Specific schoolsFull briefing
The legacy of the small-schools movement: 20 years later, did it work?
The longer form of the briefing for this story: the original thesis, the supporting findings the data team flagged, and the reporting directions a journalist could follow. For the short version and the data analysis, see the main story page.
Thesis
From 2002-2008, NYC closed several large failing high schools and replaced them with clusters of small new schools (the 'small schools movement'). MDRC studies in the early 2010s showed positive grad-rate effects. With 15-20 years of data, do the small schools still outperform what the old big schools would have produced?
Supporting findings
- Small schools created 2002-2008: typically 400-500 students each, themed (Bronx School for Law, Brooklyn Theater HS, etc.).
- Replaced large failing schools (e.g., Roosevelt HS Bronx → multiple small schools).
- MDRC's 2010-2014 studies showed ~+8 pt grad rate impact.
- But: critics said small schools selected motivated kids and excluded difficult-to-serve populations.
- 20 years later: how do the small schools compare to citywide grad rate?
- Have they consolidated / closed / merged?
- Compare with 'super-small' schools (under 300) — too small to be sustainable.
- What about NYC's new wave of small schools post-2014?
- Cost: small schools cost more per student. Is the outcome lift worth the cost?
- Frame: 'The small-schools experiment was a brave bet. Here's the ROI.'
Reporting directions
- Pull NYC DOE list of small schools created 2002-2008.
- Track each through our metric data, longest possible time series.
- Interview MDRC researchers (Howard Bloom, Rebecca Unterman).
- Compare with similar small-schools experiments (Chicago Renaissance, Boston).