For 125 years, Francis W. Parker School has espoused “a progressive approach to education that challenges students to think critically, act with empathy, and engage meaningfully with the world around them.”
As a parent of a recent Parker graduate and a longtime member of the school community, I believe the school now has a golden opportunity to put those principles into practice.
Like many in the community, I support Parker’s ambitions for its next chapter. The school intends to welcome 125 additional students, increase financial assistance and improve its facilities to strengthen an institution that has benefited generations of Chicago students.
These are goals worth supporting. Yet a more important question is whether Parker’s original proposal — to extend its presence onto a dense residential street and to demolish 15 units of family housing — offers the most effective, efficient and inclusive solution to meet these goals.
A community-developed alternative proposal suggests a more optimal and equitable approach. The plan would advance Parker’s objectives while making better use of the school’s existing 6-acre campus and assets, adding valuable new facilities and yielding significant net savings that could support Parker’s educational priorities.
More Top Picks Best Water Humidifiers
That should be an appealing proposition to everyone who cares about Parker’s mission.
For students, it would mean more resources for financial aid and educational programs. For faculty and staff, it would enhance salaries and professional development. For alumni and donors, it would allow philanthropic dollars to go further. And for current and future parents, it would enhance Parker’s offerings while perhaps even slowing the growth of rising tuition.
The alternative plan also proposes more tangible campus improvements than the original: a protected student drop-off area, covered parking for faculty and staff, geothermal wells to reduce energy costs by an estimated 40% to 60%, and a potential state-of-the-art aquatic center to offer Parker students new athletic options and administration a new enrollment draw.
Parker now has the benefit of multiple planning visions to consider. It can evaluate educational benefits, financial aid capacity, faculty needs, traffic circulation and environmental performance and determine which aspects of each approach will best serve the long-term needs of the school.
These options recall the words of Parker Principal Daniel B. Frank, who has described progressive education as embracing “thoughtful ideas and new modes of inquiry” and showing “the integrity to think for oneself, especially, if after listening and reflecting, one changes one’s mind.”
The alternative proposal offers the Parker board and administration a chance to demonstrate these principles institutionally and to reflect the needs of the broader community.
Parker’s original proposal represents considerable efforts by its trustees and administrators. But responsible stewardship does not mean staying tethered to an idea because it is favored by an inner circle. It means thinking flexibly and rigorously examining promising new alternatives.
And doing so would produce another priceless asset: greater Parker community unity around the school’s future, as the majority of community members have not endorsed the original proposal, and an increasing number are expressing support for the alternative plan.
The alternative proposal offers Parker the chance to expand its opportunities while optimizing its existing footprint, to generate more revenue rather than demolishing valuable assets and to expand the community while strengthening its relationship with Chicagoans.
To be clear: This is not a choice between supporting or opposing Parker’s goals. It is a chance to make Parker’s next 125 years — and its existing 6-acre footprint — more valuable than ever. Having experienced Parker as a parent, I want to see the school thrive. And the best way to ensure the success of the school is, in Frank’s words, to embrace new modes of inquiry.
I hope Parker’s board of trustees and administrators will respect the desire of their community for fiscal responsibility and due diligence and will undertake a fair and transparent evaluation of planning options before a suboptimal proposal becomes irreversible.
And I hope Chicago Plan Commission members will hear all of the voices concerned about Parker’s future — not only those of the board and administration — and conclude that its request for rezoning in a dense residential neighborhood is counterproductive for all involved.
Frank recently exhorted the Parker community to leave the school “a better, more inclusive, and creative place than we found it.” The alternative proposal presents a golden opportunity to do just that.
Karl Peet is a 14-year resident of the East Lincoln Park neighborhood.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].