Urban districts embrace small schools movement
By Del Stover
11/25/03 -- Fueled by hundreds of millions of dollars in public and private grants, the national movement to create smaller, more personalized high schools continues to gain momentum.
More than 1,400 smaller high schools -- operating either independently in smaller buildings or sharing space in larger buildings under the schools-within-a-school model -- now exist or are in the development stages, estimates Thomas Toch, author of a recent book on small school reform called High Schools on a Human Scale. "That's what is so important. It is indeed a movement," he says. "It suddenly is an important movement for school reform."
The scale of this effort to bring school reform to the high school level can be seen in the initiatives under way in major urban school systems across the nation. For example:
• In New York City, school officials have opened 41 small high schools and talk of having as many as 200 small schools, including charter schools, in operation within the next five years.
• Boston school officials say they are committed to reorganizing the city's high schools into smaller "learning environments." Several large buildings already house smaller schools-within-a-school, and more new small schools are scheduled to open by 2005.
• In Indianapolis, school officials are planning to break up five traditional high schools into smaller "learning academies," each with a specific academic theme.
• Cleveland school officials are reorganizing the city's high schools into smaller learning environments. Next fall, some of these schools are scheduled to break up into 15 new small schools that share building space but are otherwise autonomous.
• In Portland, Ore., a group of business leaders is offering $25 million to high schools willing to break up into smaller schools of no more than 400 students.
The push to replace large, comprehensive high schools -- and some of the nation's larger middle schools -- is based on a growing body of research showing that small schools generally have lower dropout rates, better attendance, less violence, and, in many cases, higher levels of student achievement.
Personalized instruction
Evidence suggests these benefits stem largely from the closer relationships and personalized instruction that is possible among teachers and students at smaller schools, says Jill Davidson of the Coalition of Essential Schools. In large, impersonal high schools, students can easily become lost and isolated.
"It's a lot easier for the staff of a small school to make quick corrections, to know what their kids are up to, and to work closer together," she says. "A small school allows everyone to break down the anonymity that can get in the way of a good education."
According to Tom Vander Ark, executive director of education at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, "Young people who attend smaller schools that provide a rigorous, personalized education and enable close relationships with adults are more likely to graduate and continue their education."
Influx of funding
Calls to break up large high schools can be traced back as far as A Nation At Risk. But the movement gained momentum in recent years with the influx of public and private funds to spur school district reforms.
Since 2000, for example, the U.S. Department of Education has more than tripled its investment in its Smaller Learning Communities Program to $142 million.
More significant, the Gates Foundation has given more than $590 million for small-schools initiatives in many school districts, including Chicago, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C.
The influence of such funding can be seen in Ohio's Small Schools Initiative, which is supported by $25 million from the Gates Foundation and another $15 million in other private and state funds.
The money is being used for planning grants to 40 high schools and implementation grants to 17 large high schools that plan to break apart into 70 autonomous schools sharing facilities.
Another initiative heavily funded by the Gates Foundation and Meyer Memorial Trust is under way in Oregon, where Employers for Education Excellence has offered $25 million to help the state's large high schools break down into smaller learning environments.
As they work to restructure high schools, school officials are showing a lot of flexibility in adjusting their strategies to local conditions.
In New York City, for example, school officials have created both small autonomous schools that operate out of a small building and small schools that share space in a larger building.
Meanwhile, Boston officials are embracing the schools-within-a-school model. Two of the most recent school redesigns, at South Boston and Dorchester high schools, organized each school into three separate learning communities, sharing the same building but autonomous in their budgets, staffs, and principals.
In Indianapolis, school officials are breaking up the city's high schools into smaller "learning academies" -- groupings of no more than 200 students whose studies are organized around such themes as arts and communication or science and technology.
Despite the promise of these initiatives, there have been a few recent studies critical of small schools. A legal advocacy group in New York City examined 145 of the city's small schools and found that approximately one quarter are no more secure or academically successful than the city's larger comprehensive high schools.
Caution urged
Another study by Texas State University professor Toni Terling Watt found that, in small schools, the incidence of suicide and depression actually was higher among some student groups. She theorizes that smaller schools are less diverse, making students who are "different" more likely to stand out from the crowd and be isolated.
Her research, however, did not examine conditions in large schools split into smaller learning communities. "It could be the best of both worlds or the worst of both worlds," she says about the schools-within-a-school model. "We might want to look into that."
Such research only shows that small schools are just as reliant as larger schools on good leadership, a trained staff, and a solid academic program to succeed, say small school advocates.
Still, Toch says, "you are more likely to create a learning environment that's conducive to academic achievement in a small school environment. You are playing the odds here."
A more practical concern is whether local and state budgets will be able to support smaller schools on a long-term basis. Although recent grants provide useful start-up funds, some wonder whether policymakers are up to the commitment.
In Oregon, some school officials are showing reluctance about applying for grant money because of doubts about their ability to fund their share of the reorganization efforts.
But looking at the cost of small schools on a per-pupil basis might be misleading, argue small school advocates. A New York University study of the city's small schools showed that they cost only $25 more per graduate, because the smaller schools tend to have higher graduation rates.
"While school districts that are currently saddled with large physical plants might productively move towards schools-within-schools," concluded University of Chicago professor Tony Bryk, "there is little reason to continue to build more buildings like this. In light of the positive consequences for both adults and students associated with working in small schools, the reality is one of dis-economy of scale."
Top of Page
| Reproduced with permission from the 2003 issue of School Board News. Copyright © 2003, National School Boards Association. Opinions expressed in this newspaper do not necessarily reflect positions of NSBA. This article may be printed out and photocopied for individual or educational use, provided this copyright notice appears on each copy. This article may not be otherwise transmitted or reproduced in print or electronic form without the consent of the Publisher. For more information, call (703) 838-6789. |