School Choice update
By Dylan Thomas
March 18th, 2009
As Minneapolis Public Schools officials continue to hammer out the details of a new school choice system, clues are emerging as to what that system will look like.
The documents prepared for a March 17 School Board work session show one of three scenarios for a new elementary school choice system in the fall of 2010 has been all but eliminated due to strong community opposition. And a straw poll of School Board members present at the meeting revealed a preference for eliminating the district’s so-called open enrollment areas.
It is important to note that work sessions are informal discussions among board members, and offer only a glimpse into a larger, ongoing debate involving the board, district administration and the community. No official actions were taken Tuesday night.
The district is examining new school choice systems and the future of open enrollment as it prepares a plan to rein in transportation and facilities spending. Minneapolis for years has provided a large number of different school programs, but district leaders say that level of choice is financially unsustainable.
Choice, at the elementary school level, is largely offered through 21 magnet school programs. Magnets offer specialized educational programs and can enroll students from a much larger geographic area than community schools, which generally draw students from the surrounding neighborhoods.
District administrators say magnets have a mixed record of academic performance, in part because eight consecutive budget deficits have limited investment in those programs. And busing students long distances to magnet programs is driving up transportation costs.
The three scenarios for a new elementary school choice system all include a reduction in magnets. But a proposal to eliminate magnet schools altogether has been met with strong community opposition, MPS Executive Director of Planning Jill Stever-Zeitlin told the School Board.
In an ongoing series of community meetings, many parents have expressed concerns that a district of all community schools — known as scenario A for planning purposes — would reduce school diversity and too-severely limit school choice.
In updated district documents, option A (“All community schools”) is now overlaid with a large “X,” indicating it likely will be taken out of future choice discussions. Those who attend the remaining community meetings on school choice will see this change, Stever-Zeitlin said.
That leaves two elementary school choice options on the table, as well as the possibility of a hybrid option combining elements of the two.
Option B would centralize magnets in the city core, and offer families citywide the opportunity to attend those magnets. Option C would distribute a few magnets in each of two to four new geographic zones within the district.
School Board members were evenly divided on options B and C in discussions at the March 17 work session.
Board Chair Tom Madden, along with board members T. Williams and Jill Davis all expressed a preference for the centralized magnets outlined in option B. Board members Christ Sewart, Carla Bates and Pam Costain were all leaning toward the zoned magnets offered in option C. (Board Member Lydia Lee was away on business.)
Still, many board members said their preference for one or the other was slight, and could change.
The two options offer some differences on increasing school diversity and controlling costs, which are outlined in the new planning documents. And there remains a question on which option could improve student achievement the most.
The issue of open enrollment areas was less divisive. The Board Members present at the work session were unanimous: Open areas have to go.
Over time, open areas popped up across the district in neighborhoods that had no nearby community school. Families who live in open areas instead get a choice of up to 33 different community and magnet schools.
Many families who live in open areas are now wondering what their options will be if open areas are eliminated: Will their child be forced to attend a different school? Will a younger student be separated from an older sibling?
School Board members expressed some support for “grandfathering” current open area students into the new system. Those students would be allowed to attend their current school, even if that school was no longer a choice for their neighborhood following the elimination of open areas.
But parents who choose that option may have to drive their students to school.
Most board members agreed that grandfathered students no longer should be provided bus transportation by the district. Bates, Williams and Madden all voiced opposition to continued busing, and Davis said busing should be eliminated after a few years.
There was not strong support among board members to grandfather new students into their older siblings’ schools, known as “sibling preference” in district jargon.
Board members also discussed “sunsetting” any accommodations for open area families, meaning they would be eliminated after a set number of years.
