I read with both interest and concern the article, “Study: Small schools, big costs,” which appeared on the front page of the Jan. 10 Bangor Daily News. This article discusses the results of a recent study related to the potential economic and educational benefits of school consolidation in Maine that was conducted by Philip Trostel, University of Maine associate professor of economics and researcher with the Margaret Chase Center for Public Policy.

Given the realities of our current economic situation in Maine, the issue of school consolidation as a suggested viable method for reducing the costs related to public school education in Maine clearly is very important and indeed timely. Rightfully, in coming weeks and months this issue will be thoroughly debated within and across educational, political, economic, and public arenas throughout Maine. However, it is critical that participants in these debates make their arguments based upon accurate information and solid research data.

I have read the “Trostel study.” This is not the appropriate forum in which to discuss the relative merits of this particular study with respect to its technical aspects. However, given the prominent, front page exposure that this study received, my concern is that those readers who are not familiar with the well-established research base dealing with “the impact of school size on student learning” might quite understandably accept as true this article’s opening statement, “Bigger is better, at least when it comes to schools, according to a University of Maine researcher.”

As reported in the article, several implications can be drawn from the Trostel study. First, consolidation of small schools and small school districts into larger schools and larger school districts will result in substantial cost savings because of less bureaucracy, reduced administration costs, and less duplication. Second, “Maine students will be able to receive a better education in larger school environments. In this regard, Trostel reportedly found that students in small Maine schools don’t perform as well on standardized tests as students in larger Maine schools.” Third, “students in Maine high schools especially will benefit from receiving their education in larger schools as they will have more access to music, drama, and advanced placement courses.

Relative to the first finding cited (the cost benefits which will accrue from school consolidation) this issue, although clearly controversial and very complex, arguably is worthy of comprehensive, responsible, and measured debate. However, the suggestion that Maine students, especially those at the high school level, will receive a better education in larger school environments very simply is not supported by any quality national research that has been conducted on this issue during the past 20 years.

In fact, just the opposite has been found. The results of literally all studies that have been conducted since the 1980s (e.g., Institute of Education and Social Policy, 1998; Meier, 2002; Sizer, 1996, 1999; U.S. Department of Education, 2000; Wasley et al., 2000) that have attempted to measure the impact of school size on such variables as student achievement, school completion rates, school safety, reduction in student negative behaviors and substance abuse have reached very similar conclusions. These findings have been especially true for those students who generally have been considered to be at higher risk for dropping out of school. These results can be summarized as follows:

. Students in smaller school environments generally achieve at the same or higher academic levels than those students in larger school environments

. The student dropout rate is significantly lower in smaller schools;

. Students in smaller school environments are less likely to engage in dangerous personal behaviors (e.g., substance abuse);

. Far fewer incidents of serious student behaviors, including violent acts, occur in smaller schools;

. Students in smaller schools consistently report they feel “more connected” to their peers and to their teachers and that they are able to feel more valued and respected as human beings.

I am particularly alarmed by the implication inherent in the Trostel study that Maine high school students especially would benefit from receiving their education in larger schools. Scores of research studies have been conducted subsequent to the rash of school shootings and other horrific acts of violence that took place throughout nation just a very few years ago. Several of these studies attempted to isolate specific factors and conditions that appeared to have contributed to these acts.

Results consistently shown in these studies were that the students who were the perpetrators of the violent acts felt very disconnected from their peers and their teachers, and that they felt “lost in their large school environments.”

Recommendations from these studies almost universally called for the development of smaller and more personal school cultures. Soon after, national attention and efforts were directed toward the need to create and implement smaller school environments in which teachers are able to get to know each of their students better and in which students will have increased opportunities not only to know and relate better to their peers but also to develop closer relationships with positive adult role models in their lives – their teachers.

On a much broader scale, the results of many recent studies (e.g., Public Agenda Foundation, 1997; Wasley, et al., 2000; Wagner, 2002) that solicited views of high school students themselves relative to what they identify as the most important changes needed to improve their learning consistently stated that they want “teachers who really know me and who care about me” and “schools in which I am respected and really listened to.”

Also, contemporary researchers from the fields of sociology, psychology, education, and child development alike increasingly have been calling attention to the critical need in today’s society for preadolescents and adolescents to have greater opportunities to develop meaningful, consistent relationships with positive adult role models – with individual teachers commonly identified as being among the most important. These relationships are far more likely to occur within smaller school environments.

Certainly, larger school environments arguably can provide greater access to a wider diversity and choice among academic courses and other school activities. However, as we in Maine currently are attempting to sort out and deal with the substantive and very complex issues involved in educational reform (Learning Results) and even broader economic issues, let us be sure that we base our collective decisions on solid research and factual information.

Ultimately, a valid argument may be made that school consolidation indeed will result in cost savings. Then, thoughtful decisions regarding this issue will need to be made based upon important economic issues and realities. However, I suggest, based upon a solid body of research evidence, that to attempt to bolster the argument in favor of greater school consolidation by suggesting that Maine students overall will benefit from larger school environments, is not only both inaccurate and misleading but also that it has the potential for producing negative outcomes for many of our state’s children – especially those who are most vulnerable and who are in most need of our close attention.

William E. Davis is professor of education and director of the Institute for the Study of Students At Risk at the University of Maine.