12-16-07 MPS Parents Posting

Two weeks ago, the editors of the Star Tribune expressed support for the district's efforts
to change the teacher transfer system in Minneapolis. Below is the response I submitted
that they have, to date, not published.

MFT is committed to reaching a fair and professional contract settlement as soon as
possible. Our goal is to make every school in Minneapolis a great school. We believe this
will be accomplished by building strong, shared leadership and a supportive, collaborative
relationship with the parents and community.

[Submitted to Star Tribune on December 7]
It appears the editors of this paper have accepted the scapegoat argument put forth by the
Minneapolis School Board. With all of the challenges facing Minneapolis Public Schools
(MPS), and public schools in general, it is irresponsible to target the teacher transfer
system in Minneapolis as the source of the district's ills (Editorial 12/2/07).

If we are going to improve on what is working, if we are going to close the achievement
gaps, if we are going to make Minneapolis the model of urban education, we need to
address the real challenges.

Class sizes are too large. State dollars have failed to keep up with the needs of the
students in Minneapolis, and across the state. As a result, it has become increasingly
difficult to keep class sizes at the levels identified by the referendum (a ratio of 1:19 for
grades K-2, 1:25 for grades 3-8 and 1:26 for grades 9-12). The district, however, must
do what it can to work in that direction. It should begin by focusing on class size
reductions for the students who would most benefit: special education students, students
who qualify for free and reduced lunch, English language learners, and students in
kindergarten through second grade.

The central offices of MPS need to end the practice of top-down mandates. The district
offices should respond to the needs of the schools, and support them in their efforts to
meet the varying needs of students. Teachers need the freedom and support to do the job
they know needs to be done. Teachers have continually had more and more demands
made on their time without compensation. In efforts to keep up with district mandated
initiatives and paperwork (not to mention state and federal mandates) teachers are losing
the time they need to work directly with students.

Instead of addressing these real challenges which are holding teachers back, the School
Board has decided to focus its energies on a politically popular target that will, in the end,
bring no benefits to the students of Minneapolis. Unfortunately, this paper's editorial in
support of the District's effort to dismantle the current teacher transfer system parrots the
School Board's misinformation and false assumptions.

Last Sunday's editorial asserted that students have left MPS for private, suburban, and
charter schools because families "like staff stability." While it is true, parents want stability
for their children, they don't find it in the charter schools to which we are losing most of
our students. According to a recent study out of Western Michigan University, charter
schools have two to three times the teacher turnover found in even the most challenging
urban schools.

This position is also refuted by the district's own research, collected for them by the
McKinsey Company. In the key findings of their research, McKinsey concluded, "While the
exodus is slowing, MPS is still losing many Minneapolis students to
charter, suburban and private schools as parents look for better academics, fewer behavior
issues and smaller classes." These are the issues the school board should be addressing.

Another major fallacy is the suggestion that a transfer system with seniority rights is the
old, outdated system and interview-and-select is the 21st century system. That could not
be further from the truth. Interview-and-select is the antiquated system. Our current
seniority bidding system was created in response to the abuses common to "interview and
select," such as age discrimination and cronyism. Most other school districts have not
"switched to an interview-and-select hiring method" as the editorial stated, because most
districts never could get rid of interview-and-select in the first place.

The Minneapolis School Board members assert that interview-and-select is needed to
close the achievement gap. St. Paul is a district that had a seniority bidding system, but
changed back to interview-and-select about eight years ago. The achievement gaps in St.
Paul are not the same as Minneapolis, but they never have been. The truth is after eight
years of interview-and-select, St. Paul is still struggling to close its achievement gaps as
well.

Using seniority as a scapegoat might win some political points, but it will accomplish
nothing academically. The editors of this paper expressed a desire to make "traditional
public schools more competitive, successful and family friendly." I agree, but to do this we
need to discuss real solutions to real problems.

Robert Panning-Miller,
President,
Minneapolis Federation of Teachers