A Return
to
Part
One: Questions to Those with
Responsibility for the Overall Academic Program
A Note to My Readers
Below is a set of questions that I sent to Michael
Thomas, Chief of Academics, Leadership, and Learning at the Minneapolis
Public Schools (MPS). Thomas receives a salary of $151,000
or more; I have not updated his salary
information in my records since he was seemingly elevated from his position as
Chief of Schools to Chief of Academics, Leadership and Learning.
Michael Thomas is one of the most promising
talents at the Minneapolis Public Schools.
His educational philosophy is underdeveloped, in the manner of all
decision-makers in at MPS; but he has a
firm grip on the dilemmas posed by the MPS academic record, particularly for
those struggling below grade level, and he comprehends the enormous impediment
to achieving educational excellence found in the ill-trained teacher corps at
the Minneapolis Public Schools.
Mr. Thomas’s challenge now is to firm up his
philosophy of education and then to marshal his considerable diplomatic skills
to move the Minneapolis Public Schools toward academic excellence for students
of all demographic descriptors.
This is the eighth set of questions
for MPS administrators that I am posting on my blog, examples of several such
sets of questions 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 questions that I have sent, and then
posted on this blog, to Superintendent Ed Graff, Deputy Chief Academic Officer
Susanne Griffin, Executive Director of Teaching and Learning Macarre Traynham,
Focused Instruction Project Manager Christina (Tina) Platt), Director of the
Department of College and Career Readiness Terry Henry, Department of Indian Education
Anna Ross, and Office of Black Male Achievement Director Michael Walker.
The latter two (Ross and Walker) occupy positions
designated to serve specific student populations. In posting the current set of questions, I
return my readers to questions of the kind, specified for Mr. Thomas, that I
have posed to those with responsibility for the overall academic program at the
Minneapolis Public Schools.
Please continue to 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 Mr. Thomas:
For Public Schools Chief of Academics,
Leadership, and Learning Michael Thomas
1.
Please state as succinctly as possible the philosophy of K-12 education
that drives programming under your direction as Chief Academics,
Leadership, and Learning at the Minneapolis Public Schools.
As Chief of
Academics, Leadership, and Learning at 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.
My own views are similar to those
of 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.
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?
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 for assuring that the principals in each building are
ready to provide excellent leadership from the time that they occupy these
roles?
Currently
you have six associate superintendents working under your direction. Each of these staff members earns $141,500,
for a total of $849,000. The chief
responsibility of these associate superintendents is to provide ongoing
training and mentorship to school building principals. This strongly implies that building
principals are not properly trained or prepared before assuming their
positions.
What if any plan do you have for providing
training for prospective principals before they assume their positions, thus
eliminating the need for costly expenditure on associate superintendents?
Please be very clear in your answer to this
question.
6.
Do you have a plan to expand the Office of Student, Family, and
Community Engagement or otherwise connect with economically challenged or troubled
families?
When young
people are hungry, have heard gunshots in the night, have family members who
suffer from substance addiction, have parents who cannot pay to keep the heat
on in winter, or face other problems associated with grinding poverty, getting
to school or staying focused if managing to attend may be challenging.
Do you have a plan for reaching out to
these families right where they live, either to provide services directly or to
connect them with services that meet their needs?
Please be very clear in your answer to this
question.
8.
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