Changing School Options | Community Voices

Collected Feedback, February 12 – March 28, 2009

Background | Minneapolis Public Schools began studying the sustainability of its system of school
choice, programs and operations in the spring of 2008. Data were examined on a wide range of topics,
including school-by-school and district-wide trends in the areas of: academic achievement, magnet
preferences, desegregation, enrollment, transportation patterns, facilities space usage, location of
specialized programs, choice request cards and student mobility).

The school board identified values and criteria to consider during school options planning, and
administrative team members worked with data, met with the board and went to school meetings in
district areas A, B and C in order to gather information about the types of choices that families make and
would be interested in making. From this information, the administrative team developed a series of
potential scenarios for changing school options. With guidance from the board, the scenarios were
refined until only five were considered viable possibilities.

These five scenarios – three for elementary (K-5, K-8) schools and two for secondary (middle, high)
schools – were presented formally to the community for discussions beginning on February 12.
Feedback since then has been uniformly fervent, although the contents of this input have varied widely.
This report synthesizes, as much as possible, the themes that have emerged from community voices
over the past six weeks.

The Context: Do What’s Best for Students | We would not be here if we didn’t believe this work is
critical to building a foundation for academic achievement. This work represents a very careful and
deliberate assessment of data, input and impact. We are seeking to make our schools better for our
children, and we will do everything in our power to serve them and to increase excellence in our
schools.

The Participants: Consider the Needs of All Families | The work leading up to this recommendation
has involved hundreds of voices and we thank each one for the input provided. The voices that we heard
in this process have been passionate and invested. Some have come from around the city; others have
come from school and community groups committed to ensuring the clarity of their point of view. A
sample of some of these voices is included in Appendix A.

But although we have spoken to over 1200 people in meetings organized by the school district and
hundreds more in neighborhood- and area-sponsored meetings, and although we have heard from over
700 people via online feedback forms, e-mail messages and telephone conversations, this sample is only
a small percentage of our stakeholders and is not a statistically representative sample. Many, many of
our families have not contributed their voices to this process.

As we go about making a recommendation for the future framework of school options, we must keep
these silent families in mind to balance meeting the needs of those able to be engaged in the process
and those unable to participate. We need to use our experience, knowledge, other existing survey data

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 1

and common sense; as one respondent said, “Please don't make too many generalizations about which
option would work better for wealthier families and/or be a disadvantage to lower income families.
What individual families spend their money on is very personal and part of our freedom.”

The Bottom Line: Facing Change is Difficult | The difficult reality of facing change is that we will not
be able to make a decision that pleases everyone. Our families are not in agreement on any one issue.
Not everyone agreed on how to fix the system, but most participants could see the necessity of making
changes.

Views on Change: Challenges and Opportunities | Our families have different responses to the idea
of change. Many families continue to be worried and anxious about changes ahead. They appreciate the
idea of having all schools be high quality but do not yet trust us to get there. They want us to be more
concrete when answering questions, especially those about implementation of any scenario (specifically
grandfathering). They want more information about how a new system would work – where pathways
would lead, how equal quality would be measured, etc.

Other families see the potential for change as exciting and beneficial. They want us to talk about change
as an opportunity to build “new and existing programs that attract families” rather than “a necessary
evil.” They want to hear more about the benefits of change.

Families continue to desire more information about the work going on to close the achievement gap and
improve the quality of all schools. They would also like more information about excess/underutilized
space.

Some families are weary of change. Motivations for change have not always been clear. Families raised
the question of whether we are ready to make this change.

Families value equity, quality and diversity/integration. They do not want to make changes that will
cause our schools to be more inequitable or racially isolated. They want all families to be able to have
access to the same kinds of choices. Some families expressed the desire to ensure that changes serve
the community within MPS that does not always have a voice.

Some families wanted to hear more about how Changing School Options fits into the overall plan for
addressing our projected budget shortfalls. As one parent said, “If you go after the big dollars, you can
solve the big dollar problems.” Families know that the financial impact of Changing School Options is not
immense; they want to find out how we are examining payroll, use of resources, etc., in our efforts to
balance our budget.

Views on Choice: Maintaining Some Choice is Necessary | Many families are in favor of reducing the
number of choices that we currently have. There is strong support from families around the city of
having a combination of community and magnet schools. Families recognize the value that a community
school brings to a neighborhood but do not want their neighborhoods split up by new attendance
boundaries.

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 2

Some families are in favor of closing a middle school and/or a high school in the abstract. Some families
worry that closing a high school would shut off growth options for the future.

Some families would opt to give up some of their choices in order to make the system more equitable
for all children. Other families would rather retain choices in order to make the system most serviceable
to their own children.

Some families are willing to consider a sliding scale to pay for busing to schools. Some families are
willing to explore neighborhood carpool or individual methods of transporting students to a school of
choice.

Some families feel that everyone should experience change during this process; certain schools should
not be “carved out” as untouched by change.

If choices are limited, all schools must be of equal quality. Families want us to heighten and promote the
quality of our programming. Some families value uniform programming while others want schools to be
able to retain some individuality.

Views on Scenarios | Some families appreciated being able to submit feedback on the pros and cons of
the scenarios. Other families felt that this method of soliciting feedback locked them into too vague a
framework.

Elementary Scenarios: Families Value School Choice and Quality

Families liked the idea of having access to community and magnet schools. They were
concerned about accessing a magnet school with their desired focus. Families would still like to
have a choice of K-5 and K-8 schools, and they would not necessarily like to attend a
demagnetized community school with a specific program focus (if they didn’t like that program
focus but wanted to attend their community school). Some families wanted to know more about
whether and how a school could blend its focus to align with the needs of its community.

Some families wondered about whether there would be enough magnet school spaces to meet
demand if the overall number of magnet schools were to be reduced.

In general, most people agreed that a system of only community schools (Elementary Scenario
A) would sacrifice choice and segregate schools to a degree that is unacceptable. There was not
a clear favorite between Elementary Scenario B and C.

Common Themes
Pros Cons
System of only community build sense of community, less reduced choice, students’ learning
schools busing, simpler, save money styles vary, create more

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 3

(Elementary Scenario A)
Citywide magnets in center +
community schools
(Elementary Scenario B)
Zoned magnets + community
schools
(Elementary Scenario C)
most choice and integration,
minimize north/south disparity,
save money, magnets get more
resources
magnets get more resources,
more convenient, provide choice
while saving money, attract
suburban students
segregated schools, all schools not
equal
programs would move, reduced
choice, safety concerns, too much
busing
limited choice of magnets in
neighborhoods, equal quality
among zones, magnets less
diverse

See Appendix B for more information on Elementary School Scenario feedback themes.

Secondary Scenarios: Families Value School Choice and Quality

High school parents prefer to have choices of schools because they see a benefit to their
children. Some parents mentioned improving programs in all high schools so people want to
attend their community school. Some parents were in favor of consolidating programs or leasing
space to fill empty buildings.

Some parents felt that it was important to maintain more choice at the high school level and
reduce it at the elementary level. Reducing choice at the high school level seemed to pose a risk
for families.

Some families raised the idea of a modified zoned choice system for secondary schools.

Different families supported middle and K-8 school models.

There was general concern about starting high school at 7:30 a.m. Meeting participants
mentioned connections in research between teen sleep patterns and achievement. A small
number of participants were in favor of early start times, however.

Community high schools
(Secondary Scenario 1)
Citywide high schools with
limited busing (Secondary
Scenario 2)
Common Themes
Pros
less busing, save money, eliminate
sense of confusion with current
process, like Core 4
real choice, equal access, families
will stay, innovative, programs
(could create more distinct
programs in each schools instead
of Core 4)
Cons
people will leave if don’t have
choice, all schools not equal,
unclear if MPS can replicate Core 4
programs
favors wealthier families, creates
confusion and competition,
reduces community connection

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 4

 See Appendix C for more information on Secondary School Scenario feedback themes.

Area Concerns | To an extent, the concerns raised by families were affected by the region of the city in
which they live as well as the location of their school. Some families felt strongly that no more schools
should be closed in North Minneapolis. They were in favor of closing schools in South or Southwest
Minneapolis.

Other families wondered about whether school closings were being considered for Southwest
Minneapolis. They recognized the possibility that the district needs to close schools overall but thought
they could be in other parts of the city.

Some open area families disliked the uncertainty of not having a designated community school and felt
strongly about wanting access to a neighborhood school. Other open area families valued their freedom
of school choice, however.

Some families spoke in favor of maintaining their current school program or moving a school program to
a different building in order to establish a community school in their neighborhood.

In Summary | The recommendation is not the end of the process, but the beginning. We want and
need families to stay with us and to be involved in shaping the new school programs. From this work, we
can move forward with a more sustainable system and a solid foundation to raise achievement for
students and close the gap.

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 5

Appendix A | Ideas from Our Stakeholders

The following comments are a sample of the wide range of feedback we received on Changing School
Options.

“I would consider a mix of choice B and C. It might make sense to centralize some magnets, however
those that are doing well out in the community should stay where they are. If they are full, perhaps a
move wouldn't be beneficial. It seems crucial to identify those buildings and programs that aren't full
and focus on merging/closing schools to free up resources.”

“Many F2 Open Area families want a community school returned to the neighborhood. The idea of a
Lyndale/Barton K-8 community school is catching fire among residents. Lyndale has low attendance
among area residents and is a segregated school. Teaming Lyndale families and F2 families would give
the Lyndale/Barton community school a strong active group of parents and provide another quality
choice for neighborhood residents. Given the demographics of the three neighborhoods (East Harriet,
Kingfield and Lyndale) a Lyndale/Barton community school would help the district meet its diversity
goals at both Lyndale and Barton more so than the current use of the two facilities. Giving the
neighborhoods a K-8 rather than busing students to Anthony for middle school would mean lower
transportation costs. This plan requires that the popular Barton Open program to relocate. It will not be
easy for current students and families but in the long term it strengthens the district and city. Moving
Barton to a more central location say Jefferson (an underutilized school with low area attendance)
would help the District better meet its choice, equity and diversity goals. Currently Barton Open is
attended mainly by F2 families and other southwest Area C families (including those from Lake Harriet
and Burroughs attendance areas). Centrally locating Barton would allow a more diverse group of
students access to the Open program.”

“We want to show our strong support for the Barton Open program in its current location, and offer
solutions to help the District create excellence and a sustainable school system. In our message to the
District we: support the district’s goals: to use resources efficiently, improve the performance of all
students, and provide choices to Minneapolis families; underscore the unique and successful open
magnet program at Barton and the diverse community of families it attracts; and lay out strategies to
increase racial and economic diversity at Barton, to improve the school outcomes of our English
Language Learners, and to accommodate families who live close to Barton and want to attend an open
magnet program.”

“While change is always hard, you don't necessarily want to disrupt schools that are currently doing
really well. It seems that the administration is not as concerned about the higher achieving kids (one
administrator told a parent meeting that they might have to open enroll in Edina if they want to
maintain the same quality of education), and that just seems short-sighted. You do not want the families
that can afford to move to do so, taking their tax dollars and school funding with them. This can be a
strong district, but you can't marginalize the students succeeding to try and close the achievement gap.”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 6

“Less bussing, but allow parents to send kids to schools outside their zone if they can provide
transportation. Wide "walk" zones - have more kids walk to school. The more kids on the streets, the
safer it will be.”

“The most important thing to do is to keep what is working and build on it. Do NOT dismantle
communities like Armatage Community/Montessori. Let this school that houses 3 different programs
(Community, Montessori, CLASS), provides an after school site for Minneapolis Kids and even a
community church (City Church) on Sundays be the model to build upon in all parts of the city.”

“I would choose scenario C and allow the selective busing and also allow more choice for parents willing
to transport. There is great danger of dismantling programs that are working. I would not mandate a
district policy that may solve some isolated problem but make things worse where things are working
well and disrupt communities and families.”

“I would put a spin on Choice A. Have free bussing ONLY to your community school and charge a fee
based on how far your choice school is from your community school. Also, widen the bussing area ~ do
not pick up students within a 4 block radius ~ they can walk”

“If integration is the main impetus, I would choose Option B and integrate east to west. Would want to
keep Open areas that are going to be closed intact and respect their neighborhood networks, but also
find ways to integrate. I wouldn't want to alienate the middle class, but I would want to increase
integration. Keeping people in their intact communities as much as possible (thus the east-west
integration and central magnets) seems to do the best job of this.”

“Using centralized magnets to encourage voluntary movement and mixing of the student body seems
like a good idea. I have heard a lot of discussion about changes to community schools that sounds very
disruptive. I think students should be grandfathered into their current schools -- fine if their families
have to provide transportation. At least that way people can make a choice to give their children
continuity in their educational setting. Moving so many kids around (30%?) sounds like a lot of
disruption. Where's the focus on academic excellence? “

“I live in SW Minneapolis with 2 kids nearing school age. if there are not strong school options available
to us we will likely leave the city (and I love the city, grew up here, went to public schools). Any changes
MUST be with the benefit of stronger schools or enough choice to keep families in the city. That is
critical to long-term success for the school system and the city itself.”

“I would rezone the central areas so that each neighborhood had a community school (with
corresponding magnet district) and eliminate the problem of so much transportation in those areas. I
would eliminate buses for grades 9-12 and maybe work with the city to provide MTC passes at special
rates. I would close 2-4 elementary schools.”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 7

“All of your scenarios decrease magnet seats - I think this is the most concerning problem. Most parents
I know that left MPS did so because they didn't get the magnet spot they wanted for their child. We
wouldn't turn away community children from a popular community school so why - when we have
magnet schools that are wildly popular and keeping people in the system - would we decrease those
magnet seats even further? Whatever magnet schools are kept or consolidated, I think you should build
in enough flexibility that you won't be turning people away. Space in magnets (whether citywide or by
district) should be based on demand. If you don't have the physical space in the magnet school, put
them in a bigger building or add a second campus. (That's what we would do for a growing community
school!)”

“You are not giving us enough information to give proper feedback on which scenario we prefer. We
need to know how this will affect us. We bought houses where we did for a reason. How will this affect
our investment and our children??”

“I would pick scenario B based on the information at hand. Scenario A is the worst option. I would also
consider limiting bus service so that families could provide their own transportation if they felt strongly
about a particular school. That is what I currently do now since my daughter’s bus ride would be nearly
an hour each way and I live only 15 minutes from her school.”

“I honestly don't know where to begin. The A-B-C choices leave much to be desired with very little
savings to be seen. The other choice of selectively closing 2-4 schools seems a much more strategic
approach. Why not try this instead of displacing 35% of the current students to different schools? Any
school that is really working right now would be so different, you are threatening to make all schools
weak and unstable. What makes a good school is in large part parent participation and the community
that gets built around it. If any of these wide-sweeping changes are to be done, the district should be
ensuring grandfathering of the current student body into the school. You might just make a couple of
years of all the kids across the district wanting in their education if you insist on disrupting the school
system in such a major way.”

“As a mom and a teacher, I completely understand the need for the district to make changes to ensure
that all children have the opportunity for the best possible public education. However, I have major
concerns that the scenarios that are proposed are simply cases of robbing Peter to pay Paul. As I
understand it, there are many magnet programs that are working and working well. It makes no sense
that these programs should and would be changed, uprooted, or even worse disbanded altogether. I
think it would have a detrimental effect on the students, staff, and parents.”

“As a resident of the neighborhood immediately adjoining the Barton Open School, I appreciate the
draw Barton has for many families across Minneapolis. I DO NOT appreciate the amount of bus and car
traffic at drop-off and pick-up time; obviously a majority of the students are Barton require
transportation to attend school there. I also DO NOT appreciate that our neighborhood children often
do not attend Barton (despite their strong desire to do so).”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 8

“This process is scary. You have provided estimates of savings, but you haven't provided details on any
of the options. For instance, I would like to see some preliminary maps of the proposed attendance
areas. Without any specifics, it's impossible to tell which option would be best for my family. It would be
a tremendous hardship to send my kids to private school. Please do a good job.”

“I feel that children should be grandfathered into the school they are currently in along with younger
siblings given preference so as not to disrupt thousands of kids throughout the city. It would be
complete chaos to make all of those children switch schools in the middle of their education at their
current school. Also, if the family was willing to drive instead of bus shouldn't that be a factor of
whether they can continue in a school not in their zone?”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 9

Appendix B | Elementary School Scenario Feedback

The following charts, tables and comments were compiled from feedback received via meetings, online
feedback forms, e-mail messages and telephone discussions. Please note that this data came from a self-
selecting sample of participants; as such, it is not a statistically representative sample.

Elementary Option A: Community Schools

- Students would attend the elementary school closest to their home, with exceptions for
programs such as citywide special education, English Language Learners and culturally-
specific programs.

Pros
Transportation
Less busing and lower transportation costs
(fuel, routes)
Reduce busing that does not meet any goals
Safer because less travel time on roads
Cut down on city traffic congestion
Sense of Community
Cons
Transportation
Reduction in transportation would lead to
disparity of access for families unable to
have the option of transporting students on
their own
Sense of Community
Disruption to community that has developed

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 10

 Developing community in a neighborhood
and strengthen neighborhood identity
Good community schools add value to the
neighborhood and lead to the investment by
communities to maintain the quality of the
community school
May encourage teachers to live near the
school - can walk and save money on
transportation
Students and families could walk to school
School Programming
Special education and culturally-specific
programs still available
Many neighborhood schools have lost status
as a "good" school because they an image of
"filtered" staff/students (i.e., what is left
behind)
Distribution of Resources
With the elimination of magnet schools,
community schools could have access to
resources only previously enjoyed by
magnet schools
Magnet schools sometimes take our very
best behavioral and academic models from
community schools, leaving concentrated
groups of students struggling at
neighborhood schools
Community school would not be
overenrolled by students who do not live
within the boundaries
Like the concept if my area has schools that
are thriving and excelling, not failing
I expect that this might be the most "fair"
scenario, given the budget situation
Choice Process
Simplified school choice process
Living in a community without a designated
community school, the current system is
awful. I would support this proposal for
elementary schools (k-5)
Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools
at a school
Disruption to students changing schools
Contribute to neighborhood instability as
parents with financial means attempt to
relocate to neighborhoods with preferred
schools
Walking is not ideal in inclement weather or
unsafe neighborhoods
Certain neighborhoods would need to have
ways to encourage community building for
non-school hours.
School Programming
Seems drastic to move to this option now.
Long term would be smart but need to
ensure all neighborhood schools can
adequately meet the needs of the student
population.
Loss of essential and focused instruction in
the arts, music, math, science, technology,
etc.
Quality magnets are a draw for families
Distribution of Resources
In lower income areas, parents are less able
to volunteer, they work different hours, and
don't have the flexibility to contribute and
support the schools that the parents in
higher income neighborhoods have
Do not like the concept if my area has
schools that are failing
Impact on schools in areas of concentrated
poverty
Resources available to magnet schools might
not be distributed to community schools
under this model
inequitable resources/facilities across city in
that certain buildings and programs are
better than others
Choice Process
Parents have the right to choose a school
that is best for their child, and all
neighborhood schools are not equal.
No choice; can’t select a school based on
student need
11
 Closest school to home may have a
programmatic focus that parents would not
choose
Exacerbate the problem of families who
value choice leaving MPS
Parents cannot choose based on start time
Parents cannot choose based on size of
school
Parents cannot choose based on program
offerings
Eliminates highly successful magnet
programs
Demagnetized programs may not be able to
maintain focus integrity without community
of families invested in that focus
Diversity
Schools that are located in lower income
areas will be quite segregated
Some areas of the city would not have
diverse schools at all (near north side, SW
Mpls as two examples)
Reduced integration; haves and have nots
Our ideal school would have diversity of
both ethnicity and income

Other questions about Elementary Option A:

How does this fit in with the current ELL plan?
What about kids who are in open areas and live near a magnet school? Does this mean we have
to change to the magnet?
What happens to open areas?
Would this option make start times better or worse?
What would happen to the current transportation waiver option?
What happens when a student moves?
Could you allow for limited choice by permitting families that choose to provide their own
transportation to attend a different school, assuming space is available at the school they desire?
How can you integrate schools and save money?
How will this save money?

Other comments about Elementary Option A:

Attendance boundaries should reflect that students are assigned to the school that is truly closest
to home (not walk past one school to get to theirs)

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 12

 Pros for this option are based on the sense that every school has a program of quality with a
consistent core foundation (equity of access to arts, science, etc.)
Support for this option may depend on which schools will stay open and which schools will close
moving forward
Support for this option increases if we can assure that the staff in each building is culturally
competent to serve the students of that neighborhood
Reserving space in low-poverty schools for students who live in high poverty areas of the city:
displaced community school students in high income schools may be sent somewhere else
“Good as long as children in current schools and their siblings are ‘grandfathered in.’ A school 8
blocks away, even though it might not be closest, is still part of my ‘community,’ and we have
built a strong sense of community with the parents/staff there.”
“I think in an ideal world, this scenario would be great. However, I am concerned that families
that live in areas of concentrated poverty will continue to have unequal access to quality
education.”
“Students should not be ‘bused’ across community boundaries at the expense of the state/school
district. If a parent wants their child in that school they should drive them themselves and leave
the open door policy.”
“Based on reviewing the plan in place, I am encouraged by the push towards a more community
school focus. However, I am significantly concerned on how you would implement the plan and
ultimately handle the existing school population. If the idea is to uproot children that are
currently open enrolling and place them into an assigned neighborhood/community school that
would be a poor decision in my opinion. As we all know, a child's stability in the school system is a
crucial piece of the puzzle a successful education. Your own statistics show that children that are
uprooted from their school perform poorly over the long-term. If you do move to a stronger
community school system, I feel strongly that it needs to be phased in over time and not
interrupt students that are currently enrolled in their schools.”
“Seems drastic to move to this option now. Long term would be smart but need to ensure all
neighborhood schools can adequately meet the needs of the student population.”
“If magnet schools are going to become community schools, then they should not continue using
an alternative teaching approach. In cases where the closest school is a magnet, students should
have another choice of school for their community school.”
Choice should still be an option if transportation is provided by parents.
I would react better to a map showing potential boundaries.
“Being in an open enrollment area, having options is a good thing. I do not want my children
penalized for living in a certain area and go to an inferior school. This will undoubtedly drive more
children out of the school district. Our son is completing his second year at Burroughs
elementary. Pulling him out of that school would be wrong. You are penalizing him. I think there
should still be choices, just less of them. I would also forgo busing and provide our boys with their
own transportation. Your goal of diversity is admirable. We believe in it as well. I grew up in
North Minneapolis in the 60's. My school participated in desegregation. That was a completely
different time and although it made sense, it didn't work. I completely agree the busing is an

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 13

 issue and should find some resolution. But trying to solve both inequality with financial issues is
the wrong approach. There should be some kind of grandfathering students in existing schools
provided they can find their own transportation.”
“As a taxpayer, I feel I should have the opportunity to send my child to any of the Minneapolis
schools my tax dollars support. If the cost of busing children is an issue, don't offer this option.
Parents who feel strongly enough to have their child enrolled in a school outside their busing
zone will find a way to make that work.”
“I am concerned about any of these scenarios if you are saving seats for kids from the poorer
areas of town. I understand trying to level the playing field and giving the less fortunate a chance;
I agree with that. Here in SW Mpls we have Burroughs, Barton and Lake Harriet schools bursting
at the seams with people who live here trying to get in- and some don't make it. What will
happen to these neighborhood kids if you are saving seats for kids from elsewhere?”
“I expect that this might be the most ‘fair’ scenario, given the budget situation. We live in an
open area and I am concerned about moving my kids. However, I'm sure every parent in the
district has some anxiety about this scenario. I do wonder what the all community scenario will
do for diversity. However, I feel that it is more fair than supporting a few magnets, which are
virtually impossible to get into. Since you are considering all options, I think you should get rid of
any preference Mpls public school employees (i.e., teachers' kids) get in placement. I feel this is
unbelievably unfair for tax payers and really an unnecessary "perk" for district employees.”
“This scenario is my ideological preference. We are a family just beginning our public education.
Our oldest of four is in the 1st grade. We all want our children to have a stellar, well rounded
education. The district should be putting energy into making all our schools great by sharing best
practices. Currently, with choice, the system feels very competitive.”
“I believe that open enrollment drives competition and makes our schools and communities
stronger.”
“Please remember that those of us living in an open area did not have a choice to attend a
community school. We did not choose to go out of the neighborhood. It is important that our
students continue to be able to attend their current school after the change. Students in open
areas need to be grandfathered into their current schools. As a district policy, I think community
schools make sense.”
“While I believe in community schools. Only community schools would be very alienating to both
existing and new parents. I firmly believe that parents with no choice but with financial means
will choose private schools over a not exceptional public community school. I feel strongly that
good schools need dedicated parents and these are the type of parents who will opt out of public
schools if the public schools can't provide a strong education for their children. I also believe the
public schools need parents who have the financial ability to choose private schools. These
families help financially support the discretionary spending at their child's school. These programs
are important and valuable to all the children in the school. I believe that eliminating all magnets
is alienating to staff who are dedicated to the philosophy of their magnet school. High quality and
dedicated teachers and staff are essential.”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 14

 “This would not work for my family because the schools in my community do not meet my
standards. I would like the option to attend small community schools outside of my
neighborhood. I would like to keep smaller community schools-because you do not feel like a
number and school staff really get to know my child/family.”
“I'd love a community school if the boundaries followed our neighborhood lines. I've forged
friendships and identity along these lines. Neighborhood schools whose boundaries follow
neighborhood lines seem to be the strongest. If our neighborhood is cut up I'll be heartbroken.”

Elementary Option B: Citywide Magnets and Community Schools

- The total number of magnet schools would be reduced and, with a few exceptions, located
within central area of the city. “Demagnetized” schools could choose to retain their program
focus (such as Montessori or fine arts).

Pros
Transportation
No one would have to travel very far
Reduced busing cost
Sense of Community
Citywide community can be developed
through central magnets
School Programming
Magnet programs could continue to attract
and retain families to MPS
Option to keep focus at demagnetized
school
Distribution of Resources
Reducing number of magnets would increase
quality
Choice Process
Retention of some family choice
Better than scenario A
Equalize access to all magnets
Better definition of boundaries and
community school options
Cons
Transportation
If goal is reduced busing, Option C is
preferable
Busing from all corners of the city would be
costly compared to regional magnets
Students from the far north and south may
have lengthy bus rides
Sense of Community
Rather have students in magnets in
neighborhood than magnets far away
Less community solidarity
Encourage neighborhood instability – people
moving to attend preferred schools
Fighting over magnets may cause rift within
communities
Lack of green space in city center
School Programming
People may leave MPS if forced out of
magnets
Families shouldn’t be required to attend a
community school if they don’t like a
program focus
With reduced magnet schools, how could
families find schools that will best match
their children’s needs?
Magnets currently performing well are
worth preserving, not necessarily those in
the center
Remaining magnet schools become much

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 15

 more exclusive
Pathways lost
Distribution of Resources
To meet demand, magnet school sizes may
need to increase
Relocating magnets to different buildings
ignores facility-specific assets to their
programs
Possible inequity in resources provided to
magnets vs. community schools
Choice Process
Fairness: who has to go, who gets to stay,
who gets in?
Fewer choices
Diversity
How do you tackle diversity as part of this
plan?
Disruption
Very disruptive for many students

Other questions about Elementary Option B:

Centralizing magnet schools suggests physically moving the location of schools, which would
undoubtedly be incredibly expensive. If the goal is to save money currently spent on busing, why
not come up with a plan to have families contribute to busing costs based on ability to pay and
distance from school?
Why not leave the programs intact and severely limit busing?
How does this affect language-specific programs? If a child starts in this program, they need to
finish.
Would locating magnets in the center of the city really reduce busing?
Are there enough facilities/buildings in the heart of the city to do this?
Will there be more resources for magnet programs to truly invest in their theme?
What does central mean?
Can you drive your kids to your choice?
Would school be bigger magnets in bigger building?

Other comments about Elementary Option B:

“If you choose this option, you should give people who live within proximity of a magnet school
have first priority to go there.”
“This is my preferred plan. I like the renewed emphasis on community schools while still allowing
some choice with magnets. My concerns with any plan are threefold - can my son stay in his
current school even if I have to drive him (if attendance area changes), will there still be sibling
preference even if older kid is attending non-community school, and how will school start times

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 16

 be affected with improved bus efficiency? I think 9:40 is too late to start learning and that is why I
do NOT currently send my child to the school closest to me. I would reconsider if it started earlier.
Kids are wired to learn in the mornings and play in the afternoons, and I hope MPS takes this into
account! Thanks.”
“I think reducing the number of magnets makes fiscal sense for the district. I do think that
magnet curriculum do in fact attract and retain families in MPS, who may otherwise seek other
options. If the magnets are centralized, I still see transportation as an issue.”
“Please look at schools that are successful and try to keep them intact and safe.”
“While magnets currently have enrolled students from areas outside their immediate
neighborhood, moving successful magnet programs to new locations will probably cause those
schools to lose many families. It could be fatal to those programs since much of their success is
tied to their relationships with the neighborhoods and community around them.”
“Our school has a split program and I appreciate what each brings to the school environment
(and how they support/strengthen each other). Until there is a way to prove or justify lots of
alternative programs, however, it can be hard to see how some programs are helping close the
achievement gap, etc.”
“On your surveys, proximity to home is very important to families. Centralized magnets increase
time children spend on the bus and take away our #2 value in surveys. Just because I value a
program close to my home does not mean that the traditional community school teaching model
is best for my child. If a magnet program can support multiple locations, why not offer the best of
both worlds to those families, the learning style that is most successful for their child with a sense
of community. Also if a program is successful in its location, please do not mess with a good
thing. What is truly wonderful about Mpls is our "choice." I thought we had embraced the idea
that not all children learn the same, so we offer magnet programs. It would be a shame to go
backwards.”
“I love this option. It preserves choice and frees up a desirable building for a community school
near me.”
“If it saves money it makes sense to centralize and reduce the number of magnets. From the
research it doesn't sound like they're actually meeting the needs of getting children college
ready. That said, no child should be forced to go to a magnet school just because the city is trying
to save money by making them community schools. I know many families that love their chosen
magnet school. That said, I believe it should be the parent’s choice if my child should go to a
Montessori or French immersion or fine arts school.”

Elementary Option C: Zoned Magnets and Community Schools

- The total number of magnet schools would be reduced. Geographical “zones” of the city would
each have several magnet schools. The magnets would not necessarily be the same in each
zone. The numbers of zones has not been determined, but it could possibly be 2, 3 or 4.
“Demagnetized” schools could choose to retain their program focus (such as Montessori or fine
arts).

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 17

Pros Cons
Transportation Sense of Community
Less busing expense; transportation savings Damaging to existing structure of
Sense of Community community schools
Allow for greater sense of community within School Programming
zones Duplicating magnets in all zones may be
School Programming costly in the long run
Magnets provide a focus that may draw Distribution of Resources
charter school families back into the school Might not equalize access to magnets
system Might be difficult for each area to support all
Provides more than “one size fits all” magnets
Best option to preserve quality of magnet Access limited by neighborhood; unequal,
programs unfair, discriminatory
Retains strengths of community school Demagnetized schools that retain their focus
model as community schools will underperform
Option to keep focus of demagnetized their focus if students attend based on
school geography, not affinity
Distribution of Resources Choice Process
Might equalize access to magnets Does not look like it will be easier for
Choice Process families
Gives families a choice outside of their Drive choice-seeking parents from the
community school district
Better definition of boundaries and Diversity
community school options Reduced integration
Diversity Disruption
Best option to preserve some diversity Disruption will upset parents
Disruption
Least disruption for families already
established at magnets near their homes
Most feasible option since it is close to what
we have now

Other questions about Elementary Option C:

“What about a boundary for having kids walk to their community school? When I was a kid
anyone within a mile of the school walked.”
How would magnets be decreased? Would schools that are working be allowed to remain as
they are?
Could current students stay at their schools? Would everyone at magnets need to reapply?
Could families cross transportation zone lines if they are willing to drive? Could there be a sliding
fee for inter-zone busing?
If magnet schools are located on the edges of their zones, would that enable us to attract
suburban families who might be interested in those programs?

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 18

 Some magnet options might not be as popular within a zone; should there be a citywide magnet
for these?
What does equity mean?

Other comments about Elementary Option C:

Each area should have the same themed magnets to foster equity—if there are differences in
program offerings people will perceive that someone else is getting something better
Unsustainable option because people would drive to different zones
Concern about ensuring availability of magnets
Equity based on outcome – look at outcomes to help determine school choice.
If we equalize programs across all schools, than personal choice may not be such a big issue
Academics must be taken into account
“This would be the best compromise.”
“This is my least preferred option.”
“This is a good idea and will be the least disruptive to our kids.”
“Elementary Scenario C is the best scenario, with 3, or preferably 4 zones, to reduce busing. It
keeps magnets, which draw dedicated families, and reduces busing costs. Consider quantifying
parent involvement as one measure of a school's success, to help decide which schools to keep
open.”
“I think this plan would probably be the most effective since parents can still have the option to
choose their 1 community school or maybe a magnet located in their zone. This would give some
choice (we have too much choice right now) but also maintain a sense of community within
neighborhoods.”
“You all really need to close a lot of buildings---that should be district #1 priority.”
“In all three scenarios reducing choice would be beneficial to affluent neighborhoods,
detrimental to struggling areas. People are willing to buy houses in neighborhood X because of
school choice--which helps the city and the neighborhood.”
This is a confusing tweak to a failed school selection system. Emphasizing local schools is the way
to go.
“Overall your reduction of magnet schools does not make sense to me as a cost saver. You
provide no - $0.00 - additional funding for magnets. "Magnet reductions" as presented would
make me assume there are great savings by reducing the specialties; savings for magnets come
from transportation - that is it. Separate it from underperforming schools; Magnets may
underperform due to poor principals, more diversity in students, or due to magnet distractions.
Understand the root cause(s)!! Regarding transportation, people who select charter schools or
any school outside the normal busing are should have to provide their own transportation. High
schools should have very limited busing. That age student should be able to take public
transportation. Negotiate something with metro transit.”
“The problem with magnets is that you can live across the street from them and not get in. East
Harriet and Kingfield sit without schools, yet we have no preference whatsoever to Barton.
Meanwhile, they can give preference to whomever they want to see in their school (kids of color,

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 19

 teachers' kids). It doesn't seem fair if it's going to be "fruit basket upset" for the rest of the
district when these changes are put in place that the magnets can keep on keeping on--assuming
their student bodies won't move, so they'll be full. If you're planning on not grandfathering, and
you end up with the magnet option, don't grandfather the magnets, either.”
“I think the sibling preference for magnets should be eliminated, however, when there is a
community school option.”
“I like this proposal best, but it is unclear to me whether we'd be limited to a single community
school (which scares me). Please provide as much choice as possible within the zones, and
preserve existing programs that work. Even if the make-up of schools will eventually change,
people are going to freak out and leave the district altogether if made to go to a school with a
sub-par reputation. I think this will be one of your biggest challenges, and it has to be dealt with
in whichever plan is enacted.”
“I think that this would be my first preference - Scenario C. I think magnets provide a great variety
for the district that not only help meet the different learning styles of students, but provide
exciting options for families, who might otherwise seek options outside of MPS. I also think that if
each sector had quality magnets to choose from, families would still have options that they are
very excited about, and transportation costs would also be reduced. I think getting rid of all
magnets would be a big mistake, for the attractiveness of MPS. I think magnets attract families,
but may also address issues of equity, which are not currently being met through community
schools, which tend to be quite segregated by race and class. I think all families should still have
some choices, although I agree that choices could be limited much more than they are currently.”
“Montessori as a 'focus' is not appealing at all. If anything, make a Montessori-only magnet that
would allow curriculum that is *more* in line with Montessori methods throughout the school.”
“I don't seem to understand how this is beneficial to parent choice or for student success --
seems to be adding complexity where simplicity would have more benefits (especially fiscally).”
“Of all the options presented, I favor this one the most. However, I would also encourage you to
consider lengthening the school day, lowering class size, and have fewer record keeping/teacher
workshop days as ways to improve Mpls public schools. We already have good schools. We just
need to support our students.”
“When considering whether a magnet is successful, does one consider how it is helping the
children over all, or just bottom line test results? In my experience of talking with parents
interested in a magnet program, they are interested because either a traditional program is not
anticipated to work or has been proved not to work for that particular child's learning needs.
Please let these families have the opportunity to choose academic success for their child by
maintaining the options of choice. That is what makes the MPS system so wonderful.”
“I grew up w/ school zones and it was a nightmare. You cannot help were you live, but you should
be able to decide where your child goes to school-especially if you are willing to transport them.”
“I've heard that this is the option that the district has chosen. I've also heard that Barton has
been assured that their program will remain intact in their current building. If so, I find this
grossly unfair. Barton is a place where a community school would have strong neighborhood

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 20

 support. Also, a larger space for Barton's program could allow access to this desirable program
for more families.”

Other Elementary Scenario Suggestions:

“If you have reduced magnets, you should give people in close proximity of those magnets first
choice for them.”
“How about a combination of B and C with some magnets being City-wide and some zone-wide
(and every student assigned to at least one community school)?”
“Leave the programming as it is or give families choices by areas. Limit busing or transportation
options, but leave schools intact. Families will find ways to provide transportation.”
“Should we have zones, thinking of the city as East/West instead of North/South would create
more integration.”
“Reduce busing (within 1.5 miles kids walk), add more crossing guards with official uniforms that
help with kids crossing busy intersections (using money saved from busing). Start to reward
schools who have low income families and increase the money per pupil for the reduced lunch
families. This will create a desire for schools to start programs that encourage reduced lunch
students to their schools. This will also create creative programs to address the families’ special
needs. Also provide more money per pupil for kids with disabilities. This will provide incentives
for schools to create programs to address these children's needs. I think Pawlenty went to
Canada to research these concepts (a couple of years ago). What happened to those researched
ideas? Continue to allow parents to select any school, if they are willing to drive when they are
outside of busing boundaries. Another idea, talk to MTC and see if they have ideas on how to use
the public transit (reduced tickets, special routes at special times etc.) This would increase rider
share for MTC and reduce costs to Minneapolis public schools. Why pay for 2 busing systems?”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 21

Appendix C | Secondary School Scenario Feedback

The following charts, tables and comments were compiled from feedback received via meetings, online
feedback forms, e-mail messages and telephone discussions. Please note that this data came from a self-
selecting sample of participants; as such, it is not a statistically representative sample.

Secondary Option 1: Community High Schools

- All high schools would offer the comprehensive Core 4 (Core 4 includes Advanced Placement,
Signature Career Tech, College in the Schools and International Baccalaureate programs) and
students would attend the high school closest to their home, with exceptions for citywide
“specialty” programs (such as Summatech and All Nations).

Pros Cons

Transportation Transportation
Simplifies transportation Reduces busing options
Low cost Sense of Community
Sense of Community School image; people have already formed
Kids would stay in their neighborhood opinions about schools
Neighborhood safety

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 22

 Helps build community involvement with
schools
Develops community identity
School Programming
All high schools offer same Core 4
programming
Allow for easy transfer between schools if
family moves
Standardization of curriculum and materials
Distribution of Resources
Every high school could grow and succeed
Revitalizes all the high schools
Allow district-wide staff development
(economy of scale)
Choice Process
No controversy about getting into a specific
school
School Programming
Rigor depends on school site, not name of
program
Inequity of programs at schools
Loss of families if community school does
not offer enough choice of programs to
students
Distribution of Resources
Core 4 is an expensive approach
Choice Process
No choice
Diversity
Ethnic and economic segregation

Other questions about Secondary Option 1:

How will MPS ensure that the quality of education is equitable among the different schools?
Is implementing the Core 4 in the best interest of all students?
What if we cut the athletics at the high school level to save money? We have a park board system
in Minneapolis. Why couldn't the kids play for their neighborhood park board team? Wouldn't we
be freeing up more money for the schools in general?
Where else are we looking to save money throughout the district? Administration? Physical
plant? Etc.?
Could some of the transportation savings be used to reduce the walk zones?
How would you handle the career and tech ed piece? The same everywhere? If not, how do you
decide and what do you do if a student desires a program elsewhere in the city?
If the demographics of the community high schools reflects an increase in racial segregation, will
we put our state desegregation dollars at risk?
How do we define equity and diversity?

Other comments about Secondary Option 1:

Pros for this option are based on the sense that every school has a program of quality
There are strong community passions around the high schools (both a pro and a con!)
“I oppose this change. In contrast to my position on elementary schools I believe having more
and varied high school choices makes sense.”
“At present, I would not choose to send my children to my community high school. If the quality
of the program were to improve as a result of this plan, I would consider it. However, I would
prefer to have a choice.”
“I am providing feedback as someone who wants Mpls to succeed, but who moved out of
Minneapolis primarily due to our concern about the high school changes. Middle class parents
with academically gifted children are lost in this mix… This plan confirms our worst fears for

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 23

 students like our children who are among the top performers in their grade level. Those students
need more than to be an afterthought in school program planning. Those students need a peer
group of gifted students to push them. I don't see any real opportunity for that in this plan.”
“I would be willing to pay for transportation or get my child to the school I want him/her to
attend. If the only choice was my neighborhood high school, I would seriously look at choosing a
neighboring school district.”
“I am very disturbed that North may be the only city wide school with specialty areas. South has a
highly successful Open program and I have heard nothing about what you will do to that
program. It sounds like you will close it without any discussion. Please do not do that.”
“This is off the subject but please consider not sending progress reports in high school and then
reports again at the end of the quarter. WHAT a waste of money. Couldn't the student report or
the parent could use the portal to check grades.”
“What about choices such as IB? I think Minneapolis must be one of the only districts that doesn't
offer Gifted and talented tracks. It's very alarming to consider removing strong programs or
limiting them by community area. We would probably leave the district. I would much rather be
responsible for transportation for my kids.”
“I like having the schools offer the same programs with a few specialty schools.”
“I really like going to school close to home (community building, time saving, energy saving, etc.).
It would have to make sense, however, for the various program offerings to have them
duplicated in each school (sounds like a more expensive way of organizing the programs without
knowing more details).”
“This seems like the best option. Why transport kids all over the city? That won't keep costs
down. Let's spend our money on the schools not the buses.”

Secondary Option 2: Citywide High Schools

- All high schools would offer the comprehensive Core 4 and citywide “specialty” programs would
exist. Students would have choice of any high school, with a lottery system. There would be
limited MPS transportation; for example, students might have to walk to a designed “MPS bus
stop.” We are also looking into high school students taking MTC city buses.

Pros Cons

Transportation
City buses – interesting idea
School Programming
Gives students choice of good schools with
academic, activity and social environment
that fits their learning and personality
Choice Process
Provides more and varied choices
Allows students access to high-performing
schools
Diversity
Potential for integration
Transportation
Too many buses taking kids too many places
Sense of Community
No sense of community
School Programming
Not fixing the problem of inequity of
programs at certain schools
Distribution of Resources
Unaffordable to offer IB in every school
Choice Process
Lottery system
Specific schools would be overcrowded and

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 24

Disruption others underutilized
Less disruption of current system Families who don’t “win the lottery” may
leave MPS
Disruption
Students who choose a particular school and
program would have to change schools
Special ed students who are having success
in one school may not have the same
success in another school

Other questions about Secondary Option 2:

How would transportation of lottery-selected students impact costs?

Other comments about Secondary Option 2:

“Need to make sure transportation limits are applied to charter schools as well.”
“I think this is the best scenario. Cut the busing, not the programs. Leave successful programs in
tact or you will lose massive amounts of parents. The way to lift up low achievers is not by getting
rid of or stop programming for high achievers. Program for high achievers and you raise the bar
for everyone. Program for low achievers and you lower the bar and lose all your successful
programs and a whole lot of money and parent resources.”
“It seems to me that the parents with the most resources win out in this situation. They will be
the people complaining the most when they don't get into their school of choice and they will
ultimately be the parents that will get their way.”
“How many students actually do true IB? Have it in multiple schools or in schools where the local
community wants it (builds stronger school in community and limits transportation costs).”
Please go back to the neighborhood schools. Limit open enrollment from Richfield and Edina.
“The comments I made about the other Secondary Scenario would generally be applicable here.
Figure out the purpose of high school, then figure out what to do with the buildings. If all spaces
at a school were assigned by lottery (no home school, no sibling preference) it would encourage
folks that could to leave the city since their student could end up at the worst high school in the
City even if they lived across the street from a very good one. South, Southwest and probably
Henry would be at or over capacity. The other schools would get emptier and emptier. The
downside of free choice is that the unwanted fill up with those that don't care. My neighborhood
has always had limited bus stops for high school students. There is one South High stop for the
neighborhood and it's on the opposite side of the neighborhood from the students. My student
walks half a mile; another walks farther. They survive, but it's difficult to fit boots in those skinny
lockers. MTC doesn't serve all parts of the city all day.”
“Great MPS bus stop idea. Like that all high schools would offer the same programs. Lottery
system could potentially cancel any transportation benefits??”
“I have worked in the district almost 15 years and have seen how magnets and SLC's have evolved
and I do not believe they have ever served the purpose of desegregation or improving student
involvement/interest. The cost simply outweighs the benefit. Make every high school have

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 25

 rigorous curriculum and if need-be, consolidate. It may be time to think outside the box, but I am
not sure what that would look like?? Thanks.”
“Sounds similar to the other program except for the transportation issue. MTC seems like a wise
use of resources and existing systems if city-wide option is used.”
“I favor school choice. I will evaluate the best option for my children. I would prefer to make a
choice between several strong public schools rather than public vs. private.”
“We really need to offer choice or pathway (area of study) that young adults need. So – more
schools South and North.”

Other Secondary Scenario Suggestions:

“Offer 3 viable options of HS's to students and if they want to attend a school not offered and
they get in, the family would have to provide the cost of the transportation or provide it
themselves - could be North and South zones or by the elementary school they attend so that
pathway would be clear at the elementary school choice time.”
“What about offering busing to limited # high schools in a zone or range around their address but
parents having the option to pay for transportation to certain schools beyond their zone, problem
of inequity of payment obviously but perhaps grants for low income students for this?”
“I like the idea of being able to get my child into a better school than the one designated by
where I live. My child is a strong student. I would like an idea where student grades and test
scores could be a determinant in school choice, beside just raffle. If a student works hard they
should be rewarded with top choice of school.”
“I like this option best - with so few high schools for a large city, I think too many people would
feel overly limited by only one choice. For the same reason, I think that some differentiation is
desirable even with the Core 4, such as a school focused more on the arts, or science and
technology, or liberal arts.”

Changing School Options Community Voices | Minneapolis Public Schools 26