Toch, Thomas. (2003). High Schools on a Human Scale: How Small Schools Can Transform American Education.

	Toch, Thomas. (2003). High Schools on a Human Scale: How Small Schools Can Transform American Education. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. 138 pp. $15     ISBN:0-8070-3245-X Reviewed by Melanie W. Marks Pt. Loma Nazarene University October 2, 2003 Many leaders in the field of education, such as Ted Sizer and Linda Darling-Hammond, recognize that today’s comprehensive high schools are not meeting the needs of the country’s diverse student population. High Schools on a Human Scale proves that business philanthropists believe this as well, as evidenced by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s contribution of $600 million to organizations that are building networks of small schools, and their support of Toch in the writing and research of this book. Toch, a well-known education writer and member of the Gates Foundation, journeys into the world of small schools to look at how the schools are attempting to re-design the high school experience. Toch’s goal is to provide examples of schools that are operating “outside of the box” and to show us how the innovative methods they are employing and philosophies they embrace hold potential for influencing high school reform on a nationwide scale. Toch’s well organized and clear introduction provides a thorough and insightful explanation of how large comprehensive high schools came into existence almost 100 years ago. He includes a discussion of the political and economic implications that influenced secondary school development. He also explores the philosophies around curriculum development through the eyes of Dewey and the NEA. Those involved in educational reform or who teach in a public school that is struggling to meet the needs of all students will be able to relate to the dilemma Toch describes facing secondary educators. The book is an easy and mostly engaging read, organized into separate sections for the educational complex and each small school that Toch studied. Although the selection of schools is not particularly diverse (all but one are established in urban areas) Toch’s reports on the structure and beliefs of the schools are fairly thorough and comprehensible. He looks at the dynamics of creating small schools from an existing school, as well as schools that have been designed from scratch. As an educator attempting to effect change despite the bureaucracy of the school system, I found Toch’s look at the political ramifications of the school’s site-based decision making amusing and hopeful at the same time. Toch’s descriptions of the various teaching philosophies and strategies the schools are implementing to improve student achievement are thorough and frank. He is unbiased in his analysis of what is working as well as what is not, as evidenced by his report on one school: “A number of students weren’t working particularly hard during their independent project time when I visited the school. “I’m just hanging out, I don’t really have anything to do,” a couple of students told me as I walked around the Great Room” (p. 75). Although I found the case studies on the schools enjoyable and thought-provoking, I am not in agreement with Toch when he describes the schools as a “collective expression of a promising new vision of the American high school, one that is capable of delivering a rigorous academic education to a majority of students.” I take exception to this statement because he did not provide any evidence of rigor in his examples. On the contrary, he repeatedly pointed out schools’ apparent inability to get students to perform to the level they desired, sometimes based on teacher performance or curriculum, and sometimes based on students’ work products. Toch discusses the need to identify fundamental changes that are necessary on a wide scale in order to create small schools as an alternative to comprehensive high schools. However, what Toch truly seems to be looking at are small schools that are “alternative” schools for “at risk” students, rather than a small school model that exists for all students. From a socially and culturally sensitive perspective, I was disturbed by Toch’s insertion of what I view as unnecessary comments regarding the students, particularly in the urban schools. I believe he should have left out descriptions of students such as “Three students sat sullenly at the beginning of class, weighed down by gold chains, baggy pants, and give-me-space demeanors” (p. 46), and “Kyle, a lanky fifteen- year-old who sported cargo pants, sneakers and braces” (p. 62). Additionally, in his studies he made numerous assumptions about students based on their socioeconomic status and cultural background. For me, this not only lowered my opinion of Toch, but made me wonder whether he viewed small schools not as a basis for reform as he stated was his goal, but rather as a type of alternative school for students who are of color, or economically disadvantaged. Although Toch states almost as an afterthought that he realizes that small, personalized high schools are not only for struggling students, it would be hard to prove that he did not believe that based on his accounts of the schools he visited and the statements above. For anyone interested in high school reform and the history of the current structure of secondary schools, this book will provide information and food for thought. In addition, the appendix is a useful resource, citing a listing of model high schools nationwide as well as an extensive section on sources for research on small schools. What the book will not provide is an answer to how we can address the needs of all students without cultural, racial, and socioeconomic bias in a small, public school setting. About the Reviewer Melanie W. Marks Pt. Loma Nazarene University Email: marksdm@cox.net Melanie Marks is a Content Administrator for literacy in the San Diego Unified School District, and has just completed her administrative credential in Educational Leadership.