Introduction to >PART TWO: Analysis<, a Snippet of Many to Come Featuring an Interpretation of the Facts Presented in >PART ONE: Organization<, of My Nearly Complete New Book, >>Understanding the Minneapolis Public Schools: Current Condition, Future Prospect

A Note to My Readers
You will observe in the next few articles posted on this blog a shift toward snippets from PART TWO:  Analysis, from my nearly complete new book, Understanding the Minneapolis Public Schools:  Current Condition, Future Prospect.  This phase of the book follows sequentially upon PART ONE:  Organization, which conveys a bevy of objective facts pertinent to the inner workings of the Minneapolis Public Schools.  By contrast, PART TWO:  Analysis, features my interpretation of the objective facts, giving my view of the many weaknesses but also the strengths that I see in the organization of the Minneapolis Public Schools, particularly those pertinent to the vital areas of curriculum, teaching, tutoring, family outreach, and resource allocation.   


As the first in this series of articles, please now read my introduction to PART TWO:  Analysis, from Understanding the Minneapolis Public Schools:  Current Condition, Future Prospect.


Chapter Thirty-Two

Introductory Comments on Part Two:  Analysis

Professionals in the Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) do not educate anyone very well, and the education imparted to low income students and students of color is abysmal. 

 

The reasons for the failure of MPS professionals to provide a fundamentally sound and knowledge-intense education are found in the following succinctly given areas:

 

1)  Curriculum

 

2)  Teacher quality                                                                                                                                                

  

3)  Tutoring

 

4)  Family outreach

 

5)  Bureaucratic bloat

 

In the chapters of PART TWO (Analysis), I will explain in detail how deficiencies in the Minneapolis Public Schools are fundamentally rooted in the misguided ideology of education professors in departments, schools, and colleges of education.

 

Readers will come to understand how key central office administrators and staff members making curriculum and professional development decisions in the Minneapolis Public Schools lack the scholarly credentials necessary for designing knowledge-intensive curriculum.

 

Readers will also come to understand in detail the abysmal training that teachers receive in departments, schools, and colleges of education.

 

Readers will in addition gain insight into the failure of professionals in the Minneapolis Public Schools to establish a well-articulated, comprehensive tutoring program to address the academic deficiencies of students whose performance is lagging below grade level.

 

Readers will witness the lack of intentionality on the part of decision-makers and staff at the Minneapolis Public Schools for designing a program addressing the particular needs of economically and functionally challenged families.

 

And readers will see clear evidence of bureaucratic overstaffing, gaining insight into why such bloat occurs.