Laserfiche WebLink
Exhibit "A" <br />KOHALA SCHOOLS CONSOLIDATION TASK FORCE <br />REPORT SUMMARY <br />February 21, 2010 <br />The Kohala Complex Task Force was appointed by Complex Area Superintendent Arthur Souza in June of <br />2009. This task force was asked to consider eight specific areas in order to make an informed determination <br />of whether consolidation is a feasible option for the Kohala Complex Schools — specifically whether the <br />middle school could be consolidated with the high and elementary schools at the Honomaka'u campus. The <br />specific areas of focus were categorized into three major considerations: Educational quality /opportunities, <br />financial results, and social /emotional impacts. <br />At the outset of the process, the task force was informed by Mr. Randall Moore that the impetus for the <br />consolidation study should not be driven by financial reasons. In the end, the recommendation would be <br />based on what was best for students. It is within this perspective that this consolidation process has <br />unfolded. <br />The process has been a lengthy one that spanned from June 26, 2009 to January 2010. The following <br />outlines the major considerations of the task force as included in the accompanying report. <br />1. Consideration for consolidation of the Kohala Complex differs from other studies and schools in that <br />this consolidation model is one that would displace students to a school without an existing program <br />for that grade level(s). For instance, an elementary school being consolidated with another elementary <br />school would mean that those students would be absorbed into an existing program where increased <br />enrollment would be the only factor. In this case, however, 6 -8 grade students would be dispersed to <br />campuses without an existing program for these students and would require multi- dimensional <br />changes such as program, facilities, etc. This factor along makes consolidation problematic as it <br />would likely decrease the level of opportunities for students. <br />2. The overall Weighted Student Formula (WSF) monetary distribution would be significantly less in a <br />combined configuration. Information in the report indicates that the high and middle schools are <br />currently able to offer an adequate range of courses within its curricular program using their current <br />financial resources. The array of courses and instructional programs in the high and middle schools <br />currently being offered will be adversely affected by consolidation. In an already problematic <br />situation, consolidation would magnify the chasm that small schools experience in their ability to offer <br />a breadth of course offerings to its students as compared to their urban counterparts. <br />3. Of import is the reasoning that went into splitting the high and middle school, which began in 1991 <br />and formalized in 2001. A separate middle school campus has allowed for the implementation of a <br />program aligned to the middle school philosophy that addresses intellectual, moral, physical, <br />emotional, and social development unique to students of this age. When the school system was <br />combined prior to 2001, there was a rising sentiment that this population of students was being <br />underserved in a 7 -12 school configuration. Testimony from parents, students, and practicing <br />psychologist Dr. Kimo Alameda attest to the unique needs of the middle school child. All of the more <br />than two dozen written and oral testimonies were strongly against combining the schools as people <br />feel consolidation may undermine the process of implementing the middle school model. <br />1 <br />