Thursday, September 2, 2010

Saving Greensburg AND New York City With Small Schools

07/04/2007

 

Protest over school closings in Arkansas
Some 2,500 students in December, 2003, protested plans to consolidate rural schools in Arkansas. Then Gov. Mike Huckabee pushed consolidation, and said the protest was a "rally to preserve the past."
Photo: The Arkansas News

 

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius was telling members of Congress how the people in Greensburg are trying to save their town. AKansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius mammoth tornado leveled Greensburg May 4, killing a dozen people. Whether the people of Greensburg will be successful is still an open question.

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius
Photo: M.A. Pember

The governor told Congress that Greensburg's recovery depended on the local school's re-opening in the fall. "If you close the school, you close the town — period," Gov. Sebelius said. "No doubt about it. If the school doesn't open in August, the town dies. "

The Greensburg school will reopen in August, the governor assured. But scores of other rural schools won't survive — not because of natural disasters, but on account of man-made destruction. State governments and school boards consolidate small, rural schools and school districts with abandon, creating the same destruction as a tornado only in slow motion. Rural residents following the presidential campaign should note that Republican Mike Huckabee consolidated schools to a faretheewell as governor of Arkansas — a bureaucratic whirlwind that closed mostly schools in poor and black communities in the Delta. Vermont, meanwhile, is also considering a plan to consolidate school districts.

abandoned Indiana schoolAn abadoned school in Jefferson, Indiana. The school was closed after consolidation in the 1970s.
Photo: Tele Photo

States close small schools to save money. But the accounting that leads to school consolidation usually doesn't include the cost to the town. There are studies aplenty testifying that this is a shortsighted policy: Closing small districts and schools doesn't save money; and students do better in small schools than in large ones. The evidence isn't that small rural schools do better. They do better in cities, too. "(I)t is the smallness of schools, regardless of setting, that is beneficial to students," according to one study.

We at the Yonder were reminded of the importance of maintaining small schools (rural and urban) by a new report out of New York City. The New York Times reported this past week that, yes, kids who went to small high schools in the city graduated at higher rates than did students herded into schools that, in the city, can have as many as 5,000 children.

In 2002, New York took 12 humongous (and failing) high schools and divided them into 47 smaller institutions. Now, five years later, the Times reports that graduation rates at the small schools are "substantially higher" than the city average. At some of the smaller schools more than nine out of ten students are receiving diplomas — twice the rate of the big schools in 2002.

These results won't surprise anyone who has bothered to look for a minute at the research. New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg says he will create more small schools in the Bronx, Queens and Manhattan. Meanwhile, states are closing small schools in rural America — the same kind of small schools New York is spending millions to build.

We have reason to worry what the random forces of wind can do to a school and a town, but we have more to fear from the considered intentions of people.

Comments

consolidating schools

I can tell you firsthand, as both a very involved parent and occasional substitute teacher, small schools and classes are BETTER than large; here in Arkansas, both my sons thrived at two small rural schools - each having around 350 students, K-12. The classes were small, teachers, school personnel and parents all knew each student. Out of my son Cody's 2001 graduating class of 22 students, 20 of them are in or have completed college; the school's average GPA were among the highest in the state. They were consolidated, however, by huckabee (better known in Arkansas as "the huckster") with a slightly larger school that was on waivers, and one that has one of the lowest GPA statewide. This school's board is now in charge of both schools, and are rapidly undoing everything that was successful at our small school in Leslie, AR. I believe the LAW states that class size is not to exceed either 23 or 24 students; we need to lobby again and again till the government listens to parents and teachers and administrators who know firsthand what works in education - and what doesn't.

school consolidation

As a former high school teacher and college professor, I look back at my own education (home schooled 2 yrs, one room country school--1-8 grades one year, small school--10 students per class, 100 student per class high school, then I "student taught" in 500 student per class high school, followed by teaching in another 100 student per class high school before spending ten years as a university professor. Reviewing my education experience, my best education was in the 1--8 grade one-room grade school. The teacher instructed us instead of entertaining us and we learned to work on our own and accomplish something. The bigger the school the less education is accomplished and if the parents want their children to learn anything in that environment, they must "home school" the child in the evening. The teacher's union has created guaranteed jobs with little acountability. With "distance learning" , even the smallest school can excell, but the "accredidation standards" designed for large bueaucratic school systems and designed to force closure of the small schools must be eliminated. The layers of bureaucracy provide nothing except dis-incentive for learning. "Self-governing" power must be given to local school boards so quality people will again run for school trustee situations and the education of children again can bring them literacy. The further from the classroom education decisions are made, the less relevant they become. We do not need to be spending all the money on "early education" programs which are for most students only "day care." By the time the student is fourth grade there is little difference in "pre-school" student training and the kid who begins school with maturity at six year old. The best education for a young child is with parents. Students should be tested for basic content and after about fourth grade should not promoted until they achieve a minimum level of knowledge in the subject matter since education is a building process. The average students' scores by classroom should be the basis for teacher evaluation--their job is to educate--not entertain and pychologically evaluate kids or "brainwash the kid in left-wing philosophy".