Editor’s note: This commentary is by Andrew Pond, who is the chair of the Bolton School District Board, vice chair of the Mount Mansfield Modified Union School District Board, vice chair of the Chittenden East Supervisory Union Board. The views expressed are his own.
[A]ct 46, the “game-changing” education bill the governor signed into law this June, aims to enhance pre-kindergarten through 12th grade instruction in Vermont. Many school boards will be obliged to meet with neighboring boards. This is a great opportunity to take a step back and see if there are ways we can provide a better education for our children by joining together with our neighbors.
The first stated goal of the legislation is to “provide substantial equity in the quality and variety of educational opportunities statewide.” We are to look at pre-kindergarten through high school education as a continuum. In part, the legislation hopes to alleviate the discrepancy in preparation among students from different schools (different districts). Sometimes students advancing to a middle or high school are not on an even playing field with their new peers because of the differences in offerings at their sending schools. The “preferred governance structure” — an “education district” — is a district governed by a single board for all students. Conceptually, a single board can better ensure that all of their students have equal access to a quality education than multiple boards with differing priorities.
It is important to note that the preferred structure is a suggestion and not a requirement. Recognizing that the single-district solution may not be possible or may not be the best design in some regions, the legislation allows districts to remain the way they are (or to combine in other ways) and share supervisory union functions. The law encourages us to organize in whatever ways are locally best for students to complete their primary and secondary education.
In geographically isolated areas, small (even “micro”) schools may be the best way to educate our youth. Among other things, we must balance the opportunities afforded by optimal school and class size with the realities living in a rural state with an often challenging transportation environment. The legislation asks us to talk about governance and to consider a broader view of education than we have been. The focus is not school closing or consolidation, but how we can best operate our existing schools. A larger administrative structure should be be more efficient and offer greater flexibility in the allocation of resources.
PQ This legislation, requiring local discussions among neighboring boards, is the best solution I have heard to deal with the decline in our statewide student population. Some prefer the status quo, which isn’t working.
While there is money to be saved by governance changes, the core property tax issues remain largely unaddressed. In recent years more and more costs have been shifted to the education fund, as the burden of that fund has been shifted away from the general fund and onto property taxes. We should persuade our legislators to address the cost shift, rising health care costs, and other issues that impact our schools. But for local control and governance, our legislators have given us the power to improve from a local level. We should fully embrace the governance issues and find the best solutions with our neighbors.
Should school buildings close? Certainly the discussion about buildings that have one or two students per grade will be different depending on the proximity of other schools. This legislation, requiring local discussions among neighboring boards, is the best solution I have heard to deal with the decline in our statewide student population. Some prefer the status quo, which isn’t working. The cost per student continues to rise, particularly in small schools not afforded the economies of scale available in larger schools. Some prefer larger mandatory consolidation, such as by county or technical center. On paper, the larger consolidation may make sense. The reality is that while the resulting districts would be small by national standards, they would be too big for Vermont. This legislation empowers us to create regional districts that make sense on a local scale. Districts can band together in ways that make sense for a group of schools.
The consensus of the leadership in Chittenden East was that we could best serve our students and taxpayers by merging all seven districts and the supervisory union together into what is now called an education district. But not everyone agreed. One community wanted to retain their own district. Our solution was a modified union where one community retained their elementary school board, and everyone else merged together. From a management perspective, it is not as simple and efficient as possible. But it was the right solution for us at that time.
If we change district boundaries or configurations to benefit students, it will likely change the decision making process. Upsetting the status quo can be uncomfortable for adults. Many of us are used to having a town school board for a town school, and the legislation encourages us to consider changing our definition of “local.” We are asked to consider changing who the “we” is that decides how we educate our children on a local basis. In my view, this legislation is an empowering alternative to the larger consolidation some in the Legislature have called for. It allows for smaller regions to determine how to best educate their youth.
As Vermonters we are passionate about our schools, and want our children to receive the best education possible. We are involved by volunteering in classrooms, on field trips, on school boards, and we are willing to spend more per student than almost all other states. We demand a high quality education. The conversations among boards will be great opportunity to talk about how we teach our children. The talks will validate that we are already doing many things the best ways possible. But, perhaps, we can learn that there are changes, small or large, that will be beneficial to students.
