Dissent: Don't Keep Students Separate

We fear that retaining the small schools as academically separate units would limit students' ability to shape their own education. These schools will not be entirely on par with one another. Some teachers are more skilled than others, some are specialized in certain areas--and these teachers cannot all be divided in five parts and shared. Students should not be denied the opportunity--especially by a policy intended to break down barriers--to learn from the most talented instructors.

Dispersing teachers among the five small schools will necessarily dilute the strengths of each. We believe CRLS should retain small homeroom and advising communities for students, but should not limit their course choices by school. This way, students who wish to take a primarily vocational (or college preparatory) program will still be able to do so.

More importantly, there is no reason to believe that small academic groups within CRLS would make it any easier for high school students to find their own niche. If anything, it might be more difficult for students to meet fellow classmates who share similar interests and passions if the five schools are kept separate.

The old system was wrong to socially segregate students, but removing it does not mean we must impose new barriers on student choice, mandating the same limited course options for everyone. Consistent homerooms and advising groups will allow for close-knit communities composed of students regardless of academic interest. These communities would encourage the social interaction the old system prevented without compromising the quality of education at CRLS.

--David M. DeBartolo '03, Jordana R. Lewis '02, Bryan J. Parno '04 and Stephen E. Sachs '02