what every policy maker, school leader, parent, and

What Every Policy Maker, School Leader, Parent, and Community

Member Needs to Know About the Social, Economic, and Human

Capital Costs of Closing a Rural School:

A Comprehensive Multi-faceted Investigation

By

Ruth Anne Buzzard

A dissertation

Submitted to the Doctoral Faculty of Niagara University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in

Leadership and Policy

Niagara University Niagara University, New York

April 14, 2016

APPROVED:

Dr. Walter S. Polka, Committee Chair

Reverend Dr. Kevin Creagh, Committee Member

Dr. Dennis Garland, Committee Member

Dr. John O’Connor, External Reviewer

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERSThe quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscriptand there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States CodeMicroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

ProQuest 10127581

Published by ProQuest LLC (2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

ProQuest Number: 10127581

ii

ProQuest Copyright Document

iii

Copyright © Ruth Anne Buzzard, 2016

All rights Reserved

iv

NIAGARA UNIVERSITY

PH.D. DISSERTATION COMMITTEE APPROVAL

Ruth Anne Buzzard

This dissertation has been read by each member of the following Ph.D. dissertation

Committee and is approved in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Leadership and Policy.

____________________________________ ____________________________

Dr. Walter S. Polka Date

Chair

____________________________________ _____________________________

Reverend Dr. Kevin Creagh Date

____________________________________ _____________________________

Dr. Dennis Garland Date

v

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation was to collect evidence from various sources related to the impact of school building closings on rural communities. The researcher employed quantitative, qualitative, and US Census data analysis to collect information and comprehensively evaluate the impact of school closings or consolidations upon 12 different communities in New York State. The researcher developed a quantitative survey instrument that was employed by a third party professional research company in conducting 220 telephone interviews with selected population samples in rural communities where schools were closed or consolidated. In addition, the researcher conducted intensive qualitative interviews with 13 informants representing those same 12 communities who provided their lived experiences and personal perceptions regarding school closing issues. The researcher also analyzed census bureau data in two time periods: a) pre-school closing and b) post school closing; in order to evaluate the impact of school closings or consolidations in the same 12 designated rural communities with regard to demographic and community “quality of life” factors.

The researcher comprehensively investigated and analyzed the impact of a specific school closing upon these community factors and the respective community population in the selected 12 rural communities since the presence of the local school often serves as the central focus, also referred to as the “glue”, of small rural communities (Hyndman, Cleveland, & Huffman, 2010; Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Peshkin, 1982; Reynolds, 2013). The rural school is the center of the community and all of its components together form the ever-evolving open-social system of people, things, and ideas that contribute to the “quality of life” factors identified in the literature such as: 1) connectedness, 2) development of identity and culture, 3) ideology and politics, and 4) activism and civic engagement (Budge, 2009). This centricity aspect of the institution of education is consistent with the perspective that the American school is a continuously evolving human institution that is impacted by its context and impacts its context due to the interactions of key related social sub-systems (Polka, 2014; Polka & Guy, 2001; Von Bertalanffy, 1950; Weiner, 1948; Zeeillk, 1988).

Generally, the researcher concluded, based on the comprehensive findings of this investigation, that no matter which type of analysis is performed, school district mergers or reorganizations damage rural communities. And, as long as local and state policy-makers perceive school district mergers or rural school closures as a way to fix their budget issues there will be friction between the local community members and the policy-makers.

vi

Dedicated to my father Edward H. (Sam) Lester

and my grandmother Agnes J. (Susie) Lester

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I appreciate and compliment Dr. Polka for all his help in developing me as a

student and leader. Dr. Polka has a feel for the English language and I have benefited

greatly from his craft. In addition, Dr. Polka interrupted his sabbatical to ensure that I

received the help I needed. At crunch time his talents shined and everything that was

required of me to defend my Dissertation was complete.

Thank you to my committee: Rev. Dr. Kevin Creagh, Dr. Dennis Garland, and my

external reviewer Dr. John O’Connor. Recognition and appreciation should be given to

them for their time, dedication, and knowledge. Many positive accolades go to the

Professors at Niagara University who gave their talents and time teaching the curriculum

for the Leadership and Policy Program. Another outstanding person who I met at Niagara

University is Dr. Rachael Rossi; thank you for your expertise and kindness to me.

The Cohort experience was invaluable in receiving my Doctoral Education. I want

to thank all of the members of Cohort III for helping me in many ways, large and small. I

am grateful to the Niagara University Director of Libraries David Schoen and Staff for

always searching for the materials necessary to complete my assignments. Also, I want to

thank the Information Technology department for coming to my aid throughout the years.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1: Introduction to the comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation

about the social, economic, and human capital costs associated with closing a rural

school ...............................................................................................................................1

Chapter 2: The Impact on the Quality of Life in Rural Communities in New York State

Due to a School Closure: A Quantitative Analysis ..........................................................31

Chapter 3: Qualitative Analysis of the Impact of School Building Closings on Rural

Communities ....................................................................................................................84

Chapter 4: The Impact on the Quality of Life in Rural Communities in New York State

Due to a School Closure: US Census Bureau Data Analysis ..........................................128

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations for Future Studies ..............202

General References ..........................................................................................................223

Appendices .......................................................................................................................242

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Chapter 2, Table 1: The 12 School Districts Selected for this Quantitative Survey

Portion of this Study ........................................................................................................40

Chapter 2, Table 2: Number of Informants Surveyed for each of 12 Towns Selected

for this Study ....................................................................................................................44

Chapter 2, Table 3: Results of Attempts to Phone Informants ........................................45

Chapter 2, Table 4: Reliability Statistics for Questions 1-20 ..........................................49

Chapter 2, Table 5: Summary of Demographic Information ...........................................50

Chapter 2, Table 6: Descriptive Statistics for Opinion on the Effect of School Closing

on Rural Communities .....................................................................................................51

Chapter 2, Table 7: Responses to Survey on Opinions on the Effects of School

Closings on Rural Communities ......................................................................................52

Chapter 2, Table 8: Comparisons of Means between Schools that Closed .....................54

Chapter 2, Table 9: ANOVA Analysis of Survey Results ...............................................56

Chapter 3, Table 1: The 12 School Districts Selected for this Study ..............................96

Chapter 3, Table 2: Pseudonym Names and Characteristics of Informants ....................99

Chapter 3, Table 3: Qualitative Interview Codes and Themes ........................................100

x

Chapter 4, Table 1: General Information on Closed Schools in New York State

1986-2014 ........................................................................................................................150

Chapter 4, Table 2: Rejected School District Mergers since 2009 ..................................151

Chapter 4, Table 3: The 12 School Districts Selected for this Study ..............................154

Chapter 4, Table 4: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Cherry Valley-Springfield CSD

Population Changes over time 1980-2000 .......................................................................158


Occupied and Vacant Households in year 2000 ..............................................................159


Occupied and Vacant Households in Cherry Valley and Springfield in 2010 ................159

Chapter 4, Table 7: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Genesee Valley CSD

Angelica and Belmont Population Change over Time Years 1990 and 2000 .................161


Angelica and Belmont Population Change over Time Years 2000 and 2010 .................161


Occupied and Vacant Households in Angelica and Town of Amity Year 2000 .............162

xi

Chapter 4, Table 10: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Sullivan West CSD

(Jefferson-Youngsville Campus and Delaware Valley School) Year 2000 Proportion

of Residents age 65 or Greater for Town of Callicoon and Town of Delaware ..............164

Chapter 4, Table 11: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-

Youngsville Campus and Delaware Valley School) Year 2010 Proportion of Residents

age 65 or Greater for Town of Callicoon and Town of Delaware ...................................165

Chapter 4, Table 12: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Sullivan West CSD (Lake Huntington

Campus and Narrowsburg School) Year 2000 Proportion of Residents age 65 Greater

for Town of Cochecton and Town of Tusten ...................................................................165

Chapter 4, Table 13: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Sullivan West CSD (Lake

Huntington Campus and Narrowsburg School) Year 2010 Proportion of Residents

age 65 or Greater for Town of Cochecton and Town of Tusten ......................................166


(Jefferson-Youngsville Campus and Delaware Valley School) Years 2000 and 2010

Population Change over Ten Years for Towns of Callicoon and Town of Delaware .....167


(Lake Huntington Campus and Narrowsburg School) Years 2000 and 2010

Population Change over Ten Years for Town of Cochecton and the Town of

Narrowsburg ....................................................................................................................168

xii


(Lake Huntington Campus and Narrowsburg School) Years 2000 and 2010

Change in the Number of Housing Units over Ten Years for Town of Cochecton

and the Town of Tusten ...................................................................................................168


(Jefferson-Youngsville Campus and Delaware Valley School) Years 2000 and 2010

Change in the Number of Housing Units over Ten Years for the Town of Callicoon

and the Town of Delaware ...............................................................................................169

Chapter 4, Table 18: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Duggan Elementary School

and Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-Youngsville Campus) Years 2000 and 2010

Population Change over Ten Years for Town of Bethel and Town of Callicoon ............170


and Sullivan West CSD (Lake Huntington Campus) Years 2000 and 2010

Population Change over Ten Years for Town of Bethel and Town of Cochecton ..........171


and Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-Youngsville Campus) Year 2010

Occupied and Vacant Households in the Town of Bethel and Town of Callicoon .........171

xiii


and Sullivan West CSD (Lake Huntington) Year 2010 Occupied and Vacant

Households in the Town of Bethel and the Town of Cochecton .....................................172

Chapter 4, Table 22: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Allegany-Limestone CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for the Town of Alleganyand the Town

of Carrollton Years 2000 and 2013 ..................................................................................173

Chapter 4, Table 23: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Allegany-Limestone CSD

Proportion of Residents age 65 or Greater for Town of Allegany The Town

of Carrollton Years 2013 .................................................................................................173

Chapter 4, Table 24: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Cattaraugus-Little Valley CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for the Town of New Albion

and Town of Little Valley Years 2000 and 2013 .............................................................174

Chapter 4, Table 25: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Cattaraugus-Little Valley CSD

Proportion of Residents Age 65 or Greater for Town of New Albion

and Town of Little Valley Year 2013. ............................................................................175

Chapter 4, Table 26: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Cuba-Rushford CSD Population

Change over Thirteen Years for Town of Cuba and Town of Rushford Years

2000 and 2013 ..................................................................................................................175

xiv

Chapter 4, Table 27: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Cuba-Rushford Proportion of

Residents Age 65 or Greater for Town of Cuba and Town of Rushford Year 2013 .......176

Chapter 4, Table 28: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Cuba-Rushford Educational

Attainment for the Town of Cuba and the Town of Rushford Year 2010 .......................177

Chapter 4, Table 29: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Altmar-Parish-Williamstown CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for Town of Parish and the Town of

Williamstown Years 2000 and 2013 ................................................................................178

Chapter 4, Table 30: 2 X 2 Contingency Table for Altmar-Parish-Williamstown CSD

Educational Attainment for the Town of Parish and the Town of Williamstown

Year 2010 .........................................................................................................................178

Chapter 4, Table 31: Individual Income Presented for 5 Levels of Education

Attainment........................................................................................................................180

Chapter 5, Table 1: Number of Informants Surveyed for each of the 12 Selected Towns

for this Study ....................................................................................................................208

xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Chapter 1, Figure 1: Inter-relationships that Exist in Rural Communities According

to the Literature ................................................................................................................3

Chapter 1, Figure 2: The Impact of School Building Closings On Rural Communities .15

Chapter 2, Figure 1: Twelve School Buildings in New York State that were Closed .....41


Chapter 4, Figure 1: Successful and Unsuccessful Mergers of New York State School

Districts ............................................................................................................................152


Chapter 4, Figure 3: 2 X 2 Contingency Table (Siegel, 1956) .......................................157

Chapter 4, Figure 4: School Buildings Closed in Central New York State .....................160

Chapter 4, Figure 5: School Buildings Closed in Western New York State ...................163

1





CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPREHENSIVE MULTI-FACETED

RESEARCH INVESITGATION ABOUT THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC,

AND HUMAN CAPITAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CLOSING A

RURAL SCHOOL

March 18, 2016

Ruth Anne Buzzard

2

INTRODUCTION

“Strong rural communities are key to a stronger America,”

(President Barack Obama, 2011)

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of school building

closings on rural communities in New York State. The major human capital components

that make up a rural community include: a) schools; b) volunteer service organizations

(i.e.: firefighters, Lions International, International Kiwanis, 4-H Clubs, Future Farmers

of America); c) houses of religious worship); d) businesses (usually small and family

owned); and e) community centers (i.e.: libraries, YMCA, YWCA, and Boys & Girls

Clubs) (Lyson, 2006; Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Woods, Doeksen, & St. Clair, 2005). The

researcher evaluated how these components interact with the school in rural communities

and the impact upon them and their personnel of a school closing since the presence of

the local school often serves as the central focus of small rural communities (Hyndman,

Cleveland, & Huffman, 2010; Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Peshkin, 1982; Reynolds, 2013).

Hyndman, Cleveland, and Huffman (2010) stated that the rural school is the glue that

holds the community together. School consolidation and school building closings have

drawn greater interest over the last two decades due to rural population decline and

education budget constraints.

As illustrated in Figure 1, the interaction of the key components that make up the

human capital organizations of the rural community and the epicenter role that the local

school plays. The school is the center of the community and all of its components interact

3

with one another and the rural community to form the ever-evolving open-social system

of people, things, and ideas. This centricity aspect of the institutions of education is

consistent with the perspective that the American school is a continuously evolving

human institution that is impacted by its context as well as impacts its context due the

interactions of key heterogeneous sub-systems (Polka, 2014; Polka & Guy, 2001; Von

Bertalanffy, 1950; Weiner, 1948; Zeeillk, 1988).

Figure 1 Inter-relationships that exist in rural communities.

School merger and school consolidation are terms used interchangeably by many

researchers. For this dissertation, merger is the agreement of two or more school districts

to share resources and enrollment (Sell & Leistritz, 1997). Merger does not necessarily

mean that a school building will be closed. District school consolidation implies

4

wholesale reduction in the number of school districts and closure of buildings. This

results in elimination of duplicate programs and elimination of staff (Pennsylvania

School Boards Association, 2009). School reorganization is the movement of groups of

students from one building to another within a school district to better utilize facilities.

This may result in the closing of a school building.

Since 1996, 25 New York State school districts have merged. In the last 5 years,

32 districts have considered merging but rejected a merger. Currently, 3 districts are

considering merging (New York State Association of School Business Officials, 2014).

Over two thirds of the New York State school districts considering merging were losing

fund balances and/or losing staff over the 2010-2013 period (New York State Association

of School Business Officials, 2014, p 8).

Therefore, the purpose of this multi-faceted research investigation was to

determine how the loss of a school building affects the quality of life in the rural

communities (Lyson, 2002). In addition, the impact of the loss of the rural school

building upon its human capital intense components: volunteer service organizations (i.e.:

firefighters, Lions International, International Kiwanis, 4-H Clubs, Future Farmers of

America); houses of religious worship); businesses (usually small and family owned) and

community centers (i.e.: libraries, YMCA, YWCA, and Boys & Girls Clubs) was

investigated. The characteristics of rural communities was determined using U.S. Census

data and New York State Education Department data (Lyson, 2002). The researcher also

evaluated school districts that rejected mergers using the same data-bases.

Some people do not appreciate the quality of life offered by their rural community

until it has been greatly diminished (Lyson, 2002; Sell & Leistritz, 1997). Quality of life

5

factors include: knowing community residents, helpful neighbors, security, safety, and

closeness to nature and the land (Bauch, 2009; Budge, 2006; Cross, 2001; Egelund &

Laustsen, 2006; Herzog & Pittman, 1995; Oncescu & Giles, 2012). Quality of life factors

are difficult to measure. However, a number of different measures related to quality of

life include: 1) population gain or loss, 2) average income, 3) assessed evaluation of

homes, 4) occupied versus vacant housing, and 5) the presence of a community service

such as a library (Dreier, 1982; Herzog & Pittman, 1995; Lyson, 2002; 2005). Quality of

life information can be compared for rural communities that have lost a school building at

some point during the late 20 th and early 21st centuries. To look at quality of life, Lyson’s

(2002) study showed the impact of not having a school, not the impact of closing a

school. The quality of life of rural communities that have schools was higher than the

quality of life of those that did not have a school. However, never having a school is

potentially different than losing a school. Lyson’s (2002) study does not show this

directly; Lyson’s study demonstrated relationships but not cause and effect. Therefore the

intent of this comprehensive multi-faceted investigation is focused on the impact of

losing a school in a rural community.

Background of the Problem

Over 100,000 thousand school districts have consolidated in the United States

since 1930 (Howley, Johnson & Petrie, 2011; Sell & Leistritz, 1997). The first wave of

consolidation was neighborhood city schools forming larger centrally located schools.

The initial limitation for consolidation was transportation (Howley et al., 2011). In cities,

even centralized schools could be within walking distance of the students. The second

wave of consolidation turned one-room rural schools into a central school (Howley et al.,

6

2011). Better roads and the advent of busses made rural centralization possible. Benefits

envisioned at the time of rural school consolidation included single-grade classes,

specialized subject matter, better supervision, and free student transportation (Howley et

al., 2011). The last group of one room school houses to centralize in Niagara County,

New York was the Starpoint Central School District in 1953 (Szpaicher, personal

communication, 2015).

However, the consolidation that is happening today is a reorganization within a

central school district or the consolidation of two or more school districts into a larger

central district. These reorganizations or consolidations are intended to address low

student enrollment or potential cost savings due to economies of scale (Duncombe &

Yinger, 2005; 2010). Many rural communities are losing population and the availability

of employment to attract new residents is limited (Egelund & Laustsen, 2006). The

closing of a school building exacerbates these situations. The rural school building

provided a major source of employment in the rural community (Woods et al., 2005).

When school jobs leave, the community suffers directly from fewer jobs and indirectly

from less income spent in the community (Oncescu & Giles, 2012). Additionally, parents

of students attending the consolidated school, spend money in the host community and

spend less in the vacated community (Sell & Leistritz, 1997).

But, given the loss of population and loss of employment faced by rural

communities and their schools, one might wonder why anyone would live in a rural

community. The international trend is for greater urbanization as individuals move from

rural areas to urban centers (Friedman & Mandelbaum, 2011). A major factor in

maintaining rural areas is a “sense of place” or “place-consciousness” (Bauch, 2009;

7

Budge, 2006; Cross, 2001; Herzog & Pittman, 1995). “Sense of place is not shaped by

our genes but rather by a sense for our surroundings” (Gallagher, 1993, p.12). Just as

migratory animals return to the location where they were reared, people demonstrate a

powerful attraction to their home or areas that feel like home (Budge, 2006; Steel, 1981).

Sense of place allows individuals to honestly feel that “there is no place like home”

despite the hardships and limitations of their rural communities (Steele, 1981). Budge

(2006) recognized six habits of place that most influence rural education and student

learning. These include 1) connectedness, 2) development of identity and culture, 3)

interdependence with the land, 4) spirituality, 5) ideology and politics, and 6) activism

and civic engagement. These are key concepts that organize the conceptual framework

for this study. The above, often referred to as a “sense of place”, are major determinates

of how well the school and community interact for mutual benefit (Budge, 2006; Herzog

& Pittman, 1995; Oncescu & Giles, 2012).

An additional issue faced by rural community residents is that a number of local

decisions are influenced by people outside of the community. A number of states have

enacted minimum student enrollments for school districts and universities (Duncombe &

Yinger, 2010). New York and a number of other states encourage district reorganization

using school aid programs (Duncombe & Yinger, 2005). Different states use building or

transportation aid formulas to encourage school consolidation (Haller & Monk, 1988).

Many of the school board members and administration do not live in the community

where the school is being vacated. The decision whether a particular business is added to

the community or closes, is not made by people in the community. For example, if the

owners/operators of Rite Aid Pharmacy or Dunkin’ Donuts’ Restaurant decide to close

8

because there is not enough business, the parent corporation will make the final decision

(Brian Taylor, personal communication, 2014).

Certain rural communities have addressed the problem of declining population by

consolidating or eliminating local schools. Justification for closing these schools include

declining enrollments and desires for greater efficiency (Andrews, Duncombe & Yinger,

2002; Haller & Monk, 1988; Duncombe and Yinger, 2005, Howley et al., 2011; New

York State Association of Business Official, 2013). New York State and its Education

Department have provided financial incentives for school consolidation (Bakeman, 2014;

New York State Association of School Business Officials, 2014). However, it is up to the

local communities to weigh the benefits versus costs of school consolidations and

closings (Duncombe & Yinger, 2010; Egelund & Laustsen, 2006; New York State

Association of School Business Officials, 2014; Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Sell, Leistritz &

Thompson, 1996; Surface, 2011). Mergers of two or more school districts in New York

State are now more difficult since a law was passed mandating that each school district

must approve of the merger for it to take place (Bakeman, 2014; Heiser, 2013; New York

State Association of School Business Officials, 2014).

Benefits and Costs of Consolidation

Benefits of consolidation are mainly financial (Duncombe & Yinger, 2005).

Duncombe and Yinger, (2010) have argued that economies of scale will almost always

result in lower spending per pupil. Larger schools can afford more specialized teachers

and better facilities to provide more “bang for the buck”. As a result, consolidation

should improve student performance on standardized tests. However, according to Huang

and Howley (1993) “…results have generally pointed to a negative relationship between

9

size and academic achievement. All else held equal, small schools have evident

advantages for achievement…” Those economic benefits associated with consolidation of

schools do not translate into greater educational performance (Kauffman, 2001; Kennedy,

2001; Purcell & Shackelford, 2005). The main benefit perceived by residents of the

involved communities may be a reduction in school tax rates. However, decreased tax

rates may be illusionary. When most school districts merge, the residents of one district

will see lower tax rates, yet residents of the other district will experience higher tax rates

(Duncombe & Yinger, 2005; 2015).

In New York State, Governor Cuomo has designated funds to freeze school tax

rates in merged school districts (Bakeman, 2014). Cosimo Tangorra, Deputy New York

State Education Commissioner, demonstrated a key contemporary negative position

about school mergers, he stated, “…loss of local control, loss of identity, loss of the

mascot, the fact that if you move to a reorganized district, rather than there being two or

three basketball teams, there’s only one; those generate strong emotions from community

members and end up clouding folks’ judgment” (Bakeman, 2014). Howley, Johnson, and

Petrie (2011) reinforced those concerns based on their research wherein they contended

that consolidation may produce schools so large that economies of scale disappear and

deconsolidation may yield cost savings benefits. Also, large school districts usually add

more mid-level administrators eating up savings (Howley et al., 2011). Heiser (2013)

compared the pros and cons of school district mergers and contended that the context of

the merger was of most importance in terms of its beneficial outcomes.

Duncombe and Yinger (2010) suggested that the costs of school consolidation

were largely social. This is particularly true for communities that lose their local schools

10

(Dreier, 1982; Voth & Danforth, 1981). However, the results of the Voth and Danforth

(1981) study are difficult to interpret because the study did not control for a number of

exogenous demographic and economic variables. But, residents who did not have

children in school, became disconnected from the consolidated school and may suffer

from social ennui and young people spend more time near their “new” school and less

time in their previous community that lost its school (Duncombe & Yinger, 2010;

Egelund & Laustsen, 2006; Langdon, 2000; Oncescu & Giles, 2012). Students who lose

their “sense of place” were less likely to come back to their community after graduation

from high school (Bauch, 2009; Budge, 2006; Cross, 2001). There is less loyalty to their

community and they seek employment elsewhere, which further decreases local

population (Egelund & Laustsen, 2006; Porter, 2012 Surface, 2011). Therefore, the loss

of a rural school begins a cycle that impacts the local community years after the closing

has occurred (Peshkin, 1982, Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Sell et al., 1996).

The immediate effects observed in other studies of closed or consolidated schools

are: less local business, less pride and spirit in the community (Surface, 2011), less use of

the library in the community since children and their guardians will use the library in the

host school (Kluever & Finley, 2012)), and the movement of people away from the

vacated community (Porter, 2012; Surface, 2011). Lower population will result in a

further decline of business (Surface, 2011) and potentially a reduction in the numbers of

volunteer firefighters and other volunteer community service providers, as well as a

reduction in attendance at houses of worship. Also, as a consequence of the loss of

population, there is a smaller tax base to support government, services, and schools

(Duncombe &Yinger, 2015). The end result is that both the town and the school district

11

may need to raise tax rates or decrease (or share) services in order to balance their

budgets and maintain community expectations (Duncombe & Yinger, 2015; Egelund &

Laustsen, 2006; Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Reynolds, 2013). Thus, when faced by

consolidation or closing of the community school, it is not surprising that many residents

mount a vigorous opposition to the closing (Heiser, 2013; Peshkin, 1982; Ward & Rink,

1992).

However, the true merger of two school districts yields “cost savings” as a result

of the additional state aid which is initially 40% (Bakeman, 2014). But, reorganization

within a school district does not receive additional state aid. Any savings from in-district

reorganization depends on reduction of staff and economies of scale (Duncombe &

Yinger, 2005; 2010; 2015; Howley et al., 2011).

Furthermore, consolidation or closing has a significant cost in terms of quality of

life for rural community residents (Duncombe & Yinger, 2015; Howley et al., 2011;

Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Sell et al., 1996). Consolidation and/or

closing increase the cost of transportation for the resulting larger rural student catchment

areas (Killeen & Sipple, 2000). The question then to be asked is: who is really caring

about the children in a rural community that has lost a school? The children have to give

up time with family because they spend more time on school buses going to and from the

new school (Eyre & Finn, 2002; Howley et al., 2011; Purcell & Shackelford, 2005;

Wiegand, 2005). Over 36,000 students ride the school bus for more than 2 hours each day

in West Virginia (Eyre & Finn, 2002). West Virginia State guidelines for maximum

duration for student bus rides are 30 minutes for elementary students, 45 minutes for

middle school students, and 60 minutes for high school students (Eyre & Finn, 2002).

12

The West Virginia transportation director states these guidelines are too idealistic and

gives people false hope. From a survey, Eyre and Finn (2002) found that children with

long bus rides were fatigued, and their grades suffered. In addition, these students

participated in fewer after school activities, along with spending less time with their

parents. The children are less likely to have classes with friends from the vacated school.

Parents spend more time and money driving their children to the host school, especially

when the school does not provide busing to special events or activities (Eyre & Finn,

2002).

In addition to longer bus rides, residents of school districts that have rejected

school mergers ranked loss of local identity as important in rejecting the merger (Heiser,

2013). Monetary reasons also affect success or failure of school district merger

considerations (New York State Association of School Business Officials, 2014). The

district that is financially stronger typically pays its teaching and administrative staff

more money and benefits. When districts merge contracts are leveled up, raising the

salaries of teachers and administration in the financially challenged school. School taxes

in the two districts are often different. After a merger one former school district will see a

rise in school tax (Heiser, 2013).

Problem Statement and Information Gap

Researchers, (Hyndman, Cleveland, & Huffman, 2010; Lyson 2002; 2005;

Norton, 2005; Polka, 2015; Polka & Guy, 2001; Surface, 2011) have identified that

because the school is part of an ever-evolving open-social system, whenever a school is

closed, the rest of the people, things, and ideas of the rural community is impacted.

However, there is a gap in understanding the impactful results associated with a school

13

closing on various rural community residential components such as: population trends;

housing patterns; volunteer service organizations; religious worship; business operations,

and community centers usage. In other words, there is a lack of information about the

positive or negative impact upon the quality of life in a rural community if or when the

local school is closed.

Lyson (2002) also asserted that the gap in understanding also reflects the fact that

there is sparse literature considering how the closing or the consolidation of schools

interact with different components of the rural community and its subsequent long term

impact on the quality of life in the community. Lyson (2002, p. 132) stated, “is dearth of

studies that attempt to quantify and generalize what a school means to a community.”

Sell, et al., (1996) is a notable exception with their study of school closings in North

Dakota. Many people in rural communities including community leaders, educational

administrators, and policy-makers do not recognize the importance of these interactions

until it is too late because the current literature on the effect of school building closings

on the quality of life in rural communities is limited (Bakeman, 2014).

This dissertation’s multi-faceted comprehensive investigation of twelve or more

closed schools may add to the understanding of the ripple effect on the rural community’s

human capital components within the recently closed school community. This

information potentially could help other community leaders and policy decision-makers

faced with merger or closure to evaluate the social cost of closing schools on their

respective rural community. However, since nine school closings are as recent as 2012,

2013 or 2014 (Heiser, 2013; New York State Association of School Business Officials,

2014); it was difficult to determine the long-term effects of those specific school closings

14

without a detailed study of the major components of the rural community. Therefore, this

information may help communities maintain or enhance their quality of life.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework used in this multi-faceted investigation is that in a

rural community there is a symbiotic cohesiveness among its open-social system

components (Peshkin, 1978; 1982; Polka, 2014; Porter, 2012). Specifically, the

conceptual framework of this comprehensive investigation related to the six previously

indicated habits of mind: 1) connectedness, 2) development of identity and culture, 3)


and civic engagement (Budge, 2006).

Small rural communities are more sensitive to changes in population (Porter,

2012; Surface, 2011). Rural communities contain the kind of people “who protect their

own” (Heath & Heath, 2010). The major elements of rural communities are generally

human capital intense components such as: volunteer service organizations, houses of

religious worship); businesses (usually small and family owned) and community centers

(Bauch, 2009). Traditionally, schools have been at the center of rural community life

(Egelund & Laustsen, 2006; Lyson, 2002; Oncescu & Giles, 2012) as illustrated in Figure

1.

In addition, schools often provide local employment, furnish facilities for

community activities, and cultivate community identity (Miller, 1995; Oncescu & Giles,

2012). Generally, a rural area encompasses less than 2,500 people and is not adjacent to

an urban area or urban cluster (Barley and Beesley 2007; Lyson 2002). Over half of the

15

public schools and 10 million students in the United States are located in rural areas

(Provasni et al., 2007).

This researcher, via this investigation, provides a comprehensive analysis of the

changes that have occurred in a rural community as a result of the closing or

consolidation of the local rural school. The closing of the community school causes a

ripple effect across the other elements of the rural community. If the local school closes,

the children will go to school elsewhere but the quality of life in the community has been

impacted. Consequently, to further investigate the impact of a school closing or

consolidation, a multi-faceted investigation as illustrated in Figure 2 below was selected.

Figure 2.

The Impact Of School Building Closings On Rural Communities

Chapter 1

Introduction

Chapter 2

Article 1 Quantitative

Survey

Instrument

Chapter 3

Article 2 Qualitative

Semi Structured Interviews

Chapter 4

Article 3

Analytic Study

Existing Public Data Bases

Chapter 5

Summary

16

Comprehensive Multi-faceted Investigation Research Methods

The three distinct research methods employed by the researcher in this

comprehensive multi-faceted investigation into the social, economic, and human capital

costs of closing a rural school are as follows: quantitative survey; qualitative interviews;

and census data-base analysis. Chapter One of this dissertation provides the introduction

to the complete comprehensive investigation. Chapter Two of this dissertation provides a

review and analysis of the information collected via a quantitative telephone survey

conducted with 220 residents of rural communities who experienced the closure or

consolidation of their respective local school. Chapter Three of this dissertation provides

a review and analysis of the information collected via interviews with 13 individuals

representing rural community residents who have experienced the closure or

consolidation of their respective local school. Chapter Four of this dissertation provides a

review and analysis of the information collected via an analysis of large data sets from

the New York State and the United States Census Bureau in order to ascertain the

statistical impact of school closing or consolidations in the 12 selected sample schools.

Chapter Five of this dissertation provides a general summary and analysis of the findings

of the three different facets of this investigation and, also, provides conclusions and

recommendations for future studies related to the impact of school closing or

consolidations on the quality of life in rural communities. See Figure 2 for a visual

representation of this comprehensive investigation.

Comprehensive Multi-faceted Investigation Research Questions

The following research questions guide this investigation. The overarching

research question is: How does the loss of a community school impact the quality of life

17

in a rural community? The following five are specific research questions that when

answered should reveal if the loss of a community school does impact the quality of life

in a rural community:

Question 1: Do people in the rural community understand the direct

relationship of rural schools and the local quality of life?

Question 2: How does the local quality of life change when the local

school is vacated such as: a) connectedness, b) development of identity and

culture, c) interdependence with the land, d) spirituality, e) ideology and politics,

and f) activism and civic engagement?

Question 3: How much are community members willing to pay in taxes to

keep their local school and maintain their community?


school is vacated such as a) population change, b) age structure of population, c)

number of household units d) occupancy and vacancy of housing?

Question 5: Education and Average income related to a rural community

having or not having a school?

Multi-faceted Comprehensive Investigation Research Design

This mixed method study is designed to find out how people in rural communities

feel when their school is closed and what are the social, economic, and human capital

costs associated with the closing of a rural school. Three types of methods were used in

this dissertation study: quantitative, qualitative, and analytical analysis of information

from United States Census data-bases.

18

Surveys were conducted throughout the selected sample communities to collect

useful quantitative information (Converse & Presser, 1986). To eliminate bias, an

independent third party administered the surveys. Surveys yielded quantitative data

indicating the degree of feelings about different community components. The survey

consisted of two parts, Part One: Demographical Information such as Gender, Children of

school age, Member of Volunteer Organization, School election voter, Age, and Highest

education. Part Two of the survey consisted of questions of 20 items in a Likert scale

format (see Appendix A), (1= major negative change, 2=some negative change, 3=no

change, 4=some positive change, 5=major positive change). This quantitative survey

information was collected for 12 different rural communities that have lost their school.

This survey was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Niagara University

(see Appendix B).

Qualitative interviews were used to determine responses of community members

to the loss of the school (see Appendix C). Interviews of community members involved

in the major components of the community identified similarities and differences

between these different elements. Interviews included community members who are for

and against school mergers. The strength of the qualitative portion of this study is that it

captures the depth of experiences and emotions of the interview subjects and further

buttress the validity and reliability of the comprehensive investigation findings. This

qualitative interview protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at

Niagara University (see Appendix D).

The third portion of this comprehensive investigation has been influenced by the

studies conducted by Lyson (2002). He posited that small rural communities with a

19

school were superior to similar communities without a school in a number of measures

related to quality of life. However, Lyson (2002) did not separate communities that had

lost a school from those that never had a school. To determine effects of school building

closings, data from the United States Census Bureau and other sources were compared

before and after a rural community loses its school. An advantage of this portion of this

study is that it is based on demographic and economic statistics. Twelve communities that

have lost their school building were compared using U.S. Census Data for quality of life

measures. In addition nine schools that rejected school district mergers were evaluated

using U. S. Census Data pertaining to quality of life. The reasons the residents from these

nine schools districts chose not to merge were also investigated.

Definition of Key Terms

The following terms are defined according to their intended use in this study:

School: For this paper a school means a school building.

School Closing: The closing of the school building is when the school closes and

students attend a different school.

School District: A school district is a state authorized local legislative districts

for the purpose of operating a school (New York State Education Legislation).

Economic Impact: Effect of an action, event, or other circumstance (e.g.,

legislation, migration, commercial development, literacy, existence of a school or

college) on the economic well-being of an individual, enterprise, community,

region, etc. (http://eric.ed.gov/?ti=Qualtiy+of+Life).

20

Elements of the community: Elements of the community are the school,

community library, volunteer organizations such as firefighters, churches, and

businesses.

“Sense of place”: A major factor in maintaining rural areas is a “sense of place”

or “place-consciousness” (Gallagher, 1993, p. 12; Steel, 1981, Budge, 2006).

Sense of place is not shaped by our genes but rather by a sense for our

surroundings. Just as migratory animals return to the location where they were

reared, people demonstrate a powerful attraction to their home or areas that feel

like home (Budge, 2006, Cross, 2001; Steele, 1981).

Human capital: Human capital explains the portion of Gross National Product

(GNP) that cannot be explained by physical capital and labor inputs (Howley,

1991).

Social capital: Social capital is the networks and relationships between people

living and working in a community (Miller, 1995).

School Community Relationship: A school community relationship is a formal

or informal interaction between educational institutions and their surrounding

communities.

http://eric.ed.gov/?qt=school+community+relationship&ti=School+Community+

Relationship

School Merger: Two or more School Districts have formally agreed to share

resources and enrollment. (Formally agreed means both or all school districts

must ok the merger separately, that is why recent mergers fail because of

differential tax burden). The school that ends up having to pay more in taxes may

21

not approve the merger. Merger does not necessarily indicate that a school

building will close (Sell & Leistritz, 1997).

School Reorganization: Reorganization is the movement of groups of students

from one building to another within a school district to better utilize facilities.

This may result in the closing of a school building. Reorganization is limited to

one district.

District School Consolidation: Consolidation implies wholesale reduction in the

number of school districts and closure of buildings including elimination of

duplicate programs and elimination of staff (Pennsylvania School Boards

Association, 2009). As an example, in Pennsylvania, 4 school districts

consolidated into 1 district.

Volunteer Service Organizations including:

o EMT: emergency medical training.

o Volunteer Fire Company: a group of individuals who train to fight fires,

respond to accidents and natural disasters, and aid sick or injured

neighbors.

o International Kiwanis: Kiwanis is a global organization of volunteers

dedicated to improving the world, one child and one community at a time.

http://www.kiwanis.org/

o Lions Clubs International: Where there’s a need, there’s a Lion. Lions

Clubs International is the largest service club organization in the world.

Our 1.4 million members perform valuable service in 210 countries and

geographic areas around the globe. Lions are friends, family and neighbors

22

who share a core belief: community is what we make it.

http://www.lionsclubs.org/EN/index.php

o 4-H: 4-H youth development and mentoring programs prepare young

people to make a positive impact in their communities and the world.

Quality of life: Quality of life are things that you see and do not see in

community interactions (Father Creagh) Niagara University personal

communication, 2013). Any combination of objective standards and subjective

attitudes, both other-and-self-imposed, by which individuals and groups assess

their life situation (ERIC, http://eric.ed.gov/?ti=Quality+of+Life).

Rural area: A rural area encompasses less than 2,500 people and is not adjacent

to an urban area or urban cluster (Barley and Beesley 2007, Lyson 2002).

GIS: Geographic Information Systems (Tomlinson, 1968).

Limitations and Delimitations

The researcher delimited this study to upstate New York rural communities. The

limitations were finding a number of recent school building closings in rural communities

that fit the researcher’s criteria for this study. Gaining access to similar data from

communities chosen for this study was a limitation. Another difficult limitation was

getting an independent individual or organization to administer the surveys. The

resolution to this problem was the hiring of a research company to survey by telephone.

Correlating the surveys and interviews from particular organizations to accurately

represent the views of specific community residents was often difficult.

23

Significance of the Research

The researcher intends to bring awareness to the residents of rural communities of

the importance of the interaction between various community components. Rural

communities must often face the choice of retaining their community school or raising

school taxes (Bakeman, 2014; Duncombe & Yinger, 2015). Members of rural

communities need to determine the social, economic and human capital cost of

eliminating schools. These human costs should be compared to fiscal savings when

evaluating closing or merging local schools. People need to take responsibility for the

type of community in which they want to live.

This requires leadership and volunteering to maintain the quality of life in the

rural communities (Cashman, 2008; Friedman, 2005; Friedman & Mendelbaum, 2001,

Kouzes & Posner, 2012). The leadership need not be political. However, the community

needs some activists that understand the potential damage that a school closing can do to

the rural community. If the school is closed, community leadership can mitigate the

negative effects of the closure (Harmon & Schafft, 2009; Kousner & Posner, 2012;

Surface, 2011). Subsequently, authentic leaders who are aware of their own strengths and

short- comings focus on team efforts and results and not on themselves. They strive to

accomplish goals that add purpose of service and contribution (Cashman, 2008).

Authentic and well-informed leaders who base their decisions on quantitative data and on

human capital concerns can provide the meaningful advice to policy-makers who must

eventually make the decision to close a local rural school or not.

According to the researcher and others, rural communities generally are a great

place to raise a family (Herzog & Pittman, 1995; Oncescu & Giles, 2012). The researcher

24

believes that America was built one community at a time and America should not be

disassembled through the loss of rural communities (Friedman & Mendelbaum, 2001;

Howley et al., 2011; Perkins, 1989; Porter, 2012) one community at a time. If a rural

school is closed, it may make it more difficult to maintain the spirit of the community and

its quality of life (Sell & Leistritz, 1997). And, consequently, the community may be

irreversibly changed forever.

Organization of the Study

This comprehensive multi-faceted dissertation investigation is divided into three

papers (Chapters Two, Three, and Four). Chapter One of this dissertation presents the

background to the study. Chapter One also contains a statement of the purpose of the

study, its rationale, a conceptual framework, research questions, overview of the

methodology, definitions of key terms, limitations and delimitations of the study, and the

significance of the study. Methodology for the quantitative survey study (Article One) is

presented in Chapter Two. Chapter Three details the research methodology used to

generate interview data for the qualitative study (Article Two). Both Chapter Two and

Three indicate sampling techniques, data collection, treatment and analyses of data, and

protection of those contributing data. In Chapter Four, (Article Three) United States

Census Data and data from other sources will be compared for communities before and

after their school building was closed. Chapter Five summarizes a review of the literature

discussing school reorganization, merger, consolidation, and closing and their effects on

the rural communities. Also in Chapter Five, notable results will be summarized and

discussed. Conclusions will be drawn and implications of the study will be considered.

25

Recommendations for future research will be made. In addition, limitations of this study

will be reviewed.

26

Appendix A

Survey for: Opinions on the Effects of School Closings on Rural Communities

I am Ruth Anne Buzzard and I am a student at Niagara University in the Leadership and Policy Ph. D. program. I am working on a research study; you are invited to participate in this study. Your task is to complete the following questionnaire. School Building = SB. The survey consists of 20 items in a Likert scale format (1= major negative change, 2=some negative change, 3=no change, 4=some positive change, 5=major positive change). There is no right or wrong answer to these items. You should complete the questionnaire according to your own experience. It will take you about 15 minutes. Thank you for your participation! Part One Demographical Information Please mark the appropriate choice. Gender: Male [ ] Female [ ] Children of school age: Yes [ ] No [ ] Member of: fire company [ ], Kiwanis [ ], Lions [ ] School election voter: Yes [ ] No [ ] Your age less than or equal to 30 [ ] 31 to 40 [ ] 41 to 50 [ ] greater than 50 [ ] Your highest education: high school [ ] trade [ ] Associate [ ] Bachelor or above [ ] Part Two: Rural School Building Closing (RSBC) Scale Please circle the appropriate choice according to the scales below. 20 statements (1 =major negative change 2 =some negative change, 3 = no change 4 =some positive change 5 =major positive change) Connectedness

1. Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

3. The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 5. My feelings for my community have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

Development of Identity and Culture 6. Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB. 1 2 3 4 5 8. My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed.

1 2 3 4 5 9. Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Library usage has changed after the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

Ideology and Politics 11. School taxes have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 12. Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. 1 2 3 4 5 13. Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

14. Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 15. Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed.

1 2 3 4 5

Activism and Civic Engagement 16. Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB 1 2 3 4 5

27

17. The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 18. Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. 1 2 3 4 5 19. Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 20. Local employment has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

28

Appendix B

Quantitative IRB Approval

29

Appendix C

Interview Protocol Qualitative Impact of school closings on rural communities

Hello! I am Ruth Anne Buzzard, a Ph.D. student at Niagara University. I am writing my dissertation on the impact of school closings on rural communities. I will select potential interviewees from rural communities that have lost their school building. Each actual interviewee will sign a written consent form to indicate their permission to be part of this study. In cases where potential interviewees have supervisors, managers, and others overseeing the interviewee’s work I will seek permission from these individuals. The interviews will take place at a public location within the community convenient to the interviewee. The following are the questions that will be presented to each interviewee. The interviewee has the option to skip particular questions.

1. How long have you lived in the rural community? 2. If you moved here why did you select this rural community?

3. Do you belong to any of the volunteer organizations in the community and if so

what type of outreach does your organization provide to the community?

4. What changes if any have you noticed in the community since the school building

closed?

5. Has the closing of the school building affected your perception of “quality of life”

in your community?

6. Has your community tried to compensate for the loss of your school building and

the students?

7. Do you feel that the closing of your school building has had and economic impact

on your community?

8. Have you noticed any changes in your school children that have moved to a host

school?

9. Do you see any school tax savings since your school building closed?

10. Were you willing to pay more in school taxes if it meant keeping your local school open?

Is there any other information that you would like to add to your interview about the effect of closing of the local school building on your rural community?

Thank you for participation!

30

Appendix D

Qualitative IRB Approval

31


Member Needs to Know About the Social, Economic, and Human Capital

Costs of Closing a Rural School: A Comprehensive Multi-faceted

Investigation

CHAPTER TWO

THE IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN RURAL

COMMUNITIES

IN NEW YORK STATE DUE TO A

SCHOOL CLOSURE: A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

“Find out what one is fitted to do, and to secure an opportunity to do it,

is the key to happiness,” (John Dewey, 2016)

32

Introduction

When policy makers and school leaders urge parents and community members to

merge their schools, they focus on the cost savings related to the enlarged operational

scale and other potential organizational savings associated with the enhanced

coordination of teachers, administrators, and support staff as well as reductions in the

duplication of supplies, materials, equipment, and capital expenditures. New York State

even provides supplementary financial aid to school districts that merge (Bakeman,

2014). Until relatively recently little attention has been paid to the social costs of closing

the community’s rural school (Lyson, 2002). Because social costs are not measured in

dollars and easily quantifiable, they may be over looked all together (Langlois &

Anderson, 2002).

Chapter Two provides the reader with information collected as the quantitative

part of this comprehensive multi-faceted investigation into the impact on the quality of

life in a rural community when a local school is closed. The quantitative results identified

and analyzed in this chapter are derived from a survey administered to members of 12

towns that closed a school in upstate New York. The survey contained 20 questions

asking members of the community that lost their rural school how they felt about changes

in various “Quality of Life” issues. The questions were organized into 4 sets of 5

questions each within the survey. The sets followed the identified components of: 1)

connectedness, 2) development of identity and culture, 3) ideology and politics, and 4)

activism and civic engagement as initially researched by Budge (2009). The survey

instrument used in this part of the comprehensive multi-faceted investigation is Appendix

A of this document.

33

Purpose of this Study

The purpose of this part of the comprehensive multi-faceted investigation was to

investigate the impact of school building closings on rural communities in New York

State from a quantifiable perspective using the perceptions of residents who have

experienced a school closing in their rural community. The major components that make

up a rural community include a) the school, b) community library, c) volunteer

organizations such as the firefighters, International Kiwanis, Lions International, 4-H d)

churches, and e) businesses (Lyson, 2006; Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Woods, Doeksen, & St.

Clair, 2005). The researcher evaluated how these components interact with the school in

the rural community. The presence of the local school often serves as the central focus of

small rural communities (Hyndman, Cleveland, & Huffman, 2010; Oncescu & Giles,

2012; Peshkin, 1982; Reynolds, 2013). Hyndman, Cleveland, and Huffman (2010) stated

that the rural school is the glue that holds the community together. School consolidation

and school building closing has drawn greater interest over the last two decades due to

rural population decline and budget constraints.

Literature Review and Personal Interest

There has been considerable debate over the economic savings resulting from

school district reorganization, merger, or consolidation (Andrews et al., 2002; Duncombe

& Yinger, 2005; 2010; 2015; Howley, 1991; Sell & Leistritz, 1997). This has resulted

from alternative ways to include temporary state aid to encourage mergers, savings from

staff reduction, while mid-level administrators are added, increased costs for student

transportation, and other variations in accounting principles (Andrews et al.,2002;

Duncombe & Yinger, 2005; 2010; 2015; Eyre & Finn, 2002; Killeen & Sipple, 2000).

34

However, since those researchers dealt with financial issues, if they agree on accounting

techniques, they should agree on economic savings for merged schools.

In addition, most researchers agree that there is, often, considerable social costs

associated with a rural school building closure (Dreier, 1982; Egelund & Laustsen, 2006;

Eyre & Finn, 2002; Hyndman et al., 2010; Lyson, 2002; Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Post &

Stambach, 1999; Purcell & Shackelford, 2005; Sell et al., 1996; Surface, 2011; but see

Voth & Danforth, 1981). Social costs are much more difficult to measure. When the

currency used to measure social costs is subject to feelings and emotions, concepts such

as “quality of life” and “sense of place” become more important than how much money

was saved financially by the closing of the school.

“Quality of life” and “sense of place” are interrelated concepts. The greater the

quality of life factors for a particular area or community the more likely a more positive

sense of place will develop (Relph, 1976; Seamon & Sowers, 2008). Residents of local

communities share common interests and ideologies (Ward & Rink, 1992). Americans

are losing quality of life and the support that only a rural community provides, where the

concept of “they protect their own” is prominent (Heath & Heath, 2010, p 151).

The writer of this research study has had an avid interest in the various social,

economic, political, and spiritual aspects of contemporary rural community life. Previous

studies conducted by this researcher have included investigations into the following

issues:

How do rural schools impact rural communities?

How do volunteer firefighters feel about the decline in the number of members?

35

What is the contemporary role of public libraries in rural communities?

What are the corporate interactions within the rural community it serves?

But, during this recent period of rural community involvement and study, the

researcher’s community school was closed. Subsequently, to investigate the effects that

school closings have on the local rural community, the researcher developed a multi-

faceted research investigation proposal. The proposal includes quantitative surveys,

qualitative interviews, and analysis of existing census data. This specific chapter pertains

to the information and data collected from the quantitative survey administered to 12

towns selected for the study that have lost their rural school. To eliminate bias, a third

party research company administered the quantitative survey by telephone to 220

respondents across the 12 towns selected for this study.

Research Methods Used in the Trilogy Studies of this Dissertation

Research Questions of this Trilogy Study Dissertation

The overarching research question of this multi-faceted investigation that

constitutes this dissertation is: How does the loss of a school impact the quality of life in

a rural community? The following five questions are specific research queries that when





36









number of household units, and d) occupancy and vacancy of housing?




The conceptual framework in a rural community is the symbiotic cohesiveness

among its components (Peshkin, 1978; 1982; Porter, 2012). This relates to the six

identified components of: 1) connectedness, 2) development of identity and culture, 3)


and civic engagement (Budge, 2009). Small rural communities are more sensitive to

changes in population (Porter, 2012; Surface, 2011). The major elements of rural

communities are generally the school, library, volunteer fire company, churches, and

businesses (Bauch, 2009). Traditionally, schools have been at the center of rural

community life (Egelund & Laustsen, 2006; Lyson, 2002; Oncescu & Giles, 2012).

Schools often provide local employment, furnish facilities for community activities, and

cultivate community identity (Miller, 1995; Oncescu & Giles, 2012). Generally, a rural

37

area encompasses less than 2,500 people and is not adjacent to an urban area or urban

cluster (Barley and Beesley 2007; Lyson 2002). Over half of the public schools and 10

million students in the United States are located in rural areas (Provasni et al., 2007).

This researcher provides an analysis of the potential changes in a rural

community as a result of closing or consolidation of the local rural school. The closing of

the community school may cause a ripple effect across the other elements of the rural

community. If the school closes, the children will go to school elsewhere.

Methodology

Selection of 12 School Districts for the Quantitative Study

The towns of each of the selected 12 school districts of the study (Table 1 below)

had lost a school either through merger or reorganization. In two cases the school districts

built a new central school after the merger was approved. The Angelica Central School

District merged with Belmont Central School District in 1996 forming the Genesee

Valley Central School District. Both of these original school buildings closed in 2003 and

the students attended the new school that was located in the village of Belmont, Town of

Amity. In another case, Cherry Valley Central School District merged with Springfield

Central School District in 1986 forming the Cherry Valley-Springfield Central School

District. Both of these original school buildings closed in 1989 and the students attended

the new school which was located in the Town of Cherry Valley.

Sullivan West Central School District was a result of a three-way merger.

Jefferson-Youngsville Central School District, Delaware Valley Central School District,

and Narrowsburg Central School District merged in 1999. After the merger Narrowsburg

38

and Delaware Valley Schools were closed in 2005. The Jefferson-Youngsville

Elementary School was maintained for the Sullivan West School District in the Town of

Callicoon. The newly built Sullivan West Junior-Senior School opened in 2005 and is

located in Lake Huntington, Town of Cochecton.

Brant, Duggan, Williamstown, and West Frankfort schools closed as a result of

reorganization. Lake Shore Central School District closed the Brant school building in

2010 located in the Town of Brant. Monticello Central School District closed the Duggan

School building in 2010 located in the Town of Bethel. Altmar-Parish-Williamstown

(APW) closed the Williamstown School building in 2009 located in the Town of

Williamstown and Frankfort-Schuyler school district closed the West Frankfort School

located in the Town of Frankfort in 2010.

The remaining three schools selected, Little Valley, Rushford, and Limestone

were typical mergers where the smaller school district closed their school. The Little

Valley Central School District merged with the Cattaraugus Central School District

forming Cattaraugus-Little Valley Central School District in the Town of New Albion in

the year 2000. The Little Valley students continued to attend their school until it was

closed in 2012. The Little Valley Central School District closed in 2012. The Rushford

Central School District merged with the Cuba Central School District forming Cuba-

Rushford in the Town of Cuba in 1991. Rushford students continued to attend the

Rushford School until it was closed in 2012. The Limestone Central School District

merged with Allegany Central School District forming Allegany-Limestone Central

School District in 1995. The Limestone Central School District closed in 2010. The

Limestone students continued to attend the Limestone School until it was closed in 2010.

39

Therefore, the 12 schools selected for this study are located in rural areas of

upstate New York State. The following Table 1 summarizes the 12 schools selected for

this study. The list of schools buildings for the quantitative survey study was finalized in

December 2015. However, the researcher did not know at the time that West Frankfort

and Frankfort were in the same census tract and would have the same US Census data.

Therefore, Delaware Valley Central School District was substituted for West Frankfort

for the US Census data study (see Chapter 4).

40

Table 1 The 12 School Districts Selected for this Quantitative Survey Portion of the Study.

School District

Town County Date

Reorganized or Merged

Closed Date

New School Name

Angelica Angelica Allegany 1996 2003 Genesee Valley

Merged

Belmont Amity Allegany 1996 2003 Genesee Valley

Merged

Narrowsburg Tusten Sullivan 1999 2005 Sullivan West

Merged West

Frankfort Frankfort Herkimer 2010 2010 Frankfort Schuyler

Reorganized

Little Valley Little Valley Cattaraugus 2000 2012 Cattaraugus-Little

Valley

Merged

Duggan Bethel Sullivan 2010 2010 Monticello

Reorganized

Williamstown Williamstown Oswego 2009 2009 Altmar-Parish-Williamstown

Reorganized Cherry Valley

Cherry Valley Otsego 1986 1989

Cherry Valley-Springfield

Merged

Springfield Springfield Otsego 1986 1989 Cherry Valley-

Springfield

Merged

Rushford Rushford Allegany 1991 2012 Cuba-Rushford

Merged

Limestone Carrollton Cattaraugus 1995 2010 Allegany-Limestone

Merged

Brant Brant Erie 2010 2010 Lake Shore

Reorganized

41

Figure 1 Twelve School Buildings in New York State that were Closed

The above map illustrates the locations of closed schools in up-state New York.

Survey Design

This chapter of the comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation conducted

by the author focuses on a quantitative study of the opinions of residents of rural

communities that have lost their school buildings. The researcher developed a survey

instrument using a 5 point Likert scale to measure individual’s responses to survey

questions. In this study, there are 20 items in a 5 point Likert scale format (1= major

negative change, 2= some negative change, 3= no change, 4= some positive change, and

5= major positive change). The researcher selected 12 groups of people from 12 towns

that closed their rural school. Statements related to quality of life were arranged in

relation to sense of place habits (Budge, 2006). The statements were organized into the

42

following categories: connectedness, development of identity and culture, ideology and

politics, and activism and civic engagement. The categories represent four of Budge’s six

sense of place habits. The researcher chose arbitrarily not to include statements about

spirituality and interdependence with the land because the researcher wanted to include

these factors in a qualitative study to evaluate them more intensely. From a previous

study involving a survey, the researcher learned that a one-page survey was more likely

to yield thoughtful results and not overwhelm the participants.

Administering Survey

Using a research company to administer the surveys reduces bias in the

quantitative study. The entire survey was conducted over the telephone (see Appendix

A). Before the survey could be given to the research company, the researcher had to find

every school building that closed and its address. Finding the school building address

might seem like and easy task, but once a school building is closed the task becomes

much greater. The researcher called many of the 12 schools to verify the location of the

closed school. Once the address was verified, the researcher was able to find the census

tract information on google to search census tract lookup which included the state code,

county code, and census tract code (Federal Information Processing Standard, 2010). The

researcher sent the professional research company the name of the school building that

closed and the school building census tract number. The researcher also combined two

zip codes for the Town of Springfield to get adequate potential informants because

Springfield’s population was divided into Springfield Center and East Springfield.

The research company would not begin until the researcher collected all the

census tract numbers and two zip codes, and they were sent to the research company.

43

Collecting information about schools that have closed is more difficult than one would

think. For many of these school, once the school is closed it is gone. The researcher used

Google as the main search engine. However, this proved inadequate. To collect all the

information required by the survey company, the researcher had to call each of the school

districts to either retrieve or verify the needed addresses of the closed school building.

These contacts were helpful. The researcher had to decide which closed schools to use for

this multi-faceted investigation. Often this required a string of calls until the researcher

finally talked to the individual that could actually provide the needed information.

Negotiations to finalize details of the survey and its administration required over

20 calls initially and more as the survey was in process. Potential informants of 12 towns

that had experienced school closures were personally contacted by the professional

research company. Representatives of the company told this researcher that they would

do a ‘gentle start’ to data collection. As part of the ‘gentle start’ the research company

sent a few recordings to the researcher of this quantitative study to listen to and, hence,

check if the questions were being understood and would be responded to in a reasonable

way. The researcher’s personal experiences in conducting similar surveys served as a key

benchmark in determining the quality, reliability, and validity of this approach.

The researcher designed a survey instrument to collect opinions on communities

that have their rural school closed due to merger or reorganization. A third party

professional research company conducted a telephone survey of 220 informants. These

individuals were residents of 12 communities that had a school building closed in up-

state New York. The number of informants per community with a closed school building

was: Duggan 23 informants, West Frankfort 23 informants, Williamstown 22 informants,

44

Cherry Valley 20 informants, Brant 19 informants, Little Valley 19 informants, Angelica

18 informants, Belmont 18 informants, Rushford 17 informants, Limestone 16

informants, Narrowsburg 15 informants, and Springfield only 10 informants, despite

combining two zip codes (see Table 2).

Table 2 Number of Informants Surveyed for each of 12 Towns Selected for this Study

12 Towns Number of Informants

12 Schools Selected for this Study

Angelica 18 Angelica

Amity 18 Belmont

Brant 19 Brant

Cherry Valley 20 Cherry Valley

Bethel 23 Duggan

Carrollton 16 Limestone

Little Valley 19 Little Valley

Tusten 15 Narrowsburg

Rushford 17 Rushford

Springfield 10 Springfield

Frankfort 23 West Frankfort

Williamstown 22 Williamstown

The dates of data collection began on December 29, 2015. Then next date of

collection was on January 1, 2016 and concluded on January 4, 2016 (see Appendix G).

To obtain 220 completed surveys SSI Research Company, made 11,799 phone calls to 12

areas where school buildings had been closed (see Appendix G). The percent willing to

participate in the quantitative survey was the maximum number of 45.45%, average

number of 39.03%; and the minimum number of 29.27%. The average length of the

interview with an informant was about 7 minutes and 05 seconds (see Appendix G). The

research company coded the calls as Table 3 (below) illustrates.

45

Table 3 Results of Attempts to Phone Informants

Completed Interviews I 220Terminates (Partials) P 7Eligible ,non-interview-Refusal R 339Eligible, non- interview Other NC 5741Eligible, non- interview Other O 39Unknown, eligibility, non-interview UH 5303Not Eligible NE 150Not Eligible- Screen & Quota Shutdowns SO 0

The SSI Research Company used the 5 point Likert scale developed by this

dissertation author but needed to add the number 6 option: ‘Don’t Know/Refused’ as an

answer to questions to indicate that the person chose not to answer the question or just

did not know how he/she felt about answering those specific questions. The number 6

option is not an opinion given by an informant; it is an artificial construct used for

convenience. When this option is used, it does not indicate a value greater than the

number five. Rather it produces an outlier that changes the calculated value of

Cronbach’s alpha. Either way adding number 6 option: ‘Don’t Know/Refused’ as an

option to answer a survey question made the Cronbach’s alpha lower for 3 out of the 4

sets of 5 questions. For analysis of the data, Cronbach’s alpha for this set of Questions

16-20 where the number 6 option: ‘Don’t Know/Refused’ response was excluded from

the survey, the Cronbach’s alpha was lower.

For an artificial response, one needs to be careful that responses included for

convenience do not affect the results in a significant way. For the group of Table 4

Questions 16-20 the artificial response of number 6 option: ‘Don’t Know/Refused’ just

happened to increase the value of Cronbach’s Alpha. By recoding the ‘Don’t

46

Know/Refused’ responses as missing, this excluded number 6 option: ‘Don’t

Know/Refused’ as an option from the Cronbach Alpha analysis. When the survey was

initially administered, the surveyors were faced with responses, I don’t know or I do not

want to say by some respondents. A caveat to be aware of is reduction in sample size

when response number 6 option ‘Don’t Know/Refused’ is recoded as missing response.

In this study all of the analysis was done with number 6 option ‘Don’t Know/Refused’

recoded as responses as missing.

Variables

The survey instrument for this component of the comprehensive multi-faceted

investigation asked participants to complete a section on the survey that indicates their

following demographics: gender, age, education, parent of school age child, school

election voter, and volunteers for various organizations (see Appendix A). These

demographic data served as independent variables for analysis of variance to compare

means. The 20 survey instrument questions serve as the dependent variables. The

researcher has constructed the dissertation survey instrument with similar questions asked

in a different way to check for reliability and validity of the survey (Fowler, 1995).

Security Measures

This dissertation research study was approved by the Institutional Review Board

(IRB) at Niagara University, Lewiston, NY on June 22, 2015 (see Appendix B). The

surveys were conducted in each of the participant’s communities by telephone (see

Appendix E). The SSI Research Company independently administered the survey as a

third party professional vendor (see Appendix F). The participants were informed that

47

there are no right or wrong answers and they should complete the questionnaire based on

their own experience (see Appendix G). The survey participants gave the surveyors their

permission to be questioned. The identities of the participants are protected because only

very general personal information was collected. The researcher company thanked each

participant for participating in the survey. The research company retained all of the

original data and guaranteed security measures were taken to secure the information.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistical analysis (frequencies, mean, and standard deviation) and

independent samples t-tests were conducted for the quantitative survey instrument. This

survey was answered by different sub-groups (school election voters, parents of school

aged children, and volunteers for different organizations) from each of the 12 selected

rural communities in New York State. ANOVA’s and Bonferroni’s Post Hoc analyses

were also calculated for the same data. Chi-Square tests for significant differences on

categorical questions were also collected. The researcher’s survey has not been tested for

reliability and validity, but a Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test for internal consistency.

Statistical Analyses

Microsoft EXCEL was used for data preparation. Further, Statistical Package for

the Social Science (SPSS) was used to conduct both descriptive and inferential

independent samples t-tests and Analysis of Variances (ANOVA) statistical analyses.

SPSS is a popular data-analysis program used by researchers in social sciences (Huang &

Reilly, 2013). The SSI Research Company also performed calculations using the Cross

Tabs statistical package.

48

Cronbach’ Alpha Usage

Multiple Cronbach’s Alphas were calculated to facilitate comparisons between

groups and the within groups of the 12 towns. Therefore, each of the 4 sets of 5 questions

needed to be tested for reliability. It was important to have a good Cronbach’s Alpha for

each of the 4 sets of 5 questions for these comparisons. Cronbach’s alpha measures the

internal consistency. Internal consistency is important when creating your own survey

instrument so that the questions that make up the survey instrument represent the

characteristic traits of the domain of what the researcher is measuring (Key, 1997).

Construct validity creates accuracy that indicates to the researcher that the survey

instrument is measuring the characteristic traits it should be measuring (Gliem & Gliem,

2003; Key, 1997). Therefore, if the survey instrument is valid, then it is accurate (Key,

1997). Reliability can be tested directly using Cronbach’s Alpha among other techniques

(George & Mallery, 2003). If one has a 0.5 alpha the survey questions have unacceptable

internal consistency. A Cronbach’s alpha 0.7 indicates an internal consistency that

acceptable. In addition, a Cronbach’s alpha at 0.8 has a good internal consistency.

Cronbach’s alpha at 0.9 or better has an excellent internal consistency.

49

Results of Quantitative Survey

Table 4 Reliability Statistics for Questions 1-20

Reliability Statistics for Questions 1-20

Cronbach's alpha

Based on

Cronbach's alpha Standardized Items N of Items

0.939 0.94 20

Reliability Statistics for Questions 1-5 (n=179)

0.82 0.832 5


0.866 0.866 5


0.813 0.82 5


0.842 0.842

5

Explanation of Table 4

Table 4 illustrates the Cronbach’s alpha for the total survey questions 1-20, and

all 20 survey questions revealed a Cronbach’s alpha at .939 which means the 20 survey

questions had an excellent internal consistency. Therefore, it indicated the researcher

used construct validity designing the survey instrument because it represented the

characteristic traits of the domain that she was surveying (Key, 1997). This was further

strengthened by dividing the 20 questions into 4 sets of 5 questions. Calculations of the 4

sets of 5 questions illustrates great similarity in the 4 Cronbach’s Alphas. They range

from .813 for Questions 11-15 to .866 for Questions 6-10.

50

Characteristics of Survey Respondents

Individuals who participated in the telephone survey provided personal

information for the independent variables used in the comparisons. A total of 93 males

(42%) and 127 (58%) females participated in the Survey for: Opinions on the Effects of

School Closing on Rural Communities. Of the participants in the survey, 54 (25%) had

children of school age and the remaining 166 (75%) did not have children of school age.

The number of survey participants who voted in school elections was 139 (63%); in

contrast, only 79 (36%) participants did not vote in the school election. Age

demographics revealed a somewhat skewed distribution because the age category of “51

and older” was represented by 76% of responders of 220 total number of people for this

study (Table 5 below). Education demographics illustrated a diverse educational

attainment level because there is a fairly high percent of individuals in each education

category (Table 5 below).

Table 5 Summary of Demographic Information

Inferential Statistics Age Education N 220 220

Mean 3.65 3.61Median 4 3

Std. Deviation 0.69 1.8

Table 6 indicates the mean Likert value for each of 20 questions. From the Likert

scale 3= ‘no change’. Numbers in the ones and twos indicate negative change and

numbers in the fours and fives indicated positive change. For example, there are two

questions that approach 3 in their mean value. Q14 Police presence in the community has

changed after the school building (SB) closure and Q16 Traffic has changed in the

51

community since the closure of the SB had mean values of 2.88 and 2.86 respectively.

Q3The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure and Q18

Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB had mean values of 2.55

and 2.50 respectively. Responses to Q3 and Q18 were the most negative in the survey. It

is remarkable how uniform the mean values were for all of the questions surveyed.

Table 6 Descriptive Statistics for Opinion on the Effect of School Closing on Rural Communities

Descriptive Statistics

Question N Mean Median Std. Deviation

Q1 Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure

220 2.78 3.00 1.14

Q2 Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure.

220 2.69 3.00 1.07

Q3 The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure.

220 2.55 3.00 1.19

Q4 Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure.

220 2.69 3.00 1.14

Q5 My feelings for my community have changed since the SB Closure.

220 2.69 3.00 1.15

Q6 Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure.

220 2.65 3.00 1.07

Q7 Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB.

220 2.66 3.00 1.19

Q8 My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed.

220 2.70 3.00 1.15

Q9 Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure.

220 2.70 3.00 1.14

Q10 Library usage has changed after the SB closure. 220 2.70 3.00 1.14 Q11 School taxes have changed since the SB closure. 220 2.59 3.00 1.30 Q12 Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed.

220 2.72 3.00 1.15

Q13 Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure.

220 2.65 3.00 1.26

Q14 Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure.

220 2.88 3.00 1.06

Q15 Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed.

220 2.83 3.00 1.07

Q16 Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB.

220 2.86 3.00 1.10

Q17 The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure.

220 2.63 3.00 1.15

Q18 Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB.

220 2.50 3.00 1.16

Q19 Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure.

220 2.58 3.00 1.16

52

Q20 Local employment has changed since the SB closure.

220 2.62 3.00 1.16

Table 7 compares the number of individuals that answered a question with one of

the two positive responses (4 or 5 on the survey Likert scale) with individuals who

answered one of the two negative responses (1 or 2 on the survey Likert scale). If one

assumes that an individual is equally likely to respond positively or negatively these

totals could be compared using a Chi-Square statistic. Only two of the 20 questions are

not statistically significantly different. These are: Q14 Police presence in the community

has changed after the SB closure and Q16 Traffic has changed in the community since

the closure of the SB. In both cases there were no statistical differences in the number of

respondents that chose positive responses or negative responses. For Q14 there were 36

positive responses compared to 53 negative responses (Chi-Square=3.25 p>0.05). For

Q16 there were 44 positive responses and 59 negative responses (Chi-Square=2.18 p>010

Table 7 Responses to Survey on Opinions on the Effects of School Closings on Rural Communities

Question Positive Negative Q1 Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure 38 (17 %) 70 (32%) Q2 Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure. 34 (15%) 82 (37%) Q3 The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. 37 (17%) 97 (44%) Q4 Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure. 39 (18%) 80 (36%) Q5 My feelings for my community have changed since the SB Closure. 34 (15%) 74 (34%) Q6 Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. 36 (16%) 83 (38%) Q7 Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB. 41 (19%) 88 (40%) Q8 My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed. 45 (20%) 82 (37%) Q9 Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB 40 (18%) 83 (38%)

53

closure.

Q10 Library usage has changed after the SB closure. 36 (16%) 70 (32%) Q11 School taxes have changed since the SB closure. 42 (19%) 92 (42%) Q12 Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. 38 (17%) 76 (35%) Q13 Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure. 48 (22%) 90 (41%) Q14 Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure. 36 (16%) 53 (24%) Q15 Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed. 39 (18%) 63 (29%) Q16 Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB. 44 (20%) 59 (27%) Q17 The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure. 34 (15%) 80 (36%) Q18 Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. 37 (17%) 88 (40%) Q19 Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure. 28 (13%) 61 (28%) Q20 Local employment has changed since the SB closure. 32 (15%) 79 (36%)

54

Table 8 Comparisons of Means Between Schools that Closed

Qualitative Survey Questions School Mean School Mean

Q1 Quality of Life has changed in my community since the SB closure. West Frankfort 2.23

Cherry Valley 3.12

Duggan 3

Limestone 3

Q3 The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. Brant 2.11

Cherry Valley 2.89

Duggan 2.77

Q4 Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure. West Frankfort 2.41 Little Valley 3.28

Q6 Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. West Frankfort 2.38 Duggan 3.04

Brant 2.39

Q7 Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB. Angelica 2.25 Duggan 2.96

Q8 My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed. Springfield 2.11 Duggan 3.13

Brant 2.33

Q9 Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure. Springfield 2 Little Valley 3.29

Angelica 2.29 Duggan 2.9

Q10 Library usage has changed after the SB closure. Belmont 2.2 Narrowsburg 3

Brant 2.31 Duggan 3.1

Limestone 2.4

Q11 School taxes have changed since the SB closure. Belmont 1.61 Angelica 2.71

Little Valley 2.07 Brant 2.67

West Frankfort 2.29 Cherry Valley 2.85

Limestone 2.75

Narrowsburg 2.77

Rushford 2.8

Duggan 3.38

Q12 Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. Belmont 1.77

West Frankfort 2.5

Angelica 2.53

Brant 2.76

Williamstown 2.82

Cherry Valley 2.84

Limestone 2.69

Little Valley 2.81

Narrowsburg 2.92

55

Rushford 3.07

Springfield 1.78 Duggan 3.41

Q13 Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure. Belmont 2.18 Duggan 3.09

Rushford 2.38 Little Valley 3.24

Q14 Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure. Angelica 2.41 Limestone 3.19

Little Valley 3.19

Duggan 3.22

Q15 Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed. Angelica 2.31 Limestone 3.25

Brant 2.68 Duggan 3.27

Springfield 2.4 Williamstown 3.1

Rushford 2.44

Q16 Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB. Springfield 2.44 Brant 3.35

Cherry Valley 2.55 Limestone 3,25

Belmont 2.62

Q17 The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure. Brant 2.25 Limestone 3.25

Belmont 2.39

Q18 Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. Brant 2.12 Cherry Valley 2.85

Angelica 2.33 Limestone 3.13

Springfield 2.1 Duggan 3.32

Q20 Local employment has changed since the SB closure. Springfield 2 Williamstown 3.06

Brant 2.29 Limestone 3.36

Although the mean value for each individual question ranged from 2.50 to 2.88

for all 220 informants, Table 6 masks much of the variability from one community that

closed its school building to another. Table 8 reveals significant differences in responses

from informants from one school district to another. For example, the mean response for

Q1 Quality of life has changed in my community since the school building closure was

2.33 for the twenty three informants from West Frankfort. This mean was significantly

different from Cherry Valley (3.12), Duggan (3.00), and Limestone (3.00). Mean values

for all 12 communities that closed a school building were significantly lower or higher

56

than the mean for another community for one of the questions. Six of the 12 communities

had both a significantly higher and significantly lower mean for at least one survey

question. When all questions were combined however, variation from question to

question smoothed out the data. The only community that responded more positively was

Duggan Elementary School in Bethel.

Analysis of Variance

Table 9 ANOVA Analysis of Survey Results

Questions F Value p Value Q18 Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. 2.162 0.018

Q11 School taxes have changed since the SB closure. 2.307 0.011Q12 Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. 2.579 0.005

Q20 Local employment has changed since the SB closure. 1.919 0.039

For an ANOVA analysis of survey results of the overall 12 towns with 220

participants, 4 questions were statically significantly different. These 4 questions are

listed in Table 9 above.

Post Hoc Analysis of ANOVA Results

Bonferroni comparisons revealed a statistical significance between (Town of

Amity) Belmont School and (Town of Bethel) Duggan School (p<0.001) for Q11 School

taxes have changed since the SB closure. The difference between (Town of Amity)

Belmont School and (Town of Bethel) Duggan School was statistically significant

different (p<0.002) considering the Q12 Adjustment of school children attending the host

school has changed. In addition there was statistical significant difference between (Town

57

of Springfield) Springfield School and (Town of Bethel) Duggan School (p<0.017) for

Q12 Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed.

The ANOVA determines whether all means of the groups are the same (Mann,

2007). In this study, the mean Likert values were very similar for all 12 Towns and 20

questions.

Two of the questions that were statically different, as determined by the ANOVA,

did not indicate statistically significant differences for any of the 12 Towns selected for

this study. The Post Hoc tests determines the between town differences. The two

questions Q18 Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB and Q20

Local employment has changed since the SB closure did not exhibit statistical significant

differences for the Post Hoc tests, despite being significant in the ANOVA.

Results and Findings

The overwhelming lesson that can be learned from this survey is that the

participants view all questions negatively. This might not seem surprising since all

individuals lived in towns that had lost their community school. The time that has lapsed

between the school closure and present appears to have little bearing on the opinions of

the participants. It is interesting that the residents of two communities that built a new

school in their towns (Town of Cherry Valley and Town of Amity, Belmont School) did

not have a more positive outlook on the 20 survey questions. One community had a more

positive response to the survey questions. That community was the Town of Bethel

(Duggan School), which appeared in each of three Post Hoc comparisons that were

statistically significantly different.

58

The researcher was reassured of the reliability of her survey instrument as

revealed by the calculated Cronbach’s Alpha for each of the groups of 4 sets of 5

questions. The Cronbach’s Alpha for the total survey was .939 which is rated in the

excellent range. Two questions that were least negative were Q 14 Police presence in the

community has changed after the SB closure and Q16 Traffic has changed in the

community since the closure of the SB. It is not surprising that these two aspects of the

communities’ life would be viewed as unchanged. Indeed, the ‘no change’ option was

chosen by 115, (52%) of the participants, for Q 14. For Q 16 20% chose positive

responses, 27% chose negative responses, and 47% chose ‘no change’.

Explanation of Table 8

Comparisons of overall means concealed variation between individual informants

from specific towns. For most survey questions the lowest town mean and the highest

town mean were statistically significantly different. For example, the Town of Amity’s

(Belmont’s) mean for Q12 adjustment of children (1.77) was significantly more negative

than ten of the other town means. A number of towns had mean responses from the

informants that were statically significantly greater for at least one question and statically

significantly less for another question (see Table 8). There is a lot of variability at one

level (of 20 individual questions and 12 individual towns) depending on the question and

the informant from a particular town and no significant differences at another level where

questions or town are grouped together. For an example Angelica had a mean value of

2.53 for the Q12 adjustment of school children attending the host school. This mean

value is relatively negative. However, the mean value for the Town of Amity (Belmont)

59

is 1.77 and is statically significantly less than Angelica (2.53). Therefore Angelica is

negative but Town of Amity (Belmont) is statically more negative.

Limitation for this study

In hindsight, the researcher could not envision such a uniformly negative response

to the wide array of questions asked in this survey. Perhaps, some of the communities

that served as hosts schools for children of closed schools should have been included in

the survey. Although the responses from Town of Cherry Valley and Town of Amity

were more negative than the researcher would have predicted.

Conclusion

Clearly, many people in communities that closed a rural school building bear

some social costs from the school building closure. This cost seems to be deep and long

lasting. What form of compensation can help to repair the communities and individuals

that have lost their school building? It makes you wonder how the social costs can be

affectively compared with monetary gains suggested for school mergers. Is an

expenditure needed to repair the social damage that is revealed by this survey? New York

State has given millions of dollars to the merged districts as incentives. However, nothing

is done to retain jobs, businesses, and “quality of life” issues in the “abandoned”

communities. Even for the community where the school building is located, the merger

incentives are only a short term fix (Harris & Sommerstein, 2014). If New York State is

serious about reversing the trend of communities rejecting school district mergers

(Heiser, 2013); New York State Association of School Business Officials, 2014), New

York State must consider the needs of both communities.

60

For a school district merger to be approved in New York State, two votes must

pass in each of the two districts (Heiser, 2013). A large positive vote in one school

district cannot override a negative vote in the other district. The first vote is the straw

vote; the second vote is the binding referendum (Heiser, 2013). One of the chief reasons

that merger votes are defeated is that one of the merging school districts seems to be

getting a better deal. This is often true. When tax rates are adjusted and salaries are

leveled up (Heiser, 2013), tax payers in one of the two districts may face higher taxes.

When such a situation exists, adding other reasons for rejecting the merger such as longer

bus rides may be enough to defeat one of the merger votes. Since 2009, 17 of the 19

attempts to merge have been rejected (Heiser, 2013). If New York State forced the

merger partners to share the incentives, may be there would be more mergers and fewer

damaged communities. One wonders if these communities are damaged beyond repair.

Quantitative Answers to Multi-faceted Investigation Research Questions

The following research questions guided this quantitative survey investigation.

The overarching research question was: How does the loss of a community school impact

the quality of life in a rural community? New York State offers schools districts a large

amount of money if they merge. Whether the community residents understand that the

relationship of their school to the local “quality of life” or not, they have taken the money

especially between 1996 and 2005 (New York State Association of School Business

Officials, 2014). Most community residents do not fully recognize the situation until a

few years after the merger (Heiser, 2013). Although the full effect of closing a school

varies from one community to the next, nearly everyone develops a negative feeling

about losing the school building (see Table 6).

61

For a school merger to be approved it must receive a “yes” vote from each

school district in a straw vote and in the binding referendum. The binding referendum is

the last chance for voters of the smaller school district to determine their future. Once the

merger is approved, future votes are determined merged district wide. From interviews

with district residents (Chapter Three), it generally takes a few years for the impact of

closing a school building to become fully apparent.

The survey discussed in this specific chapter consists of 4 groups of 5 questions

each. These “Quality of Life” groups address connectedness, development of identity and

culture and activism and civic engagement. Responses from the informants indicated that

the school building closings produced a negative change for each components of “quality

of life.” Even the change in traffic was viewed negatively although one could reason it

should be better without bus traffic. Two of the surveyed communities had closed their

school buildings. Subsequently, a new school was constructed by the newly merged

district. Even these communities viewed the merger negatively. This may indicate a

carryover of rivalry and animosity from before the two school districts were merged.

62

References

Andrews, M., Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2002). Revising economies of size in

American Education: Are we any closer to a consensus? Economics of Education

Review, 21, 245-262.

Bakeman, J. (2014). Cuomo, Regents push district mergers, despite challenge. Capital

New York. Retrieved from:

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2014/12/8559230/cuomo-regents-

push-district-mergers-despite-challenge

Barley, Z. A. & Beesley, A. D. (2007). Rural school success: What can we learn? Journal

of Research in Rural Education, 22, 1-16.

Bauch, P.A. (2009). School-community partnerships in rural schools: Leadership, r

enewal, and a sense of place. Peabody Journal of Education, 76, 204-221.

Budge, K., (2006). Rural leaders, rural places: Problem, privilege, and possibility.

Journal of Research in Rural Education, 21, 1-10.

Dewey, J. (15 March, 2016) "John Dewey Quotes." Quotes.net. STANDS4 LLC, 2016.

Web. 15 Mar. 2016. <http://www.quotes.net/authors/John Dewey>. Retrieved

from: http://www.quotes.net/authors/John+Dewey

Dreier, W. H. (1982). What happens when the high school leaves the community? Paper

presented at the Annual National Conference of People United for Rural

Education. Des Moines, IA.

63

Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2005). Does school district consolidation cut costs?

Retrieved from:

http://cpr.maxwell.syr.edu/efap/Publications/Does_School_Consolidation_Nov_0

5.pdf

Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2010). School district consolidation: The benefits and costs.

The School Administrator, 67, 1-6.

Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2015). School District Consolidation: The Benefits and

Costs. Paper presented to the School Superintendents Association National

Conference on Education. February 26-28.

Egelund, N. & Laustsen, H. (2006). School Closure: What are the consequences for the

local society?, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50 (4) 429-439.

Eyre, E. & Finn, S. (2002, August-October). Closing costs: School consolidation

in West Virginia. Charleston Gazette.

Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS Code) (FIPS 6-4), (2010) FIPS Codes for

Counties and County Equivalent Entities. Retrieved from:

http://www2.census.gov/geo/docs/reference/codes/files/st36_ny_cou.tx

Fowler Jr, F. J. (1995). Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation. Applied

Social Research Methods Series. V. 38 SAGE Publications, Inc. USA

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and

reference, 11.0 update (4th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

64

Gliem, J. A. and Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s

Alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-Type Scales. Presented at the Midwest

Research-to-Practice Conference and Community Education, The Ohio State

University, Columbus, OH, October 8-10 2003.

Harris, S. & Sommerstein, D. (Oct. 31. 2014) Why Canton and Potsdam said no to the

school merger. Retrieved from:

http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/story/26481/20141031/why-

canton- and-potsdam-said-no-to-the-school-merger.

Heath, C. & Heath D. (2010) Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New

York, Broadway Books.

Howley, C. (1991). The rural education dilemma as part of the rural dilemma: Rural

education and economics. In A.J. De Young (Ed.) Rural Education: Issues and

Practices (pp.73-145). New York: Garland.

Huang, J. and Reilly, M. (2013). Using Generalizability Theory to Examine Manager and

Worker Perceptions of Skilled Trades Business Leadership Effectiveness and

ineffectiveness. In Huang, J. editor, Empirical Generalizability Theory Research

Examining Rating Variability, Reliability and Validity. Untested Ideas Research

Center, Niagara Falls, New York.

Hyndman, J., Cleveland, R., & Huffman, T. (2010). Consolidation of small, rural schools

in one southeastern Kentucky District. American Educational History Journal

37.1/2, 129-148.

65

Key, J. P. (1997). Research Design in Occupational Education: Module R10 Reliability

and Validity. Stillwater OK, Oklahoma State University. Retrieved from:

http://www.okstate.edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980a/5980/newpage18.htm

Killeen, K. & Sipple, J. (2000). School consolidation and transportation Policy: An

empirical and Institutional Analysis. Working Paper. Revised. Rural School and

Community Trust, Randolph, VT.

Langlois. A. & Anderson, D. (2002). Resolving Quality of Life/Well-being Puzzle:

Toward a New Model. Canadian Journal of Regional Science. 25 (3) pp 501-512.

Retrieved from: http://www.cjrs-rcsr.org/archives/25-3/langlois.pdf

Lyson, T. A. (2002). What does a school mean to a community? Assessing the social and

economic benefits of schools to rural villages in New York. Journal of Research

in Rural Education, 17 (3) :131-137.

Lyson, T. (2006). Big business and community welfare: Revisiting a classic study by C.

Wright Mills and Melville Ulmer. The American Journal of Economics and

Sociology 65, (5) 1001-1024.

Mann, P. S. (2007). Introductory Statistics Sixth Ed. John Wiley & Sons.

Miller, B. (1995). The role of rural schools in community development: policy issues and

implications. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 11, 163-172.

National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.

Department of Education.

66

Oncescu, J. & Giles, A. (2012). Changing relationships: the impacts of a school’s closure

on rural families, Leisure/Loisir, 36 (2), 107-126.

Peshkin, A. (1978). Growing Up American: Schooling and the Survival of Community.

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Peshkin, A. (1982). The imperfect union. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Porter, E. J. (2012). Closures and Consolidation: Schools, farms, and population decline

in rural Illinois, Master of Arts Thesis, Illinois State University.

Post, D. & Stambach, A. (1999). District consolidation and rural school closure: E

Pluribus Unum? Journal of Research in Rural Education. 15 106-117.

Provasni, S., KewalRamani, S., Coleman, M., Gilbertson, L., Herring, W., & Xie, Q.,

(July, 2007).Status of education in rural America (NCES 2007-040). Washington,

DC.

Purcell, D. & Shackelford, R. (2005). An evaluation of the impact of rural school

consolidation: What challenges may a new round of rural school consolidation

have on the safety, educational performance, and social environment of rural

communities? Paper presentedto the National Rural Association Executive

committee. January 13-15.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.

67

Reynolds, R. (2013). The importance of a small rural school district to the community. A

record of study. Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M

University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of

Education.

Seamon, D. & Sowers, J. (2008). Place and Placelessness, Edward Relph. Keytexts in

Human Geography. P. Hubbard, R. Kitchen, & G. Valentine, EDS. London: Sage,

pp.43-51.

Sell, R. S. & Leistritz, L. (1997). Socioeconomic impacts of school consolidation on host

and vacated communities. Journal of the Community Development Society. 28:

186-205.

Sell, R. S., Leistritz L. & Thompson, J. M. (1996). Socio-Economic Impacts of school

Consolidation on Host and Vacated Communities. Agricultural Economics

Report. no 347, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota. 1-54.

Surface, J. (2011). Assessing the impact of twenty-first century rural school

consolidation. Connexions module: m37444.

Voth, D. E. & Danforth, D. M. (1981). Effect of schools upon small community growth

and decline. The Rural Sociologist. 1(6) 364-369.

Ward, J. G. & Rink, F. J. (1992). Analysis of local stakeholder opposition to school

district consolidation: An application of interpretive theory to public policy

making. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 8, 11-19.

68

Woods, M.D.& Doeksen, G.A., & St. Clair, C. (2005). Measuring local economic

Impacts of the education sector. The Role of Education, 16-21.

69

Appendix A


I am Ruth Anne Buzzard and I am a student at Niagara University in the Leadership and Policy Ph. D. program. I am working on a research study; you are invited to participate in this study. Your task is to complete the following questionnaire. School Building = SB. The survey consists of 20 items in a Likert scale format (1= major negative change, 2=some negative change, 3=no change, 4=some positive change, 5=major positive change). There is no right or wrong answer to these items. You should complete the questionnaire according to your own experience. It will take you about 15 minutes. Thank you for your participation!

Part One Demographical Information Please mark the appropriate choice. Gender: Male [ ] Female [ ]

Children of school age: Yes [ ] No [ ] Member of: fire company [ ], Kiwanis [ ], Lions [ ] School election voter: Yes [ ] No [ ] Your age less than or equal to 30 [ ] 31 to 40 [ ] 41 to 50 [ ] greater than 50 [ ] Your highest education: high school [ ] trade [ ] Associate [ ] Bachelor or above [ ]

Part Two: Rural School Building Closing (RSBC) Scale Please circle the appropriate choice according to the scales below. 20 statements (1 =major negative change 2 =some negative change, 3 = no change 4 =some positive change 5 =major positive change)

Connectedness

1. Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5 2. Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5 3. The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 5. My feelings for my community have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

Development of Identity and Culture

6. Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB 1 2 3 4 5 8. My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed 1 2 3 4 5 9. Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Library usage has changed after the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5

Ideology and Politics

11. School taxes have changed since the SB 1 2 3 4 5 12. Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed 1 2 3 4 5 13. Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure 1 2 3 4 5 14. Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5 15. Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed. 1 2 3 4 5

Activism and Civic Engagement

16. Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB 1 2 3 4 5 17. The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5 18. Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. 1 2 3 4 5 19. Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5 20. Local employment has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

70

Appendix B


71

Appendix E

SSI Research Report to the Researcher

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ School Closings Datamap

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qschool ‐ 2 (Single) Text: SCHOOL (qschool:01)Angelica (qschool:02)Belmont (qschool:03)Brant (qschool:04)Cherry Valley (qschool:05)Duggan (qschool:06)Limestone (qschool:07)Little Valley (qschool:08)Narrowsburg (qschool:09)Rushford (qschool:10)Springfield (qschool:11)West Frankfort (qschool:12)Williamstown ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qintro ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Hello! My name is ____, I am calling from a national market research firm. We'd like to ask you a few questions about issues on Education, particularly on the effects of School closing on rural communities. We are not selling anything and your responses will be kept strictly confidential and anonymous. Is this a good time to participate? (qintro:1)Yes, available (qintro:2)No, not available, schedule a callback (qintro:3)Refused to participate ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs1 ‐ 1 (Single)

72

Text: Gender (qs1:1)Male (qs1:2)Female ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs2 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: First, I would like to know if you have children of school age? (qs2:1)Yes (qs2:2)No (qs2:3)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs3 ‐ 7 (Multiple) Text: Are you a member of any of the following: (qs3:1)Fire company (qs3:2)Kiwanis (qs3:3)Lions (qs3:4)None of the above ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs4 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Are you an active school election voter? (qs4:1)Yes (qs4:2)No (qs4:3)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs5 ‐ 1 (Single)

73

Text: What is your age? Please stop me when I get your range... (qs5:1)18‐30 years old (qs5:2)31‐40 years old (qs5:3)41‐50 years old (qs5:4)51 or older (qs5:5)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs6 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: What is the highest level of education you have completed or the highest degree you have received so far? (qs6:1)Less than high school (qs6:2)High school graduate or equivalent (for example, a GED) (qs6:3)Completed some college, but no degree (qs6:4)Associate's degree (qs6:5)College graduate (for example, B.A., A.B. or B.S.) (qs6:6)Completed some graduate school, but no degree (qs6:7)Completed graduate school (for example, M.S., M.D., Ph.D.) (qs6:8)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q1 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure. (q1:1)major negative change (q1:2)some negative change (q1:3)no change (q1:4)some positive change (q1:5)major positive change (q1:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

74

Question: q2 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure. (q2:1)major negative change (q2:2)some negative change (q2:3)no change (q2:4)some positive change (q2:5)major positive change (q2:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q3 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. (q3:1)major negative change (q3:2)some negative change (q3:3)no change (q3:4)some positive change (q3:5)major positive change (q3:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q4 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure.

75

(q4:1)major negative change (q4:2)some negative change (q4:3)no change (q4:4)some positive change (q4:5)major positive change (q4:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q5 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ My feelings for my community have changed since the SB closure. (q5:1)major negative change (q5:2)some negative change (q5:3)no change (q5:4)some positive change (q5:5)major positive change (q5:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q6 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. (q6:1)major negative change (q6:2)some negative change (q6:3)no change (q6:4)some positive change (q6:5)major positive change (q6:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

76

Question: q7 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB. (q7:1)major negative change (q7:2)some negative change (q7:3)no change (q7:4)some positive change (q7:5)major positive change (q7:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q8 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed. (q8:1)major negative change (q8:2)some negative change (q8:3)no change (q8:4)some positive change (q8:5)major positive change (q8:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q9 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure. (q9:1)major negative change

77

(q9:2)some negative change (q9:3)no change (q9:4)some positive change (q9:5)major positive change (q9:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q10 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Library usage has changed after the SB closure. (q10:1)major negative change (q10:2)some negative change (q10:3)no change (q10:4)some positive change (q10:5)major positive change (q10:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q11 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ School taxes have changed since the SB closure. (q11:1)major negative change (q11:2)some negative change (q11:3)no change (q11:4)some positive change (q11:5)major positive change (q11:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q12 ‐ 1 (Single)

78

Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. (q12:1)major negative change (q12:2)some negative change (q12:3)no change (q12:4)some positive change (q12:5)major positive change (q12:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q13 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure. (q13:1)major negative change (q13:2)some negative change (q13:3)no change (q13:4)some positive change (q13:5)major positive change (q13:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q14 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure. (q14:1)major negative change (q14:2)some negative change

79

(q14:3)no change (q14:4)some positive change (q14:5)major positive change (q14:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q15 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed. (q15:1)major negative change (q15:2)some negative change (q15:3)no change (q15:4)some positive change (q15:5)major positive change (q15:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q16 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB. (q16:1)major negative change (q16:2)some negative change (q16:3)no change (q16:4)some positive change (q16:5)major positive change (q16:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q17 ‐ 1 (Single) Text:

80

Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure. (q17:1)major negative change (q17:2)some negative change (q17:3)no change (q17:4)some positive change (q17:5)major positive change (q17:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q18 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. (q18:1)major negative change (q18:2)some negative change (q18:3)no change (q18:4)some positive change (q18:5)major positive change (q18:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q19 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure. (q19:1)major negative change (q19:2)some negative change (q19:3)no change

81

(q19:4)some positive change (q19:5)major positive change (q19:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q20 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Local employment has changed since the SB closure. (q20:1)major negative change (q20:2)some negative change (q20:3)no change (q20:4)some positive change (q20:5)major positive change (q20:6)Don't Know / Refused

82

Appendix F

SSI Research Company Report to the Researcher

Dead Attempts Rate

Max 4.7

Avg 3.3

Min 2.7

Attempts Rate

Max 58.3

Avg 49.9

Min 31.5

83

Appendix G

SSI Research Report to the Researcher Continued

Completed Interviews [I] I 220 Terminates (Partials) [P] P 7 Eligible, non-interview - Refusals [R] R 339 Eligible, non-interview - Non Contact [NC] NC 5741 Eligible, non-interview - Other [O] O 39 Unknown eligibility, non-interview [UH] UH 5303 Not Eligible [NE] NE 150 Not Eligible - Screeners & Quota Shutdowns [SO] SO 0 Completed Interviews 220Average Length 7 min 05 secNet Effective Incidence 100%Cooperation Rate 38%Cooperation

Max 45.45%

Avg 39.03%

Min 29.27%

Dates

Start 29-Dec-15

Mid 1-Jan-16

Last 4-Jan-16

Length

Max 7 min 10 sec

Avg 7 min 05 sec

Min 7 min 00 sec

84





CHAPTER THREE

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF SCHOOL

BUILDING

CLOSINGS ON RURAL

COMMUNITIES.

“Children are the world’s most valuable resource and its best hope for the future.”

(John F. Kennedy Presidential Library, 1963)

85

Introduction

Monetary Savings and Social Costs

School district mergers and school building closures have become a panacea for

declining student enrollment and financial difficulties (Clark, 2013). As elected state

legislators and statewide policy-makers across the United States struggle to balance their

respective state budgets, state aid for education has become a major target for reduction

not supplementation (Bakeman, 2014). It is not surprising that the focus of school district

mergers have been associated with cost reductions in order to ease the burden of local

school budget expenditures and to assist the state in reducing the amount of state aid that

flows to school districts.

Duncombe and Yinger (2001; 2005; 2010; 2015) have modeled school costs and

the economy of scale. They demonstrate that the merger of two districts saves money if

each district has school enrollment of 1,500 or less. However, these calculations do not

take into account the social costs, particularly those related to the closing of the

community school. Researchers contend that these social costs include much more than

just longer bus rides (Eyre & Finn, 2002; Heiser, 2013). This specific qualitative study of

the comprehensive multi-faceted investigation into the impact of school building closures

upon rural communities was designed to obtain a wider and richer set of experiences and

opinions than those available using only a survey (see Chapter 2). The qualitative study

brings life and realism to the social and human capital costs associated with school

closings in rural areas.

86

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this comprehensive multi-faceted investigation is to investigate

the impact of school building closings on rural communities in New York State. The

major components that make up a rural community include a) the school, b) community

library, c) volunteer organizations such as the firefighters, International Kiwanis, Lions

International, 4-H d) churches, and e) businesses (Lyson, 2006; Sell & Leistritz, 1997;

Woods, Doeksen, & St. Clair, 2005). The researcher evaluated how these components

interact with the school in the rural community. The presence of the local school often

serves as the central focus of small rural communities (Hyndman, Cleveland, & Huffman,

2010; Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Peshkin, 1982; Reynolds, 2013). Hyndman et al., (2010)

stated that the rural school was the glue keeps the community together. School

consolidation and school building closings have drawn greater interest over the last two

decades due to rural population decline and budget constraints.

Literature Review

Traditionally, schools have been at the center of rural community life. Schools

often provide local employment, furnish facilities for community activities, and cultivate

community identity. Schools play an important role in the economy of the community.

Central schools districts have annual budgets in the millions of dollars. Frequently, the

school budget is greater than the budget of the government of the local community.

The economic impact of an organization or business is often divided into three

components, direct, indirect, and induced. Direct effects result from the payroll losses and

the rest of the buying power budget of the school (Woods et al., 2005). Lyson (2002)

87

used U.S. Census Bureau data and New York Department of Education data to compare

villages of fewer than 2,500 residents. Rural communities that have schools are healthier

than those that do not, as measured by a variety of economic variables such as higher

property assessments, lower rates of public assistance, and higher rates of self-

employment (Lyson, 2005). Also, the workforce occupies higher economic positions in

rural areas with schools than those without schools. Generally, workers in rural

communities have a shorter average commuting distance than those in communities

without schools, perhaps because a larger percentage of these workers are employed by

the school (Lyson, 2002).

In addition to the direct economic impact of the rural school, the presence of a

school produces a variety of indirect economic effects. Most of the staff and some of the

faculty live within the communities surrounding the school (Lyson, 2002). These

individuals support the local economy. Also, increases in local businesses from direct

purchases from the schools generate additional employment to service the increased

demand. Improvement in the local economy centered on the school often results in an

increase in sales tax revenue and higher assessed valuations of property (Woods et al.,

2005).

In turn, any change in both direct and indirect economic impact results in a

change in standard of living in the community. This is called an induced impact. Woods

et al. (2005) measured economic impacts of schools in rural Oklahoma. School payroll

accounted for over 5% of the total payroll of Atoka County, Oklahoma. This was nearly

as much as the total manufacturing payroll in the county. Woods et al. (2005) calculated a

multiplier effect for school related economic activity. Each job added to the school

88

produced an increase of 0.56 in additional jobs in the community. The economic

multiplier indicates an increase of one dollar spent by the school produces a 70 cent

additional increase in the local economy.

Thus, changes in the schools economic activity reverberate through the

community affecting sales tax revenue and property valuation. Lyson (2002) found

higher housing values associated with the presence of a school in rural New York

communities. Although Lyson’s (2002) findings are correlative and not causal, clearly

the local school is a nexus for business activity. Restaurants, banks, libraries, and supply

stores locate near schools (Woods et al., 2005).

Schools provide a source of local pride and identity (Budge, 2006). Often this is

focused on exploits of the athletic teams. However, in some areas, success of the debate

team, tech teams, future farmers, musicals, plays, orchestra, marching band, and/or other

organizations are just as important to local pride. The better the relationship between the

school and the community, the greater is their mutual identity (Peshkin, 1982).

For many rural communities, the school is the social center (Peshkin, 1982). This

is particularly true when the school is located within a village (Lyson, 2002). Residents

use school facilities for meetings, voting, athletics events for non-students, adult

education, and many other activities. School structures may be the only large meeting

room, gymnasium, or swimming pool in the area.

Quality of Life and Sense of Place

Rural community residents often develop a strong feeling of where they live.

These positive feelings are referred to as “sense of place”. Quality of life aspects of living

89

in a rural community produce happiness, satisfaction, contentedness, and other positive

emotions. The rural community school contributes to “quality of life” values in their

respective local area. In particular, families value such “quality of life” features that are

associated with rural life (Harriot, 1974).

Therefore, “Quality of life” and “sense of place” are interrelated concepts. The

greater the quality of life factors for a particular area or community the more likely a

more positive sense of place will develop (Bauch, 2009; Budge, 2006; Seamon &

Sowers, 2008). Residents of local communities share common interests and ideologies

(Ward & Rink, 1992). Individuals in a community identify both with the community and

with the community school. These shared values are important in developing a sense of

place as articulated by Relph (1976). Three key components of a “sense of place” include

a physically setting, activities and events, and people’s experiences and intuitions (Relph,

1976).

Libraries

A public library is an important component of a rural community (Lyson, 2002).

This is especially true if the local school has limited resources for a school library. As an

alternative, in several rural communities, the public library and the school library have

consolidated to eliminate duplications of costs (Kluever & Finley, 2012). There are both

positive and negative aspects to the creation of joint libraries. In addition to this financial

solution, consolidation increases the resources available to both adults and students. The

joint library may foster positive interaction between adult library patrons and school

children. On the negative side, the resultant overlap of usage makes the library noisier

and may intimidate some of the public patrons. Censorship is another key problem with

90

joint libraries, as what is suitable for adults may not be suitable for children (Wiegand,

2005, Kluever & Finley, 2012). However, economic advantages may outweigh all of the

problems in small rural communities. If a community school closes, the public library

often replaces the school as a center of community activity. Libraries feature prominently

in the discussion of filling the void when the local school closes. The public library

becomes a facility to hold meetings, an organizer to present programs, and an access to

the internet for the community (Amberg, 2010; Chad & Miller, 2005).

Libraries require an investment of time and money. Initially, women’s groups

supplied both in many areas across the United States. In addition, these groups pressed all

levels of government to provide a stable source of funding (Watson, 1994). Currently, the

Federal Government disburses library funding to state library administrative agencies.

The states, in turn, distribute the funds to their regional and local entities according to a

formula often based on population (Sullivan, 2007). In New York State, local

governments also, sometimes, provide monetary support of rural libraries.

Currently, Amazon, Yahoo, Google, and Bing provide data and information at

one’s fingertips 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (Chad &Miller, 2005). Thus, the challenge

then for libraries is how they compete with the internet. Probably, there will always be

individuals who will enjoy reading from a printed book, as long as they exist. However,

their number will decline with time and as the popularity of e-readers increase. If libraries

want to be more than repositories for books, they must change with the times. Concerns

about libraries in the future have led to the concept of Library 2.0 (Chad & Miller, 2005).

Steps toward Library 2.0 may be as simple as blogging book reviews, movie reviews, and

new acquisitions (Stephens, 2007).

91

However, skills needed for “Web publishing” are generally lacking in Library and

Information Science (LIS) curricula. In fact the general criticism of those hiring new

library staff is insufficient technology training of Library and Information Science

graduates (Mon & Randeree, 2009). Recognizing this limitation, the University of

Tennessee has initiated a program to combine information technology with library

science to educate students to work in rural libraries. The program combines work

experience in regional libraries with course work on information technology (Mehra,

Black, Singh, & Nolt, 2011). The availability of high speed internet is often limited in

rural communities. Libraries benefit from high speed internet both in how they manage

their collections and how their users access information (Amberg, 2010). Free access to

high speed internet keeps libraries in rural areas relevant to the needs of the users.

Unfortunately, rural libraries trail urban and suburban libraries in the availability of

broadband internet for public use (Bertot, 2009).

Schafft, Alter, and Brider (2006) detailed the acquisition of information

technology infrastructure of the Ridgemont Pennsylvania High School. The high school

extended access to the local community. The project was successful because everyone

agreed that quality internet access was a good thing, the superintendent received grant

money to pay for the project, and community residents received full access regardless of

their economic status or educational background (Schafft et al., 2006). High school

students developed and maintained web sites for local business. This project has been

successful improving education and community identity. However, the acquisition of

information technology infrastructure has failed to serve as a catalyst for rural economic

revitalization (Schafft et al., 2006). Clearly, there are many challenges faced by the

92

community library in the computer internet age. However, a library provides human

contact, in addition, to a repository of information.

Volunteerism and Volunteer Firefighters

People may volunteer because of intrinsic or extrinsic motivation (Perkins, 1989).

Some individuals are self-satisfied by helping others. Others need the social interaction

that comes from volunteering or the public recognition that the volunteer may receive.

Generally, satisfaction with the volunteer work, social approval, and social rewards are

more important to volunteers than in their regular jobs (Bakker, Van Der Zee, Lewig, &

Dollard, 2006). Volunteering fulfills several motivational functions including: value,

understanding, social, and protective functions. There is a significantly positive

correlation between a pro-social personality and volunteering activities.

Even though firefighting is potentially dangerous, it represents an attractive

vehicle for volunteerism in the local community (Krinhop, 1999). Other volunteers

recognize the time and labor commitment of volunteer firefighters (Michaelides, Parpa,

Henry, Thompson, & Brown, 2011). A healthy view of community, as held by

firefighters, is part of the glue that holds America together (Simpson, 1996). A strong

bond is created between volunteer firefighters and other volunteers within their

community. Krinhop (1999) suggests the following reasons people join the volunteer fire

company including: the satisfaction of helping others, prestige from stories of successful

rescues, give and take when in need, an opportunity for a professional career, and

camaraderie (Kinhop, 1999).

93

The satisfaction of helping others in times of need provide an intrinsic reward that

motivates the volunteer firefighter (Kinhop, 1999). Volunteer firefighters value the

prestige they earn both within the fire company and throughout the community. For

young volunteers, becoming a full volunteer firefighter marks a rite of passage. This

fulfills the need to be considered a serious adult in both the fire company and the

community (Kinhop, 1999).

The civic duty of reciprocity is another strong motivator for volunteerism

(Thompson III & Bono, 1993). Numerous firefighters express the feeling of mutual

respect. They feel that if they cannot help somebody else, how they can expect somebody

else to help them. Camaraderie is a lifelong benefit from being a member of a volunteer

fire company. Volunteers may join because of friendships with current members of the

fire department (Thompson III & Bono, 1993; Kinhop, 1999). Surely, a novice volunteer

firefighter will develop more friendships after joining the fire company. To make the

monthly meetings more appealing a quality meal is served. To embed the camaraderie

further, holiday parties are celebrated at the fire hall (Thompson III & Bono, 1993). It

may appear that the volunteers join for just the socializing. Therefore, it is the shared

experiences, sometimes dangerous experiences that make the socializing so enjoyable

(Kinhop, 1999; Haski-Leventhal, & McLeigh, 2009).

Comprehensive Multi-faceted Investigation Research Questions

The following research questions guide this investigation. The following

overarching research question was a major motivator for the author of this investigation:

How does the loss of a community school impact the quality of life in a rural community?

94

The following five are specific research questions that when answered reveal if the loss

of a community school does impact the quality of life in a rural community:











number of household units d) occupancy and vacancy of housing?



Qualitative Methods of this Specific Study

The following map (Figure 1) illustrates the 12 rural schools that were closed in

rural communities in New York State during the period from 1986-2010. These schools

represent the sample of this comprehensive research investigation into the impact of the

closing of rural schools upon a community in terms of social, economic, and human

capital costs. These schools were selected for inclusion in this sample to be studied based

on their congruence with the following researcher predetermined criteria: the school

95

building was closed within the last 25 years; it was located at least 5 to7 miles from the

main district campus; it is located in a community of less than 2,500 residents.

Figure 1. Twelve School Buildings in New York State that were Closed

Therefore, the 12 schools selected for this study are located in rural areas of

upstate New York State. The following Table 1 summarizes the 12 schools selected for

this study.

96

Table 1 The 12 School Districts Selected for this Qualitative Study

School District

Town

County

Date Reorganized or Merged

Closed Date

New School Name


Merged


Merged


Merged Delaware

Valley Delaware Sullivan 1999 2005 Sullivan West

Merged

Little Valley Little Valley Cattaraugus 2000 2012 Cattaraugus-Little Valley

Merged


Reorganized

Williamstown Williamstown Oswego 2009 2009 Altmar-Parish-Williamstown

Reorganized

Cherry Valley Cherry Valley Otsego 1986 1989 Cherry Valley-

Springfield

Merged

Springfield Springfield Otsego 1986 1989 Cherry Valley-

Springfield

Merged


Merged


Merged

Brant Brant Erie 2010 2010 Lake Shore

Reorganized

For the theoretical/conceptual framework that would best capture the qualitative

information required for this specific study of the comprehensive multi-faceted research

investigation, the researcher chose the narrative approach. The approach allowed the

researcher to interview knowledgeable individuals with considerable experience in all

97

aspects of small rural communities (Creswell, 2013). The narrative approach seemed

more suitable to collect the most meaningful and robust qualitative information

associated with this specific study. The characteristic of the narrative approach that most

influenced the researcher was that the narrative approach tells the experiences of

individuals using stories of their lives within the rural community (Creswell, 2013).

Another aspect of the narrative approach is that themes develop as the data is analyzed

(Polkinghorne, 1995; Riessman, 2008).

The researcher chose the open-ended interview format for data collection

(Roulston, deMarrais, & Lewis, 2003). Opened ended questions invite thoughtful

responses and prompt the informant (interviewee) to provide a more expansive answer.

The interviews were conducted over the telephone at times convenient for each of them.

The researcher used an interview protocol that provided the structure of the interview.

The interview protocol consisted of ten questions (see Appendix C), supplemented with

probing questions generated from the comments of the informants. The interview

protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Niagara University

(see Appendix D). All of the informants were asked the same ten questions to provide

consistency in the responses across all informants. The intent of the probing questions

was to get the informants to elaborate on details. The interviews lasted at least 30 minutes

to 60 minutes. The informants showed no indication that the length of the interview was

excessive; actually, they seemed to enjoy talking about their life in their community.

And, the interviews were so rich and informative, the researcher lost tract of the time.

The researcher did not take field notes. However the researcher did occasionally

memo a word or two during the interview because she wanted to document and observe

98

the tone in the informant’s voice to get the emotions or feeling evoked by each question.

The researcher allowed ample time for the informants to fully express themselves. The

interview questions definitely served as a catalyst for the informants to reflect about their

life in a rural community and the impact of a school closing in their context.

The entire interview was recorded on a digital recorder. The recordings were

transcribed to yield word documents by transcribe.com and nothing usual occurred. The

researcher created a provisional coding start list as interview protocol was finalized

(Saldana, 2013). The first time the researcher reviewed the transcripts of the interviews

was to determine if the provisional coding list was appropriate for the interviews. The

researcher started to write comments in the margins of the transcripts to get an idea of

which style of coding she should use. This was the second cycle of coding of the data.

Ultimately, descriptive coding was chosen because the researcher wanted to categorize

the information using labels consisting of a word or short phrase. The descriptive labels

were matched with a color and then the researcher revised the codes by reorganizing and

renaming the labels.

It was apparent that one interview differed considerably from the other interviews.

One centenarian had attended a one-room schoolhouse as a child and still lives nearby the

old building. Her interview was replete with historical detail. Her particular interview

was coded differently from the rest of the interviews because the researcher added a code

for historic references. This was the predominant code for the centenarian informant. This

completed the researcher’s third cycle of coding.

Along with descriptive coding the researcher used narrative coding, because it is

appropriate for exploring interpersonal experiences (Saldana, 2013). Narrative analysis

99

includes methods such as thematic, structural, dialogic and performative. The researcher

used color coding for eight main topics. For the general topics the researcher used

descriptive and narrative coding. These included volunteerism, community changes,

quality of life, compensate for loss, economic impact, changes in children, school tax

savings, and pay more taxes to keep school. As the researcher read the transcripts two

central themes emerged. One general theme was “the community wants to survive.” The

second theme revealed that the community wants to share its “quality of life” with others.

Table 2 presents information for the 13 interview informants. In column one,

pseudonyms were used to protect the identity of the informant. In column two,

approximate ranges of age were used to characterize maturity and experience. In column

three, years in the community were used to document familiarity with the specific

community. In column four, occupation was used to indicate activity and knowledge in

the community.

Table 2 Pseudonym Names and Characteristics of Informants

Pseudonym Name Age Range Years in Community Profession

Sam Lester 70 to 75 Born in the community Retired School Employee - Current Local Politician

Max House 70 to 75 50 years in community Retired School Employee - Current Local Politician

Gary Wiley 35 to 40 Born in the community School Employee

Rosalyn Good 40 to 45 12 years in community Town Employee

Nancy Weeks 65 to 70 35 years in community Local Politician

Claire Sweeney 35 to 40 12 years in community Hospital worker

Jake Stevenson 65 to 70 21 years in community Local Politician

Ellyn Imes 55 to 65 29 years in community Local Politician

Rose Field 35 to 40 13 years in community Town Employee

Joe Sullivan 60 to 65 Born in the community Business Owner - Local Politician

David Blevins 65 to 70 50 years in community Educator

Reagan Wilson 70 to 75 50 years in community Consultant Agnes Brawn 100 100 years in community Retired

100

Qualitative Interview Results

Table 3 illustrates the nine individual codes and two general themes. These were

based on the informant’s responses to the survey questions. The codes were grouped by

the general theme.

Table 3 Qualitative Interview Codes and Themes

Codes Theme

School Tax Savings

Economic Impact “Community Wants to Survive”

Changes in the Community

Quality of Life

Volunteerism

Compensate for loss “Share Quality of Life”

Changes in Children

Pay more Tax to Save School History

Results from Interviews of Rural Community Members

Who have Lost their School Building

The first two protocol questions provided basic information about the informant.

For example they included where you currently live and for how long have you lived

there? This information will remain private to protect the identity of the informants.

General information on the informant is presented in Table 2. For the remaining eight

questions the researcher coordinated any responses to that question by the informants. To

identify individual informants, pseudonyms were assigned to each informants. Not all

informants responded to every question.

101

The ten questions that were used for the Qualitative Protocol (Appendix B) are

presented below.

1. How long have you lived in the rural community?

2. If you moved here why did you select this rural community?

The researcher combined questions 1 and 2 because question 2 depended directly

on the answer to question 1.

Subsequently, according to the informant information collected via the

personal interviews: Most informants have lived in a rural community all of their

lives. A few moved to the rural community because their spouse was from the

community or they had family members in the community. A few moved to the rural

community because when they were “

Rosalyn Good noted “I just didn’t want to die in suburbia. I lived in a city and we

were over “had family here so we would come here on vacations and we just fell in

love.”

Ellyn Imes stated “we have family members living here.”

Claire Sweeny state “we moved back here because my mother owned the house that I

grew up in, and she was moving. So we you know, instead of building in another town,

where we living, we decided to buy the home here.”



102

The group of informants belong to a variety volunteer organizations. The most

common response was Volunteer Firefighters (Max House, Jake Stevenson, and

Claire Sweeney). The outreach for these firefighters included parades (Max House,

Jake Stevenson, Claire Sweeney), fundraisers (Max House, Claire Sweeney), and

benefits (Max House, Claire Sweeney).

Max House stated “As a first responder and a fireman, staff officer as well until-

you know that goes without saying what kinds of things that the local firemen provide.

It’s a community thing because we put on benefits and fundraisers and whatever. And

it’s a good excuse for people in the area to get together.” Other volunteerism

included Historical Society Jake Stevenson, Catholic Charity, Historical Society

Newsletter (David Blevins, Ellyn Imes), Church (Rose Field).

Sam Lester noted “I’m a member of the local conservation club and what we do

is, we raise money to send kids to the New York State DEC Conservation Camp.”

Wiley noted “I am more involved with my students, or my kids than myself, in

organizations.


closed?

The group of responses ranged from sad, morale went down, loss of business, less of

a connection to the communities, misses the parades, and local contests centered around

the community, and difficult to get information to the children in the host school.

103

Sam Lester noted “noticed that people now try to have local youth groups from

the community as opposed to everything being run through the school. He noticed that

they are refurbishing the playground for the school…there’s a giant hole in the

community.”

Ellyn Imes stated “I think it took me longer because I did not have school aged

children, but two years ago I realized, it had a negative impact.”

Nancy Weeks stated “the biggest change is everybody’s of retirement age. It’s

becoming a retirement community. There’s no more kids in the school and the school has

dwindled. I mean, there’s nobody with any kids anymore.

Gary Wiley stated “opportunities are there and which might not be there if it was

just one community.”

Gary Wiley noted “I have, no contact with the Board of Education here.

Rose Field stated “I was not here during that time.”

Rose Field stated “no change her children have always gone to the new school.”

Max House stated “Since the new building was put in between Cherry Valley and

Springfield, it’s actually in the town of Cherry Valley. I think we have less of a

connection, the community has less of a connection. Because you don’t have the

Halloween parade going through the middle of town anymore, and you don’t have, the

Fire Queen connection to the school district. And you don’t ---you miss some things that

were just centered around the community and its school. Now it means, you know,

traveling only a short distance but uh probably five miles.”

104


in your community?

Some communities benefit socially and financially from summer tourist (Jake

Stevenson), old school used for many things (Max House), negative impact on

community (Ellyn Imes).

Sam Lester noted “You know, this used to be a community where…ah, if there

was a function going on in the school and the kids wanted to go to it, you let your kids

walk to it…but you can’t do that now. Somebody has to… they have to raise a bus and

they have us come pick their kids up and they’ve all got to be dropped off at a certain

place, and that’s a joke. You have to bus the kids to the other school.”

Sam Lester stated “any volunteer organization is just…they’re at their wits-end

struggling. I mean, they tried everything in this little fire department to get more people

involved and it just…you know, when the fire siren goes off, this is the third call for

Angelica. I have a scanner and you listen to that all the time.”

Claire Sweeney stated “There is a playground over by the school that is still

utilized, you know, by the kids in the area, I think people have adapted, after time, over

time, and I think that you know I don’t ever hear people complaining, you know. Or I

mean, not that often anyways.” It’s been… since I’ve done parades because I think

vacated school participated in the merger partner parades, things like that.”

Sam Lester noted “Sure without a doubt. It’s just not the same community. There

is no kids walking to school. There is no activity around that building and it’s … you can

see the direction the community’s going…and it’s not the right directions. It’s the wrong

105

direction. There is a void in the community and there is no way around it. The state made

it very attractive financially to these districts…”Hey, there’s your compensation. We’re

not compensating your community that’s not for us to do.” That’s how they think. They

don’t care.

Nancy Weeks stated “We have our own garbage we have to take care of…

Nobody gives us any services.”

Joe Sullivan noted ““Quality of Life” is better if there is school. This community

had new school built.”

Rose Field noted “more blended atmosphere, but I was not here before.” I

haven’t noticed a change in the class sizes in the last 13 years. It still remains between,13

to16 per class, and there’s still two classes per grade.”

Gary Wiley noted “No change of “quality of life” school merger gives more

opportunities for education.

Rosalyn Good noted “It is just fun to have younger people around. New

generations is just invaluable. “It’s harder because our community, of course, we don’t

have a school.”

Rose Field noted “There’s a couple--- there’s a couple of key members that really

go out of their way for the Fourth of July and for the Christmas. Like, for instance, we

had the gingerbread making and then we send everybody to the fire department, and then

they have over 20 tables set up where the kids do crafts, and they have Santa come in on

the truck. And so there, probably is at least a hundred children that show up to that over

at the fire station.” I love my town, I mean I really love my town.”

106

Claire Sweeney noted “We kind of had mixed emotions about it, because we know

how, you know, some of the community people felt. I think a lot of our friends who had

kids in the Elementary School were worried about their kids taking a bus that far to go to

Allegany. It’s probably 20 to 25 minutes but the bus starts and stops, it takes more than

25 minutes. I hear the busses go by in the morning and they are going by at 6:20 in the

morning. Especially in the wintertime”


the students?

Claire Sweeney noted “They have been able to utilize the school building itself

for other things and they still have an active, soccer program, youth soccer program.

That’s very active and that actually pulls people from some of the surrounding

communities too, and let other groups use the building.” Part of the school building is

now the municipal building that used to be across the street.” And there’s programs that

rent, rent out the gym, I don’t know if they still do, for a while there was a women’s roller

derby.”

Rose Field stated “Yes, I just started here a year ago and we’ve added lot more

community outreach as far as social programs for the children. We added a story time,

we added a summer reading program, toddler painting classes, and we added knitting.

Yoga, like a family yoga class. Well that’s more weekly events as far as with the story

time. We have an Easter egg hunt now (we had 25 children), we have-for the toddlers.

Also a gingerbread house making in December, and this year over 70 people attended.

Then we did Christmas Eve cookie making, and that was 27 people. On Christmas Eve,

so, it’s a nice community, and they were really—they really—people like to be involved.”

107

“It is a community that really wants things for their children and for the community. They

want to move forward so that---just for instance this community library is in the middle of

the automation process, and is adding 550 square feet.”

Max House noted “One of the selected towns purchased the former elementary

school and has turned it into a community center. Our Town Board meets there, our

judge holds court there, and the Boy Scouts meet there, the historical society is there, the

library is there. There’s the gymnasium available for all sorts of activities, so that

building, even though it’s not a school building as such anymore, really has become the

focal point of our community.

Ellyn Imes noted “community leased portion for town meetings and community

youth center.”

Jake Stevenson noted “yes to a point, there is a summer program and swim time.”

Sam Lester noted “The state believes their compensation went to the school in

this increased incentive aid. That’s … you know, that’s huge. I mean, I think it was ... I

can’t recall what it was but, it was an ungodly number and then, when we started going

through superintendents and the superintendents, they came in because, they wanted to

build a resume, they started doing all kinds of things and people started looking at each

other like, “This is never going to last,” and it didn’t and once you go through that initial

incentive aid where you had money to do almost anything you wanted, from ah….offering

college courses in high school to other kinds of things and then, it just ended. And some

districts actually look around and they want to merge again so, they could redo that

incentive aid.

108

Gary Wiley noted “no compensation old building used by the community. He

works for the merged school district and his children are in the merged school and

spends much of his time working and participating in his children’s sports.

Joe Sullivan noted “And the one Narrowsburg Elementary closed. Jefferson-

Youngsville remained open. Once they built the new high school, which is in my town. So

that effect has been rather good.” Joe Sullivan did not lose a school, the new High

School was built in his town. However, he was very familiar with neighboring school

districts that did lose school.

Nancy Weeks stated” they are doing a good job at the library now. I men, they’ve

increased; they are expanding in the library. The Historical Society, and that’s all in that

old school building but they’re expanding. The library and the historical society is

expanding.”


on your community?

Ellyn Imes stated “I think it has somewhat. I mean the teachers would, eat, spend

money, buy gas, certainly it probably has.”

Claire Sweeney stated” We’re right outside of a national forest, attract

snowmobilers can come right over the hills of the national park and there is still little

trails all the way through town.” They stop and eat in town. We also have a water resort,

a miniature golf course, a driving range, and a huge pavilion, indoors and outdoors

pavilion for people to rent for weddings and any kind of parties and graduations, and two

cabins they rent out. It is busy through the whole summer and all year round, to either

109

campers or hunters. It is a big hunting area.” There is a casino about 20 minutes away,

where people go to work.”

Gary Wiley noted “No, actually I don’t think it has had an economic…I think it’s

actually helped it. I mean yeah, it hurt because the building wasn’t being used at first.

But, I think it’s helped it in the long run, because it’s more efficient to run one building

instead of two. And the longer people can realize that, you know, they start realizing that

it’s saving them money because the merged. So no, I don’t think it’s made much. I mean,

besides saving money, I guess.

Jake Stevenson stated “We lost those employees. We do not have a restaurant

anymore. There is work in trying to get something going.”

Nancy Weeks stated “The only thing I – you know, it doesn’t attract anybody

because there’s nobody coming over here. When you do not have people coming in, it

makes the economy less.” “We have tried to do things like a parade every year and you

know, we put on stuff—trouble is we got the other town to deal with, they take all the

money and take it to their place. Whenever there is a holiday or anything like that, they

have something going and everyone heads to the other town and we lose. We don’t make

any money because they take it all away from you.” “This town is dying, people down

south up here, there is nothing. There is no young people here anymore, and New York

State has lost ---population was 1,350 now it is 1,100 people.

Rosalyn Good stated “Well the stores, you know , we have a little tiny main

street, all of which are, are really “chichi ”shops and they cater to day trippers from New

York and they are pretty pricey. And a whole lot of kids probably will not be walking

110

into them.” “Adults are not walking into the “chichi” stores, if they are living off the

economy we’re not spending a whole lot of money on main street stores. It’s a draw for

people.”


school?

Rosalyn Good noted “I just don’t see that many and besides, teenagers never look

happy, that is not true.”

Ellyn Imes noted “I’m not sure I understand the question. I wouldn’t be, I don’t

have direct contact with them, so I probably wouldn’t really notice what kind of

change…”

Jake Stevenson stated “Well, they did not all move---move to the merger partner.

That’s the point I want to make. A lot of them have gone to other school districts.” A lot

of them have gone to a couple private schools around.”

Claire Sweeney noted “I think some parents were worried about their really

young children. They have to take two major highways early in the morning, especially in

the winter.”

Max House noted “the teachers had to compete, if you were the only third grade

teacher in town when you got together with a couple of other third grade teachers from

another town, now you’re all together, three rooms next to one another and the principal

comes down and you are working together all of a sudden all three decide “Whoops” I

better get on the stick here because I know now what the fourth grade people want. It’s

just not the one person who was next door to me before.” Complacency!!!!

111

Gary Wiley and Rose Field noted “their children have always gone to the new

school.”

Rose Field stated “All of my kids always went to Cherry Valley.”

Jake Stevenson noted “the one hour bus rides, and of course, the high schoolers

don’t like it either. But there is the other thing that you always find in a merger is –there

is animosity between the two towns.” In another school there was 50 years of long-

lasting animosity” We do- as far as for the kids- the one things we do have here is a

summer program for the kids, the town does support that.” “And that’s a swimming

program, three mornings a week, and they also have use of the old school grounds. The

town will make concessions there so the kids are available out there. Absolutely, I want

to keep things going for the kids.”


Rosalyn Good stated “No Tax Savings”

Gary Wiley noted “I believe they went down after the school merger, and you

know now they’re like everybody else’s. They go up every year, for whatever.”

Rose Field stated “I don’t know. The taxes- they always go up. They’re never

going to go back down.”

Ellyn Imes noted “I would have to follow the school budget a little bit more

closely to answer that question. The budget go down” I don’t think so. You could look

that up online though. I don’t think so.”

112

Sam Lester stated “After…just after the merger, they went down because the taxes

are spread out over a broader area and now, you know, they sucked that all up again and

we’re right back where we were. Well, that is any time that you spread your tax over a

larger base, the rate has to go down, but once they do that, that gives them more room to

start increasing. Well look it is not as high as it was back whenever. That is just a

gentleman’s play.” “Temporary savings only.”

10. Were you willing to pay more in school taxes if it meant keeping your local school

open?

Claire Sweeney stated “Yes”

Rosalyn Good stated “Yes”

Gary Wiley noted “ No, they got the incentives to build and then taxes went

slowly back up.”

Rose Field noted “Yes” “Because I do not want to live in a country of dumb

people”

Ellyn Imes stated “personally, I would. I don’t know how other people would feel

about that, especially people without-on fixed incomes and those that don’t have school-

aged children. I mean, I think that’s a personal choice.”

Sam Lester stated “Yes.”

Is there any other information that you would like to add to your interview about the

effect of closing of the local school building on your rural community?

Gary Wiley noted “the city pays for most of that taxes”

113

David Blevins noted “teacher should constantly have professional development

and assessment system, which, people said should be based on the standards, after three

years of training, and conversion, and rebooting your staff.”

Reagan Wilson noted “the biggest mistake when closing a school building was

not helping the other side survive, where the school building closed.”

A Historic Reference

The centenarian was an interesting informant because of her quick wit and

fabulous memory. She was one of twelve children. She walked to a rural school that was

a one room school house. She said it took her about ten minutes to walk there. When she

was in second grade her parents took the family out of the one room schoolhouse and

drove her and some of her brothers and sisters to school in the nearby city. The Klu Klux

Klan was threating the Catholics in their neighborhood so the parents sent the children to

a private Catholic School in the city. Several years later they returned to the one room

schoolhouse. There were only about fifteen children of various ages in that one room

school.

The centenarian had great memories of a woman who brought cookies out to the

children as they passed her house on the walk home from school. Clearly, the generosity

of the woman who bought cookies created a “quality of life” moment that seemed

mutual. It was not just the cookies that made a memory, it was the personal interaction

with a kind older neighbor who cared. By observing her body language, it could be

surmised that it was very special for this centenarian to remember those heartwarming

memories at one hundred years old. She further stated that, “The houses were a great

distance apart and not in a town or village”. The schoolhouses were located so that all of

114

the neighborhood children could reach a school by walking a reasonable distance because

there were no busses. That one room schoolhouse did not close until after the centenarian

graduated from the school. She married and moved one road away and her children

attended a different one room school a few miles away. Given the sparse population, the

centenarian was not affected by the school closing. For this centenarian, “quality of life”

is as fresh as the aroma of newly baked cookies.

General Results

The informants interviewed for this qualitative study were typical of those

surveyed for the quantitative study. They do not appreciate what they have until it is

gone. One informant noted that the loss of the school building started to affect her after

about two years. Another was aware of the shift of population to a community full of

retirees. An individual who strongly supported school district mergers in his school

district when it was up for a vote, now feels guilty. Several informants recognized the

allure of the state merger aid, but regret how the aid was spent and how little is left. One

informant wanted to know if they could merge again and receive another merger

incentive.

There seems to be more awareness of the positive relationship between the school

and “quality of life.” Few mergers have been approved since 2009 (New York State

School Business Officials, 2014). Potential mergers supported by the school

administration is voted down by better organized community groups and a “grass roots”

effort.

115

Effects on quality of life revolve around the children and young people and

supplementation from outside the community. Various communities try to keep young

people active in their communities by organizing and presenting opportunities after the

school building closed. Several communities have purchased all or part of the school that

was closed. These reclaimed schools were turned into a multipurpose community center.

Residents of the rural communities find some solace and “sense of place” using the same

building that was their school. Any land included in the purchase became sports fields or

playgrounds. It is difficult on parents when their children have to travel several miles to

participate at the merged school. Using the reclaimed school allows children to walk to

and from their local library and events. One interesting solution, is a swimming program

in a local lake.

Another boost to a community lacking a school is tourism. Communities in

Sullivan County welcome and influx of tourist from the New York City area. These

towns offer plays, music productions, recreation, and spectacular views. In turn, tourist

eat at upscale restaurants, buy antiques, pay user fees, and leave at the end of the season.

Other upstate rural communities promote areas such as the Allegany Mountains to raise

tourism and local revenue. New York is replete with small lakes and rivers, verdant

Forest, and agricultural attractions such as wineries. Some rural communities are

currently making improvements to these natural gifts.

116

Conclusions

“My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. (John Kennedy, 1961).

The informants for this specific qualitative interview study were classified into

four groups. They were not a homogenous group. The first group of informants was

community members where no school building closed. The second group of informants

was community members where a school building closed. The third group of informants

was individuals with knowledge of social costs when a school building closes. The fourth

group of informants was an historic centenarian individual. The first group of informants

included two individuals where a new school has been built, and an individual who

moved into the community after the merger took place and a new school was built.

Individuals interviewed for this study spent free time volunteering for a variety of

organizations. It is not surprising that firefighting was a common option for volunteering.

However, the historical society and church were also favored by volunteers. These

volunteer organizations held parades, benefits, and fundraisers.

The aspect of the community that changed the most was children’s activity in the

rural community. Most informants missed interaction with young people. Organizations

in the community without a school substituted youth programs that run separately from

the merged school. The adults work hard to keep the children involved in the community.

People who did not focus on the children, focused on the loss of jobs and businesses. The

aging of the community is a ubiquitous reflection of upstate New York rural communities

without schools.

117

Qualitative Study Answers to Research Questions

The following five questions are the specific questions that when answered

revealed key information about the impact on the quality of life in a rural community of

the loss of a community school:

Question 1: Do people in the rural community understand the direct relationship

of rural schools and the local quality of life? Clearly, the towns that lost their school had

a limited understanding of what was going to happen to their quality of life, after a

merger. Students that used to walk to school now require their parents to become

chauffeurs. Informant Sam Lester stated “this used to be a community where if there was

a function going on in the school and the kids wanted to go to it, you let your kids walk.

Now they have to raise a bus.”

Question 2: How does the local quality of life change when the local school is

vacated such as: a) connectedness, b) development of identity and culture, c)

interdependence with the land, d) spirituality, e) ideology and politics, and f) activism

and civic engagement? 2a.If an activity occurs in the evening, the students may stay in

the host schools community until the activity is complete. Thus, children who have been

transferred from their old school have less time to spend in the community where they

live. They and their families will also spend some of their disposable income in the host

community. Therefore, some of their connectedness is transferred to the host community.

2b.Where the closed school and the host school were bitter rivals in sports, as well as

other things students must change their identity and culture to fit into their surroundings.

Traditions such as parades and community parties weaken. Because many activities were

centered in the old school they move to the host school or disappear over time. Since

118

there is little traffic into the community that lost its school, that community must face a

declining economy. In one community, the loss of the school was followed by the loss of

a substantial Catholic Church. This was nearly as devastating as the loss of the rural

school building. 2c.The abandoned community can reduce the stress by highlighting local

attractions. Another way to encourage quality of life and sense of place is to keep familiar

community attributes available to the children. 2d. Churches may suffer from the same

reduction of population that closes schools. Yet, the church is source of pageantry and

activity. 2f. In a number of towns, the merger debate has produced pro and anti-merger

groups. This may recast the political affiliations as the impact of losing a school building

becomes clear. Town politics change. 2e.This may lead to activism and civic

engagement.

Question 3: How much are community members willing to pay in taxes to keep

their local school and maintain their community? From the interviews 5 out of 6

informants said they would pay more school tax if it meant keeping the school open. Four

informants did not answer the question about raising school taxes.

Question 4: How does the local quality of life change when the local school is

vacated such as a) population change, b) age structure of population, c) number of

household units d) occupancy and vacancy of housing? This specific qualitative study

was not intended to answer question 4 of this comprehensive multi-faceted investigation.

Question 5: Education and Average income related to a rural community having

or not having a school? This specific qualitative study was not intended to answer

question 5 of this comprehensive multi-faceted investigation.

119

Summary

The first three research questions have been addressed by information from this

specific qualitative study. This specific qualitative study was not intended to address

research questions 4 and 5. These two research questions were addressed in chapter 2 and

4. The informants from the qualitative study agree that it takes some time to appreciate

the full value of the rural school and its impact on local quality of life after the local

school is closed. Usually the first thing people notice is that the children spend much less

time in their community. They may have longer bus rides so they have to get up earlier

and they arrive home later.

The informants either grew up in the rural community where they still lived or

moved into the community some time ago. It is not surprising to discover that “quality of

life” is important to these individuals. In addition, quality of life bolsters a sense of place

or place consciousness. This also fosters an interdependence with the land. Any

individuals not affected by these concepts are likely to be gone by now. The children are

a good example of connectedness in the community. Children from the closed school

keep their personal relationships even after they attend the host school. Children who are

forced to leave their closed school and attend a host school are caught between the two

communities. Often the result is a loss of sense of place for the “old” community.

120

References

Amberg, P. (2010). Where angels fear to tread: A non-librarian’s view of

the sustainability of Rural Libraries. Australasian Public Libraries and

Information Services, 23(1), pp 28-32.

Retrieved from:http://search.proquest.com/docview/734457573?accountid=28213





Bakker, A.B., Van Der Zee, K.I., Lewig, K. A., & Dollard, M.F. (2006). The relationship

between the big five personality factor and burnout: a study among volunteer

counselors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146, 31-50.

Bauch, P.A. (2009). School-community partnerships in rural schools: Leadership,

renewal, and a sense of place. Peabody Journal of Education, 76, 204-221.

Bertot, J. C. (2009). Capacity planning for broadband in public libraries: Issues and

strategies. Library Technology Reports, 45(1): 38-42, 2, 4. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/202739478?accountid=28213



Chad, K. & Miller, P. (2005). Do libraries matter? The rise of Library 2.0. Talis. pp 4-11.

121

Clark, M. (2013). Communities cling to local schools despite state incentives. The Pew

Charitable Trusts. Retrieved from: http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-

analysis

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2001). Does school district consolidation cut costs? Center

of Policy Research Paper122.


Retrieved from:


5.pdf




Costs.Paper presented to the School Superintendents Association National


Eyre, E. & Finn, S. (2002, August-October). Closing costs: School consolidation in West

Virginia. Charleston Gazette.

Haski-Leventhal, D. & McLeigh, J.D. (2009). Firefighters volunteering beyond their

duty: an essential asset in rural communities. Journal of Rural and Community

Development, 4, 80-92.

122

Heiser, P. (2013). To merge or not to merge. New York State School Boards Association.

Latham, New York.

Herriot, J. (1974). All things bright and beautiful. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Kennedy, J. F. (1961). “Inaugural Address (1),” January 20, 1961, Public Papers of the

Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1961.

Kennedy, J. F. (1963). Re: United States Committee for UNOCEF July 25, 1963,” “July

1963: 131” folder, White House Chronological File, box 11, John F. Kennedy

Presidential Library.

Kluever, J., & Finley, W. (2012). Making connections: Challenges and benefits of joint

use Libraries as seen in one community. School Libraries Worldwide, 18(1): pp

48-55. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/921332119?accountid=282136-

Krinhop, K. (1999). Leonardville: Cultural expression in a rural central Texas volunteer

fire department (Masters theses). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses database. Lyson, T.A. (2002). What does a school mean to a community?

Assessing the social and economic benefits of schools to rural villages in New

York. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 17, 131-137.

Lyson, T.A. (2005). The importance of schools to rural community viability. The Role of

Education, 23-27.


123


Sociology 65, (5) 1001-1024.

Mehra, B., Black, K., Singh, V., & Nolt, J. (2011). Collaborations between LIS education

and rural libraries in the southern and central Appalachia: Improving librarian

technology literacy and management training. Journal of Education for Library

and Information Science, 52(3): pp 238-247. Retrieved from


Michaelides, M. A., Parpa, K. M., Henry, L. J., Thompson, G. B., & Brown, B. S. (2011).

Assessment of physical fitness aspects and their relationship to firefighters’ job

abilities. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(4), 956-965.

Mon, L., & Randeree, E. (2009). On the boundaries of reference services: Questioning

and library 2.0.Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 50(3),




Perkins, K. B. (1989). Volunteer firefighters in the United States. Nonprofit and

Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 18, 269-277.

Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. Qualitative

Studies in Education, 8, 5-23.



124


University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of

Education.

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Los Angeles, CA:

Sage.

Roulston, K., deMarrais, K., & Lewis, J.B. (2003). Learning to interview in the social

sciences. Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 643-668.

Saldana, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA:

Sage.

Schafft, K.A., Alter, T.R. & Bridger, J.C. (2006). Bringing the community along: A case

study of a school district’s information technology rural development initiative.


Seamon, D. & Sowers, J. (2008). Place and Placelessness, Edward Relph. Key texts in


pp.43-51.



186-205.

Simpson, C. R. (1996). A fraternity of danger: Volunteer fire companies and the

contradictions of modernization. American Journal of Economics and Sociology,

55, 17-34.

125

Stephens, M. (2007). Tools from "web 2.0 & libraries: Best practices for social software"

revisited. Library Technology Reports, 43(5): 15-31. Retrieved from


Sullivan, L. A. (2007). Grant funding for libraries. The Bottom Line, 20(4): 157-160.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08880450710843996

Thompson III, A. M. & Bono, B. A. (1993). Work without wages: the motivation for

volunteer Firefighters. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc. 52,

323-343.


district consolidation:An application of interpretive theory to public policy


Watson, P. (1994). Founding Mothers: The contribution of women’s organizations to

public library development in the United States. The Library Quarterly:

Information, Community, Policy, 64(3), pp 233-269.

Wiegand, W. (2005). Collecting contested titles: The experience of five small public

libraries in the rural Midwest, 1893-1956. Libraries & Culture, 40(3), 368-

384,222. Retrieved from


Woods, M.D. & Doeksen, G.A., & St. Clair, C. (2005). Measuring local economic

Impacts of the education sector. The Role of Education, 16-2

126

Appendix C

Qualitative Interview Protocol


1. How long have you lived in the rural community?

2. If you moved here why did you select this rural community?




closed?


in your community?


the students?


on your community?


school?





127

Appendix D


128


Member Needs to Know About the Social, Economic, and Human Capital

Costs of Closing a Rural School:


Chapter Four

The Impact on the Quality of Life in Rural Communities in New York

State

Due to a

School Closure: US Census Bureau Data Analysis

129

INTRODUCTION

Quality of Life in Rural Communities

Quality of life and sense of place are two related concepts that indicate how

individuals relate to their communities according to several contemporary researchers

(Bauch, 2009; Budge, 2006; Cross, 2001; Herzog & Pittman, 1995; Lyson, 2002;

Oncescu & Giles, 2012). How people feel about where they live is important in retaining

population especially in a historical time period when rural communities tend to lose

population. The community school is the heart and soul of the rural area (Dewey, 1922).

The greater the quality of life factors for a particular area or community, the greater the

possibility that a more positive “sense of place” will develop (Bauch, 2009; Budge,

2006). Many characteristics that are considered components of quality of life are also

identified as important to the development of a “sense of place” (Liu, 1976). Residents of

local communities share common interests and ideologies (Ward and Rink, 1992) and

these shared values are important in developing a “sense of place”.

According to Liu, a social statistical analyzer, “Quality of Life” is a name

frequently used for older terms such as “general welfare” or “social well-being” (1976, p

9-10). It should also be noted that the key documents relative to the founding of our

nation identify the expectation and desire for a “quality of life”. For example, Thomas

Jefferson included a reference in the Declaration of Independence 1776 to certain God

given inalienable rights chief of which are “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”

(Declaration of Independence, 1776). The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution also includes

the following key statement of our national goal “to promote the general welfare.” These

two historical documents are based on philosopher concepts developed and promulgated

130

during the Renaissance Period by such authors, John Locke, Jean Rousseau, and

Benjamin Franklin (Stossel, 1992). Although not known as “quality of life” until much

more recently, the concept of quality of life was clearly associated with the development

of the United States.

Liu (1976) suggested that there may be as many definitions for quality of life as

there are individuals. Perloff (1969), a contemporary researcher of Liu, specifically

viewed quality of life elements as a balance between inputs and outputs. Quality of life

may be defined as wellbeing, satisfaction or dissatisfaction with life and the state of

either happiness or unhappiness (Dalkey and Rourke, 1971). Although definitions of

quality of life vary from one individual to another, most people agree that quality of life

is very important in producing gratification or pleasure.

The presence of the local school often serves as the physical and conceptual focus

of small rural communities (Hyndman, Cleveland, & Huffman, 2010; Oncescu & Giles,

2012; Peshkin, 1982). The rural school has been metaphorically identified as “the glue”

that holds the community together (Hyndman et al, 2010). However, because the school

is “the glue”, communities rarely give up their local school voluntarily. The school in a

rural community serves as the focal point of community life in many ways including:

social, economic, political, and spiritual dimensions.

School buildings, also, function as central facilities for community events. The

school generates a strong sense of community identity and pride. If a school building

closes the effect on its community can be substantial. Peshkin, an educational sociologist,

stated “Viable villages generally contain schools; dying and dead ones either lack them or

do not have them for long” (1978, p. 161). Similar opinions to those initially articulated

131

by Peshkin regarding the future of communities that have lost their school buildings are

common according to several other researchers who have studied the impacts of school

closings upon their respective community contexts (Egelund & Laustsen, 2006; Oncescu

& Giles, 2012; Peshkin, 1982; Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Sell et al., 1996).

In addition to the sense of community and pride, rural communities face a

challenge of the loss of jobs and the subsequent loss of population when their local

school is closed. However, counterbalancing these threats to rural communities are the

historical quality of life and cultural sense of place experienced by rural residents that last

them a lifetime.

But, due to issues of efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of educational

services, there has been a prominent evaluation of the value of rural school districts in the

United States. This analysis has led to reorganizations, mergers, and consolidations.

These actions often result in closures of school buildings, especially buildings in

communities removed from the main school district campus site. School closures are

frequently justified by the local, regional, and state policy makers as saving money, and

improving the quality of education through economies of scale. However, researchers

have identified that once the monetary incentives furnished by the state expire, the local

tax savings disappear (Duncombe and Yinger, 2010; 2015). But, the cost to the rural

community in quality of life issues has frequently been ignored and rarely studied.

Many rural communities are not only losing population but also the availability of

employment to retain the local population as well as to attract new residents (Egelund &

Laustsen, 2006). The closing of a school building exacerbates these problems. The school

building has historically provided a major source of employment in rural communities

132

(Woods et al., 2005). Accordingly, when school jobs leave, the community suffers

directly from fewer jobs and indirectly from less income spent in the community

(Oncescu & Giles, 2012). Additionally, researchers have determined that parents of

students attending the reorganized or consolidated school spend money in that host

community and spend less in the community that has lost its school (Sell & Leistritz,

1997).

Quality of Life and Sense of Place

A 21st Century person might wonder why anyone would live in a rural community

given the problems faced by rural communities and their schools. The international trend

is for greater urbanization as individuals move from rural areas to urban centers. But, a

major factor that should be considered in maintaining rural areas is a “sense of place” or

“place-consciousness” (Bauch, 2009; Budge, 2006; Cross, 2001; Herzog & Pittman,

1995). Sense of place is not shaped by our genes but rather by a sense for our

surroundings (Gallagher, 1993, p.12). Just as migratory animals return to the location

where they were reared, people demonstrate a powerful attraction to their original home

or areas that feel like their home (Steele, 1981). Steele, (1981) repeats the old saw,

“everybody must be someplace, all the time” (Steele, 1981, p. 203). If individuals have

good memories of where they grew up, it results in a positive sense of place. Sense of

place allows individuals to honestly feel that “there is no place like home” despite the

hardships and limitations of their rural communities (Steele, 1981).

133


Another researcher who studied the impact of school closing on rural

communities, Budge (2006), recognized six specific habits of this “sense of place” that

most influence rural education and student learning. These six habits form the conceptual

framework of the entire three article investigation and are as follows: 1) connectedness,

2) development of identity and culture, 3) interdependence with the land, 4) spirituality,

5) ideology and politics, and 6) activism and civic engagement. The above, often referred

to as a “sense of place”, are major determinates of how well the school and community

interact for mutual benefit (Budge, 2006; Herzog & Pittman, 1995; Oncescu & Giles,

2012).

Relph (1976) identified three key components of a particular place and its

respective contextual uniqueness. One key component is its physical setting. However,

the other two include the activities and events associated with the context and the

personal evaluative measures resulting from peoples’ experiences and intuitions (Seamon

& Sowers, 2008). In the Seamon and Sowers reference text, Relph defines “insideness”

as the degree of attachment, involvement, and concern that a person has for an individual

location (Relph, 1976). A person who feels inside a place or feels like they “belong”,

subsequently, feels safe, enclosed, and at ease in that place (Seamon & Sowers, 2008).

Thus, the “sense of place” is a key aspect of personal growth and development as

articulated by Maslow in his seminal work, Motivation and personality (Maslow, 1954).

Contemporary individuals and, especially, families value such quality of life features that

are associated with rural life (Herriot, 1974). But, there are many quality of life features

134

that contribute to the sense of place attributes associated with rural community living

(Girouard, 1978; Jarrett, 1978).

Therefore, “Quality of life” and “sense of place” are interrelated concepts. The

greater the quality of life factors for a particular area or community the more likely a

more positive sense of place will develop (Seamon & Sowers, 2008). Residents of local

communities share common interests and ideologies (Ward & Rink, 1992). When

individuals in a community identify with the community in which they live, they have a

“protect their own” attitude (Heath & Heath, 2010, p 151). These shared values are

important in developing a sense of place as articulated by Relph (1976) and listed above.

Accordingly, geography and education seem to share the opportunity for

creativity and critical thinking (Gould and White, 1986; James, 2008). Since the

beginning of time, people have mental maps in their minds where their spatial territory is

located compared to the real world. Gould and White (1986) demonstrated that people

from different geographical areas view the world differently. People tend to be more

accurate when they consider geographical neighbors as threats or supports. In the current

world, where trade and manufacturing is becoming more global, geography must become

more dynamic (Friedman, 2005; Friedman & Mendelbaum, 2011). It is more important to

know the culture of the people in an emerging or developed country than it is to know

rote facts about another country.

In addition, the evolution of employment opportunities is trending toward project-

oriented tasks stressing creative and critical thinking (Cabanis, 2008). Individuals must

be flexible, often becoming self-employed entrepreneurs who may be working more from

home than from a distant office (James, 2008). This may have a positive impact in the

135

rural communities of America. Subsequently, employees may enjoy the quality of life of

a rural community while working from home. Also, as more people commute via mobile

devices or home computer systems, therefore, living near the work place becomes

increasingly much less important because more rural community residents can choose

quality of life rather than commuting to work. James (2008) states there will be a “Big

Revolution” in the way we will do business, especially in rural areas.

Related Quality of Life Studies

Lyson (2002) compared measures of quality of life for rural communities that had

a school with those communities that lacked a school. Accordingly, communities with

schools ranked higher in quality of life measures. Lyson (2002) compared data from

United States Census Bureau and New York State sources for quality of life variables

including: average income, percent of residents on government assistance, assessed

evaluation of homes, and demographics. In analyzing quality of life, Lyson’s (2002)

investigated the impact of not having a school on a community, but he did not investigate

the impact of a community having a school and then that school subsequently closing

which is the central focus of this comprehensive research investigation.

However, the quality of life of rural communities that have schools was higher

than the quality of life of those that did not have a school. Lyson’s (2002) study does not

show this directly because Lyson’s study demonstrated correlational relationships but not

direct cause and effect impact. In another related study, Dreier (1982) compared 11 rural

communities that had lost high schools with similar communities that had retained their

school. His findings identified that the total number of community services declined in all

11 communities where the school had been closed (Dreier, 1982).

136

Research Methods Used in the Trilogy Studies of this Dissertation

Research Questions of this Trilogy Study Dissertation

The overarching research question of the three studies that constitute this

dissertation investigation is: How does the loss of a school impact the quality of life in a

rural community? The following five questions are specific research queries that when




relationship between rural schools and the local quality of life?

Question 2: How does the local quality of life change in a rural

community when the local school is vacated in terms of the following factors: a)

connectedness, b) development of identity and culture, c) interdependence with

the land, d) spirituality, e) ideology and politics, and f) activism and civic

engagement?




school is vacated in terms of the following factors: a) population change, b) age

structure of population, c) number of household units d) occupancy and vacancy

of housing?

137

Question 5: Do education and average household income relate to a rural

community having or not having a school?

This specific investigation of the school closing trilogy study relates to an

analysis of US Census Bureau Data and directly provides pertinent information

related to the above research questions 4 and 5.

School District Mergers

In New York State there have been 12 school district mergers since 1996 (New

York State Association of School Business Officials, 2014). In addition, a number of

school districts have been reorganized resulting in the closure of some school buildings.

The researcher investigated which of these situations fit the time restrictions and

similarities to a nearby community that retains its school. Researchers who investigated

the impact of school closings on communities have identified that the effects of losing a

school building will be immediate to the students.

However, it may take a few years to see its effect on the community (Sell et al.,

1996). This lag in the total impact of closing a school is the reason that this researcher

decided to use data 4 to 5 years after the closing of the school building because any

changes in community demographics and economy may take a few years after the school

building closing to become identified as impactful. But, it is imperative to note that base

line data is more reliable from the time period before discussions and debates about the

closing of a school building begins in order to obtain an accurate historical perspective of

the subsequent impact of a school closing.

138

The intention of this researcher was to have a number of pairs of communities that

are similar in terms of those quality of life factors articulated by Lyson in 2002:

including: average income, percent of residents on government assistance, assessed

evaluation of homes, and personal demographics, but with one of the schools in each of

the pairs having been closed and the other still functioning as a school in the other

community. Subsequently, the researcher collected data for 12 schools that had closed in

communities and that had impacts on the various quality of life factors similar to those

articulated in the Lyson’s study (2002). The results of this investigation are presented in

tables and analyzed in this article. GIS mapping (Tomlinson, 1968) was used to further

enhance the display of data and contribute to the comprehension of the impact of school

closings on rural communities.

United States Census Data Issues

It should be noted that substantial United States Census Data is collected every

ten years (decennial census). Accordingly, U.S. Census questionnaires are sent to every

home in the United States. The majority of households receive the short form that simply

asks basic questions (age, sex, race, housing, and etc.). In addition, about 17% of

households receive the long form (United States Census Bureau, 2015). The long form

asks more detailed questions such as (veteran’s information, income, type of housing,

number of rooms in a house, levels of education, and etc.). However, there was a major

drawback of using the long form census data in a research study such as this one because

that long form census data was not current and readily available. But, in 2005 the

American Community Survey (ACS) was implemented to replace the Census Bureau

long form and this has been proven to be very useful in research.

139

The American Community Survey administers surveys every month to

representative samples of people in every community in the United States. Thus, the ACS

survey is based on a sample of a population, whereas the census data is based on every

individual in the population. Consequently, the ACS Survey extrapolates estimates from

population samples and the census produces counts of the entire population. The monthly

ACS surveys are compiled and analyzed and the data for a non-decennial year are

released yearly. This provides data that is quicker, more accurate, and more efficient than

a decennial census data

The results of these ACS Surveys are valuable to community leaders and policy

makers because they are used in determining how federal and state funds are distributed

(United States Census Bureau, 2015). These data are important for the community

members to complete because communities and businesses plan for the future based on

this data review of the past. The decennial census is intended to enumerate each and

every individual and his/her characteristics. Decennial census differs from the ACS

because every individual is counted in the United States. Since 2010 the United States

Census Bureau uses the short form census for decennial data collection (United States

Census Bureau, 2015). For purposes of this study, the researcher chose to use the data

from complete decennial census as often as appropriate.

Other studies (Drier 1982; Ward & Rink 1992; Sell & Leistritz 1997; Egelund &

Laustsen 2006; Oncescu & Giles 2012) have posited that the closing of a school building

may result in a change in a number of key community demographic factors. In this study,

communities that have had a school closed are compared to the community that received

140

students from the closed school. Data from the United States Census Bureau regarding

both communities facilitates this comparison.

Rationale for this Study

One of the most pervasive educational policy orientations in the United States

continues to be the merger or consolidation of smaller school districts into larger districts.

The major justifications for this policy are the economies of scale, lowering school

expenses, and increasing in the quality of education (Sell & Leistritz 1997; Duncombe &

Yinger 2001; 2005; 2010; 2015; Heiser 2013). However, there is always a personal

dimension to school closings and the experiences of this researcher was the key

motivation for this research investigation because when the researcher’s community

school was ear marked for possible closing due to reorganization of the school district,

the researcher became acutely interested in studying the effects of rural school closings

on the community in terms of both human and capital costs. But, a comprehensive related

literature review suggests that the social cost may outweigh the potential economic gain

and the personal interactions of the researcher with other community members as well as

the “feeling tone” in the community ear marked for school closure gave impetus to

further investigate the school closing impact on rural quality of life in contemporary

America.

Leadership and Policy Focused on Rural Communities

The writer of this research study has had an avid interest in the various social,

economic, political, and spiritual aspects of contemporary rural community life. Previous

studies conducted by this researcher have included investigations into the following

141

issues: How do rural schools impact rural communities? How do volunteer firefighters

feel about the decline in the number of membership in rural communities? What is the

contemporary role of public libraries in rural communities? And, what are the corporate

and business interactions within the rural community it serves? However, during this

recent period of rural community involvement and study, the researcher’s community

school was closed. Subsequently, the researcher developed a multi-faceted research study

to comprehensively investigate the effects that school closings have on local rural

communities. The study is a trilogy investigation that included quantitative surveys,

qualitative interviews, and analysis of existing census data. However, it should be noted,

that what initially seemed to be a straight-forward project quickly proven to be much

more difficult in terms of investigative time and energy. The initial intention of the

research was to compare quality of life measures similar to those of Lyson (2002) for

various communities before and after a rural school closed. School building closings

were to be selected for analysis based on a number of predetermined criteria such as: the

closed school building had to be closed within the last 15 years, located at least 5 to7

miles from the main district campus and in a community of less than 2,500 residents.

Generally, a rural area encompasses less than 2,500 people and is not adjacent to an

urban area or urban cluster (Barley and Beesley 2007; Lyson 2002). But, it must be

emphasized that over half of the public schools and 10 million students in the United

States are located in rural areas (Provasni et al., 2007).

Procedures for Data Collection and Analysis for this Study

As a result of conducting the initial phases for data collection procedures, the

researcher became aware that once a school closes it is difficult to retrieve information

142

about that school building because the key people have been dispersed and the focus is on

the present and future of education in the community and not necessarily on the historical

past. The researcher started in early May 2015 trying to find the school districts in New

York State that had recent building closures. The researcher started with contacting

former Chancellor Emeritus, Robert Bennett of the New York State Board of Regents. He

provided the researcher with key references and resources to contact in order to collect

information about recent school closing in New York State.

In New York State, there have been 26 mergers or reorganizations of schools in

rural areas since 1986. The article, Why do school district mergers fail? A policy brief

with Recommendations, authored by the New York State Association of School Business

Officials, (2014) was selected as a seminal reference for this comprehensive

investigation. Accordingly, since 2005 there were six schools that merged: Maplewood

and North Colonie merged in 2008; Oppenheim- Ephratah and St. Johnsville merged in

2012; and Illion and Mohawk in 2013 (New York State Association of School Business

Officials, 2014.) The researcher decided not to use the 2012 and 2013 school mergers

because they merged too close to the commencement of this research study in 2015 and

the comprehensive impact of those mergers would not be realized for another two or

more years. The researcher wanted schools that had been closed for at least four to five

years because she thought it would still be fresh in the minds of the people and the

comprehensive effects of the closures would have had some significance to the

community. It was at this point that the researcher realized the difficulty in finding both

the school buildings that had closed in the past and that also met her criteria for inclusion

in this study. In addition, it also became evident that even though a school district merged

143

it did not mean that a specific school building was closed on the same date as the merger

concluded. Thus, some school districts have merged but with no subsequent school

building closures and, consequently, would were not included in this study.

At this point in time, the investigation work to select the schools for this study

began in earnest because the researcher had to determine which merged districts had a

closed school building as a consequence of their respective merger.

Former Regent Robert Bennett was again contacted for help because there was no

response from those resource people he had initially recommended and assistance from

statewide representatives was delayed or not useful for this study. The researcher began

to call the identified schools districts directly to ascertain when the school building

closed, where the old school building was located, and why it closed as well as the size of

the local student population and general population. This personal approach included

contacting school officials by e-mail or telephone. This process was both time

consuming, taking over two months and at times frustrating as responses from some

school officials were limited due to the perception that consolidation was the favored

approach advocated by the New York State Education Department.

Once schools were identified the next step for the researcher was to examine if the

closed school building was in a separate community at least five to seven or more miles

from the host school. This distance was previously established as a key criteria for

selecting schools for inclusion in the study so that there would be a site location

difference between schools. By the end of July, 2015 the researcher had chosen the 12

school buildings that had closed and also were congruent with the study criteria.

144

Concurrently with the above processes, the researcher thought U.S. Census

Bureau data would be easily accessible. However, when looking for data 4 years before

and 4 years after a school building closes, the researcher found it difficult to retrieve data

before 2000. The 2000 census data are actual counts and, generally, reflect key

demographic factors. But, Census Bureau data from 2001 to 2009 are estimates and not

full counts. However, the estimates are not available for all categories. As one gets closer

to the next decennial (ten years) census, estimates for 2001 through 2005 are not likely to

be available on-line. This may because the Census Bureau views earlier estimates as less

accurate. Since the full census is collected every ten years, the researcher inquired from

other researchers and official policy makers how to retrieve additional useful census data.

A call to Representative Chris Collins’s office proved to be helpful. It was

suggested that the researcher contact the U.S. Census Library in Washington DC. The

researcher called the call center and they gave the researcher the direct e-mail to the U.S.

Census Library. The researcher sent them an extensive e-mail identifying the specific

data that was needed for this specific study. But, again the information received had

limitations and the researcher determined that she would not be able to gather complete

data for each of the12 school buildings that closed. However, the researcher was able to

glean key information from all 12 school building closures.

Dr. Rachael Rossi, served as a valuable consultant to the researcher and together

they created GIS reference maps related to New York State that included the 12 closed

school buildings for ease of geographical and conceptual references. The researcher also

constructed a Table with 12 school buildings that have closed. In addition, using GIS

145

concepts and software the researcher gathered and mapped data for five sets of schools

that chose not to merge.

The researcher quickly realized that she was a pioneer in this study and wanted it

to be as accurate, valid, and reliable as possible given the various limitations encountered

and the leadership perceptions expressed in various ways. It is likely the next researcher

will be building their study upon the findings of this study. However, the “Quality of life”

is a very important factor in decision-making in the rural community and should be

comprehensively investigated and analyzed whenever school closures or mergers are

being considered by policy makers, educational administrators and community leaders.

Sample Selection of Study Schools

The researcher reviewed different scholarly articles on the effects of school

closures across the United States to further substantiate the decision making processes

employed to exclude some schools from the sample and include others. These articles of

most pertinence to this Census Data based investigation include:

Dreier (1982), What happens when the high school leaves the community?

Duncombe & Yinger (2010) School district consolidation: The benefits

and costs

Hyndman, Cleveland & Huffman (2010) Consolidation of small, rural

schools in one southeastern Kentucky District

Lyson (2002) What does a school mean to a community? Assessing the

social and economic benefits of schools to rural villages in New York

146

Sell, R. S. & Leistritz, L. (1997), Socioeconomic impacts of school

consolidation on host and vacated communities.

The authors of these articles contend that the impact on the children of the vacated school

building occurs quickly. However, the impact on the community takes place over a

longer period of time (Sell et al., 1996, p 10).

Limitations Associated with School Selection

Several criteria were considered in selecting which communities were compared

for demographic factors. The researcher examined factors such as age, population,

education, income, housing units, occupancies, and vacancies. The demographic factors

that were comparable were somewhat limited because different census years were

employed and the data reported were not always similar. But, communities that had a

school building that closed were selected if their populations were approximately 2,500

or less. The closed school had to be located in a community several miles from the

merged or reorganized currently open school. In addition, the school building closing had

to have occurred far enough in the past so that post-closing census data were available.

Subsequently, a number of school buildings that closed were eliminated from the study

because they did not meet the above criteria. The reasons that certain closed schools were

selected and others were not selected as part of this study are further discussed below

based on the following: Geographical Considerations, Population Considerations,

Distance Considerations, Census Tract Considerations, Time Considerations

Geographical Considerations

147

The five towns: Callicoon, Delaware, Narrowsburg, Cochecton, and Bethel are

located in Sullivan County. The Sullivan West Central School District is one of the

largest school districts in area in upstate New York. The Duggan Elementary School

located in the Town of Bethel was closed as part of the reorganization of the Monticello

Central School District. In addition, Sullivan County has an influx of tourists especially

from New York City because it is well-known as a vacation paradise for site seeing,

hiking, fishing, hunting, and canoeing; making it difficult to separate short term rentals

from local permanent residents.

Population Considerations

The Towns of Bethel (population =4,221), Delaware (population = 2,709), and

Callicoon (population = 3,088) each have town populations greater than 2,500. The

researcher chose to include them in the study because none of these three towns had a

high school. In addition they served as good comparisons with the neighboring schools

already included in the study. The school enrollment for Duggan Elementary in the Town

of Bethel was only 222 students in the year 2000. Delaware Valley Elementary in the

Town of Delaware had 394 students. For comparison, the population and student

enrollment is given for the Towns of Tusten, Callicoon, and Cochecton. The Jefferson-

Youngsville School in the Town of Callicoon had 334 students in the year 2000. The

population for Town of Tusten (Narrowsburg School) was 1,415 for the year 2000 and

the enrollment of Narrowsburg School was 248 students. The population for the Town of

Cochecton (Sullivan West High School, located at Lake Huntington) was 1,328 and the

student enrollment of Lake Huntington High School was 243 students in the year 2000.

148

Distance Considerations

New Berlin and South New Berlin merged to form Unadilla Valley Central

School in 1996. Unadilla Valley built a new school in 2002 between the closed school

buildings. The new school was no longer in the middle of town but about 4 miles

between the villages. Neither community is likely to be negatively affected with the new

school located between them. Therefore, this merger was not considered suitable for this

study.

The Kinderhook (Ichabod Crane) Central School District reorganized and closed

two elementary schools in 2012. The Martin Van Buren Elementary School was located

2.8 miles from the Kinderhook (Ichabod Crane) main campus. The Martin H. Glynn

Elementary School was located 2 miles from the Kinderhook main campus. The

researcher chose to bypass Kinderhook Central School because the closed schools were

so close to the existing main campus of Kinderhook. In addition, because the elementary

schools were closed in 2012, there were limited census data from the date that the school

buildings were closed.

Census Tract Considerations

West Frankfort Elementary School was closed in 2010 as a result of the

reorganization of the Frankfort-Schuyler Central School District. The closed school was

far enough from the main campus to meet the criteria of this study. However, both

schools were located in the town of Frankfort. It is difficult to separate census data for

West Frankfort from Frankfort. Therefore, the West Frankfort School building was

eliminated from this study.

149

Chautauqua Central School and Mayville Central School merged in 1996. A new

school building was built and opened in the year 2000, just outside the village of

Mayville. Chautauqua Central School building was rejected from this study because

Chautauqua and Mayville are in the same census tract. Since Chautauqua and Mayville

are both in the same census tract the data are the same for both school districts so they

were not selected.

Time Considerations

Greenwood Central School merged with Canisteo Central School in 2004. The

Greenwood School building closed in 2013. The researcher felt that the period of time

between the closing of Greenwood and the commencement of this study was not enough

time to allow for any significant changes in the Greenwood community.

The Fowler Elementary School located in the hamlet of Fowler was closed due to

Gouverneur Central School reorganization in 2013. This is only the latest of a number of

school building closings in the Gouverneur Central School District related to population

decline since 1976. This resulted from the closing of zinc and talc mines in this rural area

of New York. The North Country was economically dependent on these mines and lost

about 1,000 students since 1976 when people left the area after the mines closed. The

reason the researcher did not select Fowler Elementary School was the district closed the

school building in 2013.

The W. H. Stevenson Elementary School located in Ransomville was closed in

2014 as a result of reorganization of the Wilson Central School District. This school was

150

excluded from the study because there has only been one year since the school was

closed.

Additional Information about Schools Closures and Mergers

Table 1 provides general information about school district closures in New York

State from 1986- 2014. Column A “Closed Schools” lists the 24 “Closed Schools”.

Column B “Host Schools” lists the schools that accepted the children from the “Closed

Schools” in Column A. Column C “School District” list the current school districts where

the children from both schools attend. Column D “Merged/Reorganized” identifies

whether the schools merged or reorganized. Column E “Date Merged” identifies the date

the specific school was merged with the host school. Column F “Date Closed” identifies

the date that a specific school was closed in the community.

Table 1 General Information on Closed Schools in New York State 1986-2014

Closed Schools

Host Schools School District Merged /

Reorganized Date

Merged Date

Closed

Angelica Genesee Valley Genesee Valley Merged 1996 2003

Belmont Genesee Valley Genesee Valley Merged 1996 2003 Narrowsburg ES Sullivan West Sullivan West Merged 1999 2005 Delaware Valley ES Sullivan West Sullivan West Merged 1999 2005

Little Valley Cattaraugus Cattaraugus-Little Valley Merged 2000 2012

Duggan ES Monticello Monticello Reorganization 2010

Williamstown Altmar-Parish-Williamstown

Altmar-Parish-Williamstown Reorganization 2009

Altmar ES Altmar-Parish-Williamstown


Parish ES Altmar-Parish-Williamstown


Cherry Valley


Cherry Valley-Springfield Merged 1986 1989

Springfield Cherry Valley-Springfield

Cherry Valley-Springfield Merged 1986 1989

West Frankfort ES Frankfort-Schuyler Frankfort-Schuyler Reorganization 2010

151

Rushford Cuba Cuba-Rushford Merged 1991 2012

Limestone Allegany Allegany-Limestone Merged 1995 2010

Brant ES Lake Shore Lake Shore Reorganization 2010 Chautauqua K-12 Chautauqua Lake Chautauqua Lake Merged 1996 2000 Mayville K-12 Chautauqua Lake Chautauqua Lake Merged 1996 2000 New Berlin (2 SB) Unadilla Valley Unadilla Valley Merged 1996 2002 South New Berlin Unadilla Valley Unadilla Valley Merged 1996 2002

Greenwood Canisteo-Greenwood Canisteo-Greenwood Merged 2004 2013

Fowler ES Gouverneur Gouverneur Reorganization 2013 Martin Van Buren

Kinderhook (Ichabod Crane) Kinderhook Reorganization 2012

Martin H. Glynn

Kinderhook (Ichabod Crane) Kinderhook Reorganization 2012

Ransomville ES Wilson Wilson Reorganization 2014

Table 2 shows school districts that school leaders and policy-makers decided to

investigate merger potential. However, those mergers were rejected by one or both

communities of the respective proposed merger. Districts indicated by the asterisks are

the school districts for which the researcher retrieved 2010 U.S. Census data for

comparisons of quality of life issues.

Table 2 Rejected School District Mergers Since 2009

School District 1 and School District 2 Year Rejected *Ripley and * Westfield 2009 *Scio and * Wellsville 2010 Lake Pleasant and Wells 2011 Kinderhook and Schodack 2012 Herkimer and Frankfort-Schuyler 2013 Glens Falls City and Glens Falls Common 2013 *Brocton and * Westfield 2013 Seneca Falls and Waterloo 2013 Southampton and Tuckahoe Common 2013 Madison and Stockbridge Valley 2013 Romulus and South Seneca 2013 Candor and Spencer Van Etten 2013

152

Crown Point and Ticonderoga 2013 Chenango Forks and Chenango Valley 2013 Hamilton and Morrisville-Eaton 2013 *Barker and *Lyndonville 2013 Mayfield and Northville 2014 *Canton and *Potsdam 2014

Figure 1. Successful and Unsuccessful Mergers of New York State School Districts.

Source: New York State Association of School Business Officials 2014

The above map (Figure 1) of New York State Districts illustrates successfully

merged school districts in green, school districts that rejected possible mergers in red, and

school districts that were in the process of investigating a possible school district merger

at the time of publication in yellow (New York State Association of School Business

Officials, 2014). By 2014 the school districts indicated by the color yellow had rejected

their attempts to merge. The researcher added to Table 2 the Ripley and Westfield

rejected merger that occurred in 2009 and the Barker and Lyndonville rejected merger

that occurred in 2013 (Heiser, 2013). These were added because they were not previously

153

identified in prior official listings of school closures. It should be noted that the

researcher did not include Long Island schools because they are part of a New York City

metropolitan region or town populations were greater than 2,500 residents.

Figure 2. Twelve School Buildings in New York Closed

The above map illustrates the locations of closed schools in up-state New York.

Selection of 12 School Districts for the Study

Therefore, the 12 schools selected for this study are located in rural areas of upstate New York State. The following Table 3 summarizes the 12 schools selected for this study.

154

Table 3 The 12 School Selected for this Study

School District

Town County Date

Reorganized or Merged

Closed Date

New School Name


Merged


Merged


Merged Delaware

Valley Delaware Sullivan 1999 2005 Sullivan West

Merged

Little Valley Little Valley Cattaraugus 2000 2012 Cattaraugus-Little Valley

Merged


Reorganized

Williamstown Williamstown Oswego 2009 2009

Altmar-Parish-Williamstown

Reorganized

Cherry Valley Cherry Valley Otsego 1986 1989


Merged

Springfield Springfield Otsego 1986 1989


Merged


Merged


Merged

Brant Brant Erie 2010 2010 Lake Shore Reorganized

155

The towns of each of the selected 12 school districts of the study (Table 3 above)

were compared to the towns where its school building was retained after their merger. In

most cases one town or community closed its school while the other town or community

retained its school building. In two cases the school districts built a new central school

after the merger was approved.

The Angelica Central School District merged with Belmont Central School

District in 1996 forming the Genesee Valley Central School District. Both of these

original school buildings closed in 2003 and the students attended the new school that

was located in the village of Belmont, Town of Amity. In another case, Cherry Valley

Central School District merged with Springfield Central School District in 1986 forming

the Cherry Valley-Springfield Central School District. Both of these original school

buildings closed in 1989 and the students attended the new school which was located in

the Town of Cherry Valley.

Sullivan West Central School District was a result of a three-way merger.

Jefferson-Youngsville Central School District, Delaware Valley Central School District,

and Narrowsburg Central School District merged in 1999. After the merger Narrowsburg

and Delaware Valley Schools were closed in 2005. The Jefferson-Youngsville

Elementary School was maintained for the Sullivan West School District in the Town of

Callicoon. The newly built Sullivan West Junior-Senior School opened in 2005 and is

located in Lake Huntington, Town of Cochecton.

Brant, Duggan, and Williamstown schools closed as a result of reorganization.

Lake Shore Central School District closed the Brant school building closed in 2010

located in the Town of Brant. Monticello Central School District closed the Duggan

156

School building in 2010 located in the Town of Bethel. Altmar-Parish-Williamstown

(APW) closed the Williamstown School building in 2009 located in the Town of

Williamstown.

The remaining three schools selected, Little Valley, Rushford, and Limestone

were typical mergers where the smaller school district closed their school. The Little

Valley Central School District merged with the Cattaraugus Central School District

forming Cattaraugus-Little Valley Central School District in the Town of New Albion in

the year 2000. The Little Valley students continued to attend their school until it was

closed in 2012. The Little Valley Central School District closed in 2012. The Rushford

Central School District merged with the Cuba Central School District forming Cuba-

Rushford in the Town of Cuba in 1991. Rushford students continued to attend the

Rushford School until it was closed in 2012. The Limestone Central School District

merged with Allegany Central School District forming Allegany-Limestone Central

School District in 1995. The Limestone Central School District closed in 2010. The

Limestone students continued to attend the Limestone School until it was closed in 2010.

Statistical Procedures and Applications

The following Figure 3 illustrates the 2 X 2 Contingency Table procedure used

for statistical comparisons and analysis in this study. The 2 X 2 table is based on the work

of Siegel (1956) and incorporates this formula:

Chi-Square = N ((ǀ AD)) – (BC ǀ) –N/2)2 / (A+B) (C+D) (A+C) (B+D)

Degrees of Freedom (df) = 1

157

Figure 3 2 X 2 Contingency Table (Siegel, 1956)

A B

C D

Explanation for the use of the 2 X 2 Contingency Table in this Study

For this study, two specific school districts were compared for two different

categories such as: population; occupied or vacant housing; number of residents age less

than 65 or 65 or greater. Calculate Chi-Square value using the formula above.

Once the Chi-Square value was calculated, use the Critical Values of Chi-Square

Table to determine the level of statistical significance with 1 degree of freedom. To be

statistically significant at the p< 0.05, the Chi-Square must be 3.84 or greater.

Results of the 2 X 2 Statistical Analysis Process

The Cherry Valley and Springfield Central School Districts merged in 1986. The

merged district built a new school building between the two existing schools that opened

in 1989. The new school has a Cherry Valley address. The communities of Cherry Valley

and Springfield were compared for several measures of “quality of life”. The researcher

chose to organize the statistical tables by school districts to make is easier for the reader

to view the data analysis by each school district.

Pre and Post school closing United States Census data for the two communities

were compared. Cherry Valley showed a small increase (5.1%) in population from 1980

158

to 2000. Springfield had a 38.9 % decrease over the same time period. This difference is

statistically significant between the Cherry Valley and Springfield communities.

Table 4 2X2 Contingency Table for Cherry Valley-Springfield CSD

Population Changes over time 1980-2000 for Town of Cherry Valley and the Town of Springfield

Year Town of Cherry Valley Town of Springfield Total

1980 1205 2210 3415

2000 1266 1350 2616

Total 2471 3560 6031

Chi‐Square = 104.7 p<0.001

Table 4 compares population change for Cherry Valley and Springfield from 1980

to 2000. Cherry Valley shows a small increase in population of 5.1%, yet Springfield had

a 38.9% decrease of population. Chi-Square which equals 104.7 indicates an statistically

significant difference (p<0.001) in population change between Cherry Valley and

Springfield communities.

Housing vacancies is another measure of the health of rural communities.

Housing vacancies in rural communities generally indicate a loss of population or a loss

of income.

Vacant houses frequently become dilapidated and impacts the economic value of

nearby housing (Liu, 1976; Castells 2010).

159


Occupied and Vacant Households in year 2000 for the Town of Cherry Valley and Town of Springfield

Year 2000 Town of Cherry Valley Town of Springfield Total

Occupied 471 532 1003

Vacant 147 191 338

Total 618 723 1341

2X2 Contingency Table Chi Square 1.09 p>0.20

Table 5 above compares the occupancy and vacancy rates in year 2000 for the

Cherry Valley and Springfield communities. Although the rate of vacancies for

Springfield (26.4%) was higher than for Cherry Valley (23.8%), the differences in rates

were not statistically significant for the year 2000.


Occupied and Vacant Households in Cherry Valley and Springfield in 2010 Year 2010 Cherry Valley Springfield Total

Occupied 511 569 1080

Vacant 178 258 436

Total 689 827 1516

Chi‐Square 5.02 P< 0.05

Table 6 above compares the occupancy and vacancy rates in the year 2010 for

Cherry Valley and Springfield communities. The vacancy rate for Springfield (31.2%)

was statistically significantly greater than for Cherry Valley (25.8%) in the year 2010.

Chi-Square equals 5.02; p<0.05.

160

Figure 4 School Buildings Closed in Central New York State

The Angelica and Belmont Central School Districts merged in 1996 to form the

Genesee Valley Central School District. The combined districts built a new school in

Belmont that opened in 2003. Both the original Angelica and the original Belmont School

closed at that time.

161

Table 7 2X2 Contingency Table for Genesee Valley CSD (Angelica and Belmont Schools)

Angelica and Belmont Population Change Over Time

Year Town of Angelica Town of Amity Total

1990 1418 2255 3673

2000 1411 2245 3656

Total 2829 4500 7329

Chi-Square = 0 p>0.01

Table 7 above compares population change in Angelica and Belmont

communities between 1990 and 2000. Both Angelica and Belmont communities showed

a small decrease of population. The decrease for Angelica was 0.49%; the decrease for

Belmont was 0 .44%. The observed and expected values for the 2X2 Contingency Table

are identical. Therefore, there is no statistically significant difference in population for

the two communities during this period of time. This is not surprising because the new

school district did not open until 2003. The old schools closed the same year.

Table 8 Genesee Valley CSD (Angelica and Belmont Schools)

Town of Angelica and Town of Amity Population Over Time

Year Angelica Belmont Total

2000 1411 2245 3656

2010 1403 2308 3711

Total 2814 4553 7367

2X2 Contingency Table Chi‐Square = 0.45 p>0.50

Table 8 above compares population change for Angelica and Belmont for both

2000 and 2010. Angelica had a 0.57% decrease in population between 2000 and 2010.

162

Belmont had a 2.8% increase in population between 2000 and 2010. These differences

were not statistically significant (p>0.50, Table 8).

Table 9 Genesee Valley CSD (Angelica and Belmont Schools)

Occupied and Vacant Households

in the Town of Angelica and the Town of Amity

Year 2000 Angelica Amity Total

Occupied 564 885 1449

Vacant 210 235 445

Total 774 1120 1894

Chi-Square =28.8 p<0.01

Table 9 above compares the occupancy and vacancy rates in the year 2000 for

Angelica and Belmont communities. The vacancy rate for Angelica was 27.1% of

housing units. The vacancy rate for Belmont was 21.0% of housing units. A 2X2

contingency table produced a Chi-Square value of 28.8 that is a statistically significantly

greater vacancy rate for Angelica compared to Belmont (p<0.01) in the year 2000.

163

Figure 5 School Buildings Closed in Western New York State

Sullivan County

There is constant interest in Sullivan County real estate by people largely from the

New York City area (Knudsen, 2015). These individuals buy property and houses to

serve as second homes or for investment purposes. Narrowsburg, Callicoon, and

Jeffersonville are the hamlets and a village respectively most chosen for summer homes

in Sullivan County because of their quaint ambience and Norman Rockwell style. As a

destination place, Narrowsburg is home to Delaware Valley Opera, Delaware Valley Arts

Alliance, and several festivals that attract tourists. Surrounding areas include tourist

attractions such as Woodstock and the Woodstock Museum. However, the Narrowsburg

164

K-6 school building closed in 2005 in the Town of Tusten. This was replaced in part by a

new Junior High and High School located in Lake Huntington in the town of Cochecton.

Jeffersonville is a village in the town of Callicoon in Sullivan County. The town

of Callicoon is known for its seasonal tourism. The school building that housed the

Jefferson-Youngsville Central School District is now the location for the Sullivan West

Elementary School. The village of Jeffersonville is also home of the Western Sullivan

Public Library. In addition to its Norman Rockwell style, Callicoon boasts of a privately

owned, 1948 single screen theater which creates a unique experience for residents and

visitors alike.

Table 10 2X2 Contingency Table: Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-Youngsville Campus and Delaware Valley School)

Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for the Town of Callicoon and the Town of

Delaware

Year 2000 Callicoon Town Delaware Town Total

Less than 65 2501 2331 4832

65 and Greater 551 388 939

Total 3052 2719 5771

Chi-Square = 15.4 p< 0 .01

The researcher compared the information about the towns as shown in Table 10.

The town of Callicoon, where the Jefferson-Youngsville campus is located, was

compared with the Town of Delaware where the Delaware Valley School was closed in

2005. The Jefferson-Youngsville campus is currently part of the Sullivan West Central

165

School District. The percentage of residents 65 or older was statistically significantly

greater for Callicoon than for Delaware, Chi-Square = 15.4; p< 0.01 for the year 2000.

The percentage of residents 65 and older for the Town of Callicoon was not

statistically significant compared to the percentage for the Town of Delaware for the year

2010. As shown below in Table 11 the Chi-Square = 0.96; p> 0.50.

Table 11 2X2 Contingency Table for Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-Youngsville Campus and Delaware Valley School)

Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for the Town of Callicoon and the Town of Delaware

Year 2010 Callicoon Town Delaware Town Total

Less than 65 2480 2192 4672 65 or Greater 577 478 1055 Total 3057 2670 5727

Chi‐Square = 0.96 p>0.50

Table 12 2X2 Contingency Table for Sullivan West CSD (Lake Huntington Campus and Narrowsburg School)

Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for the Town of Cochecton and the Town of Tusten

Year 2000 Cochecton Town Tusten Town Total

Less than 65 1097 1118 2215

65 and Greater 231 297 528

Total 1328 1415 2743

Chi-Square = 5.5 p< 0.05

As shown in Table 12 above, the percentage of residents age 65 or older is greater

for the Town of Tusten (21.0 %) than for the Town of Cochecton (17.4 %) for the year

2000. This difference is statistically significant, Chi-Square 5.5; p< 0.05.

166

However, as shown below in Table 13, the percentage of residents age 65 or older

did not differ significantly between the Town of Cochecton and to the Town of Tusten in

the year 2010 (Chi-Square = 0.35; p> 0.50).


Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for the Town of Cochecton and the Town of Tusten

Year 2010 Town of Cochecton Tusten Town Total

Less than 65 1089 1215 2304

65 and Greater 283 300 583

Total 1372 1515 2887

Chi-Square = 0.35 p>0 .50

As shown below in Table 14, the population for the Town of Callicoon grew by

1.2% between 2000 and 2010. The population for the Town of Delaware decreased by

0.4% during the same 10 year period. However, the difference in population change

between the two towns was not statistically significant (Chi-Square = 0.17; p> 0.70).

167


Population Change over Ten Years for the Towns of Callicoon and the Town of Delaware

Year Town of Callicoon Town of Delaware Total

2000 3052 2719 5771

2010 3088 2709 5797

Total 6140 5428 11568


As shown below Table 15 illustrates the comparison of the population change for

the years (2000-2010) in the Town Cochecton, the home of Sullivan West Junior and

Senior High School with the Town of Tusten the former home of the Narrowsburg

School.

As shown below in Table 15 the population of the Town of Cochecton increased

by 2.6% between 2000 and 2010. During the same period the population of the Town of

Tusten increased by 8.2%. The changes in population between the Town of Cochecton

and the Town of Tusten did not differ significantly (Chi-Square = 1.06; p>0.30).

168


Population Change over Ten Years for: the Town of Cochecton and the Town of Narrowsburg

Year Town of Cochecton Town of Tusten Total

2000 1328 1415 2743

2010 1362 1531 2743

Total 2690 2946 5636

Chi-Square = 1.06 p> .30


Change in the Number of Housing Units over Ten Years for the Town of Cochecton and the Town of Tusten

Year Town of Cochecton Town of Tusten Total

2000 955 1008 1963

2010 1114 1138 2252

Total 2069 2146 4215

Chi-Square = 0.70 p> 0.50

Table 16 illustrates the comparison of the number of housing units in the Town

Cochecton, the home of Sullivan West Junior and Senior High School with the Town of

Tusten the former home of the Narrowsburg School.

169

The change in the number of housing units over ten years (2000 – 2010) for the

Town of Cochecton was an increase of (16.6%). The Town of Tusten was an increase of

12.9% in the number of housing units of (12.9%) for 2000-2010. This difference was not

statistically significant (Chi-Square=0.70; p>0.50.)

As indicated below in Table 17, the change in housing units over ten years for the

Town of Callicoon was an increase of 11.5%. The change in housing units for the Town

of Delaware was an increase of 14.8%. A comparison of the two towns did not show a

statistically significant difference in the change of number of housing units (Chi-

Square=0.33; p>0.70).


Change in the Number of Housing Units over Ten Years for the Town of Callicoon and the Town of Delaware

Year Town of Callicoon Town of Delaware Total

2000 1797 1337 3134

2010 2003 1535 3538

Total 3800 2872 6672


When the Monticello Central School District reorganized in 2010 the Duggan

Elementary School in the Town of Bethel, New York was closed at that time. The village

of Monticello is located in the Town of Thompson, Sullivan County, New York.

Monticello’s population (6,726) is considerably greater than Bethel’s population.

Therefore, the changes in “quality of life” metrics for Bethel were compared to those of

170

Callicoon and Cochecton in the nearby Sullivan West School District. The towns of

Callicoon and Cochecton retained their local schools in the Sullivan West School

District. The Town of Callicoon had a small increase in population of 1.2% over 10 years

(Table 18 below). The Town of Cochecton had an increase in population of 2.6% over

the same period (Table 19 below).

The Town of Bethel lost 6.3% of its population over a similar time period.

Population loss for the Town of Bethel was statistically significantly greater than for the

Town of Callicoon. A 2x2 Contingency Table yielded a Chi-Square of 5.27; p< 0.05.

Population loss was also statistically significantly greater for the Town of Bethel

compared to the Town of Cochecton (2x2 Contingency Table, Chi-Square = 4.13; p<

0.05).

Table 18 2X2 Contingency Table for Duggan Elementary School and Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-Youngsville Campus)

Population Change over Ten Years for the Town of Bethel and the Town of Callicoon

Year Town of Bethel Town of Callicoon Total

2000 4506 3052 7058

2010 4221 3088 7309

Total 8727 6140 14867


171

Table 19 2X2 Contingency Table for Duggan Elementary School and Sullivan West CSD (Lake Huntington Campus)

Population Change over Ten Years for the Town of Bethel and the Town Cochecton

Year Town of Bethel Town of Cochecton Total

2000 4506 1328 5834

2010 4221 1362 5583

Total 8727 2690 11417


Table 20 2X2 Contingency Table for Duggan Elementary School and Sullivan West CSD (Jefferson-Youngsville Campus)

Occupied and Vacant Households in the Town of Bethel and the Town of Callicoon for the year 2010

Year 2010 Town of Bethel Town of Callicoon Total

Occupied 1721 1463 3184

Vacant 2415 659 3074

Total 4136 2122 6258

Chi-Square = 410.7 p< 0.001

The United States Census Bureau reported a total of 4,136 housing units for the

Town of Bethel (Table 20 above). An unusually high percent of the housing units

(58.4%) was vacant in Bethel. This value was statistically significantly greater than the

percent of vacant housing units for the nearby Town of Callicoon (30.3%). A 2X2

Contingency Table yielded a Chi-Square of 410.7; p< 0.001.

172

A similar outcome (Table 21) below resulted when housing unit vacancy was

compared between the Town of Bethel and the nearby Town of Cochecton for the year

2010. The Town of Cochecton had a housing unit vacancy rate of 45.8% compared to

58.4% for the Town of Bethel. A 2X2 Contingency Table produced a Chi-Square of 57.1;

p< 0.001.

Table 21 2X2 Contingency Table for Duggan Elementary School and Sullivan West CSD

Occupied and Vacant Households in the Town of Bethel and the Town of Cochecton for the year 2010

Year 2010 Town of Bethel Town of Cochecton Total

Occupied 1721 604 2325

Vacant 2415 510 2925

Total 4136 1114 5250

Chi-Square = 57.1 p< 0.001

Allegany-Limestone Central School District in Cattaraugus County merged in

1995. The Limestone Central School in Cattaraugus County closed in 2010. Limestone

located in the town of Carrollton has lost 19.6% of its population between 2000 and

2013. The Town of Allegany has lost only 3.7% of its population over the same period.

This statistically significant difference (Table 22 shown below, Chi-Square=17.4; p<

0.001) has led to Limestone nearly losing its identity.

173

Table 22 2X2 Contingency Table for Allegany-Limestone CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for the Town of Allegany and the Town of Carrollton

Year Town of Allegany Town of Carrollton Total

2000 8230 1410 9640

2013 7922 1134 9056

Total 16152 2544 18696

Chi-Square = 17.4 p< 0.001

Table 23 2X2 Contingency Table for Allegany-Limestone CSD

Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for the Town of Allegany and the Town of Carrollton

Year 2013 Town of Allegany Town of Carrollton Total

Less than 65 6702 920 7622

65 and Greater 1220 214 1434

Total 7922 1134 9056


As indicated in Table 23 above, in the year 2013 the comparison of populations

less than 65 and 65 and greater did differ statistically significantly between the Town of

Allegany and the Town of Carrollton. The percent of residents age 65 and older was

15.4% for the Town of Allegany and 18.9% for the Town of Carrollton. Using a 2X2

Contingency Table, these data yielded a Chi-Square of 9.23; p<0.01.

174

Table 24 2X2 Contingency Table for Cattaraugus-Little Valley CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for the Town of New Albion and Town of Little Valley

Year Town of New Albion Town of Little Valley Total

2000 2068 1788 3856

2013 1939 1535 3474

Total 4007 3323 7330


As shown in Table 24 above, the population change over a 13 year period for the

Town of New Albion was a 6.2% decrease. The population change for the Town of Little

Valley was a decrease of 14.1%. A 2X2 Contingency Table indicated a Chi-Square =

3.43; p< 0.10. For Chi-Square to be significant at the p< 0.05 level the value of Chi-

Square must be 3.84 or greater. The Chi-Square value (3.43) for Table 23 approached

statistical significance but fell just short of Chi-Square significance level of 3.84.

Table 25 below compares the proportion of residents age 65 or older for the Town

New Albion and the Town of Little Valley for 2013. Seniors 65 and over made up 16.7%

of the population of the Town of New Albion. For the Town of Little Valley the

proportion of seniors was 16.4% of the population. A 2X2 Contingency Table yielded

results indicating no significant difference between the towns (Chi-Square = 0.1; p> 0.8).

175

Table 25 2X2 Contingency Table for Cattaraugus-Little Valley CSD

Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for Town of New Albion and Town of Little Valley

Year 2013 Town of New Albion Town of Little Valley Total

Less than 65 1615 1595 3210

65 and Greater 324 315 639

Total 1939 1910 3849


The Cuba Central School District and the Rushford Central School District

merged in 1991. The Rushford School was closed in 2012. During the period of 2000 to

2013, the population of the Town of Cuba decreased by 3.4%. The population of the

Town of Rushford decreased 15.8% during the same period. This difference in population

loss is significant (Table 26 below, Chi-Square= 8.88; p< 0.01).

Table 26 2X2 Contingency Table for Cuba-Rushford CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for the Town of Cuba and the Town of Rushford

Year Town of Cuba Town of Rushford Total

2000 3392 1259 4651

2013 3276 1060 4336

Total 6668 2319 8987


176

Table 27 below illustrates that 20.8% of the population for the Town of Rushford

were age 65 or greater. For the Town of Cuba 15.9% of the residents were ages 65 or

greater. This difference in age between the towns was statistically significant, Chi-

Square = 13.6; p< 0.001.

Table 27 2X2 Contingency Table for Cuba-Rushford CSD

Proportion of residents age 65 or greater for the Town of Cuba and the Town of Rushford

Year 2013 Town of Cuba Town of Rushford Total

Less than 65 2723 840 3563

65 and Greater 515 220 735

Total 3238 1060 4298

Chi-Square = 13.6 p< 0.001

Table 28 below compares the educational level reached by residents in the Town

of Cuba and the Town of Rushford. The residents of the Town of Cuba were outstanding

in their educational attainment, Chi-Square = 105.9 p<0.05. Residents of Cuba had the

highest percent (55%) of individuals seeking education beyond high school.

177

Table 28 2X2 Contingency Table for Cuba- Rushford CSD

Educational Attainment for the Town of Cuba and the Town of Rushford

Year 2010 Town of Cuba Town of Rushford Total

High School grad or less 1053 1541 2594

Some College or more 1288 1041 2329

Total 2341 2582 4923

Chi-Square = 105.0 p>0 .001

Altmar-Parish-Williamstown Central School District reorganized in 2009. The

Williamstown Elementary School was closed at that time in 2009. The Altmar-Parish-

Williamstown Central School built a new school in the Town of Parish which opened in

2012. The Altmar Elementary School and the Parish Elementary School were both closed

when the new school opened in 2012.

A comparison of population change between the Town of Williamstown and the

Town of Parish is shown in Table 29 below. There was no significant difference in

population change between 2000 and 2013 (Chi-Square= 0.10; p>0.95). The population

of the Town of Parish decreased by 5.38% between 2000 and 2013 and the population of

the Town of Williamstown decreased by 6.67% during the same period.

178

Table 29 2X2 Contingency Table for Altmar-Parish-Williamstown CSD

Population Change over Thirteen Years for Town of Parish and Town of Williamstown

Year Town of Parish Town of Williamstown Total

2000 2694 1350 4044

2013 2549 1260 3809

Total 5243 2610 7853


Table 30 2X2 Contingency Table for Altmar-Parish-Williamstown CSD

Educational Attainment for the Town of Parish and the Town of Williamstown

Year 2010 Town of Parish Town of Williamstown Total High School grad of less 1002 681 1683 Some College or more 735 157 892

Total 1737 838 2575

Chi-Square = 137.8 p<0.001

Table 30 above compares the educational level reached by residents in the Town

of Parish and the Town of Williamstown. The Town of Williamstown had the lowest

percentage (32.0%) of residents that achieved education beyond High School graduation.

Comparisons of Town of Parish and the Town of Williamstown were statistically

significantly different (Chi-Square = 137.7; p<0.001).

Comparisons of Educational Attainment, Individual Earnings, and Housing Unit

Values

Educational Attainment

179

The researcher was interested in additional aspects of “quality of life” that are

available from United States Census Bureau data. These include educational attainment,

individual earnings, and housing unit value. Comparisons between school districts that

had their school closed and the merged district that retained their school were difficult for

these census categories. Educational attainment is presented as percentages of nine

different educational levels. Individual earnings and housing unit value are also given as

percentages of nine different ranges and the median value. Comparisons between school

districts can be constructed by arbitrarily separating the value ranges into two or more

levels.

For statistical comparisons the educational attainment data were divided into two

categories: High school graduate or less education verses some college education or

more. The percent of high school graduates or less ranged from 49.7% for Tusten to

57.9% for Angelica. However, the differences between the towns with merged schools

were no more than 0.09% for Towns of Angelica and Amity. With the exceptions of the

Cuba and Rushford and Parish and Williamstown comparisons (Table 28 and Table 30),

there were no significant differences in comparisons of educational attainment between

towns of Brant and Evans, Angelica and Amity, Cherry Valley and Springfield, and

Tusten and Callicoon respectively.

Individual Earnings

Individual earnings for the 2010 United States Census were available. The income

values are presented in the $10,000 intervals with an overall median. With the exception

of the Town of Williamstown ($18,946) and the Town of Parish ($39,375), the median

individual income value ranged from $27,980 for the Town of Cuba to $32,464 for the

180

Town of Callicoon. The researcher has not determined why two towns in the same school

district (Town of Williamstown and Town of Parish) have both the lowest and highest

median individual incomes. The difference between the Town of Cuba and the Town of

Callicoon is $4,484. The difference between Town of Williamstown and Town of Parish

is $20,429.

Table 31 Individual Income Presented for Five Levels of Education Attainment

Level of Education

Town of Allegany

Town of Carrollton

Town of Tusten

Town of Bethel

Less than HS grad

$25,195 $35,469 $13,250 $30,536

HS grad $30,967 $25,395 $24,432 $30,947 Some

college $32,121 $32,303 $30,781 $38,842

Bachelor $36,500 $28,438 $43,646 $51,031

Graduate level

$58,427 $38,750 $47,500 $47,083

Median Income

$34,486 $29,904 $31,447 $37,112

Level of Education

Town of Cuba Town of New

Albion Town of

Williamstown Town of Parish

Less than HS grad

$17,500 $14,659 $18,482 $34,231

HS grad $25,996 $20,643 $20,875 $38,125 Some

College $25,819 $26,154 $25,417 $36,905

Bachelor $46,528 $44,375 $65,313 $41,429

Graduate Level

$55,865 $47,143

$52,500

Median Income

$27, 798 $24,432 $21,387 $39,375

181

Table 31(above) illustrates the relationship between 5 levels of Educational

Attainment and Median Individual Income. Towns such as New Albion, Cuba, and

Williamstown show a steady gain in income with greater educational attainment.

However, several other towns such as Parish, Allegany, Carrollton and Bethel indicate

little difference in income or no difference in income related to educational attainment.

The Towns New Albion, Cuba, Perish, and Allegany were included in Table 31 because

they either merged or reorganized with one of the 12 schools selected for this study.

There is a relationship between educational attainment and income for the towns New

Albion, Cuba, Williamstown, and Tusten.

Housing Unit Values

Housing unit values showed an interesting pattern. There were few differences

between towns that lost its school and their neighbor that retained its school. The

following examples demonstrate this point. Town of Angelica had a median housing

value for the year 2000 of $48,400. Its merger partner the Town of Amity (Belmont) had

a median value of $47,000. Town of Springfield had a median housing value of $76,000

compared to $75,100 for the Town of Cherry Valley. Town of Tusten had a median

housing value of $92,600 and nearby Town of Delaware had a median housing value of

$87,700.

The interesting pattern is the closer the town is to New York City or Buffalo, the

higher the value of their homes. Rushford that is located near the Town of Amity and

Town of Angelica had median housing values of $51,500 that is close to the housing

value of Town of Amity and Town of Angelica. The Town of Brant that is located about

25 miles south of Buffalo has a median housing value of $116,500. Housing values for

182

the Town of Bethel that is the closest town to New York City in the researcher’s study

revealed a housing value of $218,400. It appears that location is more important than

losing a school in determining housing values as posited by real estate agents (Knudsen,

2015).

General Results of Census Data Reviews

Although it is commonly believed that population loss leads to school district

mergers, in this study eight out of ten schools lost more population after the local rural

school was closed. In three out of eight schools the community that retained its school

also lost population. However, in each, the community that closes its school had a

significantly greater population loss. This leads to the conclusion that closing a school is

related to population loss in that community. To conclude that the school closing has no

relationship to population loss one would have to demonstrate that the healthier school

district in terms of quality of life factors was the one that retained its school in each

merger.

The first school district in these sets of districts lost population and the second

district gained population: Angelica and Belmont, Springfield and Cherry Valley,

Duggan and Callicoon, Duggan and Cochecton, Delaware Valley and Callicoon. The first

school district in these three sets of districts lost population and the second district also

lost population: Limestone and Allegany, Little Valley and Cattaraugus, and Rushford

and Cuba. All three (Limestone, Little Valley, and Rushford) the loss was significantly

greater than the loss by their merger partners.

183

Another point is if a community has a population that consists of more

community members who are 65 years of age or older, it lost its school, whereas, the

community with a “younger” population retained its school. Therefore, when a school is

closed in a rural community it often leads to a change in population structure. The

opportunities for older community members may be limited and they are less likely to

leave the community (Steele, 1981). On the other hand younger families who are more

likely to rent than to own their own home, have greater opportunity as well as the desire

to move closer to their children’s school in the merged community (Sell & Leistritz,

1997; Sell et al., 1996).

School Districts that Rejected Merger

Many factors contribute to the failure of two or more school districts to merge.

Chief among them is the compatibility of the communities (Heiser, 2013). Each

community is concerned about its local identity (Bakeman, 2014). Neighboring school

districts often compete in sports, band, Future Farmers of America, and etc. Students that

previously competed against each other become teammates in a merged school but they

and their respective communities lose their school mascots (Bakeman, 2014; New York

State Association of School Business Officials, 2014). The transition may be more

difficult for the parents than for the students (Post & Stambach, 1999). With greater

student enrollment in a merged school district the teams may be more competitive.

However, competition to be a member of a team also increases, thus, leaving those

students with less ability with less opportunity to participate on interscholastic or

intramural teams.

184

In many rural communities the school serves as the focus of many activities

(Hyndman, Cleveland, & Huffman, 2010; Oncescu & Giles, 2012; Peshkin, 1982). When

two school districts merge the school in one district is eventually closed. The district that

is slated to lose its school is more likely to reject the merger. Although there may be

sound reasons to reject the merger, emotions play a significant role (Harris &

Sommerstein, 2014).

Another factor related to mergers that concern parents of students is the potential

stress of longer bus rides, especially for the very young students (Heiser, 2013). Merged

school districts have larger “footprints” that require bus rides that are longer in time and

distance. Longer distances also decrease interactions between parents and teachers if one

area loses its school. Students from the closed school may be reluctant to participate in

evening activities. Some bus routes take or hour or more to complete.

State and local officials promote mergers based on cost savings (Bakeman, 2014).

Economy of scale for schools with enrollments of less than a thousand does save costs.

However, savings decrease as student enrollment increases in merged districts

(Duncombe & Yinger, 2010). In addition to cost savings New York State provides

financial incentives to encourage school districts to merge (Heiser, 2013; Bakeman,

2014). These incentives may exceed $50 million spread over 14 years. The state may

also provide support for a feasibility study by outside consultants (New York State Rural

School Association, 2011). Financial comparisons must be accurate and transparent or

mistrust will kill the merger (Quinn, 2010).

Merger and consolidation have reduced the number of school districts in New

York State from about 11,000 in the late 1800’s to nearly 700 today (New York State

185

Association of School Business Officials, 2014). Many of the mergers resulted from loss

of jobs and declining school enrollment. The most recent round of school district mergers

has been influenced by budgetary constraints and fears of financial insolvency (Heiser,

2013). The policy of the New York State Education Department has been to encourage

school district mergers over the last 25 years or more. Current incentives for mergers

include an increase of state aid of 40% for six years followed by a decrease in this

incentive over the next eight years (Heiser, 2013). Although state incentive aid lasts 14

years, the merged district will start to run out of fund balance in about seven years (Harris

& Sommerstein, 2014).

School districts considering merger can apply for a grant to pay for a merger

feasibility study. The completed feasibility study is summited to the New York State

Education Department. If approved, the school districts begin public discussions to

inform district residents. Two votes are held to ratify the merger. The first vote is the

advisory straw vote. If all involved communities approved, a second binding referendum

is held. If any community rejects the merger, the districts must wait at least a year and

day before they attempt to merge again (Heiser, 2013).

Before New York State School District merger laws were changed in the 1990’s,

area wide voter approval was sufficient to validate a merger. If the total “yes votes”

exceeded the total “no votes”, the merger was approved. This favored the larger

community. In the 1990’s New York State changed the approval votes so that each

community must vote yes or the merger is denied (Heiser, 2013; New York State

Association of School Business Officials, 2014). Of 22 failed school mergers since 2010,

eight would have passed had area wide voting been the law.

186

Although declining enrollment and loss of jobs have been blamed for financial

difficulties in smaller school districts, New York State must bear much of the blame.

New York has placed a cap on increases in local school taxes (Nolan, 2012). The yearly

cap increase averages about 2%. Even if a central school district wants to increase taxes

by more than 2%, approval requires a 60% yes votes by both school budget voters and

the local government (New York Government, 2015). New York also has mandated

programs that are unfunded by the state. These mandates are considered to be good for

the general population, but neither the federal or state governments are willing to pay for

them. However, the local school district must provide funding for these mandates. Gap

Elimination Adjustment (GEA) has reduced state aid to local districts to reduce prior

state deficits.

Statewide policy-makers in New York State have pressed school district mergers

as the most reliable method to cure financially troubled districts. These State officials

usually stress that district mergers would result in cost saving through economies of

scale. Duncombe and Yinger (2010) specifically identified that districts with enrollments

of 300 students each could achieve 20% cost saving if they merged. Cost savings

decreased as the enrollment of the merged schools increased. However, little saving is

achieved if both merging school districts had enrollments of 1,500 (Duncombe and

Yinger, 2001; 2005; 2010).

In addition, mergers require “leveling up” of pay scales for teachers and support

staff (Heiser, 2013). For example, in the rejected merger of Ripley Central School

District with Westfield Central School District in 2009, Ripley teachers had a better

contract than Westfield teachers and Westfield support staff had a better contract than the

187

Ripley support staff (Heiser, 2013). “Leveling up” of the two contracts so that teachers

and support staff in the merged district would have the same pay scale would reduce cost

savings (Heiser, 2013).

In addition to cost savings, merging school districts could offer more academic

opportunities. Many small school districts have been forced to eliminate teachers and

staff positions as the result of lower state aid and local property tax caps. District mergers

could restore advanced placement courses, business and financial courses, computer

technology, and art and music programs among others (Heiser, 2013; New York State

Association of School Business Officials, 2014). Various extra-curricular activities and

sports would also be supported by the pooled resources of two merged school districts.

Many attempts to merge have been voted down such as Barker and Lyndonville (Heiser,

2013).

Barker and Lyndonville Central School Districts

The neighboring Barker and Lyndonville Central School Districts have endured

decreasing populations. The two districts are similar in demographics and student

enrollment. Barker Central School District is located in the Town of Somerset in Niagara

County. Somerset had a population of 2,662 in 2010, occupied housing of 988 and school

enrollment of 621 students. Lyndonville Central School District is located in the Town of

Yates in Orleans County. Yates had a population of 2,559 in 2010, occupied housing of

972 and school enrollment of 586 students. The similarities plus the location of the

districts led to consideration of school merger (Heiser, 2013). A mutual study consultant

was selected and a community advisory council was chosen for each district. The

188

Lyndonville Central School Board voted unanimously to bring merger to a public vote.

Barker decided not to bring the merger to a vote.

The Lyndonville District school board concentrated on the potentially positive

aspects of a merger (Heiser, 2013). Given the reduction in pupils, they focused on

maintaining or enhancing educational and extra-curricular opportunities. Barker’s school

board dwelt on potential negative effects of the merger. These negative effects of the

merger included concern about New York’s poor financial condition (Heiser, 2013).

Barker residents feared they would not receive all of the merger incentive aid. In

addition, the merger of Barker and Lyndonville was unlikely to enhance learning

opportunities (Heiser, 2013). But, chief among these concerns was the increased cost of

busing and the added stress on students that must travel an hour or more each way

(Heiser, 2013). Baker is proud of its school and the community does not want to lose its

identity.

Brocton and Westfield Central School Districts

The School Districts of Brocton, Ripley, and Westfield have experienced financial

difficulties for more than 20 years (Gerould, 2009; Chippone, 2013). Ripley Central

School and Westfield Academy and Central School attempted to merge in 1994 (Buffalo

News, 1994). Ripley voters rejected the merger although Westfield voters approved the

merger in 1994. Ripley and Westfield tried to merge again in 2009. This time Ripley

voters approved the merger and Westfield voters rejected it (Gerould, 2009).

Brocton Central School District and Westfield Academy and Central School spent

over a year preparing to merge. Brocton and Westfield share a football team comprised of

189

students from both districts. The two districts voted on the merger of the school in

October of 2013 (Chippone, 2013). In the Westfield District 58.6% of the voters rejected

the merger. In the Brocton District 89.7% of the voters favored the merger.

Potsdam and Canton Central School Districts

Nearly twice as many Potsdam and Canton residents turned out for a merger straw

vote than usually vote in school board elections (Harris & Sommerstein, 2014). When all

the votes were counted, Potsdam rejected a merger by 1,279 “no” votes to 558 “yes”

votes. Canton also rejected the merger by 1,404 “no” votes to 680 “yes” votes. Both

school superintendents thanked their communities, but turned to other possibilities to

solve their financial difficulties (Harris & Sommerstein, 2014).

Both Potsdam and Canton Central School Districts had lost millions in New York

State aid as the Gap Elimination Adjustment (GEA) forced the schools to return aid to

reduce New York State deficits. The two districts have cut over 100 positions of facility

and staff and eliminated classes and special programs. The carrot of $35 million in

merger incentive aid was attractive. However, residents of both communities had similar

concerns. Chief among them was the fear of merging was only a temporarily solution

(Harris & Sommerstein, 2014). Concerns about bussing and sports also entered into the

rejection. However, the loss of community identity brought out the “no” voters in historic

numbers.

190

Scio and Wellsville Central School Districts

In 2010, the Scio District’s population was 1,754 individuals living in 726

residences and sending only 312 students to the local school. In contrast, Wellsville’s

population was 7,440 occupying 3,239 households. The school enrollment was 1,348

students. Scio residents who supported a merger felt it was necessary for financial

stability. Although Wellsville community members favored a merger, they were not

committed to the idea that a merger was the only solution to their concerns (Quinn,

2010).

The Scio and Wellsville Central School Districts approached a merger through

months of research, a feasibility study, and the straw vote. Scio and Wellsville residents

met in Wellsville cafeteria to hear about successful mergers in the Bolivar-Richburg

Central School District and the Genesee Valley Central School District (Briggs, 2009).

The straw vote was passed by Wellsville on February 4, 2010 by a vote of 578 “yes” to

334 “no” and passed by Scio 262 “yes” to 255 “no”. The statutory referendum was

passed by Wellsville voters 631 “yes” to 481 “no”, but was rejected 641 “no” to 284

“yes” by Scio (Quinn, 2010). The major reason that the Scio vote changed was that the

community felt it was misled about the financial condition of the Scio Central School

District. In January 2010, the Scio School District leaders told the community that the

school had a deficit of about $300,000. Subsequent to the straw vote it was revealed that

the reported deficit was inaccurate. This brought out the negative voters of the Scio

Central School District to reject the statutory referendum.

191

Conclusion

Central school districts that reject mergers must develop other ways to maintain or

improve their communities. Otherwise these communities will be facing the same

problems that caused them to consider merging in the past. Most school district mergers

occurred between 1985 and 2005 (Heiser, 2013; New York State Association of School

Business Officials, 2014). There has only been a few schools that merged since 2010.

During this period only two pairs or 4 school districts (Oppenheim- Ephratah and St.

Johnsville 2012 and Ilion and Mohawk 2013) merged. Since 2010, 17 pairs of school

districts rejected mergers. A comparison of a number of merged school districts with the

number of school districts that rejected a merger during this period was significantly

different assuming a 50/50 distribution (Chi-Square= 11.8 p<0.01).

New York State continued to encourage mergers by providing grants to pay for

merger feasibility studies. During the period from 2010 to the present, requests for

feasibility study funds has increased only to be rejected when the possible merger is

brought to a vote (Heiser, 2013). School boards and superintendents have invited school

officials of nearby schools that have merged to promote the value of a merger in the

schools contemplating their own merger (Quinn, 2010). Nevertheless, voters used their

own personal reasons and turned out in large numbers to defeat the merger votes. It may

be that experiences with mergers in neighboring school districts have convinced other

school districts voters to try to go it alone. However, if student enrollment continues to

drop and school taxes and state aid continue to be inadequate, will school merger be the

only solution?

192

Answers to Research Questions Based on Census Study Findings

As a result of this investigation using US Census data the following are presented

as answers to the research questions that guided this investigation. The overarching

research question is: How does the loss of a community school impact the quality of life

in a rural community?

There is a significant change in the population in many of the towns in New York

State wherein there was a school closing. For example, generally the population in the

context where the school closed significantly decreased. In addition, the age structure of

population of the communities that closed a school has shifted to an age group of more

than 65 years and over with fewer younger residents. Also, the number of household units

did not change in the communities where there was a school closing. However, there was

a significant increase in the percent of housing vacancies in the community that lost its

school. It is less likely that an existing house will be torn down; it simply becomes

vacant. But, the researcher cautions that the findings are based on correlations that she

found via the investigation and that there is no intent to assume a “cause and effect

relationship”.

It should also be noted that there may be additional reasons for changes cited in

the housing vacancy data due to other extenuating situations such as: purchase of land for

investment property or potential fracking rights. This has been seen in this study when

looking at schools in Sullivan County.

There were few differences in education attainment in the communities that were

studied for this dissertation. Although average income was similar (around $30,000) for

all the 12 school districts that were studied, US Census Bureau data revealed different

193

incomes related to an individual’s education. Because the distribution of education

attainment was similar for each community this did not result in a particular community

having higher or lower median income. The researcher was able to collect census data for

12 school districts. A few unexpected results were seen. Chief among these was the

relationship of housing values to the proximity to New York City. The closer the town

was to New York City the property value was higher.

194

References

Barley, Z. A. & Beesley, A. D. (2007). Rural school success: What can we learn? Journal


Bauch, P.A. (2009). School-community partnerships in rural schools: Leadership,

renewal, and a sense of place. Peabody Journal of Education, 76, 204-221.

Briggs, T (2009, December 1) Wellsville/Scio schools: Merger success stories told, Olean

Times Herald. Retrieved from:

http://www.oleantimesherald.com/news/wellsville- scio-schools-merger-success-

stories-told/article_ca651c04-e5f8-5693-ab96-f0e8fc476c91.html



Cabanis, J. (2008). Envisioning the next century. Retrieved from:

http://www.jenniferjames.com/articles/envisio/index.htm

Callicoon Business Association. (2015). Retrieved from:

http://www.visitcallicoon.com/BUSINESS/entertainment.html

Castells, N. (2010). Hope VI Neighborhood spillover effects in Baltimore. Cityscape: A

Journal of Policy Development and research, 12 (1) 65-98.

Chippone S. (2013, October 9) Proposal to merge Brocton, Westfield districts goes down

to defeat. The Buffalo News City and Region

Retrieved from: http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/proposal-to-merge-

brocton-westfield-districts-goes-down-to-defeat-20131009

195

Christmann, R. (2013). Executive Director of Western New York Educational Service

Council (2013) Feasibility study for the purpose of consolidation of the Brocton

Central School

District and Westfield Academy and Central School District. Retrieved From:

http://www.observertoday.com/pdf/news/582787_1.pdf

Cross, J. E. (2001). What is Sense of place? Paper presented at 12 Headwaters

Conference, Western State Colorado College, Gunnison, CO.

Dalkey, N. C. & Rourke, D. (1971). “Experimental Assessment of Delphi: Procedures

with Group Value judgments”. Rand, “pp” 8-24.

Dewey, J. (1922). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to Philosophy of

Education. New York. MacMillan Company. 434 p.

Dreier, W. H. (1982). What happens when the high school leaves the community? Paper






Retrieved from:


5.pdf

196








Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat. New York, New York: Farrar, Straus and

Giroux.

Frieman, T. L. and Mandelbaum, M. (2011). That used to be us. New York, New York:

Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Gallagher, W. (1993). The power of place. New York: Harper Collins.

Gee, D. J. (2014, March 8) Declining enrollment is forcing school districts in

WNY to consider merging in order to survive. The Buffalo News City and Region

Retrieved from: http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/schools/declining-

enrollment-is-forcing-school-districts-in-wny-to-consider-merging-in-order-to-

survive-20140308

Gerould, S. A. (2009, February 12) Westfield Residents reject, Ripley voters approve

Merger. Retrieved from:

http://www.observertoday.com/page/content.detail/id/519114/Westfield-

Residents-Reject--Ripley-Voters-Approve-Merger.html?nav=5093

197

Girouard, M. (1978). Life in the English Country House. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Gould, P. & White, R. (1986). Mental Maps second edition. Winchester Massachusetts:

Allen & Unwin Inc.




canton-and-potsdam-said-no-to-the-school-merger

Heath, C. & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New

York, N.Y.: Broadway Books.

Heiser, P. (2013). To merge or not to merge. New York State School Boards Association.

Latham, New York.


Herzog, M. J. R. & Pittman, R. B. (1995). Home, family, and community: Ingredients in

the rural education equation. U.S. Department of Education. 388-463.

Hu, W. (April 14, 2011). New York School Districts Challenge State Mandates. New

York Times, N.Y./ Region.

Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/nyregion/new-york-school-

districts-challenge-state-mandates.html

198



37.1/2, 129-148.

James, J. (2008). Ready, Set, Change.

Retrieved from:jenniferjames.com/articles/ready/index.htm

James, J. (2008). Mighty Morphin’ Law makers must respond to change.

Retrieved from: jenniferjames.com/articles/might/index.htm

Jarrett, D. (1978). The English landscape garden. New York: Rizzoli.

Knudsen, D. (2015). Current Market Conditions Report for Sullivan county Real Estate.

Retrieved from: http://www.catskill4sale.com/current-market-conditions-sullivan-

county- Catskills .

Liu, B. (1976). Quality of Life indicators in U.S. metropolitan areas: A statistical

analysis. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Lyson, T. A. (2002). What does a school mean to a community? Assessing the social and



Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper. pp. 93.

New York State Association of School Business Officials. (2014). Why do school

district mergers fail? Albany, New York. Retrieved from: www.nysasbo.org.

199

New York Government (2015). Cap New York Property Taxes: A citizen guide

Retrieved from: http://reforminggovernment.ny.gov/

New York State Rural Schools Association (2011 April 21). Needs Assessment Survey

prepared for the Scio Central School District and the Wellsville Central School

district. Retrieved from:

www.olsconsulting.com/downloads/projreport/sw_2011_04_21.pdf

Nolan, M. (2012, March 4) New York State school districts won’t merge even when

offered extra money Retrieved on January 24, 2016

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/new_york_state_school_district

.html



Perloff, H. S. (1969). “Policy Measures for the Environment”, extracted from “A

Framework for Dealing with Urban Environment: Introductory Statement” in The

Quality of the Urban Environment. Washington, D.C., Perloff, Harvey S., ed.,

Resources for the Future, Inc., 1969





Pluribus Unum? Journal of Research in Rural Education. 15 106-117.

200


(July, 2007).Status of eduction in rural America (NCES 2007-040). Washington,

DC.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences,

U.S. Department of Education.

Quinn, B. (2010, March 20) No Merger. Wellsville Daily Reporter. Retrieved from:

http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20100320/NEWS/303209992




pp.43-51.



186-205.

Sell, R. S., Leistritz L. & Thompson, J. M. (1996). Socio-Economic Impacts of school


Report. no. 347, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota. 1-54.

Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric Statistics for the behavior sciences. New York:

McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Steele, F. (1981). The sense of place. Boston, Massachusetts: CBI Publishing Company,

Inc.

201

Stossell, J. (1992). ABC 20/20 report on the mystery of happiness: who has it…and how

to get it. New York: American Broadcasting Company.

The Buffalo News (1994, October 20) Ripley District rejects merger with Westfield

Retrieve from: https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-22649978.html

Tomlinson, R. (1968). A Geographic Information Systems for Regional Planning.

Retrieved from: https://gisandscience.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/1-a-gis-for-

regional-planning_ed.pdf

United States Census Bureau. 2015. Retrieved on: September 21, 2015.

http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/about.html




Whitman, V. (2006, October 20). Sullivan West mulls closing high school.

Times Herald-Record. Retrieved from:

http://www.recordonline.com/article/20061020/News/610200328

Woods, M.D. & Doeksen, G.A., & St. Clair, C. (2005). Measuring local economic

Impacts of the education sector. The Role of Education, 16-21.

202

What Every Policy Maker, School Leader, Parent, and Community Member

Needs to Know About the Social, Economic, and Human Capital

Costs of Closing a Rural School:

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

FUTURE STUDIES

The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining (John F. Kennedy, 1962).

203

Review of Literature

According to Bob McKeveny, the Seneca Falls School District Superintendent in

New York State, “…the two things that a community never wants to lose are its post

office and its school district” (Clark, 2013, p 2). For many rural communities, the school

is the social center of the local community (Peshkin, 1982). This is particularly true when

the school is located within a village (Lyson, 2002). In addition, residents use school

facilities for meetings, voting, athletics for non-students, adult education and many other

activities. School structures may be the only large meeting room, gymnasium, or

swimming pool in the area. Therefore, the school is the central focal point in many small

communities and provides residents with a sense of place and belonging.

“Quality of Life” is any combination of objective standards and subjective

attitudes by which individuals and groups assess their life situation. These are “feel good”

components ranging from the environment to personal relationships with loved ones

including family and friends (Lyson, 2002). Quality of life is a common reason for the

residential choices made by individuals and their families to live in one particular

community or move into another area. For a local rural community, the bucolic lifestyle

imagery off sets limited jobs and declining populations with decreasing options. Quality

of life is an important balance to strengthen the community (Sell et al., 1996). Sense of

place is a related concept (Budge, 2006) based on positive responses to a particular

location or place. Quality of life and sense of place are key in communities facing the

possible loss of a school building, resulting from a voter decided multi-district merger or

an intra-district reorganization.

204

“Quality of life” and “sense of place” are interrelated concepts. The greater the

quality of life factors for a particular area or community, the more likely a more positive

sense of place will develop (Relph, 1976; Seamon & Sowers, 2008). Residents of local

communities share common interests and ideologies (Ward & Rink, 1992); but,

Americans are losing the quality of life feelings and the personal support that only a rural

community provides where the concept of “they protect their own” is prominent (Heath

& Heath, 2010, p 151).


Budge (2006) recognized six habits of place that most influence rural education

and student learning. These include 1) connectedness, 2) development of identity and

culture, 3) interdependence with the land, 4) spirituality, 5) ideology and politics, and 6)

activism and civic engagement. These are key concepts that organized the conceptual

framework for this study. The above, often referred to as a “sense of place”, are major

determinates of how well the school and community interact for mutual benefit (Budge,

2006; Herzog & Pittman, 1995; Oncescu & Giles, 2012).

School District Mergers

When policy makers and school leaders urge parents and community members to

merge their schools they focus on the cost savings related to the enlarged operational

scale and other potential organizational savings associated with the enhanced

coordination of teachers, administrators, and support staff as well as reductions in the

duplication of supplies, materials, equipment, and capital expenditures. New York State

even provides supplementary financial aid to school districts that merge (Bakeman,

205

2014). Until recently, little attention has been paid to the social costs of closing the

community’s rural school (Lyson, 2002). Because social costs are not measured in dollars

and, thus easily quantifiable, they may be over looked all together.

School district mergers and school building closures have become a panacea for

declining student enrollment and financial difficulties (Clark, 2013). Small rural

communities are more sensitive to changes in population (Porter, 2012; Surface, 2011).

Individual states, throughout the United States, struggle to balance budgets and state aid

for education is a target for reduction not supplementation (Bakeman, 2014). It is not

surprising that the focus of school district mergers has been on cost reductions.

Duncombe and Yinger (2001; 2005; 2010; 2015) have modeled school costs and the

economy of scale. They demonstrated that the merger of two districts saves money if

each district has school enrollment of 1,500 or less. However, these calculations do not

take social costs into account, particularly those related to the closing of the community

school. These social costs include much more than just longer bus rides (Eyre & Finn,

2002; Heiser, 2013). This comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation employed

both quantitative and qualitative studies as well as US Census Bureau Databases to obtain

the widest and richest set of opinions, experiences, and information to respond to the

overarching research question: how does the loss of a community school impact the

quality of life in a rural community? The following five specific research questions were

comprehensively answered via this multi-faceted research project and, thus, provided

acute insight into the impact that the loss of a community school has on the quality of life


206

Research Questions











number of household units, and d) occupancy and vacancy of housing?



Therefore, this chapter provides the answers to the above research

questions and the overarching research question. It provides recommendations to

policy-makers, school leaders, parents, and community members in terms the

social, economic, and, especially, the human capital costs of closing a school in a

rural community. It also provides recommendations for future studies based on

the findings of this comprehensive investigation.

Quantitative Analysis Findings

As reported in Chapter 2, the researcher designed a survey instrument to collect

opinions about communities that have had their rural school closed due to merger or

207

reorganization. A third party professional research company conducted a telephone

survey of 220 informants. These individuals, who represented the quantitative study

sample, were residents of 12 different communities that had a school building closed in

up-state New York. The number of informants per community with a closed school

building was: Angelica, 18 informants; Belmont, 18 informants; Brant, 19 informants;

Cherry Valley, 20 informants; Duggan, 23 informants; Limestone 16, informants; Little

Valley, 19 informants; Narrowsburg, 15 informants; Rushford, 17 informants;

Springfield, 10 informants; West Frankfort, 23 informants; and, Williamstown, 22

informants (see Table 1).

The survey instrument used to collect data for the quantitative study employed a 5

point Likert scale for informants to express their opinions. The possible values ranged

from: 1= major negative change, 2= some negative change, 3= no change, 4= some

positive change, to 5= major positive change. The telephone surveys were completed by

220 individuals from 12 school districts that had closed a school building. The number of

surveys varied from 10 for Springfield to 23 for Duggan (see Table 1, below).

Survey results for each of 20 questions provided evidence to reveal that the group

of 220 informants had a negative view of change brought on by having their school

building closed. The mean values for each of 20 questions ranged from 2.50 to 2.88 on a

5 point Likert scale as seen in Chapter 2. For each question, there were more negative

responses than positive responses. The two highest mean values were the result of a

greater number of “no change” (3 on the Likert scale) votes than from more positive

votes (Likert scale 4 and 5). The mean that was the most negative (2.50) was Q18:

Community activities have changed since the closure of the school building. The

208

distribution of opinions for Q18 was 49 ones, 39 twos, 81 threes, 23 fours, and 14 fives.

The mean that was least negative (2.88) was Q14: Police presence in the community has

changed since the school building closure. The distribution of opinions for Q14 was 27

ones, 26 twos, 115 threes, 16 fours, and 20 fives.

Table 1

Number of Informants Surveyed for each of 12 Towns Selected for Study

12 Towns Number of Informants12 Schools Selected for this

Study

Angelica 18 Angelica

Amity 18 Belmont

Brant 19 Brant

Cherry Valley 20 Cherry Valley

Bethel 23 Duggan

Carrollton 16 Limestone

Little Valley 19 Little Valley

Tusten 15 Narrowsburg

Rushford 17 Rushford

Springfield 10 Springfield

Frankfort 23 West Frankfort

Williamstown 22 Williamstown

Despite the overall negative means, there was considerable variation from one

community to another. These mean values ranged from 1.61 for Q11, School taxes have

changed, for Belmont to 3.41 for Q12, adjustment of school children attending the host

school has changed for Duggan. Duggan was significantly less negative in the three post

hoc tests that revealed statistically significant differences.

Another interesting result from the survey was the negative responses from both

the Belmont and Cherry Valley School Districts. When the Angelica and Belmont School

209

Districts merged, a new school was built on the edge of the Belmont School District.

Students from both districts attended the new school named Genesee Valley. Similarly,

when Cherry Valley and Springfield School District merged a new school was built on

the edge of Cherry Valley near Springfield. Although both Belmont and Cherry Valley

received new school buildings built within their district boundaries, their responses to the

survey questions were as negative as their merger partners, Angelica and Springfield

respectively.

New York as well as other states such as: Maine, Kansas, New Jersey (Clark,

2013) has provided incentives to encourage school district mergers. In Maine’s case, the

incentives were actually penalties not aid. Either the Maine School Districts merged or

the districts lost money. In most cases the justification for mergers was relieving the

stress on state budgets. Andrew Cuomo, Governor of New York suggested “that if the

local budget situation was really really tough you‘d see consolidation happen” (Clark,

2013). Cuomo seemed to be squeezing local school districts financially until they

accepted a merger. Mergers were common in New York State from 1995 until 2005

(Heiser, 2013; New York State Association of School Business Officials, 2014).

However, since 2010, 17 of 19 attempted school district mergers have been rejected. The

type of negative feedback seen in this quantitative study’s survey may affect the voters in

other school districts. New York State may need to take a different approach to convince

rural school districts to merge.

210

Qualitative Analysis Findings

The qualitative study component of this comprehensive multi-faceted research

investigation was initiated to obtain a wider and richer set of experiences and opinions

than those available using only a survey. The qualitative study brings additional life and

realism to social costs. Thirteen people were interviewed using the researcher’s interview

protocol. One of the thirteen was a centenarian who had walked to a one-room

schoolhouse in her rural community and reflected about both the positives as well as the

negatives associated with her experience. The researcher conducted thirteen individual

semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions. The narrative approach seemed to

be the best fit to capture the emotion and stories of people who lived in the rural

communities.

The purpose of this comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation was to

determine how the loss of a school building affects the “Quality of Life” in rural

communities (Lyson, 2002). The researcher thought the narrative approach of thirteen

people in different rural communities might share some commonalities because each

informant had experienced the loss of the rural community school. The second-order

narrative expresses stories of other people’s experiences (Creswell, 2013).

Although selected in different ways, people interviewed for the qualitative study

were quite similar in attitude to the informants that were surveyed for the quantitative

study. One informant noted the loss of the school building and its students started to

affect her after about two years. The effects of a merger and the closing of a school

building are almost immediate on the students (Sell & Leistritz, 1997). However, the loss

of the rural school building begins a cycle that impacts the local community for years

211

after the closing has occurred (Peshkin, 1982; Sell & Leistritz, 1997; Sell et al., 1996).

The interviews reveal that many of the community members do not appreciate what they

have until it is gone.

The interview informants missed the children, young adults, and young parents

the most. One informant said that new generations are just invaluable. Another lamented

that there is an increase in the percent of those of retirement age in the community. One

informant from an area where a new school was constructed volunteered that the “quality

of life” is better if there is a school. Another noted the there is a giant hole in the

community without students. The informants were asked what their communities have

done to compensate for the loss of their students. The adults of one community

encouraged local youth groups that are run by the community as opposed to everything

being run through the school. Several communities have purchased the closed school to

be used as office space for community groups, a library, sports fields, and play grounds.

The old school has become the community center again.

In reviewing the codes used for the qualitative analysis, two themes emerged. One

was that each community wants to survive. The second was to share quality of life. To

survive, the community must deal with tax savings, economic impact, and other changes

in the community. Almost all informants made comments related to survival of their

community. Something has to be done to replace the economic engine that was driven by

the community school. When the school closed, many school staff members who were

employed by the merger partner and took their families with them to live near their new

school employer. School closings also resulted in the closing of restaurants and other

212

businesses. It may take some time and investment in the economy to restore and

strengthen the local economy to a survival level.

Results and Findings

Volunteer Fire Companies are important components of rural communities.

According to Thompson and Bono (1993) firefighting is the most highly admired and

respected profession in the United States. Volunteering is a way of life for volunteer

firefighters. When a rural community closes its school building, the volunteer fire

company expands its role to compensate for the loss of the community school building.

In addition to the traditional services offered by the fire company, members have fund-

raisers, benefits, present safety programs, and activities for young people. In some

communities the volunteer fire company fills in so many gaps that it is virtually the new

“center” of the community. In other communities, a similar role is taken on by the local

library. Again, the focus is on the youth and the library may expand its service offerings

intended for the students when they are in their own hometown. Informant Rosalyn

Good, a town employee expressed, “It is just fun to have younger people around. New

generations is just invaluable. “no music ,no art that’s been cut and the community can

fill that void. And we certainly can here because its’s such an artistic community. But you

know we’re not being able to share it with younger people” “It’s harder because our

community, of course, we don’t have a school.” One of the informants Sam Lester,

eloquently expressed the general feelings of residents who have experienced the loss of

the local school building. Sam an informant summed up the situation for his town, “Sure

without a doubt. It is just not the same community. There are no kids walking to school.

There is no activity around that building and it’s … you can see the direction the

213

community’s going…and it’s not the right directions. It’s the wrong direction. There is a

void in the community and there is no way around it. The state made it very attractive

financially to these districts…”Hey, there’s your compensation. We’re not compensating

your community that’s not for us to do.” That’s how they think. They don’t care.

United States Census Data Analysis

The author used comparative United States Census data to tie the concepts of

“quality of life” and “sense of place” to the important relationships between schools and

communities in Chapter 4 of this comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation.

The “quality of life” is a combination of objective standards and subjective attitudes by

which individuals and groups assessed their life situation. “Sense of place” is not shaped

by our genes but rather by a sense of our surroundings (Gallagher, 1993, p. 12; Steel,

1981). Three important aspects of sense of place include the physical setting, activities

and events, and experiences and intuitions (Relph, 1976; Seamon & Sowers, 2008).

Residents of local communities share common interests and ideologies (Ward & Rink,

1992). The greater the quality of life factors for a community, the stronger is the sense of

place (Seamon & Sowers, 2008). Shared values maintain the cohesiveness of a

community.

To investigate how these concepts are affected by the loss of the community

school, rural towns were divided into towns that gained students from a merger and

towns that had their schools closed because of merger and reorganization. The

community that lost its school had to have a population of 2,500 or less, be located

several miles from its merger partner, and to have closed long enough ago so that before

and after data were available.

214

The major change in the towns that merged and then closed their school was a

loss of population. This occurred in eight out of ten incidences. In three of eight schools,

the town that retained its school also lost population. However, each town that lost its

school had a statically significantly greater population loss than its merger partner that

retained its school. This strongly suggests that a loss of a school leads to the loss of

population.

Not only do communities without schools lose population, but they also see a shift

in the population structure. This is particularly true of the percentage of older individuals

especially 65 and older. Younger families have greater opportunities to move in order to

remain closer to their children’s respective school. The town that closes its school does

not lose the number of households. It is costly to demolish a house. However, the percent

of vacant houses does increase without a school according to the data gleaned from the

census data bases.

Educational Attainment

Aspects of quality of life that lend themselves to United States Census Bureau

Data Analysis included: educational attainment, individual earnings, and housing values.

Educational attainment was presented as percentages of nine different educational levels.

Individual earnings and housing unit values were also given as percentages of nine

different ranges with respective median values. Comparisons between school districts can

be constructed by arbitrarily separating the value ranges into two or more levels. For

statistical comparisons, the educational attainment data were divided into two categories:

High school graduate or less education verses some college education or more. The

percent of high school graduates or less ranged from 49.7% for Tusten to 57.9% for

215

Angelica. However, the differences between the merger partner towns were no more than

0.09% for the Towns of Angelica and Amity. The comparisons between Cuba and

Rushford as well as between Parish and Williamstown were statistically significant

(Chapter 4, Table 28 and Table 30). There were no significant differences in comparisons

of educational attainment between the towns of Brant and Evans, Angelica and Amity,

Cherry Valley and Springfield, and Tusten and Callicoon respectively.

Individual Earnings

Used as part of this study, the 2010 United States Census Bureau provided data to

compare individual earnings between towns that had merged. The income values were

presented in $10,000 intervals with an overall median. The Town of Williamstown had a

median individual income of $18,946. The Town of Parish had a median individual

income value of $39,375. The difference between Town of Williamstown and Town of

Parish is $20,429. The median individual income value ranged from $27,980 for the

Town of Cuba to $32,464 for the Town of Callicoon. The difference between the Town

of Cuba and the Town of Callicoon is $4,484. The researcher has not determined why

two towns in the same school district (Town of Williamstown and Town of Parish) have

both the lowest and highest median individual incomes. The Town of Williamstown has

one of the lowest educational attainment levels. The individual income of the residents of

the Town of Parish is relatively flat across all of the eight income levels given by the US

Bureau data. However, with the exception noted above (Williamstown and Parish) the

median individual income is quite uniform.

216

Housing Units

There were few differences in housing unit values between towns that lost their

school and their neighbor that retained its school. The interesting pattern is the closer the

town is to New York City or Buffalo, the higher the value of their homes. Rushford,

located near the Town of Amity and Town of Angelica, had median housing values of

$51,500 that is close to the housing value of Town of Amity and Town of Angelica. The

Town of Brant that is located about 25 miles south of Buffalo has a median housing value

of $116,500. Housing values for the Town of Bethel that is the closest town to New York

City in the researcher’s study revealed a housing value of $218,400. It appears that

location is more important than losing a school in determining housing values as posited

by real estate agents (Knudsen, 2015).

School Districts Contemplating Mergers

When two school districts are considering a merger, school stakeholders evaluate

the “pros” and “cons” of joint operations. The “pros” are mostly economic. Economies of

scale provide cost savings if the student enrollment of each school is less than 1,500

(Duncombe & Yinger, 2005). Savings from economies of scale may be used to lower

school taxes or keep budgets in check. The incentive package supporting mergers

provided by New York State is substantial. It amounts to roughly 40% increase in State

Aid spread over 14 years (Heiser, 2013). The major non-economic “pro” is improved

educational opportunities and extracurricular activities supported by incentive aid

(Heiser, 2013). For mergers to be successful they require careful planning and

responsible budgeting. Recommendations for benefits of merging school districts could

217

be if the merging school districts do not share similar values and similar economics then

contrasting values need to be further explored.

The “cons” are largely social. These range from loss of community identity to

long tedious bus rides (Eyre & Finn, 2002). The one economic “con” is the possibility of

higher taxes as contracts of teachers and staff are leveled-up (Heiser, 2013). The cost of

leveling may exceed the savings from economies of scale (Heiser, 2013). Incentive

money is largely used up in seven to eight years (Harris & Sommerstein, 2014). For a

merger to pass, it must be approved by both school districts. The history of merged

districts has provided much ammunition for anti-merger voters. The ultimate argument is

that a merger is only a temporary solution (Harris & Sommerstein, 2014). What will the

schools do when the incentive money runs out?

Central school districts that reject mergers must develop other ways to maintain or

improve their communities. Otherwise these communities will be facing the same

problems that caused them to consider merging in the past. Most school district mergers

occurred between 1985 and 2005 (Heiser, 2013; New York State Association of School

Business Officials, 2014). There has only been a few schools that merged since 2010.

During this period only two pairs or 4 school districts (Oppenheim- Ephratah and St.

Johnsville 2012 and Ilion and Mohawk 2013) merged. Since 2010, 17 pairs of school

districts rejected mergers. A comparison of a number of merged school districts with the

number of school districts that rejected a merger during this period was significantly

different assuming a 50/50 distribution (Chi-Square= 11.8, p<0.01).

New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo is unwavering in his support of school

district mergers. He feels that there are too many school personnel and too few students.

218

To him a merger means cost savings. The problem appears to be that it is difficult get the

cost savings in reality despite what was predicted. When school districts merge, no one

wants to lose her/his job. No reduction of staff means no savings. Despite complaints

about taxes, residents of local communities would rather keep their school even if they

have to worry about the budget. From the analyses of data in this comprehensive multi-

faceted investigation dissertation study, New York needs to develop a new way to

encourage mergers because they have strongly fallen out of favor.

Comprehensive Multi-faceted Research Investigation Summary

The overarching research question that the researcher desired to answer was:

How does the loss of a community school impact the quality of life in a rural community?

Thus, as a result of this comprehensive multi-faceted research investigation the researcher

contends that there is a significant impact on the quality of life in a rural community

when the local school is closed. The general answers to each of the following five

research questions support this assertion:


relationship of rural schools and the local quality of life? Most people in rural

communities contemplating a school district merger do not consider the

relationships between the school and the quality of life. This is particularly true

when merger incentive money is on the table. Interviews and surveys from this

study demonstrate that community residents recognize the importance of these

relationships from observing what they have lost. Once the quality of life is

reduced it takes a lot of work to restore it. Perhaps, the difficulty in ratifying new

219

school district mergers is an indication that more people are aware of quality of

life before a merger is pasted.




and f) activism and civic engagement? 2a. Connectedness probably takes the

hardest hit when the local school building is closed. The children are bused to a

new area with no parents or friends. The researcher knows of no study of the

resiliency of children when they are forced to attend a host school. The parents

also miss their children and may have a difficult time attending school functions

do to distance. 2b.When the community school closes, it takes identity and culture

with it. This is particularly true if the merged schools were rivals. Changing team

names and mascots to new unbiased ones may be helpful. 2c.The abandoned

community can reduce the stress by highlighting local attractions. Another way to

encourage quality of life and sense of place is to keep familiar community

attributes available to the children. 2d. Churches may suffer from the same

reduction of population that closes schools. Yet, the church is source of pageantry

and activity. 2e. Pro merger and anti-merger factions may be the new political

divide in communities that are contemplating a school district merger. 2f.

Activism and civic engagement may follow monetary difficulties in a rural

school. When you have budget problems people start considering merger again.


keep their local school and maintain their community? A good number of tax

220

payers say they would pay more taxes if it guaranteed their local school would be

safe from closing. Few would put even a ball park number on the alternative of

paying more taxes. That voters reject proposed mergers suggests that community

members are willing to pay more if it is not wasted.



number of household units d) occupancy and vacancy of housing? 4a. United

States Census Bureau Data document the loss of population in rural New York

State. The loss is even greater in areas where the school closes. 4b.The loss of the

school shifts the age structure in a community. Higher numbers of older people

are present in a town that has closed a school. There are fewer young parents and

their children. Retired individuals are less mobile and may own their own home

which may be difficult to sell after the school closes. Those residents with limited

roots may be the first to migrate to find a community school. 4c Census data does

not support a decrease in the number of housing units after the school closes.

4d.The houses have value even if they are vacant. However, Census data does

support an increase in the number of housing units that are vacant after the school

closes.


having or not having a school? As indicated in this study (Chapter 4), educational

attainment and average individual income are fairly uniform across the twelve

towns selected for this study. Income and education are related but the pattern of

educational attainment makes any relationship difficult to determine. In general,

221

as people become better educated they earn more money. However, some of the

selected towns for this study have relatively flat increases in income.

Suggestions for Future Studies

It would be interesting to survey residents of communities that retained their

schools after a merger. Perhaps the merger produced negative feelings despite the

retention of the community school. The author’s survey (see Chapter 2) serves as a

reliable baseline to compare to communities that merged and communities that did not

lose their school. The author’s current survey produced a Cronbach’s alpha of .94 which

is rated as excellent for internal consistency. Researchers could use the communities from

the current study to provide baseline data for comparison purposes to communities that

did not lose their school. The results of this new survey may help determine how school

district mergers are viewed by the host community. In addition, a number of the schools

that merged were excluded from this study because they closed too recently. As the time

period since they merged increases, there is a better chance to get additional data to

further study the consequences of school building closures. Given the similarity in

opinions for residents who have had their school closed, it could further justify additional

studies that would include individuals from merged districts that still retained their

school. Whether a school building is closed because of reorganization or merger, leaders

should try to keep both communities thriving because the social costs are too great

Conclusions

It is clear that rural communities suffer population loss and heartbreak when its

rural school building is closed. “Quality of Life” and “sense of place” usually strengthen

222

the rural community. However, the loss of the school reduces the quality of life when the

school building is closed. Sense of place that normally comforts an individual, now only

brings pain. How can the communities survive such a significant loss? Some of the

communities have substituted the old school building as a new community center. Instead

of activities being run by the merged school, the community without a school promotes

activities run by the community or its organizations.

No matter which type of analysis is performed, school district mergers or

reorganizations damage rural communities. Subsequently, attempts to merge school

districts have been defeated often by both of the communities. As long as states see

merger as a way to fix their budgets there will be friction between the local community

and the state. Every policy maker, school leader, parent, and community member needs

to know about the social, economic, and human capital costs of closing a rural school. As

one of the informants interviewed in this research project, Reagan Wilson stated, “the

biggest mistake the State Education Department has made was to not help the losing

community survive.”

223

General References

Amberg, P. (2010). Where angels fear to tread: A non-librarian’s view of

the sustainability of Rural Libraries. Australasian Public Libraries and

Information Services, 23(1), pp 28-32.

Andrews, M., Duncombe, W. & Yinger, J. (2002). Revising economies of size in

American Education: Are we any closer to a consensus? Economics of Education

Review, 21, 245-262.





Bakker, A.B., Van Der Zee, K.I., Lewig, K. A., & Dollard, M.F. (2006). The relationship

between the big five personality factor and burnout: a study among volunteer

counselors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146, 31-50.

Barkley, D., Henry M., & Li, H., (2005). Does human capital affect rural economic

growth? Evidence from the south. The Role of Education, 10-15.

Barley, Z. & Beesley, A., (2007). Rural school success: What can we learn? Journal of

Research in Rural Education, 22, 1-16.

224

Briggs, T (2009, December 1) Wellsville/Scio schools: Merger success stories told, Olean

Times Herald. Retrieved from:

http://www.oleantimesherald.com/news/wellsville- scio-schools-merger-success-

stories-told/article_ca651c04-e5f8-5693-ab96-f0e8fc476c91.html

Bauch, P., (2009). School-community partnerships in rural schools: Leadership, renewal,

and a sense of place. Peabody Journal of Education, 76, 204-221.

Bertot, J. C. (2009). Capacity planning for broadband in public libraries: Issues and

strategies. Library Technology Reports, 45(1): 38-42, 2, 4. Retrieved from




Cabanis, J. (2008). Envisioning the next century. Retrieved from:

http://www.jenniferjames.com/articles/envisio/index.htm

Callicoon Business Association. (2015). Retrieved from:

http://www.visitcallicoon.com/BUSINESS/entertainment.html

Cashman, K. (2008). Leadership from the inside out: Becoming a leader for life. Provo,

UT: Executive Excellence Publishing.

Castells, N. (2010). Hope VI Neighborhood spillover effects in Baltimore. Cityscape: A

Journal of Policy Development and Research, 12 (1) 65-98.

Chad, K. & Miller, P. (2005). Do libraries matter? The rise of Library 2.0. Talis. pp 4-11

225

Chippone S. (2013, October 9) Proposal to merge Brocton, Westfield districts goes down

to defeat. The Buffalo News City and Region Retrieved from:

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/proposal-to-merge-brocton-westfield-

districts-goes-down-to-defeat-20131009

Christmann, R. (2013). Executive Director of Western New York Educational Service

Council (2013) Feasibility study for the purpose of consolidation of the Brocton

Central School District and Westfield Academy and Central School District.

Retrieved From: http://www.observertoday.com/pdf/news/582787_1.pdf

Clark, M. (2013). Communities cling to local schools despite state incentives. The Pew

Charitable Trusts. Retrieved from: http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-

analysis Converse, J. M. & Presser, S. (1986). Survey questions handcrafting the

standardized questionnaire. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publications. Series:

Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 63.

Creswell, J. W. (2013).Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. Los Angeles. Sage.

Cross, J., (2001). What is Sense of place? Paper presented at 12 Headwaters Conference,

Western State Colorado College, Gunnison, CO.

Dalkey, N. C. & Rourke, D. (1971). “Experimental Assessment of Delphi: Procedures

with Group Value judgments”. Rand, “pp” 8-24.

Dewey, J. (1922). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to Philosophy of

Education. New York. MacMillan Company. 434 p.

226

Dewey, J. (15 March, 2016) “John Dewey Quotes.” Quotes.net. STANDS4 LLC, 2016.

Web. 15 Mar. 2016. http://www.quotes.net/authors/John Dewey. Retrieved from:

http://www.quotes.net/authors/John+Dewey

Dreier, W., (1982). What happens when the high school leaves the community? Paper






Syracuse,NY: Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School of Citizenship and

Public Affairs. Retrieved from:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/propertytaxsession/opi/dors_school.pdf.








227

Eyre, E. & Finn, S. (2002, August-October). Closing costs: School consolidation in West

Virginia. Charleston Gazette. Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS

Code) (FIPS 6-4), (2010) FIPS Codes for Counties and County Equivalent

Entities. Retrieved from:

http://www2.census.gov/geo/docs/reference/codes/files/st36_ny_cou.tx

Fowler Jr, F., (1995). Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation. Applied Social

Research Methods Series. V. 38 SAGE Publications, Inc. USA.

Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. New York, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Friedman, T. & Mandelbaum, M. (2011). That used to be us. New York, New York:

Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Gallagher, W. (1993). The power of place. New York: HarperCollins.

Gee, D. J. (2014, March 8) Declining enrollment is forcing school districts in WNY to

consider merging in order to survive. The Buffalo News City and Region

Retrieved from: http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/schools/declining-

enrollment-is-forcing-school-districts-in-wny-to-consider-merging-in-order-to-

survive-20140308

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and

reference, 11.0 update (4th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon

228

Gerould, S. A. (2009, February 12) Westfield Residents reject, Ripley voters approve

merger Retrieved from:

http://www.observertoday.com/page/content.detail/id/519114/Westfield-

Residents-Reject--Ripley-Voters-Approve-Merger.html?nav=5093

Girouard, M. (1978). Life in the English Country House. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Gliem, J. A. and Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s

Alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-Type Scales. Presented at the Midwest

Research-to-Practice Conference and Community Education, The Ohio State

University,Columbus, OH, October 8-10 2003.

Goetz, S. & Rupasingha, A. (2005). How the returns to education in rural areas vary

across the nation. The Role of Education, 6-9.

Gould, P. & White, R. (1986). Mental Maps second edition. Winchester Massachusetts:

Allen & Unwin Inc

Haller, E. & Monk, D. (1988). New reforms, old reforms, and the consolidation of small

rural schools. Education Administration Quarterly, 24 (November) 470-483.

Hannah, K. (1997). Alternative funding for libraries: A plan for success. The Bottom

Line, 10(4), 169-175.

229

Hare, D. (1991). Identifying, recruiting, selecting, inducting and supervising rural

teachers. In A. DeYoung (Ed.), Rural education. Issues and practice (pp. 149-

175). New York: Garland.

Harmon, L., & Schafft, K., (2009). Rural school Leadership for collaborative community

development. The Rural Educator, 30, 4-9.




canton-and-potsdam-said-no-to-the-school-merger

Haski-Leventhal, D. & McLeigh, J.D. (2009). Firefighters volunteering beyond their

duty: an essential asset in rural communities. Journal of Rural and Community

Development, 4, 80-92.Heath, C. & Heath D. (2010) Switch: How to change

things when change is hard. New York, Broadway Books.

Heiser, P. (2013). To merge or not to merger Making sense of school mergers. Latham,

New York: New York State School Board Association.


Herzog, M. & Pittman, R. (1995). Home, family, and community: Ingredients in the

rural education equation. U.S. Department of Education. 388-463.

230

Howley, C. (1991). The rural education dilemma as part of the rural dilemma: Rural

education and economics. In A.J. De Young (Ed.) Rural Education: Issues and

Practices (pp.73-145). New York: Garland.

Howley, C., Johnson J., & Petrie J. (2011). Consolidation of Schools and Districts: What

the research says and What is means?, National Education Policy Center,

University of Colorado at Boulder, 1-24.

Hu, W. (April 14, 2011). New York School Districts Challenge State Mandates. New

York Times, N.Y./ Region.

Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/nyregion/new-york-school-

districts-challenge-state-mandates.html?_r=0

Huang, G. & Howley, C. (1993). Mitigating disadvantage: Effects of small-scaled

schooling on student achievement in Alaska. Journal of Research in Rural

Education 9: 137-49.

Huang, J. and Reilly, M. (2013). Using Generalizability Theory to Examine Manager and

Worker Perceptions of Skilled Trades Business Leadership Effectiveness and

ineffectiveness. In Huang, J. editor, Empirical Generalizability Theory Research

Examining Rating Variability, Reliability and Validity. Untested Ideas Research

Center, Niagara Falls, New York.



37.1/2, 129-148.

231

James, J. (2008). Ready, Set, Change.

Retrieved from:jenniferjames.com/articles/ready/index.htm

James, J. (2008). Mighty Morphin’ Law makers must respond to change.

Retrieved from: jenniferjames.com/articles/might/index.htm

Jarrett, D. (1978). The English landscape garden. New York: Rizzoli.

Kauffman, B. (2001). The tragedy of school consolidation. American Enterprise 12 (6):

50.

Kennedy, J. F. (1961). “Inaugural Address (1),” January 20, 1961, Public Papers of the

Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1961.

Kennedy, J. F. (1963). Re: United States Committee for UNOCEF July 25, 1963, “July

1963: 131” folder, White House Chronological File, box 11, John F. Kennedy

Presidential Library.

Kennedy, M. (2001). Thinking small. American School and University. 74 (1): 16-22.

Key, J. P. (1997). Research Design in Occupational Education: Module R10 Reliability

and Validity. Stillwater OK, Oklahoma State University. Retrieved from:

http://www.okstate.edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980a/5980/newpage18.htm

Killeen, K. & Sipple, J. (2000). School consolidation and transportation Policy: An

empirical and Institutional Analysis. Working Paper. Revised. Rural School and

Community Trust, Randolph, VT.

232

King, S. (2012). Increasing College-Going Rate, Parent Involvement, and Community

Participation in Rural Communities. The Rural Educator, 33, 20-26.

Kluever, J., & Finley, W. (2012). Making connections: Challenges and benefits of joint

use Libraries as seen in one community. School Libraries Worldwide, 18(1): pp



Knudsen, D. (2015). Current Market Conditions Report for Sullivan county Real Estate.

Retrieved from: http://www.catskill4sale.com/current-market-conditions-sullivan-

county- Catskills

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (2012). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass.

Krinhop, K. (1999). Leonardville: Cultural expression in a rural central Texas volunteer

fire department (Masters theses). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses database.

Langdon, P. (2000). The school consolidation plague. American Enterprise 1 (1): 22.

Langlois. A. & Anderson, D. (2002). Resolving Quality of Life/Well-being Puzzle:

Toward a New Model. Canadian Journal of Regional Science. 25 (3) pp 501-512.

Retrieved from: http://www.cjrs-rcsr.org/archives/25-3/langlois.pdf

233

Legutko, R. (2008). A Decade’s Difference: Research revisited on family influence of

rural high school students’ postsecondary decisions. The Rural Educator, 29, 4-7.

Liu, B. (1976). Quality of Life indicators in U.S. metropolitan areas: A statistical

analysis. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Lyson, T. (2002). What does a school mean to a community? Assessing the social and



Lyson, T. (2005). The importance of schools to rural community viability. The Role of

Education, 23-27.



Sociology 65, (5) 1001-1024.

Mann, P. S. (2007). Introductory Statistics Sixth Ed. John Wiley & Sons.

Martin, M. & Henry, A. (2012). Building rural communities through school-based

agriculture programs. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53, 110-123.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper. pp. 93.

Mehra, B., Black, K., Singh, V., & Nolt, J. (2011). Collaborations between LIS education

and rural libraries in the southern and central Appalachia: Improving librarian

technology literacy and management training. Journal of Education for Library

and Information Science, 52(3): pp 238-247. Retrieved from


234

Michaelides, M. A., Parpa, K. M., Henry, L. J., Thompson, G. B., & Brown, B. S. (2011).

Assessment of physical fitness aspects and their relationship to firefighters’ job

abilities. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(4), 956-965.

Miller, B. (1995). The role of rural schools in community development: policy issues and

implications. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 11, 163-172.

Mon, L., & Randeree, E. (2009). On the boundaries of reference services: Questioning

and library 2.0.Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 50(3),



National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.

Department of Education.

New York Government (2015). Cap New York Property Taxes: A citizen guide

Retrieved from: http://reforminggovernment.ny.gov/

New York State Association of School Business Officials. (2014). Why do school district

mergers fail? Albany, New York. Retrieved from: www.nysasbo.org.

New York State Rural Schools Association (2011 April 21). Needs Assessment Survey

prepared for the Scio Central School District and the Wellsville Central School

district. Retrieved from:

www.olsconsulting.com/downloads/projreport/sw_2011_04_21.pdf

235

Nolan, M. (2012, March 4) New York State school districts won’t merge even when

offered extra money Retrieved on January 24, 2016

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/new_york_state_school_district

.html

Norton, M. (2005). Executive leadership for effective administration. Boston: Pearson.



Pennsylvania School Boards Association. (2009). Merger/Consolidation of School

Districts: Does it save money and improve student achievement? Executive

Summary www.psba.org.

Perloff, H. S. (1969). “Policy Measures for the Environment”, extracted from “A

Framework for Dealing with Urban Environment: Introductory Statement” in The

Quality of the Urban Environment. Washington, D.C., Perloff, Harvey S., ed.,

Resources for the Future, Inc.

Perkins, K. (1989). Volunteer firefighters in the United States. Nonprofit and Voluntary

Sector Quarterly, 18, 269-277.




236

Polka, W. (2015). The American School as an Open-Social System: A Continuously

Evolving Institution Due to the Inactions of Six Key Heterogeneous Sub-Systems.

In Nicholas Sun-Keung Pang & Jinyan Huang. Eds. East-West Perspectives on

Educational Leadership and Policy. Untested Research Center, Niagara Falls,

New York.

Polka, W., & Guy, A. (2001). Developing a systematic approach to educational planning

for the new millennium: An analysis of the North American school as a complex

of heterogeneous systems. Educational Planning, 12(1), 27-33.

Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. Qualitative

Studies in Education, 8, 5-23.

Porter, E. (2012). Closures and Consolidation: Schools, farms, and population decline in

rural Illinois, Master of Arts Thesis, Illinois State University.


Pluribus Unum? Journal of Research in Rural Education, 15, 106-117.


(July, 2007).Status of eduction in rural America (NCES 2007-040). Washington,

DC.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences,

U.S. Department of Education.

237

Purcell, D. & Shackelford, R. (2005). An evaluation of the impact of rural school

consolidation: What challenges may a new round of rural school consolidation

have on the safety, educational performance, and social environment of rural

communities? Paper presented to the National Rural Association Executive

committee. January 13-15.

Quinn, B. (2010, March 20) No Merger. Wellsville Daily Reporter. Retrieved from:

http://www.wellsvilledaily.com/article/20100320/NEWS/303209992

Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion



University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for th degree of Doctor of

Education.

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Los Angeles, CA:

Sage.

Roulston, K., deMarrais, K., & Lewis, J.B. (2003). Learning to interview in the social

sciences. Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 643-668.

Saldana, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA:

Sage.

238

Schafft, K., Alter, T., & Bridger, J. (2006). Bringing the community along: A case study

of a school district’s information technology rural development initiative. Journal




pp.43-51.

Sell, R., & Leistritz, L. (1997). Socioeconomic impacts of school consolidation on host


186-205.

Sell, R., Leistritz L., & Thompson, J. (1996). Socio-Economic Impacts of school


Report. no. 347, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota. 1-54.

Sharratt, G., McClain, C., & Zehm, A. (1993). Vocational education in rural America: An

agenda for the 1990’s. The Rural Educator, 14, 21-26.

Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric Statistics for the behavior sciences. New York:

McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Simpson, C. R. (1996). A fraternity of danger: Volunteer fire companies and the

contradictions of modernization. American Journal of Economics and Sociology,

55, 17-34

Steele, F. (1981). The sense of place. Boston, Massachusetts: CBI Publishing Company,

Inc.

239

Stephens, M. (2007). Tools from "web 2.0 & libraries: Best practices for social software"

revisited. Library Technology Reports, 43(5): 15-31. Retrieved from


Stossell, J. (1992). ABC 20/20 report on the mystery of happiness: who has it…and how

to get it. New York: American Broadcasting Company.

Surface, J. (2011). Assessing the impact of twenty-first century rural school

consolidation.

Connexions module: m37444.

Sullivan, L. (2007). Grant funding for libraries. The Bottom Line, 20(4): 157-160.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08880450710843996

Szpaicher, D. (2015) Assistant Superintendent of Starpoint Central School. Personal

Communication.

Taylor, B. (2014). Personal communication.

The Buffalo News (1994, October 20) Ripley District rejects merger with Westfield

Retrieve from: https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-22649978.html

The White House, Office of Press Secretary. Executive Order: Establishment of the

White House Rural Council. (June 9, 2011). Retrieved from:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/3- years-after-bitter-people-clinging-guns-

speech-obama-creates-rural-council

240

Thompson III, A. M. & Bono, B. A. (1993). Work without wages: the motivation for

volunteer firefighters. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc. 52,

323-343

Tomlinson, R. (1968). A Geographic Information Systems for Regional Planning.

Retrieved from: https://gisandscience.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/1-a-gis-for-

regional-planning_ed.pdf

United States Census Bureau. 2015. Retrieved on: September 21, 2015.

http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/about.html

Von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). The Theory of Open Systems in Physics & Biology. Science

Vol. 3.

Voth, D., & Dansforth, D. (1981). Effect of schools upon small community growth and

decline. The Rural Sociologist. 1(6) 364-369..



making. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 8, 11-19

Watson, P. (1994). Founding Mothers: The contribution of women’s organizations to

public library development in the United States. The Library Quarterly:

Information, Community, Policy, 64(3), pp 233-269

Weiner, N. (1948). Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and

the Machine. New York: MIT Press.

Weiner, N. (1950). The Human Use of Human Beings. New York: Avon Books.

241

Wettersten, K., Guilmino,A., Herrick, C., Hunter, P., Kim,G., Jagow,D., Beecher, T.,

Faul, K., Baker, A., Rudolph,S., Ellenbecker, K., & McCormick, J. (2005).

Predicting educational and vocational attitudes among rural high school students.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 658-663.

Whitman, V. (2006, October 20). Sullivan West mulls closing high school.

Times Herald-Record. Retrieved from:

http://www.recordonline.com/article/20061020/News/610200328

Wiegand, W. (2005). Collecting contested titles: The experience of five small public

libraries in the rural Midwest, 1893-1956. Libraries & Culture, 40(3), 368-

384,222. Retrieved from:


Woods, M.D., Doeksen, G.A., & St. Clair, C. (2005). Measuring local economic Impacts

of the education sector. The Role of Education, 16-21.

Zeeillk, M. (1988). Astronomy: The Evolving Universe. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

242

Appendix A


I am Ruth Anne Buzzard and I am a student at Niagara University in the Leadership and Policy Ph. D. program. I am working on a research study; you are invited to participate in this study. Your task is to complete the following questionnaire. School Building = SB. The survey consists of 20 items in a Likert scale format (1= major negative change, 2=some negative change, 3=no change, 4=some positive change, 5=major positive change). There is no right or wrong answer to these items. You should complete the questionnaire according to your own experience. It will take you about 15 minutes. Thank you for your participation!

Part One Demographical Information Please mark the appropriate choice. Gender: Male [ ] Female [ ]

Children of school age: Yes [ ] No [ ] Member of: fire company [ ], Kiwanis [ ], Lions [ ] School election voter: Yes [ ] No [ ] Your age less than or equal to 30 [ ] 31 to 40 [ ] 41 to 50 [ ] greater than 50 [ ]

Your highest education: high school [ ] trade [ ] Associate [ ] Bachelor or above [ ] Part Two: Rural School Building Closing (RSBC) Scale Please circle the appropriate choice according to the scales below. 20 statements (1 =major negative change 2 =some negative change, 3 = no change 4 =some positive change 5 =major positive change)

Connectedness

1. Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

3. The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 5. My feelings for my community have changed since the SB closure 1 2 3 4 5

Development of Identity and Culture

6. Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB. 1 2 3 4 5 8. My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed. 1 2 3 4 5 9. Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Library usage has changed after the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

Ideology and Politics

11. School taxes have changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

12. Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. 1 2 3 4 5

13. Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

14. Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

15. Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed. 1 2 3 4 5 Activism and Civic Engagement

16. Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB. 1 2 3 4 5

17. The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

18. Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. 1 2 3 4 5

19. Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

20. Local employment has changed since the SB closure. 1 2 3 4 5

243

Appendix B


244

Appendix C

Interview Protocol Qualitative Impact of school closings on rural communities


1. How long have you lived in the rural community? 2. If you moved here why did you select this rural community?




closed?


in your community?


the students?


on your community?


school?





245

Appendix D


246

Appendix E

SSI Research Report to the Researcher

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ School Closings Datamap

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qschool ‐ 2 (Single) Text: SCHOOL (qschool:01)Angelica (qschool:02)Belmont (qschool:03)Brant (qschool:04)Cherry Valley (qschool:05)Duggan (qschool:06)Limestone (qschool:07)Little Valley (qschool:08)Narrowsburg (qschool:09)Rushford (qschool:10)Springfield (qschool:11)West Frankfort (qschool:12)Williamstown ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qintro ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Hello! My name is ____, I am calling from a national market research firm. We'd like to ask you a few questions about issues on Education, particularly on the effects of School closing on rural communities. We are not selling anything and your responses will be kept strictly confidential and anonymous. Is this a good time to participate? (qintro:1)Yes, available (qintro:2)No, not available, schedule a callback (qintro:3)Refused to participate ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs1 ‐ 1 (Single)

247

Text: Gender (qs1:1)Male (qs1:2)Female ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs2 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: First, I would like to know if you have children of school age? (qs2:1)Yes (qs2:2)No (qs2:3)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs3 ‐ 7 (Multiple) Text: Are you a member of any of the following: (qs3:1)Fire company (qs3:2)Kiwanis (qs3:3)Lions (qs3:4)None of the above ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs4 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Are you an active school election voter? (qs4:1)Yes (qs4:2)No (qs4:3)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs5 ‐ 1 (Single)

248

Text: What is your age? Please stop me when I get your range... (qs5:1)18‐30 years old (qs5:2)31‐40 years old (qs5:3)41‐50 years old (qs5:4)51 or older (qs5:5)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: qs6 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: What is the highest level of education you have completed or the highest degree you have received so far? (qs6:1)Less than high school (qs6:2)High school graduate or equivalent (for example, a GED) (qs6:3)Completed some college, but no degree (qs6:4)Associate's degree (qs6:5)College graduate (for example, B.A., A.B. or B.S.) (qs6:6)Completed some graduate school, but no degree (qs6:7)Completed graduate school (for example, M.S., M.D., Ph.D.) (qs6:8)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q1 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Quality of life has changed in my community since the SB closure. (q1:1)major negative change (q1:2)some negative change (q1:3)no change (q1:4)some positive change (q1:5)major positive change (q1:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

249

Question: q2 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Volunteerism has changed in the community since the SB closure. (q2:1)major negative change (q2:2)some negative change (q2:3)no change (q2:4)some positive change (q2:5)major positive change (q2:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q3 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ The center of the rural community activity has changed since the SB closure. (q3:1)major negative change (q3:2)some negative change (q3:3)no change (q3:4)some positive change (q3:5)major positive change (q3:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q4 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Interest in living in the community has changed since the SB closure.

250

(q4:1)major negative change (q4:2)some negative change (q4:3)no change (q4:4)some positive change (q4:5)major positive change (q4:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q5 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ My feelings for my community have changed since the SB closure. (q5:1)major negative change (q5:2)some negative change (q5:3)no change (q5:4)some positive change (q5:5)major positive change (q5:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q6 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Lifestyles in the rural community have changed since the SB closure. (q6:1)major negative change (q6:2)some negative change (q6:3)no change (q6:4)some positive change (q6:5)major positive change (q6:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

251

Question: q7 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Pride in the community has changed since the closure of the SB. (q7:1)major negative change (q7:2)some negative change (q7:3)no change (q7:4)some positive change (q7:5)major positive change (q7:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q8 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ My interest in the impact of school closure has changed since the local SB closed. (q8:1)major negative change (q8:2)some negative change (q8:3)no change (q8:4)some positive change (q8:5)major positive change (q8:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q9 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Student satisfaction with school has changed since the SB closure.

252

(q9:1)major negative change (q9:2)some negative change (q9:3)no change (q9:4)some positive change (q9:5)major positive change (q9:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q10 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Library usage has changed after the SB closure. (q10:1)major negative change (q10:2)some negative change (q10:3)no change (q10:4)some positive change (q10:5)major positive change (q10:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q11 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ School taxes have changed since the SB closure. (q11:1)major negative change (q11:2)some negative change (q11:3)no change (q11:4)some positive change (q11:5)major positive change (q11:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q12 ‐ 1 (Single)

253

Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Adjustment of school children attending the host school has changed. (q12:1)major negative change (q12:2)some negative change (q12:3)no change (q12:4)some positive change (q12:5)major positive change (q12:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q13 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Interest in moving into the community has changed since SB closure. (q13:1)major negative change (q13:2)some negative change (q13:3)no change (q13:4)some positive change (q13:5)major positive change (q13:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q14 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Police presence in the community has changed after the SB closure. (q14:1)major negative change

254

(q14:2)some negative change (q14:3)no change (q14:4)some positive change (q14:5)major positive change (q14:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q15 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Awareness of potential changes in my community since the SB closure has changed. (q15:1)major negative change (q15:2)some negative change (q15:3)no change (q15:4)some positive change (q15:5)major positive change (q15:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q16 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Traffic has changed in the community since the closure of the SB. (q16:1)major negative change (q16:2)some negative change (q16:3)no change (q16:4)some positive change (q16:5)major positive change (q16:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q17 ‐ 1 (Single)

255

Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ The amount of business has changed in the community since the SB closure. (q17:1)major negative change (q17:2)some negative change (q17:3)no change (q17:4)some positive change (q17:5)major positive change (q17:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q18 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Community activities have changed since the closure of the SB. (q18:1)major negative change (q18:2)some negative change (q18:3)no change (q18:4)some positive change (q18:5)major positive change (q18:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q19 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Recruitment of volunteer firefighters has changed after the SB closure. (q19:1)major negative change (q19:2)some negative change

256

(q19:3)no change (q19:4)some positive change (q19:5)major positive change (q19:6)Don't Know / Refused ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Question: q20 ‐ 1 (Single) Text: Next, I would like to ask you a few questions about Rural School Building Closing (RSBC). Please rate the following statements using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is major negative change, 2 is some negative change, 3 is no change, 4 is some positive change, and 5 as the highest score as major positive change. Agent note: SB means School Building ‐ Local employment has changed since the SB closure. (q20:1)major negative change (q20:2)some negative change (q20:3)no change (q20:4)some positive change (q20:5)major positive change (q20:6)Don't Know / Refused

257

Appendix F

SSI Research Company Report to the Researcher

Dead Attempts Rate

Max 4.7

Avg 3.3

Min 2.7

Attempts Rate

Max 58.3

Avg 49.9

Min 31.5

258

Appendix G

SSI Research Report to the Researcher Continued

Completed Interviews [I] I 220 Terminates (Partials) [P] P 7 Eligible, non-interview - Refusals [R] R 339 Eligible, non-interview - Non Contact [NC] NC 5741 Eligible, non-interview - Other [O] O 39 Unknown eligibility, non-interview [UH] UH 5303 Not Eligible [NE] NE 150 Not Eligible - Screeners & Quota Shutdowns [SO] SO 0 Completed Interviews 220Average Length 7 min 05 secNet Effective Incidence 100%Cooperation Rate 38%Cooperation

Max 45.45%

Avg 39.03%

Min 29.27%

Dates

Start 29-Dec-15

Mid 1-Jan-16

Last 4-Jan-16

Length

Max 7 min 10 sec

Avg 7 min 05 sec

Min 7 min 00 sec

what every policy maker, school leader, parent, and

Documents