A recent report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute reveals that school closures may become an inevitable reality for many districts grappling with declining student enrollments. The study indicates that approximately 25% of schools nationwide experienced enrollment drops of around 20% since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, chronically low-performing schools were found to be over twice as likely to have significant enrollment declines compared to their higher-performing counterparts.
Authored by Sofoklis Goulas, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, the report highlights that nearly 500 schools designated as chronically low-performing by state authorities have seen substantial enrollment losses in the aftermath of the pandemic. As school districts prepare budgets without the financial cushion of federal COVID-19 emergency funds, these under-enrolled and low-performing schools may face potential closures. However, the report cautions that considerations such as the availability of quality educational alternatives for students and logistical implications of closures must also be taken into account.
The Fordham executives acknowledged the sensitive nature of closure decisions, describing them as “painful” and “politically fraught.” They noted, “we understand why district officials and local leaders often kick the school-closure can down the road for as long as they can,” yet emphasized that many will eventually need to confront the fate of their nearly empty buildings.
Cost savings from closing schools typically stem from reduced labor expenses. A blog post by EdSource, referencing insights from Edunomics Lab, estimates that closing 1 in every 15 schools could result in a 4% budget savings for districts. However, the authors cautioned that financial considerations should not overshadow the effectiveness of a school in fulfilling its educational mission.
The Fordham study found that from the 2019-20 school year to the 2022-23 school year, about 15% of low-performing schools lost 20% of their student body, compared to 7% of higher-performing schools. The report also noted that low-performing schools were more frequently situated in high-poverty, urban areas, and often operated as charter schools.
The report categorizes low-performing schools based on specific federal law provisions, including:
- States’ identification of the lowest-performing 5% of Title I schools.
- High school graduation rates below 67%.
- Title I schools with low-performing student subgroups that haven’t shown improvement after receiving targeted supports.
States such as Louisiana, Maine, Nevada, and West Virginia were identified as having the highest proportions of chronically low-performing schools.
Goulas emphasized that low-performing schools are not inherently “bad” and acknowledged the various factors states consider when labeling a school as low-performing, leading to different identification practices across states. Nevada and New Mexico reported the highest rates of schools with substantial enrollment declines during the study period.
Nationally, 8% of schools experienced enrollment losses of 20% or more from 2019-20 to 2022-23, a notable increase from 5% in the preceding three years. The report also provides a list of 500 chronically low-performing schools that have faced significant enrollment declines.
The report concludes that regardless of the underlying causes, under-enrollment poses challenges for school districts, and both under-enrolled and chronically low-performing schools warrant attention from policymakers. It recommends that districts address the challenges of these schools by considering systemic inequities, strategically managing budget resources, and prioritizing vulnerable student populations. Nevertheless, the report acknowledges that in certain situations, consolidation or closure of schools may be unavoidable.
