A Few Final Words
Over the next few years, many states and the communities within them will discuss school buildings. They will ask, "How can we make the best possible use of tax dollars?" Research and experience show us there are many benefits from creating small schools of choice either within large buildings, or in collaboration with various organizations. Doing things differently is never easy. But strong leadership, such as that described above, shows that the right things—small schools and shared facilities—are not just desirable; they're doable.
About the Authors
Joe Nathan is the Director and Debra Hare is the Associate Director of the Center for School Change at the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota. The Center for School Change has helped people start innovative small schools throughout Minnesota and the nation and recently published Smaller, Safer, Saner Successful Schools with the National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities. Joe Nathan is an award-winning teacher, administrator, and founder of a small K-12 school that has thrived for over 20 years. Debra Hare is the former administrator of the Minnesota Senate Education Committee.
ReferencesAgron, J. (2001, May 1). Building for the boom. American Schools and University. Available online: http://industryclick.com/magazinearticle.asp?magazineid=134releaseid=6346&magazinearticleid=103130&siteid=17
Bryk, A. S. (1994, Fall). More good news that school organization matters. Issues in Restructuring Schools, 7, 6-7. Available online: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archives/completed/cors/Issues_in_Restructuring_Schools/ISSUES_NO_7_FALL_1994.pdf
Dryfoos, J. (2000). Evaluation of community schools: Findings to date. New York: Carnegie Corporation.
Education Trust. (1999). Dispelling the myth: High poverty schools exceeding expectations. Washington, DC: Author.
Education Writers Association. (1989). Wolves at the schoolhouse door: An investigation of the condition of public school buildings. Washington, DC: Author.
Henderson, A., & Berla, N. (Eds.) (1994). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to student achievement. Washington, DC: National Committee for Citizens in Education, Center for Law and Education.
Howley, C., & Bickel, R. (2000). When it comes to schooling, small works: School size, poverty, and student achievement. Washington, DC: Rural School and Community Trust.
Newmann, F., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Division of School Support Planning. (2000, November). Making current trends in school design feasible. Raleigh, NC: Author.
Raywid, M. (1999). Current Literature on Small Schools. Charleston, W. V.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
Stiefel, L., Latarola, P., Fruchter, N., & Berne, R. (1998). The costs of size of student body on school costs and performance in New York City high schools. New York, NY: Institute for Education and Social Policy, New York University.
Additional ReadingFebey, K. & Nathan, J. (2001). Smaller, safer, saner successful schools. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities. Available online: http://www.edfacilities.org/pubs/saneschools.pdf
Previous | School by Design Home
 |
