A Common Thread: Rural America and Education Policy
Commentary by Aurora Kenworthy.
Aurora Kenworthy is a rising third-year law student at the University of Nebraska College of Law and an incredible research assistant who has been instrumental in helping us develop the Rural Reconciliation Project. (See her bio as you scroll down on the “Creator” page to the new “Student Contributors” section.) This Commentary reflects her original research and work. Like all Commentary here on The Rural Review, this post expresses the personal opinions of the author.
While working on digests for The Rural Review, a common thread emerged: education. From the discussion of the role law schools can play in bridging the rural-urban justice gap in Legal Deserts to Johnson and Lichter’s analysis of education trends in the context of census reclassifications, education is featured across disciplines in rural scholarship as a solution, an indicator, or a root problem. Because of the close relationship between rural education and rural communities, education in rural America is, in many ways, all three. In this commentary, I attempt to sketch some of the current challenges rural schools face in the hopes of providing a background to those unfamiliar with rural education policy. The scope of this commentary is limited: the role of broadband in rural education, challenges related to school nutrition programs, and the expense of transportation are but a few of the topics not discussed here. Further, discussion of the multitude of solutions that have been proposed or implemented to address the challenges I have outlined falls outside the scope of this brief overview. As this is merely a jumping-off point, I have included links to a wide variety of literature in this commentary that I hope will spark further research for those interested. Hopefully, this outline will provide a starting point for deeper consideration of the intersection between rural education policy and rural America more generally.
While this commentary is focused on challenges facing rural schools, it is important to note that rural schools have many strengths. For example, families may value the smaller settings, greater personal attention, safe environments, and the sense of community rural schools may provide. (Rude & Miller, 2018). Additionally, rural high schools on the whole have higher graduation rates than the national public-school average and have higher math and reading scores than their urban counterparts. (Lavalley, 2018; Marcus & Krupnick, 2017; Semke & Sheridan, 2011).
While examining rural education literature it is important to consider definitions and gaps in existing research. As in other contexts, the definition of “rural” in education research is elusive and this variability can make comparisons and interpretations within the body of rural education research more difficult. (Thier et al., 2021; Hawley et al., 2016). Additionally, one study has found research on U.S. rural education privileged the South and Midwest, “seeming to desert the Northeast, Upper Midwest, and swaths of the West.” Further, rural research on K-12 education is far more prevalent than research on pre-K or postsecondary education. (Thier et al., 2021). The uniqueness of each rural school, district, and community ensures that “one-size-fits-all” solutions will not work and having these gaps in data makes crafting thoughtful and tailored solutions much more difficult.
Demographic Changes in Rural Education
Just as the demographics of rural communities continue to change, rural student demographics are also shifting. Overall, student populations in rural areas have decreased, but economically disadvantaged students and minority students as a percentage of all rural students have increased by 46.9% and 51.2% respectively and the number of English Language Learners (ELL) students in rural counties has more than doubled in the last 20 years. These changing student dynamics present several challenges for rural schools as rural districts struggle to find intervention specialists and ELL instructors. (Johnson et al., 2018). Some scholars have connected education and rural demographics in a different way. They assert education has reinforced patterns of rural out-migration by encouraging high achieving students to leave their rural communities. (Schafft, 2016; Carr & Kefalas, 2009; Corbett, 2007; Hektner, 1995; Huang et al., 1997; Sherman & Sage, 2011). Whether education plays a role in encouraging out-migration, the loss of rural populations is an important factor in the discussion below on K-12 financing.
Financing K-12 Rural Education and Consolidation Effects
Traditionally, the funding formula for school districts consists primarily of property taxes imposed at the local level. According to the U.S. Department of Education, in 2003-2004, 39% of education funds for rural public elementary and secondary schools were provided by local governments, primarily through local property tax revenues, whereas 52% and 9% of funds were state and federal contributions, respectively. (Status of Education in Rural America, 2007, p. 81).
Across the U.S., funding formulas for schools differ significantly. For example, some states have attempted to address inequities in school revenue by creating financing formulas that weigh multiple factors. At least 13 states provide some cost adjustment for rural districts based on geographic location or population density, and 43 states provide supplemental funding for transportation. (Kolbe et al., 2021; Shavers, 2003). Further, a single state may have multiple funding mechanisms in use as each state may apply different funding formulas for different categories such as special education funding or English language learner funding. (For a 50-state survey on funding mechanisms, see Dachelet, 2019).
More general tax policies are also at play when it comes to funding rural education. For example, rural counties experience substantially higher erosions of local property tax base from homestead exemptions than nonrural counties and tax increment financing (TIF) in rural areas can affect the local property tax base. (Combs & Foster, 2021; Nguyen-Hoang, 2021).
While school funding formulas vary greatly from state to state, one commonality is financial strain. One idea put forth as a solution to the financial problems facing rural schools is school consolidation. The impact of consolidation on education cost and student achievement is heavily debated, and there is evidence that the outcome of consolidation depends on district size and other factors. (Howley et al., 2011; Dority & Thompson, 2013; Cooley & Floyd, 2013).
School consolidation can divide communities well before a school is shuttered. One study described a community splintering apart as some families sought to hold onto the local district, other families sent their children to neighboring districts, and landowners exercised their option to transfer their property into the neighboring district to save on taxes. (Surface, 2011). Community division can also be attributed to the fact that members know school consolidation will change their communities in many ways not directly related to education. For example, communities where school consolidation takes place face lower property values, decreased employment rates, and lower entrepreneurship. (Lyson, 2002; Brasington, 2004; Sell & Leistritz, 1997). Additionally, studies have found a decrease in civic participation as a result of school consolidation and a decrease in parental involvement in school activities. (Post & Stambach, 1999; Duncombe & Yinger, 2007).
Perhaps the greatest fear in rural communities is the threat to community identity the loss of a school poses. Local schools serve as community-centering institutions, repositories of local history, and the hearts of community pride. Schools impart a strong sense of local identity and shared purpose as the identity of rural communities often centers on school sports teams, high school bands, and arts events. (Jimerson, 2006; Bauch, 2001; Budge, 2006; Schafft & Biddle, 2013).
Rural Communities and Higher Education
The gap in educational attainment between rural and urban areas also poses a challenge for rural communities. Twenty percent of rural young adults have four-year degrees compared to 37% of young adults in urban areas. (Rural Education at a Glance, 2017). One barrier to college attendance is the distance between rural communities and higher education institutions. Seventy-five percent of the 41 million Americans living in education deserts (commonly defined as any place located more than 25 miles away from a postsecondary institution) can be found in rural communities. (Boggs, 2019). Since it has been shown proximity to higher education institutions correlates with the likelihood of college attendance, this distance is an important factor to consider. (Ruiz & Perna, 2017). This distance also contributes to higher education institutions overlooking rural youth and inadequate recruitment efforts since college recruiters have a propensity to visit areas with greater concentrations of schools and greater numbers of students for higher education payoffs. (Gettinger, 2019; McDonough et al., 2010).
Another barrier is a lack of opportunities to engage in high-level coursework and gain college credit while in high school. (Goldman, 2019). As of 2017, nearly 30 percent of rural high schools did not offer any Advanced Placement (AP) courses, compared to 5 to 8 percent of suburban and urban schools, respectively. (Mann et al., 2017). However, it is important to note that while rural schools may not offer as many AP courses, the percentage of public high school students in rural areas attending schools offering dual credit courses (76%) is not measurably different from cities and suburbs. (Status of Education in Rural America, 2017).
Rural America’s past may also contribute to the education attainment gap. Many rural areas have historically been able to offer employment in sectors that did not require a postsecondary degree. Therefore, many rural families have not witnessed the economic advantages that result from schooling, and thus, less importance is placed on education as a means of escaping poverty or achieving upward mobility. (Corbett, 2007; Hendrickson, 2012; Pappano, 2017; Schafft, 2016). This also means that rural students are more likely to come from families who do not have a precedent of college attendance. (Chenoweth & Galliher, 2004).
For students from rural communities who do attend higher education institutions, student loans are an important consideration. Individuals with student debt are less likely to remain in rural areas than those with no debt. (Deller & Parr, 2020). It is suggested those with student debt will seek higher-paying jobs and are less likely to take “public-interest” jobs like those in school districts. (Minicozzi, 2005; Rothstein & Rouse, 2011). Since rural areas generally have lower pay scales than urban areas and school districts and governments are often the largest employers in rural counties, student debt poses a particularly troubling problem for rural communities. (Deller & Parr, 2020).
It is important to note that, while the rural and urban gap in higher education attainment is a challenge, data does show that rural students are attending postsecondary institutions at increasing rates. (Byun et al., 2012; Nelson, 2016; Sorensen & Hwang, 2021). This can possibly be attributed to the creative strategies employed by rural high school students and their families to counteract the challenges discussed above. (Whiteside, 2020).
Weaving Strands Together: Attracting and Retaining Educators
The recruitment and retention of teachers illustrates the interconnectedness of many of the challenges rural schools face. For example, restrictive budgets contribute to a number of challenges discussed previously. Some remote schools cannot offer salaries high enough to attract teachers with qualifications to teach AP courses and this, as discussed above, may contribute to lower higher education enrollment among rural students. (Levalley, 2018; Marcus & Krupnick, 2017). Additionally, teacher shortages in rural areas may be compounded by high student loan debt because rural schools cannot offer salaries high enough for individuals factoring in loan repayment. (Deller & Parr, 2020). In light of this interconnectedness, rural districts have identified creative ways to address multiple issues at once. For example, a solution to funding problems in rural districts (the 4-day school week) also serves as an amenity that rural districts can provide to attract and retain teachers. (Thompson et al., 2020; Anglum & Park, 2021).
Teacher retention data also illustrates the importance of considering the heterogeneity of rural America. While teacher turnover rates are lower in rural schools than in urban and suburban ones, teachers in sparsely populated states are substantially more likely to leave their schools than teachers in more densely populated states. (Nguyen, 2020; Williams et al., 2021). Ultimately, multiple factors such as the overall rurality of the state, the degree of remoteness of the school within the state, and the characteristics of the students in the schools all help explain the degree of challenges faced by school districts in hiring teachers. (Stoddard & Toma, 2021).
A Tight Knot: Rural Education and Rural Communities
Considering rural education policy when discussing rural issues is critical and contemplating wider rural challenges when considering rural education policy is essential. Careful resistance to generalizations regarding rural school districts and communities when imagining policy solutions is also vital. As discussed in this commentary, rural schools differ not only from urban schools but also from one another. Rural education is multifaceted with far-reaching implications for rural communities, and it is impossible to unravel rural education from discussions of rural America more generally.
Continue the Conversation!
The Rural Reconciliation Project thanks Aurora Kenworthy for this thoughtful synthesis of literature on rural education policy (and all of her work here on The Review). We welcome similar contributions from a range of rural and non-rural voices here on The Rural Review and have posted submission guidelines here.
