Bigger isn't better
John Hood writes today about a new study linking geographically larger school districts with lower high school graduation rates.
This is a new twist. A lot has been written about problems associated with school districts that are large in terms of enrollment.
Check out some examples:
and here.
Some of the issues raised there also have driven a movement -- getting nowhere -- in Mecklenburg County to break up North Carolina's largest school system.
The Manhattan Institute study touted by Hood says geographically large systems hinder school choice. If parents want to place their children in a different system, they often have to move a significant distance, which can necessitate changing jobs and leaving relatives. If school systems were smaller, it would be easier for families to move from one to another.
I suppose that makes sense.
The study doesn't address why a smaller system would be better. Instead, it suggests that "residential school choice" simply provides incentives for school systems to improve rather than lose students to nearby systems.
One problem with the idea that better systems draw more students, however, is that this ppopularity drives growth. The better the school, or school system, the bigger it will get. Right? But then, bigger isn't really better, according to critics of large systems.
Perhaps the ideal is to let some parents send their kids to the best schools and then cap enrollment before other parents try to do the same and spoil it all. In other words, let my kid in but not yours.
Due to recent automated spamming attacks on our blogs, we are temporarily requiring commenters to authenticate themselves via TypeKey® before posting comments to any News & Record blog in order to prevent denials of service. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.