The number of editorials and op-ed commentaries appearing in the Bangor Daily News in recent weeks supports the Jan. 31 editorial that “there is a lot of passion surrounding small schools.” As legislators and local school systems draft budgets that balance affordability with the need for a high-quality K-12 education, rural schools are feeling the outside pressure to consolidate schools and-or services and are resisting state efforts to divert money to larger schools.

Big-district and big-school advocates are telling us that we can save money by closing small schools and busing kids. A recent study, however, shows that it’s not the size of a school that determines the educational achievement of kids, it’s whether their parents went to college and whether they live in communities with higher family incomes and higher-paying jobs.

I conducted a careful study in 2004 of all Maine public high schools. I asked three questions: Did the size of the school students attended make a difference in their scores on the Maine Educational Assessment? Did the amount of money spent on their education make a difference? Finally, did the education and income levels of the adults in their communities explain any differences?

I began by analyzing MEA scores over a three-year period and comparing them across small (less than 300 students), mid-sized (300-900), and large (more than 900) Maine high schools. The scores did not differ much, but the differences were statistically significant: Student achievement was slightly higher as school size increased.

On the basis of this evidence, it looked as if there might be some educational advantage to larger high schools. But might it be that funding differences could explain these differences rather than the size of the school?

Further research demonstrated that, even though the per pupil expenditures varied considerably from high school to high school, money spent did not explain the differences in achievement. That is, simply spending more did not account for higher scores. And spending less did not account for lower scores. Interestingly, the large high schools did not deliver the lowest per pupil expenditures; schools in the high-medium range did.

When I looked at parent education, community income levels and com-munity occupations, the most surprising results surfaced: It was these factors that explained most of the differences in MEA scores, not the size of the high school or the amount of money spent. Schools where students came from more affluent communities and whose parents had higher levels of schooling and white- collar jobs had higher MEA scores.

Our smallest high schools tend to serve rural communities where a higher percentage of adults do not have the higher income levels and formal education found in more populated areas. Yet, it is these differences that explain differences in student achievement, not size itself. This implies that if we want to enhance student achievement, school closures and school consolidations are not the answer. Bringing together more students with similar poverty levels to produce bigger poor schools may actually compound problems and result in lower student achievement.

So what does this mean for us as we strive to improve the learning of all Maine students? First, it means we absolutely must base our programs and policies on where the kids are coming from. If we want them to show proficiency in the standards of the Maine Learning Results and to finish school “college ready,” then we need approaches that will invite parents into the process, engage communities in understanding the need for more rigorous learning, and that will train and pay our very best teachers to work in our most demanding communities and schools.

Second, we need to get past the controversy over school size. It’s not the size of the school that makes the biggest difference in kids’ learning, it’s the quality of the people in it and the commitment of the community around it. Given that, we should heed the strong research evidence (and the efforts of the Great Maine Schools Project) that smaller schools can more readily boost the aspirations and achievement of students who are likely not to reach high educational goals.

Third, consolidating schools simply has never demonstrated the benefits claimed by its advocates. It is costly (the greatest leaps in funding for Maine schools came during the last consolidation movement from 1965 to 1980). It lengthens bus runs and removes schools from parents. It’s usually accompanied by the creation of large districts and the termination of local school committees – a sure recipe for growing administrative costs and community and parent disenfranchisement.

As we continue the vital search for excellent yet affordable public schools, let’s not oversimplify the issue with a “bigger is better” attitude. In particular, let’s be sure that students in rural communities and urban neighborhoods who do not begin with the same educational advantages as students in many of our “mid-sized” suburbs and commercial centers get the resources they need to have an equal learning opportunity.

Most importantly, let’s move away from the groundless belief that school consolidation will yield increased efficiency and work toward really enhancing student achievement for every Maine child.

Dr. Fern Desjardins is superintendent of schools in SAD 33 (Frenchville and St. Agatha).