UACHS

History of Upper Arlington Community School Democracy
Of the five core missions of Upper Arlington Community
School, DEMOCRACY has always been our highest priority.
The history of UAC has been built upon this principle from the beginning of the school’s conception.
In 2003 the Community School began in the Upper Arlington
School District when the high school formed teacher groups called action teams designed by instructors with the goal of developing strategies that could improve our school. One of the action teams was devoted to the study and promotion of progressive education techniques. This group became the genesis of what was to become the Community High School.
The work of this group established the idea that democratic decision-making would be the foundation of all school activity. The next year sought to connect teacher reform efforts with student energies by the creation of the Transitions Program.
This was a group of teachers and students that met in a class that had the goal of planning the Community High School.
The class studied progressive educational philosophy and used their findings to form the core principles upon which the
Community High School would be constructed. This interaction was the first step for Community School democracy. The voting method used was a consensus model requiring 100% participation and agreement to enact ideas.
This model worked well for the smaller Transitions class but came under pressure the following year when the Community
School opened in 2006.
The initial year of Community School established the principle of common law. The precedent of previous decisions would be the starting point for each new generation of the Community School. From there, each generation could amend governing rules as the new class saw fit in order to evolve and adapt to the growing needs of the community. The democratic body took the form of a town meeting to facilitate this development. It became clear early on that the 100% consensus was difficult, if not impossible, to meet with the larger group size, so the Community School turned to parliamentary procedures to formulate the governing rules within town meeting.
As part of the school's continued study of educational philosophy, OSU professor Michael Glassman provided instruction to the class on John Dewey and participatory democracy. Dewey’s focus on student-centered curriculum was a natural fit to the ideals of the Community School.
Students were challenged to study Dewey’s philosophies and come up with ways it could be applied to our school in order to improve it. Students especially liked Dewey’s belief that it was not necessarily the end of the process that rendered learning; rather it is the method of analyzing what happened to draw out lessons for improvement. About halfway through
2006, Town Meeting adopted amendments to enact participatory democracy methods over the parliamentary procedures that had been used earlier in the year.

Adoption of participatory democracy principles meant that any member of the community could affect change in the school if they came up with a well-researched proposal and were able to gain majority support for their plan. The school enacted a two-day process. Day one was for open discussion called the
Forum. This open discussion was lead by a Community
School teacher with the purpose of establishing the legislative agenda for Town Meeting. The second day was for Town
Meeting where motions would be voted upon officially.
In Town Meetings, students developed a voting system that allowed competing proposals to explain and refine their ideas for the class. Class members would then physically move and sit with the member they supported giving immediate visual feedback regarding support during three rounds of discussion.
If no proposal was passed, the community would continue to function under the previous rules. The first threshold established required 75% support to enact school change, but this proportion proved to be too high to enact legislation. A later threshold of 51% proved to be better able to enact legislation. Current Town Meeting rules were adopted March 27, 2008.
This amendment produced a hybrid of the parliamentary rules and participatory democracy rules previously used in UA
Community Town Meetings. Legislative change would be submitted in writing to the community via an email to the chair prior to Forum. These proposals would be discussed, possibly amended, and then voted upon by the school. Any proposal receiving at least ! support of the membership then goes on for a vote the next day in Town Meeting.
During Town Meeting the Chair will read the motion to the community following which the community gets a chance to ask clarification questions of the motion. Questions are limited to 1 per community member during this round. Next the Chair will call for a vote during which each member is required to vote yea, nay, or abstain. If the motion receives
51% of the vote it passes.
Current rules and procedures are not set in concrete. The democratic process in Community School remains open to future change to allow our school to continue to grow and evolve. It is a flexible process that can truly represent democratic ideas of the members in the school. An example of such a change is the Emergency Town Meeting provision.
Occasionally a very important issue will arise that requires immediate attention. This type of meeting may be called for by any member of UAC requiring an explanation for the meeting followed by a vote for or against. If 75% of UAC votes in favor, an Emergency Town Meeting must be held within 72 hours of the vote in order to deal with the situation.
Hopefully you can see how all members of UAC have equal voice in the governing of our school. You have real power to make our school better so!"ake your voice count!