Kelly Young of Education Reimagined on Paradigm Shift Toward Learner-Centered Education

Help us kick off a new series on Thursday, October 13, with breakfast with Kelly Young, Executive Director of the DC-based Education Reimagined. Come hear about their work to shift the paradigm in American education toward learner-centered learning—that is, learning that is personalized, relevant, socially-embedded, competency-based, and open-walled.

Ron Brown College Prep: A Student-Centered School For Male Students of Color

Ron Brown College Prep exteriorWhen I walked into a sophomore mathematics class at Ron Brown College Preparatory, an innovative high school in Washington DC that serves male students of color, the students were sitting at desks arranged in a circle, deep in conversation, and engaged in their lesson. Projected on the whiteboard was a bar chart of college enrollment statistics in the United States, broken down by race.

The teacher was walking around the classroom, asking probing questions, and checking for understanding. She called on one student to explain what the information on the bar chart conveyed. The student explained that the data illustrated that, out of all races, African-Americans had the lowest college enrollment rates in the United States.

All of the students in the classroom were African-American.

“How does this make you feel?” the teacher asked.

The “Kings”—which is how students are referred to at Ron Brown—turned to a partner and began discussing the teacher’s question. Wanting to know what the students thought, I walked over to one student, introduced myself, asked his name, and inquired about the prompt. He explained that this data upset him because he wants to go to college. He paused and then said with conviction, “I know I am smart and I know I will go to college.”

I told him that I have no doubt he will.

Ron Brown High School: Designed to Meet the Needs of Their Students

Ron Brown College Preparatory, named after the first African-American U.S. Commerce Secretary, opened its doors in August 2016 to 110 freshmen as part of DC Public Schools’ twenty million dollar “Empowering Males of Color” initiative.

The primary purpose of the school is to serve the city’s young African-American and Latino men, two groups who have historically struggled in the district. During the 2014-15 academic year, only 57 percent of African-American males and 60 percent of Latino males graduated on time in DC, as compared to 87 percent of their white peers. Further, for years DC has experienced persistent and unchanging achievement gaps between their students of color and white students.

These statistics, while disappointing and unacceptable, are not surprising. Disproportionate suspension and expulsion rates, and achievement gaps between students of color and white students has been, for many states, a pervasive and enduring issue.

At EE, we have long advocated that if we want an equitable, high-quality, and rigorous education system then learning must be designed with students at the center. That is, learning must be personalized to students' unique needs, interests, identities, and aspirations—and designed with their ideas and voices at the table.

That is just what educators at Ron Brown have done—intentionally designed a school that is purposeful about meeting the individual needs of the students they serve. According to Ron Brown’s founding principal, Dr. Benjamin Williams, "We're building [a school] where they feel loved, they feel like it's a safe space. They feel like it's a place where they can take chances, and where they can grow."

Solutions Not Suspensions: How Ron Brown Uses Restorative Practices

According to the Ron Brown staff, one of their keys to success is their use of “restorative practices,” which provides students with the opportunity to work out problems with one another and come to a solution, instead of suspending them.

For example, if two students get into a fight, they're not suspended, as in other DC schools. Rather, they must come together, in a circle, with others in their class and talk honestly about the impact that conflict had on them.

The results of these restorative practices are evident. During the 2016-17 academic year, Ron Brown’s first year of operation, they issued only six suspensions, far below district averages. Four of the suspensions were given to just two students and were mandated under district policy regarding incidents involving drugs or weapons in the school building.

According to Dr. Williams, most of the students “have really bought into the idea that suspension is not a consequence for behavior, that they’re going to have to take ownership at some point.”

Breaking Down Stereotypes: Positive Identity Development

In addition to the restorative nature of the circles, they can also serve as a catalyst for positive identity development. Reflecting on the use of circles at the end of the first school year, Dr. Charles Curtis, the school’s psychologist and one of its founders, indicated that he is more devoted to the technique than ever, because the identity development of young black men is “marred with expectations of criminality, expectations of pathology, expectations of aggression and hyper-sexuality — and all kinds of other stuff that people impose on them.”

But in these circles, the students are able to break down those stereotypes and confide in their peers. They talk about family difficulties, like losing parents or family members, issues at home, and so on.

The curriculum at Ron Brown is also culturally responsive and relevant. In a 2017 NPR podcast on Ron Brown, the English Teacher, Ms. G, had her students read and discuss “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison. In the podcast, Ms. G. and the students are having a deep discussion on internalized racism and the role of traditional public education in perpetuating the students’ negative stereotypes about themselves. Ms. G. pushes the students to dig deeper into topics and gives them the space to speak freely. For another assignment, Ms. G. had her students read Romeo and Juliet and then, if they wanted to, had them rewrite it to be relevant to their lives.

Positive Relationships with Teachers of Color

At the core of executing the curriculum and restorative practices are the adults who work at Ron Brown, all of whom genuinely care about and are fiercely dedicated to their students. They regularly inquire about the students’ families and talk to them about their futures. They recognize students for their accomplishments, speak honestly with them when they make mistakes, and also create space for them to have authentic conversations about issues that are relevant to their lives.

Another important component of Ron Brown is the CARE Team, a group of 6 staff members, mostly African-American men, which includes a psychologist, social worker, and several counselors. These leaders are charged with keeping students on track emotionally and academically by getting to know the students’ strengths and weaknesses, who has a short fuse, who's living on a friend's couch, who spent the night in jail, etc.

Importantly, almost 100 percent of the teachers and staff at Ron Brown look like the students they serve. This is significant because research has found that students of color benefit from having teachers who share their racial and ethnic identity. Specifically, teachers of color “can be more motivated to work with students of color in high poverty, racially and ethnically segregated schools” and have higher academic expectations for students of color.

Personal Reflections on Ron Brown Visit

Being at Ron Brown reminded me of my own tenure as a special education teacher in the Calumet Heights neighborhood in the far southside of Chicago. My students, mostly male and African-American, were amazing and intelligent individuals who had been failed by an outdated education system. They had been told by standardized test after standardized test that they “didn’t meet standards,” were suspended at shameful rates, had lost several friends and family members to gun violence, and the list goes on.

And even though we, my students and I, worked together to create relevant, engaging, and high-quality lessons that led to most of them making over four years’ growth in two years, writing letters to the mayor on gun violence, and completing incredible projects on social justice and race in the United States, it didn’t change the system as a whole. They still had word finds in history class, watched too many movies in English, and didn’t receive the proper social-emotional supports for the trauma they had and still too frequently experienced.

I spent so much of my time as a teacher wishing we could completely redo our school so that, from the very first decision, it was designed with my students’ needs at the center. I wanted them to have an education that was culturally relevant, engaging, high-quality, equitable, met their “whole needs”, and included their voices. This desire led to me to make a career change to education policy and then to EE. I’m proud to be part of an organization that works every day with, and not upon, teachers, students, and families to advance student-centered learning so that one day the experience that the Kings have at Ron Brown will be a reality for all students in Minnesota and across the country.

0 comments · Leave a comment

What I Wish I Had Known Before I Left Teaching

Earlier this year, Julie Cook published a compelling post about her complicated relationship with teaching—one that ultimately led her to a long-term career at her school.

I was the teacher who left.

Bewildered by the unrelenting demands of the job, and not impermeable to the demoralized banter of my colleagues, I left my 5th grade teaching post—and the teaching profession—after just two years. Strangely, I even insisted to my now-husband that he not let me teach again. Somehow I knew that I would want to.

The Costs and Benefits of Teaching

That’s the funny thing about teaching. In his landmark and remarkably-still-relevant 1975 book, Schoolteacher, Dan Lortie calls the job “special but shadowed.” It holds so much promise—the opportunity to help young people to self-actualize, instill in them a passion for learning, and remove barriers to their success.

And yet, historically, the costs of teaching have outweighed the benefits for far too many novice and seasoned teachers alike. It is exhausting, and often lonely. Success is hard to come by, and much more difficult to measure. In many schools, pressure to “cover content” disincentivizes the personalization and adaptiveness that enrich learning experiences for students and teachers alike. And although we love to “appreciate” teachers, our society doesn’t really respect them. Anyone who has ever referred to themselves, or been referred to by others, as “just a teacher” knows what I mean.

When a teacher weighs these pros and cons and ultimately decides to leave, students and schools suffer a range of consequences—a fact of which I am now painfully aware. Fortunately, Lortie’s bleak depiction of teaching isn’t universally accurate. There are entire education systems around the world that operate under completely different norms around teachers’ work (perhaps Finland’s being most well-known). And here in the U.S., the vast diversity of educational options means that pockets of divergence in teachers’ work life emerge when you go looking for them—so that’s exactly what I did.

So puzzled by my own experience of being simultaneously allured and repelled by the teaching profession, and so dismayed by the consequences of turnover for young people, I enrolled in a Ph.D. program at the University of Minnesota in education policy and leadership. I knew that teachers were immensely important to students’ success in school. What I wanted to know was how to build a teaching profession that truly honored that importance. A profession that was sustainable and sustaining.

Discovering Teacher-Powered Schools

Just over a year into my studies, the first annual Teacher-Powered Schools national conference was held in Minneapolis. One of my professors forwarded a request for volunteers: work the registration booth in the morning, and attend the afternoon sessions free of charge. I didn’t know about TPS at the time, but was curious enough to sign up.

As a conference observer, I was struck by the passion with which participating teachers spoke about their work. Discussions about developing students as independent learners, critical thinkers, and good citizens focused on possibilities, not roadblocks. Presentations highlighted innovative strategies for making decisions inclusively and efficiently. The allure of teachers’ jobs was quite apparent, but the negativity—the overwhelming sense of defeat I had witnessed and experienced in my own teaching days—was gone.

By the end of that day, I had a research topic.

Fast forward two and a half years and I’m nearing completion of a mixed methods, multi-site study on the professional work life of teachers in Teacher-Powered Schools. My research considers the role of collective teacher decision-making authority in teachers’ workplace “vitality,” a term I use for the combination of teachers’ retention in the profession, their enthusiasm for the work they do, and the energy to keep getting better at it.

It’s premature to report my findings here (though I do hope to be able to share them soon!) but for me, the research process itself has been instructive. I was fortunate to spend a week at each of three Teacher-Powered Schools—one on each coast and one in the Midwest, representing a range of autonomy arrangements. (I have kept school names confidential to protect participants’ identities.)

I observed teachers working with students and colleagues, and interviewed them about their careers and work experiences. I then surveyed about 350 teachers in 40 Teacher-Powered Schools across the country. From my perspective as a former teacher and an educational researcher, three things stood out to me throughout the research process.

In my experience, TPS teachers:

  • Had time for me.

I mean this both literally and figuratively. I was surprised to find that teachers at all three school sites—some more so than others—had below-average teaching loads (not to be confused, necessarily, with work loads). This also meant that they had considerable unstructured time throughout the school day to meet one-on-one with students, collaborate with colleagues, and speak with the occasional graduate student researcher.

Furthermore, they were eager to contribute to my research—seeing our interviews as opportunities to “get the word out” about their schools and about Teacher-Powered Schools more generally. In essence, the teachers I spoke with—though candid about the challenges they faced in their work—were generally proud stewards of the schools they had helped to shape. Knowing how difficult it can be to convince teachers to participate in research, I felt fortunate to have found willing participants in TPS teachers!

  • Embraced their imperfections.

Teachers are constantly being judged by non-teachers: school leaders, instructional coaches, district officials, parents, reporters, politicians, researchers, and even students themselves. Everyone has an opinion on teachers’ work and why they are or aren’t “performing,” presumably because everyone has had first-hand experience in K-12 schools.

It is no wonder, then, that teachers can be suspicious of observers who don’t really, truly understand the context in which observations occur. I can’t really, truly understand teachers’ contexts, either, so I was surprised that teachers seemed so unphased by my presence in their classrooms and work spaces. I learned that, in the schools I visited, observations were just a normal part of life for teachers. Being observed meant feedback and new ideas, not judgment; it meant community, not shame and blame. The observation cultures I witnessed seemed to reflect “open-door policies” in which teachers felt comfortable displaying their imperfections, seeing them as opportunities for growth and not as damning signs of ineffectiveness.

  • Craved improvement.

For the most part, the teachers I met seemed genuinely curious about my project and were interested in hearing about what I was learning. They understood the challenges they faced as inherent to teaching, and hoped that my observations would help them view those challenges in a different light. Whether I succeed in that regard is still up for debate, but the fact that teachers were poised to make changes when problems became apparent distinguished them from most other teachers I have spoken with in the past. With time during the day to problem-solve, a cultural openness to change, and the collective authority to translate ideas into actions, teachers had become accustomed to improvement. As a researcher, I could be an important source of insight into the improvement process.

Of course, these were impressions—not research findings. And as a good researcher would, I should not generalize to all teachers in all schools I visited, nor all Teacher-Powered Schools for that matter. But as I reflect on my research experience, I am inspired by the teachers I observed and spoke with. I could see myself in their shoes: challenged but not depleted, proud but not self-defensive, determined but not demoralized.

I’m still not sure if teaching is the right career for me, but I can say for sure that I’m putting the option back on the table.

You can read more about teacher-powered schools on the website for the initiative.

This post originally appeared on the blog.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

MN Charters Recognized for Innovation and Leadership

On May 10, the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools recognized four schools at the third annual Innovation Awards event. Additionally, under a new award program established this year, one educator was honored with the Minnesota Charter School Leadership Award.

Innovation Awards categories are derived from Minnesota statute (124E.01), which defines the purposes of charter schools in the state:

  • Increase Learning Opportunities for Students
  • Encourage the Use of Different & Innovative Teaching Methods
  • Different & Innovative Forms of Measuring Outcomes
  • Create Professional Opportunities for Teachers

2018 Innovation Awards winners

Increase Learning Opportunities for Students

Seven Hills Preparatory Academy (SHPA), a K-8 school in Bloomington, understands the relationship of social-emotional learning to student success. Still, SHPA has struggled to find a budget for things like a full-time student counselor—a common dilemma for schools across the state.

In partnership with Adler Graduate School, they developed a model wherein graduate interns provide counseling services in four areas: guidance curriculum, individual planning, responsive services, and system support. This field experience prepares interns for licensure while meeting student need for counseling. Since 2013, the partnership has grown, demonstrating that cost-effective counseling can be a reality for charter school students and families.

Encourage the Use of Different & Innovative Teaching Methods

When the Academy for Sciences and Agriculture, a Vadnais Heights middle and high school, relocated in 2017, staff determined it was the right time to also rethink the learning environment.

They arrived at an open-space physical school design that enables more hands-on experiences for students, who participate in mixed-grade level learning groups centered on their unique interests and needs. This flexibility empowers students to take ownership of their learning within an interdisciplinary school curriculum.

Different & Innovative Forms of Measuring Outcomes

Face to Face Academy, a 9-12 high school in Saint Paul, serves an often over-aged and under-credited student population. Face to Face strives to hold themselves accountable for making (and tracking) progress on meeting the needs of their students. But they found traditional graduation rate measures did not accurately capture progress for their student population.

They saw that attendance was a reliable predictor of graduation (of students with an attendance rate of at least 80%, all graduated), and so developed a replicable graduation rate on-track measure to inform the way they support students—placing emphasis on engagement to improve attendance and increase the number of students earning a diploma from the school.

Create Professional Opportunities for Teachers

Prairie Creek Community School, a K-5 elementary school in Northfield, tackles professional development by emphasizing teacher autonomy. Teacher-led, weekly professional development sessions cover interdisciplinary teaching, authentic assessment, social justice, literacy—topics relevant to their ongoing work with students.

In their professional development culture, teachers are encouraged to take risks. They do so with the support of their colleagues—who they see as always there to answer questions and offer support, but also to challenge them.

Innovation Award winners receive $1,000 and a video highlighting their innovation. The award for a fifth purpose of charters, “to establish new forms of accountability for schools,” did not receive applications this year.

Charter School Leadership Award

The new Minnesota Charter School Leadership Award honored Tracy Quarnstrom from TRIO Wolf Creek Distance Learning Center. Quarnstrom founded TRIO 16 years ago and has served as its Executive Director ever since.

Tracy Quarnstrom and MACS Executive Director Eugene PiccoloThose who nominated her for the award attribute her success to the trust and respect she shows her staff. Quarnstrom helps facilitate time for teachers to participate in Professional Learning Communities and learn about innovative teaching methods. In so doing, she allows and encourages teachers to develop quality curriculum that is personalized, engaging, and that best serves the students.

In addition to her award, Quarnstrom received $500 and her leadership will be documented in a video produced by MACS.

Innovation Awards applications will be available November 1, and can be submitted from January 2, 2019 until the January 31 deadline. The Minnesota Charter School Leadership Award nomination period opens January 7, 2019, with a deadline of February 28. Check the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools website for more information.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

How a Rural Elementary School Became a Hub of Community Action

Deanna Hron—a kindergarten teacher at King Elementary School in rural Deer River, MN—received the Educator Leadership Award at the Community Schools National Forum in Baltimore last week, in recognition of her “strong leadership in advocating for community schools.”

She was one of two recipients for this national honor, and was recognized in front of over 2,000 community schools practitioners, families, youth, nonprofit and education leaders, and policymakers from around the country.

Hron does much more than teach academics. She knows the obstacles students face in their own learning: food and housing insecurity, limited medical and dental care, lack of access to transportation and technology, the list goes on. 68% of students in her district qualify for free and reduced price lunch. In a rural area, community resources are particularly hard to come by.

Enter, the community school.

What is a Community School?

According to the Coalition for Community Schools, “a community school is both a place and a set of partnerships between the school and other community resources.” Hron calls it “a place and a strategy.”

Put another way: “Most people think of schools today as serving a single purpose: a binary, analog-system of delivery — teachers teach and students learn. [In] community schools … schools and communities connect, collaborate, and create. Children and families have an array of supports from community partners right at their school. Communities and schools leverage their shared physical and human assets to help kids succeed.”

In Minnesota, there are 16 community schools across several districts—Brooklyn Center, Rochester, St. Paul, Duluth, Deer River, Faribault, and Minneapolis. Additionally, there is state support for the initiative. In 2015, the Minnesota legislature passed a bill that created a state pilot community schools program that provided $100,000 in funding for four schools.

Hron’s Journey with King Elementary

Years ago, Hron was a recent convert to the idea of community schools. After hearing one Duluth school’s success story, she reached out to her school’s principal. Then to her district’s superintendent. With clarity of vision and everyone on board, they sought a Minnesota Department of Education community schools grant... and were denied.

But Hron pressed on.

“I think we can do some of this on our own,” Hron recalls thinking. The school district entered into partnership with a Grand Rapids health service to bring mental health practitioners into the school. When Hron wasn’t participating in training herself, she led staff training on what it means to be a full-service community school.

Two years later, already on the path to becoming a community school, King Elementary reapplied to MDE and received an implementation grant—money to hire a coordinator and move the process forward. Hron stresses the commitment it took: even buoyed by supportive administration and colleagues, it took years to lay the groundwork. However, missing those early grant dollars was not the only struggle.

Persevering Despite Opposition

Community support for a community school doesn’t always come easy, especially in rural communities. For one, there are slim to no corporate partners to be found. Also, “a lot of community members don’t believe our job is to bring [more comprehensive student] services to school,” Hron explained.

When Hron and others backed a referendum that would see one building serve as the new full-service community school, the Deer River City Council chose not to support it. One member went so far as to lead a “vote no” campaign against the referendum.

Nonetheless, Hron and her allies galvanized a winning coalition. The referendum passed two to one. The city council member, once the most ardent opponent of the community school, now has a child in Hron’s classroom. Seeing the transformation of the school today, the member conceded, “I can admit when I’m wrong.”

King Elementary Today

King Elementary School’s building is used from morning to night. It’s a hub of activity, housing both a senior center and early childhood center. The school now has four mental health practitioners. In partnership with Second Harvest, there’s also a food pantry, a backpack program that sends food home with students, and twice-weekly “community cafes” with free meals for community members. Afterschool programming is available through the expanding Boys and Girls Club, with a late bus set up to accommodate.

Once, Hron noticed a student taking the late bus, arms full with take-home meals: he was providing his family dinner that night.

“We are in our first year of implementation,” Hron said, her eyes on the future. Next up: a plan to expand access to health services for students. Hron noted that many community programs housed at King Elementary had previously existed, but it took the establishment of a full-service community school to find the people these programs were designed to serve. “I am hopeful that as we help families, we will see students who are ready to learn as their basic needs are being met.”

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

PELSB Selects New Executive Director and Releases New Rule Draft

On Friday, April 20, the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board (PELSB) met to do final interviews for the three finalists for the executive director position, as well as to go over the new rule draft. The day prior, the three finalists had answered questions that had been provided by the public. The three finalists were:

  1. Jennifer Cherry, Director of Student Services for Anoka-Hennepin School District
  2. Paula Cole, Minneapolis Public School Teacher, Richfield School Board Member, and Founder of Parents for Excellence Academy
  3. Alex Liuzzi, Interim Executive Director of PELSB

After interviewing the candidates, PELSB deliberated and ultimately voted 8-2 to move Alex Liuzzi forward in the hiring process to become the permanent Executive Director. This post will go over their deliberations, the new rule draft, and the newest timeline for rulemaking.

Didn’t PELSB Already Search for an Executive Director?

This is the second Executive Director search for PELSB. In their first search, PELSB received 12 applications and narrowed it down to three finalists—Kevin Dahle, Paula Foley, and Anne Soto. However, after the final interviews in February, PELSB decided they didn’t want to move any candidate forward and reopened the search.

After this decision, Jim Miklausich, head of the PELSB committee tasked with leading the search, said in a MinnPost interview, “I think the longer we discussed the candidates, the more it became clear that we felt like these were good people, they all had great qualities. At the same time, nobody had the complete set we were looking for.”

Who Were the Three Finalists?

During the second search, PELSB received many more applications and several PELSB members indicated their satisfaction with the final candidates. When deliberating about which of the final candidates to select for Executive Director, the PELSB members quickly decided to narrow it down to two—Alex Liuzzi and Paula Cole.

While they were impressed with Cherry’s experiences working with a wide variety of stakeholders and managing conflict, there was concern over whether she was qualified for the legislative responsibilities required of the executive director and her lack of understanding around the urgency of the rulemaking process and timeline.

When discussing the final two candidates, several of the PELSB members commented on Cole’s clear passion and dedication to educational equity and social justice, as well as her own relevant experience with going through the teacher licensure process and starting her teaching career as a community expert. Further, many were impressed with her work founding Parents for Excellence Academy, which brings teacher-led parent workshops to schools where parents learn to become better education advocates for their children, and her work with helping to create a board policy for community comment.

With regard to Liuzzi, the vast majority of the PELSB members were incredibly impressed with his experience as a former educator, teacher specialist for the former Board of Teaching, as well as the work he has done as the interim executive director. Further, several of the members brought up his extensive legislative experience, knowledge of the rulemaking process, and his vision to help PELSB with promoting alternative teacher preparation pathways and increase teachers of color.

In the end, eight of the ten present PELSB members voted to move Liuzzi forward in the hiring process for the permanent Executive Director position.

Some of the Changes in New Rule Draft

After PELSB chose their new Executive Director, they switched focus to some of the changes in the new rule draft, which provides clarity around statute. As EE’s previously written, two of the biggest areas of contention in the original rule draft were around cultural competency and requiring mentorship for Tier 1 and Tier 2 teachers. Some of the biggest changes in the new rule draft are:

  • Cultural Competency: Almost everything was kept from the original rule draft. However, “religious diversity” was added to the list of topics that PELSB contends must be included in cultural competency training. They also changed the “knowledge and understanding” language in the previous draft, to language that was more aligned to professional growth and development.
  • Mentorship: With regard to mentorship, the new rule draft maintains the mentorship requirement for Tier 1 licensed teachers for renewal. However, they made mentorship and licensure renewal for Tier 2, Tier 3, and Tier 4 teachers more aligned to 122A.40.
  • Tier 3 “Alternative Pathway”: Removed requirement that, for renewal, a teacher must demonstrate to PELSB that the standards of effective practice have been met and kept only the requirements listed in statute.
  • Related Services: One of the biggest areas of change in the new rule draft pertains to related services. When the new teacher licensure legislation was written, related service licenses were unintentionally not addressed. The first rule draft attempted to address what was missing, but it fell short. The new rule draft added ten more pages in order to accommodate these changes.

There were still some concerns from some PELSB members that, even with some of these changes, that the new draft is overreach. However, Liuzzi pointed out if that is the case, the administrative law judge would simply tell PELSB if they needed to cut or amend those sections.

What’s Next with Rulemaking?

After Governor Dayton approves the Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR), PELSB plans to post a Notice of Hearing on April 30. After the Notice of Hearing is posted, there will be a hearing where the administrative law judge determines if the rules are aligned with statute. Following this, there will be a period for public comment and rebuttal. Depending on the public comment, PELSB could make more changes to the rule draft and go through the process again. In the end, the Governor will have to approve the rule draft and then it will have to be formally adopted by PELSB.

Education Evolving will continue to follow and report on PELSB rule draft and other relevant topics with regard to teacher licensure.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

MDE Wraps Up ESSA Committees and Prepares for Implementation

Last week, the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) held the last meeting of their Reporting and Recognition Committee, which was formed after MDE submitted the state’s Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan to the US Department of Education (USDE) in September 2017.

The Committee was formed because there were a couple of key components that did not have to be finalized by the September submission deadline—namely, school recognition and data reporting—but on which MDE needed to receive stakeholder input. In order to get feedback in these two areas, MDE created two Subcommittees of the Reporting and Recognition Committee that met from December 2017 to April 2018:

  • Dashboard and Data Reporting
  • School Recognition

MDE also formed a third subcommittee—School Quality or Student Success (SQ/SS) Indicators—in order to obtain stakeholder input regarding possible future measures that could be included in their SQ/SS indicator when MDE goes through the process of identifying schools for support again in 2021.

This post will discuss the recommendations from each Subcommittee, how Minnesota will deal with a new ESSA provision around fiscal transparency, and some important dates regarding implementation.

Review: Minnesota’s ESSA Plan

On January 10, 2018 USDE approved Minnesota’s ESSA plan. One of the main purposes of the plan is to describe how MDE will identify public schools for support. Specifically, MDE will identify schools for Comprehensive School Improvement (CSI) and Targeted Support in the summer of 2018, and notify them in the fall of 2018. In their executive summary, MDE estimates that they will “identify and support between 300 and 400 schools, much more than under our No Child Left Behind Waiver.”

As a reminder, MDE will use a three stage decision process (formerly known as the “funnel approach”) to identify the bottom 5 percent (about 50) of Title I schools for CSI. Additionally, about 167 schools will be identified for Targeted Support, which is any public school with one or more student groups performing similarly to the bottom 5 percent of Title I schools or any consistently underperforming student group. Finally, MDE estimates that about 246 public high schools will receive support for having a four year graduation rate below 67 percent. You can read more about the Minnesota’s ESSA plan and the three-stage decision process here.

School Quality or Student Success Indicators Subcommittee

As we’ve previously written, due to data limitations, in the final plan MDE submitted to USDE, MDE was only able to use consistent attendance (i.e. chronic absenteeism) for their SQ/SS indicator. However, as MDE continues to develop their data systems, there are other possible SQ/SS indicators that can be added in the future.

The SQ/SS Indicators Subcommittee was charged with providing input about possible measures that had been previously discussed in ESSA committees: well-rounded education, career and college readiness, and school readiness.

According to MDE, the vast majority of the Subcommittee expressed “some level of discomfort” with using existing measurement tools for all three possible measures. With that said many of the Subcommittee participants’ “willingness to support these measurements would depend on how several specific details were resolved.”

Another consideration MDE noted was that the Subcommittee expressed interest in reporting more data around these three measures in the state’s future school report card or dashboard, as well as using the data to recognize schools/districts for success.

In the end, the recommendation from the Subcommittee, albeit reluctantly, was to not add any new measures to the SQ/SS indicator for when MDE identifies schools again in 2021. However, the Subcommittee also said that, as MDE improves the quality and range of data they collect, they wanted to revisit the conversation.

School Recognition Subcommittee

The School Recognition Subcommittee had little to no universal agreement regarding what schools and districts should be recognized for. Some participants wanted a wide range of things for school recognition, while others wanted only a couple of areas of acknowledgement. However, MDE did recognize a few priorities they had frequently mentioned:

  • Recognition should include some combination of academic indicators (growth, proficiency, graduation rates, etc.).
  • Include areas beyond academic indicators for recognition.
  • Recognize both overall performance and the performance of specific student groups.

There were several ideas for both academic and non-academic areas that districts and schools could be recognized for. A few of the suggestions for academic recognition areas were:

  • Achievement Gap Closer: Schools that are doing an excellent job with raising the academic success of their student groups who have been traditionally underserved and closing the achievement gap.
  • Most Improved: Schools that had previously been identified for support by MDE and then, after the three years before re-identification, are no longer recognized for needing support.
  • Academic All-Star: Top X% of schools/districts using the three-stage decision process.

A few of the suggestions for non-academic recognition areas were:

  • Ready for Kindergarten
  • Well-Rounded Education
  • Rigorous Coursework
  • Credit and Dropout Recovery

Importantly, measures like “well-rounded education” and “rigorous coursework” can be included in the recognition system, but not as a SQ/SS measure. This is because SQ/SS measures have to be able to be measured and compared across all schools in Minnesota and to be broken down by student group. Recognizing schools and districts for their accomplishments does not have to abide by these same standards.

Dashboard and Data Reporting Subcommittee

In addition to the Dashboard and Data Reporting Subcommittee, MDE also received input from focus groups across the state, survey forms, IdeaScale online forum, and they are also doing ongoing public reporting feedback sessions.

From the feedback, MDE found that in the current reporting system, participants do not like the lack of context or explanation around the data, the graphs, and the jargon.

According to MDE, from the feedback, some of the common things that participants would like to see in the new reporting system are:

  • Printable, one-page summary information with good data visualization
  • Graphs and charts with helpful and clear labels
  • Give schools a chance to tell their story
  • Staffing profiles and student survey information
  • Easier ways to make comparisons across and within schools

A Little Known, But Significant Provision in ESSA Related to Reporting: Fiscal Transparency

ESSA requires the state report card for schools to now include “the per-pupil expenditures of Federal, State, and local funds, including actual personnel expenditures and actual nonpersonnel expenditures of Federal, State, and local funds, disaggregated by source of funds, for each local educational agency and each school in the State for the preceding fiscal year.”

In other words, this is the first time that USDE requires districts to break out school-level spending, and it has to be done by December 2019. According to a February 2018 Education Week article, this is a level of detail that is “unknown even to most district superintendents.”

Fortunately, this type of reporting isn’t entirely new to Minnesota. Rather, since the 1970s Minnesota has developed and refined a uniform financial accounting and reporting standards (UFARS) system that looks at instructional, support service, and administrative expenditures at each building. Because of the UFARS systems, according to MDE, they have the ability right now to satisfy ESSA’s minimum reporting requirements.

Timeline for ESSA Implementation in Minnesota

By August 30, MDE will release the list of schools that have been identified for CSI and Targeted support. Additionally, by December 31, an ESSA compliance date, MDE must update their reporting system with the most recent information for the 2017-18 academic year.

MDE will also continue to develop their new reporting system throughout the 2018-19 academic year, but how much they do is dependent on how much funding they receive from the legislature.

Education Evolving will continue to follow and report on Minnesota’s ESSA state accountability plan, as well as relevant education policy topics related to ESSA nationally.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

2018 MN Legislative Session: Four of the Biggest Education Policy Topics So Far

While the legislature takes a break this week to observe Easter and Passover, we wanted to provide an overview of some of the most talked about education policy topics, so far, from the 2018 Minnesota legislative session. Even though it’s not a budget year, Governor Dayton’s last session is shaping up to be filled with important and contentious discussions. From school safety to “Academic Balance,” the education policy topics discussed at the Capitol have touched on issues that are relevant in the current national and state political climate.

This post will discuss four education policy issues that have garnered a lot of attention and we recommend you keep an eye on.

Policy #1: School Discipline

On March 6, there was a hearing in the Senate’s E-12 Policy Committee on legislation relating to non-exclusionary disciplinary policies and practices (SF 2920). In his opening remarks Committee Chair, Senator Eric Pratt (R-Prior Lake), said, “We’re all here because we want our students to learn, all of our students. And, they won’t learn if they are not in the classroom. And so what we want to do is try to encourage school boards and local districts to adopt non-exclusionary discipline policies.”

Specifically, the legislation:

  • Provides a definition for non-exclusionary disciplinary policies and practices.
  • Encourages school officials to use non-exclusionary discipline policies and practices before they begin dismissal proceedings.
  • Requires parents be notified if their child is removed by a school resource officer, police officer, or otherwise removed from class, suspended, or expelled.
  • Requires school officials to provide coursework and work closely with suspended pupils, and also grant them full credit for work they completed during their suspension.

Lauren Gilliam, a parent of three children spoke in support of bill: “As a parent, I am thankful for provisions that would foster better communication and partnerships between schools and families...Right now, communication with families is too often broken.” Lars Lindqvist, a teacher at North High School in Minneapolis, also spoke in support of the bill, “I believe we must do better with our students to keep them in our schools through supporting students and restoring relationships instead of pushing them out, particularly for minor, subjective offenses. This bill is a step in the right direction towards doing better for our students.”

Grace Keliher, representative for the Minnesota School Boards Association, asked the Committee to “proceed carefully with any changes to this part of the law. There is a balance between students’ individual rights and the rights of all of the other students to a positive and productive public education, which needs to be maintained.”

Related to this bill, the topic of school discipline has also gained a lot of traction in the past few months in large part due to action the Minnesota Department of Human Rights took last fall when they delivered letters to 43 district and charter schools, informing them that they were under investigation for violating the state Human Rights Act because of significant disparities in their student discipline data.

Policy #2: Five-Star Academic Achievement Rating System

On March 13, there was a hearing in the Senate’s E-12 Policy Committee on legislation relating to an Academic Achievement Rating System (SF 2816). Senator Roger Chamberlain (R-Lino Lakes) explained that the bill is “about data that already exists and using that data to create information that is meaningful, understandable, and transparent.”

The bill requires that the Commissioner assign each school and district a star rating—one star for the lowest performing schools and districts and five stars for the highest performing schools and districts—based on measures like student proficiency rates in reading and mathematics, achievement gap scores, and four-year graduation rates. The specific components of the rating systems would depend on whether the Commissioner is assigning a rating to an elementary school, high school, or district.

Daniel Sellers, Executive Director of EdAllies, provided testimony in support of the bill, noting that even though Minnesota collects a lot of data around student, school, and district performance, it is often hard to find or use, which makes it hard for families to find out if their child’s needs are being met. Amy Guidera, President and CEO of the Data Quality Campaign was also in support of the bill, “The most important role that data can play in education is a tool of empowerment and a tool of transparency. And that is what this bill is about.”

On the other side, Adosh Unni, the Director of Government Relations for the Minnesota Department of Education, acknowledged that the current Minnesota Report Card is hard to navigate and should be improved. He noted, however, that “while seeking to improve on this current data tool we want to avoid the pitfall of creating something that is maybe too simplistic and that is relying on just one or two scores and doesn’t give parents the necessary context for a school’s performance.” Dale Anderson, a Shakopee Public School teacher on leave who is serving as the President of the Shakopee Education Association, also provided testimony against the bill arguing that encapsulating an entire school’s performance on the basis of a single day of testing is not an effective measure of a student’s strengths and abilities.

Related, the omnibus bill in the House (HF 3315) includes the Five-Star Academic Achievement Rating System.

Policy #3: School Safety

On March 7, Governor Dayton proposed the Safe and Secure School Act, which would provide $15.9 million, or an increase of $18 per student, for the purpose of enhancing “safety for students, teachers, parents, and staff at schools throughout Minnesota.” Specifically, some highlights of the proposal are that it:

  • Provides an additional $5 million in school-based grant monies for mental health services to students who need additional support.
  • Provides additional revenue for building improvements like secured entrances, bulletproof glass, or other classroom security measures.
  • Directs district and charter schools to ensure expelled students are progressing with their alternative educations and remain eligible for school-based mental health grants until they enroll in a new district.
  • Directs district and charter schools to improve data sharing with one another about expelled students.

On March 29, House Republicans announced their School Safety Package which calls for $50 million in order to make schools safer from violence. Some of the things the plan calls for are:

  • School resource officers, student support personnel, and other school security programs to be funded through increased Safe Schools revenue.
  • School facility security upgrades, and expanded use of Facility Maintenance revenue for security projects, including emergency communications systems.
  • School-linked mental health programming.
  • Suicide prevention training for teachers so they can learn how to engage and assist students experiencing mental distress.
  • School-based threat assessment teams established to assess, intervene, and report threats facing students, teachers, and staff.

Importantly, this plan significantly overlaps with Governor Dayton’s proposal, which suggests that an agreement is possible.

Policy #4: Academic Balance Policy

On March 8, Senator Nelson proposed legislation (SF 2487) that would require all districts and charter schools to develop “Academic Balance Policies” that would:

  • Prohibit school employees from requiring students or other school employees to express social or political viewpoints for the purposes of credit, extracurricular participation, or employment.
  • Require schools to provide a learning environment, curriculum, and instruction with access to a broad range of serious opinions.
  • Require students to be assessed on the basis of “reasoned answers” and “appropriate knowledge of the subjects.”
  • Require caution from classroom teachers when expressing personal views in the classroom.

In her opening remarks, Senator Nelson said, “We know how important it is in all of our education institutions that all ideas be respected, valued, free speech and that is part of what we are looking at in this’s very important that our K-12 systems are very much focused on education, requirements for our students, and that anything that is not a scientific fact be presented in a balanced way.”

Testimony in support of the bill was provided by Katherine Kersten, a Senior Fellow at the Center for the American Experiment, members of Edina’s Young Conservatives Club, and an Edina parent. One of the Edina students, Jazmine Edmond, said that she had seen “teachers being openly aggressive to students, just because they may disagree with their views.”

There were several teachers, education advocates, and Edina students who opposed the bill. David Aron, a staff attorney for Education Minnesota, said that they strongly oppose the bill because it is “Unnecessary, it is unworkable, and it is very likely unconstitutional.” In particular, he said the bill is not necessary because teachers are already required to observe civil rights laws like the Minnesota Human Rights Act.

Josh Crosson, Senior Policy Director at EdAllies, acknowledged the Edina students’ experiences and said that “Bullying of any type is completely uncalled for.” He also noted the states’ persistent and stagnant achievement gaps, particularly between students of color and their white peers, asserting “The disparities that exist in our education system are, frankly, race based.”

Education Evolving will continue to follow and report on relevant education policy topics throughout the 2018 legislative session.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

Four Innovation Research Zones Approved by Commissioner Cassellius

On February 22, the Innovation Research Zones (IRZ) Advisory Panel convened to decide which of the nine IRZ applications they would recommend to Commissioner Cassellius for approval. An important note: the IRZ legislation put a cap on the number of IRZs the Commissioner could approve—up to three in the seven-county metropolitan area and up to three in greater Minnesota.

The Panel decided to recommend four for approval, which were subsequently approved by the Commissioner:

  • Bloomington Public Schools (Metro)
  • Saint Paul Public Schools (Metro)
  • TriDistrict: Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul and West St. Paul-Mendota Heights-Eagan School Districts (Metro)
  • Janesville-Waldorf-Pemberton School District, St. James Public Schools, Fairmont Area Schools, Waseca Public Schools, St. Peter Public Schools, Sleepy Eye Public Schools, Tri City United, and Granada Huntley East Chain (Greater MN)

Below are detailed descriptions of each IRZ, as well as future plans Education Evolving has to improve the legislation.

Refresher: What Are the Innovation Research Zones?

During the 2017 legislative session, Education Evolving led a coalition that worked with legislators to successfully pass the IRZ Pilot Program. The purpose of the legislation was to “allow school districts and charter schools to research and implement innovative education programming models designed to better prepare students for the world of the 21st century.”

Specifically, the IRZs created the opportunity for public schools and other organizations to join together to form a partnership. Schools in those partnerships could receive statutory flexibility that makes it easier to implement innovative programs like personalized learning, multidisciplinary models, and competency-based progression.

Of the five possible statutory exemptions provided in the legislation, the Commissioner ended up only granting two of them to IRZs—online learning and adjusting the length of the school year.

Bloomington Public Schools

In their application, Bloomington Public Schools (BPS) outlined their their intention to use three innovations at Valley View Elementary School, Valley View Middle School, Kennedy High School, and Jefferson High School. Notably, in three of the schools (except Jefferson), the majority of the students are low-income and students of color, and a significant portion are students with special needs and English Learners (EL).

Specifically, the innovations include:

  1. Creating and piloting a seamless, integrated “E-5” educational system that locates and unites Early Learning programming with the district’s traditional K-5 academics under the instructional leadership of the elementary principal.
  2. Creating and piloting a system to identify “beat the odds” teachers and instructional strategies and use this information to personalize learning more effectively for EL students.
  3. Creating and piloting a system of alternative pathways to graduation that provide more flexibility in the way students are able to earn credits and meet graduation requirements.

The purpose of these innovations, according to BPS, are to address “persistent challenges and improve outcomes for all students as we reduce or eliminate disparities in outcomes for low-income students, ELs, and students eligible for Special Education services.” In addition to addressing disparities and improving outcomes for ELs, BPS asserted these innovations would enable their students to:

  • Enter kindergarten fully prepared.
  • Read fluently by third grade.
  • Graduate from high school prepared for college and career.


In their application, the TriDistrict outlined their Career and College Readiness Initiative, which focuses on improving career and college readiness for all students, but particularly for students of color and low-income students, by providing them with immersive learning experiences (ILE) while in high school. The TriDistrict defines an ILE as an experience that is a “rigorous career-focused course or pathway that contains at least one value-added aspect (e.g. accreditation, certification, concurrent enrollment, internship/mentorship, or other extended career-related experience), and incorporates profound, purposeful collaboration with business and/or community partners to enhance and deepen the authenticity of the learning experience.”

Specifically, they focused on two main types of ILE pathways and courses:

  1. Career and technical education (CTE) courses and pathways into careers that are in high demand in their area and that offer a high wage or salary. They identify high demand areas through engaging with businesses, their local chambers of commerce, research, and data on job growth and forecasts. These courses may also include an internship or mentorship component.
  2. Rigorous courses that create the opportunity for students to earn college credit, or articulated credit, in Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, College in the Schools, Post-Secondary Enrollment Options, concurrent enrollment, or through articulation agreements that are aligned to the student’s personalized post-secondary education plans.

Importantly, the TriDistrict aims to ensure that the students’ “interests, aptitudes, and passions” are reflected in the pathways and courses they are participating in, as well as create opportunities for students to participate in self-directed learning and to develop their 21st century skills in perseverance, grit, collaboration, time management, etc.

Saint Paul Public Schools

Saint Paul Public Schools’ (SPPS) IRZ application was focused on serving their older EL students through their two alternative learning centers (ALCS)—LEAP High School and Gateway to College ALC.

Describing the need, SPPS wrote, “Unfortunately, four years is insufficient time for many EL students to complete graduation requirements. Although EL students are able to continue pursuing graduation requirements after senior year, many feel pressured to leave the traditional high school setting because they are older than other high school students.” SPPS also noted that their EL students have lower four-year graduation rates and higher dropout rates than their non-EL peers.

In order to provide EL students with the supports they need, raise graduation rates, and lower dropout rates, SPPS outlined how they want to create a program that works closely with older EL students to identify their academic and career goals and then match them with the ALC that best suits their needs. While attending the ALC, the EL students would work with counselors and other staff to create a graduation plan that includes supports that would ensure that the students receive a diploma and are also ready for college and career.

Eight Districts Band Together in Greater Minnesota

Eight school districts (listed above) and South Central Service Cooperative are working together to “bridge the equitable programming gap that exists between districts in our region and between rural and metropolitan area schools.” Specifically, they want to do the following:

  • Allow students to meet standards while also pursuing their passions, interests, and strengths.
  • Provide professional development for their educators in several student-centered areas: self-paced learning, blended instruction, project-based learning, etc.
  • Formalize student-centered learning partnerships with regional businesses, industries, and post-secondary institutions.
  • Improve equitable access to career and technical education programming, industry certification, and college credit.

Another component of their plan spoke to developing and retaining talent in the rural areas, explaining “Rural Minnesota has many good paying jobs but are struggling to find qualified candidates.” Through their IRZ, they believe that they will not only better prepare their students for college and career, but also help retain talent in their region.

What’s Next?

Over the last couple months, Education Evolving has spoken with school and district leaders, policy makers, and IRZ Panel members who have been involved with implementing or applying for the IRZ program. Based on these conversations, our recommendation to the legislature is to lift the cap the number of possible IRZs. We also heard some ideas for additional statutory flexibility options that could be added to the law.

We look forward to working with legislators and other champions of innovation to advance these recommendations. We will report on progress here on this blog.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment

PELSB Seeks Public Input on Rule Draft

On Friday, March 16 the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board (PELSB) hosted a meeting at the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) in order to receive public input on PELSB’s rule draft for the new, four-tiered teacher licensure system.

However, the rulemaking process for PELSB hasn’t been the smoothest. Originally, they were on a tight timeline to have the rules done by July 1, 2018, the date prescribed in statute. They had also had a March 2 hearing scheduled, which would have moved PELSB forward on finalizing the rule draft that they had inherited from the now-dissolved Board of Teaching (BoT) in fall 2017.

The rulemaking process, however, came to a stop on February 24 so PELSB could address a report issued by Chief Administrative Law Judge, Tammy Pust. In the report, Pust said that PELSB violated state law when they failed to publish a Request for Comment on or after January 1, 2018. Rather, PELSB had been following a timeline that had been established by BoT and the Revisor’s office had also assured them that their actions were “not only legally sound, but the only path to completing rulemaking prior to the July 1, 2018 deadline.”

Pust allowed PELSB to use BoT’s draft rules as a starting point, but at the same time mandated that PELSB reinitiate the entire rulemaking process on their own, which they have done. This post will discuss two major issues in the rule draft—mentoring and cultural competency—that have so far been a focus of public comment, as well as a timeline for how individuals can provide feedback to PELSB.

Mentoring: Mandated in Statute or PELSB Overreach?

One of the more contested areas in PELSB’s rules is the section on required mentorship for Tier 1 and Tier 2 teachers. In the rule draft, it reads that, in order for a candidate to receive a Tier 1 or Tier 2 license, the district must affirm that the candidate “will participate in a mentorship program aligned to board-adopted criteria.” The rules do not mention mandated mentorship for Tier 3 and 4 teacher candidates. However, in statute, school districts are only “encouraged to develop teacher mentoring programs for teachers new to the profession or district” (not required).

At the public hearing, as well as in public comment, there was wide agreement that teachers, should receive mentorship. The issue was whether PELSB had exceeded statute through their rulemaking by requiring Tier 1 and 2 teachers to receive mentorship. EdAllies wrote, “This rule would prevent schools that do not a mentorship program from hiring—or retaining—Tier 1, Tier 2, and licensure via portfolio teachers.” While Richard Rosivach, a teacher in Mounds View, wrote, “The requirement for teachers in Tier 1 and 2 to have mentorship experience is both reasonable and necessary.”

Cultural Competency: Inclusive or Exclusive?

Another highly contested component in the draft rule is around the definition of cultural competency training. PELSB defines it as a “training program that promotes self-reflection and discussion on all of the following topics: racial, cultural, and socioeconomic groups; American Indian students; implicit bias; systemic racism; gender identity, including transgender students; sexual orientation; language diversity; and individuals with disabilities.”

Several comments made online indicated that the PELSB definition in draft rule is overreach because “cultural competency” is already defined in statute as, “the ability of families and educators to interact effectively with people of different cultures, native languages, and socioeconomic backgrounds.” David Petron wrote, “The statutory definition that was passed by the Minnesota legislature provides flexibility for school districts, allowing each district to design and provide training that meets the needs of their teachers and students in an appropriate, district-specific manner.”

Many echoed Petron’s remarks, calling for retaining the legislature’s definition and removing PELSB’s definition entirely from rule, while others called for amending PELSB’s definition. Robert Osburn wanted religious identity to be added to the definition, writing, “In the same way, Minnesotans who hold deeply religious perspectives, whether Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, or Christians, will perceive that what many of them consider a core dimension of their identity is simply ignored by those who have crafted this rule.”

How Can You Provide Input to PELSB?

Below is information on ways that individuals can provide PELSB with feedback on their draft rule.

After public comment has closed, PELSB aims to have the new draft rules available the week of April 9. You can find more information about the meetings here.

Education Evolving will continue to follow and report on PELSB rule draft, executive director search, and other relevant topics.

Found this useful? Sign up to receive Education Evolving blog posts by email.

0 comments · Leave a comment