A Summary of Minnesota Public School Choice Programs
(From Facts, Figures and Faces: A Look at Minnesota’s School Choice Programs, Mike Malone, Joe Nathan, and Darryl Sedio November 1993, Center for School Change, Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs)
The 1985 – 1993 Minnesota Legislatures passed several laws expanding educator and parental choice among schools.
Post-Secondary Options (1985) allows public school 11th and 12th graders to attend colleges, universities and vocational schools. Participants increased from about 3,600 students in 1985-86 to more than 7,000 In 1991-92. First year results showed that about 6% of the participants had dropped out of school, that 2/3 of the students had average grades of B, C or D, that the high school students had done as well or better in post-secondary courses, that 90% of the parents said their children learned more, and 95% of the students said they were satisfied with the program. Ninety-four per cent of 221 high school students at the University of Minnesota in 1989 rated their experience “excellent or good.” Since 1985 more than 90 high schools have established courses in their high schools which allow students to earn both high school and college credit. The College Board also reports that the number of Minnesota high schools offering Advanced Placement Courses has more than doubled since 1985-86.
Area Learning Centers and High School Graduation Incentives (1987) permit students ages 12-21 who have not succeeded In one public school to attend another public school outside the district, so long as the receiving district has room and a student’s transfer does not have a negative impact on desegregation. Criteria used to indicate lack of success include low test scores or grades, chemical dependency, excessive truancy or expulsion. Research carried out in 1990 found that almost 8,000 students used these programs in 1989-90, and that about 1/3 of the students were returning after having dropped out. Students reported much higher levels of achievement and satisfaction. After attending an area learning center, the percentages of students planning to graduate after having dropped out Increased from 19% to 39%. After attending a private non-sectarian school under the
HSGI law, the percentage of youngsters planning to graduate increased from 6% to 41%. (Nathan and Jennings, 1991)
The fourth law is called the Enrollment Options Program (“open enrollment”). Parents of children ages five-eighteen may transfer their children to public schools outside their resident district unless the receiving district does not have room or the transfer will have a negative impact on desegregation. About 440 students used the law in 1988-89 (when the home district could refuse permission to leave), about 3,400 applied to use it in 1989-90 (when resident districts of less than 1000 students could deny transfers), and more than 12,000 applied to use it in 1992-93. A 1992 survey of parents found that parents’ most important reason for shifting schools was academics. (Rubenstein, et al., 1992) A survey of 126 principals around the state found that most felt choice had “stimulated improvements to school curricula, promoted greater parent and teacher involvement in planning and decision-making and increased ethnic diversity in schools.” (Tenbusch, 1992)
Charter public schools (1991, revised 1993): Permits up to 20 schools to be established which do not have to follow most state rules and regulations, but are responsible for improved student achievement specified in a contract between the school and a local district. More than 25 groups have proposed charter schools in rural, urban and suburban areas. Most have been turned down by their local board.
Eight have been approved by the local and state boards of education. The 1993 legislation allows proponents to appeal to the State Board of Education if at least 2 members of a local board support the proposal. The original Minnesota charter school proposal would have allowed either a local or the State Board of Education to authorize a school. As of 1993, California, Colorado, Georgia, Massachusetts, and New Mexico have authorized charter schools. Legislation varies from state to state.
Within district options: Since Governor Perpich proposed cross-district school choice in 1985, 163 new schools or schools within schools have been created in urban, suburban and rural Minnesota districts. For example, “schools within schools” have been created in Blackduck, Coon Rapids, Fairmont, Grand Rapids, Minneapolis, Morris, Princeton, Rosemount, St. Cloud, St. Paul, Thief River Falls, Virginia and Westbrook-Walnut Grove.
Rural magnet schools have been created in Belview, Cyrus, Delavan, Miltona and Randall. The Cyrus Magnet School was selected in 1993 by Redbook Magazine as one of the nation’s 51 best public elementary schools in the country. This school is run by a committee of teachers. It has no principal.
Suburban districts like Bloomington, Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, Roseville and Stillwater have created distinctive elementary and middle schools which families have [chosen]. These programs serve a cross section of students.
The participants in the above “within district” programs are not counted as participants in “cross district” plans because they transfer within their district. Most previous reports have ignored this important dimension of Minnesota choice plans.
More than 75 new programs also have been created since 1985 which serve secondary students who do not succeed in traditional schools. Some of these are called “alternative schools.” Others are called Area Learning Centers. Some of their students come from within the district. Others transfer across district lines, using the “Second Chance” laws adopted in 1987.
