By Jasper Feinberg
One of the largest issues currently facing our school is how to, or whether, to change the Small Learning Community (SLC) system. At the moment, there are five Small Learning Communities on campus: BIHS, AC, CAS, AMPS, and AHA. While much of the school community understands the issues with this system, its origins and possible benefits are not closely studied.
The concept of smaller, more personalized schools was pushed heavily by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation around the time Berkeley High created such a system. The justification was that within a chosen environment, each student would have a better chance to reach his or her potential, even if the system was not perfect. It would also create a sense of community within a school of 3,600, larger than many colleges.
To some extent, these goals have been accomplished. I think most would agree an artist will have a better chance to succeed in AHA, while a student focused on film production may thrive in CAS. The themes of each school are not always executed perfectly, but they do provide valuable opportunities for specialization regardless. Moreover, if a student does not want to choose such a theme, both BIHS and AC provide the “typical” high school experience and focus on all subjects more or less equally. Moreover, the Small Learning Community system has fostered communities that would not likely exist otherwise given the size of Berkeley High, especially in the smallest schools. Thus, when looking at reforming the Small Learning Community system, it is important to understand the benefits provided by each.
That is not to say there are not issues that require fixing. There is an unacceptable amount of segregation between the schools, which is often along racial lines. Much of this can be traced to the geography based lottery system, as well as the perpetuation of stereotypes about who is “right” for each school. There are also issues with the differential opportunities for AP and higher level classes allotted to each school.
I believe we must act to fix this inequity, but in a way that does not completely destroy the benefits of the current system. For instance, if the school were all combined in one program, the community and personalization of the small schools would be lost. If every program was converted into a small school, there would likely be budgetary issues associated with trying to maintain the same sense of personalized learning, but on a large scale. Thus, I think the best and most realistic solution is to keep the general format of the school, but fix the way in which students pick their small schools. If schools were chosen after 9th grade, and a true emphasis was placed on eliminating the real and perceived educational differences between the small schools, the racial disparities would likely improve. No system is perfect, and neither is Berkeley High’s. That is not an excuse to avoid change. Rather, it means we need smart changes.