Small Schools Aren't Bad

I am really sick and tired of people from KC thinking that big schools are so much better than small ones! Kansas City and St. Louis have the worst schools in the state, they also have the largest districts. I think that once a school district gets so big, there is lack of control, management and oversight. It is also more difficult to provide individualized attention to each student.

There is no way that "local control" of schools was intended to mean a 7 member board and one superintendent control 100's of schools just because they are in the same city limits. I also do not believe that education is best served by being locally funded. I think schools would be in better shape if there were a statewide property tax and that tax was given to schools based on the cost to educate the kids in their district. It would be better if school district boundaries were drawn based on geography, rather than political boundaries. Where one can afford to live should not impact the quality of the education ones children receive.

I am not saying that every school should be k-12 and only 300 students. I am saying that once there are more than 3 high schools in a district there really isn't any local control. In a city large enough to support more than 3 high schools there will be distinct neighborhoods. Unless it is required that at least one board member be from each neighborhood, someone who lives in that city has lost their local control.

I attended and am teaching in a small school. I wish that those in huge districts would look at the good things we are able to do, and how well our kids do after graduation before they just assume that all small schools are bad. The money issue is difficult, but more money doesn't always mean a better education is being provided.