MODERN TIMES

Art Hobson

ahobson@uark.edu

NWA Times 31 Mar 2007

 

Do We Really Want a 3000-Student High School?

 

              Since my earlier column "Whither Fayetteville High School?" (February 3, http://physics.uark.edu/hobson/ ), the FHS advisory committee recommended a single future high school and that the current 10-12 grade structure be expanded to 9-12, and the school board adopted both recommendations on 4-3 votes.  

              Furthermore, the board voted to appraise the current FHS property in order to evaluate the extent to which selling it could help subsidize the construction of a new high school for 3000-4000 students.  The only suggested location for such a school is out beyond I-540.  These decisions will have major effects not only on future students and their families but also on the entire Fayetteville community.

               The current school is full at 2000 students.  The enrollment projection for grades 9-12 in 2011, when a new high school might be ready, is 2700.  The projections for 2015 and 2020 are 3000 and 4000, respectively.  A single new school for grades 9-12, for 3000 students, would be nearly full the day it opened.  And what would we build then?  Another new school for 3000?  But at our two percent student growth rate, that school would be less than half full for most of 2020 to 2050!  A 4000-student single high school would only make this dilemma worse.  It makes little financial sense for our community, with a moderate student growth rate, to build big schools, because they take too long to fill up. 

              But this decision should be primarily about education, not money.  Here, the evidence clearly shows that 3000-4000 is far too big.  There are lots of serious studies of this issue, and they indicate the superiority of high schools having 400-900 students.  106 studies are summarized in Kathleen Cotton's "School Size, School Climate, and Student Performance."  Nearly 100 studies are summarized in John Slate and Craig Jones' "Effects of School Size:  A Review of the Literature with Recommendations."  And Arkansas specifically commissioned Lawrence Picus' study "An Evidence-Based Approach to School Finance Adequacy in Arkansas."  They all conclude that 400-900 is the right size. 

              The school board's web site says a strong reason for the one-school recommendation was, "Two schools would put small group extracurricular activities and small [specialized] classes at risk."  But the Slate and Jones study concludes that "Increasing school size, especially beyond 400 students, does not typically result in a large increase in curricular offerings."  Also, "No more than 12 percent of students at larger schools enrolled in courses that were not taught at the smallest [400-student] schools."  If larger schools were compared with "smaller" schools of around 1500—probably the smallest that this school board would want to consider—that 12 percent figure would be far smaller.  So the curricular arguments favoring enrollments of 3000-4000 over enrollments of 1500 apply to a tiny percentage of students, and my guess is that even they would find the overall drawbacks of such a huge school far outweigh any possible curricular benefits. 

              The school board has recommended school sizes many times larger than these recommendations, with no stated justification.  The only reason discernable in the news reports is that, for one board member, "4,000 just doesn't feel right" while "3,000 for some reason feels better to me."  Citizens must demand that the board present more compelling reasons for ignoring the experts' advice.

              It's written all over the newspaper reports that one big "reason" for the one-school decision is football:  "They [the business community] were also strongly opposed to the prospect of Fayetteville's athletic classification getting lowered if a second school was built."  "Many people who wanted one new school cited not having to change athletic classifications."  "Assistant Superintendent Dick Johnson said athletics shouldn't be the deciding factor Ébut athletics are important to a school's success."  "While changes in athletic programs shouldn't be a primary factor Éit cannot be ignored, Principal Jim Price said." 

              I disagree.  Athletics should play no role in this decision.  Zero.  We should be ashamed that the topic even arose.  It's no wonder, given such pro-sports attitudes, that Arkansas winds up near the bottom of so many measures of success, and that American students score poorly on international tests. 

              Sports addicts, reaching for debating points, argue that our teams shouldn't be burdened with the extra travel distances required if our 7A classification is lowered—while ignoring the far more extensive extra travel generated by a single huge school in a distant corner of town.  A rough calculation shows that the additional driving caused by a single school of 3000 in the northwest corner of town, as compared with two schools of 1500, is about 4 million miles per year, consuming 200,000 gallons of gasoline, emitting 2,500 tons of carbon dioxide, and totaling $2 million in driving costs. 

              It's striking that athletics have figured so prominently in this discussion, while the effects on our fair city haven't been mentioned.  Despite welcome signs of new development in midtown Fayetteville, it's still impossible to do normal shopping near the square, families are still moving to far-flung suburbs, and buildings are shuttered along North College.  Although I-540 was originally conceived as, believe it or not, a bypass around Northwest Arkansas towns, it's fast becoming the regional main street.  Selling our centrally-located high school in favor of a huge school in the suburbs will be a big additional step toward this insidious "geography of nowhere" that's sucking the life out of the real Fayetteville. 

              The school board should remodel the present high school for a maximum of 1500, and order a new second school of about 1500 students.

LINK TO ART HOBSON'S HOMEPAGE