Rural Matters

A new study by the Rural Trust finds that students who attend consolidated rural high schools face longer bus rides and are less likely to participate in extra-curricular activities because of the challenge of transportation.

The study, Slow Motion: Traveling by School Bus in Consolidated Districts in West Virginia, examined surveys of high school students in four West Virginia counties. In two counties, high schools are consolidated, and in two counties, high schools are smaller and located in or near the communities where more students live.

The investigators found that bus rides in districts with consolidated high schools are 43% longer than in districts that have not consolidated their schools. In the consolidated counties, high school students who ride the bus lose an average of 49 minutes each day, compared to students ho have other forms of transportation in those same districts.

These long commutes to school mean students participate in fewer extra-curricular activities, and many students participate in none at all. For these students, travel logistics present insurmountable challenges.

Participation in extra-curricular activities is associated with engagement in schooling, lower dropout rates, and higher grade point averages.

Students with alternative forms of transportation in consolidated districts also had longer commutes than their counterparts in the non-consolidated districts, but they were more likely than bus riders in their own districts to engage in extra-curricular activities.

The author of the study, Lorna Jimerson, Ed.D, notes: "Having access to a car apparently is a prerequisite for actively participating in extra-curricular activities for many students who live far from school, which unfairly disadvantages poorer students."

This study is an important contribution toward understanding the real effects of school consolidation and long bus rides on students' school experiences and life opportunities, especially because extra-curricular participation is so closely associated with other important achievement indicators and behavioral outcomes.

You can read this and other studies at the Rural Trust web site.

Posted by Robin Lambert at 10:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

RURAL SCHOOLS

Community Partnerships. The “Community Schools” model, like the Stevenson-YMCA Community School in Long Beach, California, is a model that encourages schools that provides a range of family and social services--at the school, usually during and after school hours. Such arrangements are often a more likely option in urban areas where there is a concentration of government and social services. But the idea that the school would be the center of the community and that the school would help address a variety of needs is one with long and deep roots in rural areas as well. Unfortunately, rural schools are less likely to receive support from institutional partners, nonprofit foundations, and business coalitions than urban and suburban schools. (See Rural Matters "Rural Schools Have Fewer Supports.") That does not mean, however, that rural schools cannot and do not form important partnerships in their own communities. The stories of six rural schools that have formed mutually beneficial partnerships with their own communities are featured in Rural Policy Matters, April 2006.

Student Engagement. Students in 26 states have reported on their levels of engagement at school in the 2006 High School Survey of Student Engagement. Many students feel that at least one adult at school knows and cares about them. But a majority of students feel bored almost every day, and most want more opportunities for relationships and for active learning opportunities. Read the Rural Matters take on the survey results here.

TEACHERS

Here on Rural Matters, we’ve been following some of the pay-for-performance initiatives around the country, in part because paying teachers according to the progress of their students is a hot topic right now. Houston is the largest city in the country with a pay-for-performance plan. That city started their program last year and gave their first bonus checks recently. Some teachers who had been recognized as outstanding by other measures did not receive a bonus (see Rural Matters "In The News-February 15, 2007"). And, some teachers who were supposed to receive bonuses based on the program’s criteria were overlooked and received their awards late. Now some teachers have been asked to give back part of their bonus. Seems the district gave these part-time teachers a bonus based on a full-time equivalent salary. Hmm. Sounds like a little math drill, and maybe some math concept work, is in order somewhere in Houston. Read more.

Posted by Robin Lambert at 04:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Results of an annual survey of student engagement in high school are in and the results offer lots of food for thought. Many students report that they identify with their school and are engaged in school activities and curriculum. But most students also report that they are bored in school, and many feel disconnected from adults in the school and do not think that their opinions or experiences will matter to school staff. Low-income students, students of color, students in regular and low-track classes, and students in upper grades are less likely to report high levels of engagement than other students.

“Voices of Students on Engagement," which you read here and here, was recently released by Indiana University’s Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.

Early in the introduction, the report notes that, “Engagement is about relationship; engagement is not a solo activity.”

This statement belongs in the category of observations that are so simple and so profound that they’re easy to dismiss out-of-hand, as if nothing else is possible. But relationships in high school don’t occur by magic and engagement doesn’t happen because the sun shines. So it’s worth paying attention to this report and what students say about their own engagement at school.

What comes through in student responses to the survey is their desire for stronger and more productive relationships with adults and other students. Seventy-eight percent of students agreed with the statement, “There is at least one adult in my school who cares about me and knows me well.” But only a little over half agreed that “I am an important part of my high school community.”

It’s also clear that students want school to support a stronger relationship between their own intellects and the work that school requires them to do. Two-thirds of students are bored in class at least every day. About 75% said they were bored because “Material wasn’t interesting,” while 39% said, “Material wasn’t relevant to me,” and 31% said they are bored because they have, “No interaction with teacher.”

Students reported being most engaged in academic activities—such as discussion and debate and group projects—in which they learn with their peers. They also reported engagement with academic activities in which they are active participants such as presentations. They reported the least engagement in and excitement for passive learning situations such as teacher lectures.

When students ranked their reasons for going to school, almost three-quarters responded to the question, “Why do you go to school?” by answering, “Because I want to get a degree and go to college.” Only 39% answered, “Because of what I learn in classes” and only 34% answered “Because I enjoy being in school.”

An open-ended response item elicited many positive responses, but many students expressed interest in more intellectually interesting and challenging work, and the authors made point to note that the most common response was that the survey was “pointless” because schools would not change in response to student views or experience. That’s a strong indictment that students do not feel they are relationship to their school.

When you’ve finished the report, you can’t help but think that over-emphasis on test scores, career preparation, and behavioral management in many schools is strangling students of a sense of meaning and connection in their educations.

There are some other interesting findings about how students spend their time and how much importance they attach to their out of school activities.

• 76% of students reported spending five or fewer hours a week on homework.
• 30% reported spending six or more hours a week on school-sponsored activities.
• 31% reported spending six or more hours a week watching television or playing video games.
• The most time-consuming activity—on which 54% of students reported spending six or more
hours a week—was “socializing with friends outside of school.”

When students ranked the importance of their activities, 62% ranked “socializing with friends outside of school” as Very Important or Top Priority. Surfing/chatting online was the activity most students ranked as “Not at All” important (31%), with volunteer work coming in a close second in least important, at 28%.

More than 81,000 students in 110 school in 26 states took the survey. Those schools are located in a nearly even mix of urban, rural, and suburban communities and range in size from 37 to 3,881 students. The report does not break down student response based on geography, location of school, school demographics, or school size.

WHAT DOES YOUR SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY DO TO FOSTER STUDENT RELATIONSHIPS AND ENGAGEMENT?

Share your thoughts by "commenting" to this post on Rural Matters.

Posted by Robin Lambert at 04:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Two small rural high schools in Union County, South Carolina are likely in their last year of existence, as soon as a recent school board decision to consolidate becomes final. Even though over 700 Jonesville High and Lockhart School supporters jammed into public meetings to plead for their schools – especially notable because Lockhart has 120 students and Jonesville has 240 – the board voted 7-2 to consolidate the schools into Union High School, which has 1000 students. The two smaller schools lived under threat of consolidation for years, and successfully fought off efforts to close them until just these last few weeks. How did this happen?

Let’s look at informal score sheet of some of the arguments of each side.

According to school officials:
• Consolidation will save more than $1 million a year, and would eliminate the need to spend $14 million in renovation and repairs on the aging Jonesville and Lockhart schools.
• The bigger high school can better implement the 2005 Education and Economic Development Act, under which each high school must provide up to 16 career clusters or majors, even though these do not have to be offered immediately or without collaboration among schools.
• Jonesville has nine portable classrooms, Lockhart has four and Union has none.
• Jonesville and Lockhart students take advanced placement courses at Union High or online.
• All three schools have football, basketball and baseball teams and marching bands. But only Union offers soccer, cross-country and golf.

Supporters of the two small schools have said:
• The benefits of a close knit learning community where every student is known and appreciated outweigh the budget considerations.
• The 2007 Lockhart High School valedictorian is currently taking all of his classes at Union High School, but is opposed to the consolidation of the schools. He says: "At Union, I feel like a Social Security number -- I don't feel like a person. At Lockhart, everybody belongs. The learning environment at Lockhart is great. If they combine all three schools, that strong learning environment will fade away. It will vanish."
• About half of the teaching positions from Lockhart and Jonesville would be eliminated.
• Jonesville students say they benefit from small classes with few discipline disruptions and enjoy academic advantages of having higher class rankings, which means increased opportunity for college scholarships.
• School bus rides for some students to the bigger school would increase dramatically.
• Parents state that moving their children to Union High School is a mistake that would rob them of a sense of community.

And, of course, the situation is even more complicated when you learn more. As in many rural counties, money is tight in Union. Many blame unemployment, a loss of major businesses – mostly manufacturing - and declining population for the consolidation. Another important thing to know about Union County is that approximately one-third of the county is federal government land. School enrollment is declining district-wide, and some say the decision is being made solely to help boost Union High’s ability to compete in a bigger-school athletic bracket. Also, the district is accessing bond money to build new elementary and middle schools through a special Installment Purchase Finance Plan to renovate schools and eliminate the need for portables. So, no additional borrowed funds would be needed for consolidation. Younger students at the two smaller schools would attend the new schools being built.

At a January school board meeting, an extensive presentation was made on the renovation needs of the schools, on the cost savings to the district, and on the supposed benefits of students attending the larger school. But school officials made no mention of other means of helping those students without closing their schools, the most obvious being fully funding and supporting the two small schools, but other smaller steps such as offering distance learning for some classes were also left untaken.

Jonesville and Lockhart were long protected by a 1971 state law relating to Union County that says that any consolidation decision by the board must be unanimous. The Union School District's Office of Public Information had stated previously that the law is likely unconstitutional, since it is a special law. The district says: "according to our attorney, the state constitution prohibits a special law ... when general statute is or may be made applicable. There already are general statutes on the books that deal with the operation and closing of schools, and none of them require a unanimous vote." Mike Anthony, the state House representative from Union and a Union School District employee introduced legislation to repeal the ’71 law, known as Act 301. It passed the House – Anthony was the only one voting, and then two of the three senators in the Union County delegation agreed. The senator who held out publicly stated he was against repealing the law because he’s heard that smaller schools are better. Another felt that Act 301 should be repealed, saying "I think those sorts of decisions are best left to local people," and "I would lean toward letting people who have carefully studied what impact it will have on their community make those choices." The opinion of the third senator was revealed last week, when he stated that Union County students can best be prepared for our changing world by “offering a broader and deeper curriculum through a unified high school where opportunities to succeed will continue to improve in the future.”

Several citizens groups in Union have threatened to sue to stop the consolidation, and approximately 25 students at Jonesville staged a walkout in pouring rain last week and were suspended from school for five days. Students interviewed expressed hope that they could still save their school. The school board meets again soon and will likely take the final official steps toward consolidation with the change in the law.

What is the lesson for those of us who watched this happen from a distance? How did two small rural schools amass $14 million in repair deficiencies while the central high school in the district seemingly flourished? How does log-rolling such as the local legislation process become the determining factor in whether a school and essentially, two small communities live or die? South Carolina is one of the most consolidated of states when it comes to large districts and schools, but even the small schools and districts that remain have had to fight tooth and nail for funding, and many of those districts led the legal school finance battle against the state. There will likely be another legal battle over the future of Jonesville and Lockhart Schools, but in the meantime, what can local citizens – and all of us who care about small and rural schools – do to overcome this lack of sense?

Posted by Amanda Adler at 11:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)