ISD 535: "restraining the heartless"

But we must go on to say that while it may be true that morality cannot be legislated, behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart but it can restrain the heartless.  - Martin Luther King, Jr., address, Western Michigan University, December 18, 1963 

The discipline of students enrolled in ISD 535 is now the effective purview of the federal government through the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education.

Title VI: Discipline: Rochester Public Schools (District) (MN) (05-10-5003) 

On September 1, 2015, the Rochester Public Schools (District) entered into a voluntary Agreement to resolve a Title VI compliance review that OCR initiated regarding the equitable discipline of students.  According to the Agreement,

• the District will review its Student Behavior Handbook and make revisions, as appropriate, taking into account any recommendations or suggestions made by the District’s consulting expert and other relevant parties; 

• designate an employee to serve as a Discipline Supervisor and designate administrators who will address complaints regarding matters related to its disciplinary policies; 

• require teaching and support staff to employ a range of corrective measures before referring a student to administrative personnel; 

• instruct the established team at each school to discuss and make recommendations on the equitable implementation of discipline policies, practices, and procedures; 

• place a link on its website to OCR’s Civil Rights Data Collection data for the District and a link to updated data concerning referrals for discipline, suspensions, expulsions, and referrals to law enforcement, disaggregated by race and other factors; 

• ensure that it has in place a system of supports, such as mentoring or counseling, to assist students who display behavior problems; 

• provide annual training programs on discipline to District personnel and students and make informational programs on the District’s discipline policies and procedures and an updated Student Behavior Handbook available to parents or guardians on the District website; 

• collect and evaluate data on an annual basis regarding disciplinary referrals, suspensions, expulsions, and reports to law enforcement; evaluate whether it is implementing its student discipline policies, practices and procedures in a non-discriminatory manner; 

• establish uniform standards for the content of student discipline files at all schools; 

• examine how disciplinary referrals occurring at each school compare to those at other District schools and explore possible causes for any racial disproportion and consider steps that can be taken to eliminate the disproportion to the maximum extent possible; 

• and limit the role of police liaison officers to investigating crimes or potential crimes and not include the officers in recommending or determining student discipline.

This summary [bullets and formatting added] of the United States Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (OCR) Title VI compliance review outcome regarding the Rochester Public Schools (ISD 535) is available on the department's website.

Also available are copies of the Resolution Agreement #05-10-5003 Rochester Public School District signed by the Rochester Public School Board Chair Deborah Seelinger, and the Rochester Public School Board Clerk Dan O'Neil on September 1, 2015; and, the Resolution Letter addressed to ISD 535 Superintendent Mr. Michael Muñoz and signed by Adele Rapport, Regional Director, US Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Greater Chicago Area, dated September 9, 2015.

When the Post-Bulletin asked for information regarding this Title VI compliance review and the resulting agreement now in force, the superintendent demurred claiming concerns about "data privacy". It may well be the case that the district is under no obligation to release the information to the public. However, the pretense that the findings of this Title VI compliance review and resulting agreement is somehow subject to the data privacy restrictions is belied on page 14 of the very letter the superintendent received on 09.09.15.

Additionally, under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a request, we will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personally identifiable information, which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Apparently Post-Bulletin reporter Brett Boese, who has done some excellent reporting (see here and here) breaking this story, eventually acquired the paperwork through "another source". Whether he used an FOIA request, or just googled it as I did, I do not know. Either way, the superintendent had little justification for not being more forthcoming. Nor, for that matter, did the school board.

As this blog post was being written, the Post-Bulletin posted an editorial calling on the district to "shine more light on school discipline." Agreed. But greater transparency must be accompanied by greater accountability to the public. Greater accountability to the parents of the 17,163 students enrolled in the district. Greater accountability especially to the parents of black students whose treatment by the district are at the center of the civil rights issues that were the subject of the OCR compliance review.

When district officials indicate they are "taking steps to address this issue," let's be clear these steps are being taken as part of an agreement with the federal government that forestalled further review of possible illegalities. The steps the district are taking to address this issue are subject to OCR oversight and reporting requirements and the threat of "administrative enforcement or judicial proceedings to enforce the specific terms and obligations of the Agreement" should the district again fall short of doing so.

The district's failure to provide a learning environment that respects the civil rights of black students has come to this:

Based on the commitments the District has made in the Agreement described above, OCR has determined that it is appropriate to close the investigative phase of this compliance review. OCR will monitor the District’s implementation of the Agreement. All plans, policies and procedures that are developing during the monitoring are subject to OCR review and approval. The District has agreed to provide data and other information demonstrating implementation of the Agreement in a timely manner in accordance with the reporting requirements of the Agreement. OCR may conduct additional visits and request additional information as necessary to determine whether the District has fulfilled the terms of the Agreement and is in compliance with Title VI with regard to the issues in the review. OCR will not close the monitoring of this Agreement until it has determined that the District has complied with the terms of the Agreement and is in compliance with Title VI.

In short, to ensure that the civil rights of black students are protected, the discipline of students enrolled in ISD 535 is now the effective purview of the federal government through the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education.

Well, if that's what it takes.

"Dear Mr. Muñoz:"

No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. - Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964

Dossier

from Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan http://bit.ly/1NWybmo

We believe: 
Each individual has value and purpose.
Its is our responsibility to provide a community where each individual feels welcomed, respected, included, and safe. 

We will not:
Allow behaviors that limit our possibilities.
Allow behaviors that diminish the value of any person.

from United States Department of Education Office of Civil Rights OCR Docket # 05-10-5003 pp. 9 - 11 http://1.usa.gov/1MgKZlk

With regard to black male students in particular, the data showed that 9,052 disciplinary incidents in the 2013-2014 school year involved male students, and that 3,503, or 38.7%, of these incidents involved black male students. Data further showed that male students received 577 out-of-school suspensions, and that black male students received 232, or 40.2%, of these out-of-school suspensions and that male students received 1,077 in-school suspensions and that black male students received 453, or 42.1%, of these in-school suspensions. As black male students represented 1,179 of 8,696 male students enrolled in the District, or 13.6%, the data showed that black male students were disproportionately represented to a statistically significant degree in the proportion of male students who were disciplined, suspended out-of-school, and suspended in-school during the 2013-2014 school year.  

With regard to black female students in particular, the data showed that 2,964 disciplinary incidents in the 2013-2014 school year involved female students, and that 1,203, or 40.6%, of these incidents involved black female students. Data further showed that female students received 183 out-of-school suspensions, and that black female students received 81, or 44.3%, of these out-of-school suspensions and that female students received 330 in-school suspensions and that black female students received 146, or 44.2%, of these in-school suspensions. As black female students represented 1,129 of 8,193 female students enrolled in the District, or 13.8%, the data showed that black female students were dispropor-tionately represented to a statistically significant degree in the proportion of female students who were disciplined, suspended out-of-school, and suspended in-school during the 2013-2014 school year.  

For the 2011-2012 school year, disciplinary data similarly showed that black students were disproportionately represented to a statistically significant degree in the proportions of students who were disciplined, and who were suspended in-school and out-of-school in each middle and high school in the District. Black students represented 12.5% of the enrolled students, but were the subject of 5,089, or 34.9%, of the 14,569 disciplinary incidents in the District, and received 780, or 40.0%, of the 1,948 in-school suspensions and 388, or 43.2%, of the 898 out-of-school suspensions.  

The District expelled six students in 2013-2014: three white students, two black students, and one multi-racial student; the District expelled five students in 2011-2012: three white students, and two black students.

With respect to law enforcement, the District advised OCR that it did not maintain data on police referrals that were made by District schools. Accordingly, OCR contacted the local police and obtained reports compiled by the local police documenting calls received by the local police from District schools during the 2011-2012 school year. The data showed that black students were the subject of approximately 50% of police referrals made by District personnel, that approximately one-third of the police referrals involved disorderly conduct citations, and that black students were the subject of nearly three-fourths of the referrals involving disorderly conduct citations.  

In addition to the discipline sanctions outlined above, when compared with their enrollment proportion, black students were disproportionately given other discipline sanctions, including detentions, parent contact, restitution, and lunchroom suspensions; the only four sanctions listed for which black students were not disproportionately sanctioned were sanctions given on fewer than 12 occasions (as compared to 3,641 detentions and 2003 lunchroom suspensions). Data also showed that, compared with their enrollment proportions, black students were disproportionately sanctioned for 46 of the 50 types of misconduct, including misconduct that could be characterized as subjective, such as insubordination, disrespect, and disorderly behavior.

Observations

i

The district released the findings of a compliance review with the Office for Civil Rights, finding no evidence of intentional discrimination or wrongdoing by Rochester Public Schools. http://bit.ly/1WVK4i9

Let's just say OCR agreed to find no evidence of intentional discrimination or wrongdoing after RPS agreed to try and stop discriminating and doing wrong. Read carefully what the district touts in its 09/02/15 press release and what the Dept of Ed OCR says in its 09/09/15 summary.

Prior to the conclusion of OCR’s investigation and compliance determinations under Title VI, and before OCR had evaluated whether, for example, the disparities in imposition in discipline were or were not legally justified, the District expressed interest in voluntarily resolving the review with an Agreement. Accordingly, OCR is not making compliance determinations under Title VI. On September 1, 2015, the District signed the enclosed Agreement that is designed, when fully implemented, to resolve the issues in the compliance review. The provisions of the Agreement are aligned with OCR’s compliance concerns regarding the specific civil rights issues examined in the review. http://1.usa.gov/1MgKZlk

What the district says OCR did not find was what OCR stopped short of looking for because the district cut a deal. Despite the district's public statement, it's not for nuthin', that "[a]s part of the agreement, the OCR will continue to monitor Rochester Public Schools for the next three school years."

Not to put too fine a point on it, but ISD 535 is coming up short in complying with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

RPS and OCR have have partnered since 2010 when the district was selected to gather and review data. On Sept. 1, the compliance review concluded and found areas for improvement. http://bit.ly/1WVK4i9

RPS "partnered" with OCR in much the same way one might "partner" with the IRS after being "selected to gather and review data" for a tax audit; or as one might "partner" with a patrol officer after being "selected to gather and review data" from a breathalyzer.

In a press release, the district noted a discrepancy between suspension rates for students of color, meaning some minority groups are suspended at a higher rate. But the district said it will work to eliminate that discrepancy by identifying the reasons behind the disproportionate suspensions. http://bit.ly/1WVK4i9

You say, "disproportionately represented to a statistically significant degree"; we say, "discrepancy". You say, "black male students, black female students, black students"; we say, "some minority groups".

ii

A recent home visit to a frequently disciplined black student provided one teacher with an intimate glimpse into how cultural differences — and a corresponding lack of cultural awareness or training — plays a role in the numbers. Lewis says what was considered disruptive in school was simply standard with the student's family. Trying to bridge that gap will be critical moving forward. 

"It's really that connection piece and getting to know our students," [Assistant Superintendent] Lewis said." http://bit.ly/1X0Iw1b

Are we supposed to feel encouraged that "getting to know our students" gets on the list of things to do. Better the board, administration, staff, and teachers look at themselves: that's kind of the point and the source of the problem. Not "those" students or "their" families, but the board, administration, staff, and teachers who fail to see them as other than "them" and "other" - and worse - would just rather not have "them" in the classroom to look at.

iii

"We are concerned about all of our discipline and student behavior and how we handle it," Munoz said. "Are we concerned about it? Yes, but we're concerned about all of our student behavior. Obviously, we want all of our students to behave well and be in school. We need them in the buildings to learn." http://bit.ly/1N5AftB

Essentially, the superintendent is refusing to say "Black lives matter" and is saying "All lives matter" instead. Kolloh Nimley, a program specialist for the Council for Minnesotans of African Heritage's Rochester office, is right to say 'Those numbers here are not about all of our students, they're about black students....'"

Failing to embrace the evidence of racial disparity with some sort of appeal to "color-blindness" obstructs pursuing remedies for that racial disparity. Whether intended or not, that obstruction sustains the institutional racism that produces the racial disparity and further masks and abets the individual racism that persists within the system.

iv

Community forums are tentatively planned for late 2015 or early 2016 to solicit feedback from parents and other stakeholders. Those dialogues are required by the OCR as a way to begin correcting the complicated issue, but Lewis says that race-related topics are frequently discussed at dialogue sessions. http://bit.ly/1X0Iw1b

It sounds as if we are to be reassured that "race-related topics are frequently discussed at dialogue sessions." If "race-related topics" are "frequently discussed at dialogue sessions" shouldn't that suggest to the administration something about "race-related" issues in the district? Do they really want to say to the community, "Hey, no worries, we hear about this sort of thing all the time"?

v

But the discipline disparities aren't new issues with Rochester Public Schools.  http://bit.ly/1X0Iw1b

Indeed these issues are not new - from School Discipline and Disparate Impact: A Briefing Before The United States Commission on Civil Rights Held in Washington, DC (approved October 21, 2011):

While efforts have been undertaken since the 1990s to address the changing face of Rochester, there is still an underlying feeling today, as voiced in the September stakeholders meeting, that “hostility to diversity is present” and that there is a tendency among district members “to blame children and their families.” White parents, parents of color, and newcomer parents expressed the belief that there are some deep-seated prejudices and hostilities within the community but that, for the most part, people know what the appropriate ‘politically correct’ responses are and so do not present these in public. [pp 63-64]

Suffice to say, consistent with the findings of this report, the actions taken in response to these findings were reviled, ridiculed, and rebuked by significant portions and members of the community. What remains, however, is this persisting consequence:

At the administrative level, both at the central office and school sites, the lack of diversity clearly impedes the development of new ways of thinking and limits the district’s ability to make use of fresh viewpoints to challenge existing beliefs and practices. When discipline is not applied fairly and consistently, the culture of diversity is undermined. [p 67]

vi

This agreement with the OCR requires frequent updates and annual reporting requirements.

As part of the agreement, the OCR will continue to monitor Rochester Public Schools for the next three school years.

Superintendent Michael Munoz says the discipline totals are a concern and will continue to be tracked, but he declined to say whether the figures would be made available publicly in subsequent years. http://bit.ly/1N5AftB

Let's hope the superintendent becomes more inclined to say the figures would be made available to the public in the subsequent years.

During these subsequent years when the district celebrates its efforts to improve - what are they calling it, oh yes - "cultural training and awareness," let us remember to recall the circumstances under which these improvements are being accomplished:

Dear Mr. Muñoz: 

If the District fails to implement the Agreement, OCR may initiate administrative enforcement or judicial proceedings to enforce the specific terms and obligations of the Agreement. Before initiating administrative enforcement (34 C.F.R. §§ 100.9, 100.10), or judicial proceedings to enforce the Agreement, OCR shall give the District written notice of the alleged breach and sixty (60) calendar days to cure the alleged breach. http://1.usa.gov/1MgKZlk

11/11

Robert D. Beal, Sr.
SERVED IN THE EUROPEAN THEATER WITH COMBAT ENGINEERS. ATTACHED TO VARIOUS UNITS, INCLUDING THE 3RD ARMY DURING THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE.

The United States Congress officially recognized the end of World War I when it passed a concurrent resolution on June 4, 1926, with these words:

Whereas the 11th of November 1918, marked the cessation of the most destructive, sanguinary, and far reaching war in human annals and the resumption by the people of the United States of peaceful relations with other nations, which we hope may never again be severed, and 

Whereas it is fitting that the recurring anniversary of this date should be commemorated with thanksgiving and prayer and exercises designed to perpetuate peace through good will and mutual understanding between nations; and 

Whereas the legislatures of twenty-seven of our States have already declared November 11 to be a legal holiday: Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), that the President of the United States is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on November 11 and inviting the people of the United States to observe the day in schools and churches, or other suitable places, with appropriate ceremonies of friendly relations with all other peoples.

i

Despite the proclamation, and due to circumstances beyond my control, World War Two took place. As a result, a young man from Fredericktown, Ohio was uprooted and sent to Camp McCain in Duck Hill, Mississippi. While there he met a young woman from Winona, Mississippi. They got married.

After the war, they did what was quite popular at the time. They were fruitful and multiplied their number by three sons - all of whom clung tenaciously to their mother's womb for ten months before resigning themselves to the inevitable.

And so it is I am: a month late, the outcome of a big war and a little whoopee.

ii

Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, but in 1954, after World War II had required the greatest mobilization of soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen in the Nation’s history; after American forces had fought aggression in Korea, the 83rd Congress, at the urging of the veterans service organizations, amended the Act of 1938 by striking out the word "Armistice" and inserting in its place the word "Veterans." With the approval of this legislation (Public Law 380) on June 1, 1954, November 11th became a day to honor American veterans of all wars.

iii 

Dad returned from Europe with a few souvenirs: a Luger pistol, a couple of German military daggers, a Nazi party lapel pin, among other things. His uniform was stored in Mom's cedar chest along with a pair of Lederhosen. I wore his combat boots for while when they fit.

He was in his seventies before a few stories broke loose. The ship over to Europe. An officer he knew. The family he was billeted with in Germany. One of my brothers is named for an officer he must have liked. He tells us that in the late forties my mother and he drove over to Indiana from Ohio - long before the interstate - to visit a buddy from his unit and the partner with whom he lived.

Now in his nineties, Dad never laughs so hard as when he tells the tale of an officer who flipped a Jeep. To be honest, I'm not sure why he finds it as funny as he does, but I enjoy the laughter.

__________

If you have a friend or relative who served in WWII, you can honor that service at the WWII Memorial Registry here.

Being true to your school, part last: money/mission

ISD 535 Strategic Plan

I’m often quoted as saying, "No money, no mission." That’s true, but remember the rest of it: "No mission, no need for money." - Sister Generose Gervais

Last week, a larger than expected number of voters (around 30%) turned out to approve the public school levy by a margin at the right of a decimal point - 50.6%. Those results may yet be subject to challenge.

The day after the referendum, the Post Bulletin published a post mortem of this "tepid" approval observing: "By passing the levy override, voters have given [the district] increased responsibility with more tax dollars. It's time to show the community what that responsibility looks like."

ISD 535 has long needed to better tell their story. Their obsession with spread sheets during this campaign did a great disservice to district's real accomplishments and invited no conversation about what more needs to be done - not just to address gaps and shortfalls, but to what the community might aspire.

In all the ballyhoo about who was reading budget line items correctly, there was far too little about what should drive the budget. Frankly, the school board absenting itself from vigorously carrying the message, telling the story, and advocating for the district they govern was noticeable and noticed in this campaign.

The school district may have protected itself against budget cuts for the next four or five years, but during this campaign they set the community dialogue about education back just as many years. Back to the days when the talk of money drove mission rather than talk of mission driving money.

Early in the century, there seemed to be a district committee convened every year to consider budget cuts. Whether that impression is true or not, there were committees of community members convened in 2008/9 and again in 2010 to prioritize and recommend budget cuts. During the 2010 effort, committee members began to question the wisdom of a process that produced such frequent budget crises and did little to avert them. Concerns were also raised on reducing discussions regarding education to spreadsheets, line items, and the tortured budgeting practices of public education. The Post Bulletin reported at the time:

Some members stressed the need for long-term thinking in the process. 

“Taking this in one-year increments has gotten us where we are right now,” said Walt Ling of IBM. 

Sean Allen of the Rochester Area Foundation said he wondered in what direction the district is headed. 

“I haven’t gotten a solid sense of that in these meetings,” he said. “Who’s figuring out how to avoid having budget-cutting committees in the future?”

In presenting its recommendations to the board, the 2010 committee urged the district to engage in a process that set educational goals rather than budget priorities. In other words, determined what kind of education we wanted for our students and let that determination be the basis for budget decisions. Or, as I wrote prior to the vote last week:

Whether you are inclined toward voting yes or no, the attempt to reduce the referendum decision to the "facts" diverts us from questions that we should be asking and assumes answers to questions that go unasked. For example:

When school finances are limited, the cost-benefit test any educational policy must pass is not “Does this policy have any positive effect?” but rather “Is this policy the most productive use of these educational dollars?” Assuming even the largest class-size effects, such as the STAR results, class-size mandates must still be considered in the context of alternative uses of tax dollars for education.  Will a dollar spent on class-size reduction generate as much return as a dollar spent on: raising teacher salaries, implementing better curriculum, strengthening early childhood programs, providing more frequent assessment results to teachers to help guide instruction, investments in educational technology, etc.? 

The same cost-benefit test can be applied to any of the alternative uses of tax dollars listed above. Alternatives that are before many school districts including ISD 535.

In 2010 the board seemed receptive a new approach, but the departure of one superintendent and the hiring of another delayed action until 2012 when a large scale, community wide strategic planning process was undertaken by the district. The 12 month process concluding on March 2013 reported out a set of objectives and action plans to be pursued over the next four years. The process began as:

the district hosted "World Cafe" sessions that allowed community groups to offer ideas on what they wanted their schools to look like. The sessions involved more than 400 participants. It was followed by the drafting of a strategic plan by a Core Planning Group, made up of district school employees, parents and community members. It also involved the development of specific action plans by Action Planning Teams for achieving strategic objectives.

Though the strategic plan summary was included in the pile of "factual information" about the referendum on the district's website, there was little (any?) discussion of it by the district or referendum supporters during the campaign. 

What progress has been made toward achieving these 2017 objectives? How would the referendum have advanced or impeded their achievement? How did the core values inform the district's decision to place the levy on the ballot and consider the implications if it failed? Shouldn't our conversations around budget be driven by policy? Shouldn't policy further the objectives we have for students? 

That the referendum passed without posing or answering these questions speaks of a community that has its own reasons for saying yes. That the community said yes by such a slim margin speaks to the work the district needs to do to build support for its mission, accomplishments, and aspirations - otherwise the district will not know to what the community has said yes. 

That district employees can recite the mission of the district is laudable. That the community cannot is not.

Being true to your school, part two: fact/value/policy

Today's speaker says "It is a fact" with all the gravity and air of finality with which his less secular-minded ancestor would have said "It is the truth." ..... Today when the average citizen says "It is a fact" or says he "knows the facts in the case," he means that he has the kind of knowledge to which all other knowledge must defer. - Richard M. Weaver, The Ethics of Rhetoric

Among my favorite thought parables is G.E.M. Anscombe's little story of the potted flower. She uses it to make a point regarding the limits of "facts" in explaining conduct - and by extension, I think, formulating policy.

The story poses a simple question: Do I water the flower in a flower pot on the window sill because I understand that the flower needs water to survive? She concludes that knowledge of that fact is not sufficient to account for why I might water the flower. She observes instead that I water the flower because I want the flower to survive and know that for it to survive I must water it.

In other words, the action of watering the flower is not entailed in the fact that the flower needs water. Some end-in-view must also be present for the facts to motivate the action. Further, that end-in-view is itself a framed in values that give pursuit of that end a motive.

The "facts" themselves are rarely - if ever - sufficient motive for action, or sufficient to explain an action. Likewise, the "facts" themselves are rarely - if ever - sufficient justification for a policy. But that has been the determined strategy of the Rochester Public Schools regarding the property tax levy referendum.

When the school board decided it had worked so hard to set the levy that it should just leave it to the administration to explain it, it handed over to the administration a strategy that could by law only provide "factual information" related to the referendum. The district has done its best to make a virtue of it.

The "independent" group formed in support of the referendum has also embraced the limitations of the district administration, somehow hoping that the "facts" will speak for themselves. For example, much is made of the "fact" of state averages and, that when it comes to funding, our district levels are below that state average. Even the district's consultants concluded in their survey research that: "Reminding voters that a cost of $183 brings the cost of the levy to the state average has no impact on the level of support." Perhaps because the salient issue is not factual: "above or below average"; but rather, policy: "how much is enough."

Surprisingly the district as the arbiters of fact uncovered no "factual information" that would lead one to question the need for an increase in the property tax levy or an increase to the levels proposed by the referendum. Are there no such "facts"? None? At all?

Wondering at the apparent dearth of any facts to the contrary is not the same as saying that the district is being consciously disingenuous or intentionally deceptive in their role as "suppliers of factual information". It's too much to expect of the district to aid in providing the factual basis for opposing it's own referendum. Isn't it?

At any rate, the district and their supporters make far too much of what they think the facts might show (e.g. average state levies); probably know far too well that the issue turns on appeals not at all "factual" (e.g. do it for the children); and, offer up implicit policy statements that are given the aura of  "fact" (e.g., keeping class sizes small).

Whether you are inclined toward voting yes or no, the attempt to reduce the referendum decision to the "facts" diverts us from questions that we should be asking and assumes answers to questions that go unasked. For example:

When school finances are limited, the cost-benefit test any educational policy must pass is not “Does this policy have any positive effect?” but rather “Is this policy the most productive use of these educational dollars?” Assuming even the largest class-size effects, such as the STAR results, class-size mandates must still be considered in the context of alternative uses of tax dollars for education.  Will a dollar spent on class-size reduction generate as much return as a dollar spent on: raising teacher salaries, implementing better curriculum, strengthening early childhood programs, providing more frequent assessment results to teachers to help guide instruction, investments in educational technology, etc.? 

The same cost-benefit test can be applied to any of the alternative uses of tax dollars listed above. Alternatives that are before many school districts including ISD 535.

"Facts are stubborn things," observed Ronald Reagan, no it was John Adams, or was it Tobias Smollett, or Alain-René Lesage, or maybe Jared Elliot? Well, if not stubborn, facts can indeed be obstinate. Anyway can we all agree with Patrick Moynihan that, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - unless, of course, it was James Schlesinger who said it first or was it Bernard Baruch? Well, maybe we can at least agree that in the end we all choose when to cease looking for the "facts" and get on with it.

Those who show up at the polls will decide the referendum issue. That decision will establish another very consequential "fact". Based on that fact, we should pose to the absent school board the questions that were left unasked or sent begging by their "factual" referendum campaign.

[To be concluded in Being true to your school, part last: money/mission]