Toronto Africentric school “within a school?”
According to the Saturday edition of the Toronto Star, Louise Brown says that the Toronto District School Board is proposing to put “Canada’s first Africentric alternative school within a school — not a free-standing building — for a wing of sprawling Sheppard Public School near the northwest corner of Sheppard Avenue West and Keele Street” in Toronto.
Scheduled to open in September 2009 for children in Grades JK to 5, area trustee James Pasternak said the new school would bolster falling enrollment at Sheppard and add a vibrant program that would NOT be separate from all the other students attending Sheppard.
“There ’s this misconception of two solitudes running down the halls, but that’s incorrect — these kids (in the regular school and the Africentric wing) would be together in the schoolyard, together in the playground, together in the lunchroom,” said Pasternak.
While it looks like all the criticism has had an effect on the board’s decision making and spin, there now appears to be more questions than answers. For example:
- Is this proposal just to avoid the political fallout of closing Sheppard Public School?
- Why does the proposal just include the youngest of elementary aged children — from JK to Grade 5?
- How can children who are together with the main student body most of the time be considered an “alternative school” – as opposed to a special program?
- And last but not least, on what basis does the board believe that the children will all get along and that there will be no problems?
Most board trustees have obviously never been on yard supervision or they wouldn’t make that judgment. The regular Sheppard kids, for example, no matter what their cultural heritage or skin colour, will know exactly who the “Africentric” kids are and will resent them — as well as vice versa. It is human nature.
Moreover, will all the ”Africentric” children be those deemed to be “at risk” of later failing or dropping out and/or identified as special needs with learning and behavioural problems? If so, will the necessary specialized teachers and teaching assistants be available to provide the children with the individualized attention they need to make the school within a school work? Or is this all window dressing?
In my opinion, and I hope I am wrong, all the hype over an “Africentric School” was just that – hype. The Toronto public were given the impression that the black-focused school would be a high school to help cut down on failure and drop out rates. Well, as it turns out, given this proposal, it will be no such thing.
For readers who would like some background on this topic, three of my earlier posts on this topic are here, here and here.
C/P at Crux-of-the-Matter.
Update: The issue is not whether to implement creative solutions to keep schools open or to give parents and students choice, it is to tell the general public what is really going on. If this is an “Africentric Program” within Sheppard Public School, then fine, the trustees should simply say so. But, saying it is both a “school within a school” while being “together,” is pure spin. If it is to be a separate “school” within another “school,” the students would be apart most of the time – getting together just for special events and projects. The purpose for this post was to propose that TDSB trustees tell the public what is really going on — not reacting to previous criticisms — and not spinning what they think the public want to hear. While I don’t live in Toronto, I would imagine what parents want to hear are the facts. Then, they can make an informed decision about where they want their children to attend.
As I’ve mentioned in an essay I wrote for Cynics Unlimited, I am sceptical of the idea that Black-focused schools or programs will really lower Black students’ dropout rate. But I do think it’s good for all students, whatever their ethnic background, to know about non-European (and European too of course) history, not to help Black students stay in school but to broaden all students’ knowledge. Unfortunately when I was going to school we only learned about European (or North American) history. So I would certainly support expanding history to include non-European cultures.
Emilia Liz — I agree.
I just put an update as well. It all depends on how the board does this. They are spinning it as a “school within a school” but you can’t suck and blow at the same time. It is either a separate school sharing a building or it is an “Africentric Program.” Doing it by half and trying to please everyone is not going to work.
As you suggest, why not include Africentric history and culture in all history courses? In fact, I think it IS already included and called “ethnic diversity” because it is about a lot of different cultures.
Where is the board going to draw the line? How many generations back? I would imagine there are an awful lot of folks who have black skin that do not consider themselves of African heritage.
I mean, my grandparents came from Scotland. Before them, ancestors were from Ireland and before that they were Vikings from Denmark. Yet, I think of myself coming from a Scottish heritage rather than Scandanavian.
I think schools should teach all continents’ history, but not because I think it will necessarily improve the grades of the students of those nationalities. For example, Chinese students have an extremely low dropout rate in Ontario schools (12%) despite the fact until recently Asian history was not part of the regular curriculum. As well, one of the groups with the highest dropout rate, the Portuguese, are White (which automatically dispels the notion that the higher Black dropout rate is due to genetic inferiority). Again, I think Black-focused schools are worth a try. But I doubt they’ll do much to improve the situation of low academic achievement among Black students.