You really should make some time to read through the linked presentation and reports. The District is looking into making some pretty drastic changes that may impact you or your kids. A few of interest:
- Changing who gets first preference, Intradistrict Transfers or Open Enrollees.
- Considering if siblings should still automatically get into RSIS just because their big bro/sis did.
- In general: Ear marking more "good spots" for Open Enrollees in general. (remember: they are extra money and you are money they already have...)
Of course from my far off perspective, there seems to be a huge flaw in their logic. Do they really think that RAS families will not leave the district if they are bumped from their preferred RAS school because the District puts Open Enrollees and their funding first. Now remember that Intradistrict Transfer Moms and Dads are already driving their kids to school daily. My guess is that they can just go a few more miles to the S or SW... (Which has more funding impcat? an IDT leaving or an OE joining)
Then we have the Magnet dilemma... Some days I really miss Gary and his excessive details... They have posted cost and payback numbers with minimal information regarding how many kids have to be enrolled to hit those numbers and what the likelihood of enrolling them is. (ie "If we open it, they will come") This is more of a concern with regard to the STEM school, since RSIS has to ramp up slowly from Kindergarten. And they remind us that Transportation costs will be less when they have Immersion in both Middle Schools, yet give us no idea what the marginal cost is of having Immersion in a Middle School. Or what the cost of cross district transport to 2 Magnets is ...Luckily my family doesn't Intradistrict Transfer, attend RSIS or have any interest in a new Magnet. However if you do or if you are tax sensitive, now would be a good time to learn more and make your thoughts known. RAS Board Contact Info
14Dec10 Work Session Notes
Sun News 281 Magnets
Sun News Magnets Interest Plymouth
Thoughts or additional Info? Have a great weekend !!!
"Do they really think that RAS families will not leave the district if they are bumped from their preferred RAS school because the District puts Open Enrollees and their funding first."
ReplyDeleteIt isn't always clear what motivates kids to open enroll in our out of the system. That's something we need to know more about. But here is another instance which raises the issue of competitiveness. If we want to compete with surrounding districts, and other schools, we quite simply have to open up our schools to out of district kids. And that raises a fairness issue, since it means preferring out of district kids to kids from within the district. One response to the fairness issue is to expand the district so that out of district kids won't displace district kids. But that would cost money the district doesn't currently have. Fairness issues are just about always money issues.
I guess I disagree that fairness is always about money issues, especially in this case. We are considering blocking RAS citizens from choosing their school within the district. Even though they choose to live in and pay taxes within our "school community" boundary...
ReplyDeleteThe only reason we are doing this is to get more money to cover costs that RAS Mgmt preceives to be fixed. When in reality, no costs are fixed over the long term.
The ESC, large bus garage site, extra buildings, admin/overhead staff, etc can all be downsized or eliminated as the RAS student body shrinks.
Think about districts like Delano or Hopkins, they perform incredibly well with a much smaller student body and a fraction of the RAS annual budget. They just don't carry all the burden we choose to.
So here is my recommendation: downscale gracefully and get your focus on the schools we have currently. We do not have to be the biggest to be the best!!!
If we have some extra space in the schools, distribute the District staff and Administration across them. If you have to, rent some small amount of office space for the personnel that must collaborate often. Then find someone to buy the ESC/Garage site. The trick is that costs outside of the active schools must be chopped aggressively and regularly.
That is why we fund based on student head count, the value added activities are tied directly to that one kid's head... All other activities are support / non-value add. (ie some are necessary, but all must be minimized)
So bigger with more complexity and confusion. (ie requiring more overhead and "fixed" costs) Or smaller with more focus and intensity. (ie less overhead)
I am not sure what drives the RAS Mgmt and Board to fight shrinkage so intensely. (ie bigger is better) Maybe they like having a huge annual revenue. I am more of a it's the profit and results that matter.
One example of David and Goliath that may explain my perspective.
ReplyDeleteHonda Automobiles had only a couple of car offerings for years. They focused intently and worked very hard at making these the best cars they could and the customers rewarded them handsomely for this effort. And they still only offer Hondas and Acuras.
Where as General Motors maintained many brands and even added Saturn and Hummer to complicate things further. The costs associated with maintaining all of the minor variations between brands and the loss of focus finally caused them to go into bankruptcy. Where they were ordered to kill many of the Brands... Thankfully !!! It may give them a second chance to get it right !!!
With this in mind... How many Brands can RAS afford to maintain? How much loss of intense focus is acceptable?Especially when their core "Chevy" Brand is doing OK at best.
To emphasize this: All this study of new options has taken a lot of time and energy. The time and energy was taken from somewhere, likely these people's day time jobs were sacrificed to some extent. Now do we want them spending more time setting up new schools or focusing on making the current ones are GREAT.
Since I have spent most of my career developing new or maintain large mobile equipment, I can tell you that developing new is more exciting and fun. However, the hard and most critical work is ensuring that your current product's quality is second to none, and that it offers the best value in the market. Without these there is no funding for R&D or expansion.
Fairness is expensive, and so is choice. Maintaining multiple school systems, public and private costs more than having just one system that serves all. That's the point I was making about charter schools. But the object of the school system isn't to make money for it's owners, it's to provide the education we want for our children. So we have a system that serves different needs, and different things that parents want from schools.
ReplyDeleteThe Honda comparison is interesting by the way. For example, in the health care debate, a big issue was whether national health care would limit choice in various ways. We might not be able to choose the doctor we want, or the specific plan or insurer or whatever. I had two thoughts about that. First was that we don't have a great deal of choice under the status quo. Most of us are stuck with choices are employer offers us. And secondly, we don't really need as many choices concerning health care as we think we want. Americans thought they wanted cars from different brands with a lot of options, but when presented with an alternative, the were perfectly satisfied with foreign cars that didn't give them nearly as many choices but provided them with the value, that it turns out they really wanted.
I agree, I think the Parents will look back and find that they appreciated a system that "didn't give them nearly as many choices but provided them with the value, that it turns out they really wanted."
ReplyDeleteIs that what you were trying to say?
By the way, maintaining multiple school systems may be expensive. However, maintaining one inefficient and indecisive school system may be even more expensive.
ReplyDelete"Is that what you were trying to say?"
ReplyDeleteIs that what you say or think? If a parent has a brilliant child who wants to study advanced calculus or learn Japanese in high school, is he grateful that the school didn't offer those options? If a parent has a child with special needs, are they grateful that the school doesn't provide services that respond to those needs?
Yes, I am aware that my summary was not your intent. However you made my point so beautifully !!!
ReplyDeleteNow, is the purpose of the public schools to teach advanced calculus and multiple languages in High School. (ie Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, French, German, etc, etc, etc) If so, where do we stop?
Now we are back to priorities. The public schools are intended to prepare children to become good knowledgeable citizens. Not to be a substitute for college. (ie where there are many specialties and fields of high end study)
There job is to ensure that the many are ready for life. The few with unique wants can attend classes outside the Public schools to pursue their specialized interests. This is also why the state offers the PSOE option. (HS students attend college courses)
Should Honda have built Humvees to please everyone?
I've been watching the emergence of the new magnet concepts with interest, as it will afffect my family now and in the future. I appreciate the transparency that the district is using and how muc they're soliciting input.
ReplyDeleteYour car:school analogy is interesting, but here are two obvious difference I see:
At the moment, it appears that RAS is producing average Chevys and a couple of great Acuras. Since we seem to have a good model, should we try to get all the kids into the Acura or go with the cheapest one across the board?
And following that line of thought, a cheap, safe car is really all a person needs. But an education is an investment in a child's future. Still a flawed comparison, but it's more akin to buying a house. You can buy a very cheaply made, poorly located home for much less than a solidly built home near your work. Each will put a roof over your head, but one is cheaper now, but will cost far more in the long run.
And as for "Is the purpose of the public schools to teach advanced calculus and languages?"
I'd say absolutely, if we intend to compete in the global marketplace. The nations that are presently kicking our butts in every international educational measurement surely are.
--Annie
Now Annie,
ReplyDeleteTell me that you did not intend to imply that RSIS is the Acura and the rest of us lowly standard curriculum folks are the Chevys... Or that RSIS is a solidly built home near your work and the rest of us lowly standard curriculum folks are the very cheaply made, poorly located home?
A reminder: demographics seem to be what matters most, not curriculum... Unless having English/Spanish bilingual kids is deemed a critical public school output. (Link){not in the AYP tests yet...}
RSIS is a good school with a good curriculum and very active Parents, however the data indicates that NO academic miracles are being worked there. They have very low diversity, and therefore they have pretty good scores.
As for World tests... The reason we get trounced is because we are leaving too many children behind. (ie see graphs in link above) Not because we are not teaching college level math and Japanese to High Schoolers.
Now imagine that you had not been picked in the lottery, because the district wanted to accept open enrollees.... Or, you wanted to Intradistrict Transfer to ZLE, but you could not because ~80 Open Enrollee slots were being held to bring ~$800,000 into the district. How would you feel ???
As for more Magnets, I mentioned on Speed's blog previously that if we need one? I would prefer to expand RSIS, over starting a STEM school. I mean we are already are paying for that curriculum, maintenance and oversight. Might as well apply the costs across more students.
The only concern I have is that several districts offer it... And I wonder when supply will exceed demand.
A correction: It is actually PSEO and here is a link regarding it. (PSEO Link)
"Now, is the purpose of the public schools to teach advanced calculus and multiple languages in High School. (ie Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, French, German, etc, etc, etc)."
ReplyDeleteSure, if that's what parents want, if that's what our society needs, if that's what gives us a competitive over our neighbors.
"If so, where do we stop?"
We don't ever stop.
Analogies do have their limits. Kids aren't cars. They don't come with warranties, and we can't trade them in, when the new models come out.
ReplyDeleteOh goodness, settle down, John. Are you going to jump all over anyone who tries to engage in a conversation on this topic? I'm saying, as I've always said, that a couple of RAS schools have higher test scores (yours included, and congratulations on that), and I support replicating those elements that can be replicated. We can't change the district demographics, but we can take reasonable steps like providing another choice for the 50% of the RSI applicants that don't get in. There's clearly a demand for the school.
ReplyDeleteThe one-size-fits-all community school that we all successfully attended as kids isn't the default model for success in the future. Magnets--language, arts, STEM--give focus and a different kind of engagement. I agree that other focus areas may be bigger players in the future--for instance, this health science magnet in Osseo sounds fascinating and promising. http://www.startribune.com/local/north/112137259.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU
I'm watching the RAS magnet conversation with interest, as I mentioned, because it will affect my family. I understand that open enrollees bring funds, and I also understand that the RAS tax base is shrinking, state funds are changing and trending down, and the powers that be appear to be exploring ways to identify new revenue streams. So I'm witholding judgement until I learn more about the structure and other districts' plans. It could become a big free-for-all of open enrollment, but I suspect there will be some limits will organically emerge. I can't imagine any of the districts want to see open enrollees significantly displace resident families who may just open enroll elsewhere.
I do, however, stand behind the idea that an education is an investment, like a home. People choose their house based on location, neighborhood, convenience--and they'll choose their school based on the academic equivalents--choices that feel like the right fit for their family. The most basic, cheapest version, whatever that may be, is not what I'd choose for my family, not what best serves our district's children and not what serves our nation for the future.
--Annie
Then back to fairness, money, priorities and community citizen rights.
ReplyDeleteWhere will all the funding for all these variations come from?
And yes. Complexity increases cost.
Higher taxes? Thoughts?
Sorry Annie. It was just too easy... And your analogy certainly did sound leading...
Annie,
ReplyDeleteI was in a hurry when I posted the last comment. The reality is that I had no intent to "jump all over you" personally. However, I do plan to continue actively questioning paradigms and comments that say specific schools are doing better because of their curriculum.
The reality is that ZLE and Northport have approximately the same curriculum and dedicated staff. (ie remember their Principal used to be ZLE's...) Therefore the difference in results is purely due to the student and parent body. Therefore, not too much to copy from ZLE since they are already doing it.
If you dropped the RSIS curriculum into Northport, I am pretty sure you would have the same result as today. Except some of the kids would find it hard to read in 2 languages instead of only 1.
As for the we should offer it because people want it argument... Remember that McDonalds offered the "Supersize" meals because people wanted a better deal... And we are still supplying cigarettes because people want them... And people wanted zero equity mortgages so they could get into that dream home. etc. etc. etc. My point is that often people ask for and demand things that are not good for them... It is in our nature... Probably the same with schooling... (ie fulfilling some Parent's unfulfilled dream of being a great artist..)
Thank you for your thoughts as always !!! Have a Happy Holiday Season !!!
I added this weeks Sun News article links to the original post.
ReplyDeleteMy recent thoughts were:
- Isn't this school behavior somewhat like pre-deregulation airline behavior? I seem to remember that since prices were fixed, the airlines continually tried to offer miscellaneous attention grabbing services in order to grab customer's. Now the services / entertainment did not necessarily improve travel productivity or effectiveness, but it was good Marketing. Would some of my older readers share their perspective?
- I thought the SUN News article about Plymouth wanting another school was interesting. I keep wondering when this next baby boom is supposed to hit. Folks seem to be forgetting that we closed schools because of declining student numbers in these first tier suburbs. Now folks want schools back... Maybe they believe that more kids will arrive from one of the other shrinking districts if we open more schools. Interesting...
Thoughts?
I neglected to comment on this comment:
ReplyDelete"Analogies do have their limits. Kids aren't cars. They don't come with warranties, and we can't trade them in, when the new models come out."
I whole heartedly agree that kids are not like cars for the reasons you note. However, car companies and schools may have a lot in common. Bear with me...
The car company starts with parts and materials that vary in quality, size, strength, etc. They have a staff of personnel that execute processes and use tools to add value to these parts and materials. The personnel all vary in knowlege, capability, experience, education, beliefs, etc. Somehow Management and the Personnel need to turn these parts and materials into high quality cars for a reasonable cost. That is if they want to stay in business.
Now: The School starts with students that vary in capability, behaviors, support, etc. They have a staff of personnel that execute processes and use tools to add value to these students. The personnel all vary in knowlege, capability, experience, education, beliefs, etc. Somehow Management and the Personnel need to turn these students into high quality citizens that can live a happy productive life. That is if the USA wants to stay in business.
The reality is that if either the car companies or schools forget to prioritize and execute, they fail. And I would much rather have a bolt or two fall out of the car. As you said, a warranty can fix that. Not so with the kids...
Thoughts?
"The car company starts with parts and materials that vary in quality, size, strength, etc."
ReplyDeleteI tend to disagree. The entire industrial revolution is based on standardization of commodities. A supplier that got in the habit of supplying car companies with parts and materials of varying quality would soon find itself an ex-supplier.
Kids are fundamentally different in this respect. Each one is, at all times, entirely unique.
The challenge is that in an effort to compete, us manufacturers are continually working to balance cost, quality, delivery, etc. I would love to agree that variability has been driven out. Unfortunately it has not, especially when we start sourcing from low cost countries.
ReplyDeleteRemember: All parts vary... Even when they look identical... (ie machining centers shift, tooling wears out, humans drill off center, welds vary, parts warp, etc) It is just a matter of how fine you can measure. It is all a matter of managing the variation within acceptable tolerances. And within acceptable costs...
Then of course, don't forget that your cars start back at raw materials. Seems even you would agree that ore, crude oil, etc have a significant amount of variation.
I agree with you that "Each one is, at all times, entirely unique." And the kids do vary more than many car parts. The good thing is that the acceptable output has greater tolerance. So the relative relationship is similar.
We only want to have 90+% of the kids correctly answer ~80% of the questions in ~4 of dozens of subjects. Would you be satisified if your engine failed to start 20% of the time...
Now if society could hold Parents (ie suppliers) accountable to reducing variation within the inventory of 5 yr olds, that would simplify things greatly. One can only hope...
Til then the system must be robust enough to handle the incoming variation. Just like my designs must handle the part variation.
By the way, I truly do appreciate that each child is unique and special. Also, I realize that many people think this requires an infinitely complex and expensive system to handle. This is why I appreciate Excellent Teachers so much.
ReplyDeleteThe system, processes, curriculum, etc can be much simpler, more common and less expensive because the Teacher can adjust somewhat depending on the student's uniqueness.
The challenge is that the system needs to become more complex when we allow less capable Teachers in the classroom. Just like when we allow less capable people to do any job. More job prescription and less freedom. More processes to handle all the variations... I personally would prefer a simpler system with better employees.
So please do not confuse the system and the Teacher... The Teacher works with the student and can adjust as needed. The system enables and supports the Teacher.