A Former Church As a Center of Excellence for Children.

By the mid-1980s, St. Mary of Sorrows Roman Catholic Church, located in downtown Buffalo, New York, appeared certain to suffer the same fate as many other historic buildings in inner cities across the United States. The immigrant populations (e.g., Polish, German, Irish, Italian) that had for years formed the heart of its congregation had long since moved elsewhere, and the church was slated for demolition. Yet, through the cooperation of a host of corporations, foundations, organizations, institutions of higher education, and community support, this church was transformed into a state-of-the-art educational facility for children and their families. It also, eventually, became one of the first charter schools in the state of New York.

THE TRANSFORMATION PROCESS

In 1985, upon hearing that the beautiful 100-year-old edifice was scheduled to be demolished, a broad-based organization of concerned citizens advocated for saving St. Mary of Sorrows because of its architectural beauty and its prominence in the local community. This group was able to achieve "historic landmark" status for the church, thus saving it from destruction. A Blue Ribbon Committee was then commissioned by Buffalo's governing body to study possible adaptive reuses for the building. This group recommended forming a Sacred Sites Restoration Corporation, composed of community leaders, educators, lawyers, business people, and elected officials to oversee the adaptive reuse of the newly designated historic landmark.

Numerous suggestions for possible reuse of the former church, renamed the King Urban Life Center, quickly emerged. Initial suggestions included: a theater, television station, office space, and condominiums. It was finally agreed that, since the hope for reviving this community would reside in ensuring the education and well-being of its children, the facility would be used to provide the highest quality of education to the community's youngest children.

This effort would require support from the local colleges and universities. Consequently, in 1991, the presidents of the 20 institutions in the Western New York Consortium of Higher Education were asked to help establish a "Committee on Inner-City Initiatives." This new committee began to explore how to mobilize the talent of the higher education community and address some of the concerns of this largely African American community. The presidents also appointed a liaison from each campus to serve on the committee. Students and faculty from several disciplines (e.g., education, social work, nursing, administration) were involved in planning and developing the King Urban Life Center.

In 1993, while funds were being raised and the decaying facade of the building was being renovated, the King Urban Life Center initiated a pilot educational program in a nearby public school (P.S. No. 90). This Pre-K through Grade 2 pilot program was designed to model a high-quality, research-based, holistic educational program of the type that could be re-created in the old church building upon completion of the renovations. Staff believed that if a working model of the program was up and running, potential funding sources would be more likely to commit to the effort.

From the beginning, the governing committee decided that the school's curriculum would follow the standards of practice espoused in the National Association for the Education of Young Children's (NAEYC) guidelines for developmentally appropriate practice (Bredekamp, 1987). As such, the program would focus upon each child in the program as an individual uniquely affected by school, home, and community environments. In addition, the city's public school administrators agreed that the school's curriculum would conform with the NAEYC guidelines.

Community Partners

One of the major assets of this project was the community's involvement. Although many problems arose during the development of this project, the possibility of creating a high-quality, research-based, developmental program for children in this socio-economically disadvantaged area kept the group on track. Below is a sample of the diverse organizations that contributed to this unique center.

* Early Childhood Teacher Preparation Programs at Houghton College, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo State College, and State University of New York College at Fredonia.

* Buffalo Public School Early Childhood No. 90, a Pre-K through Grade 2 inner-city school that serves approximately 600 children (of whom 87 percent qualify for free or reduced price lunch). The collaboration with the King Urban Life Center began with two classrooms and expanded to include four multiage (Pre-K through Grade 2) classrooms.

* Western New York Consortium on Higher Education (20 public and private colleges). At one critical point, 12 institutions designated a representative to serve on the Committee on Inner City Initiatives Task Force. This task force functioned for four years and facilitated higher education participation in the developing program.

* Buffalo Coalition of Home Day Care Providers, a grassroots organization that networks with family child care providers to provide educational enrichment for providers and children. The King Center education project worked with 24 family providers to help them earn the Child Development Associate (CDA) credential.

* Holy Innocents Child Care Center, located next door to the King Center, and operated by Catholic Charities, which provides care for children ranging in age from infancy to school age. It also provides before- and after-school care for children in the King Center Project.

* Grassroots Gardens of Buffalo assisted the King Center in developing garden plots on two vacant lots that were obtained by the King Center.

* Family Literacy Consortium Project FLIGHT (Family Literacy Intergenerational Home Training). This consortium participates with The Buffalo News to solicit and distribute books to needy children and families. FLIGHT helped build the King Center's library by providing money for culturally appropriate books.

* Americorps assisted the King Center by providing tutors for in-school and after-school programs.

* Albright Knox Art Gallery's "Art Attack" Program provided art classes at the King Center for two years, including two visits to the museum, each semester, for children and parents.

* New York State Foundation for the Arts and Ujiima Theatre provided drama and music enrichment for the school.

From Church to School Building

Because of its historic landmark status, the architectural and artistic beauty of the facility (e.g., stained glass windows and religious paintings) were preserved. During the church-to-school transformation, however, a number of adaptations were required. First, the public seating area was emptied and partitioned into four modern classrooms. The partitioned areas did not include ceilings, instead remaining open to preserve the church's beautiful, vaulted ceiling. Each classroom was equipped with the latest in computer and video technology. A camera in each room follows an infrared button that can be attached to the clothing of a teacher or a child. This feature, along with an observation room equipped with sophisticated distance-learning capabilities, allows researchers and teacher educators to observe the activities of this urban program. Plans are currently underway to link this center to teacher education programs in Finland (at the University of Oulu) and in Ethiopia (Addis Ababa University).

In addition to the four classrooms and observation room, a computer laboratory area was built. This laboratory includes 10 new Macintosh computers, 2 scanners, 2 digital cameras, and laser printers. After school hours, the lab is opened to the students' siblings, parents, and other people in the community.

A multimedia center/library, equipped with over 5,000 books, 4 computer workstations, and a media presentation area, is housed in the former choir loft. All computers in the center are connected through a network and have access to the Internet.

THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THE KING CENTER

School After School

The King Center offers a variety of after-school programs, at no charge, to parents, children, and adolescents in the neighborhood. These programs include: afterschool computer enrichment programs for adults and children, "Wee Read" (a beginning literacy program), a drama club, weekend reading programs, a sewing class, and seminars on such topics as home ownership. Finally, the facility is designated as a "Safe Haven" by Weed and Seed, a program (sponsored by the U.S. Attorney's office and implemented by the Mayor's office) that provides for the presence of additional police officers.

Interdisciplinary Focus of the King Center

From the time that the idea for the King Center was introduced in 1991, members of several departments from area colleges/universities became interested in lending their expertise. The schools of nursing and social work from the State University of New York at Buffalo, for example, took an active role, helping to transform a property adjacent to the church building (a former crack house / house of prostitution) into a community health center. Grants from the Independent Health Foundation were used to renovate and equip the facility. Houghton College also began using the Center as a model for urban education courses. The involvement of multiple disciplines enabled higher education faculty and their students to become more aware of the cognitive, physical, social, and emotional needs of each child in the center.

Technology in the Classrooms

Each teacher has a workstation that includes a Macintosh G3, a scanner, a printer, and a digital camera. This technology is used to collect and organize information about each child's academic and nonacademic performance; an interdisciplinary team continually evaluates the data regarding each child's development. From this ongoing assessment, highly individualized instructional programs are planned and implemented. In addition, each classroom has three Macs equipped with developmentally appropriate software.

Virtual Learning Collaboratory

The King Center's Virtual Learning Collaboratory is a virtual urban lab school that brings together professors from area colleges / universities and their students to observe and reflect upon real teaching through a distance learning framework. Each of the four classrooms is equipped with a video camera. The teacher is provided with a microphone and a camera remote pack. Using the remote, the camera follows the teacher's movements (or the movements of a designated child) throughout the classroom. The microphone picks up conversations between teacher and children. Interactions are typically taped for research, later discussion, and evaluation.

The virtual urban lab connection was introduced in the fall of 1999. Twenty-seven early childhood students met during the semester for seven one-hour sessions. During that time, the authors went on-line with the King Urban Center, watching live teaching, in a grades 1 and 2 multiage classroom.

Typical ground rules of distance learning stipulate that the classroom teacher will have the first opportunity to ask questions, based on the activities observed and student responses. This framework allows the teacher to see the professor(s) as a resource who can provide direction in light of theory. After the teacher has an opportunity to reflect and pose questions, professors may ask questions related to the observation. An example of the collaboratory operation is provided below.

Sample Collaboratory Scenario

The Education Director at the King Center, Claity Massey, begins the morning work session by placing the telephone call to the video conferencing bridge serving the King Center Teaching Collaboratory. She is joined by Julie Henry and three graduate assistants at Buffalo State College, and by James Hoot (with eight graduate students) at the Early Childhood Research Center at the University at Buffalo (25 miles from the King Center). Henry briefly reviews the data collection procedures for analysis of the classroom learning environment and responds to questions.

From the control panel in the Virtual Learning Collaboratory, Massey activates the cameras in Mrs. Graves's King Center multiage classroom. Using the wall-mounted Camera Man, Massey pans the classroom, then zooms in for close-ups of the six learning centers. Live video and audio are transmitted to the education students at their participating institutions.

Next, students follow the classroom activities of Raphael, an energetic 4-year-old. A tiny wireless microphone and an infrared homing device are concealed in the vest Raphael has been asked to wear. The wall-mounted Camera Man follows the movement of the homing device. At the conclusion of the observation time, the education students work together to prepare a report for their afternoon class.

At 3:45 p.m., Mrs. Graves initiates a video conference with the morning participants. She is joined at the King Center by two other classroom teachers, and remotely by professors Henry and Hoot, and their students, at their respective institutions. Students at each institution begin by sharing their reactions to the observed classroom interactions. They use a series of 30-second video clips to illustrate observed behaviors, then use a documents camera to show how they recorded their observations on their data collection instrument. A lively discussion among the participants of all three sites ensues. The cooperating professors offer short critiques of the teams' work.

The collaboratory provides a "safe" place for all participants to reflect upon using more developmentally appropriate teaching practices. Data are collected relating to observations of teachers as they:

* Create a caring community of learners

* Promote a positive climate for learning

* Build a democratic community

* Enhance development and learning

* Optimize the environment and schedule

* Implement innovative teaching strategies

* Motivate and guide students

* Construct an appropriate, integrated, coherent curriculum

* Develop a continuum of development and learning

* Assess children's learning and development

* Establish reciprocal relationships with parents.

Through this emerging medium, professors of early childhood teacher education are able to regularly interact with students in area colleges/universities through critical analysis exercises. This experience challenges all participants to refine and expand their thinking about what constitutes appropriate education in an urban context. Discussions are rich, lively, and sometimes difficult. Professional growth is a natural byproduct of this experience for professors, classroom teachers, and prospective teachers as they work together to define and evaluate the needs of young urban children.

Virtual Lab Benefits. Some of the many benefits of the virtual lab are:

* Best Practices. Prior to the establishment of the King Center, it was difficult for teacher educators to link preservice teachers to a field experience with a "master teacher" who exemplified those theory / research-based values presented in teacher preparation classrooms. Through the King Center virtual lab, students at the earliest stages of their teacher preparation program are able to see strong models of what to do in classrooms.

* Guided Observation. By using this technology, the education instructor has the opportunity to talk "in the moment" of the teaching, interpreting and reflecting with students on what they are seeing without disrupting the classroom. Moreover, participants in the virtual lab follow a real, time-guided observation model. At the conclusion of each live teaching episode, the classroom teachers join the college classroom on-line. This opportunity provides immediate feedback to students and allows them to ask for clarification and interpretation.

* Theory to Practice Connection. The virtual lab enables participating instructors to relate real observations to assigned readings. For example, when observing a lesson integrating music, reading, math, and science, professors can ask students, "What subject are we observing?" As the teaching episode unfolds, it becomes clear to students that they are observing an example of cross-curricular planning. In the question-and-answer period following such an observation, a student might ask the teacher to discuss why she chose the current theme.

* Urban Education As a Model. Through the virtual lab, students from rural campuses in Western New York now have a different perspective on teaching in an inner-city school. Prior to this experience, most students would not have considered living and working in an inner-city district. This experience presents a vision of city schools as models of best practice.

Student Reflection. The comments made by participating education students that are presented below reflect the potential for greatly expanding the use of this teaching strategy in the years to come:

I have never been involved with a distance learning class before and found it very exciting. I find it amazing that we were able to watch a class while it was going on in the city of Buffalo. I was in shock at how high tech this experience is. I also give the teacher a lot of credit for letting an entire class of college students watch every move she makes.

I enjoyed being able to see the classroom split into several groups for the majority of the teaching. I learned more about time management, something I am particularly worried about.

Even though there were a few technology glitches, it was interesting to see an unedited classroom experience.

The best thing about this opportunity is timing. It is real timing. We could see how the teacher responded on the spot.

I got to see many of the things we learned about in class being practiced in a real classroom.

I found it very interesting to see how the teacher integrated things across the curriculum and still met the needs of both grades. It was interesting to see how she used the older children as a model for the younger ones. I never realized how a multiage classroom worked. You would never know there were two different age groups.

I was able to learn some new teaching strategies. I tried some of these out in my own field placement.

Urban Student Teaching Opportunities

The King Center stands as a demonstration of urban education at its best. Having observed the center in action, many education students who had previously expressed misgivings about working with urban children have begun requesting urban field placements. The following comments exemplify the students' new attitudes:

Our time spent at the King Urban Life School was an experience that we will never forget. The city area that surrounds the school may seem a little worn down, and unkempt, but the inner beauty that is found inside the school's cathedral walls contained a unique program just perfect for the lucky children enrolled in it.

Many teachers hold the bias that urban parents don't care about their children. The King Center breaks down that myth. Even I was especially surprised by the involvement of parents at the center. The general questions and concerns from the parents on a daily basis displayed the love and interest that most had for their children. It is so important to allow parents the opportunity to get involved, and the program gave them every opportunity to do so. We have seen firsthand how effective a tool and resource that parents are.

Many educators agree with the need for child-based curriculum and independent learning, but oftentimes it is felt that this approach can't work for struggling, disadvantaged students. In the King Center we found that it can and does work. Although at times we found the classrooms a bit noisy, everyone was very effective in the encouragement of the learning of social and thinking skills. Our students really thrived in a self-paced, self-taught discovery setting. They displayed over and over again their ability to think on their own.

SYSTEMIC ISSUES

While encouraged by the many accomplishments outlined above, a number of issues continue to be challenges for this collaborative effort.

Teacher Selection

The King Center's commitment to establishing a developmentally appropriate model requires that teachers agree on moving toward a more developmentally appropriate program. Yet, in a couple of instances, teachers were arbitrarily assigned to the center by principals. This problem was mitigated a bit by requests that interested teachers be interviewed by a Curriculum Committee, composed of participating early childhood teacher educators. In addition, some teachers elected to leave the program, either because they found it too challenging or they did not agree with the program's philosophy.

Curriculum

The initial agreement between the ECE professors and local public school system was that the teachers would teach the curriculum content developed by the district, but that the King Center would have control over the instructional methods. Often, however, district supervisors demanded that standard instruments be used for students' progress evaluation. At times, the teachers expressed concern that while the King Center was challenging them to follow DAP guidelines, the supervisors were evaluating them based on whether or not they were following a prescribed schedule when teaching from the textbooks. This was a problem, because the supervisors' completed evaluations were then placed in the teachers' personnel files. After learning of this conflict, the authors worked with the supervisors and principals to make special provisions for the King Center teachers' evaluations.

Assessment

The King Center was initially granted permission to use a multimedia portfolio as its major student assessment tool. While both parents and teachers saw great potential with this approach, the Buffalo Public School District moved into a new phase of testing and assessment during the 1997-98 school year. The district mandated that all students--beginning at the 1st-grade level, with no exceptions--would have to take the Terra Nova Test. This decision was certainly counterproductive to more authentic assessment procedures.

THE KING CENTER BECOMES NEW YORK'S FIRST CHARTER SCHOOL

In 1993, Yale University's Bush Center in Child Development and Social Policy designated the King Center as New York State's first "School of the 21st Century." It was given this designation in recognition of the expansive collaborative efforts of the emerging program and because of its promise to support children in all areas of development. Since 1993, much has changed in the leadership of the Buffalo Public School system. Unfortunately, the variances that had been initially granted to the King Center Project were gradually revoked. In 1998, the King Center was informed that there would be no further variances. That same year, New York State joined many other states in the U.S. in passing a charter school law.

The groups working toward developing the model program at the King Urban Life Center agreed that the Buffalo Public School system no longer offered potential. Over the course of a year, work was completed on developing a proposal for a charter school; on January 25, 2000, the SUNY Board of Trustees approved the King Center Charter School application to begin a Pre-K through Grade 3 school for 80 children in August 2000.

King Center's charter school status will more strongly support its mission of developing a model educational program for young urban children. The King Center Charter School Board of Directors will now appoint a teacher selection committee to assist in the selection of future teachers. A developmentally appropriate curriculum model which includes the work sampling program, along with multimedia portfolios, has been approved by the chartering entity.

CONCLUSION: THE KING CENTER AS A MODEL OF COLLABORATION

Thanks to remarkably strong collaborative efforts, the King Center now stands as a model of what can be done to educate urban children. This adventure has been extremely valuable for all parties. Teachers see their efforts validated and supported by college faculty. College professors and their students now can study the world of urban early childhood teaching in "real time," with real teachers and children. Children and families are surrounded by both an actual and a virtual web of professionals dedicated to linking all available knowledge with their daily realities.

Future plans for the Center include the establishment of an outreach program for families with children in the program, especially for those who also have children younger than age 4 at home. Next year, the King Center will apply for formal accreditation from NAEYC. Such accreditation should further strengthen the bonds between the once almost-demolished church building in the heart of Buffalo and the field of early childhood education.

References

Bredekamp, S. (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Note: The King Center was financially supported by a wide variety of public and private foundations. Gifts ranging from $5,000 to $1,000,000 were received from the following sources: the Balbach Family Foundation, the Buffalo Foundation, Bell Atlantic, Buffalo State College Research Foundation, Cameron Baird Foundation, Chase Bank, City of Buffalo, Consortium for the Advancement of Private Higher Education, Early Childhood Investment Fund, Fisher-Price, Fleet Bank, Goodyear Foundation, HUD Special Initiatives Grant, Independent Health Foundation, The Knox Foundation, The Margaret L. Wendt Foundation, Marks Family Foundation, New York State Office of Children and Families, New York State Department of Health, NYNEX, Righteous Babe Records, State of New York, State University of New York at Buffalo, and United Way of Buffalo and Erie County.

James Hoot is Director of the Early Childhood Research Center, State University of New York at Buffalo. Claity Massey is Director, King Center Charter School. Marion Barnett and Julie Henry are Associate Professors, Buffalo State College. James Ernest is Assistant Professor, State University of New York at Buffalo.