On Meeting NCLB School Improvement Mandate: What Size High School Is Most Effective for New York City?

This descriptive study used nonparametric (Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U) tests to determine the efficacy of New York City (NYC) small school initiative. A sample of 369 NYC high schools was tested on various performance indicators. The results: Large schools generated statistically significant higher performance scores and were more effective at preparing students for college and careers. On the New York State (NYS) English language arts (ELA) test, a Mann–Whitney U found statistically significant difference between scores for small school (median = 2.62, n = 213) and large school (median = 2.81, n = 58), U = 3200.00, z = −5.63, p = .001, r = −.34. On the state’s math test, a Mann–Whitney U found statistically significant difference between scores for small school (median = 2.76, n = 213) and large school (median = 3.12, n = 58), U = 3086.00, z = −5.84, p = .000, r = −.35. On NYC Department of Education (NYCDOE)–assigned college and career readiness scores (CCRS), a Mann–Whitney U found statistically significant difference between CCRS for small school (median = 3.00, n = 213) and large school (median = 3.00, n = 58), U = 4705.50, z = −2.90, p = .004, r = −.018. The evidence suggests the city reconfigured large failing schools into smaller ones, resulting in the concentration of poverty (through the placement of mostly low socioeconomic status [SES] and underperforming Black and Hispanic students) in those schools. Recommendations include future studies exploring the effect of mediating and moderating factors.