ucational decision-making process is another question altogether. The important issue is that the opportunities do exist. The schools are in fact accountable to the local community.)

In ghetto communities, there is traditionally no such local control. High level decisions are sufficiently removed from the ghetto client that he can have little or no impact on what the school does to his child.

Black communities are now developing a strategy for creating accessibility and accountabilitycommunity control. In every way, this strategem is simply an extension of a concept that has been implemented in many communities. Logically, there should be no problem. And yet, as any one who reads the New York Times is aware, the problems in New York City have risen to epic proportions. Virtually no one is prepared to permit the black community to run its schools.

At its heart, the thrust toward community control is a complex political as well as educational issue. Minority group communities have been contained within the implicit, and often explicit, walls of the classical ghetto. Regardless of social and economic class, members of the Black, Mexican American, Indian, and Oriental communities have been relegated to a geographically definable area of the nation's metropolitan areas, the "quarters". Within the ghetto, minority groups find

themselves "served" by institutions that are controlled by White America-schools, police, welfare agencies, public housing administrations, etc. The resulting sense of fear, distrust, and alienation has provided an impetus for the growing demand for self-determination in the ghetto-the cry for Black Power.

Unfortunately for the country as a whole, White America has misinterpreted this symbol. Because White America has sensed the anger and hostility without understanding the underlying causes, it has concluded that the aspirations of minority groups are essentially destructive, that the fabric of the society will be destroyed.

Instead, Black Power must be viewed as a positive, unifying theme. In political terms, it means the acquisition of black control over the political machinery of the ghetto, the mobilization of a black power bloc. In economic terms, Black Power connotes the development of Negro entrepreneurship, of black-owned businesses and black economic power. In the social and cultural context, Black Power means the development of a positive self-concept, of a self-identity that will provide much needed psychological support. Finally, in education, Black Power means the creation of an educational system that has meaning for the residents of the ghetto, one to which they can relate and one which maximizes their potential. In other words,

the black community is being urged to control those institutions that directly affect its life.

It should come as no surprise that the schools of the ghetto have become the initial focus of the black community, since they represent perhaps the single most visible institution in the ghetto. They are numerous; and, as vehicles for cognitive development and as instruments for socialization, they necessarily have a profound influence on the lives of the children they serve.

Most importantly, ghetto parents are convinced that the existing school systems are inadequate. They see ample evidence that their children do not respond intellectually or psychologically to the demands placed on them by tradition bound educators. They sense the alienation that has grown between the black student and his school environment. In fact, they are coming to a strong awareness of the correlation between the role of the school and the racist practices of American society.

Seeking Community Control

The history of the black community's relationships to its schools has not been encouraging. The educational system has been dominated by a white educational bureaucracy that has demonstrated an amazing imperviousness to change. An important example of the static quality of urban educational systems has been pro

vided by David Rogers in his book, 110 Livingston Street. Rogers documents in considerable detail the many political forces in New York City that mitigate against any substantive change within that city's public school system.

In addition, because the teaching profession has been one of the few that has been open to them, many black teachers have found themselves conforming to a prescribed, restrictive code of professional attitudes and behaviors. They are caught in a dilemma between this professionalism and the need to function as change agents in education. The Parent Teacher Association, an important vehicle for access in sub

urban schools, has never functioned effectively in the ghetto. Parents have been taught that they are not to question educational decisions, and school administrators have discovered that they can minimize discontent by using PTA meetings for social functions.

In a broader context, the black community has had little impact on the system as a whole. The potential political power of the ghetto has not been effectively uti lized in electing school board members or in electing those public officials who appoint the school board. In sum, then, the black community has been powerless in the educational decision

making process.

But black people are demanding

a change. Recent events in several large cities have indicated that the black community has identified a political strategy for gaining access to educational decisionmaking; the strategy-community control. By creating a school or series of schools that are directly responsible to officials elected by the black community, ghetto resi dents have discovered that they can play a substantially greater part in insuring that at least one institution is responsive to their needs and expectations.

Community control of schools is, of course, a form of Black Power. It represents a thrust for increased power, in a political sense and a psychological sense. Through community control, the

black community can increase its control over its own destiny. Many would argue that the political implications of community control for the future of the ghetto are just as important as any educational considerations.

The Old Education Establishment

Only

the most reactionary would argue with the abstract concept that minority group members should assume a greater role in the decision-making process. However, when an operational definition focuses on the schools, there are cries of outrage from many quarters. The usual comment, "leave education to the professional educators," becomes combined with an implicit, racist assumption that minority group members, particularly lower-class ghetto residents, have even less educational sophistication than do white laymen. The resulting opposition to community control of schools has become a strong force in many areas, of which New York is only an extreme example.

On the other hand, proponents of community control contend that urban educational systems have grown too large and consequently have exceeded the limits of effectiveness. The educational establishments, they believe, are ossified and unwieldy. The bureaucratization of the systems has served to widen the gap between top-level educators and the individual student, thus reducing the responsiveness of major educational decisions to the needs of the student.

Furthermore, proponents argue, they have been denied equal access to quality education. Ghetto parents come into contact with teachers who, to them, dem

onstrate little sensitivity to their children. They are confronted by administrators who, they believe, show little interest in the education of minority students. In addition, they see an educational milieu aimed at duplicating the white, middle-class model, without any apparent recognition of the strength and vitality of the culture of minority group communities.

As a result, these groups are increasingly convinced that they are being cheated educationally by a society which for decades sanctioned insensitivity and unresponsiveness and which now in the absence of those sanctions is unable and unwilling to discard old habits. They attribute their children's failure to the schools, not to the "culturally disadvantaged" environment in which they are reared. Their response to this intolerable situation is to demand local control of the schools.

How Community Control
Works

A locally-elected, responsive, and accountable decision-making body forms the operational base of community control. By involving local residents in the election of local officials to operate the schools, the schools will become more responsive and accountable to the interests and demands of the community. As parents gain a greater sense of control over the schools, their children will develop the same confidence, the schools will become more responsive to their needs, and, as a result, student achievement will improve. Through community control, contact between the school and community will increase, parents will become more involved in their children's education, and a posi

tive impact on student achievement will result.

In several communities, of which Ocean Hill-Brownsville and Harlem in New York and the Adams-Morgan area in Washington, D.C., are the best known, local elections for school governing boards have been held. In these elections, voter turn-outs have been relatively light. And yet, one could contend that any elected member of a school governing board in the ghetto, regardless of the size of the vote, is sufficiently aware of the community's educational aspirations and expectations to attempt to follow a policy that has some direct relationship to the educational goals of the community.

Opponents to community con

trol argue that these local elections represent an opportunity for the emergence of political despotism and for the practice of misdirected. political patronage. There is little doubt that by creating local elections for school boards, politics is being introduced into education. Whenever this is the case, there is always the possibility of the rise of a dictator and the utilization of the spoils system. And yet, as Kenneth Haskins, former principal of the Morgan Community School, has suggested, "Why do whites always view the black community with such suspicion? We are perfectly capable of running our own elections, if only we are given the chance. I dare say that we can handle our 'kooks' better than outsiders can."

Given the history of political repression in this country, it should hardly be surprising that the black community has not instantly taken full advantage of the democratic process. In the past, black residents have either been

denied access to the polling places and voting booths of our country or have had so little impact on election outcomes as to make their votes virtually meaningless. It will take time to overcome the heritage of this direct and indirect exclusion. If residents of ghetto communities come to the realization that their votes count and are vital, particularly in the educational process, they will participate.

It is in opponents' views toward ghetto school elections that one is most struck by the use of a double standard. There can be no doubt that the results of these elections

are

groups of democratically elected officials. And yet, because America refuses to use the same criteria for judgment, ghetto elections do not produce "representative" officials because not every eligible voter has cast his ballot. Ghetto elections cannot possibly be valid because there is the possibility of rigging the elections. No one seems to voice the same type or level of concern about school board elections in suburbia. The Real Issue

Another concern expressed by opponents of community control focuses on the racial implications of the movement. They contend that administrators will be extremists, that teaching staffs will be all black, that students will become "radicalized"-in short, that these schools will become the hotbed of revolution.

This attitude must be exposed as the racist fear it is. In New York and Washington, for instance, the faculties of the community controlled schools are more integrated than are a large majority of their neighboring schools. Administrators like Kenneth Haskins,

Rody McCoy, and Charles Wilson are Black Power advocates, but they are not advocating the destruction of American societythey simply aspire to the development of a strong black community.

Furthermore, there is some evidence that community controlled schools are not inimical to the development of integrated student bodies. At the Morgan School, increasing numbers of white parents are sending their children to the school because of the quality of the school.

In addition to political and social issues community control also faces the problem of traditional, inappropriate education evaluation. Standardized, culturebound instruments are administered each year to ascertain whether a student has increased his reading level by 1.0 years as is expected of the "normal" (read white middle class) child. Dropout rates are examined statistically, with slight attention paid to identifying motivational factors. The relationships between the school and the community are appraised in quantitative terms-i.e., the number of parents who visit the school or attend night meetings, despite every indication that these are inappropriate criteria. Considered in these terms the deck is stacked-community control, as well as other innovative approaches to urban education, cannot be validly assessed.

If community control and its impact on the schools are to be judged fairly, a whole new approach to educational evaluation. is needed. Researchers and psychometricians must start with an understanding of the objectives of these schools and work from there, not ascribe traditional objectives

and measure the achievement of them in traditional ways.

The theoretical rationale for community control rests on several basic assumptions which in turn can be translated into educational objectives. Students with a more positive self-concept will improve academic performance. Schools will become more relevant when local community residents participate in educational decision-mak ing. Furthermore, through the increased participation, parents will gain a greater sense of fate-control which will be communicated to their children and will have a posi tive effect on the children's performance in school.

If the evaluation of community control is to have any meaning, a search must be instituted to find answers to several crucial questions. What are appropriate ways to measure academic performance, local participation, and degree of fate-control? What precisely is "self-concept", how should it be measured, and how is it reflected in the child's achievement and be havior? What is the relationship between parent participation in the educational process and student achievement? What is the impact of community controlled schools on the local community, on the large urban community? A review of educational literature provides few answers, for few edu cational researchers are even beginning to raise some of these issues.

In this time of spiraling school budgets, growing teachers unions, and expanding Federal involve ment in education, it is easy to lose sight of the primary stakeholders in the nation's educational systems. It is the student and his parents who have most to gain from quality education; they are