The Crimson applauds the recent vote of the Cambridge School Committee to retain, at least for the next two years, their policy of assigning students to the five "small schools" of the Cambridge Rindge and Latin School. The vote presents an opportunity for change that must be capitalized upon in order to ensure the future success of this currently troubled institution.

CRLS has had a rocky history. The only public high school in Cambridge, CRLS has traditionally been composed of different academic units whose programs were both programmatically and racially unequal. The vocational education 'school,' whose students were predominately minorities, had been decertified by the state, while other 'schools' such as the predominately white "Academy" had been experiencing far higher achievement levels. The racial and ethnic disparities in the schools were compounded by teachers who were of unequal quality and had very different visions for their students.

With the new "High School Redesign" process championed by Mayor Anthony Galluccio that began last spring, we have seen a potential for better results for all students at CRLS. Among other changes implemented this year, students were assigned through a semi-random process to the different schools rather than allowed to choose among them, and the schools' curricula and teaching staff were standardized. This move increased the diversity of the students, both racially and with regard to achievement level, ending the segregation of more academically talented students in certain schools away from the general high school population. This positive step is one that will disperse talented students throughout the school community, invigorating the traditionally low-performing schools with valuable class discussion contributors and role models.

The opportunity to improve Cambridge's high school must now move forward with certain fundamental principles in place. The five schools must be retained in any redesign plan, and reform measures should include ways to strengthen the small learning communities that these schools create. By breaking larger high schools with thousands of students into smaller segments, administrators allow a core group of common teachers to be more attentive to their students' needs. If the same group of students share the same teachers for the core classes, they will share a common experience that fosters a sense of belonging, rather than being 'no more than a number' in a sea of thousands of others.

Small schools also afford teachers the ability to cooperate in a more effective way. The possibilities for team teaching, group teaching and thematic teaching throughout the courses that this group of students share would be vastly improved, especially if talented "lead" teachers are dispersed throughout the schools.

The teachers in these small schools will also stay in better contact with their students. In meetings, teachers can track students' performance in each of their classes, better determining whether a students' difficulty comes from the particular subject or more importantly, if it comes from more fundamental problems such as poor study skills or a difficult home situation. This reform will make the small schools more responsive to students' quality of life than guidance counselors who have very limited day-to-day contact with their students due to each counselor's enormous caseload.

In order to keep these small schools successful, CRLS principal Paula Evans should work diligently to change preconceptions about the schools' past history. Each school should provide an equal college preparatory curriculum as mandated by the state, so that each student will have the opportunity to pass the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System test in order to graduate.

The reforms put in place over the last year have done much to improve the learning environment of CRLS. If CRLS can continue to reform, retaining the successful aspects of the small schools yet eliminating the barriers between students that they traditionally imposed--if it can thoughtfully maintain quality as well as equality--its students will be well served.

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