A Generation At Risk

In September 1980, D Magazine devoted an issue to an examination of the Dallas Independent School District (DISD). The cover line proclaimed, “THIS CHAOS MUST END.” Inside was a series of horror stories: A board of education composed of bumbling clowns who made spectacles of themselves at public meetings, persistently interfered with the day-to-day management of the district and turned Superintendent Linus Wright’s job into a nightmare. An Accountability and Development Division that spent more than $9 million in 1981 and employed 382 people who burdened teachers with endless demands for data to satisfy federal grant requirements. A social promotion policy that pushed students from one grade to the next whether they had mastered the work or not. Beleaguered teachers who tried to function in open classrooms that contained media centers, portable basketball nets, reading areas and pianos within the same four walls.

Looming over the rest was a desegregation case that had gone on and on and on, dulling the vitality of the district and replacing the resonance of English literature and American history with the language of law, quotas and computer printouts. By fall of 1980, much had been lost. The question was, How do we repair the damage and return some sense of purpose and pride of attainment to our public schools?

The answers, at the same time, seemed obvious: First, replace the board of education. This has been done-the election of 1981 swept out the worst offenders, restored some order to the board and brought Linus Wright a cadre of solid support. Next, dismantle the Accountability and Development Division. This, too, largely has been accomplished. No longer operating directly under the superintendent, Dr. William Webster’s group now is an adjunct to the office of Deputy Superintendent Otto Friday. The department is slated for 127 people and $5.6 million in next year’s budget-an increase of three people and almost $500,000 over fiscal 1983. That’s an 8 percent hike in money and a 2 percent growth in personnel. Even so, the glory days are gone.

There has been progress within DISD, but problems persist that are far from settled. Three years ago, social promotion plagued the district. Although it’s no longer permitted in the lower and middle levels, it is just now being eliminated from DISD high schools.

Discipline remains a vexation. While Dallas schools aren’t quite as chaotic as they were three years ago, they’re still far from serene. Wright is trying to institute a program of uniform behavior standards throughout the district.

As for the federal courts, they’re still entangled in the lives of DISD students. Last year, federal Judge Barefoot Sanders decided against the Minority Neighborhood Option Plan, which would have permitted minority students to attend the school nearest their homes rather than be bused across town. The proposal currently is before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; a ruling is expected soon.

That leaves DISD with two hard-core problems: What caliber of teachers does the district have; and what are teachers teaching? The question of curriculum is being addressed by Wright and his staff, who are devising tougher graduation requirements that will mean more English, math and science and fewer soft electives. Who will teach the new program depends on the district’s success in attracting gifted people to the classroom-which, in too many cases, has become the preserve of the uninspired and the uninspiring. How well our colleges are training future teachers is part of the story, as is the day-to-day experience that awaits teachers in the real world. An examination of both follows.