A group (a majority, I suppose) of the CAC sent the following letter to the Board of Education last month:
September 13, 2013
Dear Hamilton Board of
Education,
We, the undersigned
members of the Hamilton Community Advisory Committee, after careful
consideration of the data that was compiled by SES consultants during
the merger study, conclude that merging the two school districts is
not a good option for our district. We ask you to act decisively so
that our two districts can continue to pursue alternatives in a
cooperative, collegial manner. Our reasons for this recommendation
are highlighted as follows:
Relationship between
the HCS and MECS Districts
We are concerned that
if the process continues to a straw vote, this will further polarize
the two districts which have been working together, and will need to
continue in the future, on shared services and creative solutions.
Transportation
We remain concerned
about transportation. By merging, we would be increasing a fixed cost
for both districts that could never be reduced. Most likely, the cost
of busing students will only increase, and the new school board would
have no options for reducing the cost of a transportation system that
would be much larger than it currently is for two separate districts.
Transportation in a huge geographic district also presents
significant issues for students and parents related to increased time
on buses; impact on extracurricular participation; changes in school
starting times; demands on bus drivers with additional runs; and
safety concerns with increased busing, as well as with high school
student drivers. The modest proposed increase in curriculum doesn’t
sufficiently enhance the student experience enough to offset this
added time en route to and from school.
When each community
sends its kids off on buses, the least efficient aspect of public
education gets amplified. But perhaps the human aspect is more
disappointing, for time spent getting from point A to point B is time
away from classroom learning and family, and more dollars spent on
transportation means that those dollars are not available for
educational programs.
Financial Reality
The difference in
savings presented between staffing cuts and increased transportation
costs is minimal. Even if the actual savings can be considered
larger due to shifting the burden to state reimbursements, this is
still a taxpayer expense and not a real savings.
In addition, the
financial picture presented in the report may be very dissimilar to
the actual merged district’s reality. Once a new school board is in
place, that board would make decisions on building configurations
(including the location of the high school), budget, staffing, class
size, etc. Therefore, we feel it is important that the community
understands that this report is only one possible scenario for the
way a new school district would look.
Research on Student
Success
We continue to be
concerned that the community should be informed about current
research that demonstrates that students have very little, if
anything, to gain from being a part of a merged district. Research
also shows that students in low-income communities benefit
academically from smaller schools.
We, along with others
who have provided time and effort in this process, really want to
foster what is best for our kids. At this point, we see a
merger as a somewhat outdated fix that may no longer fit, especially
not the needs of our two disparate communities. And there is
research that lends credence to this view. The National
Education Policy Center was established in 2010 and works out of the
University of Colorado, Boulder. A study done in 2011under the
auspices of the NEPC entitled “Consolidation of Schools and
Districts: What the Research Says and What It Means,” presents some
well researched findings:
Research
on the effects of contemporary consolidation suggests that new
consolidation is likely to result in neither greater efficiency nor
better instructional outcomes--especially when it results from state
policy that implements large-scale forced consolidation. The
window of opportunity for useful state-level efficiencies seems to
have closed because the desired systemic benefits were substantially
realized in earlier consolidations pushes. The consolidation
strategy seems to have reached the point at which markedly diminished
returns should be anticipated.
(nepc.colorado.edu/files/PB-Consol-Howley-Johnson-Petrie.pdf)
It is our hope that the
board will decide not to bring this to a straw vote, and instead will
engage the Hamilton and Morrisville communities in a continued
discussion of how to structure their respective schools so they can
continue to provide a high quality education for students within the
current financial situation.
Respectfully submitted,
Mason Amann
Sandra Carter
Julie Dudrick
Linda Little
Susan Marafino
Tom Myers
Dominick Pangallo
Steve Tuttle
No comments:
Post a Comment