Getting Established 1970-1983
The STI was launched, and now it had to be sustained. It was up to the
Institute Committee and the Director to find appropriate ways to continue, expand and
institutionalize the program. The challenge of the early years of the STI, under the
leadership of Doris Breslow, was to build the structure.
Developing community support continued to be a primary focus of the STI.
The Institute Committee, the policy making group of teachers from each of the schools
in the district, quickly welcomed community members to teach and take STI courses.
The Educational Advisory Board and the Friends of the Institute were the two major
community groups offering advice and support. The local paper continued to feature
articles about the programs of the STI. In these multiple ways, community support for
the program grew.
Relevance and immediacy were other hallmarks of the early program.
Because teachers did the planning in response to the needs of their colleagues, the
courses reflected immediate concerns teachers had about curriculum, teaching
methods and social issues such as “Multidisciplinary Approaches to Teaching,”
“Oceanography,” and “Comparative Literature,” among others.
In 1970, the STI addressed the emerging problem of drug use with a
course, “Drug Education: A Preventive Approach,” led by Werner Feig. The course
examined the problem of drug use in high schools in relation to social issues. Sessions
included: the role of the school in society, the definition of education, the right of
privacy, the proper administration of discipline, and the limits and jurisdiction of the
educational institution. Another course, “The New Student,” furthered the discourse in
the community on student rebellions and their meaning. Thus the STI, from its
inception, assumed a role in helping teachers and the community they served better
understand the world in which their children lived.
The very first computer course, “Introductory Computer Programming,”
was given in 1971, taught by a member of the high school math department. The
catalogue description states that the course “will introduce the group to the operation of
computer systems and the language and techniques of programming.”
Werner Feig became Director of the STI in 1972 and served until 1975.
During his tenure the STI program continued to grow. Courses for credit and noncredit
were offered. A Table of Contents was added to the catalogue, and members of the
community continued to provide support for the program. Courses included “Piaget,”
“Flexible Mod Scheduling,” “The Holocaust,” “The Amateur Naturalist,” and "Practical
Applications for Teaching.”
Under Werner Feig’s guidance, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Thomas Sobol
and Mr. Vin Dempsey, Assistant Principal, Scarsdale High School, led a course entitled,
“The Hidden Curriculum: The Impact of the School as a Social Institution.” Judith
Schwartz offered “Lib,” a course designed to “help understand sex bias, the traditional
means of establishing sexual roles, social pressures, and the expectations of
individuals.” The STI was nothing if not current.
By 1975, the STI had established regular procedures for the review of courses
through the Accreditation Committee, a group of teachers and administrators who made
recommendations on programs prior to sending them to the Board of Education for
approval. Allocations from the Board to the STI remained low.
In 1975, the Board contributed $4250 for programming to the STI. These
negotiated funds and the course approval were the major responsibilities of the Board of
Education, and the program continued to develop in the schools with teachers teaching
and participating in the majority of programs.
One of the Board of Education members, Sally Ballard, who participated in the
founding of the STI, reflected on the importance of the program to the school district. A
member of the research team reports his interview with Sally.
The greatest challenge was to put together courses that were substantive,
both from the district’s point of view and the teachers’. It was an enormous
success. When I asked her why, as opposed to the days before the STI,
she mentioned both the pragmatics of it being easier, but also a lot more
fun. She talked about the plus of having teachers from all different levels
learning together, and asserted that such cross-pollination of ideas was
rarely, if ever, replicated in a university situation.
She recalls the greatest strength of the STI as being a place where
teachers knew the needs of teachers, and could fit lessons/ curriculum to
those needs much better than university professors who were (at least)
one step removed from the trenches.
Ralph Ricci took over the leadership of the STI in 1975. The Institute Committee
was responsible for the selection of each of the directors of the STI. It was, and
remains, its most important responsibility. By contract, the position was to be held by a
tenured teacher of the Scarsdale School District. The choice of director was reviewed
by the Scarsdale Teachers Association and confirmed by the Board of Education. The
responsibility for the selection of the director of the STI that rested with the Institute
Committee is symbolically and, in fact, the most dramatic example of teacher leadership
within the public school setting. It remains a hallmark of the foresight of the founders of
the STI.
The years of Ralph Ricci’s leadership of the STI were marked by an increase in
teacher involvement in the planning of the program and emphasis on writing and the
arts. The period was also marked by difficulties in reaching agreement in contract
negotiations. The Board and the STA did not reach agreement on the contract that
expired in June 1975 until February 1976. Despite not having any Board funding for the
first semester, the Institute Committee managed to put together a program and maintain
the viability of the STI.
Many courses reflected the changing needs of the community and the student
body: “Coping with Learning Differences Within the Classroom,” “Language and
Learning: Normal Development, Disorders and Remediating,” “Understanding Human
Behavior,” and “The New Genetics.” These courses helped teachers reflect on the wide
variety of student ability and brought the latest research and information on a broad
range of subjects to the STI. During this period the STI organized its first Writer-inResidence program with the Teachers and Writers Collaborative. The group worked
with teachers on creative approaches to teaching writing in the classroom. There were
also Actor and Artist-in-Residence programs at a number of the schools. Architecture,
children’s writings, science in the elementary school, gifted and talented education, and
Near East legacies were some of the many topics of STI programs during those years.
The tenth anniversary of the STI in 1979 found Doris Breslow back at the helm
for one more year. By this time the funding for the STI from the Board of Education had
reached $9000 for programs. Teachers supported the STI through their tuition
payments, and the program continued to grow. “Computer Literacy,” “Scarsdale: An
Ecological Resource,” and “Coping with Crisis” were on the agenda. Doris retired in
1980, and the Institute Committee selected Judith Schwartz, an English teacher at the
high school, as the new director.
By this time the organizational structure of the STI was secure, the
transformation of professional development well underway, and the future of the STI
was assured. About 40% of the faculty participated in STI programs, up from the initial
numbers, but not yet the institutional program that it would become. The STI functioned
independently of the district curriculum office, and while programs generally were
reflective of general district needs, they were not coordinated with school or district
goals. What had been transformed were the concepts of ownership of professional
development and leadership of teacher in-service education. Doris Breslow relates the
story:
The STI transformed the image of the teacher as know-it-all, as having
completed his education and having entered a different stage, above the
fray of learning, and replaced it with the image of the teacher as lifetime
learner, struggling right in there with the student. What better example
could students have?
The Institute also altered the concept of what a course should be. Our
courses did not originate in a university, but often with teachers who had
firsthand knowledge of the needs of Scarsdale children; they were
coordinated by teachers, and, often, didn’t culminate in tests or research
papers. Instead teachers were encouraged to think imaginatively about an
application of the course material to their own classrooms. Many of the
sessions were hands-on workshops instead of lectures. We also tried to
erase traditional distinctions between branches of learning by offering
interdisciplinary courses.
The early 1980’s set the stage for the expanded role of the STI in the district and
in the state. These years saw a continued expansion of courses built upon the
Principles of the Institute established in the late l960’s, and the recognition that a new
set of educational realities had emerged and needed to be addressed by the school
community. Such issues as the use of computers in the classroom, a multicultural
student body, children at risk, a support system for teachers, cooperative learning and
conflict resolution techniques, writing methodology and supervision, and school climate
were all on the agenda.
Several other initiatives were underway as well. A number of courses were
offered as part of the recommendation of a district committee on Gifted and Talented. A
Title IV-C grant for Citizenship and School Democracy led a coordinated effort with the
STI and the District to provide the professional development to implement the grant.
This established the practice that all voluntary staff development programs should be
offered through the district. The barriers between the STI and the District Curriculum
Office started to disappear.
Initiatives begun in the early 1980’s led to many new programs in the schools.
“An Introduction to Scarsdale,” coordinated by John Gosen, STA Vice-President, was
the forerunner of the Mentor Program designed to help new school personnel learn the
ins and outs of the Scarsdale community. “Child Care Association: Meeting Community
Needs” introduced the concept of day care in the Scarsdale community which
foreshadowed Kid’s Base. The “Professional Development Program,” begun during the
1981-92 school year, evolved into a course giving the grant recipients a forum for
sharing their projects with other teachers and ultimately led to a Mini-Grant Program.
Many other programs led to changes in cross-cultural activities, student government at
the high school and the change from a junior high to a middle school, and the
development of an interdisciplinary 9th grade program
In the spring of the1983-84 school year, Judith Schwartz presented a program at
a Board of Education meeting noting the 15th anniversary of the STI. There were
displays in the room celebrating the event. To help the STI plan its courses for the next
year, questionnaires were distributed and the audience was asked to note their
preferences. Judy explained how courses are developed, assessed and accredited and
showed slides of teachers in various courses. The program was entitled, “The Morning
After: Results of the STI Courses.” Teachers described how courses they had taken
influenced their classroom teaching.
The stage was set for the period of greatest growth for the STI and for the
contribution it would be able to make to teachers, the district and the state. The STI had
established is role as the single provider of credit bearing programs for teachers in the
district. It maintained its affiliations with the community and encouraged community and
student participation in its programs. Coordination between the District Curriculum
Office and the STI strengthened, and initiatives for new programs were pilot tested
through the STI. More teachers coordinated, taught and took courses; programs for
new as well as experienced teachers were part of the regular offerings; technology
played an increasing role in courses and delivery methods, and programs designed for
individual schools became more commonplace. Teachers had assumed leadership
roles in professional development and had enhanced their own skills and those of their
colleagues.