Current Structure

The first step for the ASR Committee was to study the current administrative structure. In January 2005, the OISD had a full-time, on-island employee in the superintendent's position. That individual's job consisted of two part-time components: a .75 superintendent and a .25 special ed director. There were also two full-time principals: an elementary and a middle/high school principal, a full-time business manager and a part-time bookkeeper. Included in this report is a breakdown of duties performed by each of these individuals (see Supporting Research).

Identifying Administrative Structure Paradigms

Having established what the current structure looked like, the ASR committee then came up with a spectrum of other possible administrative structures. The spectrum ranged from wholly consolidating with other island school districts and sharing a superintendent, to eliminating the superintendent's position entirely, to not changing the structure at all. The committee was charged with remaining objective in its pursuit of the best options for the district, to carefully analyze available research, and to provide documentation. 

Research

Once the ASR identified different administrative structures, the next step was research. Research was conducted in three ways:

1. Abstracts

Committee members reviewed professional, nationally published abstracts addressing the issues of administrative models and consolidation.  Particularly compelling was research on the detrimental effects of consolidating and of academic advantages resulting from small school size. While there may be minor financial savings as a result of initial consolidation, that savings is often lost to organizing sub-administration necessary to support it and academic performance almost always suffers as a result. In fact, in more populace areas there are efforts being made to actually break up large districts and reduce school sizes in order to more effectively nurture students and help them achieve their best academic potential (through programs such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Small Schools Project). This is due to overwhelming research validating such efforts (see Supporting Research).

2. ESD Report

The ASR committee also asked ESD 189 to do an independent report on identified structure models (see ESD Report by Dr. Jerry Jenkins). This too supported the concept of small, independent schools and thwarted arguments about advantages of consolidation.

3. Surveys of Similar School Districts

Finally, the ASR Committee did its own research in the form of comprehensive surveys of other school districts. Districts were selected based on information obtained from the ESD regarding number of students, academic performance (as indicated on WASL scores) and vaguely similar geographic issues (such as rural location), though of course the geographic challenges due to presence on an island could not be duplicated. ASR Committee members contacted administrators and asked them a lengthy series of questions about their perceptions of how administration has contributed to their district's success and what frustrations they have experienced in the evolution of their own structures (see Supporting Research).