Student Consolidation

Larger schools are able to employ more specialized educators, such as science or math teachers. The potential gains from specialization may provide a good reason for consolidation in an era of rising standards. If schools were consolidated, the amount of specialized staff would increase. There are many opponents of school consolidation because it is assumed that larger schools mean larger class size. Larger class size, it is felt, has a negative effect on student achievement. Evidence suggests, however, that class-size reduction has no effect on student achievement. There are hundreds of studies of class size that suggest that reducing class size does not raise achievement. Consolidation also should result in better coordination of curriculum and easier transitions for students between grade levels, greater educational opportunities for students and more coordinated and efficient special education services. It is a proven fact that poor students perform better in schools in which they are integrated with middle class students. The problem with districts in which a majority of the students are low income is the need to add middle class students. One solution is school consolidation. This would call for legislative action that would never occur, unless districts came forward voluntarily. When the share of a school’s students who are disadvantaged reaches sixty percent or more, the focus, morale, and educational environment shift dramatically. Teachers have reduced time to teach, are forced to teach many remedial courses, and generally seek to leave; middle-class parents of all races do the same. If school districts were reconfigured and consolidated, the integration of races and socioeconomic classes would benefit those who are disadvantaged. It was found that test scores of poor students improved when they went to school with middle class students.