Small Schools, Great Strides

Abstract

EVIDENCE is mounting that schools, not just smaller classes, lead to higher achievement. The consolidation of schools, especially high schools, was one of less noted events that followed Sputnik. Franklin Keller wrote The Comprehensive High School in 1955, and that book greatly influenced James Bryant Conant as he was about to conduct his own study of American high Indeed, list of high Keller identified as was used as a starting point for Conant's work. Keller thought that high he labeled comprehensive were those found in cities where a single high school served entire community and provided an extensive range of courses, including foreign languages and vocational courses. Contrary to some school critics of his day, Conant held that no radical alteration in basic pattern of American education is necessary to improve our public high schools. More instruction in foreign languages was necessary, and academically able girls did need more guidance. Aside from that, major recommendation of Conant's study, The American High School Today, was that the number of high must be drastically reduced through district reorganization. Conant's study was published in early 1959, and his timing was impeccable. The Russians had launched Sputnik in late 1957, throwing Americans into a tizzy about their schools, which were, inappropriately, blamed for letting Russians get into space first. It now appears, though, that large schools, especially large high schools, produce their own set of problems, which a growing number of researchers and policy makers think can be solved by returning to Advocates for have argued that they can * raise student achievement, especially for minority and low-income students; * reduce incidents of violence and disruptive behavior; * combat anonymity and isolation and, conversely, increase sense of belonging; * increase attendance and graduation rates; * elevate teacher satisfaction; * improve school climate; * operate most cost-effectively; * increase parent and community involvement; and * reduce amount of graffiti on school buildings. Each of these would be a major outcome. Taken together, they constitute a powerful array of improvements. Three recent publications offer additional information on impact of The first, by Valerie Lee of University of Michigan and Susanna Loeb of Stanford University, examines effect of school size on teacher attitudes and student achievement. It was published in Spring 2000 issue of American Educational Research Journal. The second, also by Lee - with co-authors Becky Smerdan of American Institutes for Research; Corrinne Alfeld-Liro of Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin; and Shelly Brown of Johns Hopkins University - looks at how size relates to curriculum and social relations in high The third is a more comprehensive, but quite readable, summary document, Small Schools: Great Strides, by Patricia Wasley, dean of Bank Street College of Education, and a gaggle of collaborators (http://www.bankstreet.edu/html/news/SmallSchools.pdf). In their study, Lee and Loeb ask three questions: Do teachers in take more responsibility for students' academic and social development, and do they think their colleagues also do? Does willingness to take responsibility for achievement actually enhance achievement? Does school size have an impact on student achievement that is independent of collective responsibility for achievement expressed by teachers? The study is unusual because it focuses on elementary Most studies of school size have been conducted at secondary level. For this study, small schools were defined as those enrolling fewer than 400 students. …