SI cover features area model
Winter weather photos
Madison vs. Waynesville
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > May > 19 > Entry
Saving old schools
Jean Booker climbed the concrete front stairs of Jefferson Elementary School for the first day of kindergarten in 1931, beginning a remarkable 62-year journey through Dayton schools as student, teacher, principal, administrator and school board member.
At my urging, that trek ended where it began when we met in front of Jefferson on her last week as a school board member in December of 1999. I had this idea to interview her back where it all began, but even I was amazed as Booker, then 73, led me through the school to the very room where she first sat down at a desk to learn, rattling of intricate details of what it was like then and who was there.
She remember her teacher’s name, what she wore, what part of the room she stood in when she recited from the book. Most remarkable, Booker rattled off the names of all her classmates and pointed to where they all sat. Her descriptions of what school was like in her day were a real history lesson. Here’s just a small taste from the story I wrote:
“…she got her diploma from Roosevelt High School on June 7, 1944, the day after the Allies invaded France on D-Day in World War II. “I remember the faculty on the stage were all crying because so many of the boys were over there,” she said.
Booker went on to teach for 18 years at Roosevelt, the school that I’ve been writing about for the past week as school officials decided and finally announced yesterday they would tear it down and replace it with a new school bearing the Roosevelt name.
After two years of agonizing about what to do with the 83-year-old Dayton landmark, the school board ultimately decided not to preserve it in one of the most difficult decisions I’ve seen board members make in seven years covering Dayton Public Schools.
The core question with Roosevelt, and with many old schools today, is when are they important enough to save rather than raze in favor of more modern schools? I have a three-step test for evaluating a school’s significance while keeping sentimentality in check that I thought we could try out on Roosevelt today.
One of the tricky problems in judging the value of an old school is the question of its historical significance. It’s the first thing everyone says when an old school is targeted for replacement — that the school is “historic.” Most of the time, schools are not truly historic places in the sense that they played a direct role in history — such as a history book event actually happened there. But occasionally school buildings are key sites in the history of a city or area.
What’s more common is that old schools have what I call “emotional significance.” That is, the school played no actual historical role, but was so deeply ingrained in the life of the community that sustaining it has real value to a large number of people.
Many buildings are emotionally significant to small numbers of people. For instance, few of us would like to see the houses we grew up in torn down. But not all schools engender this feeling for large numbers — a school with widespread emotional significance isn’t as common as you might think. It’s most often found in particularly close-knit communities.
Finally, there’s architectural significance. This is a little out of my league, since I’m no expert on architecture. But unique designs or buildings that evoke the history or peculiarities of a place are worth saving.
So let’s run Roosevelt through the test.
Historical significance
Did Roosevelt play a direct role in history? I think all sides agree that you could make a strong case that it did for Dayton.
When Roosevelt opened, it’s 300,000 square foot size was huge on an almost unheard of scale. On its first day in 1923, the school was one of the very largest in the country.
And as Dayton, and America, changed, Roosevelt’s experience almost perfectly tracked some of the most important changes. For instance, the school was all white when it opened in a white neighborhood on West Third Street. But by 1950s, demographics had begun to change and a third of the students were black. School leaders struggled with the new reality, initially separating kids by race for activities like swimming and sports until after the Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
Even so, black and white students from that era say they forged friendships across racial lines. And many of Dayton’s future leaders say their views of race relations were shaped by both good and bad experiences at Roosevelt High School. Eventually the school, like the school district, became majority black before it closed in 1975.
(Note: Is it a little ironic that Roosevelt, a name that came to represent painful integration that ultimately conquered racial segregation, will be the name of an all-boys school — segregated by gender — in the future?)
Emotional significance
My colleague Ben Kline tells my a story that perhaps best sums up the kind of impact Roosevelt’s looming shadow had on many lives in the west Dayton neighborhood where it sits. He has a friend, August Brunsman, who still recalls the day the school opened. Brunsman told Ben he remembers the school cost $1 million to build, a huge sum in 1923. Throughout his life, anytime the figure $1 million came up, he thought of Roosevelt. “Roosevelt was my first concept of what a million dollars looked like,” he told Ben.
I know there are strong emotional ties to the school for both folks who grew up in the neighborhood and from those who attended Roosevelt. Although I am a bit surprised that there hasn’t been more community reaction to the talk of tearing down Roosevelt. School board President Gail Littlejohn told me yesterday she’s gotten more phone calls in favor of a new school at that site than opposed to tearing Roosevelt down.
Architectural significance
While I’m certainly not qualified to judge Roosevelt’s architectural value, I don’t think there’s any debate that the school is a marvel. The uniqueness of the building for its time alone is probably enough to qualify as architecturally important. And its detail and sturdiness are a testament to the hand-crafted artisanship of the builders of its era.
The bottom line is that Roosevelt does seem to be a rare school in that you can make a pretty good case for its significance on all three measures. I’m not usually sentimental about schools. I think too often schools aren’t upgraded or replaced because people get emotional about keeping them the same as they once were. And in the meantime, today’s kids can suffer in poor learning environments. But in this case, it’s hard to argue with those who want to preserve the school.
Does that mean the board is making the wrong decision? That depends on your perspective. Board members argue that at least their approach is a sure bet to bring revitalization to a neighborhood that desperately needs a break. That’s why I’ve said all along this is a tough, tough call.
What would you do if you were on the school board?
Permalink | Comments (4) | Categories: Dayton Public Schools, My Favorite Posts
Comments
By Connie Evans
May 22, 2006 9:17 PM | Link to this
This building has been poorly maintained and therefor drifted into disrepair. Why is it repairs were not made as needed? Roosevelt should remain standing. Did anyone think of asking for donations to help cover the cost?By robert jollay
May 22, 2006 7:07 PM | Link to this
Perhaps from an architectural standpoint than from any other, Roosevelt should remain standing as it stands today. No question, it is and always has been, a unique structure. Why not make this so called future boy’s school, USING the existing Roosevelt school site? Why tear down and rebuild? Keep the school as it is.By TR26
May 20, 2006 9:49 AM | Link to this
Fourth step for your test: can we afford what it costs to maintain/renovate vs. demolish. Decided by legislators who promise to slash taxes. Fifth step: did people care about the building before condemnation? How many have visited—or even knew about—Roosevelt/Building 54/Arcade? Sixth step: if renovated, will the building serve any tangible purpose? Let us know about those steps, Mr. Elliott.By Mary
May 19, 2006 9:58 PM | Link to this
I guess the thing that bothers me the most is why do we let buildings like Roosevelt drift into disrepair in the first place. Was it poorly designed or poorly maintained? It is another indication of our wasteful throw-away mentality. Many public buildings throughout the country and overseas exist and are utilized for hundreds of years. After World War II, I think many European cities reconstructied damaged and destroyed buildings. Why do we we have to constantly raze the past instead of maintaining and appreciating our history. I recently heard about similar concerns in Hollywood where historical old mansions are facing the wrecking ball for newfangled architecture. Newer is not always better.