All posts in the topic $60M School Referendum Proposal (Short link)
Summary
- There are 43 posts — by 25 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Barb Lickness at May 24 21:28 UTC
Strib reports that MPS will seek a $60M/annual excess levy referendum for 8 years, representing a doubling of the referendum currently in place. Sources close to the schools say that RT will be an honorary co-chair. I think this link will get you to the brief Strib report: http://www.startribune.com/local/18961114.html?location_refer=Local%20+%20Metro Ann Berget Kingfield 8-7
Ann, Yes, Rybak and Cong. Keith Ellison are the honorary co-chairs. I mentioned it a story that ran April 29. Co-chairs are Courtney Cushing Kiernat and Hussein Samatar. >>> <email obscured> 5/15/2008 9:57 AM >>> Strib reports that MPS will seek a $60M/annual excess levy referendum for 8 years, representing a doubling of the referendum currently in place. Sources close to the schools say that RT will be an honorary co-chair. I think this link will get you to the brief Strib report: http://www.startribune.com/local/18961114.html?location_refer=Local%20+%20Metro Ann Berget Kingfield 8-7 Ann Berget Info about Ann Berget: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/annberget This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4lPFyjGLBMAqTLSvNhLjec
We actually have two honorary co-chairs: Minneapolis Mayor RT Rybak and
Congressman Keith Ellison.
Acting co-chairs of the committee are parents Courtney Cushing Kiernat and
Hussein Samatar
And our citizens campaign committee is developing the web site that will
continue to grow and provide additional information: www.StrongSchoolsStrong
City.org
At 2:57 AM +1200 5/16/08, Ann Berget wrote: >Strib reports that MPS will seek a $60M/annual excess levy >referendum for 8 years, representing a doubling of the referendum >currently in place. Sources close to the schools say that RT will be >an honorary co-chair. > >I think this link will get you to the brief Strib report: > >http://www.startribune.com/local/18961114.html?location_refer=Local%20+%20Metro How interesting. I participated in a very long and involved telephone survey about this. The surveyor told me she was in Utah or someplace like that, not anywhere local. I was asked many questions about different levels of referenda and what each would provide the district. I was also asked to respond to a lot of possible "pitches" for the referendum. Ah, I see the poll mentioned in the article.
>At 2:57 AM +1200 5/16/08, Ann Berget wrote:
>>Strib reports that MPS will seek a $60M/annual excess levy
>>referendum for 8 years, representing a doubling of the referendum
>>currently in place. Sources close to the schools say that RT will be
> >an honorary co-chair.
>>
> >At 10:16 AM -0500 5/15/08, Karen Cooper wrote:
>How interesting. I participated in a very long and involved
>telephone survey about this. The surveyor told me she was in Utah or
>someplace like that, not anywhere local. I was asked many questions
>about different levels of referenda and what each would provide the
>district. I was also asked to respond to a lot of possible "pitches"
>for the referendum.
>
>Ah, I see the poll mentioned in the article.
>
Connie here: What bothers me here is that the $60 million figure is
based on a telephone survey of randomly-selected people, rather than
on a rational, data-based assessment by the District of what is
needed to fund what.
I'm unimpressed. I hope the School Board anticipates questions about
that and has better answers the next time.
Connie
Como, in Southeast Minneapolis
>Strib reports that MPS will seek a $60M/annual excess levy >referendum for 8
years, representing a doubling of the >referendum currently in place. Sources
close to the schools >say that RT will be an honorary co-chair.
Additional money thrown at a terrible product we are asked to pay MORE for? Did
anyone hear about that waterfront property in the beautiful Louisiana "wetland"
that is for sale? I certainly hope the voters of Minneapolis will finally say
enough is enough. Throwing money at a failed system will not help.
What was the dropout rate for poor children?Approximately 50% someone has said
on the List.
The Minneapolis school system needs to be thrown out and reorganized, not have
more money sunk down this rat hole. I do not mind paying a fair share for a
good product but I am personally insulted that I am asked to pay for
incompetence.
I would NOT send another child to that system, and apparently our good Mayor
(who is a "Co-Chair" of this farce) feels the same way. Didn't we have that
discussion before "on List" about RT Rybak sending his children to private
schools? If those schools are not good enough for Mr. Rybak's children, with
all their advantages, then they sure as hell are NOT good enough for a poor
child from a broken community and possibly a broken home. If they are not good
enough forRT Rybak'schildren then they sure as heck are not good enough forhim
to waste MY money on.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village
“The people are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. We
must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.”- Thomas Jefferson
So, pray tell, what is your solution?
It is easy to criticize; it is easy to say "no", and "that doesn't
work", and "you're incompetent". It is, however, not easy to educate
children, particularly those you mention, the poor and those from
broken homes. That is a task that requires skill and dedication,
compassion and insight, and a willingness to keep going when folks
(sometimes students, sometimes community members) call you names and
try to tear you down.
I'm here, on the front line, working to educate those young people.
I'm not in the suburban districts, where the "clientele" is far easier
to deal with. I'm not in private industry- where my skills would earn
considerably better money. I'm in North Minneapolis. And I'm damned
proud of it. I've been other places, taught other children, and I
came home to Northside, precisely because this is where the need is
greatest and the challenges are biggest.
Didn't I read in the Strib that MPS students were outperforming those
enrolled in "The Choice is Yours"? Obviously, the Minneapolis school
system was and remains the problem for those students. Moving them to
suburban districts really helped, didn't it?
I'm sorry you don't feel your own child(ren) received a quality
education from the Minneapolis Public Schools. Perhaps you'd like to
expand on what brings you to this conclusion? I, for one, think it
ridiculous that the Mayor sends his children to private schools. I
think it reflects badly on his commitment to the CIty and to the
public schools.
Any time you'd like to come see what we do for a living, feel free. I
am sure any school you'd like would be more than willing to show you
around, including the two I work in- I'd be glad to show you around
myself. And any time you'd like to do our jobs better than we do,
feel free to sign up.
Do I hear crickets?
At 3:20 PM -0500 5/15/08, Constance Sullivan wrote:
>Connie here: What bothers me here is that the $60 million figure is
>based on a telephone survey of randomly-selected people, rather than
>on a rational, data-based assessment by the District of what is
>needed to fund what.
>
>I'm unimpressed. I hope the School Board anticipates questions about
>that and has better answers the next time.
The survey outlined in incredible detail (I believe I was on the
phone for 45 minutes) a large number of options, some much more
expensive than the referendum under discussion, and some much less
expensive. I was asked to consider how much value could be got for
how much of a property tax increase, and I was asked this in many
different ways, with many variables added or subtracted from the
scenarios I was asekd to consider. The survey included questions
about my impressions of past referenda, and about accountability and
this one.
Because the survey asked me questions that seemed to get at a set of
central questions from various directions, I believe that my answers,
collated with the rest of the respondents, were a statistically
accurate representation of our opinions.
And I have spent years volunteering in the public schools, for
political campaigns, and in the local arts scene, as well as having
been a member of this list. Since the data set of known respondents
at this moment is, um, me, I think there no basis to your claim that
the survey respondents were randomly selected. They might have been.
We don't know. The only example we have suggests otherwise.
I do know that the school board got the answer their survey appeared
to be designed to get: What is the will of the people about a school
referendum?
MPS has both distressing failures and impressive successes. The
challenge, of course, is to address the failures while retaining and
building on the successes. Should the referendum pass, we still will
hardly be "throwing money at" MPS. But a step in the direction of
adequate support stands a much better chance of helping than does
starvation.
The Mayor's choice to educate his children at a private school has
nothing to do with the merits of the referendum. I teach in a private
school, so my choice to send my daughter to MPS is not a repudiation
of private education. There likewise is no reason to assume that the
Mayor's choice of a private school is a repudiation of MPS or of
public education generally. It's simply a choice.
Brad Peterson
Field Parent
The fact that a survey was commissioned doesn't mean that the District
doesn't have a rational, data-based assessment of its needs. Contact
any board member and I suspect s/he can rattle off a strong case
without breaking a sweat. But MPS must go to the people for the
money, and it would be madness not to have some data on how much
people are willing to spend and for what purposes. This actually
sounds a little like something from a civics textbook, updated for the
21st century by the inclusion of paid pollsters.
Brad Peterson
Field Parent
Kingfield Resident
I'm not sure what you are using to draw your conclusions about how the
referendum dollar amount was determined but perhaps as a member of the
citizen's Steering Committee involved with developing the campaign, I can
provide some insight for those interested.
Pricing, which is essentially what this exercise is, is a two-part process.
There is one side of determining how much something actually costs and there
is the other where how much people are willing to pay.
In this case, members of our Steering Committee including myself worked
closely with the district leadership team to define what it was we believed
we should support with the levy referendum. That leadership team included
the district's CFO, the Chief Academic Officer, the Chief of Operations, and
the Superintendent to name a few. As you may understand, the levy is only 7
percent of the total budget. So what we can do with this amount is rather
limited. The last levy was dedicated solely to managing class sizes. If we
wanted to get to the class sizes in 2000, it was determined that the levy
referendum would have to be more than $60 million. However, that was
coincidental in the process. We agreed that with the development of the
Strategic Plan, that expectations were raised and we needed to determine
what it would cost to fulfill these expectations.
If you recall from the survey, you were asked about different levels,
including $30 million which is the level we're at but would require
continued reductions in services, $45 million which would allow some of the
elements of the strategic plan to be implemented in some of the schools, $60
million, which would allow implementation of elements of the strategic plan
in about half of the schools, $75 million, which would allow full
implementation of elements of the strategic plan on schedule, and $90
million which would allow an accelerated implementation.
Through the polling process, we found high levels of support for all levy
amounts. Actually, the lowest level of public acceptability was for the $30
million level. The public recognizes that there is a need beyond the current
level and were least willing to accept the same-o same-o.
Then along the issue of class size. The more we had conversations with
parents and teachers, the more we acknowledged that class size is too
important an issue to not include. The fact is, about three-fourths of the
district's operating costs are in teachers salaries and benefits. Regardless
of what we do with the levy amount, a large portion of the dollars
inevitably get to the classroom in the form of teachers' wages and benefits.
But what we believed we needed to explicitly acknowledge was that we would
maintain the commitment to class size relative to where we are today. So we
made it clear, rather than implicit, that class sizes would receive half of
the referendum dollars.
The delicate balance of pricing came down to selecting an amount that fits
the appetite of the populace. And it needed to be done with a as much risk
as the district was willing to accept. With every dollar we go up in
pricing, the more of a challenge it would be to gain approval.
There's a follow up caveat to this pricing decision. We have been working to
place this investment in public education in context. Today, our levy of
about $30 million translates to about $535 per student resident in
Minneapolis. The state law permits districts to tax themselves at a rate of
$1,472. This is supposed to equalize local communities, with the recognition
that the state government through its constitution is supposed to pay for
the lions share of education. It is supposed to provide the basic needs and
provides districts with a limited ability to "put some frosting on the cake"
so to speak. The $535 per student resident (which are all the kids of school
age living in the district's geographic boundaries, regardless of where they
attend school) means that as a city, we are taxing ourselves 39% of what is
permissible. What's most relevant about that figure, however, is how it
compares to surround school districts.
I performed an analysis, with the district's support in sourcing the data,
of the surrounding districts, and was especially interested in those
districts where a lot of Minneapolis residents are leaving the district to
attend. Minneapolis looses at least 100 students to each of the following
districts. Here is what their level of support is per student resident, in
rank order of their support through local property tax referendums:
ST. ANTHONY-NEW BRIGHTON $1,985
WAYZATA $1,609
ST. LOUIS PARK $1,561
HOPKINS $1,552
EDINA $1,505
RICHFIELD $1,100
BLOOMINGTON $991
COLUMBIA HTS $879
ROBBINSDALE $848
OSSEO $842
What is interesting about these figures is twofold. One, There are five
districts that already exceed the state limit. So comparing Minneapolis' tax
support to the state limit understates the competitive disadvantage
Minneapolis Public Schools is operating at with regards local funding.The
second insight is that it's niot just simply "rich" communities" that
significantly out-invest Minneapolis in their support of public education.
Going from a $30 million to a $60 million levy would place Minneapolis just
above Richfield in this ranking. So we'd be just in the middle pack, and not
in the upper tier.
I hope this provides some perspective on the factors that were used to set
the $60 million mark. It is clearly less than the district needs to fully
implement the strategic plan, but it seems to be what is within the
realistic appetite of potential supporters. We recognize that the 73 percent
approval of the levy in 2000 was considered a success, but we felt we needed
to be more aggressive and even more realistic than pricing based on the
survey results, which is essentially what was done in the year 2000.
Sorry for such a long post, but this forum does not permit for repeated
posts like other forums so I wanted to be sure to get as much out there for
people to understand with the chance I had today.
For any more specific questions or concerns please feel free to contact me
off line. Otherwise, I'll track responses here. And I'm literally in the
process of writing the content of the web site, so please feel free to visit
www.StrongSchoolsStrongCity.org.
james graham wrote:
>
> Additional money thrown at a terrible product we are
> asked to pay MORE for? Did anyone hear about that
> waterfront property in the beautiful Louisiana
> "wetland" that is for sale? I certainly hope the
> voters of Minneapolis will finally say enough is
> enough. Throwing money at a failed system will not help.
Would it be reasonable to assume that the author, after
complaining about crime in his neighborhood, will suggest
that funding for the Minneapolis police department be
_cut_??? Or, after seeing a neighbor's house burn to the
ground, suggest that funding for the Minneapolis
fire department be _cut_???
> What was the dropout rate for poor children? Approximately
> 50% someone has said on the List.
As far as I understand, students entering kindergarten
in Minneapolis are less prepared for school than perhaps
any other school district in the state. (Can someone
confirm that?) These childrens' families have failed them,
their communities have failed them. On top of that,
the author apparently begrudges these children for being
so expensive to educate.
> The Minneapolis school system needs to be thrown out
> and reorganized, not have more money sunk down this rat
> hole. I do not mind paying a fair share for a good
> product but I am personally insulted that I am asked
> to pay for incompetence.
What "product" is the author talking about? I don't
believe that any other school system faces comparable
demographic challenges, and so it would seem to be
extremely unfair to compare the effectiveness of the MPS
with any other school system. Sure, the Edina school
system is effective at graduating children from
motivated, and generally already successful, families.
But, comparing the MPS to Edina hardly seems fair.
Given the the author's apparent resistance to put
forth incremental money to educate Minnesota's most
challenging student population, I would be really
surprised if he was willing to put forth the money
necessary to completely revamp the school system.
My MinnPost colleague Beth Hawkins checks in with a report from last night's parents' meeting. Well worth reading: http://tinyurl.com/5dgxqc
I think that voters should be clear that a Yes vote on the referendum will do
nothing to raise test score, reduce the achievement gap, or improve
opportunities for poor students, just three of the serious problems facing the
MPS. What a Yes vote does do is help subsidize teacher salaries, which I'm sure
is sufficient reason for a majority of voters in Minneapolis to approve it.
I think these are very valid points. I'd be interested in seeing the
research that shows the more money we throw at education, the better
educated the children are. And I certainly hope that the $60 million figure
has some amount of fiscal logic to it (as much as it could have)...... and
is not poll driven, though Ms. Sullivan states otherwise. Tax increases by
poll? Nice.
I know, I know......this is the >>one<< issue that is really super-duper
important (at least for this week) that requires running again to the
bottomless pit of taxpayer dollars. I'm running out of veins that the city
and the county and the state can tap. This voter will vote a big no. The
schools can make do with what they have, like I have to.
Mike Thompson
Windom
I am a man, not an ATM.
Mike Atherton said that these funds will do nothing to close the achievement
gap. I am asking the pundits just that question. How will these funds be used
to close the achievement gap and increase the graduation rate?
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change
the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead
Saturday's DFL City Convention will be a frustrating day. I will have to vote
on school board candidates that I know will be negative towards charter schools
and their students as soon as they are elected. Director Lee has been
unresponsive to any requests or discussions. Now, a referendum approval will
be done with practically no discussion.
Thousands of students attend charter schools in Minneapolis. Minneapolis first
ignored the charters but is now openly hostile towards them. Minneapolis owns
12 vacant buildings. Yet, they have failed to offer them for sale. The
consultant in fact is recommending against educational reuse despite
neighborhood support for a charter school option. This could net the district
millions of dollars.
Recently, Minneapolis was forced by the state to allow my Vocationally oriented
charter school into a Tech Prep consortium meant for all students. Minneapolis
district administration still has not responded to any requests. Now my taxes
for schools are to be doubled. The least the supporters of the referendum
could do was to require the Minneapolis Board and Administration to answer
requests and letters. Charter schools are public schools.
I have always supported the levy by the district. All I am asking their main
supporters is to force the district to work collegially with the many charter
schools in the district. Over 80% of Minneapolis residents do not have
students in their schools. Between 20-25% of all Minneapolis parents put their
students in public school choice (charter schools, alternative schools,open
enrollment, and college classes). I would hope the Minneapolis School Board
and Administration would work with us if they want our property tax money.
Tony Scallon
Longfellow
james graham said: > Additional money thrown at a terrible product we are asked to pay MORE for? Did anyone hear about that waterfront property in the beautiful Louisiana "wetland" that is for sale? I certainly hope the voters of Minneapolis will finally say enough is enough. Throwing money at a failed system will not help. .. > The Minneapolis school system needs to be thrown out and reorganized, not have more money sunk down this rat hole. I do not mind paying a fair share for a good product but I am personally insulted that I am asked to pay for incompetence. I have to say that now that I have a child (now 20 months), it seems to me that there are a number of people who just are not prepared for parenthood (I'm barely able to keep up and I have a lot of advantages other folks don't) and as a result, a number of kids who are not prepared for school. These kids start behind and stay behind. This is about what parents do with kids when they are 2 and 3 and not what schools are doing with kids when they are 17 or 18. To quote a New York Times article: "They (Betty Hart and Todd R. Risley, child psychologists at the University of Kansas) found, first, that vocabulary growth differed sharply by class and that the gap between the classes opened early. By age 3, children whose parents were professionals had vocabularies of about 1,100 words, and children whose parents were on welfare had vocabularies of about 525 words. The childrens I.Q.s correlated closely to their vocabularies. The average I.Q. among the professional children was 117, and the welfare children had an average I.Q. of 79." This New York Times article goes on to talk about other research on class differences in school readiness and how the things parents do with toddlers affects their ability to succeed in school when they are fifteen years older. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/magazine/26tough.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=education+early+successful+&st=nyt&oref=slogin The article also talks about some approaches that seem to overcome these class differences in school readiness, one called KIPP in particular. The problem is that the types of approaches that seem to work are more expensive and more labor intensive. I don't know enough about the School Board budget to know if this referendum is the right amount of money or not. I also am not an expert on K-12 education. But I do know that dumping the school performance issues of Minneapolis kids solely on the shoulders of the School Board ignores what may be the real source of many of these problems. Carol Becker Longfellow Proud parent
I am about to post to the list that my African American son attended a charter
school for 4 years and is in the small percentage of African Americans to
graduate in 4 years and even a smaller percentage to do so on the freakin'
honor roll.
I yelled my last "get your ass out of bed" this morning. It's his last day of
school. He graduates Monday.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change
the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead
Carol Becker and Tony Scallon have hit on some of the salient points regarding
a referendum. It is clear that many and many a child is not ready for school
and, frankly, cannot be readied for school. The child's parents were not ready
for school, nor were the grandparents. It would take a mass media education
campaign to educate the whole nation on how to ready kids for school.
Jim Graham's dark view is also erroneous. You cannot expect the schools to be
able to patch over what is a continuing problem--families who do not grasp just
how to prepare their children to be even moderately successful in school. If
you succeeded to any degree as an adult and you also came from poverty, then
somewhere along the line someone taught you how to learn.
Whether extensive polls were taken or not, it still remains a fact that we have
been taxed to the limit (granted much of the taxes go to stupid wastes). I'm
willing to support schooling for kids, and I have done so. But, there is no
more money in my pocket to take. The end effect will be to have my house "go
for back taxes." The race is whether that will happen when I'm 65 or 70 or 75.
When the end of life is a race between the tax man and the grim reaper, that
sucks.
At 7:05 PM -0500 5/15/08, Steve Kotvis wrote:
>I'm not sure what you are using to draw your conclusions about how the
>referendum dollar amount was determined
Me: I was using the information in an article on the School Board
meeting, in the Star Tribune, where it was reported that a question
was raised about how the figure of $60 million was reached for the
referendum amount. The answer, as reported in that article, was that
it came from a survey.
If you recall from the survey, you were asked about different levels,
Me: No, Steve, I don't "recall from the survey" because I wasn't
asked to participate in it. I don't mind that I wasn't personally
consulted; that happens in random, scientific surveys--lots of folks
don't get "picked" to have an opinion.
Now, I'm an academic, so the word "survey" tends to mean that there
is some scientific basis to it. Therefore, I assumed that the survey
was random--Minneapolis residents, chosen at random according to a
formula that tries for representativity of respondents. All
Minneapolis residents who own homes will be asked to pay the new
school levy (and renters, indirectly), so I just assumed that if MPS
wants to know what the public is willing to bear, they would consult
the public, scientifically, randomly.
Apparently, there was not much "random" at all about the survey, if
the people consulted in it were long-time school activists in
Minneapolis, like one of the folks on our list. Or, maybe she really
was a "random" pick. But, how many typical Minneapolis voters could,
or would, know how to juggle all the information mentioned in the
survey? So it seems that MPS consulted the choir about how the
church service music sounded.
In any case, the District must learn to communicate better with those
who will be asked to take up this tax burden. When an honest
questioner wants to know how the levy amount was determined, you
simply can't say "a survey" and expect that to persuade.
That was my point.
Connie
Como, in Southeast Minneapolis
Barbara
Congratulations to your son. That is an accomplishment for any one to
make, and one I hope he is very proud of.
We can see that you are proud of his accomplishment.
Good to have met you at the interviews Tuesday night.
Ron Leurquin
Nokomis East
Barbara shared:
I am about to post to the list that my African American son attended a
charter school for 4 years and is in the small percentage of African
Americans to graduate in 4 years and even a smaller percentage to do so
on the freakin' honor roll.
I yelled my last "get your ass out of bed" this morning. It's his last
day of school. He graduates Monday.
The citizens committee used a professional polling organization. You are
correct in assuming that when the word "survey" was used that it was done
scientifically using random methods and controlled for geography and
demography.
I'm afraid that the newspaper article over-simplified the process (what's
new) that failed to describe the full process, as I previously described,
used the polling survey as one of several inputs.
The process of communicating with the public is pretty much the mission of
our campaign. I hope you have a chance to visit our web site that is being
developed and updated daily to help with this.
Carol Becker wrote: > I have to say that now that I have a child (now 20 months), > it seems to me that there are a number of people who just > are not prepared for parenthood (I'm barely able to keep up > and I have a lot of advantages other folks don't) and as a > result, a number of kids who are not prepared for school. > These kids start behind and stay behind. This is about what > parents do with kids when they are 2 and 3 and not what schools > are doing with kids when they are 17 or 18. I've been spending my online time in educationally focused groups for a number of reasons. One is that often my posts are about general educational issues that do not fall within the boundaries of this list, but since we have a major funding issue to decide and since I've become something of an expert in this area (although an openly opinionated one) I might be able to provide some factual information that might be of value. I hope that people won't mind that I cut and paste a little from previous posts in other groups. One of the most important things to keep in mind when trying to understand contemporary education is that the major stakeholders are in direct competition with each other: teachers compete with students for funding; middle-class parents compete with poor parents for resources; institutes and think tanks compete for dominance of philosophical perspectives. These multiple competitions generate a huge amount of misinformation and make an accurate interpretation of reality difficult. Doing so requires a considerable about of critical, logical, and statistical analysis. There are three major rationalizations that are commonly used to avoid adapting educational policies to the needs of poor children: 1) It's poverty: the problem is so pervasive that nothing can be done. 2) It's the parents: there's nothing that can be done because children are damaged beyond repair. 3) It's a lack of funding: there's not sufficient funding to deal with the problems 1 & 2. None of the above are true and there's plenty of consistent factual and empirical evidence to the contrary. The problem lies with the political and administrative resistance to well known, although not necessarily publicly known, solutions. First let me address the arguments Ms. Becker cited in the NYT article. There are no (common) cognitive environmental detriments so severe that they cannot be remediated by (low cost) focused interventions. It is true that if you lock a child in a dark closet for a number of years that may not be able to recover fully, but that's not the type of problem faced by the MPS. I can and have made specific recommendations for low cost strategic and local solutions. Access to solutions is not the problem, unwavering commitment to the status quo is the problem. Carol Becker wrote: > The article also talks about some approaches that seem to > overcome these class differences in school readiness, one > called KIPP in particular. The problem is that the types of > approaches that seem to work are more expensive and more labor > intensive. That they are more labor intensive might be partly true (it often does require more time on task); that these approaches are more expensive is propaganda. The main problem is that you can't take a system that is designed for middle-class children and expect it to work for poor children. Why would people think it would? The public schools work for middle-class children because they have internalized many values and behaviors that are essential prerequisites for minimal outcomes within the current system. Many poor children do not have these internalized prerequisites and need them to be structured externally. If you look at successful programs like KIPP (and there are many other examples) you'll find that this is exactly what they do. Why the MPS are unable to do this should not be too hard to figure out (I can explain if necessary). If nothing comes to mind you might start here : http://pdfmenot.com/view/http://pdfmenot.com/store_local/085caa0a0cd44114854f2f6824c2321e.pdf
In his remarks above Steve Kotvis of the MPS referendum effort writes:
"The citizens committee used a professional polling organization."
He comments further:
"The process of communicating with the public is pretty much the mission of
our campaign."
So, Steve, in the interest of transparency, would you please post to the list
the name of the polling organization that was used? Also, when was the poll
done and where is the organization located (city, not address)? Was this poll
paid for by MPS or by a citizen group?
Thank you.
Ann Berget
Kingfield 8-7
It is perhaps more important to ask who wrote the questionnaire. The
people actually making the calls have to stick rigorously to a script
(if they are caught changing even one word or reading in such a way as
to invite a certain answer, they can lose their jobs) and it doesn't
really matter where they are.
Although you may be interested in whether the money is being spent
locally or not.
Jeane
>So, Steve, in the interest of transparency, would you please post to the list
the name of the polling organization that was used? Also, when was the poll
done and where is the organization located (city, not address)? Was this poll
paid for by MPS or by a citizen group?
The questionnaire was developed by myself, Dan Cramer of our organizational
planning consultant Grassroots Solutions, and the principal and staff of our
polling consultant Grove Insights. Grove Insights was selected after an RFP
(Request for Proposals) process that was submitted to three professional
polling firms.
Grove Insights was selected based on the criteria we set for selection, as
well as based on an interview process.
For anyone interested, I have telephone market research experience. Public
polling is in my opinion just another way to say quantitative consumer
research. This experience includes masters degrees in social work with an
emphasis in research and planning from The Ohio State University. I also
have a masters in city and regional planning. Both of those degree programs
involved advanced classes in tests and measures, survey development and
quantitative methodologies. I have personally worked as a telephone
surveyor. I didn't like that much. For about four years, I worked in the
field of community and economic development where I conducted on-site survey
research for the purpose of neighborhood redevelopment. Projects included
West Broadway, Lake Street, the Sears redevelopment (where we advised the
city in 1985 to redevelop the site as a global market), Feast Franklin
Avenue, University Avenue in St. Paul, and the Kansas City Farmers market,
just to name a few. For three years I worked for an advertising agency where
I managed survey research projects conducted by market research firms. For
another three years I ran a consumer research department and eventually the
company with an-in house telephone survey bank. In another ad agency, I ran
the Minnesota Lottery account and was invited by the Lottery research
director and executive director to join the team involved with selecting and
managing a market segmentation project that involved a state-wide telephone
survey.
In developing the questionnaire, one of the advantages we had in working
with Grove Insights is that this is the same polling agency that was used in
the 2000 Referendum. In that way, we had opportunities to have our questions
consistent and comparable to the past.
I hope that provides a bit of trust behind the process. This is not some fly
by night operation.
I would be interested to learn what exactly you did with the "Feast Franklin
Avenue" research. I assume you mean East Franklin and I am even more interested
in that. Who was the research for, when done, and for what purpose?
The real question about the "Referendum Research" is how the survey instrument
was created to begin with. Even if you were duplicating the 2000 study. Just as
important, and perhaps even more important, would be your sampling techniques
and their rigor. Was it random sampling, stratified sampling, or stratified
cluster sampling? If so what was size of the sample and what was the criteria.
Perhaps you can post that information. Perhaps even post the exact
questionnaire?
Such information might give more (or less) confidence in the results of your
questionnaire and its reliability. As you must know (from all your experience)
it is quite possible to do research in such a manner as to successfully prove
almost any point.
Of course the results of the research still does not show why we would want to
invest more of our money in a failed system instead of making that system more
responsive to the needs of thepoorerstudents. How could your research results
solve that problem? If not what was the purpose of it other than to support a
referendum to raise taxes.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without
accepting it."
I am not convinced that the $60m is the answer to this problem. I have heard
the program and strategic plan and I am impressed by it. But that is not what
the bulk of the assets will go toward. The bulk of the assets will go toward
maintaining class sizes and that is a hard sell for me
.
There is a fallacy unproven by data that all children do better in smaller
classes. Some do, those that are gifted, from higher income families, and have
parents with higher education. They also have to be in a setting below twenty
kids with teacher utilizing individualized education plans.(Tennesee study has
been verified by a study done by Northwestern) None of which is possible with
the 60m let alone any other mix of reasonable financing!
There are however 5 things that both the district and state can do to offset
costs to the districts statewide.
1) Combine pensions and healthcare into one pool with all other state personel.
THe U of M should be the designated campus for teacher continuing education and
that price should be born by the state for its requirement, the fed for its
requirements and districts for their requirement. No more unfunded education
mandates.
2)Level all the empty buildings and buildings with less than 50% usage.
Contract out for grass and shoveling. Sell the property away to highest bidder
and restructure debt service by taking advantage of low interests rates.
3)See program choice as a failed project. Limit programs to 3 specific programs
offered the same way at all schools and mandate advance placement. Some will
leave but catering to niche groups has driven the budget out of whack. This
curriculum can and should challenge students. Did you know that there are
parents who opposed making Advanced Placement History, the norm for history. We
need to stop coddling our children and let kids earn their way down to basic
instead of up to AP!
4) We don't need to bus kids who attend schools outside of their designated
quadrants. I intend to have my freshman MTC'ing it to Southwest this fall. I
don't see any reason short of disability to pay for transport outside of
attendance area. We could close many schools in NE Mpls by taking this tact and
send our kids to Jordan Park which is a better facility. The children from
North would benefit from the increased capacity from the Northside Initiative
instead of watering down those benefits by sending wasted funds across the
river.
5) Don't reward declining communities. We don't need 7 high schools. We maybe
need 3 large communities.(one in each area) We waste resources to appease small
but vocal groups holding onto dying institutions.
I live in a neighborhood that is half empty, and frankly we barely get by. I
can't afford to fix my leaking basement let alone pay additional taxes. The
overall per pupil expenditures will amount to over 12k per pupil! Now I can
sent my kids to REALLY good private schools for this amount.(Breck, Dela Salle,
Holy Angels)
Some had better show better rationale than what has been expressed thus far!
What a child goes home to at night has a lot more to do with whether a child
succeeds in school and then in life than any other factor, including money. If
a child goes home to a loving parent or parents who provide that child with a
reasonably safe, happy and positive environment, 99% of the time the child
will do just fine. This is especially true if the proper discipline and role
models are provided. The child could go to school in a cave and he or she
would do just fine. On the other hand Minneapolis could spend ten times what
they do now and nothing will change as long as factors out side of the schools
control don't change.
Forty years of political correctness has made it very difficult in our
society to get together and solve problems like this. It would mean pointing
fingers at large numbers of people who are doing a poor job of being parents.
It would mean pointing fingers at a very large number of men who have
disappeared from their child’s life and this is uncomfortable. It is much
easier to just say we need to spend more money. The reality is that children
of all races fail for the same reason, bad homes, bad parents, bad role models
and no hope. But I think children of color in the lower economic urban areas
have an additional burden. Thus school districts like Minneapolis have an
additional burden. To a certain degree we've spent the last forty years
teaching black children in urban schools how to fail. The older generation of
black leaders have grown rich teaching and preaching this message. In a country
where the vast majority of money and jobs are controlled by non blacks perhaps
black leaders have put too much emphasis on their black culture and heritage to
a point where it is detrimental to the future economic success of black
children. I think that black children should be taught like all children that
they are Americans first and as good as anyone and that if they aim high they
can achieve anything. But in life there are rules to the game that are
important to follow most of the time in order to succeed. For most of us we
must follow those rules or we are out of the game. I believe that an important
part of any child’s development should be helping them clearly understand what
will be expected of them when they go out into the world for their first job.
What skills and values do they need to impress those who control their economic
future. How do you walk, talk dress and act. Is it fair ? Life isn’t always
fair. We should all work for a more perfect world but in the meantime we have
to live in the real world. We also should all respect our heritage and take
pride in where we came from but not at the expense of our future. I happen to
be of Norwegian heritage and I'm very proud of it but I only think about it
about once a year, at Christmas. Being Norwegian doesn’t pay my bills. Thus
we need a new generation of black leader who will start teaching young urban
children how to win in our society. Leaders who will quit looking to the past
and providing reasons for failure but rather start teaching black children at
an early age what it take to succeed in our society. As these children start
to believe that they are being told the truth about how to succeed in life they
will start to believe that they can win in life and as these children start to
win in greater numbers, we all win. Please don’t blame it on the building,
the books and the teachers.
On May 18, 2008, at 12:03 AM, Eric Pone wrote:
> [snip]
> 3)See program choice as a failed project. Limit programs to 3
> specific programs offered the same way at all schools and mandate
> advance placement. Some will leave but catering to niche groups has
> driven the budget out of whack. This curriculum can and should
> challenge students. Did you know that there are parents who opposed
> making Advanced Placement History, the norm for history. We need to
> stop coddling our children and let kids earn their way down to basic
> instead of up to AP!
BP: I can well believe that people would oppose making AP history the
norm. The US course is a survey, and some might prefer an approach
which focuses more deeply on less content. Many might also prefer a
world history course to AP European History. Don't get me wrong; I am
a fan of the rigor and methods of analysis taught in AP history
courses. However, the Advanced Placement authorities, through their
course audit process, exercise a high degree of control over what
happens in AP courses. I strongly support making /retaining AP as an
option in all MPS high schools, and am myself a happy teacher of AP
Calculus. But there are strong reasons not to make AP the driver of
the history curriculum.
> [snip]
> I live in a neighborhood that is half empty, and frankly we barely
> get by. I can't afford to fix my leaking basement let alone pay
> additional taxes. The overall per pupil expenditures will amount to
> over 12k per pupil! Now I can sent my kids to REALLY good private
> schools for this amount.(Breck, Dela Salle, Holy Angels)
BP: $12K will not bring you anywhere near a full tuition at Breck.
Brad Peterson
Kingfield resident
Field parent
Thanks to Mr. Boger for his thoughtful articulate (but I believe flawed)
commentary on reasons for low achievement among many African American
students in Mpls and elsewhere. Mr. Boger does an excellent job of sharing
views many in Minnesota have which is that ultimately, as he begin:
"What a child goes home to at night has a lot more to do with whether a
child succeeds in school and then in life than any other factor,
including money."
<email obscured> wrote:
> One of the reasons that achievement gaps are so large in Minneapolis and
> some other areas of Minnesota is that the views Mr. Boger articulates have
> been held for a long time by a lot of Minnesotans.
>
It is possible that viewpoints articulated by Mr. Boger have contributed
to the achievement gap; I don't really know for sure because I don't
have access to any data that says so.
I think it is more likely that the increase in charter schools has
contributed more to the achievement gap by subtracting a significant
percentage of students that would otherwise have helped increase the
overall achievement levels had they been included in the group. I want
the achievement gap figures to include ALL of the students in a given
area. Have the KIPP schools or the YES schools increased the overall
achievement of the whole population of students or are they merely
pulling a group of students out of the whole and doing a good job with
that very small percentage of students. That's like a farmer
fertilizing only the rows of corn near the road and then pointing out
how high the corn has grown in his field compared to his neighbor who
spread the same amount of fertilizer over the whole field. Let's measure
the whole field and truly not leave any kids behind.
Specialty schools increase the achievement gap of the population from
which their students are drawn - that's good for the kids in the
specialty schools, but not necessarily for the other 95%.
Let's get the facts out about Minneapolis one more time, folks.
Despite what Mr. McGuire writes - along with a number of other Mpls
teachers who keep using charters as an excuse for problems in Minneapolis
Public Schools,
* Charters in Mpls enroll a higher % of low income, limited English
speaking and Students of color than do the district public schools. This
has been true for the last 5 years.
* Many White and middle/upper income students, who tend to score higher on
tests, have been retained by MPS.
Minneapolis charters like Four Directions and Minnesota Transitions are
drawing predominantly students with whom the Mpls district has not
succeeded - predominantly Native American and African American students.
Neither KIPP nor Yes Pres is operating in Mpls.
Using Mr. McGuire's metaphor,
Some farmers make excuses when year after year, when there are problems
with some of their crops. Other farmers look for new ways to carry out
their farming, while retaining some of the things that work well.
If Mpls wants to continue losing students (and teacher jobs), it will
continue the path of excuses and denial.
If Mpls wants to retain more students, attract new students and retain more
teacher jobs, it will refine and improve existing schools and create some
new schools, open to all, that attract students into the district.
Joe Nathan, parent of 3 young people who graduated from St. Paul Public
Schools and Director Center for School Change, Humphrey Institute
I can confirm what Joe is articulating. Minnesota Transitions (MTS) is heavily
low income and struggles with achievement scores.
Our elementary is 95% low income but we have managed to keep classes below 20
and place our Title I service from No Child Left Behind strategically
disproportially at the site. We are gradually raising the scores for our
elementary.
Our other seat based programs are similar. In fact, MTS has expanded outside
Minneapolis. A majority of our students reside in outstate Minnesota or the
suburbs.
Mpls schools and residents need to understand that we all pay taxes in
Minneapolis. Charter, alternative contract schools and suburban open
enrollment students have a stake in the education programming. Almost 25% of
Minneapolis public school students do not attend Minneapolis Public Schools.
Yet, we do not benefit directly from the referendum. Alternative contract
schools educate almost 2000 Mpls students. Their students and state income are
counted in Minneapolis. These students receive no referendum funds, a serious
flaw in the referendum.
Charter schools and alternative contract schools need to be seen as part of the
solution and not the enemy. I hope the school board and minneapolis politicians
understand this.
Tony Scallon
Longfellow
P. Boger: "What a child goes home to at night has a lot more to do with whether
a child succeeds in school and then in life than any other factor, including
money."
Dan McGuire: "It is possible that viewpoints articulated by Mr. Boger have
contributed to the achievement gap; I don't really know for sure because I
don't have access to any data that says so."
I don't think it is any secret that attitudes about class permeate our entire
society and each individual in it. What Mr. Boger says appears to be true, but
only if, as Michael Atherton says, no school structure is implemented that
counters a less than perfect home--which homes, BTW, are not necessarily only
those of the poor.
It is far less than credible to take the position that we, as a society, are
ignorant of the fact that we are spending both our money and our energy in
keeping whole classes of people from achieving in school. Not only economic
class, but protected classes as a whole. We need only look at who makes the
decisions and who is not considered in the decisions to know that we are an
extremely class oriented society and also, that we are loathe to address the
issue head on. We are very comfortable squelching the aspirations of the many
to benefit the few.
Once upon a time in Cincinnati, a young woman got the "highest mechanical score
ever recorded in the state of Ohio." This mechanical score was a prerequisite
in order to get free training as a mechanic (both cars and airplanes). The
young woman requested training as an airplane mechanic and was told it was
impossible, she was female. The state would, however, train the woman as a
secretary or a nurse's aide. That's a blatant way of saying you can't enter the
job market with skills to make good wages (so she could pay for college and
move up the ladder).
The more subtle way is the way Minneapolis is doing it. DFL backs a $60 million
referendum; the referendum language will produce only small, cosmetic changes,
but nothing solid which will attract caring parents who are determined to
educate their children. Cycle repeats, keeping whole classes of people out of
the mix costs another $X million to shore up the failing school structure, $X
million in welfare benefits, $X million in health care costs, $X million in
police, courts, misery, and mayhem. It is much too late to pretend otherwise.