From the Oklahoman:
Oklahoma governor eyes voluntary consolidations of school districtsGov. Mary Fallin says she will encourage public school districts to consolidate or share administrative services. Oklahoma has 522 school districts in its 77 counties.http://newsok.com/oklahoma-governor-eyes-voluntary-consolidations-of-school-districts/article/3682716



According to the Census, OK has about 667,000 school aged children. The top ten districts have an enrollment of about 226,000 students. That means the remaining 512 districts have en enrollment of about 441,000, for an average of about 860 students per district. By comparison, OKC has 43,000 students, Tulsa - 41,000; Moore - 22,600; Edmond - 22,000.

This info was from a cursory glance at the Dept of Education Website. There may be more data available, but I am curious to see how many "districts" have less than 100 student enrolled.

Seems like there could be some common sense cost sharing in administrative oversight, as well as sharing of technology, and the ability to offer more advanced courses. I think we should do away with the "voluntary" part of this and do some involuntary consolidation.

This is something that's been discussed as a good idea forever. If she can get it accomplished, I'll be impressed.

Our state gov. she will encourage [the local elected politicos] to voluntarily implement school consolidation is a bit like a mom suggesting her kiddo's friends pick up their rooms at home on Thurs. so they have more playtime on Saturday. Not really in control of those other houses, but hey, she got to hear herself speak and someone else talk about it to boot.

Folks have talked voluntary consolidation for over three decades. If it is going to take place in any measurable manner, it won't be through a voluntary process. Not saying it should or should not transpire, only that it's fairly clear the voluntary route is pretty much a non-issue unless the end game is part of a 100+ year plan.

Them stating the number of years to complete college being related to basic courses and consolidation with this seems a bit of a red herring. There was almost no one I knew that did not breeze trough the basic required math, writing and science classes. The vast majority of the extra time for people I knew was due to changing majors for no longer wanting to do what they thought when they started, not planning what they want to do before starting college, partying/not studying/not going to classes or having problems with the most difficult classes specific to their major.

They tried this in Arkansas and it didn't go over well. For many small communities, their little schools are their only real source of pride and people in them get very angry when this subject is brought up.

It's a political non-starter.

Also, funny enough, with charter schools and school choice, we're for all intents and purposes vastly expanding the number of school districts out there. Every charter school out there does all of the same things within itself which ordinary school districts do. They have their own school boards and the principal is basically also the superintendent.

There are a lot of more rural school districts that may need to be consolidated say for instance all the school districts in Sequoyah county. This should probably also be done in Tulsa and OKC metro area's also. It would really help make education in the state better. But it would pretty much have to be forced on every one. Especially in rural areas what are people gonna say your trying to take away my vian wolverines. etc, etc.

If anything, OKC and Tulsa should be split up. When an administration becomes so big and bloated that it is possible to hide incompetent administrators by placing them into the bureaucracy, things are too big.

Several southern states have their school districts by county, with only the largest cities having their own school systems. Granted, geographically speaking, counties in OK are far larger, but its something to consider.

I do agree that this is a non-starter politically. Hence Fallin's half-assed appeal for schools to "voluntarily" consolidate.

Kansas is much further along on this issue than Oklahoma and most of their rural areas are similar to ours.

What’s needed is some type of state incentive and perhaps some help. We should look at states who have done this successfully.
It would save us all money in the long run and help produce a better product.

Some of the proposals have been to not combine the districts, but to combine the administrative items. So thing like the superintendent and directors of this and that. It makes sense for those smaller communities, but there would always be some issue someone would have where they would say that money is going more to one town over another. We already get that inside larger districts today.

I thought the primary platform point of Gov. Fallin's candidacy was reduction of government spending. Shouldn't she just force this through; what're they going to do, vote Democratic? :tongue: So long as it's reducing other peoples' benefits, I suppose...

I thought the primary platform point of Gov. Fallin's candidacy was reduction of government spending. Shouldn't she just force this through; what're they going to do, vote Democratic? :tongue: So long as it's reducing other peoples' benefits, I suppose...

Tell ya what. go into small town Oklahoma, even medium to large town Oklahoma, and strike up a conversation in a diner or a PTO meeting about how much better off everyone, including their children, would be if only folks would check their egos and local control desires and turn over major decisions about their school to someone from out of town, especially some near by rival town with a larger population, relegating the perspective of the locals to a minority position. Let us know how that turns out for you.

There is still a lot of populist at heart in this state, and it really shows through regarding schools and how they function.
Now if you ask them to get behind a proposal to shut down the state dept. of ed and divide those funds into classroom dollars, irrespective of whether you are talking the current admin or the couple of decades of Garrett's admin run, they likely would leap on that notion.

I thought the primary platform point of Gov. Fallin's candidacy was reduction of government spending. Shouldn't she just force this through; what're they going to do, vote Democratic? :tongue: So long as it's reducing other peoples' benefits, I suppose...

It is easy to campaign against generic terms like government waste but when it comes down to cutting/restructuring actual programs you start getting a lot of pushback.

It is easy to campaign against generic terms like government waste but when it comes down to cutting/restructuring actual programs you start getting a lot of pushback.

100% correct.

You have all the supposedly ultra-conservative politicians pontificating about responsible spending but as soon as something is on the chopping block that affects their constituents, they fight like mad against any cuts. See Jim Inhofe as a prime example. Cutbacks are great as long as it's done by someone else; most politicians are more than happy to take pork barrel spending while simultaneously decrying others for the same.


Most of these small towns don't have much left other than their independent school districts and they are not going to willingly give them up.

It seems that every small district under X,000 students could share the same Superintendent and board in a district/county situation but each maintain a principal, athletic director, and their mascot etc etc, cut the unessesary overhead cost and agree that 100% of all cuts go to teachers who actually impower students. I worked with school districts once upon a time and there are definely cases where some middle sized districts could probably make it without 2-3 assistant/deputy superintendents, and numerous other positions. I respect the administrations but at the end of the day it's a business office and the teachers and principles are who matter, or did in my education.

100% correct.

You have all the supposedly ultra-conservative politicians pontificating about responsible spending but as soon as something is on the chopping block that affects their constituents, they fight like mad against any cuts. See Jim Inhofe as a prime example. Cutbacks are great as long as it's done by someone else; most politicians are more than happy to take pork barrel spending while simultaneously decrying others for the same.



Most of these small towns don't have much left other than their independent school districts and they are not going to willingly give them up.

Yeah that's like all politicians from the far right to the far left to the center.