[Mpls] Re: Career Pathways for 8th Graders in MPS

2003-06-18 Thread James F. Grathwol
June 18th 2003

Dear Ms. Quist;

Thank you for your response to my letter to Senator Higgins about the
concerns you raised regarding the work of our High School Small Learning
Communities.

I continue to respectfully disagree with your interpretation of the work
taking place in Minneapolis Public Schools.  While I will ardently
defend your right to your views I don't want anyone to confuse your
views on this matter, with reality.

At the risk of repeating myself let me restate:

1) Minneapolis Public Schools does not force 8th grade students to
choose career tracks.
2) Enrolling in a Minneapolis Public High School Small Learning
Community cannot be equated by any reasoning adult to being "forced into
a career track".
3) All of our Small Learning Communities (SLC's) deliver the state's
required and elective academic standards.  
4) Some of our SLC's are developed around an educational philosophy
(e.g. the Open programs at Henry, South and Roosevelt or the IB programs
at Henry and Southwest.
5) Some SLC's are developed around general interest areas (e.g. Arts and
Communication, Summatech - math and science - at North, Arts and
Humanities at Southwest, Liberal Arts at South, American Studies at
Washburn)
6) Some are developed around broad career pathways (e.g. Engineering at
Henry, Emerging Technologies at Edison, Teaching and Public Service at
Edison, and Medical Technologies at Roosevelt, Travel and Tourism at
Washburn.) 
7) The Small Learning Communities in our high schools are being
developed in response to best-practice research and in response to focus
groups with students who want a more relevant educational experience.
8) We believe Small Learning Communities, are a key strategy to
increase: student engagement in learning; attendance; achievement; and
graduation rates.

Ms. Quist, perhaps we can agree that knowledge comes from experience. I
know you have visited our website.  I am not sure if you have visited
our schools, spoken with our students and teachers, or seen for yourself
the work taking place in our high schools.

I invite you to come visit with our High School Academic Superintendent,
Dr. Robert McCauley to discuss our high school reform initiatives.  Dr.
McCauley can be reached at 612-668-3820 to schedule your visit.

You are welcome to visit our schools and speak with our students to
discern for yourself , based on your own experience whether your
statements about our work match up with your experience in the
Minneapolis Public Schools.

Sincerely,


Jim Grathwol.

612-290-1190





MREdCo wrote:
> 
> Re: Career Pathways for 8th Graders in MPS
> 
> Dear Mr. Grathwol,
> 
> In your June 8th letter to Senator Higgins you state that
> "no one  [Mpls student] chooses a career pathway" and that
> Mpls "does not force students to choose careers in 8th grade."
> 
> Your statements are simply not true. The small learning
> communities (SLCs) in Minneapolis require students to make
> career decisions before they enter high school.
> 
> You say that Minneapolis students "have the
> opportunity to choose their high schools." What you don't
> mention is that in 8th grade students actually must choose an
> SLC, and that choice determines their career pathway. SLCs
> are focused around future career plans. Therefore, choosing an
> SLC is choosing a career path. The SLC sales language calls
> the career pathways "themes," but they are career themes.
> 
> The American Youth Policy Forum describes SLCs
> this way:
> "a multi-year sequence of courses that integrate core
> academic knowledge with technical and occupational
> knowledge leading to higher levels of skill attainment
> over time with a unifying theme around which to
> organize the curriculum." (p. 6 "Rigor and Relevance,")
> http://www.aypf.org/publications/aypf_rigor_0004v.3.pdf
> 
> You say that every SLC "delivers all of the state
> required and elective academic standards." They do indeed
> teach the standards, but all of the curriculum is integrated
> with the particular career pathway. American Youth Forum
> notes that, "In grades 9-10, a program of study [in SLCs]
> would focus primarily on academic foundations using the
> context of careers." (p.iii)
> 
> The MPS district website calls SLCs  "school-to-
> career," and "school-to-work."  The website states:
> 
> "School-to-Career Transition in Minneapolis is a
> comprehensive system involving a diverse group of
> school, agency and organization partners committed
> to transforming the educational experience of
> Minneapolis learners. Guided by this commitment,
> the School-to-Career (STC) Transition System is
> dedicated to realizing the following vision:
> 
> "The Minneapolis School-to-Career Transition
> Consortium seeks to establish a COMPREHENSIVE
> K-life education and EMPLOYMENT TRANSITION
> SYSTEM which prepar

[Mpls] Community Education vs. Community Schools

2003-01-02 Thread James F. Grathwol

Several Listmembers had concerns regarding offerings in the latest MPS
Community Education Catalogue.  Concerns included: separation of church
and state and appropriateness of offering less than "core curricular"
offerings by a district that has low reading and math scores, graduation
rates etc. 

The state provides separate finance mechanisms for general education
funding (K-12 Education) and community education.  The statutory
definition guiding Community Education can be found at MN Statutes
124D.18 et seq.:

 124D.18 Purpose of community education programs. 
 
The purpose of sections 124D.18 and 124D.19 is to make
 maximum use of the public schools of Minnesota by the community
 and to expand utilization by the school of the human resources
 of the community, by establishing a community education program.

The finance mecahnism is a separate community education levy, in a
separate fund to finance course offerings to the community.  The
description of the levy mechnism can be found at Minn Statutes 124D.20. 
In summary, the mechanism provides a specific dollar amount of levy
authority per capita for community education programs.

Community education revenues are separate distinct and not in
competition with general education revenues.  It would be innappropriate
and illegal to use community education revenue to fund general education
and vice versa - general education revenue can not be used to finance
community education programs.

The commnunity education revenue finances the course offereings in the
catalogue and a number of other programs folks will recognize: the GED
General Equaivalency Diploma Program; Adult Basic Education; ECFE -
Early Childhood Family Education and more.

With regard to content, I am not qualified to speak to whether a Yoga
class violates the establishment clause and will leave it to
constitutional scholars lurking on the list to advise us on whether we
have crossed any lines there.  

I should also clarify that there seemed to be some confusion between
Community Education Programs targeted to the broader community and MPS
Community Schools, neighborhood schools offering a comprehensive
elementary (K-5) or (K-8) education.

Finally, in a post to this list Mr. Atherton states:

"I believe that the Minneapolis Public School District
Administration is a left-wing "progressive" organization.
On their website,
http://www.mpls.k12.mn.us/about/referendum_class_size.shtml, 
they claim that their "Data shows that small class size 
increases achievement for students of all races."  This
is a totally bogus, deceptive, insincere, and intellectually
vacuous statement and anyone with a decent introductory
statistics class knows it. And they know it too."

I think we have a case where reasonable people can have reasonable
disagreements.

Mr. Atherton, I presume you are reasonable.  I had the pleasure of
meeting you during your campaign for school board.  I know you have
written in this forum that you don't believe investments in class size
are wise.

MPS district administration, and the voters of Minneapolis, three times
over the course of eleven years, respectfully disagree.  The MPS
district administration and voters are not alone.  The federal
government, other states, school district adminstrations and voters have
embraced class-size reduction as a valid reform tool.

We don't think class size is a silver bullet.  We think qualified
teachers, grade-level expectations, research-based curricula all matter
and we make significant investments in all these areas.

In the current budget cycle we are looking at all our investments in
student achievement and will be forced to choose from among those that
are good and those that are best to find savings.

The debate can rage on over whether small class-size is just
"good-practice" or is it "best-practice".

As we conduct the debate internally and externally we do our best to
respect that reasonable people can and do have reasonable differences. 
In my experience labelling your opponent, and your opponent's positions
does not advance the debate nor bring the issues to a resolution.

Happy New Year!

Jim Grathwol
MPS Lobbyist
W. 11
612-668-0223

begin:vcard 
n:Grathwol;Jim
tel;cell:612-290-1190
tel;work:612-668-0223
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fn:Jim Grathwol
end:vcard