The Minnesota legislature makes it possible for districts to create schools with charter-like independence and autonomy
In 2009 the Minnesota legislature created a new statewide platform for the creation of new schools. The Site-Governed Schools law allows for the creation of schools inside districts that enjoy the same autonomy and exemption from state regulation as schools in the chartering sector.
Education|Evolving contends that placing this authority in state law is critical to sustaining a district’s commitment to new and innovative schools through the political changes in district and city leadership.
School and teacher autonomy is spelled out explicitly in the law, leaving little to doubt and dispute. The teachers in schools created under the law may have significant control over who works there, what learning model is used, how the budget is allocated, and the schedule of the school days and year. These details are arranged through an agreement with applicants who wish to start and run one of these schools, and the schools are judged on results.
On Wednesday E|E partner Bob Wedl will talk about his experience helping Minneapolis teachers start their own Site-Governed School in that district, following the passage of the law in 2009. He will describe the challenges faced, and the energy and attitude of the teachers involved in putting together the first proposal.
Image: Minnesota House, Minnesota Legislature
July 6, 2010 - 7:14am
I'm concerned that the focus on governance might distract from actual learning. I'd rather see the focus of change be on the relationship between teacher and student and the tools they use in the learning process. Asynchronous online tools can significantly enhance the student teacher relationship without spending so much energy altering the governance structures.
July 6, 2010 - 12:43pm
Dan, we appreciate the emphasis you put on the teacher and the student and the tools to use. The point of changing governance though is to create conditions under which teachers will be better motivated (students too) and more likely to reach for innovative learning models. Curt
July 6, 2010 - 7:53pm
Does Minnesota have district-authorized charter schools? If so, how are site-governed schools different?
July 7, 2010 - 9:36am
Briana-- In Minnesota districts may be the 'sponsor' or 'authorizer' of a chartered school (just like other non-profits) which makes the school still very much independent. The chartered school has its own board, and comes up with a sponsor agreement contract with the district. This is similar to many states...
...But there are other states, like Wisconsin, where chartered schools may be in fact part-of districts...WI law allows districts to make chartered schools "instrumentalities" of districts.
The SGS law in Minnesota gives districts the option to have charter-like schools, without affecting the actual charter law. The effect, then, is similar to districts 'chartering' their own schools. Take a look at the SGS legislation under the Minnesota page on this website...it is brief, only 2 pages, and beginning line 57.27 it says basically that the "SGS are to be exempt from the same laws and rules as charter schools," and references the charter school statute.
I put up a document here that outlines the differences more clearly.
We can talk further, if you'd like...either on the blog here or by by email/phone.
July 7, 2010 - 12:15pm
Briana...
Good question. Let's keep in mind that "chartering," "site-governed (SGS)," district-operated" etc. are just management tools to be used to start schools...they are not kinds of schools. A state wants to have as many options (tools)as possible to provide excellent public education for its citizens if the needs and aspirations of all students are going to be met...and so should district boards and teachers. But there are a number of differences between chartering and SGS in Minnesota and the document provided by Tim McDonald lays that out in considerable detail. A district can use both options (as well as other options as well). A district board does retain a bit more control with the SGS than with the chartering model but there are many similarities. With a SGS, both the teachers union and the district board need to agree that this option will be used because both need to provide significant automony to the school and the teachers. However, in the SGS students remain "district students" and the teachers remain "district teachers." With chartering, a new independent school organization is created separate from the district with its own board. The students are now "chartered school students" and the money follows the students from the state to the charter school. If the district board is the authorizer, the district board is in charge of oversight and accountability so like with the SGS, the district board makes certain that the school is meeting the needs of the students of the community. So both options, SGS and chartering, are good tools for district boards to have available.
In one MN district (Staples-Motley) the district board and teachers chose to charter two schools rather than go the SGS route because the teachers wanted the greater autonomy provided by chartering. For some reason, the State did not approve either of the charter school proposals so the district and teachers were left with the SGS option which they are now exploring. The state has no role in approving SGS.
July 8, 2010 - 11:56pm
Curt,
You're saying you want to change governance which you assert will create conditions under which teachers will be better motivated (students too) and more likely to reach for innovative learning models.
How do you know that will actually happen? I assert that the existing governance will work when it becomes truly transparent. Let the innovative learning models change the structure. Your whole approach is dependent on the 'traditional system' continuing to fail rather than enabling the existing traditional system transforming itself and becoming successful.
I work in a traditional district and am using innovative learning models (see my blog.) It's working; it is possible. I have a great job.
Post new comment