Challenges, Supports, and Strategies in the Implementation of School District Consolidation in Maine

• In Event: Roundtable Session 124
  In Roundtable Session: Lessons Learned From School District Reorganization in Maine: Process, Progress, and Early Impacts of State-Mandated District Consolidation

Abstract

Objective
This paper describes the challenges, supports, and strategies as school districts in Maine responded to the 2007 legislative mandate to consolidate. The presentation focuses on the planning process as districts organized for consolidation in the first year and a half following the legislation.

Perspective
The literature on district consolidation typically focuses on a particular aspect of school or district size, fiscal efficiency, or educational impacts related to equity (e.g., Berry, 2007; Berry and West, 2010; Brasington, 2003; Duncombe and Yinger, 2007, 2010; Hicks and Rusalkina, 2004; Johnson, 2006; Monk and Haller, 1986). Research on the process of school district reorganization, and resources or structures to support that process, is scant (Chance and Cummins, 1998). This investigation seeks to address the gap in research by describing the process of reorganization as it unfolded from the perspective of those leading the work—school district leaders, community members, and state-sponsored facilitators.

Methods and Data Sources
This investigation used qualitative research methods (interviews, documents, observation) and a case study design. The primary source of data for this investigation is interviews with district leaders, community members, and state-sponsored facilitators from 15 groups of Maine districts engaged in reorganization planning from 2007- 2009. Interviews were conducted at multiple points in time, recorded and transcribed. Documents from the state, districts, and media reports were collected and used to triangulate other data sources. Observations of planning meetings were documented through fieldnotes. Researchers analyzed data for each case through analytic tables, drawing on all sources of data. Cross case analysis followed a similar process and use of analytic tables to identify themes and patterns (Yin, 2009).

Findings
The interviews surfaced consistent themes related to the state policy. The short timeframe for policy development and implementation, and the use of a mandated approach with fiscal penalties combined to create resentment at the local level and even resistance in some cases.
Other significant challenges related to districts’ self-interest in selecting consolidation partners. Districts were motivated to select partners partly based on size , fiscally neutral impacts, and compatibility of educational programming or philosophy. Decisions about governance, representation on the regional school board, and cost sharing were the major issues that frustrated districts.
Factors that facilitated district consolidation included a history of prior collaboration among partnering districts and mutual interests. Superintendents provided information and assistance in developing reorganization plans. Use of a planning committee and a state-sponsored facilitator provided a structure to accomplish the complex work.
Strong leadership from superintendents, board members, or community leaders and savvy communication strategies were helpful in bringing districts together and obtaining local approval of consolidation plans.
Findings illustrate the hard, messy work involved in school district consolidation.

Significance
This research addresses gaps in the literature and informs state and local policymakers about factors that constrain or facilitate the process of district consolidation. The findings have relevance for both policymaking and implementation.

Authors

• Janet C. Fairman, University of Maine

• Christine Donis-Keller, Public Consulting Group

• David L. Silvernail, University of Southern Maine

• Walter J. Harris, University of Maine