---

U.S. Assistant Secretary Patricia McNeil, who heads the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Vocational and Adult Education, talked with Northwest Education writer Denise Jarrett recently about the New American High Schools initiative, a recognition program she created to give momentum to high school reform.

Q: It seems most good ideas begin with one person having a notion about something, and that notion grows into a conviction that simply must be shared. Would you tell me a little bit about your idea to create the New American High School initiative?

McNeil: With anything in life that you end up feeling passionate about, it arrives through personal experience. As our children were going through high school, I began to see the very different kinds of experiences they were having, how high school is designed for only one kind of learner. Our oldest daughter is like the 20 percent of kids who do well and could learn and work within the system. Our other four kids faced different challenges. Two actually dropped out of high school. I tried to visualize what a new high school would look like if it could be redesigned for success, one that would really support all students in their learning and would create a culture of respect.

Q: Did the shootings at Columbine High School draw the nation's attention to the need for changes in our high schools?

McNeil: In a very tragic way, that event made a difference in raising high schools much higher on the agenda. We'd been working on this long before Columbine, so when Columbine happened, we actually had some insights into what might be done differently in high schools to change the culture. It's interesting that the first responses to Columbine were all about metal detectors and more police, very much a violence-prevention approach. And yet, when you listen to kids talk about what they think went wrong, the themes are about more support, more adult intervention, closer contact with adults, more positive culture in the school—all of those things were what kids were asking for.

Q: What about your own high school experience strikes you most deeply?

McNeil: As I look back on it now, the expectations of teachers were pretty low for most of us. I think only 20 percent of my graduating class went on to some kind of postsecondary education. Most kids could get a job right in the community, but this was 40 years ago. Unfortunately, when I visit high schools today, it's like déjà vu. Kids have more tattoos, more piercing, the dress is a bit different, but basically the content of what's offered in high school is the same. What is exciting about going into New American High Schools is that they have much higher expectations for the students, and they believe that the students can reach those expectations.

Q: Times are quite different today.

McNeil: Yes they are! There's an intensity today that wasn't there 40 years ago. What you're expected to do to be successful is so different. And the fact that schools are providing the same kind of education that they offered then, and still making judgments about students' abilities, is discouraging.

Q: How essential are smaller learning communities to high school reform?

McNeil: I don't think just creating smaller learning communities is enough, and I don't think just changing content and instruction are enough. We've got to create a supportive learning culture in schools. Part of that is curriculum, part of that is instructional practice. But you can't have a really strong learning environment unless there is a culture of respect. Personalization is critically important for creating that learning environment. You have to feel listened to and appreciated and supported in order to be an effective learner.

Q: Why was a Commission on the High School Senior Year recently established?

McNeil: You may recall, a little over a year ago, Secretary Richard Riley gave a speech at the Press Club about high schools and said that we really need to have a national dialogue on high schools. There was a lot of consensus in discussions that the Secretary had with principals and education experts. From those discussions it became really clear that the senior year could be used more productively. A number of principals from our New American High Schools were talking about some of the innovations that they were doing, like having kids take college-level courses, and doing internships and community service, senior projects, ways in which the senior year could be more compelling for young people. From that, the Secretary started really focusing on the senior year and thought that this might be a way of taking on the high school reform issues in a way that would resonate with a lot of people. So he announced in his State of American Education speech in February (last year) that he wanted to support this commission, and that people from both the private and public sectors would serve on it.

Q: A student serves on that commission, right?

McNeil: Yes, Jeremy Solly—he's from Rex Putnam! He was just wonderful at the first meeting that we had. When he spoke it was so interesting that everybody who spoke after him referenced what he had to say. It was very powerful to have him there. He talked about the importance of the student voice, and he talked about the importance of personalization in the high school, and the importance of teachers who care what their students do.

Q: What will it take to sustain high school reform?

McNeil: I think that it's not a question of whether we're going to reform our high schools, it's just a question of when and how we're going to do it. I'm convinced that economic and social forces eventually exert pressure on all institutions in society to respond to what's going on in the world. Schools are beginning to feel that pressure. The standards movement is certainly one indication. Students need to have a much different set of academic and technical skills to be successful in today's world. The pressure on schools to raise the level of education and achievement for all students is a response to what the world is demanding. I think those outside pressures are going to continue to exist and schools are going to have to change.

What is it going to take? I think we're going to have quite a bit of debate about that. My sense is that we're creating a movement of outside pressure and internal response that probably is not going to gel immediately, because education is a cautious institution, but I do think in 10 years, maybe even sooner, our high schools will look very, very different than they do today.

Respond to this article