Neighborhoods Matter: The Role of Universities in the School Reform Neighborhood Development Movement

Abstract

Where you find distressed neighborhoods, you will also find poorly performing public schools. Yet many contemporary school reform efforts ignore neighborhood-level factors that undeniably impact school performance. The purpose of this study is to use a case study approach with social institutional and urban school reform regime frameworks to demonstrate why school reform and the re-creation and redevelopment of distressed neighborhoods should occur simultaneously. At the same time, researchers will examine the role of higher education in catalyzing partnerships with so-called anchor institutions for the explicit purposes of simultaneously improving neighborhoods and reforming schools. By focusing on a federal Choice neighborhood initiative, the study will not only make the case for connecting school reform and neighborhood development but also present a model that demonstrates how this can happen. The study will also make a strong case for the university's unique role in fostering neo-collaborative structures fit to take on wicked problems of neighborhood distress and urban decline.

Notes

In this era, however, the schools never were the hubs of community life imagined by John Dewey. This potential was never realized. Even so, they still were critical neighborhood-based institutions.

Building-centric approaches to school reform focused on improving building-level factors, such as teacher effectiveness, curriculum and instruction, and building-specific leadership (Desimone, 2002). These models wholeheartedly ignored the context of neighborhood factors that, in many ways, reinforced the problems and issues appearing in schools manifested by substandard academic performance.

The basic idea undergirding this approach to economic development and governance is that competition is good. Within that context, there are four basic characteristics of neoliberalism. The first is that the market rules in “free” societies. Therefore, market principles should drive the activities of all sectors in society, including the public and nonprofit sectors. Most critically, the best way to stimulate the economy and produce jobs and opportunities is to deregulate the market. The belief here is that a thriving economy benefits the entire society. The second trait is the cutting of public expenditures for social development, including education and health care, whereas the third relates to deregulation. The final trait is privatization and the imbuing of public and private institutions with market principals.

Wilson called this distressed neighborhood a jobless ghetto. However, distressed neighborhood is a more accurate term. The civil rights movement ended “ghettos” because Blacks were coerced into living there and because higher income groups chose to leave.

Throughout this article, the term university is used interchangeably with higher education.

The UB Center retained its connection with the regime through the tenure of an interim superintendent and the naming of a new superintendent. A number of important changes took place in the composition of the urban regime and the power relations within it. A discussion of these dynamics is beyond the scope of this article.

Each priority schools—persistently low-achieving schools—must develop a reform strategy that is designed to transform conditions inside that school. That reform strategy must be approved by the district and the State Education Board and it becomes a template for improving academic outcomes in the school. Impacting school building and curriculum activities are extremely difficult within this context.

These are pseudonyms for educational nonprofit groups in the city.

FIGURE 4 BMHA Perry Choice Neighborhood People Organizational Chart. (color figure available online).

These are pseudonyms for our partner schools.

Redshire joined the Mini-Education Pipeline after it was established.