A Note to My Readers
Until a
couple of months ago, Susanne Griffin was Chief Academic Officer of the
Minneapolis Public Schools, near the top of the Minneapolis Public Schools
administrative hierarchy; she and Chief
of Schools Michael Thomas occupied positions just under the superintendent,
along with Chief of Finance Ibrahima Diop and General Counsel Amy Moore.
Susanne
Griffin has now been effectively demoted to Deputy Chief Academic Officer and
much of her authority has been assumed by Michael Thomas, who now bears the
title of Chief of Academics, Leadership, and Learning.
But Ms.
Griffin still oversees a number of departments, whose executive directors and
directors report to her. These include the
administrative heads of Teaching and Learning, Special Education, and Early Childhood
Education.
This is the
second set of questions that I am posting on my blog, one of several that I
have submitted to officials at the Davis Center, 1250 West Broadway, housing
the central offices of the Minneapolis Public Schools.
Scroll on down to see the first set of questions that I have posted, those for which I have requested answers from MPS Superintendent Ed Graff.
In the days
to come, please look for articles such as this one, in which I pose questions
for Minneapolis Public Schools personnel as I work toward the conclusion of my
new book, Understanding the Minneapolis Public Schools: Current Condition, Future
Prospect.
Following
are the questions for which I have requested answers from Ms. Griffin :
For Minneapolis Public Schools Deputy
Chief Academic Officer Susanne Griffin
1.
Please state as succinctly as possible the philosophy of K-12 education
that drives programming under your direction as Deputy Chief Academic Officer at the Minneapolis
Public Schools.
As Deputy
Chief Academic Officer of the Minneapolis Public Schools, your philosophy of
education should undergird your communications to the staff under your
direction for developing academic programming at the Minneapolis Public
Schools. Thus, your answer to this
question is of great importance as a matter of public information.
For your
reference, my own answer to that question would be as follows:
My philosophy of education in its
most succinct rendering is that the purpose of K-12 education should be to give
students the opportunity to go forth at graduation to experience lives of
cultural enrichment, civic preparation, and professional satisfaction.
Undergirding
this philosophy are definitions of an excellent K-12 education and the
excellent teacher as follows:
An excellent K-12 education is a
matter of excellent teachers imparting a knowledge-intensive curriculum in the
liberal, technological, and vocational arts to all students in grade by grade
sequence throughout the K-12 years.
An excellent teacher is a
professional of deep and broad knowledge with the pedagogical skill to impart
that knowledge to students of all demographic descriptors.
You know from our discussions that
my own views are similar to those of E. D. Hirsch. In my nearly complete book, Fundamentals
of an Excellent Liberal Arts Education, the curriculum that I present
is a logical follow-up to Hirsch’s Core
Knowledge course of study, emphasizing grades pre-K through grade six. My own book presents compact courses in
economics, psychology, political science, world religions, world history,
American history, African American history, literature, English usage, fine
arts, mathematics, biology, chemistry, and physics for high school students,
college students, and adult readers.
You most likely know also that in
his book, The Schools Our Children Deserve (1999), Alfie Kohn wrote a
detailed counterview to that espoused by Hirsch in the volume, The
Schools We Need and Why We Don’t Have Them (1996). Kohn and other so-called “progressive
education” proponents maintain that the key components of an excellent
education are “critical thinking skills” and motivation to become a “lifelong
learner”; such advocates convey the view
that a sequentially, systematically accumulated body of knowledge is not
important, because as to any factual information needed in a given situation,
“You can always look it up.”
In your reply to my question,
please honestly and clearly tell me with whom you agree most, Hirsch or
Kohn. There is a heavy tendency to
waffle on this question by blending the two views. I am always doubtful of such waffling. My own statement would be the following:
I heavily favor the
knowledge-intensive education advocated by Hirsch: Genuine critical thinking must proceed upon a
firm knowledge base, and the propensity for lifelong learning most likely
occurs in those who in childhood and adolescence developed a respect for
factual knowledge.
Please be as clear in your
answer to this question as I have been in stating my own views.
2.
What is your vision for the Focused Instruction program that began
during the tenure of Superintendent Bernadeia Johnson?
I am of the
view that Focused Instruction languished under Interim Superintendent Michael
Goar and that new Superintendent Ed Graff will not be inclined toward
reinvigoration of this program.
Would you confirm those observations?
As you know,
my attraction to Focused Instruction is found in the program’s promise as a
conduit for knowledge- intensive education of the Core Knowledge type:
Is this your vision for Focused
Instruction? If not, please be clear
about your non-agreement with me.
And whether or not you do agree, please
give me a clear account of your vision for Focused Instruction and your plan of
action for completely implementing the program.
Please be as clear in your
answer to this question as I have been in stating my own views.
3.
Please explain what you are doing to address the abysmal academic
performance of African American, Hispanic, and American Indian students; and students on Free and Reduced Price
Lunch; at the Minneapolis Public
Schools--- as similarly revealed in the
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCAs), the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP), and the Multiple Measurement Rating System MMRS).
Two and
one-half years into the Acceleration 2020 Strategic Plan of the Minneapolis
Public Schools, performance of these students is generally flat or getting
worse, despite the goal of the strategic plan that the percentage of these
chronically low-performing students improving so as to attain grade level
performance shall rise eight (8) percentage points per year.
What actions
are now being taken by those under your direction to elevate student
performance in accordance with the goals of the Acceleration 2020 Strategic
Plan?
Please be very clear in your answer to this
question.
4.
Do you have plans for developing and overseeing a district-wide program
of tutoring for students who are not according to MCA, NAEP, and MMRS results
performing academically at grade level?
Answers to
questions that I have posed to staff at the Minneapolis Public Schools confirm that
there is no staff member with specific responsibility for developing and
overseeing a district-wide program of tutoring for students who are not
performing at grade level. Those answers
also confirm that such tutoring as is provided is rendered by several different
organizations and is not consistent from school to school.
Do you have plans to designate a person
with overall responsibility for tutoring, and to develop a well-articulated,
coherent tutoring program that is consistent from school to school?
Please be very clear in your answer to this
question.
5.
Do you have a plan to provide thorough training of teachers to assure
that a competent (and, as we look toward the future, truly excellent) teacher occupies
each classroom of the Minneapolis Public Schools?
People in
many positions at the Minneapolis Public Schools clearly acknowledge that
teacher quality is a problem in your school district. I have in many places given evidence for my
view that the reason for the mediocrity of teachers lies in the low level of
training and expectations inherent in the programs of departments, colleges,
and schools of education.
Providing
teacher training--- not really
retraining or mere “professional development,” but the main training that
teachers should receive before ever taking positions in the classroom--- will be expensive and require great skill
and subject area knowledge on the part of those doing the training.
Do you acknowledge the problem of teacher
quality?
If so, what is your plan for providing the
necessary training for prospective teachers in the Minneapolis Public
Schools?
The “Grow Your Own” program seems
inadequate to the severity of the problem.
Do you agree?
Please be very clear in your answer to this
question.
No comments:
Post a Comment