SFUSD High School Taskforce
In 2022, the Board of Education voted to form a High School Taskforce, in part to evaluate merit-based admissions at both Lowell and SOTA. The task force consultants are being paid $500,000 by the school district. Task force members are unpaid volunteers from the community.
Phillip Shinn, a member of the taskforce, is concerned that problems he flagged are not being addressed. He requested to make a presentation on behalf of the Lowell Alumni Association (on which he serves as Vice President) at the January 19 meeting — the first one with a discussion on admissions. Matthew Kelemen, the taskforce coordinator, declined this request. Here are the slides Mr. Shinn intended to share:
Mr. Shinn also requested that I published the following emails between him and Mr. Kelemen to inform the public:
From: Phillip Shinn
Date: Friday, December 30, 2022 at 7:02 PM
To: Matthew Kelemen
Cc: Davina Goldwasser, "Benau, Tami"
Subject: Re: Communicating with the Task Force
Hi Matthew,
Thank you for your reply and the helpful links to the RFP and other documents that pre-date the selection of Task Force members.
Transparency/Questionnaire
I remain concerned that members of the Task Force and the public have not been given an opportunity to observe or provide input into the key decisions made by the District and its consultants in formulating the Task Force's activities, and that the Task Force will simply be asked to sign off on recommendations and conclusions reached by the District and consultants without adequate opportunity for input from either Task Force members or the public. My specific initial concern is that the process of gathering written questionnaire answers from high school parents, to be used in analyzing the needs of San Francisco's high schools, seems to have been conducted without input from the members of the Task Force. I apologize if this information has already been shared with the Task Force, but I have the following threshold questions about that questionnaire:
1. When was the questionnaire created?
2. Who was involved in creating it?
3. What questions are in the questionnaire? May we have a copy?
4. Why weren't Task Force members given the opportunity to add questions or object to questions in the Questionnaire?
If the consultants and the District control: (a) the gathering of information for the Task Force; (b) the blueprint for the Task Force's activities; and (c) the analysis of the information gathered by the consultants, what then is left for the Task Force members to do? (RFP 4.5 lists duties of the consultants, including "A. Analyze and summarize the current state of San Francisco's high schools, including offerings and student outcomes.")
Data to be Used in Analyzing the Needs of San Francisco's High Schools
As to the information gathering process, I am unclear on the utility of the Questionnaire and community outreach events. Hasn't the District been collecting decades of data on the performance of its students and high schools? I believe that the District has gathered, analyzed and published statistics measuring a wide range of student learning rates. Can Task Force members obtain and consider in their deliberations the data that the District already has in its possession?
Request for Proposal v. Consultants' Directions to the Task Force
As to the PowerPoint slides that you shared at the first meeting, they do not seem to line up entirely with the District's "Request for Proposal for High School Task Force Consultant Services No. SFUSD-PD-FY22-23#30." For example, the RFP provides, "if advisable," for the selection of "co-chairs" of the Task Force, (RFP 4.2(C). The RFP instructs the consultants to "Work closely with the co-chairs to create agendas for Task Force meetings..." (RFP 4.4(A)), and instructs the consultants to "Prepare Task Force co-chairs for media interviews by providing talking points and coaching." (RFP 4.6(C). In contrast, your PowerPoint slide 24 states: "No chairperson of the group." In addition, nothing in the RFP seems to prohibit the Task Force member from creating committees, but your PowerPoint slide 24 states: "No committees (but maybe ad-hoc sub-groups if needed)."
Norms for Task Force Members
You have mentioned the need to have "Norms" (Power Point slide 23). Norms are standards of conduct that can have the effect of rules regulating conduct, including speech. In discussing how to improve San Francisco's high schools, it is unclear why the Task Force members should be expected to comply with norms suggested by the consultants. If the norms are used to regulate what the Task Force members can say, isn't that a bit of an overreach? The RFP states that "The final recommendations must include and account for input from a robust community engagement and outreach process." (RFP 3.(C)), and requires "A transparent process with proactive communication to the community." (RFP 3.(E).
One of the norms in PowerPoint 23 is "Keep equity at the center of the dialogue and the work." I could not find any mention of such a norm, or in fact any norms, in the RFP. The RFP does require "H. Collaborative, productive, and inclusive meetings by the task force." (RFP 3 (H)). If I missed the RFP's mandate concerning norms of conduct, please correct me.
Suggested Legal Compliance Review
Replying to my suggestion that the District ask its legal counsel to conduct a legal compliance review of the Task Force's activities to date, you referred me to District staff members, Davina Goldwasser and Tami Benau. Although I would be glad to engage with them, it is unclear to me whether either of them is legal counsel to the District. More importantly, I am not clear from your reply whether such a review will be conducted. Can you please let me know?
Consultant Selection Process
Although it is good to know that there was a public process for the selection of consultants, the actual application of the selection criteria is still unclear to me. What I saw was expressed by a numerical scale up to 80 points, but I could not find what the points meant. Perhaps there are other documents that explain how the point system for selecting consultants works, and what the actual criteria were that were used to decide which consultants were selected?
Additional Item for the Summary of the December 1, 2022 Task Force Meeting
The District's Task Force web page contains a summary of the December Task Force meeting, but does not mention comments by Task Force members that 8th grade algebra should be restored as a course offering in the District's schools. I recall that discussion and request that it be made part of the summary posted on the web page.
Thank You,
Phil
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
[January 2, 2023 @ 3:34 p.m.: Kelemen to Shinn]
From: Matthew Kelemen
Date: Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: Communicating with the Task Force
To: Phillip Shinn
Cc: Davina Goldwasser, Benau, Tami
Phil,
Thanks for your continued communication about the issues you are concerned about. For the two issues that are highlighted in yellow below, I will ask Davina and Tami to respond.
With respect to the other issues you raise:
Transparency/Questionnaire: I will address the questions and concerns that you raise in this section at our upcoming meeting, including responding to the numbered questions and the broader concern about the Task Force being asked to “sign off on recommendations and conclusions reached by the District and consultants without adequate opportunity for input from either Task Force members or the public.” That is not my intent as the facilitator for the Task Force’s work. I look forward to sharing with you and the Task Force the details about the surveys that were conducted as part of the Looking at Student Journeys process, and to learning what additional information Task Force members want to seek out to inform your work.
Data to be Used in Analyzing the Needs of San Francisco's High Schools: You asked if the Task Force can access to existing district reports. Yes. We have started that process at each of the first two meetings by collecting your questions. Part of Thursday’s agenda is focused specifically on the Task force discussing what information will be most helpful to its deliberations related to recruitment and access.
Request for Proposal v. Consultants' Directions to the Task Force: As I alluded to my prior email, no decisions have been made by the Task force regarding structures such as identifying chairs. We, the consultants, have proposed a structure, but it requires discussion by the Task Force.
Norms for Task Force Members: It’s my experience as a facilitator that groups need norms to guide their work. The proposed norms, which will be further discussed and need to be agreed upon by the Task Force, are adapted from norms that SFUSD uses. Various versions of the norm related to equity have been used by the district for many years. Since there seemed to be a need for further conversation about this norm, we are bringing it back for discussion by the Task Force on Thursday.
Additional Item for the Summary of the December 1, 2022 Task Force Meeting: You asked for a specific comment to be recorded in the notes. We are not keeping detailed notes of the meetings, but rather a summary of topics discussed and actions taken. If the Task Force as a whole wishes to have a more robust record of proceedings, that’s something we can discuss.
Beyond these written replies, please let me know if you would like to talk one on one either before or after the next meeting. I would welcome the chance to talk with you.
Best,
Matt