July 11, 2008

The case for smaller schools-Guest Column

Editor’s Note: Retiring Southern Wells Superintendent Neil Potter has always been vocal about the benefits of smaller schools, even more so since the Kernan-Shepherd Commission’s recommendations about forcing school consoldiations. We asked Neil to share his thoughts with our readers.

I am now closing a rewarding 37 year career in teaching and school administration and have a flood of thoughts and memories as the time draws to a close. In retrospect, I have become more and more convinced of the value of small schools with a close community governance structure.

My high school class was well over 400 students so I experienced the atmosphere and characteristics of a larger school. My student teaching was at Woodlan High School, my first teaching and administrative experience at Adams Central, and my 10 years as superintendent were at Southern Wells Community Schools.

One of the great needs for students to find success in the work world is to have a broad and varied background of school activities. As international economics force working adults to change jobs and retrain multiple times in their careers, the best preparation for unexpected change is to have broad base of varied activities. Small schools are excellent places for students to try many activities including sports, fine arts, clubs, and leadership roles. Students do not have to specialize in one area to even make the team as is often the case in larger settings.

Students do best in a climate where they know and are known by their peers and the staff. When the principal can call all the students by name and most teachers know most of the students, the advantages are remarkable. Outsiders who come into the building are immediately identified which makes security a much easier issue. Students will be better citizens when being supervised by a caring adult who knows their name and often knows the parent names. Children come to school more and more from varied and unsettled circumstances. For them to have a place where people know and care for them is a huge step in helping them succeed in troubling times.

The best decisions for students are made by people who are close to those students on a daily basis. Small school corporations enable a situation where the students and staff have daily contact with the central office administration. The communications and immediate feedback concerning decisions and policies help create a very accountable structure which is responsive to the needs of students. It is a tremendous help for administrators who are dealing with paperwork, budget challenges and difficult situations to be able to walk through the halls many times each day and observe students engaged in learning activities. Staff members who see a problem arising can share the concern face to face and the solutions can be addressed efficiently. A small administrative structure and staff can be very responsive to student concerns and decisions about programs.

Real parent involvement with their student’s education is encouraged with a small school. The involvement needed is more than PTA and fundraising which is a great beginning. I am talking about really getting involved in knowing what the students are learning and how they are doing on a daily basis. This valuable component of a student’s experience is only made stronger by a small community based program to which parents have easy access and where their input is valued.

Young teachers often find the small school setting to be a more comfortable place to start. These communities can be very welcoming and appreciative of new staff and that young talent is valuable to continuing success of programs and future improvements. The confidence to get started and to try new endeavors is usually more welcome in the small school setting.

I have observed many misconceptions about the programs and financial viability of school corporations with less than 1,000 students. The most glaring untruth is that small schools cost more to operate per pupil than large schools. As a blanket statement, this is just not correct. The school systems spending the highest amount per pupil in Indiana are generally the largest systems and many of the most efficient financially per student are the small schools. The often uncalculated factor in most of these dollars per student studies is the massive amounts of federal dollars which flow at a greater rate to many large and urban systems. The dollars are needed by these schools to meet demands but are left out or mis-represented when dollars per student studies are published. The reasons for less cost per student in small schools are plentiful. One reason is administrative structure. I see many schools with twice as many students as our small school but well over twice or up to three times as many administrative staff and their individual salaries are higher.

The often-stated claim that each county should only have one superintendent to save money does not prove out. Usually this superintendent will demand and need a bigger salary because of the market for these skilled individuals. To get the job done, assistants will need to be hired with a subsequent higher total administrative cost per student. With size and multiple campuses, directors and coordinators are added. Big box efficiencies are not always appropriate for educational structures. Employee costs in larger schools tend to be higher due to more union involvement and needing to pay more to attract quality staff.

Other claims of efficiencies in size are in purchasing and special program administration. Small schools through service centers and other cooperatives are able to purchase many supplies and are served at comparable or better rates because of the joint arrangements. We are combining our efforts with other schools when it is clearly required in areas of special needs programs and vocational programs which need consolidated efforts to have critical mass efficiencies and excellence. The bids we get in small schools for our insurance coverage tend to be lower because of the closer management enabled by small structure of staff and facilities as well as better loss ratios.

Transportation costs per student are not eased by combining campuses. Transporting students more miles increases fuel costs and valuable student time on the bus.

There are some very important issues that arise when schools or school systems get bigger which are beyond financial issues. Student security issues in most facets become more difficult with large size. Students are less involved in after-school activities because of travel time and competition for spots on the team or group. The governance structure of the school is less obvious and less available to parents and patrons. Student and staff turnover tend to be higher in larger schools.

What is the ideal size school for programs and cost efficiencies? My experience over the last four decades leads me to believe that cut-off numbers for when a school is too small are unsupported by real evidence. Other states out west would consider Southern Wells to be a large school corporation in context of their population. Many schools in my home state of Nebraska which have less than 200 students K-12 have viable programs which produce college student success and career development history comparing favorably with any public schools in the nation. Good schools are based in good communities which support financially and through personal involvement to get the best programs for their own students. The ideal size is what the community feels is sufficient to enable opportunities for students and for governance input.

I chose to have my career in what Indiana would generally call small schools and would make the same choice again if I were 20 years old. Small schools are a great place to work, to make an impact, and to feel appreciated for your efforts.

by NEIL POTTE

Talk about this story in our forums!