Overview of Alternative Education

Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, public schooling became organized in the U.S. to prepare a workforce for a developing industrial society. Government control over curriculum, teacher certification and achievement standards are characteristics of public education. Alternatively, theories and methodologies of child-centered education focus on developing the innate potential believed to exist in each individual learner. Alternative educational approaches are implemented in a variety of private schools and also in publicly-funded charter and magnet schools. Publicly funded alternative programs especially are available for students considered at risk of dropping out of school. Multiple viewpoints on alternative education are held by advocates of learner-centered education and skeptics who desire more stringent evaluation data related to student academic outcomes.

Keywords Alternative Education; At-Risk Students; Charter Schools; Child-Centered Education; Common School; Continuation Schools; Learning Centers; Magnet Schools; Multi-Cultural Schools; No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB); Non-Traditional Education; Private Schools; Progressive Education; Public Education; Social Efficiency

Overview

There have been various manifestations of alternative education dating back to the 1840's when public education began in the United States. Prior to then, many towns had schools, attendance was voluntary, and school subjects were confined to the "three Rs" -reading, writing, and arithmetic. Students in rural areas, living in a predominantly agrarian society, attended school for only a few months each year (Oslo, 1999; Tyack, 1999).

The U.S. public school system was established to support the needs of a developing industrial society that began after the American Revolution. The common school system, which has developed since 1837, was created to build loyal citizens and effective workers for the purpose of social efficiency (Miller, 2007). Under this model-that continues in current times-education is provided for children of the general public with control and funding coming from local, state and federal governments. Public education involves compulsory student attendance (until a certain age) and government direction over the curriculum, certification of teachers and testing standards.

During the early years of public education, Americans were adjusting to the new industrial society. Leaders looked for ways to find order for the collective as they knew it, and as they wanted it to remain. They were also concerned about the great number of immigrants whom they feared would challenge the American way. The public school system began to be seen as the place where children could be brought up in a way that would preserve traditional values and social institutions (Johanningmeier, 2006).

Alternative vs. Traditional Education

Alternative education, also known as non-traditional education, is based on philosophies, school structures, and teaching methodologies that focus on the development of an individual learner instead of on the economic needs and social norms of the public collective. Under this model, the individual is assumed to have abilities that-when cultivated through education-will allow the individual, regardless of gender or cultural, racial and economic background, to achieve personal fulfillment that includes becoming a contributing member of a broader collective.

Cuban and Tyack (1995, as cited in Emery, 2000) suggest that there are common threads to alternative education movements that have recurred over the decades and can be described as a pendulum that swings between two poles, traditional public education at one pole and alternative education at the other. They describe this pendulum as moving:

• From socializing students to be obedient, to teaching students to be critical thinkers;

• From passing on what is considered the best academic knowledge, to teaching practical knowledge and skills;

• From inculcating basic skills, to nurturing creativity and higher order thinking;

• From only providing the basics, to allowing for a range of choices;

• From fostering assimilation into a dominant culture, to affirming diversity;

• From affirming gender roles, to challenging gender roles; and

• From preserving the advantages of a favored class, to providing equal opportunity to achieve high status and profitable remuneration for all (Cuban & Tyack, 1995, as cited in Emery, 2000).

Progressive Education

The roots of the first alternative school movement come from three European philosopher-educators-Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, and Friedrich Froebel. Their emphasis on child-centered education and the belief in the innate potential of human nature was the philosophy that Francis Parker, who, with John Dewey, promoted the advancing education movement in the U.S. in the latter part of the 19th century.

During the progressive education movement, two European educational pioneers designed alternative teaching methods also based on the philosophies of Rousseau, Pestalozzi and Froebel. Maria Montessori was an Italian pediatrician who opened her first "children's home" in 1907 and Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, applied a spiritual science in the first Waldorf School in 1919. Both of these methods are based on using schooling to develop the innate abilities of the learner and have influenced alternative education movements, especially in private schools, throughout U.S. education history.

Humanism & Holistic Education

The second alternative education movement that is noted by educational historians began in the 1960's and is called by various terms including free schools, humanistic education, or holistic education. Miller (2007) describes “the period between 1967 and 1972 as a time when racial justice, pacifism, feminism, and opposition to corporate capitalism exploded into public view and credits educators-including Paul Goodman, John Holt, Jonathan Kozol, Herbert Kohl, George Dennison, James Herndon and Ivan Illich-launched passionate attacks against the ‘one best system’ and its agenda of social efficiency” (Miller, 2007, ¶ 7). Open classrooms and magnet schools were introduced. The focus on child-centered education of Rousseau, Pestalozzi and Froebel began to seep back into educational circles by the late 1970's.

The Return of Traditional Education

Miller (2007) contends that during the last thirty years, traditional values have been reasserted in public education. His examples include the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk by the Reagan administration; America 2000, an agenda of the Bush administration; and Goals 2000 of the Clinton era. Each of these led to a number of legislative mandates directed at producing disciplined citizens and prepared workers for a competitive global economy. Tighter state and federal control over learning, politically mandated outcomes, and national standardized tests are characteristics of modern public education (Miller, 2007).

The No Child Left behind Act of 2001, commonly known as NCLB, is the latest federal legislation that directs U.S. public education based on the philosophy that higher expectations will motivate successful results for every student. While NCLB does not declare a national achievement standard, it requires each state to produce criterion-based evaluations in basic skills to be forwarded and applied to every student in certain grades.

Critics of the No Child Left Behind Act claim that it narrows the public school curriculum and promotes a technical orientation to teaching aimed at increasing test scores. Teachers across the country report that they have little or no time for subjects-such as art, history, and music-that extend beyond standardized tests. Critics include proponents of child-centered education that focuses on the development of broad skills such as critical thinking, meaningful literacy, collaboration, judgment and service that are useful for all students as they mature and take part in adult life.

Applications

Alternative Schools & Programs

In the public school system today there are many other program options for students who may drop out because conventional schooling does not meet their needs. Through such initiatives as charter schools, there are pockets of progressive educators who subscribe to the theories of humanistic education but also focus on the practicality of preparing students for purposeful adult lives.

Lange & Sletten (2002) “explain that while alternative schools and programs have evolved over the years to mean different things to different audiences, literature suggests several key areas that address the needs of a large group of students at risk of dropping out. These areas include academics, relationships with teachers and peers, and school size” (Lange & Sletten, 2002, p. 5).

Academics

Research on dropout prevention “suggests that dropout before the tenth grade is most strongly predicted by poor academic achievement. A series of suspensions, missed classes, disciplinary actions and academic failures leave this group of students distrustful of the education system. Researchers recommend that students who are failing be placed in multi-grade-level classrooms where the curriculum is individualized and based on mastering specific skills” (Lange & Sletten, 2002, p. 11). Alternative approaches that focus mostly on the academic needs for at-risk students include learning centers, continuation schools, and multi-cultural schools.

Relationships at School with Teachers & Peers

Poor student-student and student-teacher relationships are also influential in students' decisions to leave school. Research recommends that alternative programs for “at-risk students strengthen student connections to peers, to adults in school and to the school as an institution. Studies also highlight the teacher's role and suggest that an atmosphere of high expectation and support has a positive effect on the behavior and academic success of at-risk students. The tested-effective theory is that a sense of caring encourages students to persist in their school experience and, along with a sense of academic success, will increase the self-esteem of students not served by mainstream education” (Lange & Sletten, 2002, p. 13).

School Size

Research has consistently shown that large school size contributes to student alienation from the mainstream educational system. Small school size “is a positive characteristic of most alternative schools. It has been linked to reduction of violence because smaller size allows for higher teacher engagement on academics rather than discipline. A higher level of student-adult contact increases the potential for meeting students' needs and promoting a sense of community” (Lange & Sletten, 2002, p. 12).

Lange & Sletten (2002) also discuss alternative approaches for students with disabilities who need special education and needs-based services. Students with emotionally-related behavioral issues or learning disabilities often have a hard time adapting to traditional school settings and may have the tendency to drop out for similar reasons as their non-disabled peers.

The University of Minnesota conducted an in-depth study of alternative programs and students with disabilities. The findings report characteristics of effective programs for students with disabilities to include:

• Set up and enforcement of high standards;

• Teaching emphasis on living skills and vocational skills;

• Provision for counseling or therapy;

• Establishment of relationships with trusted adults;

• Creation of educational goals linked to future education or work opportunities (Lange & Sletten, 2002, p. 14).

Viewpoints

“Alternative schools have evolved from a promise made within the American educational system to educate all students, no matter their circumstances or educational issues” (Lange & Sletten, 2002, p. 23). From the start, different options have been implemented based on various philosophies and practices. While many educators have realized the potential of alternatives to provide an environment for the success of at-risk children, many others have scrutinized alternative settings for concrete evidence of effectiveness. Those who question desire systematic, ongoing research that adequately addresses program character, student description, and special education services related to academic outcomes for the students who attend.

Mintz (2006) contests that the teach-to-the-test approach is obsolete and not valuable in this age of information. His belief is that there are two basic educational models-one followed by public school education based on a view that children are naturally lethargic and must be forced to learn, and one followed by alternative approaches based on the view that children are natural learners and that the teacher is a guide. He asserts that education needs to revolve around the learner, not the curriculum alone, and points out that students graduating from alternative programs do well in college and the workforce. He maintains that homeschoolers average in the 85th percentile on standardized tests, but they often do not study for them.

Webber (2004) provides a creative viewpoint on alternative approaches based on her experience as a public high school English teacher and also as the owner of a new puppy that needed training. She notes that, quite by accident, she found a dog trainer's manual that seemed quite descriptive of alternative teaching methods. For example, the training text suggested not using force to teach the dog to sit, but rather tap the dog's natural activities, praising it lavishly as its rump touched the floor. The guiding principle is that the dog wants to please out of instinct, not from coercion. The text continued to explain that coercion produces a hostile and belligerent creature but if the dog learns on its own, the learning will be deeper and the dog more pleasant.

Webber thought about her experience in training a pleasant puppy to sit on its own and likened the dog's nips and snarls when coerced to the aggressive defiance of young humans thrust into a coercive educational environment. She noted that many belligerent and ill-tempered creatures fill public classrooms where teachers spend much of their time engaged in acts of discipline instead of teaching. They reprimand students who do not wish to be coerced and whose well-being is threatened by coercion. Webber concludes with the hope that contemporary educators will rediscover the transformative power of student-directed learning and alternative education and embrace reform strategies that allow students to become compassionate, contributing adults instead of belligerent and ill-tempered creatures.

Terms & Concepts

Alternative Education: This term, also referred to as non-traditional education, describes approaches to teaching and learning that differ from those supported by mainstream public education.

At-Risk Students: The term is used to describe students who are "at risk" of failing academically and/or of dropping out of public school.

Charter Schools: This term describes publicly-funded schools that are free from regulations that other public schools must abide by. Charter schools are responsible for their own sponsor, usually a local school board, education agency or other entity, to create successful educational results and follow the decided contract that is usually granted for 3-5 years.

Child-Centered Education: This term describes an alternative education philosophy that focuses schooling on the development of the innate potential of an individual learner; this philosophy strongly influenced Francis Parker and John Dewey who promoted the Progressive Education Movement in the U.S. in the latter part of the 19th century.

Common School: This term was given to the first "public schools" in the U.S. to refer to the fact that the school was meant to serve individuals of all social classes; common schools were funded by local taxes, governed by a locally-elected school board, did not charge tuition, and were to be open to all children with a small amount of state oversight.

Continuation Schools: These schools provide education for students whose schooling has been interrupted, including dropout centers, re-entry programs, pregnancy-maternity centers, and evening high schools.

Learning Centers: These provide learning experiences that commonly are complementary to public education in a community. Examples include GED preparation, remediation, and career-education programs.

Magnet Schools: This term describes a public school which offers a specialized curriculum, such as a focus on technology or the arts, for students across boundaries of normal school zones.

Multi-Cultural Schools: These schools emphasize cultural pluralism and ethnic and racial awareness and include bilingual schools with optional enrollment.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): A 2001 law that implemented the aid of federal programs to enhance the performance of American schools by way of adding to the standards of responsibility for schools, districts, and states.

Non-Traditional Education: This term, also referred to as alternative education, describes approaches to teaching and learning that differ from those supported by mainstream public education.

Private Schools: This term describes schools that are not administered by local, state or national government. They have the right to select students, do not receive public funds, and are funded in whole or in part by charging tuition.

Progressive Education: This term generally applies to an alternative education movement, spearheaded by John Dewey in the early 20th century; the underlying philosophy is that education must be based on the principle that children are social animals who learn best in real-life activities that facilitate the development of their innate potential.

Public Education: This term refers to education that is mandated by the government for all children of the general public; in the U.S., K-12 public education is paid for, in whole or part by local, state and federal taxes and is commonly overseen by an elected school board of the local community.

Social Efficiency: This term has been used to describe the system of public education that was designed to build loyal citizens and an effective workforce to fulfill the needs and continue the norms of the general collective.

Bibliography

Emery, K. (2000). Alternative schools: Diverted but not defeated. Retrieved October 11, 2007, from http://www.educationanddemocracy.org/Emery/Emery_AltSchoolsPaper.htm

Hemmer, L.M., Madsen, J., & Torres, M.S. (2013). Critical analysis of accountability policy in alternative schools: Implications for school leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 51, 655-679. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90608796&site=ehost-live

Johanningmeier, E., (2006). Public education, educational research, and the nation's agenda during the progressive era. American Educational History Journal, 3. Retrieved October 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=21294140&site=ehost-live

Lange, C. & Sletten, S., (2002). Alternative education: A brief history and research synthesis. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from National Association of State Directors of Special Education website, http://www.nasdse.org/Portals/0/Documents/Download%20Publications/DFR-0264.pdf

Meyers, A., (1988). Examining alternative education over the past thirty years. Education, 109. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=4722535&site=ehost-live

Miller, R., (2007). A brief history of alternative education. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from http://www.educationrevolution.org/history.html

Mintz, J., (2006). Alternative education. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/08/11/DI2006081100598.html

Oslo, L., (1999). The foundation of universal education. Education Week, 18. Retrieved October 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=1542970&site=ehost-live

Phillips, R. (2013). Toward authentic student-centered practices: Voices of alternative school students. Education & Urban Society, 45, 668-699. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90398141&site=ehost-live

Simonsen, B., & Sugai, G. (2013). PBIS in alternative education settings: Positive support for youth with high-risk behavior. Education & Treatment of Children (West Virginia University Press), 36, 3-14. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=89531113&site=ehost-live

Tyack, D., (1999). Democracy in education: Who needs it. Education Week, 19. Retrieved October 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=2579944&site=ehost-live

Villavicencio, A. (2013). "It's our best choice right now": Exploring how charter school parents choose. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21, 1-19. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=91720483&site=ehost-live

Webber, L., (2004). The bamboozled: Reflections on progressive education. Paths of Learning, 22, 26-28. Retrieved December 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=15637760&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Eisner, E., (2004). Preparing for today and tomorrow. Educational Leadership, 61, 6-10.

Emery, K., (2007). Corporate control of public school goals: High-stakes testing in its historical perspective. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34, 25-44. Available from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=26012194&site=ehost-live

Mintz, J., (2000). No homework and recess all day: How to have freedom and democracy in education. NY: Bravura Books.

Tyack, D., (1999). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. MA: Harvard University Press.