School Consolidation: What School Administrators Need to Know 317Financially the districts were similar with approximate general funds and although one district
had approximately $700,000 more bonded indebtedness, the same district also has a seven
million dollar higher valuation which offset the difference.
Politically, the state legislature wanted more school consolidations as demonstrated by
threats of removing any preferential funding for small schools and plans to force
consolidation for districts with fewer than 100 students.
Data Sources
A case study was conducted on the consolidation of two rural districts. Data were
collected the second year of consolidation, 2007. Data sources included the artifacts of board
minutes, newspaper articles, and state reports. Semi-structured interviews of the super-
intendent and BOE members were recorded, transcribed, and coded for predominant themes.
Results
The researcher sought to identify the events in the consolidation process used by the two
districts. A review of the process indicated that most events were deliberate and some were
serendipitous. Through the late 1990s and early 2000s, both communities experienced
declining enrollment. During those years, board of education members and superintendents in
the five nearby communities had informally discussed the possibility of consolidation.
Nothing seemed to present itself as an opportunity and plans did not materialized. However,
in a proactive manner, a few of the boards had carefully maintained and deliberately improved
the community school facilities. The obvious benefit was an improved facility, but an added
benefit was that in the event of consolidation, the community would have a facility to offer
up; thus improving the odds of having a school sited in their community. Both boards of
education, in the communities that later consolidated, had informally discussed the possibility
of consolidation; but, they moved in slow, deliberate steps over a four -year time period.
Then an opportunity presented itself. In 2002 one district had a superintendent vacancy
and the two districts decided to share that position and those of both the high school and
elementary school principals. Both BOEs met throughout the year to monitor progress. The
plan was felt to be successful and the following year, 2003, the sharing of administrators
continued and some faculty were shared. These were faculty positions that neither school
could support full time. The football teams were combined.
The third year, 2004, resulted in the combination of all athletics programs. As all the
athletic teams were now combined, new team colors and a mascot were chosen. This step
was a high water mark in the process. Both communities were fiercely proud of their team
histories and this meant student athletes were now, both literally and figuratively, on the same
team. It presented a very visible break with the past. The green and white and red and white
school colors where exchanged for blue and white uniforms. Fans learned a new school song.
The student councils selected the new eagle mascot to retain aspects of both the former
warrior and cardinal mascots. Parents and other community members were getting used to
cheering together, working together, and planning together. Two more shared faculty
positions were added.
By the fourth year, 2005, all shared positions continued and the addition of a world
language teacher, shared between the schools, expanded the program of study. Prior to this, a
world language was provided through video distance learning so the addition of a live teacher
was viewed positively. At this time, several staff members and all administrators worked in