Transforming the Minneapolis
Public Schools:
Strategic Plan Recommendations
November 6, 2007
Objective of strategic planning work
To develop a strategic agenda
to ensure that every child in
Minneapolis can get an
excellent education through
the Minneapolis Public Schools
2
The strategic planning process has
incorporated input from many sources
Inputs
1. Student focus groups
2. Parent focus groups
MPS Board
of Education
3. Parent survey
4. Parent advisory committee input
5. MPS staff survey
6. MPS staff interviews
7. Principal interviews
8. Teacher interviews/focus groups
Strategic
planning team/
SAG
Recommendations
9. MPS student achievement, financial,
and enrollment data
10. Community and education leader
interviews
11. Community Connections Committee
12. Educational expert interviews
MPS Staff
13. Urban school reform research
3
Strategic planning is a multi-phased
process
Current activity
High-level process
Refine recommendations and design for
implementation
Develop
recommendations
and overall strategy
1. Plan and
launch
May
2. Establish
common
fact base
June-July
3. Develop
and refine
options for
change
AugustOctober
Implement and
evaluate
4. Decide
on core
strategies
NovemberDecember
4
To move towards fulfilling the mission, MPS
will need a stretching and measurable goal
Vision
By 2012
• 80% of all MPS students will
Every Child
College Ready
score proficient or higher on
MCA Math and Reading
• 80% of all MPS students reach
threshold score on college
entrance exam (e.g., ACT)
• Race and income achievement
gaps reduced by 75%
5
Why is this possible?
• Great assets to build on
– Many excellent staff and high performing schools
– A legion of die-hard parents and other supporters
– Board that is willing to make tough decisions
– District leadership team that is moving aggressively
– Diverse, global student population with unlimited
potential
• Other schools and districts are raising achievement
with similar challenges and students
• A window of opportunity to act decisively and
inspire dramatic change
6
• Less than half of MPS kids meeting Minnesota standards
in reading and math
• 67% of kids graduate but many MPS graduates who go to
college need remediation
• Students of color can and do achieve, but MPS is not
getting the job done
• Increased competition will continue and students are
leaving for options that aren’t always better than MPS
• Some communities have little faith in the district
• The financial situation is grim: a $100 million deficit
• Enrollment down dramatically; decline expected to continue
7
• Across the District, staff not measured on student results – no
one is accountable
• Poor performing principals and teachers are shuffled around the
District while new stars are not retained
• Principals are not able to build and lead their teams
• Some staff have low expectations of students and do not see
families as partners
• Ineffective/inconsistent application of behavior strategies
• Inconsistent acceptance of curricula and instructional strategies
• Unfunded mandates and subsidies short-change MPS students
• Antiquated schooling model trying to serve today’s students
8
• Effective teachers are the most important
• Principal quality is second only to teacher quality
• One-size doesn’t fit all - different schools must be
addressed differently
• High expectations, “whatever it takes” culture, and
instructional time are crucial
• Academic rigor drives achievement for all
• Aligning instruction from pre-K to college keeps kids from
falling behind
9
Effective teachers are the most important
Student performance
100th
percentile
90th
percentile
53 percentile
points
50th
percentile
37th
percentile
0th
percentile
Age 8
Age 11
10
Principals matter, especially when focused
on instruction
Doubling principal focus on
instruction-related tasks . . .
Principal time allocation (percent)
Personal
needs
Managerial
tasks
100
4
. . . doubled rate of improvement in Jefferson County, KY
Change in school performance
100
3
5.1
32
+114%
2.4
66
66
Instructional
tasks
30
2003
2004
Point gain 1-year
trend
gain
(5-yr)
with SAM
11
Teachers and principals were at the
core of Boston’s reform
Key reforms
• Heavily invested in teacher
Percent of Boston students meeting
the target standard in Grade 10 MCAS
professional development
• Focused principals on excellent
Math
instruction
Reading
87
82
• Focused on principal and
teacher quality and pipeline
• Used data to manage
performance
43
25
• Created 20 Pilot Schools which
provide teachers and principals
with high autonomy
1998
2007
1998
2007
12
Districts have varied autonomy in different
ways to drive performance
Autonomy examples
Miami model
High
performers
Chicago model
High autonomy
Middle
performers
Middle
performers
Low performing “zone”
Low performing “zone”
Low autonomy
High autonomy
High
performers
Low autonomy
Replace
Restart with
high autonomy
High autonomy
MPS should choose a model based on capacity in
school leadership talent pool
13
High expectations, “whatever it takes”
culture, and instructional time are crucial
Common tenets of high
performing charters
Dramatic gains with diverse,
low-income students
• High expectations and high
Average test score growth over
3 years in KIPP schools
National percentile ranking
standards
• Relentless focus on
Start 5th
End 7th
achievement
• Rigorous curricula
• Structured environment
• More instructional time
83
58
44
34
50%
• Accountability and data-driven
instruction
Math
Reading
14
• Rigorous curriculum is more predictive of earning a
Bachelor’s degree than test scores or GPA
• More rigorous coursework predicts higher test scores,
even controlling for academic ability
• Those who enter high school in the bottom quartile do
better in rigorous classes than in the traditional
coursework they would otherwise enroll in
• Students expected to master more rigorous curricula
are more likely to persist and be better prepared for
post-high school
15
Montgomery County, MD has seen results
from increased academic rigor
Class of ‘06 taking > 1 AP Exam
Percent
Class of ‘06 scoring a 3 or higher
Percent
National
56
National
45
MCPS
MCPS
42
27
24
24
33
24
16
15
15
12
15
3
Overall
African- Hispanic
American
Overall
African- Hispanic
American
Access not only increases participation, but success
16
Aligning instruction from pre-K to college
keeps kids from falling behind
Elementary
• Preparation
Pre-K
• Intense
• Increase
school
readiness
• Improve
transition
Middle
Grades
focus on
literacy
and math
for high
school
High
School
• Critical skills
and ways of
thinking
needed for
future success
• Preparation
for postsecondary
All kids
college
ready
• All kids
prepared
for college,
whether or
not they
choose to
attend
Rigorous academics with learning supports
17
• Effective teachers are the most important
• Principal quality is second only to teacher quality
• One-size doesn’t fit all - different schools must be
addressed differently
• High expectations, “whatever it takes” culture, and
instructional time are crucial
• Academic rigor drives achievement for all
• Aligning instruction from pre-K to college keeps kids from
falling behind
18
1. Restart and/or bring in other high quality schools to replace bottom
25%; unleash high-performing schools
2. Raise expectations and academic rigor for all students, aligning preK-12 programs to college readiness goal
3. Develop principal corps and give principals the power, training, and
support to lead great instructional teams
4. Develop teachers as leaders and give them tools and supports to get
excellent results
5. Set clear expectations for all staff at all levels; reward successes and
develop or remove low performers
6. Transform relationships and partner with families
7. Correct and stabilize financial situation
8. Commit to supporting a network of great schools for all
Minneapolis kids
9. Build widespread support for getting results
19
Recommendations: 5 core strategies
supported by 5 enablers
Every Child
College Ready
Objective
Core
strategies
Raise
expectations
and academic rigor
Strengthen
principal
leadership
Support
teachers,
improve
instruction
Partner
with
parents/
families
Take aggressive action on bottom 25% of schools;
unleash high performers
Critical
enablers
Financial
Stability
Accountability
MPS Culture
- Choice
mindset
- Service
Community
and govt.
support
Infrastructure
e.g., IT, Communications
20
1. Restart and/or bring in other high quality
schools to replace bottom 25%; unleash
high performing schools
Why?
• Need speed, more leadership capacity & innovation
What?
• Restart/replace 15 traditional schools in 5 years
• Restart/replace contract alternatives
• Create “Office of New Schools” to launch – sponsored
charters, self-governed schools, and restart models
• Strengthen restart model – e.g. more time, all-day
K/pre-K, and class size/staff support
• “Wrap around” social services
• Phase in/phase out instead of total school conversion
• Different strategies/autonomy for different schools
How is this • More schools doing more of what works
different?
21
One-size does not fit all – different schools
must be addressed differently
Students proficient on MCA II tests
Percent
Distribution
of schools
Number
of schools
Math
69
Top 25%
47
Next 25%
31
Next 25%
Other
State average
Reading
74
14
54
15
41
14
15
Bottom 25%
~25
61
14
15
14
28
14
2
Number
of schools
14
10
~25
68
22
1. Restart and/or bring in other high quality
schools to replace bottom 25%; unleash
high-performing schools
Why?
What?
• Need speed, more leadership capacity & innovation
• Different strategies/autonomy for different schools
••By
2012, 25% of 15
MPS
studentsschools
are enrolled
Restart/replace
traditional
in 5 years
new MPS-sponsored
or
•in
Restart/replace
contractcharters
alternatives
schools
•restarted
Create “Office
of New Schools” to launch – sponsored
charters, self-governed
c schools, and restart models
••All
new MPS-sponsored
or
Strengthen
restart modelcharters
– more time,
all-day
restarted
schools
in top half
K/pre-K, and
classperforming
size/staff support
MPS schools
within 3social
years services
of launch
•of
Provide
“wrap around”
• Phase in/phase out instead of total school conversion
How is this • More schools doing more of what works
different?
23
2. Raise expectations and academic rigor
for all students, aligning K-12 program to
college readiness goal
Why?
What?
• Higher rigor leads to higher achievement
• Set expectations for what students should know
• Raise rigor of coursework across the board and ensure that
Career and Technical Education courses are available and
embedded with academic rigor
• Align curriculum with aggressive standards and postsecondary expectations
• Make sure advanced courses reflect MPS student body
• Provide academic, ELL, behavior support and
teacher training
• Make sure every child is ready to move on to the
next grade
How is this • “Smart is not what you are, it’s what you do”
different?
24
2. Raise expectations and academic rigor
for all students, aligning K-12 program to
college readiness goal
Why?
What?
• Higher rigor leads to higher achievement
• Set expectations for what students should know
• Raise rigor of coursework across the board and ensure that
Career and Technical Education courses are available and
embedded
with
rigorstudents and
• By
2009, 50%
ofacademic
high poverty
•50%
Alignofcurriculum
with
aggressive
standards
and poststudents of
color
in 11th and
12th grade
secondary
are
enrolledexpectations
in 1 or more IB or AP courses
• Make sure advanced courses reflect MPS student body
• Provide academic, ELL, behavior support and
teacher training
• Make sure every child is ready to move on to the
next grade
How is this • “Smart is not what you are, it’s what you do”
different?
25
3. Develop principal corps and give
principals the power, training, and
support to lead great instructional teams
Why?
• 2nd only to teachers in driving achievement
What?
• Spend 80% of time on instruction
• Hire School Administration Managers to protect
principal time
• Focus training on instructional leadership
• Expand pipeline of talent
• Evaluate and remove underperforming principals
• Choose own teams along with accountability for results
How is this • Instructional leaders, not building managers
different?
26
3. Develop principal corps and give
principals the power, training, and
support to lead great instructional teams
Why?
What?
• 2nd only to teachers in driving achievement
• Spend
of timespend
on instruction
• By
2009,80%
Principals
60-80% of time
on
instruction
• Hire
School Administration Managers to protect
principal time
• By
2010, all principals are considered
• Focus
training on instructional leadership
“highly effective” by at least 90% of teachers
• Expand
pipeline
ofin
talent
and
90% of
parents
their schools
• Evaluate and remove underperforming principals
• Choose own teams along with accountability for results
How is this • Instructional leaders, not building managers
different?
27
4. Develop teachers as leaders and give
them tools and supports to get
excellent results
Why?
• Most important for student achievement
What?
• Reallocate training dollars to primarily in-class coaching
• Create common planning time to collaborate, share best
practices and use student results to improve approaches
• Provide better support for behavior and instructional
strategies for key groups (e.g., ELL, Special Education)
• Selectively reduce class size, e.g., bottom 25%, writingintensive high school classes
• Expand pipeline of talent
• Evaluate and remove underperforming teachers
How is this • A teacher in every classroom who engages all students
different?
and can improve achievement by more than one grade
level for every student
28
4. Develop teachers as leaders and give
them tools and supports to get
excellent results
Why?
What?
• Most important for student achievement
Reallocate
training
dollars
to primarily
••By
2009, teachers
believe
that
90% of in-class coaching
•professional
Create common
planning activities
time to collaborate,
share best
development
are a
practices
and use
tomake
improve approaches
highly
effective
usestudent
of their results
time and
•them
Provide
better
support
for behavior and instructional
more
effective
as teachers
strategies for key groups (e.g., ELL, Special Education)
Selectively
class feel
size,their
e.g.,principals
bottom 25%, writing••By
2010, 90%reduce
of teachers
intensive
highinschool
support
them
raisingclasses
academic
•achievement
Expand pipeline
talent management
and of
classroom
• Evaluate and remove underperforming teachers
How is this • A teacher in every classroom who engages all students
different?
and can improve achievement by more than one grade
level for every student
29
5. Set clear expectations for all staff at all
levels; reward successes and develop or
remove low performers
Why?
• You can’t manage what you don’t measure
• MPS can’t afford to have low performers anywhere to
meet its goals
What?
• Create simple, aligned scorecards at every level
• Publish District and individual school scorecards
• Clarify expectations and goals for every role
• Review performance often, including multiple pointsof-view
• Eliminate barriers to retaining top performers
• Remove underperformers who don’t improve
How is this • Pinpointing concerns and making change, not making
different?
due with the status quo
30
2.88
Proficient
In Good Standing
31
5. Set clear expectations for all staff;
reward successes and develop or remove
low performers
Why?
• You can’t manage what you don’t measure
MPS
can’t
afford
havestaff
low agree
performers
anywhere to
••By
2008,
90%
of alltoMPS
that they
meet what
its is expected of them at work
know
•s
••By
2009,simple,
90% ofaligned
teachers
and principals
in level
What?
Create
scorecards
at every
school
agree
807 staff
supports
•every
Publish
District
andthat
individual
school
scorecards
effectively
•them
Clarify
expectations and goals for every role
Review performance often, including multiple points••By
2010, 90% of teachers in every school
of-view
agree that their principal is an effective leader
• Eliminate barriers to retaining top performers
Remove
underperformers
who don’t
••By
2010, 90%
of principals agree
that improve
all of
their teachers are effective or have potential
How is this • Pinpointing concerns and making change, not making
different?
due with the status quo
32
6. Transform relationships and partner with
families
Why?
• Families play a powerful role in academic achievement, and
are essential to the success of MPS
What?
• Ensure MPS staff are culturally competent and work well
with families of all backgrounds
• Collaborative partnership between parents, teachers, and
principals to address student needs
• Increase family connectedness at school level
• Support families to help children succeed
• Develop trust of families through transparent operations
• Build loyalty through good experiences when it
matters most
How is this
different?
• All parents are engaged and share responsibility with their
school for increasing student achievement. All staff held
accountable for inclusive family engagement
33
6. Transform relationships and partner with
families
Why?
• Families play a powerful role in academic achievement, and
are essential to the success of MPS
What?
••By
2008, 90% of parents in every MPS school
Ensure MPS staff are culturally competent and work well
say they feel comfortable talking to their child’s
with families of all backgrounds
or principal
aboutbetween
school matters
•teacher
Collaborative
partnership
parents, teachers, and
principals to address student needs
••By
2008, 90%
ofconnectedness
parents in every
school
Increase
family
at MPS
school
level
they families
feel welcome
theysucceed
visit
•say
Support
to helpwhen
children
• Develop trust of families through transparent operations
••By
2009,
90%through
of parents
in experiences
every MPS school
Build
loyalty
good
when it
are
satisfied
matters
mostwith the amount of connection
How is this
different?
and communication they have with their
school
•child’s
All parents
are engaged and share responsibility with their
school for increasing student achievement. All staff held
accountable for inclusive family engagement
34
7. Correct and stabilize financial situation
Why?
• MPS has a $100 million shortfall and an aggressive
academic improvement goal
What?
• Fix shortfall by managing high areas of cost (e.g., health
insurance) and reprioritizing spending
• Seek reimbursement for unfunded mandates (e.g., $31
million of Special Education costs) and/or MPS subsidy
of non-MPS student services (e.g., transportation to
other schools, others’ Special Education excess costs)
• Improve reporting in order to match spending to student
needs and priorities
• Increase transparency of financial reporting for
programs, schools, and 807
• Develop new Master Facilities Plan
How is this • Financial decisions made using an “academic return on
different?
investment,” not just across-the-board cuts
35
7. Correct and stabilize financial situation
Why?
• MPS has a $100 million shortfall and an aggressive
academic improvement goal
What?
• Fix shortfall by managing high areas of cost (e.g., health
insurance)
and reprioritizing
spending
• By
2008, balanced
budget with
no
•forecasted
Seek reimbursement
for unfunded mandates (e.g., $31
deficit
million of Special Education costs) and/or MPS subsidy
of non-MPS
student
services
(e.g.,
transportation to
• By
2009, clear
financial
reports
are publicly
other schools,
others’
Special Education
available
and drive
decision-making
and excess costs)
•programmatic
Improve reporting
in order to match spending to student
tradeoffs
needs and priorities
• Increase transparency of financial reporting for
programs, schools, and 807
• Develop new Master Facilities Plan
How is this • Financial decisions made using an “academic return on
different?
investment,” not just across-the-board cuts
36
8. Commit to supporting a network of great
schools for all Minneapolis kids
Why?
• To best serve Minneapolis kids, MPS should provide the
best education it can and support high quality options
for students most in need
What?
• Adopt a new mindset towards competition
• Create positive partnerships with high quality
“competitors,” including sharing practices, services,
and facilities where appropriate
• Advocate for high quality standards for all and a “level
playing field”
• Help families understand choices
How is this • MPS supports high quality options, regardless of
different?
sponsor, and learns from/shares
with others
37
8. Commit to supporting a network of great
schools for all Minneapolis kids
Why?
• To best serve Minneapolis kids, MPS should provide the
best education it can and support high quality options
for students most in need
What?
• Adopt a new mindset towards competition
• Create
partnerships
high quality
•By
2009,positive
MPS has
establishedwith
partnerships
“competitors,”
sharing
practices, services,
with
at least 2-3 including
high quality
“competitors”
and facilities where appropriate
• Advocate for high quality standards for all and a “level
playing field”
• Help families understand choices
How is this • MPS supports high quality options, regardless of
different?
sponsor, and learns from/shares
with others
38
9. Build widespread support for getting
results
Why?
• Support from all stakeholders is critical to making
transformational change
What?
• Build shared commitment within MPS
• Regain broader community support
• Rally government partners: City, County, State
• Partner with higher education
• Solicit business community and foundations
How is this • Move past blame game to shared game plan
different?
39
9. Build widespread support for getting
results
Why?
• Support from all stakeholders is critical to making
transformational change
What?
• By early 2008, clear commitments of specific
•support
Build shared
commitment
within MPS
from key
external partners
(e.g., state
localbroader
government
partners
in place, county
•and
Regain
community
support
social workers in MPS sharing space to serve
•high-needs
Rally government
City,security
County, State
studentpartners:
populations;
•support
Partnerfrom
with city)
higher education
• By 2008, at least 2-3 external partners involved
•with
Solicit
business
and foundations
MPS
change community
effort (e.g., technology
support, Financial reporting assistance)
How is this • Move past blame game to shared game plan
different?
40
Leadership stability is critical to
systemic reform
• Many urban school districts experience frequent
Superintendent turnover (average tenure of 2-3
years), often leading to a change in direction and
leadership team
• MPS has had 3 different Superintendents or
interims in the last 4 years
• Many large urban districts no longer have
elected boards
• The SAG recommends that additional exploration
into stability-enhancing governance models
be undertaken
41
MPS will be different for everyone
Teachers
Principals
• Part of outstanding teams with inspiring principal
leaders who support their teaching and development
• Have easy access to accurate and timely student data
• More planning time and more effective (and less timeconsuming) PD activities
• Strong instructional teams
• Support to spend time on instruction
• Responsive 807 support that meets unique school
needs
Parents
• Always welcome at school
• Feel confident that their child’s school expects the best
•
Students
from its students
Aware of current school happenings and their
student’s progress
• Feel challenged, know that they are expected to
•
achieve, and believe they can
Feel safe and supported in a positive school
environment
42
Next steps: change of this size cannot be
“business as usual”
Publicly report Implementation Scorecard quarterly
Form external Implementation Advisory Board
Form Implementation SWAT team to supplement
senior leadership team
Seek extra help: Finance, IT, Communications
43
MPS must have an aggressive high-level
implementation plan to track progress
SAMPLE
20072008
Activity
• Plan
– Develop detailed/further design plans
– Design and staff “SWAT” support team
• Bottom 25%
– Monitor and enhance NSI
– Design/staff Office of New Schools
– Set criteria, decide restart & solicit replace
– Restart schools internally
– Open first set of new schools
• Rigor
– Redesign HS program to expand
rigor and engagement
– Link HS redesign to middle
school reform
• Principals
– Redesign role and pilot SAMs
– Redesign training and pipeline
– Simplify performance evaluation
• Teachers
– Start collecting teacher feedback on PD
– Revise PD model
– Develop performance evaluation
2009
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Progress
44
MPS must have an aggressive high-level
implementation plan to track progress (Cont’d)
SAMPLE
2008
Activity
2009
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Progress
• Accountability
– Continue developing system, including
school and District scorecard
– Explore options for 360° feedback
• Family engagement design
– Continue implementation of school-level strategy
– Create issues hotline
– Develop and implement “Moments of Truth”
• Financial stability
– Address forecast 2008-2009 deficit
– Design clear financial mgmt reporting system
– Design master facility plan
• Widespread support
– Engage external partners and secure commitments
– Design/implement internal change mgmt strategy
• Quarterly implementation reports
45
MPS must publish its own scorecard
and metrics focused on achievement…
Academic achievement – overall
Percent
• Proficient MCA Math
45
51
–Racial gap
–Income gap
?
• Proficient MCA English
–Racial gap
–Income gap
• Threshold score on ACT
–Racial gap
–Income gap
EXAMPLE
2012 Goal
80
48
49
?
80
?
?
?
80
46
…and based on school report cards
with some district-level measures
EXAMPLE
School profiles
Family engagement
Academic rate of return
Rating Previous Current
Percent parents
comfortable talking to
teachers/principals
Major initiative
ARR
• After school
TBD
A
X
Y
B
X
Y
C
X
Y
D
F
X
X
90%
• Early
TBD
childhood
59
Y
Y
program
45
Reporting
Previous
•
Pub reports available
•
Still in development
Now
47
• A comprehensive solution is needed, not more one-off
programs
• Set a strategic direction and stick to it long enough to get
results
• Not everybody will be happy
• You will need to be bold in carrying out the bottom 25%
strategy and actually executing the instructional
improvements - few have fully done it
• Real reform will require sustained commitment over
multiple years, from the Board, District, and external
community
48
MPS leadership willing to make tough
decisions in favor of student achievement
Targeted initiatives already underway
• Northside Initiative
• High School Redesign
• Middle School Improvement
• Accountability Plan
• Facilities Re-use Process
Broader community is interested and engaged
• Parents and community
• Government/legislative representatives
• Business community
49
50
Additional Information
51
Less than half of MPS kids meeting
Minnesota standards in reading and math
MPS average
State average
MPS students meeting state standards, 2006-07
Percent
Math
45
61
Reading
48
68
52
Many MPS graduates who go to college
need remediation
2000-03 MPS high school graduates taking at
least 1 remedial course at Minnesota public
higher education institutions
Percent
Total enrollees in
MN public colleges
or universities
37
South
569
41
Southwest
Henry
427
48
Washburn
227
53
430
57
Edison
397
59
North
Roosevelt
256
70
State average
364
36
53
Students of color can and do achieve, but
MPS is not getting the job done
MPS students meeting state standards 2006-07
Percent
Math
African American
American Indian
Reading
22
33
28
31
48
Hispanic
Asian
35
61
Caucasian
43
73
MPS Total
45
State average
82
48
61
State average
68
54
Some communities have little faith
in the District
Top 5 reasons
Percent of top 3
Parents who left MPS
Worried about the future quality
of education offered by MPS
40
Behavior/safety issues in school
36
Some parents of
color specifically
cited:
• Not feeling
welcomed
• Believe kids
Class size too large
31
treated unfairly
• Some negative,
Child not learning/not challenged
Did not like options
(school, program, activity)
29
culturally insensitive interactions
with staff
27
55
The financial situation is grim: a $100
million deficit
Cumulative budgetary shortfall
$ Millions
• MPS will have reserves
-18
of approximately $15
million after 2007-08
-41
• 23% of revenue stream
is vulnerable: referendum, compensatory,
and integration aid
-68
-100
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
56
Enrollment down dramatically; decline
expected to continue
K-12 MPS enrollment
Thousands
47.5
-26%
35.2
29.8
2000-01
2006-07
-16%
2010-11E
57
Each group of MPS schools should be
treated uniquely
EXAMPLE APPROACH
School types
High achieving
schools
• Unleash
Momentum
schools
• Build momentum
Struggling
Schools
• Bolster weak leadership, or
• Start over with autonomy, or
• Enlist outside providers
58
Real reform will be challenging and require
sustained commitment over many years
Boston 10th grade MCAs test results
Percent
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
English
87
Math
82
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
59