“School consolidation proposals are typically driven by notions of cost savings, which raises two questions: 1) Will there be the kind of savings that make the consolidation worthwhile? 2) Will there be deleterious effects which outweigh whatever savings are achieved? History and an understanding of what makes good systems good suggest to me that the answers are no and yes.
First, we should recall that a dozen or so school districts were combined into one giant district in 1978. I don’t have the financial records but do not recall any material cost reduction. Indeed, the big district was immediately divided into 4 smaller (but still very large) “areas” and the system seemed to be driven to find jobs for the administrators who would otherwise have been displaced. I will bet money that any move to consolidate and seriously reduce administrative overhead will be met with the same kind of resistance that we saw in 1978 (and 1981, when the General Assembly turned the 4 “areas” into independent districts). Never underestimate the ability of the system to resist change and regenerate any positions eliminated in the short run.
Next, my experience teaches that bigger systems add geometrically more bureaucracy and red tape which, in turn, proportionally reduces any real accountability. That kind of bureaucracy can crush educational improvement.
Finally, we need to recognize that a school district is a government and each consolidation will increase current feelings of inaccessibility and unresponsiveness among the system’s customers. Indeed, we would be better off asking whether the government should be in the business of actually delivering educational services – as opposed to funding them – at all.
For these reasons, I would argue that, rather than wrestle about whether to make big systems bigger, we need to redesign the delivery system and create a confederation of independently run schools, requiring only a small and nimble central administration which acts as a resource when called upon, rather than a top-down regulator. In other words, the question shouldn’t be “school districts – bigger or smaller?” Instead, it should be “school districts – yes or no?” Let’s at least think about building a brand new system in which responsibility, accountability, risk and reward get pushed down to each school, rather than blurring all those things by accumulating more power centrally in a bigger, less responsive system.”
—Bill Manning, Member of Delaware Charter Schools Network board of directors
“The issues include how much money realistically will be saved after taking into account Delaware school finance law, the cost of leveling up salaries, and other factors.”
—Ed Ratledge, Director of the Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research at the University of Delaware
“What does consolidation do for improved student achievement? In my judgment, not much. It is a dodge. It takes the focus off what we should all be concerned about: those Delaware students who are not getting the best possible education. If the political energy around consolidation was put to genuine school improvement, we’d be much better off.”
—John Taylor, Executive Director, Delaware Public Policy Institute
Considering school district consolidation
The latest effort to consider consolidating Delaware’s school districts is making its way through the General Assembly. A new bill proposes merging Delaware’s three Vo-Tech districts into one, while a resolution calls for a task force to examine consolidating Delaware’s nineteen school districts into five.
Lawmakers and others are debating how much money truly can be saved by consolidating, and the whether the timing is right to deal with the logistics.
DFM News asked a trio of observers who know the history and issues surrounding Delaware school consolidation to weigh in on the topic. Their thoughts, submitted via email, are here:
What do you believe are the issues that must be considered in any discussion of school district consolidation?
“School consolidation proposals are typically driven by notions of cost savings, which raises two questions: 1) Will there be the kind of savings that make the consolidation worthwhile? 2) Will there be deleterious effects which outweigh whatever savings are achieved? History and an understanding of what makes good systems good suggest to me that the answers are no and yes.
First, we should recall that a dozen or so school districts were combined into one giant district in 1978. I don’t have the financial records but do not recall any material cost reduction. Indeed, the big district was immediately divided into 4 smaller (but still very large) “areas” and the system seemed to be driven to find jobs for the administrators who would otherwise have been displaced. I will bet money that any move to consolidate and seriously reduce administrative overhead will be met with the same kind of resistance that we saw in 1978 (and 1981, when the General Assembly turned the 4 “areas” into independent districts). Never underestimate the ability of the system to resist change and regenerate any positions eliminated in the short run.
Next, my experience teaches that bigger systems add geometrically more bureaucracy and red tape which, in turn, proportionally reduces any real accountability. That kind of bureaucracy can crush educational improvement.
Finally, we need to recognize that a school district is a government and each consolidation will increase current feelings of inaccessibility and unresponsiveness among the system’s customers. Indeed, we would be better off asking whether the government should be in the business of actually delivering educational services – as opposed to funding them – at all.
For these reasons, I would argue that, rather than wrestle about whether to make big systems bigger, we need to redesign the delivery system and create a confederation of independently run schools, requiring only a small and nimble central administration which acts as a resource when called upon, rather than a top-down regulator. In other words, the question shouldn’t be “school districts – bigger or smaller?” Instead, it should be “school districts – yes or no?” Let’s at least think about building a brand new system in which responsibility, accountability, risk and reward get pushed down to each school, rather than blurring all those things by accumulating more power centrally in a bigger, less responsive system.”
—Bill Manning, Member of Delaware Charter Schools Network board of directors
“The issues include how much money realistically will be saved after taking into account Delaware school finance law, the cost of leveling up salaries, and other factors.”
—Ed Ratledge, Director of the Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research at the University of Delaware
“What does consolidation do for improved student achievement? In my judgment, not much. It is a dodge. It takes the focus off what we should all be concerned about: those Delaware students who are not getting the best possible education. If the political energy around consolidation was put to genuine school improvement, we’d be much better off.”
—John Taylor, Executive Director, Delaware Public Policy Institute
Proponents of consolidation point largely to potential cost savings to the state. Assuming there are significant savings to be found, would that alone be a reason to seriously consider consolidation?
“IF one assumed significant savings, and IF one were unwilling to redesign the system as I have suggested, then my answer is “maybe.” But I don’t accept either assumption.”
—Bill Manning, Member of Delaware Charter Schools Network board of directors
“There is substantial disagreement about how much could actually be saved. Can jobs be eliminated by consolidation? It is not as simple as reducing the number of superintendents. In many cases this would lead to the creation of more assistant superintendents. Many of the jobs are more related to school buildings rather than school districts. There are also currently purchasing arrangements whereby districts can use the state contracts but in many cases can buy the same thing cheaper elsewhere. There are also sharing arrangements across district lines for scarce talent which helps smaller districts. There are many claims about massive savings but the evidence is very soft.
We also need to be concerned with “efficiency”, that is, the relationship between effectiveness (that is student achievement broadly defined and support for public schools) and spending. In short we could save a lot of money by having no public schools but that would not be a plus for the state or its population.
And consider the whole issue of community control of school districts. Is local control a bad idea?.”
—Ed Ratledge, Director of the Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research at the University of Delaware
“The main reason people bring up consolidation is to save money through elimination of duplication. But I have been involved in three school district consolidations since 1968 and no one lost a job and teacher salaries were leveled up. So not much savings took place. In each of the consolidated districts, leaders and workers have champions who try to protect them. And each of the districts involved in consolidation believe their district should be the dominant one in the end.
Without the political will to really do what will save money – elimination of jobs – there’s not much point to this. And you just can’t overlook that people have loyalty to their district, which isn’t easily tossed aside.”
—John Taylor, Executive Director, Delaware Public Policy Institute
Would it make more sense to focus simply on cost consolidation measures – something that may be more attainable without upsetting the apple cart politically?
“The last thing that should drive us right now is a reluctance to “upset the apple cart politically.” Our schools are not nearly good enough, we spend too much on them and every reform effort in the past three decades has attempted to be politically warm, fuzzy and non-threatening. The result is some crummy schools, disaffection among entire communities and a teacher’s union so powerful that it can spend thousands to elect school board members friendly to its causes- more money and less accountability. Politics is what got us into this mess and worrying about the political apple cart is not going to get us out.”
—Bill Manning, Member of Delaware Charter Schools Network board of directors
“Yes, districts should consider consolidating services perhaps with a state-sponsored incentive program. Collaboration among districts in some functions such as human resources would be better than competition. Some of this is taking place but there are difficult issues that have to be addressed.”
—Ed Ratledge, Director of the Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research at the University of Delaware
“Sure it would make sense. The school districts could consolidate many of their operations now with considerable savings right now. Does every district need its own business manager or human resources director etc.? Of course not. But it gets down to control and power and the districts are not likely to give either up easily.”
—John Taylor, Executive Director, Delaware Public Policy Institute
Does the pursuit of Race to the Top initiatives make this a poor time to discuss consolidation – perhaps distracting from that effort?
“The question suggests that good things are happening because of RTTT. I, like everyone, hope that is true, but believe we need a candid assessment of whether RTTT has made any significant difference. IF RTTT is adding value, we should note that it is pretty top-down from Dover and would not be disrupted by any consolidation. Heck, if RTTT causes good things to happen long after the last federal dollar is spent, I might become a fan of uber-consolidation. But, I fear that will not be the case.”
—Bill Manning, Member of Delaware Charter Schools Network board of directors
“Absolutely. Race to the Top is a tremendous opportunity, challenge, and commitment. District consolidation and reorganization would probably take at least two years of major attention of the state’s educational policy makers, administrators, and stakeholders, attention now required for RTTT.”
—Ed Ratledge, Director of the Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research at the University of Delaware
“Yes, as I said already, it’s distracting us from the real issue: improving student academic performance.”
—John Taylor, Executive Director, Delaware Public Policy Institute
If a task force is formed to examine the issue – whom do you believe should be represented to get the best information/insight?
“We should not form any task force and limit it to the question “consolidate the current system or not?” Instead, it should imagine a complete overhaul which not only saves admin. dollars but also creates proper incentive and opportunity for each school to manage its own improvement.”
—Bill Manning, Member of Delaware Charter Schools Network board of directors
“There have been several studies that claim savings but when a thorough review of the literature is done, there are more questions than answers. You need to show real benefits for output as well as costs before throwing out the students with the bath water.”
—Ed Ratledge, Director of the Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research at the University of Delaware
“Any committee would have to include representatives from all interested parties: school boards, teachers, administrators, parents and other community members and, yes, students. There would need to be a impartial staff.”
—John Taylor, Executive Director, Delaware Public Policy Institute