Help For At-Risk Kids

By Susan Tifft

Television calls them the wonder years, but for millions of youths between the ages of ten and 15, the years of early adolescence are anything but wonderful. No longer children, not quite adults, they are bombarded by ! dizzying physical changes, reeling emotions and raging hormones. Today's youngsters, however, face problems far more formidable than acne or gangly limbs. Drinking, drug abuse, sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancy, once the province of high schools, have drifted into the lower grades. Add to this the crippling effects of broken homes and ill-equipped parents, and it is easy to see why nearly 7 million children ages ten to 17 are considered "at risk" of becoming troubled, unproductive, even dangerous adults.

The nation's middle and junior high schools -- encompassing Grades 6 through 9 -- play a potentially crucial role in shaping the future of young adolescents. Yet these institutions have largely been left out of a flurry of educational reforms that have focused on U.S. elementary and secondary schools over the past six years. That may soon change, however. This week the spotlight will be squarely on the middle grades, as more than 200 educators, lawmakers and health specialists gather in Washington to discuss an ambitious report sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Titled "Turning Points: Preparing American Youth for the 21st Century," it calls for a sweeping middle school overhaul aimed especially at helping "those at risk of being left behind." Among other things, the report recommends:

-- Creating smaller communities for learning. This would be done by restructuring schools into "houses," or "schools within schools," each consisting of 200 to 300 students; grouping teachers and students together in teams; and assigning an adviser to each student, so that every child is well known by at least one adult.

-- Teaching an interdisciplinary core curriculum that would include English, fine arts, foreign languages, history, literature, math, science and social studies. The emphasis would be on critical thinking -- making connections between ideas -- rather than rote learning. To promote positive values and encourage good citizenship, the curriculum would include health instruction and community-service activities.

-- Eliminating the practice of tracking students according to their achievement level. Instead, schools should promote "cooperative learning" in which small groups of students of varying abilities work in teams under the supervision of one or more teachers.

-- Boosting academic performance through better health and fitness. Schools should ensure access to health-care and counseling programs, preferably through a "health coordinator" or on-site clinic. Specifically, the report calls on middle schools to provide family-planning information to young adolescents.

The Carnegie recommendations add up to a middle school that is part classroom and part social-welfare agency, a combination that is bound to make some educators uneasy. "Middle school administrators have got their hands full just trying to educate kids, let alone creating warm, caring environments," says Samuel Sava, executive director of the National Association of Elementary School Principals.

But in a world where a great number of children arrive at school undernourished, neglected and in poor health, many feel that schools have little choice but to try to fill the gap left by the collapse of families and other social supports. "Parents just aren't there today," says David Lawrence, principal of the Thomas J. Quirk Middle School in Hartford, Conn. "We still are. The kids can't be left to founder."

Besides the recommendations on sex counseling, perhaps the report's most controversial proposal is the elimination of tracking. While it is true that minority and at-risk students are often warehoused in low-level classes, a blanket insistence on cooperative learning may motivate parents of gifted children to abandon the public schools. "We need to be careful," says Stanford education professor Michael Kirst. "We certainly don't want to slow down kids on the fast track."

One problem with carrying out the Carnegie proposals is that they will require a corps of instructors specialized in teaching early adolescents. But only 23 states offer a credential for teaching in the middle grades. Those on the front lines "will need help and training," says Chester Finn, former Assistant Secretary of Education under William Bennett. "It's not everyone who can teach a 14-year-old."

The best argument in favor of the foundation's suggestions is that many of them have already been tried successfully: according to one study, 63% of middle schools provide health instruction, 40% assign adult advisers to students, 33% use team teaching, and 28% offer sex education. Breaking up large, impersonal schools into smaller units is also starting to gain acceptance. "It's a lot more work, but it's very stimulating," says Elizabeth Ophals, a social-studies teacher at the Louis Armstrong Middle School in New York City, where houses and team teaching were adopted last year.

The price tag for transforming the country's middle schools will doubtless be higher than the federal, state or local governments want to pay. But, warns Carnegie, the real choice is whether to fund health clinics, counseling and teacher training today or pay the far higher cost of dropouts, an ill-prepared work force and swelling welfare and prison rolls tomorrow. "The nation cannot afford to continue neglecting these youth," concludes the report. Lorraine Monroe, director of the Center for Minority Achievement at Manhattan's Bank Street College of Education, agrees. "We can't hold school the way we used to hold school," she says. "Some educators may say, 'I didn't sign on for that.' Well, that's the job now."

With reporting by Jerome Cramer/Washington and Janice C. Simpson/New York