Bigger schools are not always better or the answer.
As for the agents. They do play a role but as time goes by they play less and less of a role.
You're correct, bigger schools are not always better. Theres a balance. However, you cannot tell me that the schools that have 5 people in a senior class are able to provide the educational opportunities for all the diverse educational needs -from special education to gifted\talented to AP classes to vocational skills, or even electives like music and art that even more medium or large sized schools are. I'm definitely not advocating all schools be valley-sized (i came from waukee, back when the graduating class was about 160) but there comes a point where the school sizes are too small to justify the resources.
Bigger schools are not always better or the answer.
As for the agents. They do play a role but as time goes by they play less and less of a role.
I'm not suggesting bigger schools at all. What I do find wasterfull is a seperate superintendent for each school. You could easily have one superintendent for each county(okay perhaps more then that in Metro counties.
You're correct, bigger schools are not always better. Theres a balance. However, you cannot tell me that the schools that have 5 people in a senior class are able to provide the educational opportunities for all the diverse educational needs -from special education to gifted\talented to AP classes to vocational skills, or even electives like music and art that even more medium or large sized schools are. I'm definitely not advocating all schools be valley-sized (i came from waukee, back when the graduating class was about 160) but there comes a point where the school sizes are too small to justify the resources.
There are some super small schools yes, but if it works for them, they should leave good enough alone. My wife had a friend that had 6 people in her class and she has done very well for herself. What happens in HS doenst always translate to how you do in college.
Originally Posted by Bobber
I'm not suggesting bigger schools at all. What I do find wasterfull is a seperate superintendent for each school. You could easily have one superintendent for each county(okay perhaps more then that in Metro counties.
Schools need their own superintendent, but there is no reason he cannot do more that just be a superintendent, teach a class or 2 or something else. If we go to the county idea, you know as well as I they will have to have people under them for diffent schools or areas and once you do that you are back to where you started.
The gap in our economy is between what we have and what we think we ought to have--and that is a moral problem, not an economic one. - Paul Heyne
There are some super small schools yes, but if it works for them, they should leave good enough alone. My wife had a friend that had 6 people in her class and she has done very well for herself. What happens in HS doenst always translate to how you do in college.
Schools need their own superintendent, but there is no reason he cannot do more that just be a superintendent, teach a class or 2 or something else. If we go to the county idea, you know as well as I they will have to have people under them for diffent schools or areas and once you do that you are back to where you started.
If the Cedar Rapids community school district which includes 3 4-A schools (Washington, Jefferson, Kennedy) can get by with 1 superindendent, I think a single superintendent can handle a half dozen smaller schools. Maybe each individual school could have an associate superintendent that also teaches stuff, but I don't think each school needs a full time superintendent.
If the Cedar Rapids community school district which includes 3 4-A schools (Washington, Jefferson, Kennedy) can get by with 1 superindendent, I think a single superintendent can handle a half dozen smaller schools. Maybe each individual school could have an associate superintendent that also teaches stuff, but I don't think each school needs a full time superintendent.
Exactly. You need a principal at each school of course.
Exactly. You need a principal at each school of course.
Yep, I agree completely. I graduated from a school that has 750 students K-12, so it isn't super small by Iowa standards, but they have 3 full time principals (that don't teach) and 1 super. Completely unncessary.
If the Cedar Rapids community school district which includes 3 4-A schools (Washington, Jefferson, Kennedy) can get by with 1 superindendent, I think a single superintendent can handle a half dozen smaller schools. Maybe each individual school could have an associate superintendent that also teaches stuff, but I don't think each school needs a full time superintendent.
Each school district has a monthly board meeting. If 6 districts share a sup, that one person would have 6 board meeting to prepare for each month. The hours needed would be ridiculous.
The sup. is the final say of all problems in a small district. In larger schools the sup. might not even hear of smaller issues.
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone.
[QUOTE=kingcy;1037304]There are some super small schools yes, but if it works for them, they should leave good enough alone. My wife had a friend that had 6 people in her class and she has done very well for herself. What happens in HS doenst always translate to how you do in college.
In theory that is fine, but whent the state provides $6-7,000 per student, then the people of the broader funding area do have a right to debate the size.
In theory that is fine, but whent the state provides $6-7,000 per student, then the people of the broader funding area do have a right to debate the size.
If the funding is the same per student, let the district decide if they need to consolidate.
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone.
If the funding is the same per student, let the district decide if they need to consolidate.
Here is what it boils down to, if the state, (ie the non residents of the district are the only ones making a district viable, then they have an equal or greater say than the local).
For the record, I favor smaller schools, and local control. Many studies have shown schools can be to large, and to small.
Bottom line if you use non-local funding those making the funding will expect input mechanism.
Here is what it boils down to, if the state, (ie the non residents of the district are the only ones making a district viable, then they have an equal or greater say than the local).
For the record, I favor smaller schools, and local control. Many studies have shown schools can be to large, and to small.
Bottom line if you use non-local funding those making the funding will expect input mechanism.
This is way past the original post, but why does the state have control of local school districts? (Money) I will state again, if the state payes the same per student to school districts, why do they want to make schools bigger?
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Originally Posted by Bobber 
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks