, parks and other necessary infrastructure in ways that permit maximum use of non-automotive transport, chaining of shopping and other trips with school trips, and sharing of parking, recreational and other public facilities. Thus, while the court ordered remedy addresses the urgent need for an overhaul of the outmoded and decrepit school buildings in the 30 Abbott districts, the need for expediency in completing top priority repairs to address critical health and safety issues does not preclude the need for planning the more comprehensive school reform and improvement projects proposed as part of the Long-range Facilities Plan, which each district was required to submit to the Commissioner of Education in December 2000. Urban School Reform and Community DevelopmentMany cities and older suburban towns in New Jersey have been enjoying a renaissance, thanks largely to the sustained growth of the national economy, if not the SDRP. It has not been so easy, however, to reverse the fortunes of the impoverished Abbott districts. Yet timing is everything. The coincidence of the state funded retooling of public education with the urban renaissance offers a truly unique window of opportunity to capitalize on the inherent strength of cities and towns as a resource to improve the effectiveness of urban schools. With proper planning, the state’s investment in new and improved Abbott schools can serve as serve as a catalyst for the revitalization of these neighborhoods that have been left behind by boom times. Thus while the Abbott legislation will benefit all of the school districts in the state, both rich and poor, it is crucial for the conversation about how to leverage the state’s investment in schools to focus on the impoverished districts, which are primarily, but not exclusively, urban. Fortunately, there is sufficient time to think broadly about the next generation of New Jersey’s urban schools as well as capture the opportunity for a new approach to school building, represented by the role of the Economic Development Authority (EDA) in the implementation of the school construction program. EDA is responsible for construction and financing all projects in Abbott districts and those non-Abbott districts eligible for 55 percent or more state aid. All other districts have the option of using the authority's services. Construction will not get underway until spring 2001, according EDA Executive Director Caren Franzini. It will then take up to ten years to complete the entire scope of work. The EDA has already made clear its support for any school district in New Jersey that desires to pursue a broader vision for its facilities, In taking this step it is important to be both visionary and pragmatic. The Department of Education has set "facilities efficiency standards" to determine the extent to which a district’s construction project qualifies for state aid. These are not construction design standards, but rather "represent the instructional and administrative spaces that are educationally adequate to support the achievement of the State’s Core Curriculum Content Standards"–which the Supreme Court accepted "as the definition of what students need to learn as the result of the ‘thorough and efficient education’ that… [NJ’s] State Constitution promises them." A district may design other spaces to be included in project and the EDA will assist in the search for funding necessary to cover the cost of these design elements. To contribute to school reform and community revitalization, however, bricks and mortar projects must embody a vision for change cultivated through community partnerships, and form part of an integrated solution to local environmental, social and economic concerns. OSP Communities of Learners CampaignSignificantly, the biggest obstacle to building urban schools that can serve as a catalyst for community revitalization may not be the obvious targets, such as red tape or lack of money, but rather, the complexity of mobilizing the resources–social, cultural, economic and political–required for comprehensive improvement projects, in which schools collaborate with their communities and beyond. It may be necessary to build the capacity of school districts to carry out the kind of strategic planning and visioning activities to design a community collaboration and to develop and strengthen partnerships with colleges, parents, businesses and other schools. The challenge of building local capacity is compounded by the difficulty of implementing innovative strategies and visionary ideas in the framework of inherently conservative bureaucratic systems–schools, state and local agencies–which may have to learn new, more flexible and cooperative ways of working together. The OSP Communities of Learning campaign aims to help overcome these obstacles by educating the public, including public officials, about the tremendous and limited window of opportunity New Jersey residents have to leverage the state’s investment in schools to serve as a catalyst for community development by creating schools that serve as centers of communities. This campaign operates at several levels–scales of communities of learning– including convening a series of meetings to build a consensus for the community-based school agenda among policy makers, the education community and civic leaders; outreach and technical assistance to enhance existing efforts underway to link school facility planning with redevelopment initiatives; and forging partnerships that join the resources of area planning and design faculty and students with local officials, schools and community groups to investigate creative approaches and generate and test new ideas.
One source of funding for municipalities interested in conducting such projects is the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs’ (DCA) award winning Smart Growth Planning Grant program, administered by the OSP. To further target this assistance, in August, 2000, DCA Commissioner Jane Kenny announced the Community School Planning Grant program, [which in the first year is targeted at the 16 designated communities selected by the Urban Coordinating Council (UCC)]. The purpose of this new program is to promote cooperation among municipal officials, education officials, community groups and local residents to coordinate planning for new school facilities with inclusive neighborhood planning. (On January 19, 2001, at a conference convened by the OSP on Smart Schools, Smart Growth and Abbott Implementation, DCA Deputy Commissioner Anthony Cancro announced the second round of funding for the Community School Planning Grant program, for which any UCC eligible city may apply.) A National IssueNew Jersey is not alone in facing a huge schools facilities challenge. Communities nationwide are struggling to address critical needs to repair, replace and build new schools, as the number of school-age children grows, and the nation's inventory of school buildings ages and wears out. President Bush has called the overhauling of the nation’s public schools his number one domestic priority. The difficulty of meeting this challenge is compounded by the rising tide of the education reform movement, which calls for new ideas about what constitutes an effective, appropriate learning environment. Further complexity is added by the growing interest in and commitment to integrated solutions to environmental, social and economic concerns, evidenced in the support expressed by several international conferences and organizations for sustainable development. The US Department of Education has articulated six critical reform dimensions that have implications for the planning and design of educational facilities:
To guide states and local districts in their efforts to literally reinvent their educational infrastructure–and build more equitable, effective, and environmentally sustainable systems–in the summer of 1998 the US Department of Education convened a group of architects, planners, school board members, teachers and representatives from federal agencies to discuss issues concerning the learning environments of the future. This group endorsed the idea of schools that serve as centers of community–community learning centers–an approach that brings the community more into the school and the school into the community by expanding the usage of and access to the school through initiatives such as after-school, evening, and weekend activities and programs. While this approach makes sense in suburban and rural as well as urban communities, it is particularly valuable in impoverished districts, where the school is the hub for community support systems. Community Schools: Planning and Design ConsiderationsThe idea of community schools is actually not new. It evolved within and around the settlement house movement in the late nineteenth century, which was inseparable from the Arts and Crafts. This was a time when progressives hoped to use design as a lever to reform society and build the ideal democratic community, based on cooperation. (John Dewey's pioneering work at the University of Chicago, and the founding of the Dewey School, focused on child-centered, learning-by-doing took place in this context.) The late nineteenth century progressive design-reformers advocacy of place-based social reconstruction is itself rooted in a long tradition of communitarian thought–concern for the shape of settlements–based on the premise that urban form shapes social life (and its corollary, that the form of a community reflects its values). In other words, design was always an integral component of the concept of community schools as a vital institution of civic society. By the mid-twentieth century, however, trends toward specialization resulted in growing separation not only between schools and their communities, but also between architects and planners; aesthetic and social concerns, and the units of government responsible for community resources such as housing, education, health, transportation, recreational, and cultural facilities. But a holistic or understanding of communities–including an appreciation of the importance of design in daily life–survived as a counter trend evident today in widespread support for the idea of "livable" or "healthy" cities. In fact, the community schools movement can be understood as part of an international trend whereby a number of foundations, organizations and institutions have become increasingly focused on finding ways to strengthen families and nurture healthier communities. National Design Policy: Schools As Centers of CommunityThe emerging bi-partisan consensus on national education policy and livable communities reflects this trend. Notably, the forum on Design of Schools as Centers of Community, convened in October 1998, by the US. Department of Education, generated a widely endorsed set of national Design Principles, and the handbook, Schools as Centers of Community: A Citizens Guide to Planning and Design. The authors of the Citizens Guide explain that the six design guidelines it offers are "intended as a compass to point the way, not a cookbook-style recipe." In other words, the following design guidelines are not proscriptive, but rather, provide a framework for a process of discovery–an exploration of new possibilities–as well as for investigation of the new issues and problems that might arise in realizing alternative visions. Because the Citizens Guide is such a useful tool, rather than "re-invent the wheel," the DCA, OSP and NJRA distributed it as part of the Community Schools Planning Grant application packet. The following discussion considers the six recommended design principles contained in the Citizens’ Guide in terms of projects already underway in New Jersey as well as a framework for investigating further opportunities to leverage the state’s investment of billions of dollars in new and improved school facilities to create better neighborhoods and better community based learning centers. The italicized portions of text below are excerpts from the Citizens’ Guide, which is in the public domain. Design Guidelines for Schools That Serve As Centers of NJ CommunitiesTo meet the nation’s needs for the 21st century, learning environments must:
Although there is a profusion of theories and research about how to enhance teaching and learning, and many new ideas about what constitutes an effective learning environment, there seems to be "an emerging consensus that smaller size is an essential condition of an effective school." There are several strategies for creating smaller learning environments in existing large schools, including limiting class size, and subdividing units within existing large schools, creating "mini-schools," academies, charters or "house plans." Bayonne High School, which houses a student population of 2,050 in grades 9-12, offers a good example of how subdivision works. Each student is assigned to one of five heterogeneous "houses." Students benefit from the intimacy of a small cohort while still having access to the programs, facilities and resources of a large institution. Students may also spend part of each school day in their "home" division, each of which is staffed with its own vice-principal, guidance counselors, and secretary, as well as the assigned faculty members. To ensure even more continuity, students maintain the same counselor, homeroom, and homeroom teacher for all of their four years. Where new construction is an option, another strategy is to cap the overall size of schools. As Jeanne Frankel, executive director of the Public Education Association (PEA), a policy analysis and advocacy group, reports: "In cities across the country and among the nation's most exciting educational leaders–exemplified by Deborah Meier, the founder and principal of the Central Park East Schools [in]…New York, and Ted Sizer, the former dean of the Harvard School of Education, founder of the Coalition of Essential Schools, and author of a leading study of American high schools…the conviction that schools must be smaller is flourishing." In 1989 the PEA joined with the Architectural League in sponsoring an influential design study: New Schools for New York, which generated many innovative ideas and designs that may be adapted to New Jersey's urban and older suburban areas where land is scarce. As Rosalie Genevro, executive director of the Architectural League explained: [New Schools for New York aimed] to illustrate with specific designs how …[to] build schools small enough to meet contemporary criteria for an effective learning environment and how those small schools might be closely integrated with their communities….Our premise was that it would be possible to build many small schools…if ingenious and innovative approaches toward using the existing built fabric of the city were adopted, along with a willingness to make judgments based on an evaluation of the overall quality of a facility rather than its adherence to myriad individual standards…. Accordingly the League and PEA developed six architectural and educational programs… that would test the feasibility of a creative 'urban opportunism'–to take creative advantage of small sites, existing buildings and general development activity. Architects were then invited to design actual school buildings that responded to the programs. To complement this design study, PEA investigated how to build affordable small schools. This investigation identified several opportunities for potential cost savings achieved by adopting a "flexible strategy, one which takes advantage of potential savings associated with the interface between the opportunities a neighborhood affords for cost-effective building and its combination of educational and community needs." Opportunities for cost savings include:
The PEA refers to such, ad hoc, flexible strategies as "urban opportunism." A good source of models of urban opportunism is the charter school movement. In New Jersey charter schools have to live within frugal facilities budgets, by taking advantage of small sites, existing buildings, and general development activity. For example, students enrolled at the Hoboken Charter, which is housed in vacant space in an existing school, go to the local Y for their gym classes. Having outgrown its current home, the Hoboken Charter School is now considering several options: renovating a decrepit Boys and Girls Club; accepting a developer's offer of space in a proposed housing project; or leasing a barge, which would be moored at one of the new waterfront developments in town. The barge idea may have seemed far-fetched to some, until the Neptune Foundation of New York agreed to finance construction of a public swimming pool on a barge in Hoboken. In rural and suburban New Jersey, an additional advantage of building new small schools is to help contain sprawl, by reduce the pressure to develop "mall-sized schools" outside town–anonymous buildings surrounded by giant parking lots and big athletic fields. Some observers, including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, blame excessive school acreage requirements which force schools away from the center of a community as a primary obstacle to community-centered schools as well as one of the prime driving forces perpetuating sprawl. Renovation of existing schools in existing neighborhoods, within walking distance for students, not only retains the school as a central civic institution, but also includes opportunities to reduce dependence on vehicular transportation–both school buses and parent car-pools. One of the City of Chicago’s School Reform Board’s first resolutions was in support of small schools. This reform effort is supported by the Small Schools Workshop, a group of educators, organizers and researchers based in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. (See: http://www,uic.edu/depts/educ/ssw/main.html ) In Los Angeles, a civic coalition, New Schools Better neighborhoods, promotes the concept of designing smaller facilities that can build upon and accommodate existing community land and facilities to save on the time, money, land, and other resources used to duplicate functions elsewhere. (See: http://www.nsbn.org ).
The movement that seeks to design schools to serve as centers of community is based on the curriculum concept of Community Education, which offers local residents and local agencies and institutions the opportunity to become active partners in providing educational opportunities and addressing community concerns. The Coalition for Community Schools explains: "A community school is both a set of partnerships and a place where services, supports and opportunities lead to improved student learning, stronger families and healthier communities." To achieve these goals most community schools work towards linking educational and cultural programs, recreation, job training, community improvement, and service activities. These linked activities may be housed in a single building, a cluster of adjacent facilities, or a decentralized network of sites. There is already a substantial institutional support for community schools in New Jersey. New Jersey's School-based Youth Services Program (SBYSP), developed by the Department of Human Services in 1987, was the first major state program in the nation that gave grants to community agencies to link education and human services, health and employment systems. Schools and community agency partners in 30 school districts have undertaken this "one-stop" program. Each site provides health care, mental health and family counseling, job and employment training, and substance abuse counseling. Many sites provide additional services including teen parenting education, day care, transportation, tutoring, family planning and hotlines. Programs operate before, during and after school and during the summer; some are open on weekends. New Jersey's School Based Youth Services Program has won national acclaim, and has been replicated in Iowa and Kentucky. Plainfield is a good example of a community that is taking advantage of NJ's School Based Youth Services Program to move towards the creation of community schools. The Plainfield Board of Education established its first school-based project in Stillman Elementary School in 1997, in partnership with the nonprofit organization Communities in Schools (CIS) and Managed Healthcare Systems, with a local service provider group called the Plainfield Coalition serving as an advisory council. This served as the basis for a district-wide plan, Plainfield's Promise, based on the national initiative America's Promise– a comprehensive service delivery initiative to revolutionize the way in which the school-based and community-based services are delivered to its at-risk youth and their families. Local support for Plainfield Superintendent Larry Leverett’s vision for community schools was so strong, voters approved a bond issue to redesign the Washington Elementary School with the needs of the community in mind–even before Abbott funds became available. Construction of the "educational" portion of the Washington School is complete, and the EDA is working with the Plainfield Public Schools to find money to build the rest. Meanwhile Dr. Leverett is currently leading an effort, supported by Community Schools Planning grant, to apply lessons learned from the Washington School planning process in developing a model for ensuring community participation in the planning for the rest of the schools to be built or rehabbed in Plainfield with Abbott funds, in coordination with this City’s redevelopment initiatives, which the DCA is also supporting, with a Smart Growth planning grant. Clearly, with the launching of the school construction program, New Jersey has the opportunity to continue to lead the nation, by building the physical infrastructure needed to support innovative public-private partnerships such as school based service delivery systems. Notably, the first new school to be built with Abbott funds in Newark, the Belmont Runyon Elementary School, in the Clinton Hill neighborhood, will be a community school with specially designed facilities to house the social services components of the program. The EDA is currently working with the Newark Public School to find financing for those portions of the project that will not be eligible for Abbott construction funds. The design and construction of this school has also served as a catalyst for the formation of a coalition to undertake inclusive neighborhood based planning to integrate the new school with the millions of dollars of public and private housing, transportation improvements, economic development projects, and social service initiatives targeted for the area. Federal funding is available to leverage the state's investment in such community school facilities, through the Department of Education's 21st Century Schools program supports after school programs, and the Health and Human Services' Healthy Schools, Healthy Communities, program, which helps establish school-based health centers. In California, the law that authorizes spending $9.2 billion in state bond funds to modernize and build new schools, mandates school districts to consider joint use projects as a cost savings mechanism, and allocates $25 million for the funding of such projects. California lawmakers encourage joint use schools to promote the more effective delivery of community services. As Steven Szalay, Executive Director, California State Association of Counties explains: The health and success of California communities is dependent on strategically located, multi-use school facilities. Community services currently provided independently by cities, counties, special districts and school districts could be provided jointly through neighborhood centers consolidated with neighborhood schools. In this way, community goals, rather than parochial agency goals, could be emphasized and achieved. FOCUS ON PATERSON: One strategy for sustaining the relationship between a school and its community is to distribute and network smaller sub-units of the school throughout the neighborhood in both new and existing sites. This approach has the advantage of dissolving some of the traditional barriers between school and life and school and community. In Paterson, a city where vacant land is scarce but vacant buildings are plentiful, Schools Superintendent Edwin Duroy has begun to do just this by creating small, specialized learning academies, housed in sites scattered throughout the downtown. For example, a leadership academy operates within a high school, the Academy of Fine Arts, occupies the former St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church, while an academy for international studies and languages has opened in an old synagogue. The second floor of a failing downtown shopping plaza serves as home for two academies: the Health and Related Professions Academy (HARP), which relocated serves 125 students and which relocated from Eastside High School where it has been for four years; and the new, 25-student Metro Paterson Academy for Communications and Technology (MPACT), which has a special focus on urban planning and design. Lucent Technologies has opened a national training center within MPACT's space, students have access to for learning and career opportunities. Dr. Duroy's urban academies project took shape with the help of Roy Strickland, a professor of architecture at MIT, and director of the New American School Design Project there. After taking more than 20 proposals from the community, the district announced that it would establish seven "innovative academies" by 2001. Dr. Duroy hired Strickland to help find sites for the career-based academies. The MIT team then came up with a plan they call "The City of Learning," an ingenious effort to link schools, neighborhoods and resources. This plan states: "As a city of learning, Paterson will exploit its social, economic, and physical resources (and those of its surrounding region) for learning by both children and adults; leverage learning and technology as economic development tools; renovate and build schools as multi use centers for neighborhood revitalization; and empower Paterson's people to become the city's technologists, conservationists, planners, and entrepreneurs while they learn." Strickland and his colleagues aimed for nothing less than to make Paterson a model for nation's urban education systems. A core concept of the City of Learning plan is that the use of empty upper floors of downtown buildings to house schools, teachers and educational resource centers, essentially turning the downtown into a decentralized campus. The first floors of these buildings could house businesses that serve as a training ground for students. For example, the plan calls for transforming one empty building into a school of culinary arts where students might actually run a ground-floor restaurant. A pathway signaled by distinctive lighting, banners, and paving would link the various academies. A parking lot in front of the church-cum-arts academy would be transformed into a new civic plaza complete with trees and fountains. A parking lot in front the former church-cum-arts school would be transformed into a new civic plaza complete with trees and fountains. The mingling of students, teachers, workers, and shoppers along the pedestrian paths and in the plaza, would surely breathe new life into the heart of this old industrial city. The City of Learning's vision of an inter-connected, decentralized campus also provides an opportunity to coordinate schools with educational programs linked with neighborhood resources. As Strickland explained to city officials, "We looked at the whole town for its learning opportunities and figured out how the new facilities could be matched with learning programs." For example, the HARP academy could offer programs at nearby St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical center. Other opportunities abound. A school in the Great Falls Historic District could emphasize preservation; one near the Passaic River could focus on environmental studies. The international school could be tied into an international trade zone, a concept championed by Mayor Martin Barnes. By encouraging teachers to develop these academies that offer specialized curricula and smaller classes, a concept started by Manhattan's Center for Innovative Education, Dr. Duroy acknowledges he is essentially replicating the success of the charter school idea within the system: "The most important concept here is that we're bringing choice to parents and the community." Both charter schools and Paterson's urban academies are the right scale for experimentation–both had to "find" affordable spaces to occupy, and were able to fit into what was available. Unlike charter schools, however, Dr. Duroy's adaptive reuse facilities plan is eligible for state support through the new construction program.
In crafting the Educational Facilities Construction and Financing Act, New Jersey lawmakers recognized that the location of school facilities in the context of the communities which they serve is important to both the educational success of the schools and the development of those communities. They agreed that it makes sense to integrate the planning and construction of schools, where possible, into the economic and community development efforts of local governments and community redevelopment entities to promote more effective and efficient use of land, resources and expertise and to better assure the future viability of local neighborhoods and communities, especially in urban areas. Thus the legislation (Section 4 subsection (g) mandates that: Each district shall submit the long-range facilities plan to the planning board of the municipality or municipalities in which the district is situate for the planning board's review and findings." Moreover, the legislation amends Section 22 of P.L.1975, c.291 (C.40:55D-31) to read as follows: "22.b The planning board shall review and issue findings concerning any long-range facilities plan submitted to the board pursuant to the "Educational Facilities Construction and Financing Act–for the purpose of review of the extent to which the long-range facilities plan is informed by, and consistent with, at least the land use plan element and the housing element contained within the municipal master plan adopted pursuant to section 19 of P.L. 1975 c.291 (C.40:55D-28) and such other elements of the municipal master plan as the planning board deems necessary to determine whether the respective sites for school facilities contained in the long range facilities plan promote more effective and efficient coordination of school construction with the development efforts of the municipality. The board shall devote at least one full meeting of the board to presentation and review of the long-range facilities plan prior to adoption of a resolution setting forth the board's findings." The municipal government has a crucial leadership function to play in the task of harmonizing school facility and municipal master plans, but this effort should focus on incorporating neighborhood-based strategies developed by community leaders. The planning effort should be based on a clear picture of current conditions within the district and community, for example, by agreeing on a common set of demographic forecasts. Another important task is to establish a process for site selection that maximizes the achievement of other municipal goals of economic, social, cultural development and environmental protection. In urban communities this is particularly important since many of the sites available for schools may also be brownfields, designated by the city for reclamation for economic development projects. The success of this effort hinges on recognition that the integration of school planning with municipal planning does not compromise the independence of the school district in determining educational content. The Department of Community Affairs initiated the Community School Planning Grant Program to serve as a catalyst for collaborative and inclusive neighborhood planning that if implemented, could result in better schools and better communities. The key to a successful plan is the dialogue that must take place between stakeholders, students, parents, school and municipal personnel about what kinds of schools they want and what their neighborhoods need. Ideally, the Community School Planning process will be guided by a steering committee that includes representatives of all of these groups. By translating community input into the program for the school the design team can tailor a plan to complement rather than duplicate a neighborhoods existing amenities. But there is no formula for collaborative planning or easy way to engage all stakeholders. There must be diverse opportunities for talking about projects. It may be necessary for an extended round of presentations to explain to educators and parents the range of choices inherent in the planning and design process, and familiarize municipal planners with the constraints that govern school building.
Health and safety concerns are the top priority for all state-funded school facility projects. As a result of the Abbott legislation, beginning in the 1999-2000 school year, each district must prepare and submit to the commissioner of the Department of Education a long-term facilities plan that details the district’s school facilities needs and the district’s plan to address those needs for the ensuing five years. As stated in the bill: The long —range facilities plan shall include an educational adequacy inventory of all existing school facilities in the district, the identification of all deficiencies in the district’s current inventory of school facilities, which includes the identification of those deficiencies that involve emergent health and safety concerns, and the district’s proposed plan for future construction and renovation. The commissioner then establishes, in consultation with the Abbott districts, a priority ranking of all school facilities projects, in terms of critical need, in which health and safety concerns are the most critical. In addition, the legislation also directs the commissioner to study, by July 1, 2001, the Safe Schools Design Guidelines, prepared by the Florida Center for Community Design and Research in 1993. Based upon the commissioner’s study of these guidelines, which illustrate recommendations founded on principles and strategies of Crime prevention Through Environmental Design, the commissioner will issue recommendations to districts on the appropriateness of including these principles in the design and construction of school facilities projects in New Jersey. A downloadable copy of the Florida Safe Schools Design Guidelines is available at http://www.fccder.usf.edu/Projects/safeschl.html. In recognition of the need to improve conditions that affect the safety of children that walk or bicycle to and from school, the State of Florida has also created the Safe Ways to School Program, which is administered by the state’s Traffic and Bicycle Safety Education Program, through the University of Florida, Department of Urban and Regional Planning. The project is committed to helping reduce traffic speed and congestion around schools, and to increase the number of children who walk or bicycle to school. Significantly, the project involves conducting a school site design analysis and a neighborhood site assessment to determine the conditions of street traffic, parent and bus drop-off locations, sidewalks, crossing, and the overall safety of existing routes to school. Most student violence occurs between 3 pm and 6 pm. Thus, while the design of the physical environment can affect the incident rate of crime, perhaps the most effective way to address student safety is to provide for a wide range of after-school programs. A good way to accomplish this is by connecting schools to community networks. "Safe Schools/healthy Students," a joint effort of the US Department of Justice and Health and Human Services (HHS), promotes this community-wide approach to preventing violence, decreasing drug use and giving youth more options about how to have healthier lives. Pilot programs are underway in Boston, St. Louis and Washington DC. Opportunities for expanded and alternative use of k-12 school buildings:
A similar effort is underway in four school buildings in Trenton, as part of the Weed and Seed program, which is a comprehensive approach to law enforcement and community revitalization. The program attempts to first, weed out violent crime, gang activity and drug use and trafficking in target areas, and then seed the target area with a wide range of social services. As part of the Trenton Weed and Seed program, four Safe Haven schools provide after-school and summer activities for children and adults. These schools serve as insulated community meeting places. In addition to a wide range of educational and recreational programs for youth, the Safe haven schools offer adult educational workshops in financial management, tax preparation, parent education and stress management. Trenton now has an unprecedented opportunity to use Abbott funds to design new school buildings and grounds to support the kinds of after hours use provided by the Weed and Seed program, to improve the well being of the community.
This guideline falls under the more general concept of sustainable design–"a strategy that works towards a whole building design that balances the total impact of facilities on the environment and community," writes Jonathan Weiss of HEERY International, the firm advising the NJEDA on how to organize the school construction and finance program. "Sustainable schools represent an integrated design of the educational program and the school facility that responds to the economic, environmental and social needs of a community." To borrow a phrase from Weiss, the Abbott legislation "provides an unprecedented opportunity to demonstrate the economic viability of sustainable facilities and the importance of long-term thinking in design and construction programs." Key Components of Sustainable School Design
A good resource for districts interested in sustainable design is the New Jersey Sustainable Schools Network, a consortium of schools and a wide variety of organizations committed to promoting education for a sustainable future in schools in New Jersey. In their words: "In a sustainable school, students–and everyone else–will see the intellectual concern for a sustainable future mirrored in practical decisions in the cafeteria, during construction or renovations, in the inclusion of students and custodial staff in energy efficiency training and initiatives, in transportation policies and in the design and maintenance of school yards, etc." Another source of information on sustainable design for the state's school districts is the New Jersey Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (NJHEPS), which includes among its goals serving as a catalyst for sustainability efforts by the k-12 system. There are many programs available to school districts interested in ways to incorporate energy conserving and environmentally "friendly" features in learning environments. Notably, the Green Schools program, designed for K-12 schools, creates energy awareness, enhances experiential learning, and saves schools money on energy costs. The Alliance to Save Energy–a nonprofit coalition of business, government, environmental and consumer groups–created Green Schools "in response to the concerns that schools are under-retrofitted compared to other building types" and "to educate our next generation about the importance of energy issues." Based on the success of the pilot, the Alliance resolved to facilitate the formation of partnerships and programs tailored to the particular needs of schools. In New Jersey, those needs could include expanding new construction or renovation projects beyond the scope of work eligible for state funding. Districts looking for opportunities to renovate and preserve rather than build new facilities may now look at historic neighborhood schools, both existing and decommissioned, with renewed appreciation. One sign of the value of some older school buildings is the extent to which these fine structures have been converted to residential uses. Quality materials, sturdy construction, distinctive architectural character, and convenient neighborhood locations are among the features to be found in many old schools. New Jersey's landmark Rehabilitation Code makes it easier, and less costly to renovate historic buildings, including schools, while still ensuring safety. Adaptive reuse of other building types should also be considered because of the potential for blending academic and vocational programs in actual workplace settings. For example, the addition of a school to the mix of uses in a larger building offers both advantage of streamlined building operations and the exposure of students to potential role models, mentors and career paths. One example of creative adaptive reuse of existing buildings for a new high school that melds the best of technical and academic training is the Marine Academy of Science and Technology, or MAST. Located on the grounds of Gateway National Park in Sandy Hook, NJ, MAST classrooms occupy 13 newly renovated buildings that once served as a US Army base. MAST is a science and technology state-wide magnet school in the Monmouth County Vocational School District, which has been recognized for its innovative programs and practices by the US Department of Education's office of vocational and adult education as an example of the New American High School. MAST has partnerships with the US Navy, the Coast Guard, the National Park Service and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, which operates a state of the art lab on the campus where seniors work on research projects with scientists. It also has a "floating classroom"–the vessel the Blue Sea–which offers students "real-world" experience to prepare them for careers in the field of marine-technology "MAST was initially designed to offer students either a marine-science or a marine-trades program, but instructors found that the distinction was creating a divide between 'tech kids' and 'trade kids'" according to the Paul J. Christopher, the school's principal. All students are now enrolled in a marine environmental-technology program, which integrates biology, computer applications, and systems technology. "When you take them out of the traditional classroom environment and let them go, it is amazing what they will do," Pete Murdoch, a teacher at the school, said in an interview, as he watched members of the Coast Guard test boats his students had made for a regatta.
Conventional wisdom holds that any building can be a school. That is because a school is a set of relationships, a community of learners. Moreover, "as we expand our knowledge of how we learn, we also must expand our concept of what constitutes a stimulating and creative learning environment," note educational researchers Bruce Jilk and George Copa. As the previous design guidelines and examples indicate, the growing emphasis on integration and inclusion in education today extend the traditional K-12 program to include the community as part of the learning environment. The designers of new educational facilities must think outside of the box of the "school house" to allow for linkages not only between public schools and neighborhood resources and the work place, but also between k-12 schools and institutions of higher education–and through the internet, the world. An excellent model for this sort of integrated educational system is the West Philadelphia Improvement Corps (WEPIC), a collaborative project with the University of Pennsylvania. WEPIC’s mission is to build university-assisted community schools, designed to revitalize both school curricula and local neighborhoods through community-oriented, real-world problem solving. This work is "focused on the public school as the educational and neighborhood institution that can, if effectively transformed, serve as the concrete vehicle of community change and innovation." WEPIC’s activities are focused upon areas chosen by each school’s principal, staff, students and local residents. Students learn not only by doing, but also learn by and for service. The idea behind this approach is that schools can function as the strategic and catalytic agents for community transformation. The West Philadelphia Partnership, a mediating organization composed of institutions (including the University of Pennsylvania) and community groups serves as coordinator for the program. Other partners include the School District, unions, churches, and city, state, and federal agencies and departments. A national foundation has awarded a grant for replicating this university-school partnership in several other cities. A core component of the model is the type of university-community partnership fostered by HUD’s Community Outreach Center Partnership Center (COPC) program. So far, there are three COPC programs in New Jersey–in Camden, sponsored by Stockton State College, in Newark, sponsored by Rutgers University, and in Elizabeth, sponsored by Kean University–that could provide the foundation for replicating this model. While it is impossible to predict what the school of the future will look like, one thing seems certain: schools will become more and more like communities–at various scales of community from the local to the global–and communities will become more like schools–sites for life-long learning. Abbott funds may serve as a catalyst for building portions of the facilities to support communities of learning, but the key ingredient for their success is a flexible and open minded approach–a willingness among the partnering agencies and institutions to re-think conventional and reconfigure established bureaucratic practices. While new multi-agency collaborations offer new possibilities for cost savings, increased productivity and more effective use of each agencies' efforts and resources, it will not necessarily be easy to assess the associated costs and benefits. However, maximizing this opportunity to reflect on a future vision for schools that serve as centers of community will facilitate the development of informed, pragmatic strategies. ConclusionThere is much to learn from the efforts to plan and design the new social and physical forms needed to support communities of learning already underway in many places throughout New Jersey and the nation. Most important, perhaps, is the lesson that these efforts are not focused on how to build a better or more cost effective school building, but on how to build a better, more livable community. There is a limited window of opportunity to come up with a vision for new schools that serve as centers for New Jersey communities. In a few years it will be too late to leverage the investment in schools through smarter, more efficient integrated resource development. The need for investment and for innovation innovative planning and design is greatest in New Jersey's urban communities. But the pay-off of such an investment is too great to ignore–nothing less than community renewal centered on neighborhood schools.
Author and Copyright InformationCopyright 2001 by Author Ellen is a licensed architect and planner, who also holds a Ph.D. in urban planning. She is currently Senior Urban Designer at the NJ Office of State Planning, where she directs the Communities of Learners campaign, which aims to leverage the state’s $12 billion investment in school facilities to serve as a catalyst for community revitalization, by encouraging the design of schools that serve as centers of communities. Formerly she was the founding Director of Housing Research at the Center for Architecture and Building Science, an applied research group in the School of Architectue at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. She is also the author of Design Process: Case Studies in Project Development (Whitney Library of Design, 1989). |