Integration Rule and Statute Alignment Work Group

Report to Commissioner

Chapter 116 Article 3, Sec. 32.

ACHIEVEMENT AND INTEGRATION; RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONFORMING CHANGES. The education commissioner shall review Minnesota Rules, parts 3535.0100 to 3535.0180, for consistency with Minnesota Statutes, sections 124D.861 and 124D.862, and make recommendations to the education committees of the legislature by February 15, 2014, for revising the rules or amending applicable statutes

Basic question for work: What do we need in rule in order to make statute work?

The recommendations listed below reflect discussions of the Work Group.

Recommendation: Revised the rule or modify statute to reflect the following changes:

1. Purpose Statement. The current statute includes a purpose (Minn. Stat. 124D.861 Subd. 1 (a) so not needed in rule. Potentially would cause confusion if we maintain both.

Recommendation: Delete purpose section from Rule or amend to make statement consistent with statute.

2. Protected Class Student. Definition for “protected class student” needs to be clarified.
a) Recommendation: For purposes of determining “ eligible district” and for determination of funding, the following NCLB designated classifications be used;
· American Indian/Alaskan Native
· Asian/Pacific Islander
· Hispanic
· Black
b) Recommendation: For purposes of plan development, implementation, reporting, and evaluation, that all NCLB classifications referenced in statute shall be used:
· American Indian/Alaskan Native
· Asian/Pacific Islander
· Hispanic
· Black
· Free and Reduced Priced Lunch (economic)

c) American Indian Students.

Recommendation: Retain dual status language for American Indian students.

3. Definition of Eligible District.

Recommendation: Eligible district” shall be identified as the following:

a. A district with an enrollment of 20 percent or more of “protected class students;” or
b. A district or districts that have an enrollment disparity of 20 percent or more of “protected class students” compared with an adjacent district; or

c. A district with a school site that has an enrollment disparity of 20 percent or more of “protected class students.” than other school sites within the district; or

d. A district submitting a voluntary plan to meet the intent of the statute.

4. Intentional Discrimination. Statute does not cover intentional discrimination while Rule requires Department to make a determination of intent if there are racially isolated schools.

Recommendation: Cross-reference Minn. Stat. Section 127A.41, which provides for the reduction in state aid if a district violates the Minnesota Human Rights Act or the Minnesota Constitution.

5. Collaboratives: When is adjacent district planning required?

o Only disparate districts? All adjacent disparate districts?

o How is determination made for adjacent district planning?

· Do racially isolated districts decide who participates?

6. Evaluation

How is achievement to be measures (MMR measures)

· Closing gap

· Proficiency

· Growth

· Graduation rate

· M.S. 124D.861, subd. 3 (d) requirement for reporting longitudinal data that is based on students’ growth and progress in reading and math.

· What are Integration Goals?

· How is progress on other goals to be measured?

7. Definition of terms

What other terms, if any, need to be defined?

8. Community Input on plans. Process required and outlined in statute; Not necessary in rule.


· Statute defines community input; no need for Rule.

· Add a provision for sign-off by local American Indian Parent Committee.

9. Incentive funding/Use of integration funds guidelines.

Question: Are statute and guidelines sufficient or is there need for rules?

10. Issues for future consideration:

· Ethnocentric schools/Language Immersion schools

· Charter schools

· Online schools are currently excluded from MDE’s definition of school, but these enrollment numbers are included in a district’s overall pupil count for determining racially isolated districts.

· EL sites.

· Special Ed. students.

· Care and treatment facilities.

· Open Enrollment guidelines that support pro-integrative enrollment that is aligned with a district’s achievement and integration plan.

· Incentives to support pro-integrative establishment of boundaries.