SmallerSchools.org and the Blog will soon be moving to a WordPress site at https://smallerschools.wordpress.com/
Please head over there for the latest research on Smaller Schools and Districts, plus information on the Alpine School District division of 2024.
Donna Barnes served on the Alpine School District Board for many years. Earlier this year, she spoke out in favor of a split for Alpine School District. Here are some of the key points she laid out:
We heard the term “economies of scale” several times in the meeting. Essentially, the term means the more you serve, the cheaper it is. As a board member, I heard this often and wondered how that broke out in actual dollars. I always heard we ran our district more economically than others, but I have not seen actual figures. The term “economies of scale” concerns business and supplies rather than schools and students. After an ASD board meeting, I often felt like I had attended a corporate meeting focusing on the bottom line rather than a school meeting focusing on student achievement.
Speaking about the Jordan/Canyons split, she said:
I was aware of some of the angst during the split, but today, if an employee of either Canyons or Jordan were questioned about the wisdom of the split, they would agree that it was the best thing that could have happened. Today, Canyons and Jordan School Districts outpace ASD teacher pay by almost $10,000 annually. A substitute teacher in Canyons makes around $200 per day; the rate is around $100 in Alpine.
She concludes that "we have reached a point where the district’s size has reached a point of diminishing returns. I could name several instances where the district’s size has made decision-making slow and cumbersome."
Governor Spencer Cox has called the legislature into a special session to address the possibility of competing ballot initiatives. A bill has been sponsored by Rep. Brammer and Sen. Grover that would remove the option for the school board to put the issue on the ballot. This would mean the only options to split the district would be via a citizen petition, single-city, or an interlocal agreement.
The best option for splitting the district should be with the local school board. However, given what has taken place on the Alpine School District board this year, it has become obvious that this presents a conflict of interest. Two board members (Ada Wilson and Mark Clement) have repeatedly and publicly stated their opposition to splitting the district. Yet they are also voting to advance a ballot initiative that they will be actively campaigning against. This is what is referred to as "bad faith".
The legislature should pass this legislation and Gov. Cox should sign it so voters can have clarity and honesty in the choices they will be deciding at the ballot box.
Many people will ask what are the benefits of smaller school districts. Frequently, they bring up arguments for large districts and/or district consolidation like economies of scale. But a deeper analysis reveals that large school districts are not good for students or communities. "Researchers have long known that school-district size matters" according to AmericanProgress.org.
Here are some of the unique challenges facing large school districts that can negatively impact the quality of education:
Administrative Complexity
According to the Education Commission of the States, districts over 50,000 students experience a "diseconomies of scale" (also see the AmericanProgress.org study). This can lead to inefficiencies and a slower response to the needs of students and schools. They claim that the sweet spot for school district costs is more than 25,000 students, but less than 50,000. A 2022 Performance Audit of Public Education Administrative Costs in Utah that found that "some of the lowest administrative costs per student are among midsize and large districts (i.e., those with student counts of 10,000 to 20,000 students)".
Lower Equity and Funding
Large school districts often encompass diverse communities with varying socioeconomic backgrounds. This can lead to significant disparities in educational resources and outcomes between schools in affluent areas and those in lower-income neighborhoods. Urban.org notes that "Research has shown that smaller school districts tend to be better funded, leading to improved educational outcomes."
Reduced Community Engagement
In large districts, it can be challenging for parents and community members to engage meaningfully with school administration. The distance—both physical and metaphorical—between district leaders and individual schools can make it difficult for parents to voice their concerns and for schools to tailor their approaches to community needs. We see this in district consolidation, but it can also be seen in districts that grow rapidly over a short time - especially if the growth is not balanced over all areas.
Smaller school districts tend to foster stronger connections between schools and their communities. This increased engagement can lead to higher levels of parental involvement and more community support for schools.
Lower Student Achievement
Multiple studies have repeatedly found that "large school district size is detrimental to achievement ... in that it strengthens the negative relationship between school poverty and student achievement." Another study considering district consolidation concluded that "increasing district size has a negative effect on student achievement" and that "total district enrollment is negatively correlated with student achievement across all tested grade levels." This multi-state study found that smaller sized schools and districts "reduces the negative influence of poverty on school and district performance by as much as 70%."
A California study also found that reducing school district size could be potentially important to educational reform. "Controlling for characteristics of the student population and other environmental factors, including class and school size, district size appears to hinder educational achievement, having its biggest impact on middle school student performance.
Bigger Districts = Bigger Schools
“Smaller, more intimate learning communities consistently deliver better results in academics and discipline when compared to their larger counterparts. Big schools offer few opportunities to participate.” – J. Matthews, Education Reporter, Washington Post
A Clemson University study found that "school district size is the most significant factor in determining school size with consolidation/reorganization plans generally resulting in larger schools." While other studies then show that "small schools have very strong advantages" in safety, teaching conditions, academic performance, culture of connection and inclusiveness, learning choices and curriculum. And article from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance asserts that "one of the most effective ways to improve student achievement and curb school violence is to reduce the size of the nation’s schools."
Smaller districts can improve administrative efficiency, enhance equity, foster greater community engagement, and ensure better resource allocation. As such, policymakers and education leaders should consider the potential advantages of restructuring large school districts to better serve their students and communities.
Alpine School District released the slides they are using at the 2 public comment presentations, and they continue to make the faulty assumptions we have addressed in previous posts.
The idea of splitting school districts like Alpine School District wasn't random. Former teacher and state representative, David Cox, was serving as a stake (a stake is a collection of congregations - aka wards) clerk in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the 1990s when the growth in Lehi was just starting to take off. As clerk, his job was to divide up the congregations and change boundaries for the stake to split into two.
A lot of planning and considerations went into these decisions, and not every one was happy with them. Many people complained about how their ward boundaries were being redrawn. But the Church and its leaders knew that to accommodate the growth, they needed to divide, even though this would increase some expenses (duplication of services, offices, buildings, etc).
So why does the Church divide stakes? First, because it allows for many decisions to be made closer to the people. Second, it allows more people to be involved in their local wards and stakes. Additionally, when people become a number, lost in a sea of many, they are easier to become lost. To expound on a parable of Jesus, it's one thing to leave the 99 to go after the 1. If there were hundreds of sheep in a fold, there would be a lot more lost sheep and fewer shepherds. If the Church didn't divide their large congregations and stakes, it could not handle the growth it has experienced world-wide or even in Lehi, Eagle Mountain, and Saratoga Springs.
Recently, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints updated their handbook regarding creating new wards and stakes. As pointed out in a post by Matthew Watkins on X, the new recommendations align all countries and allow for smaller wards and stakes to be created in the US and Canada. There seems to be a sweet spot between too small and too big, as the numbers have increased for those outside US and Canada.
