Upload
emid-families
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 1/7
1
East Metro Integration District, ISD 6067
(EMID) member Superintendents’
“WHITE PAPER”
Concerning future programs and services
offered by
EMID
Draft of
October 12, 2011
EMID Vision: EMID’s vision is to create integrated communities in which all learners have
knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary for success in an increasing diverse and
interdependent world
EMID Mission: EMID’s mission is to provide and promote integrated opportunities for students,
families, and staff that expand cultural understanding and support academic achievement.
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 2/7
2
IntroductionBrief History
The first Joint Powers Agreement was approved in 1995. The original member districts were St.
Paul, Roseville and North St. Paul/Maplewood. This Joint Powers Agreement was formed to
encourage St. Paul and the surrounding districts of Roseville and North St. Paul/Maplewood topartner in desegregating the St Paul schools. This partnership created a movement of students
of color to suburban districts which at that time had not experienced any significant
demographic changes in their enrollment. The enrollments of the districts surrounding St. Paul
were majority Caucasian. With changes in legislation, voluntary districts were encouraged to
join with the other three districts. This new membership created the East Metro Integration
District. Out of this newly formed collaborative grew a magnet school, Harmabee. A second
magnet school, Crosswinds, was built a couple of years later. These magnet schools were built
with the purpose ofofferingparents a choice of having their children educated in an integrated
learningenvironment. Moreover, they were formed to respond to the mission and vision of
EMID as it was formed at that time. Today East Metro Integration District is a ten district
collaborative: St. Paul, Roseville, South Washington County, Stillwater, White Bear Lake, Inver
Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Spring Lake Park, Forest Lake, and WestSt.Paul/Mendota Heights.
Programs and services offered by EMID now include the Office of Equity and Integration with a
purpose of offering professional development and student programs, member developed
shared services for the member districts, and the two magnet schools.
Strategic Planning
During the 2008-2011 schools years there was compelling evidence that it was time for a
broader, more comprehensive re-evaluation of the mission of EMID. The first evidence of this
need was the withdrawal of two member districts; North St. Paul/Maplewood in 2008/09 andMahtomedi in 2009/10.Also during this period two new districts joined EMID: Forest Lake and
Spring Lake Park Lake. The second major change during this time period was in July 2010 when
a new superintendent was hired to replace the retiring superintendent. The new
superintendent refocused the mission of EMID to concentrate not only on the programs of the
two magnet schools serving 880 students, but also to give greater attention to services and
programs to the full 120,000 student enrollment of the member districts. In November 2010
the new superintendent initiated a strategic planning process. That process focused on data
collection in three areas; a) utilization of outreach services provided to member districts, b) the
future of Harmabee and Crosswinds, and c) funding of EMID programs and services. This data
collection commenced in January 2011. Stakeholders were interviewed in focus groups, in
person, phone interview, or via electronic surveys. Stakeholders included in the data collectionwere school board members, superintendents, EMID administrators, parents, and teachers. A
major initiative of the strategic planning process was to develop ideas of how to increase
collaboration among the ten districts, given that a large portion of resources were allocated to
fund the two magnet schools. The magnet schools enrolled less than 1% of the students from
member districts. (See Attachment A for an overview of the data collected.)
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 3/7
3
Recommendations of the Strategic Plan
The recommendations from the strategic plan data collection were discussed at meetings of the
superintendents and school board. A comprehensive discussion was held July 20, 2011 at aschool board, district superintendents, and EMID administration retreat. The
recommendations focused on the magnet schools were outlined in 3 options:
Option 1: Strengthen schools under current structure: EMID schools have the potential
to transform into models of integration and high student achievement; however, it may
require additional time and investment.
Option 2:Transfer governance of schools to different operator:The nature and
environment of the schools seem to be highly valued, though direct student education is
a small portion of EMID’s overall purpose and core competency. Therefore, perhaps
EMID should refocus its efforts away from operating the schools.
Option 3: Merge students back into home district schools: this option is similar to option
2, in terms of reprioritizing EMID’s focus. This also assumes that current EMID students
could smoothly integrate back into home district schools
The recommendations that focused on the shared services and outreach were outlined in the
following:
There is an opportunity for EMID to shift from mostly direct service to focus on
strengthening and coordinating member district programs.
EMID as a coordinator of member district programming has the potential to leverage
current offerings to increase overall participation without dramatically increasing costs.
EMID as a technical assistant to member districts can deliver its knowledge base of “best
practices” to strengthen and develop member district programs.Each of the above recommendations has ramifications on the delivery of programs services to
member districts.
Regarding the funding for EMID programs and services the data indicated the following:
A majority of EMID revenues is spent on the magnet schools, including a significant
amount of integration revenue.
Budget breakdown for EMID is:Revenue: Expenditures:
Tuition: $5.3 million A) Magnet Schools $ 8.7 million
Integration: $3.8 million $2.million from Integration
Other: $2.9 million $5.3 million tuition
TOTAL $12,000,000 $1.4 other
B) District costs: $ 1.4 million
C) Shared Services: $720,000
D) OEI: $940,000
E) Federal: $240,000
TOTAL: $12,000,000
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 4/7
4
With these data and feedback as the foundation, the school board engaged in making strategic
decisions focused on the future of the collaborative. A primary consideration was to determine
the future programming and resources dedicated to the magnet schools. Along with seeking
extensive community input, the board charged the member district superintendents with
developing a recommendation and rationale regarding their vision of the two magnet schoolsand the collaborative as a whole. Meetings of the member district superintendents were held
to formulate a recommendation for consideration by the school board.
Recommendations for the board to consider regarding the 2 magnet schools and EMID
programs
The following two recommendations are presented for the board’s consideration.These
recommendations are listed in order of priority. That is, recommendation number one is the
recommendation the superintendents encourage the board to consider.
Recommendation 1: At the conclusion of the 2011/12 school year discontinue using
Harmabee and Crosswinds as P-10 attendance sites.In order to address the ongoing educational needs of all member districts and create an
allocation process where all member district needs are considered, the recommendation is to
close Harmbee and Crosswinds at the conclusion of the 2011/12 school year.The rationale for
this recommendation is as follows: a) currently EMID allocates a disproportionate amount of its
resources to the operation of two magnet school; b) not all member districts have families that
choose to send students to the two sites yet all districts allocate a portion of their integration
dollars to the schools; c) a more effective means of allocating resources for all members
districts could be developed; d) approximately 20% of the students enrolled in the 2 two
magnet schools are from non-full member districts. Consequently, the full collaborative
provides additional resources to support programs for non -member districts, d) the uniqueintegration needs of the member districts cannot be addressed in the present model, and e)
there is a need to consider the fairness of the current structure.
Expected outcomes for the collaborative and member districts are:
1. The resources allocated to the two sites can be re-purposed so all members
districts are served;
2. Unique needs of member districts can be addressed;
3. There is equity for both the students of the collaborative and the member
districts;
4. It increases the capacity to serve more students In a more efficient model,
further extending the power of the collaborative to meet the requirements of the rule and current recommendations for best practice.
Recommendation 2: Restructure the funding sources for the two magnet schools . Fund the
schools with foundation aid only and reduce the integration revenue sent from member
districts by 43%. The board may be asked to allocate portions of the fund balance to support
the schools and the overall operation of EMID. The integration revenue would be used to
support expanded shared services. The recommendation is similar to the funding structure of
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 5/7
5
the programs and sites in the West Metro Education Program. (See attachment C)In order to
provide additional resources for all collaborative services supporting the students of all
members districts, the recommendation is to reduce the per pupil allocations for funding the
two EMID magnet schools. This recommendation is supported by the following rationale: a)
currently the two EMID magnet schools are allocated a significantly higher per pupil revenue
than that of any member district, b) there are compelling educational needs for studentsthroughout the collaborative that are not addressed in the current finance model, c) the
member school districts have analyzed the funding model and believe that a fair and
appropriate allocation of resources would be to reduce the funding per pupil for Harambee and
Crosswinds to a funding level that is comparable to that of the member districts, and d) the
reallocated funds could be used by collaborative members to meet the programmatic need
ofstudents in all member districts consistent with priorities indentified in the EMID strategic
planning process. Expected outcomes for the collaborative and member districts are:
1. It bridges the issue for the two schools while the state determines future
funding.
2. Establishes an “equal playing field” regarding funding programs in memberdistricts.
3. There are more resources available to member districts for shared services that
will benefit more students.
4. There will be additional integration revenue for member districts to address
integration needs in their districts.
5. A broader base of students will be served.
Consideration of Option 2.
The superintendents agreed there is a need for more discussion regarding any recommendation
under Option2 as part of the strategic plan. This option is to transfer operation/governance of the 2 magnet schools. Under this optionthe board may wish to investigate are: charters,
transfer to Perpich Center for the Arts, a member district operates the schools, an intermediate
school district assume operation of the schools, transfer the operation to another state agency.
Ramifications and outcomes of each recommendation
Each of the recommendations is focused on the benefits to all member districts. The
superintendents are concerned not only with maintaining the collaborative but enhancing the
power of the collaborative as well. As leaders of education, the group sees more influence in
improving outcomes for students working as a membership of 10. A new recommendation may
emerge out of this process. A possible vision statement may be: Optimize student learning and outcomes for all students by operating as collaborative and engaging in a system of delivery
that is research based, best practice for students, intended to raise achievement levels for
minority students and improve outcomes for all.
Some examples and possibilities that could be outcomes of the recommendations are:
1. Expands shared services. This includes districts addressing the achievement gap.
2. Creates a regional approach to integration and the achievement gap.
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 6/7
6
3. Creates a new vision with deeper meaning and richer goals for all students.
4. Creates a new system that address needs in all districts.
5. The return on investment is much greater to all member districts.
6. The benefits to all students and districts is maximized.
7. A new delivery system is created that forms partnerships with higher ed, service
cooperatives, intermediate districts, other integration collaborative, MDE, andbusinesses
8. Expands shared services
o Expanded AVID program
o 21st
Century career goals for 7th
and 8th
grades in member districts
o Advanced placement skills benchmark in PK-12
o Literacy bench marks for 4 year olds
o Literacy links to parents
o Effective literacy interventions
o EMID literacy conference for all member districts
o Reading proficiency
o Staff development in cultural competency and cultural differential in the classroom
o Developing work force skills for immigrants
o Increase shared purchasing power for integration program needs
o Curriculum management for addressing the achievement gap
o Expand early childhood programs
o Develop joint efforts on recruiting teacher of color for all schools
o Consider unique program needs for districts experiencing increases in diversity
o Other shared and member district needs to be considered.
Development of transition plans
Any new vision/mission and resulting structure will need time to realize the full power of the
vision. It will require a comprehensive process of planning over the next 6-8 months. It will
require a concentrated effort of the board, superintendents, community, EMID staff and others
to complete a strategic planning that is concise and specifically addresses the achievement
needs of all students. However, immediate consideration must be given to the following:
1. Information for students and families regarding options for fall 2012 and beyond
must be provided. This includes the listing of services in the member districts,
charters and other choices available in the collaborative and in those districts
that send students to the two magnet schools.
2. Connections should be made between staff and member districts regarding skills
and potential positions.
3. A legal opinion needs to be obtained regarding the future “ownership” of the
two sites.
Other considerations
The board will need to consider what recommendations will surface from the “Repurposed
Integration Funding Task Force” and what ramifications those recommendations might have on
decisions. However, it is the recommendation of the superintendents that the board takes
8/3/2019 EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/emid-member-superintendents-white-paper-draft 7/7
7
action on one of the recommendation and not wait for the task force to complete its work.The
school board should consider engaging in the second phase of the strategic planning process.