US Gov't Accountability Office finds "little evidence" that better school facilities improve student outcomes
Tom Moertel
proposed renovation of the high school, one of the most important
kinds of evidence to consider is that describing the relationship
between investments in school facilities and the resulting effect, if
any, upon student outcomes. This is the evidence that allows residents
and policymakers to answer the question, If we invest in our school
facilities, how much educational value does that investment really buy
us?
Trying to answer that question, I have reviewed numerous studies, and
they are consistent with the conclusion that such investments have
little to no effect on student achievement. Similarly, In /Green
Schools: Attributes for Health and Learning/, a 192-page report
published by the National Research Council, researchers reviewed 20
such studies and concluded similarly: "With 19 out of 20 studies
showing increases in test scores for students in buildings in better
condition, one might reasonably assume a relationship exists between
building conditions and student achievement. In fact, the limitations
of the methodologies and data used in these studies may reflect a
consistent underlying bias rather than a consistent, albeit undefined,
cause-and-effect relationship." In short, the evidence of a cause-and-
effect relationship was so weak that the researchers were unwilling to
claim that it was real and not measurement error.
Now, in an October 2009 report (GAO-10-32), researchers at the U.S.
Government Accountability Office consider the very same issue,
reviewing 24 studies. They conclude:
"Some research suggests that better school facilities are associated
with better student outcomes, and school district officials agreed,
but there is little evidence of a causal relationship" (p. 18).
In sum, the body of research argues (strongly) that investments in
school facilities have little to no effect on student outcomes; such
investments provide almost no educational value.
Cheers,
Tom