1 / 9

School Board Work Session September 21, 2011

School Board Work Session September 21, 2011. INTRODUCTION. Purpose:

nikki
Télécharger la présentation

School Board Work Session September 21, 2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. School Board Work SessionSeptember 21, 2011

  2. INTRODUCTION • Purpose: • Describe what the superintendents were charged to do; Develop a frame work for a “White Paper” that outlines a recommendation concerning the future service and programs of EMID including the possible utilization of Harambee and Crosswinds. View EMID in its entirety and not fragmented, i.e. ramification to the whole with a change to any part of the system. This power point is the beginning of that “White Paper.”

  3. FRAME WORK • It is important for EMID to determine its priorities for inter-district cooperation, • The options need to align with the priorities of EMID and its programs, • The options need to consider the ramification for students, staff, and other programs, and • Determine how better to utilize the limited resources available.

  4. Review of the three (3) options • Option 1: Strengthen Schools under current structure: EMID schools have the ability 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: Similar to option 2, in terms of reprioritizing EMID’s focus. Belief that current EMID students could smoothly integrate back into home district schools

  5. Option 1 Strengthen Schools under current structure: • Concerns: • The need for additional resources is unknown • Only meeting the needs of 800 students out of 122,000 students • Question as to whether the sites are aligned with the mission/vision of EMID • Concerns if this would meet the needs of all member districts • Concerns whether the original purpose of the magnet schools is still relevant • The status quo can not continue

  6. Option 2Transfer governance of schools to different operator: • Concerns: • Not sure if the board has the authority to consider an alternative management of the sites. However, for discussion purposes, the following are possible considerations: • Charter Schools: Who would be the authorizer? EMID should not be in the “business” of authorizing charters • Local districts assume operations: Questions if the 2 local districts (Roseville and South Washington) would be willing to assume operations for their own district purpose(s) • Perpich Center for the Arts: A state issue which is well beyond the scope of the school board authority • Intermediate District 916: Questions if those building can or would serve their purpose • Ownership of the buildings: A yet unanswered question. Should the sites remain in the ownership of EMID for a purpose to be determined in the future

  7. Option 3 Merge students back into home district schools • Concerns: • Will students return to their home districts • How will staff be addressed • Can the original purpose of EMID, education in an integrated environment, be met in the home school • Can the reasons why the choice was made to transfer students to the 2 sites be addressed in the home district • How much revenue will be saved by member districts

  8. Recommendation of the EMID superintendents • At the conclusion of the 2011-12 school year discontinue using Harambee and Crosswinds as K-10 attendance sites. • Rationale: • The schools serve less then 1% of the total enrollment in the collaborative (880 of 122,000) • The sites do not serve the total membership of EMID • The resources allocated to the 2 sites can be repurposed so all members districts are served • Unique needs of member districts can be addressed • Of the 880 students attending 170 students are from non-member districts ( approximately 20%) • Of the 880 students 616 are from 3 member districts • Two member districts do not send any students

  9. Additional Considerations • Possible repurpose of resources: • Early literacy/early childhood • Magnets within member district sites • Immersion Professional Development site • Model schools for addressing the gap and multi cultural competency • More extensive staff training • Expanded shared services • Leadership training • A subcommittee be established to continue the strategic planning process that will address the future direction and purpose of EMID that a) reaffirms, or revise as needed, the vision/mission, b) strengths services to all member districts, and c) benefits all students within the collaborative.

More Related