Is Small Really Better? Testing Some Assumptions about High School Size

Abstract

Several years ago, I was in a meeting with a group of Chicago pub lic school coaches and physical education teachers who were discussing the negative implications of one of Chicago's recent reform initia tives, the construction of smaller high schools. Much like other urban areas, Chicago had begun dismantling some of its large high schools to form smaller entities, with an "optimal" enrollment of 600 students. The coaches were deeply concerned that the small school movement was fostering the elimina tion of school-sponsored athletic teams, which sometimes acted as a magnet for marginal students, encouraging them to complete high school and in some instances enroll in college. From their perspective, intramural teams were unable to fill the void left by school-sponsored teams, which had helped some students obtain postsecondary scholarships and promoted a high school iden tity that instilled pride in the student body. Reflecting on their comments, I was struck by how my work and that of oth ers had championed small schools. Could we have been wrong? Small schools were generally viewed as places that fostered a strong sense of community and encouraged academic achievement and attainment. But many of us had not explored whether small schools were better for all types of students. More specifically, would the consequences of creating small-school environments prove to be detrimental, especially for low-income minority students enrolled in urban high schools?