The following is an example of a personal paradigm that was recently changed. One of my Professors had referred to this as a "BGO". This is when you feel you thoroughly understand/believe something, or you just can't grasp a concept no matter how you try. Then something small happens and you receive a "Brilliant Glimpse of the Obvious". After this you have a paradigm shift and things just make sense.
For as long as I have been paying attention, I have operated under a belief that:
The Robbinsdale Area School Board was the voice of citizens with regard to schools within the RAS boundaries. This meant that their first priority was helping to ensure the citizen's money was well spent to ensure the community's students were given excellent learning opportunities.
The following article helped me to understand that I was operating under an incorrect paradigm. My new belief is that:
The Robbinsdale Area School Board is the voice of citizens with regard to District 281 schools. This means that their first priority is maximizing District 281 revenues in order to provide District 281 students excellent learning opportunities.Now I disagree with these goals, roles and responsibilities since our district is so complex, however I assume this is what they are supposed to be doing based on their defined Board mission.
I still believe that the community tax payers spent money to build the Pilgrim Lane Elementary School to be a community school. The reality is that RAS chose to stop using it, and another school wants or wanted to buy the facility to fulfill its intended purpose. The District School Board would rather bull doze the usable building than allow competition and risk District 281 funding.
I think this is wrong, a waste of our tax dollars and a missed opportunity for the community's kids. Of course, I belief that competition raises standards of performance.
What do you thinks regarding these topics?
For your reference:
Information for Prospective School Board Candidates
Several qualities of effective School Board members that have been identified by the Minnesota School Boards Association are: a conviction that public education is important; the ability to make decisions and communicate well with others; time and energy to devote to board business; respect for district staff; and ability to make decisions that are in the best interest of students and citizens.
281 Mission
The mission of Robbinsdale Area Schools is to inspire and educate all learners to discover their potential and positively contribute to their community.
24 comments:
"I think this is wrong, a waste of our tax dollars and a missed opportunity for the community's kids. Of course, I belief that competition raises standards of performance."
This whole thing presents a lot of interesting issues. But one thing I would note in passing is that the reluctance to sell the property to a charter school might be motivated by the possibility that they see the charter school as a competitor. Competitors don't help other competitors.
My modest proposal for any charter school looking to school districts for help is that they find ways to persuade the district that their interests are complementary, and not in competition. They should be prepared to make the case that cooperation in all the different ways schools can cooperate with each other are mutually beneficial.
Something for charter schools to keep in mind is that the obligation of the school district is to serve the interests of the entire community and all the children of RAS.
The comments in the Sun Sailor from the school board on this are ridiculous, with the exception of Jonas Buegen, who incidentally is the only one not running for re-election.
This was one of my many issues with the school board's short-sighted "right sizing" decision. Close a school in a "nice residential area" and then what? What else can you do with that facility, particularly now? Clearly, the only building in question here is Pilgrim Lane. 281 had and still has an offer to rent it for $500,000 to a charter school, which would be income on top of the saved costs of utilities, etc. that would be paid by the charter school. The article indicates that about 600 students cause a loss of $3 million. So, 100 kids lost to a charter is $500,000 in lost revenue. So, if the district allowed a charter to move in, it could lose 100 kids, and still come out ahead financially, because of not having to pay utilities. Allowing an established charter like Beacon would not instantly drain 100 kids, because it is full. Perhaps over time, you would get more 281 applicants instead of 284, 279, etc., because of location. But still, I think you'd be hard pressed to show that renting to a charter would be financially disastrous to 281. In fact, I think it is terrible that that rental income, which could have been used to restore full day kindergarten at the Title 1 elementaries, has been disregarded. I think it's out of pride and spite that most of the school board won't even consider the possibility. They don't care about losing students when they close a neighborhood school, but now suddenly it's critically important.
You are right in that they are largely concerned about maximizing funding, but clearly they are also concerned about maintaining numbers. They are not enough concerned about providing quality education.
Also, I think that article proves that this declining enrollment, which has been repeatedly blamed on lower birth rates, is quite largely due to the exodus of students to charter schools.
As you know, my children are attending Wayzata schools next year. I've been out of town and busy with company, but I also need to separate myself a little for my own sanity. I'm still interested in reading all of your insights and responses from commenters, though.
"They are not enough concerned about providing quality education."
I think they are very concerned with providing quality education. It's up to the charter school to prove to all of us that their concern for the kids of 281 is at least equal to the district's and that having a charter school in the district benefits the children and residents of 281.
It is not up to the Charter school to prove to "us" that they care as much. Their customers are the parents and students that choose to attend their school, and the staff that chooses to work there.
The public just "sells/rents" them an empty "school" building with a stipulation that community kids can attend if they are so inclined.
If they don't convince enough customers of their quality and intent, the school ceases to exist... In the very American tradition, add more value or perish.
"It is not up to the Charter school to prove to "us" that they care as much."
It is if they want to deal with school district that defines it's mission in those terms.
The district is in the education business, not the real estate business.
"If they don't convince enough customers of their quality and intent, the school ceases to exist... In the very American tradition, add more value or perish."
If the charter school wants to work with the school district, it's up to them to convince the school district that what they are asking of the school district is good for the 281 community.
I think it's very important that the school district communicate effectively with the public, but they aren't in the public relations business either.
"They are not enough concerned about providing quality education."
They may be concerned with providing a quality education to students in the IB and Spanish Immersion programs. But they are not equally concerned about all students.
281 has an elementary school, Meadow Lake, with test scores that put it in the bottom 10% of all elementary schools in the state. That is not quality education. When pressed on the issue, the admin and board say over and over that the scores are low because of poverty. To say those kids cannot reach proficiency because they are poor is wrong. That is precisely the reason for NCLB.
What is being done to improve test scores at Meadow Lake? When the federal funding for all day kindergarten at Meadow Lake ran out last year, they reverted to half day kindergarten. And when the school board allocated money from the school closures, did they restore all day K? No, they used it for transportation for IB and Spanish Immersion. And when they received federal stimulus dollars? They used to to pull 18 of the best and most experienced teachers out of the classroom and replace them with new teachers. A mentor for a teacher seems like a poor replacement for an extra two and a half hours of instruction every day for a child at a critical juncture.
I question the priorities.
The charter school has made an offer of $500,000, plus $100,000- $200,000 in saved utilities and custodial. I think that income would serve the district very well.
I think the school district now owes it to us to:
1. Disclose the costs of maintaining the unused building.
2. Prove that renting the building out would likely be more expensive than leaving it empty.
Dismissing it with no cost analysis is ridiculous.
Christine, I love your comments they make a lot of sense.
Jon, The reality is that 281 does not want any competition from a basic charter school like Beacon... Maybe ethic specialty schools are ok, but not one like this. It may take the wrong students. Therefore there is no viable argument Beacon could make to convince the Board that their presence would be good for the community's kids.
Even though I can not think why the typical citizen would not want another thriving school in their community. It is a very interesting topic and I can not wait to see what RAS does with our Community asset/building and tax dollars.
Throwing the money into the dump by demolishing the building still seems wrong for the community. However it may be right for 281...
"Therefore there is no viable argument Beacon could make to convince the Board that their presence would be good for the community's kids."
I don't share your pessimism. If, as you suggest, that RAS will not sell to a competitor, perhaps Beacon Academy should find a way not to present itself as one.
There are a lot of problems in general with charter schools which could form a reasonable basis for the conclusion that they are not in the interests of the community. They are expensive, and they divert funding from already unfunded schools, just to name two. But I think there also can be good arguments in favor of charter schools. If Beacon Academy or any other charter schools want to work with RAS, they should identify and address the concerns that the district has, and also be prepared to present a case for the benefits of charter schools.
I don't think it is pessimism given Patsy's comment:
"This is flat out competition. I'm not ready to make it easy. They can exist, but I'm not interested in selling a building in one of our nice residential areas."
I am just listening to one the protectionist Board members...
"This is flat out competition. I'm not ready to make it easy. They can exist, but I'm not interested in selling a building in one of our nice residential areas."
"I am just listening to one the protectionist Board members..."
Maybe a better choice here is not to listen quite so carefully, and to hear what is advantageous and ignore the rest. Patsy said she isn't ready to make it easy, but she didn't say she would make it impossible. She said she wasn't interested in selling the building, but that doesn't have to rule out the possibility of finding things that would interest her.
I am not saying a deal can be done here. Maybe it can't. But I am pretty sure a deal can't get done if those working on behalf of the charter school go into the process without an understanding of the mission and goals and the responsibilities of the school board. Mutual respect is of the essence if any successful negotiation is going to succeed. And I am also pretty sure that a deal can't get done simply by throwing money at the school district.
I guess this comment string brings up an interesting question....
Should the District and Board be the ones to disposition the "public property" once they say they no longer have use for it? Or should the city that it resides in?
Since as you mentioned, the District should not be in the real estate business. And the city/community/neighborhood is really the primary concerned party, once the district says they no longer need it.
The city could then send the proceeds to the District once the deal was done. The amount could be compared to the appraised value to keep them honest. Interesting thought...
"Should the District and Board be the ones to disposition the "public property" once they say they no longer have use for it?"
I believe the property belongs to the district, not the city. If the Pilgrim Lane site is sold, the money will go the district, not to the city of Plymouth. It was after all District taxpayers who paid for it. The District does have a continuing interest in property it owns whether or not it is currently operating schools there or not.
I agree the district should get approximately the appraised value. However, I disagree that they should have a continuing interest or say. They are done with it by their own choice and admission. Therefore the future usage should be determined by the city of Plymouth in this case...
We'll probably need to agree to disagree on this one.
I think the district should get what they can get for the property, if that's the direction they want to go. I know of no reason why they should be limited to appraised value if they can get a better offer.
They do have a continuing interest in the property as long as they own, despite anything anyone might have said to the contrary. And Plymouth has no more claim on district property than any other of the seven cities, served by District 281 schools. The school board is elected by and works for the residents of RAS, and not the cities which happen to be located in the district.
Now we are back where I started with my BGO...
In my opinion, they are more interested in supporting District 281 and its success. And less interested in maximizing the educational potential of the RAS community and representing the best interest of the RAS citizens.
This is likely what they are supposed to be doing based on their charter. They are not the Robbinsdale Area Community School Board. The are the RAS District 281 School Board.
It was just important to me that I recognize the difference. Therefore I can view their decisions from the correct perspective.
Thanks for your thoughts as always.
"they are more interested in supporting District 281 and its success."
And I suppose Beacon Academy is interested in the successes of it's students. But I don't think the relationship has to be competitive, a zero sum game, and I think anyone who views it that way does both sides a disservice.
I agree !!!
The board should stop seeing charters as negative competition and rent/sell PLE to Beacon.
Thereby creating a win/win situation for the community and students. And increasing the sum of the game to well above zero...
This would be a very positive, daring and proactive service to the community. Sounds like a great idea !!!
"The board should stop seeing charters as negative competition and rent/sell PLE to Beacon."
The board has perfectly sound reasons for seeing charter schools as competition. It's a reasonable position. And in the real world, you don't help the competition. The Vikings aren't going to let Favre play a quarter for the Packers, just to prove they are nice guys. Only in the movies, does Gimbels tell shopper to buy at Macy's.
If a charter school wants a deal with the board, they are going to have to work for it. They are going to have to address the serious and legitimate concerns the board has about bringing a charter school in the area. They are going to have to develop a strategy for success. Maybe it would help if the charter school board made that an expectation for it's administrative staff charged with entering into those negotiations.
I am a big "Mad Men" fan. In last Sunday's show, Don Draper talked about changing the conversation. The charter school should ask itself, does it like the conversation it is engaged in? If not, and if they want a successful outcome, they should find a way to change it.
"But I don't think the relationship has to be competitive, a zero sum game, and I think anyone who views it that way does both sides a disservice."
Would you please make up your mind... Is viewing this as a competition a disservice or not?
Who is doing the disservice here?
Or is a double standard acceptable here?
By the way, my favorite stores are the ones that send me to the competition when they are unable to satisfy my needs. Instead of pushing a product or service that does not work for me. I run into this often and really appreciate it... Then I make sure I support that business in the future, because they put satisfying the customer as job 1.
Interesting and excellent analogy...
"Would you please make up your mind... Is viewing this as a competition a disservice or not?"
I think I have been consistent here. If the charter school wants to work with the school district, it shouldn't present itself as a competitor, as an entity with interests adverse to those of the school district. I think that's the conversation they are having now, and that's the wrong conversation to have if cooperation with the school district is their goal.
I agree that the setting of goals is important, and even essential to success. And the essential first step in that process is deciding what those goals are.
Where as I am more interested in the tone set and voiced by our elected public officials.
I am happy we could get these different perspectives out on the table for people to review and ponder.
Have a great week !!!
Where as I am more interested in the tone set and voiced by our elected public officials.
I am interested in how are kids are taught. As far as I am concerned, public officials can take any tone they like as long as our children are taught well.
Post a Comment