Community School Model: Is It an Alternative for School Closures in Rural Territories?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/EEC.2019.007Keywords
community school; rural depopulation; small rural schools; school closure; rural municipalitiesAbstract
In the light of rural depopulation and a decreasing number of schoolchildren, municipalities with rural territories face a question regarding whether to close small rural schools or seek alternatives for school operation. The analysis of a quantitative survey of rural municipalities and rural schools is focused on these main questions: what are the extended functions of rural schools with pupils less than 100, and whether the community school model in rural municipalities may be considered as an alternative to school closures in the context of depopulation of rural territories. The results of quantitative surveys are supplemented and explained by the data of 58 in-depth interviews with different stakeholders, living or working in rural areas. The main findings show that rural schools and munici- palities positively evaluate the approach of community schools with extended func- tions, and partly it is an adaptation strategy for the diminishing number of pupils. However, extended functions and the community school model do not serve as an important argument for keeping a school open, but as a means for attracting pupils from neighbouring municipalities, and is a form of competition between municipalities. The article is prepared with funding from the EEA/ Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 under Project Contract n° NFI/R/2014/014.
References
Assmo, P. And E. Wihlborg 2012 ‘Public services choices when there are no alternatives? – A paradox of new public management in rural areas’ The Journal of Rural and Community Development 7(2): 1–17.
Autti, O. And E. K. Hyry-Beihammer 2014 ‘School closures in rural Finnish communities’ Journal of Research in Rural Education 29(1): 1–17.
Ball, S. J. 2015 ‘Subjectivity as a site of struggle: refusing neoliberalism?’ British Journal of Sociology of Education.
Ball, S. J. 2010 ‘The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity’ Journal of Education Policy 18(2): 215–28.
Brandt, J. and H. Vejre 20030 ‘Multifunctional landscapes – motives, concepts and perceptions’ in: J. Brandt and H. Vejre (eds) Multifunctional landscapes. Volume 1: Theory, values and history, Southampton: WIT Press, pp. 3–32.
Baltic Institute of Social Sciences [BISS] 2013 Pētījums: Sorosa fonda – Latvija iniciatīvas „Pārmaiņu iespēja skolām” 2. kārtas „Skola kā kopienas attīstības resurss” novērtējums. Rīga: SFL, 2013 [unpublished research study report].
Campbell-Allen, R., Shah, M., Sullender, R. R. and Zazove 2009 Full-service schools: Policy review and recommendations. Harvard Graduate School of Education, http://a100educationalpolicy.pbworks.com/f/Full+Service+ Schools+complete+paperZ.pdf (07.07.2019).
Coalition for Community Schools website 2019 http://www.communityschools. org/aboutschools/what_is_a_community_school.aspx (07.07.2019).
Dryfoos, J. 1994 Full-service schools. A revolution in health and social services for children, youth and families. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Egelund, N. and H. Laustsen 2006 ‘School closure: What are the consequences for the local society?’ Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 50(4): 429–39.
Geske, A., Grīnfelds, A., Kangro, A., Kiseļova, R. and L. Mihno 2015 Quality of education. International comparison. Latvia in OECD Programme for International Student Assessment. Riga: University of Latvia.
Hammer, P. C., Hughes, G., McClure, C., Reeves, C. and D. Salgado 2005 Rural teacher recruitment and retention practices: A review of the research literature, national survey of rural superintendents, and case studies of programs in Virginia. Charleston, WV: Edvantia.
Hannum, W., Irvin, M. J., Banks, J. B. and T. W. Farmer 2009 ‘Distance education use in rural schools’ Journal of Research in Rural Education 24(3): 1–15.
Hargreaves, L., Kvalsund, R. and M. Galton 2009 ‘Reviews of research on rural schools and their communities in British and Nordic countries: Analytical perspectives and cultural meaning’ International Journal of Educational Research 48(2): 80–88.
Fernandez-Cano, A. 2016 ‘A methodological critique of the PISA evaluations’ RELIEVE 22(1): 1–16.
Katane, I. 2013 ‘Changeable educational environment of rural school for sus- tainable development’ Engineering for Rural Development: Proceedings of the 12th International Scientific Conference 12: 616–22, Jelgava: Latvia University of Agriculture, http://www.tf.llu.lv/conference/proceedings2013/ Papers/114_Katane_I.pdf. (07.07.2019).
Katane, I. and A. Laizane 2012 ‘The diversity of educational environmental models of Latvian rural schools’ International Journal of Multidisciplinary Thought 2(1): 433–53.
Kļave, E. and A. Tūna 2014 ‘School as a community center and resource: the case of Latvia’ In: Scientific journal published by The King Stanisław Leszczyński Higher School of Humanities in Leszno (Poland) “Dialogi o Kulturze i Edu- kacji” (“Dialogues on Culture and Education”).
Kvalsund, R. 2009 ‘Centralized decentralization or decentralized centralization? A review of newer Norwegian research on schools and their communities’ International Journal of Educational Research 48(2): 89–99.
Leta 2017 Šadurskis: Skolēnu skaita un skolu skaita izmaiņu process būtiski atšķiras [Šadurskis: the changes in number of pupils and number of schools differ significantly] Diena. 24.08.2017, https://www.diena.lv/raksts/latvija/viedokli/sadurskis-skolenu-skaita-un-skolu-skaita-izmainu-process-butiski- atskiras-14178996 (07.07.2019).
Ling, C., Handley, J. and J. Rodwell 2007 ‘Restructuring the post-industrial landscape: A multifunctional approach’ Landscape Research 32(3): 285–309. Lind, T. and O. Stjernström 2015 ‘Organizational challenges for schools in rural municipalities: Cross-national comparisons in a Nordic context’ Journal of Research in Rural Education 30(6): 1–14.
Lyson, T. 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): 131–7.
Maier, L. and M. Shobayashi 2001 Multifunctionality: Towards an analytical framework, Paris: OECD.
Miller, B. 1995 ‘The role of rural schools in community development: Policy issues and implications’ Journal of Research in Rural Education 11(3): 163–72.
Nitta, K., Holley, M. and S. Wrobel 2010 ‘A phenomenological study of rural school consolidation’ Journal of Research in Rural Education 25(2): 1–19.
Ozga, J. 2008 ‘Governing knowledge: Research steering and research quality’ European Educational Research Journal 7(3): 261–72.
Press, F., Sumsion, J. and S. Wong 2011 Integrated early year’s provision in Australia. A research project for the professional support coordinators alliance (PSCA). Bathurst: Charles Sturt University, https://childaustralia.org.au/wp- content/uploads/2017/03/CSU-PSCA-Integrated-Services-Report_Final-1. pdf (07.07.2019).
Shi, W. and H. Woolley 2014 ‘Managing for multifunctionality in urban open spaces: Approaches for sustainable development’ Journal of Urban Manage- ment 3(1–2): 3–21.
Smith, M. K. 2004 Full-service schooling. The encyclopaedia of informal educa- tion, http://www.infed.org/schooling/f-serv.htm. (07.07.2019).
Solstad, K. J. 2009 Bygdeskolen i Velstands-Noreg (Rural schools in Western- Norway). Opplandske bokforlag.
Strode, I., Vanags, A., Strazdiņa, R., Dirveiks, J., Dombrovska, H., Pakalna, D. and K. Pabērza 2012 Economic value and impact of public libraries in Latvia. Study report. Kultūras informācijas sistēmu centrs.
Tayler, C., Cloney, D., Farrell, A. and T. Muscat 2008 Hubs Report: Child care and family services hubs. Impact study in rural and regional communities. Brisbane: QUT, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/26940/ (07.07.2019).
Tūna, A. 2014 Development of the school as multifunctional community resource in Latvia: opportunities and challenges. Proceeding of the International Sci- entific Conference May 23th–24th, 2014 Volume I., http://journals.ru.lv/index. php/SIE/article/viewFile/759/873 (07.07.2019).
Turlajs, J. 2017 Optimāla vispārējās izglītības iestāžu tīkla modeļa izveide Latvijā. Pētījuma prezentācija, [Optimal network of primary and secondary schools in Latvia. Presentation], http://titania.saeima.lv/livs/saeimasnotikumi.nsf/0/ b4632f82ddc9c45ec225811c001fe03f/$FILE/IZM.MK.P%C4%93t.pptx (07.07.2019).
Villa, M. 2015 Literature review: Research and evaluation of school centralization and structural change. The case of Norway. Trondheim: Norwegian Center for Rural Research, http://xn--skoleogsmsamfunn-lob.no/wp-content/up- loads/2016/08/Litterature-Review-Villa.pdf (07.07.2019).
Witten, K., McCreanor, T. and R. Kearns 2007, The place of schools in parents’ community belonging, New Zealand Geographer 63(2): 141–8.
Woods, M. 2006 ‘Redefining the “rural question”: The new “politics of the rural” and social policy’ Social Policy and Administration 40: 579–95.
Åberg-Bengtsson, L. 2009 ‘The smaller the better? A review of research on small rural schools in Sweden’ International Journal of Educational Research 48(2): 100–8.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Inese Supule

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 48
Number of citations: 0