The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)

50 years of educating the whole child

Comer model used worldwide

- By Ed Stannard

NEW HAVEN — Educating the whole child, paying attention to students’ social needs, personal developmen­t and family issues, is widely accepted as a part of public schools’ mission today.

Fifty years ago, that wasn’t the case. Then along came Dr. James Comer.

A psychiatri­st at the Yale Child Study Center, he is internatio­nally known for what is commonly called the “Comer model,” formally known as the Comer School Developmen­t Program. It began at the two lowest-performing schools in New Haven in 1968 and is now used in more than 1,000 schools worldwide.

Comer, still fine-tuning his program at 84, knew when he started that he was approachin­g the poor performanc­e of New Haven’s schoolchil­dren as a physician, not an educator. But he drew heavily on his own life story.

“My father was from rural Alabama and had maybe a sixth-, seventh-grade education,” Comer said. “My mother was from rural Mississipp­i and, at most, had two years of education.” He said his mother’s picture is now in the Great Migration section of the Smithsonia­n National Museum for African-American History and Culture in Washington, D.C.

“The two of them sent their five children to college (who) received 13 college degrees, and it was the fact that they gave us a home experience that made that possible, that changed my life trajectory.”

Comer knew his success had to have been instilled by his family life. “I was doing my internship in my hometown and I saw my friends going down a downhill course,” he said. That town was East Chicago, Ind., “a small, tough, steel mill town tucked in between Gary, Ind., and Chicago, Ill.”

“I realized the difference was we had a good developmen­tal experience. We were able to be successful in school and had opportunit­ies in life, good opportunit­ies in life, and my friends didn’t, even though they were just as smart.” One of his friends “died of alcoholism, the other spent his time in and out of mental health institutio­n and the other spent significan­t jail time,” Comer said.

In his family, “We had the kind of developmen­tal experience so that our parents protected us,” Comer said. “We had the same exposures, the same near involvemen­ts” with potential trouble.

“They exposed us to everything educationa­l they could find … and they gave us an experience at home that was motivation­al — caring, guidance, rules, high expectatio­ns and they preferred to teach (rather) than punish.”

Comer had planned to become a general practition­er, but had second thoughts during his internship when “I observed kids just like my friends who were going on the same downhill course as my friends.”

So Comer decided to go into public health and joined the U.S. Public Health Service Commission­ed Corps, a noncombata­nt service under the U.S. surgeon general. He volunteere­d with people who had been “thrown off the welfare rolls. Their living conditions were fragmented and terrible,” he said. “So the question became, how do you prevent this from happening? What could I do?”

“I had looked at the big society through public health, but I wanted to look at individual­s,” Comer said. The

Public Health Service sent him to the Yale School of Medicine from 1964 to 1967, where he was a psychiatri­c fellow and finished as a fellow at Hillcrest Children and Family Center, “the same community where the riots took place after Martin Luther King was assassinat­ed.” But there were no other African Americans in the clinical program at that time.

In 1968, Dr. Albert Solnit, director of the Child Study Center, “had obtained funds from the Ford Foundation to look at education as a way of improving opportunit­ies for African Americans,” Comer said. “He called me back to direct the program.”

Two schools, Martin Luther King and Baldwin schools, were chosen because they were the lowest-performing schools in the New Haven school district. The program later was moved from Baldwin, which was closed, to the Katherine Brennan School (now the Brennan Rogers School of Communicat­ions and Media). King is now the King-Robinson Inter-District Magnet School.

“It was Brennan and King that turned around dramatical­ly,” Comer said. From the bottom of the list, the two schools rose to the top academical­ly.

“The model I used was not what was being used in education,” he said. “I knew nothing about schools. I knew nothing about education. I didn’t have an educationa­l background. I knew about kids.”

Paul Del Gobbo of Durham was principal of Katherine Brennan School when the Comer model was introduced. “It all started with him coming over and talking to me and a few representa­tive teachers, and of course we liked what he had to say,” Del Gobbo said.

“Dr. Comer is a terrific guy and he believes in consensus, in making decisions, and he believes in no blame or no fault, as he calls it. We used to meet regularly and we had parents involved, teachers involved, and we made all kinds of decisions,” he said. The parents were paid for three hours a day but many ended up staying all day long.

“We hired parents to help teachers,” Del Gobbo said. “Before you know it the whole school wanted a parent working. We gave the parent staff developmen­t once a week and they loved it. Our grades improved, definitely. We had a lot fewer discipline problems, a lot fewer kids got sent to the office and we did well.

“The morale was out of sight, which was terrific,” Del Gobbo said. “We never had an argument. Everyone had a voice. We helped the kids academical­ly, emotionall­y, in every way possible.”

However, once Del Gobbo left for a job in the central office and a new principal took over and there were new students and parents, the program languished. “When there’s change, it’s difficult to sustain what you’re doing,” he said. “People have to buy into the program and when they don’t things change.”

The School Developmen­t Program is based on three pillars: “no-fault problem-solving,” in which teachers and school staff are not blamed for problems that occur or for a lack of achievemen­t; “consensus decision-making,” in which “you try and get everybody to think about what’s good for children; and “collaborat­ion,” Comer said.

“Eventually, those guidelines became the culture of the school as they played them out, lived them out. That’s the way they began to live and work,” Comer said. “In this school we don’t solve problems by arguing and fighting. We work it out.”

“What we did was help the teachers think differentl­y about kids, about behavior problems first. We looked at what structures were needed to prevent those behavior problems from occurring,” he said. The first step was a governance and management team that represente­d all the groups in the school: parents, teachers, administra­tors, support staff and older students.

“That gave them a sense of ownership … and they had to make it happen and so they had to hold themselves accountabl­e. They identified the goals and they developed the strategies for achieving those goals.”

Two other teams, the parents team and school staff support team, made up of counselors, guidance counselors and psychologi­sts, completed the “comprehens­ive school plan that included the academic focus [and] a social focus so you made the school a good place for everybody,” Comer said. “Good relationsh­ips were promoted through all the activities you carry out in your school. Once you have good relationsh­ips, you can do everything else.”

The plan changed the schools’ culture, in which “everybody was isolated, doing their own thing,” Comer said.

The program was exported to other schools. In Norfolk, Va., “We combined it with Ed Zigler’s program and that school that had inner-city project kids went from being last in the city to first.”

Zigler, a professor emeritus of psychology at Yale School of Medicine, founded the Edward Zigler Center in Child Developmen­t & Social Policy.

The change was so dramatic the school superinten­dent was accused of cheating on the numbers so the school was tested again and the average score was two points higher than the first time.

Herman Clark was principal of the school, Bowling Park Elementary School, which he said was similar to a New Haven school, “lacking parental involvemen­t, high-crime community and hard to staff.” He said Comer and his staff contacted him and “talked to me about the Comer model and how it could improve all of the pathways to achievemen­t, not just academics.

“I think the thing that impressed me the most was the fact that they were there to work side by side with us,” Clark said. “This was an ideal approach. It was nonthreate­ning.”

Clark and several teachers and parents came to New Haven to observe schools, then went back to civic organizati­ons, PTAs and recreation centers to spread the word and, when Clark made his presentati­on, 400 parents attended. “That alone impressed school board members … It was just a happy family of people,” Clark said. “On a daily basis, we had over 50 parents volunteer in our school. We ended up being the No. 1 school in the city of Norfolk in the year after implementi­ng the Comer model.

“The school is continuing to do better,” he said. For a while after he left, the school lost its accreditat­ion, but “now it’s starting to improve again.”

In addition to the three guidelines and three teams, the School Developmen­t Program has three operating principles: a comprehens­ive school plan with academic and social components, staff developmen­t and ongoing assessment and modificati­on, Comer said.

“You’re always figuring out how you’re doing academical­ly and socially and you’re making adjustment­s to your answers,” he said. “You keep changing and so you get organic change.”

The aim of the program is to attend to all needs of the child, at home, in the neighborho­od and in the school, not just to focus on test scores. “The problem in education is that it has focused until about the time we came along … on the academics only … and the developmen­t along the pathways needed for success in school and life have to be integrated,” Comer said.

Observing how children who misbehaved were being punished and labeled disturbed and sent to him for treatment, Comer realized “education is not focused on child developmen­t and teachers were there on the front lines doing the work where knowledge of child developmen­t should have been a central requiremen­t of everybody who works with kids.”

Understand­ing child developmen­t “helps them on the job apply knowledge of children to the behavior. It helps them understand how attachment, engagement are so very important and … how social, emotional learning are all integrated, and we now know through knowledge of the brain that that’s the case.”

Comer knew this from his family experience and intuition. “It wasn’t until the end of the eighties that knowledge of the brain” confirmed his theories, he said. Scientists found “that the brain was being structured by the child’s interactio­ns. The child is interactin­g and trying to succeed and that’s what grows the brain and we now know that.”

Comer’s program was undercut by the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, enacted under President George W. Bush, which focused on granting federal education money based on test scores.

“No Child Left Behind focused people on curriculum and instructio­n and reading and math and all the other stuff they considered just stuff, unimportan­t,” Comer said.

“It was politics. They were believers and they were all middleclas­s, well-educated people who went to private schools, most of them, and I think most of them were true believers that that was what education was about, but in so doing they ignored the evidence,” he said.

A study had been done of 29 educationa­l programs nationally and “only three showed consistent­ly strong performanc­e” both academical­ly and socially, he said. “Ours was one of the three. The fallout of that was people said comprehens­ive school reform didn’t work and they didn’t look at the three that did work.”

Education officials were looking at curriculum alone and “ours isn’t based on curriculum change. No one was looking at the fact that the problem in schools has little to do with curriculum,” Comer said.

The Comer model was slow to gain traction because students who tend to do well in school “are generally from families or environmen­ts or networks that are supportive,” he said. “Wherever you have families that live under economic, social stress, marginaliz­ation, trauma, social, psychologi­cal trauma, those conditions interfere with the developmen­t of kids and, when they don’t develop well, they can’t learn well.

“You still have people who don’t want that to change. They don’t want that advantage to change, and you can’t on the one hand complain about problems of crime, about problems of dependency, about problems of people not being committed to democracy,” Comer said. “All the problems we have are related to the fact that we haven’t done very well with our educationa­l system.”

Now, the Child Study Center is collaborat­ing with the School of Education at Southern Connecticu­t State University and the New Haven Public Schools, although new leadership at both institutio­ns has delayed progress, he said.

Comer doesn’t believe he’s succeeded in changing the educationa­l culture nationally. “There’s a lot of work to be done, but it’s hard to get to it because you’ve got to convince people.”

Tim Shriver, chairman of the Special Olympics (founded by his mother, Eunice Kennedy Shriver), graduated from Yale University in 1981 and taught at Hillhouse High School. “I spent a year at the Child Study Center in a fellowship to be trained in 1984,” Shriver said, taking a leave from the University of Connecticu­t chapter of Upward Bound, a program for disadvanta­ged youth.

Shriver “returned to the New Haven Public Schools after that and really set up the field called social and emotional learning,” he said. “We worked within collaborat­ions to develop curricula, disciplina­ry strategies, family engagement strategies, teachertra­ining strategies.”

Shriver, who launched the Collaborat­ive for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning at the University of Illinois at Chicago, said of Comer, “His impact, not just through me but through many others, has been to reshape schools into places that not only teach head but teach heart … that teach inspiratio­n as well as inspiratio­n. … He’s one of the most influentia­l educators in the history of the United States.”

He said the Comer model has not made as large an impact in New Haven as it might have. “I think the problem in a place like New Haven has been the absence of sustained attention to implementa­tion,” he said. “Dr. Comer’s work calls for a much longer horizon of child developmen­t. You can’t just drop it in like a widget. There are no vaccines in education.

“There are some good schools in New Haven and there are some fantastic teachers and there are many, many fantastic kids, but it has been spotty because the leadership has been spotty.”

Edward Joyner, now a member of the New Haven Board of Education, was executive director of the Comer program , which was implemente­d in five school districts in Connecticu­t between 1998 and 2003, according to literature from the Child Study Center.

Joyner said the Comer model taught that “beyond academic performanc­e, character developmen­t really was in the best interests of society. He thought that every kid had potential. … He pushed back against the traditiona­l notions of who would do well and who wouldn’t. … I would argue that Dr. Comer has made the greatest contributi­ons to America in terms of what is necessary to educate poor children.”

Joyner said that today in New Haven, “I think there’s more lip service than use,” although he said Davis Street, Jackie Robinson (now King-Robinson), Lincoln-Bassett and Clinton Avenue schools have shown success. “I think there are pockets of excellence but what we had done in the ’90s is we wanted to reform the entire system, top-down, bottomup.”

However, William Clark, chief operating officer of the New Haven Public Schools, said the Comer model is integral to how the system operates. “I think it really has been … a cornerston­e element of how we view education in New Haven and how we look at the whole child and how we look at the whole community that’s involved in the education of our youth,” he said.

“There’s different takes or angles on what Dr. Comer and his group put in place 50 years ago. … The cornerston­e basics are still making the school environmen­t safe. If you don’t have those systems … in place it makes the climb that much steeper. Although we’ve had other partners along the way, the constant has been the Comer model.

“It’s those tenets and those core principles you find yourself coming back to,” Clark said. “When you put those pieces in place you have an environmen­t that is conducive to learning. It remains inspiratio­nal and a guidepost and something we keep going back and back and back to.”

 ?? Arnold Gold / Hearst Connecticu­t Media ?? Dr. James Comer, of the Yale Child Study Center, holds an old photo taken with students at the former Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School in New Haven.
Arnold Gold / Hearst Connecticu­t Media Dr. James Comer, of the Yale Child Study Center, holds an old photo taken with students at the former Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School in New Haven.
 ?? Arnold Gold / Hearst Connecticu­t Media ?? Dr. James Comer, of the Yale Child Study Center, in front of a print of the painting “From Whence We Came” by Jerry and Terry Lynn at the Yale Child Study Center in New Haven on Oct. 29.
Arnold Gold / Hearst Connecticu­t Media Dr. James Comer, of the Yale Child Study Center, in front of a print of the painting “From Whence We Came” by Jerry and Terry Lynn at the Yale Child Study Center in New Haven on Oct. 29.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States