Student
Achievement:
The Value of Small Schools in Missouri
National research shows that:
1) Student achievement is higher in small schools
2)
Student achievement is
higher in small districts
3)
Family income level is the
single largest predictor of student achievement, but smaller schools narrow the
achievement gap between wealthier and poorer students
Missouri-specific
research
A
2004 study conducted by Jerry Johnson of the Rural School and Community Trust,
replicated studies now done in nine other states. It showed that in Missouri:
<
Smaller districts (below
the state median size of 600 students) have higher levels of student
achievement
<
Students in districts
with higher levels of poverty score lower on all sixteen achievement measures[1]
on M.A.P. (Missouri Assessment Program) tests
<
Across all levels of
poverty and affluence, increased district size is associated with decreased
levels of achievement
<
Poverty has a
substantial negative effect on student achievement in Missouri’s larger
districts but very little negative effect over achievement in the state’s
smaller districts.
<
Smaller school districts
diminish the influence of poverty on student achievement on MAP (MO Assessment
Program) scores, and at every grade level tested.
<
In addition to the
finding that larger district size and higher student poverty levels are each
individually associated with decreased student achievement, the study found
that the two negatives compound each other.
For the student who attends school in a large district with a high
percentage of impoverished students, the negative effects of size and poverty
are not merely added to one another, but are multiplied by one another.
<
As has been the case in
many other state studies, the results appear to be consistently strongest for
the critical grade levels where children are at or approaching the age when
they are most at-risk of dropping out of school.
<
The study used the
concept of “power rating” to show how much power poverty had over student achievement
in a particular group of school districts.
Comparing poverty’s power rating in small school districts (under 600
enrollment) with those in large school districts (over 600 enrollment), the
study found that:
1)
For
primary grades assessments (grades K-5, a total of 6 assessments), poverty’s
power rating is from 40 percent to 94 percent lower in smaller districts than in larger districts. On average, poverty’s power over primary
students’ achievement was cut by 77 percent in smaller districts .
2)
For
middle grades assessments (grades 6-8, a total of 5 assessments), poverty’s
power rating is from 65 percent to 83 percent lower in smaller districts than in larger districts. On average, poverty’s power over middle
grades students’ achievement was cut by 78 percent in smaller districts.
3)
For
secondary grades assessments (grades 9-12, a total of 5 assessments), poverty’s
power rating is from 72 percent to 96 percent lower in smaller districts than in larger districts. On average, poverty’s power over secondary
students’ achievement was cut by 80 percent in smaller districts.
<
The power rating for poverty in Missouri’s smaller districts was among
the lowest of any group of districts in any of the states in which this
analysis has been performed (Arkansas,
Georgia, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Texas, West
Virginia, and Missouri)[2]. This means that in Missouri small districts
play an even more important role in overcoming the negative effect of poverty
on student achievement.
<
A strategy of district consolidation
would likely produce lower test scores in all communities where consolidation
occurs, but would hurt the achievement of children from lower income
communities the most.
The
full study. “Missouri’s Smaller School Districts Counter The Harmful Effects of
Poverty on Student Achievement”, can be found at http://www.moare.com
or at http://www.ruraledu.org