« July 2006 | Main | October 2006 »

September 28, 2006

Paron and the Propagandist

Paul Greenberg’s been getting some mail. And he doesn’t like it.

The editorial page editor of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette said in a Sunday editorial (September 24, 2006) that he had been sent about a “zillion” copies of an article appearing on this Blog (“Facts are stubborn things, Mr. Greenberg,” posted September 8, 2006).

The article chided Greenberg for not leveling with Arkansans about the facts surrounding the closing of Paron High School. Paron High was forced to close after it was annexed by neighboring Bryant School District. The excuse Bryant gave for the closure was that Paron allegedly was unable to teach all of the 38 courses Arkansas high schools are required to teach each year.

Our article recited a pile of facts about the good performance of Paron students and about the circumstances surrounding the school’s efforts to teach journalism, one of the 38 required courses. Those facts were repeated by many writers who sent letters to the editor as well as emails to the Democrat-Gazette editorial page.

And Mr. Greenberg feels beleaguered and besieged by all this email. I doubt he got a zillion, but any number might have been a bit much for him.

He’s not used to seeing in print opinions he doesn’t agree with, unless he approves publishing them. As editorial

page editor of one of the few remaining statewide newspapers with a near monopoly on daily print news and opinion, he has more control than anyone over whose views are fit to print. His views, of course, get daily circulation to over 175,000 readers on weekdays, over 280,000 on Sunday. It’s hard to think of him as drowned out by email.

Anyway, he was feeling a lot better when he wrote Sunday’s editorial because he had a real winner. In that pile of facts we documented about Paron, Greenberg triumphantly found a single one that he could dispute.

Seems that Paron students’ college remediation rate is not zero as we reported. He admits that the web site of the state department of education – where we got our information – says it is zero. But the department, whose every decision to close a rural school Greenberg defends -- was wrong. At least according to Greenberg’s buddies in a University of Arkansas data center that helps the state education department collect and report data on school performance.

They told Greenberg that Paron’s remediation rate was not accurately reported on the state department’s website because the number of Paron students requiring remediation was so small that it is not reported. The website says “0” students required remediation when in reality, Greenberg’s university buddies told him, two students required remediation. Greenberg describes their analysis as “heavy number lifting.”

Never mind for the moment that this university agency is now leaking inside information about individual student performances that they are not supposed to disclose. Never mind that they are doing it to boost a political opinion writer who supports heavy-handed methods of closing rural schools. And never mind that remediation rates only reflect the performance of graduates who attend public institutions within Arkansas, not the students who attend private colleges and universities that are harder to get into.

And while you’re being generous, also never mind the fact that the reason the state does not disclose remediation rates for schools where the number requiring remediation is fewer than 10 – apart from the need to protect student privacy -- is because the sample size is too small to draw valid conclusions about the school’s performance.

And that means that any reported remediation rate at Paron is virtually useless for evaluating the school’s performance.

So we’ll call it a draw on remediation.

But please, while you are never-minding these bothersome facts about Greenberg’s remediation rant, don’t be so generous with him that you ignore the elephant sitting on his keyboard. While he runs on and on about whether it was 0 or two kids requiring remediation, he remains utterly silent on all of the other evidence about Paron’s academic performance. That’s because he has no bone to pick with these facts:

• In 2005, on every state mandated test in every high school grade, Paron outscored the state average. Same thing with the end-of -course tests for Algebra I and Geometry.

• Fewer Paron kids scored below “basic,” the lowest score on state tests, than did kids from the rest of the state, on average.

• On the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, a test that ranks kids against their peers nationwide, Paron outscored the national average. And it outscored the Arkansas average, usually by 5-10 points, depending on the grade and the subject tested.

• Paron student’s composite score on the ACT college entrance exam was 21. The state average was 20.5. Bryant district was 19.8.

• Paron’s dropout rate was 1.7%. Graduation rate was 89.6%. Bryant drops out 3% a year, and graduates 84.5%.

Scoreboard: Paron 5, Greenberg 0, and 1 draw.

The overwhelming weight of the evidence is that the Bryant district, with the help of a conniving state department of education, has closed a better-than-average school on the thin excuse that it is alleged not to have taught journalism.

I say “alleged” because while Mr. Greenberg incessantly makes the point that Paron could not teach all 38 required courses, the fact is that all 38 courses, including journalism, were being taught at Paron High School when the Bryant district decided to close it. Journalism was being taught by a teacher with a Master’s degree who was certified to teach English, Advanced Placement English, drama, and speech. She was not separately certified to teach journalism, but she had been granted a waiver by the state department so she could teach journalism.

Paron was 38-course compliant. So what’s the beef?

When Bryant decided to close Paron -- to save money, by the way, not to teach journalism -- Paron appealed to the state board of education, a body that has never seen a small school it didn’t want to close. And just four days before Paron was due to have a hearing before that board, the state department of education cynically withdrew the journalism teacher’s waiver, without explanation. And four days later, Bryant used the lack of a certified journalism teacher as a defense of its decision to close Paron.

Mr. Greenberg’s inside information may have given him a chance to gloat about remediation rates, but that is only because he hopes to cover up the undisputed truths about Paron. Like how well Paron students test. How many graduate. And how ugly the steps taken to close the school really were.

But ugly as that process was, it can’t hold a candle to the ugliness of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s editorial disrespect for rural people who want to save their schools.

Greenberg sneers at what he calls these “Paronistas.” He repeatedly uses this fabricated cultural slur to refer both to the parents at Paron High School who are fighting to keep it open, and more broadly, to all rural Arkansans who want to keep and improve their small community schools. He used it three times in Sunday’s editorial alone.

By labeling them with this pseudo Latin American slur, Greenberg is suggesting that rural school advocates are an embattled backward resistance movement, a threat to law and order, a dangerous element that borders on the guerilla side of resistance, as in “terrorist.”

Labeling people this way targets them for scorn, if not hatred. Scorn is, after all, the mother’s milk of hatred.

These are the tools of the propagandist. True, some of the editorial tactics Greenberg uses are merely petty, but some come right out of the playbook of the most irresponsible political propagandists.

Propagandists have long known that you can divert political attention away from bad policies by identifying the victims of those policies as targets for scorn and branding them with distinctive slurs.

Demonizing the victim can stampede the public into favoring policies that would otherwise be unacceptable.

Sometimes this is done for corrupt or evil purposes. Sometimes it is merely done pathetically in the name of progress. Granted, the Democrat-Gazette editorials are more pathetic than evil.

But propaganda is propaganda, whether it claims to defend progress or not. And what Greenberg is doing is propagandizing for state policies aimed at separating rural people from their schools.

He uses trumped up allegations about curriculum standards to draw attention away from boneheaded bureaucratic and political decisions to close small schools no matter how good they are, and then invents names suggesting lawlessness to pin on those who want to save their schools from this nonsense.

The propagandist’s fingerprints are everywhere in these editorials.

Greenberg blames the victims for being deceived by erroneous information issued by the very state agency whose heavy-handed ways he defends. He maligns those he targets for scorn with repeated malicious slurs. He selectively relies on facts that divert attention from the agenda he trumpets.

And that agenda is the dismantling of Arkansas’ rural community schools. Paron is an embarrassment to this agenda precisely because it defies the image state officials and the Democrat-Gazette have cultivated of small schools as bad schools that need to be closed.

Make no bones about it, there clearly are struggling small schools in Arkansas, or more precisely, schools that have never had a chance to be good schools because, as the Arkansas Supreme Court put it plainly, they have not been adequately or equitably funded.

Come to think of it, there are some struggling big schools in Arkansas, too. But they are now getting a chance to be better with adequate funding.

Can all of Arkansas’ small rural schools, given proper funding, become good schools if they are run by the communities they serve?

Paul Greenberg doesn’t think so. And neither do some other powerful people, who may use terms like “those people” instead of Greenberg’s “Paronistas.” They don’t think parents and communities should have a say in their children’s education. They don’t think “those people” are capable of running good schools democratically.

They have a right to think that way. And to talk and write that way. And to vote that way.

But a lot of people in rural Arkansas do think they can run good schools close to home for their kids. A lot of people don’t think that arbitrarily closing schools because they are small is smart.

A lot of people – in Little Rock as well as rural Arkansas – don’t think that putting kids on a bus for three hours every day is a program for excellence in education.

And a lot of people don’t like demonizing good people who care about their kids just because they don’t agree with state officials who want to close their schools.

At the heart of every propagandist is a wretched coward who fears those he misleads as much as those he maligns. What he fears most, of course, is the truth. Because it is the truth that threatens to unite those he misleads with those he maligns. And truth has a troublesome way of percolating to the surface through the sludge of the propagandist’s half-truths, disinformation, and distortions.

September 13, 2006

Goose and Gosling

"We are going to be able to take professional development where teachers are rather than simply asking them to come where we are. It also means we are using the latest tools and technology to give teachers the best tools of teaching an educational capacity."

Those are the words of Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in announcing a new on-line program offered by the state Department of Education so teachers can take a required 60 hours of professional development courses annually through distance learning programs.

That’s the same Department of Education that requires that all high schools actually teach 38 required courses every year, with a certified teacher on site, whether students sign up for the course or not.

Nope, courses taught by distance learning cannot meet this requirement. Even if the course comes from the high school’s home district. Or from the state’s virtual high school. Kids can take distance learning courses, but that won’t relieve their high school of having to teach the 38 required courses.

Paron High School was recently closed because one course – journalism – was being taught on site by an uncertified teacher. She had an English certificate and a master’s degree, but no journalism certificate. So Paron students now put in a ten-and-a-half hour day, three of them on the bus, going to Bryant High School which offers all 38 courses.

Another school was ruled in violation of the 38-course requirement because it did not offer Physics. Seems its students were taking Advanced Placement Physics, instead. Can’t have that.

Rural school officials also report that College Algebra cannot be counted as one of the 38 credits. However, Transition to College Mathematics, an easier course that can be taken after Algebra II and before College Algebra, is considered one of the 38. Most students would rather take the College Algebra and get concurrent high school/college credit. But if no one takes Transition to College Mathematics, the school violates the mandatory 38-courses-taught requirement.

Said one official, “That leaves counselors begging a student to take the less challenging Transitional Math Course in order to teach all 38.”

In case what you are reading here seems incredible, we’ll say it again for clarity. The requirement is that each high school actually teach all 38 courses, not that it offers to teach them.

What is the purpose of the irrational 38, as we like to call it? To force small schools to close. No matter how good they are.

The distance learning program for professional development is a great idea. Letting small high school meet the demands of a rigorous curriculum through distance learning is, too. What is good for the goose is good for the gosling.


Marty Strange is policy director of the Rural School and Community Trust.

September 08, 2006

Welcome to Rural Matters

Welcome to Rural Matters blog, sponsored by the Rural School and Community Trust.

Rural Matters will regularly post information and resources, perspective and comment, on issues related to rural education and small schools.

A blog is an interactive web site. That means that anyone with computer access can participate in and contribute to Rural Matters. We want to hear from you, so we've provided several easy and fun options you can use to share your news and perspectives on rural schools and communities.

COMMENTS. Anyone can add comments to any post. You can also read the comments others have made. Simply click the word "comments" under a post that interests you. You'll see the comments others have posted. Scroll to the bottom for easy instructions on how to post a comment. Note: you do not have to register to post a comment.

GUEST AUTHOR. A second way to participate in Rural Matters is by posting a blog entry. Click on the button "Apply to Post a Blog as a Guest Author" in the right column of the MAIN Rural Matters page.

Rural Matters has a number of additional useful and easy-to-use features.

TOPICAL CATEGORIES/ARCHIVES. Rural Matters archives all posts in topical categories. That will make it easier for you to follow topics that are of particular interest to you. In addition, all posts are also archived chronologically by month.

RESOURCE PAGES. These pages provide useful links to studies, web sites, and other resources related to particular themes. They are regularly updated.

PERMALINKS. Every post on Rural Matters has it's own unique url--that's the web address. To find the permalink for any post, just click the work "permalink" under the post. This allows you to bookmark or create other kinds of links to specific posts.

BLOG@ruraledu.org. Share your questions or make suggestions via email to blog@ruraledu.org. This is an email link and your suggestions or questions will not show up on Rural Matters.

EMAIL NOTIFICATIONS. If you'd like to get a notification in your email in-box when new posts appear on Rural Matters, just click on "notifications" and follow the simple instructions.

RSS FEEDS. RSS Feeds are another easy way to keep up with activities and posts on Rural Matters. A "feed reader" is an easy-to-use program that grabs and stores new blog posts for blogs for which you’ve subscribed. You don’t have to visit each blog separately, your inbox does not get cluttered, you can choose only the Rural Matters blog topics that interest you, and you can open your feed reader when it’s convenient for you.

For more information on RSS feeds and for step-by-step instructions for subscribing to an RSS feed for Rural Matters, visit About RSS. For general information about RSS feeds, click on [What is RSS?] on the right side bar of the main Rural Matters page. To sign up for RSS feeds, click the "Subscribe to this blog's feed" button on the right side bar, ignore the HTML code in the link, and put the url from the address bar into your feed reader.

LINKS. In the right column of Rural Matters, you'll find links to websites and other blogs. If you have suggestions for links that should be listed on Rural Matters, email the link and the organization to BLOG@ruraledu.org. We won't guarantee that we'll post your links, but we do want to hear about them.

TRACKBACKS. TrackBacks show where other bloga have linked to specific posts in Rural Matters.

Facts Are Stubborn Things, Mr. Greenberg

“Facts are stubborn things,” John Adams said, arguing for the Redcoat defendants in the Boston Massacre trial. He won their acquittal. It won’t be as easy for the people trying to get the facts in public view on the matter of the Arkansas Press Corps v. Paron High School.

That’s not a court case. That’s just a caption for the relentless diatribe against small schools, Paron in particular lately, spewing from the pundits who write columns, editorials, and cartons for the state’s editorial pages.

It’s a diatribe far more embarrassing than those pundits claim the state’s small schools are.

But maybe relief is in sight. In one of his increasingly inane rants about the battle to keep Paron High School open, Paul Greenberg, the editorial page editor of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, and the top bully on the beat, finally got one thing right.

But the thing he got right is buried under a Pinnacle-Mountain sized pile of nonsense. It’s under there buried with all the common sense dumped by the state and local education officials presiding over this melodrama.

Sometimes Greenberg’s rush to taunt the afflicted gets him more than a little confused.

Consider this gem. First, Greenberg ridicules Paron parents for being concerned that 90 minute one-way bus rides might keep their children from participating in extracurricular activities, like sporting events. They care more about sports than education, he says. Only faking commitment to their kids.

Then he chortles that Paron didn’t even have a football team. Hmmmm…

Am I missing something here? If Paron parents are guilty of caring more about sports than schooling, why in blue blazes are they fighting to keep open a school that can’t field a football team?

Maybe it’s because they are worried that their kids will be perpetual outsiders in a school so remote from their homes that participation in any extra-curricular activities will be next to impossible. Carpool, he advises. That’s what parents did when he was in school. Let’s see, that was in Shreveport wasn’t it? Must have been a fifteen minute ride, if you didn’t hit the traffic lights right.

Never let logic get in the way of a good argument.

Not when you’ve got sarcasm, ridicule, mockery, and a 37 year-old Pulitzer Prize for hyperbole going for you instead.

Unlike their parents, of course, Greenberg only wants what is best for the Paron kids. He wants them to have choices of the 160 courses offered at Bryant. Guess he hasn’t read the research that shows that kids in big schools offering a “rich” curriculum are actually more likely to take fewer courses – because in big schools, kids are not needed to fill courses, and teachers don’t want the strugglers and the poor test takers. Kids hide in big schools, and teachers don’t go looking for them. Paron parents understand. So did the state’s consultants when they recommended against the requirement that every high school teach 38 courses every year.

But Greenberg runs with the conventional wisdom of Little Rock – the only good small school is a closed small school. So he wants kids to have lots of curricular choices.

Unless, of course, they choose to take courses by distance learning. He cites as disturbing one Paron student who chose to take Spanish courses from the Bryant District via distance learning. Must be better to put her on a bus to and from Bryant for 3 hours a day than to let her tune into broadcast Spanish for 50 minutes.

It’s also no good if students choose to use the state’s highly touted virtual high school to take some other exotic courses every high school in the state is now required to teach each year, like journalism, for example.

Nope, whether it comes from your home district or your state education department, you can’t meet the 38-course requirement using courses taught by distance learning. The course has to be offered on site. Put her on a bus. Close the small school close to home.

And teach a lesson to these backward people who are arrogant enough to want to use the latest education technology to get the most for their kids. In Arkansas, you are only modern if you want to close small schools. Otherwise, you are an “Arkie,” as Greenberg is fond of calling rural Arkansans.

To Greenberg, those Paron Arkies are especially reprehensible. Why, only 35 percent of the parents attended parent conferences last year, lowest rate in the Bryant District according to its superintendent.

But could it be that parents in Paron don’t need to schedule conferences with teachers? Maybe they just walk right in the door of their small…er, excuse me, the Greenberg standard for belittling “small” is “tiny” -- school anytime they want and talk to their kids’ teachers.

Maybe they see their teachers at the store or in church or at a school event. Maybe they know their kids are doing well, so they don’t feel they need a conference.

Maybe their kids are getting a good education, and maybe they know that.

But of course, that can’t be. If that were so, Greenberg’s incessant rant about Paron offering a bad education -- always on “double-secret probation,” whatever that is – wouldn’t hold water. And since that is the entire foundation of his argument against keeping Paron open, his argument would be, well, underwater.

Re-enter John Adams and his stubborn facts for the defense.

In 2005, Paron High School had a higher percentage of its students score proficient or better on every grade 7, 8, and eleven Arkansas Benchmark test in literacy and math than the average for all high schools in the state.

Same thing with the end of course tests for Algebra I and Geometry.

And on each and every one of these tests, Paron had a smaller percentage of students scoring below basic, the lowest score, than the average for the rest of the state.

On every state mandated test in every high school grade, Paron outscored the state average.

In head-to-head matchup with the Bryant district, Paron performed better on some tests and not as well on others. But it had far fewer kids scoring below basic than Bryant. On 3 of 7 Benchmark and end of course exams, not a single Paron student scored below basic.

All this despite the fact that the poverty rate among students in Paron is 52% higher than for the Bryant district as a whole. In small…even tiny…schools, kids don’t get left behind. And they don’t need a federal law to tell them that.

So, how did Paron do against the nation? On the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, a test that ranks kids against their peers nationwide, Paron outscored the national average. And it outscored the Arkansas average, usually by 5-10 percentile points, depending on the grade and the subject tested.

Ah ha, we imagine Mr. Greenberg argues, when Paron students head for college, that weak curriculum will show up in the way they perform. They won’t do well on entrance exams and they will require remedial courses before they can begin their college work.

Sorry. Their composite score on the ACT college entrance exam was 21. The state average was 20.5. Bryant district was 19.8. Go figure.

Well, then, remediation, Greenberg grasps. Nope. Remediation rate for the state is 51.6 – over half Arkansans who get to college require some remedial coursework. For Bryant, the “rich” curriculum district, the rate was 66.7%. Paron didn’t contribute to Bryant’s problem, however. Its rate was 0. As in “zero.” Zilch. Nothing. Nada. Hmmmm….

Greenberg hunkers down. Maybe they just aren’t graduating kids – only the very best make it out of Paron, the rest dropout and are lost in the swirling winds of time, unprepared for life, a drag on the Arkansas economy and culture.

Wrong again. Paron’s dropout rate is 1.7%. Graduation rate is 89.6%. Bryant drops out 3% a year, and graduates 84.5%.

Stubborn facts.

Can every small school in Arkansas be as good as Paron? Yes. But for the first time, Arkansas will have to fund these schools, and provide other supports as necessary, to make them the best they can be. It’s a big challenge in the poorest parts of the state. It’s a challenge worth taking, rather than cynically ranting about sports and courses.

But, ask yourself this: Will only 1.7% of Paron students dropout when they are on a bus 3 hours a day headed to a school that already loses nearly twice that number? You don’t need a course in journalism to get that one right.

And that brings us to the one stubborn fact Paul Greenberg did get right. He says that Paron was on probation last year because it couldn’t get a properly credentialed teacher to teach journalism, one of the 38 magical courses that every Arkansas school must teach (not offer, but actually teach, even if no one wants to take it). That’s true.

But it’s not the whole truth. What Greenberg does not tell you is that a licensed teacher with a master’s degree but no journalism certificate was actually teaching the journalism course. The Bryant district – which had hired this teacher for Paron -- had a waiver from the Arkansas Department of Education that allowed her to teach that course.

However, just four days before the state board of education hearing on whether to close Paron, that waiver was revoked.

Bryant could have appealed that decision, but chose not to, in effect volunteering to be out of compliance. What do you bet that was to support the decision to close Paron?

Does anyone else see the irony in these stubborn facts? Maybe Arkansas needs fewer high school journalism courses and more journalists who care about the facts.


Marty Strange is the Policy Director of the Rural School and Community Trust.

September 07, 2006

School Finance Resource Page

“Only a fool would find that money does not matter in education.”
- Howard E. Manning, Jr., North Carolina Superior Court Judge,
from the 2000 Hoke County v. State school finance decision.

Despite these strong words, those of us who work to ensure a quality education close to home for all students often find ourselves without answers for those who assert that schools don’t need more money. How much is enough? What unique resources do rural schools need? How can we obtain the funding to meet the needs of our local school? These are all questions that must be answered. Here are some resources that may help you find the information you need, provide ideas for advocacy campaigns, or perhaps inspire more questions that you should ask of public officials and policymakers who deal with your school’s finances every day.

Check back on this page often – we will continue to add to it and update it so that it contains the most up-to-date references and research that may assist rural school advocates. And, please – share with us helpful websites, articles, and other resources that you do not see listed here!

Organizations Working on School Funding and Finance Issues

The Rural Education Finance Center (REFC) of The Rural School and Community Trust
The Rural Education Finance Center works with rural people and organizations who advocate for equitable funding for all public schools serving rural communities. REFC researches school finance issues and shares findings, promotes best fiscal management practices for rural schools. REFC provides support on current legal issues involving school finance systems, and tracks legal and policy developments affecting rural school finance nationwide.

The National Access Network
Access is a research, networking, and training organization working with advocates. Their website provides nationwide school funding litigation and policy updates, as well as information on other education issues, including No Child Left Behind.

Rural Trust Research on School Finance Issues

Best Fiscal Management Practices for Rural Schools
Jerry Johnson and Greg Malhoit have written a step-by-step guide to the school budgeting process, and in clear language, have compiled the ways in which community members can be involved from start to finish. The guide also explains how using sound budgeting principles can strengthen rural advocates’ positions when advocating for the funding their schools need.

How to Analyze Your State's Education Finance System
This booklet, written by William Mathis, is a comprehensive way for citizens to begin learning about education finance, and contains definitions, explanations, and flowcharts to help guide you step by step through this often complicated and challenging field.

Providing Rural Students with a High Quality Education - The Rural Perspective on the Concept of Educational Adequacy
How do five leading state-level rural advocacy organizations define “adequacy” from a rural perspective? How do these groups, experienced in working for change in the school finance arena, make the connections between financial resources, community involvement, and high quality education so that policymakers listen and better understand what rural schools need? Greg Malhoit has compiled responses and information from a convening of these groups into a guide to participating in the costing-out process to determine adequacy.

Research Websites

U.S. Census
The U.S. Census website contains an Education Finance Data page where you can find figures from every state on very broad topics such as per-pupil spending totals and amounts received from federal, state, and local sources. The most recent data, reported in 2006, is from the fiscal year 2003-2004.

Education Finance Statistics Center
The Education Finance Statistics Center, a part of the National Center for Education Statistics of the U.S. Department of Education contains graphs of much of the Census data, as well as papers describing the stsate systems for financing local school districts. The state overviews are brief, but serve as good introducations to the various ways states allocate money to schools.

Online Guides to School Finance Topics

Public Education Network (PEN) - Guide to Public Engagement and School Finance Litigation
PEN developed this paper to describe how advocacy groups can organize around school funding lawsuits, whether they have been recently filed, are ongoing, or have already been decided. The guide also includes basic information on how the litigation process usually proceeds.

Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning (MCREL) - School Finance: From Equity to Adequacy
MCREL’s paper provides a brief history of school funding suits and explains the equity and adequacy theories on which those lawsuits have been based.

The Hobbit Effect: Why Small Works in Public Schools

Despite the fact that many states are pursuing the irrational policy of closing small schools in rural areas—even as many urban areas are scaling down the size of their schools—the research is clear that when socioeconomic factors are controlled, students in smaller schools fare better academically, are more likely to graduate, and participate in more numbers and kinds of extracurricular activities. The advantages are especially strong for at-risk students.

Now a new report from the Rural Trust, The Hobbit Effect: Why Small Works in Public Schools, explores the research that helps explain why smaller is better when it comes to schools.

The report identifies ten research-based attributes of small schools that are proven to have a positive impact on kids and their learning. These elements are either normally found in most small schools or are more common in smaller schools than in larger schools.

You can read this and other reports at the Rural Trust.