I wasn't suggesting and didn't say that the board and school principals didn't know
about it and hadn't maybe mentioned
it at a meeting. My point was and still is that unless the changes and options are
understood by a significant part of
the general public, parents and taxpayers, we, and I mean that in the largest sense
possible, haven't really talked about
them. At least, we haven't talked about them enough and we haven't read about them
enough in the newspapers. I would
venture a guess that barely over 1% of the parents of Mils students would be able to
give you an accurate definition of
Title I. The funding changes and options were discussed only a very little at any
board meeting I saw or read about.
Mostly, announcements were made about what had already been decided. The kind of
discussions necessary today were not
required in times past, unfortunately or not.
The board and the administration needs desperately to inform, educate and discuss
with the general public how money
comes into the district and how it is spent. Mentioning something at a board meeting
is not the same as informing the
public. The postings on the district web site in the Community Engagement Process are
a good, even if overdue,
beginning. I also think the media needs to ramp up their coverage and use more space
to explain the complicated info
instead of doing personality profiles of some of the players, and I appreciate David's
acknowledgment of an awareness of
that in his recent post. It's not really about Title I, allocations and facilities
usage, which are admittedly not all
that much fun to write or talk about, it's about our kid's and their classrooms.
Dan McGuire
Ericsson
List manager wrote:
> Forwarded on behalf of the author:
>
> I want to respond to immediately to Title I question. The district had
> been talking about the TItle I cut since early February. It was
> discussed at principals meetings and mentioned at the Board meeting in
> March when we presented the budget plan. At the time thought we were
> only get to reach schools with 70% poverty or more.
>
> I am not sure why principals did not share this information with their
> school communities -- some did, I know, others did not.
>
> Also, the district does NOT get to decide who is and who is not
> eligible for Title I dollars. There is a process set by the state and
> federal legislation. Although the district did receive fewer dollars,
> the larger factor in the cuts to schools was/is the percentage of set
> aside mandated by the federal government for supplemental services.
>
> Marj Rolland
> Mpls Public Schools
>
> REMINDERS:
> 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL
> PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
> 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
>
> For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
> For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
> ________________________________
>
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
> Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
