This is such a clear illustration of why small, human-scaled schools matter. At Small Schools Coalition, we see over and over how micro-schools and small learning communities give students the chance to be truly known, strengthen relationships, and flourish academically and socially. Articles like this make it easy to imagine a future where school design centers on students, not systems.
- isnt it better for students to have a bigger group to socialize?
- i buy most of what it is said here, as long as the quality of the teacher is exceptional. A mediocre teacher in a small school destroys everything. A mediocre teacher in a big school is a bump in the road. Isnt it a high risk high reward model? (i think the same about child centric school, also high risk high reward)
- economically, even if students go elsewhere for athletics/pool etc, it sounds hard to have proper infrastructure with such small amount of kids? things like a good library, nice classes with light and good materials to work with, music class, a nice patio etc
1 - i don't think a group over 100 is helpful. Dunbar's number basically defines 150 as maximum group size, but even that size stretches our limits to feel like a group. I think there is a meta-question here, which is "should a school feel like one cohesive group". Personally, I think the answer for mental health and safety reasons is yes. But some parents and students may want to answer to something like "no, school should be an abundance of options and groups to choose from". That is certainly what most colleges feel life. And there is some argument that more parents and students want that in high school. Personally, I've never heard "i want a bigger school" from an elementary or middle school parent or child. I know for my daughter, her small middle school was totally fine, but by high school she wanted to go somewhere bigger.
2 - i agree that the teaching team is very important in a micro-school. If you have four teachers, you might get away with one who is not as good, but certainly difficult to tolerate. I would argue though that mediocre teachers in elementary and middle do a lot of harm in macro-schools as well. This study is a good one. https://hanushek.stanford.edu/publications/low-performing-teachers-have-high-costs
3 - I'm not saying facilities don't matter, but one of the main tenets of micro-schools is that the teachers matter more than the building and a lot of teachers want to work in a smaller setting where they know every child. this really depends on what you want in a school. flourish are one-room schoolhouses, a team of teachers working with students, grouping and regrouping. totally reasonable that a parent could choose a school based on its library, but i haven't met that parent yet. I think most parents want caring adults, a safe place for their children, and educators that will stretch them both academically and as young people.
just to understand, the article and flourish are focussed on elementary and middle school? Maybe the US is different but in Barcelona most parents look for a school that kids can stay all the way until university. Parents are concerned with school changes. Doesn’t seem to be the case there right? (i agree the socialization and being able to pick friends from a wider group matters later)
We do middle schools. The network I started previously, Rocketship, was elementary. Students here typically go elementary school-> middle -> high although we do have k-12 schools, k-8, 6-12, they are the minority.
This is such a clear illustration of why small, human-scaled schools matter. At Small Schools Coalition, we see over and over how micro-schools and small learning communities give students the chance to be truly known, strengthen relationships, and flourish academically and socially. Articles like this make it easy to imagine a future where school design centers on students, not systems.
Great article but a few caveats/questions:
- isnt it better for students to have a bigger group to socialize?
- i buy most of what it is said here, as long as the quality of the teacher is exceptional. A mediocre teacher in a small school destroys everything. A mediocre teacher in a big school is a bump in the road. Isnt it a high risk high reward model? (i think the same about child centric school, also high risk high reward)
- economically, even if students go elsewhere for athletics/pool etc, it sounds hard to have proper infrastructure with such small amount of kids? things like a good library, nice classes with light and good materials to work with, music class, a nice patio etc
These are great questions.
1 - i don't think a group over 100 is helpful. Dunbar's number basically defines 150 as maximum group size, but even that size stretches our limits to feel like a group. I think there is a meta-question here, which is "should a school feel like one cohesive group". Personally, I think the answer for mental health and safety reasons is yes. But some parents and students may want to answer to something like "no, school should be an abundance of options and groups to choose from". That is certainly what most colleges feel life. And there is some argument that more parents and students want that in high school. Personally, I've never heard "i want a bigger school" from an elementary or middle school parent or child. I know for my daughter, her small middle school was totally fine, but by high school she wanted to go somewhere bigger.
2 - i agree that the teaching team is very important in a micro-school. If you have four teachers, you might get away with one who is not as good, but certainly difficult to tolerate. I would argue though that mediocre teachers in elementary and middle do a lot of harm in macro-schools as well. This study is a good one. https://hanushek.stanford.edu/publications/low-performing-teachers-have-high-costs
3 - I'm not saying facilities don't matter, but one of the main tenets of micro-schools is that the teachers matter more than the building and a lot of teachers want to work in a smaller setting where they know every child. this really depends on what you want in a school. flourish are one-room schoolhouses, a team of teachers working with students, grouping and regrouping. totally reasonable that a parent could choose a school based on its library, but i haven't met that parent yet. I think most parents want caring adults, a safe place for their children, and educators that will stretch them both academically and as young people.
thank you for the answer.
just to understand, the article and flourish are focussed on elementary and middle school? Maybe the US is different but in Barcelona most parents look for a school that kids can stay all the way until university. Parents are concerned with school changes. Doesn’t seem to be the case there right? (i agree the socialization and being able to pick friends from a wider group matters later)
We do middle schools. The network I started previously, Rocketship, was elementary. Students here typically go elementary school-> middle -> high although we do have k-12 schools, k-8, 6-12, they are the minority.