Link
to printable .pdf
Participating:
Elizabeth Burmaster, Katharine Lyall,
Richard Carpenter, Rolf Wegenke, Barbara Manthei
(for Scott McCallum), Tom Beattie, Bob Beglinger,
Ken Cole, Winnie Doxsie, Richard Grobschmidt,
Stan Johnson, Gloria Ladson-Billings, Joseph
Lowndes, Dave Newby, Luther Olsen, Judd Schemmel,
Miles Turner.
Staff
Attending: Jayson Chung, Sue Grady, Kathryn
Lind, Mari McCarty, Francine Tompkins, Janet
Washbon.
Also
Attending: Gabrielle Banik, RJ Binau,
David Dies, Julie Enloe, Tom Grogan, Lisa
Hanrahan, Gordon Hanson, Ron Jetty, Jack Kean,
Beth Lewis, Jack Lewis, Paul Nelson, Evan
Norris, Tom O'Day, Mary Pluta, Peggy Swick,
Kelly Williams.
Unable
to Attend: Ray Allen, Ray Boland, Paul
Gabriel, James Haney, Robin Kreibich, Mark
Meyer, Scott McCallum, Stephen Nass.
President
Lyall opened the meeting at 2:10 p.m. by welcoming
the members and thanking them for attending
today's meeting. She welcomed and introduced
Richard Carpenter, the State Director of Wisconsin
Technical College System. He thanked her and
expressed his honor at joining the Council.
He expressed his appreciation of Wisconsin's
unique methods of looking at education. Where
there is tension in other states, Wisconsin
works collaboratively to find solutions. He
is committed to seamless education. The more
people we are able to bring through the system,
the more people through the pipeline, the
more people educated, the more people in the
workforce. Director Carpenter is looking forward
to working with the Council and strengthening
the economy of the great state of Wisconsin.
Katharine
Lyall introducing the Youth Options presentation
said that staff prepared the presentation
to educate the Council about what Youth Options
does and who it serves, to answer questions
and raise issues. Those questions and issues
not fully covered will be researched and addressed
at the next meeting. Attached
is a copy of the PowerPoint for the presentation.
Janet
Washbon opened the presentation by reviewing
its context as it relates the Council's mission.
She explained that Youth Options was only
one of many ways Wisconsin high schools students
could access college credit. Beth Lewis, from
the Department of Public Instruction, gave
an overview of the Youth Options program's
history in Wisconsin and the general process
and timeline of the program. She explained
the different manner in which the university
system, the private colleges and universities,
and the technical college system must administer
the program. She also gave summary data on
enrollment. Francine Tompkins presented data
for the University of Wisconsin System, Mari
McCarty for the Wisconsin Association of Independent
Colleges & Universities and Janet returned
to do the same for the Wisconsin Technical
College System. Each also distributed a list
of typical courses in which the Youth Options
students enrolled. Those lists are attached.
Some
of the clarification, provided by the staff
in response to the many questions resulting
from the presentation, produced more questions
that will need research. What follows is a
re-cap of the discussion. Issues and questions
yet to be addressed are listed as part of
the next steps at the end of the discussion
summary.
Note:
Italics represents responses to questions.
Youth
Options is a student-initiated program.
A
survey should be conducted to find out what
motivates the student to participate in Youth
Options. Anecdotally, students enroll in
Youth Options for several reasons. They are
curious. They are taking courses not offered
at their high schools. They are exploring
career options. Students are advised by counselors
that one of the best ways to get into college
is to have a couple of college credits on
your transcript.
Looking
at the number participating, why is it so
small? Speculation is that many students
want to remain high school students or are
participating in Advanced Placement courses
and the other available programs.
Why
is Milwaukee student participation so low?
Again, speculation is that not many students
are eligible because they are high risk, but
may be accessing college credit some other
way. The Milwaukee Partnership Academy is
looking at and addressing these issues. Link
to Academy. http://www.uwm.edu/Org/MPA/
Some
at-risk high school students do not have access
to WTCS through the Youth Options program
but do have other ways to access college credit.
41%
of the students taking at least one technical
college class through the Youth Apprenticeship
program have instruction that is delivered
through the Youth Options mechanism.
WTCS
completion rate for Youth Options students
is 85% vs. 79% of comparable students, failure
rate 7% vs. 7.5%, and drop rate 6% vs. 10.5%.
Are
students participating in Youth Options staying
at the same institutions? Anecdotally we
can say that they continue, but not necessarily
at the same institution. More research is
needed.
Are
students taking courses at postsecondary institutions
taught by teachers certified to teach high
school students? There is an agreement
between the teachers union and postsecondary
institutions that allows instructors at those
institutions to teach high school students.
Also, students do meet the admission criteria
for college entrance.
What
is the social impact for the students spending
their day at a higher education campus and
not high school? The nice thing about this
program is that students can go back and forth
between high school and college. We believe
that most stay part of the high school community.
This is a problem in rural areas. Students
sometimes drive quite a distance to get to
a higher education campus, and it is easier
for them to take all their credits at the
campus than to try getting back to the high
school. Don't overlook that transportation
is an issue. Youth Options is not equally
accessible to all students. It may be getting
more accessible with e-college.
We
need to look at the courses the students are
taking and profile district participation.
Additional data needs to be collected in the
following areas: course array, purpose of
course selection, and complement to high school
curricula.
Do
the higher education institutions choose in
what courses the students are allowed to enroll?
No, that is up to the school district to allow
or disallow. But there is an appeal process
for the student? Yes. That is why districts
usually just let the students take what they
want. The appeal usually finds for the student.
Actually, the majority of the appeals brought
forward find for the district.
Smaller
school districts, unable to offer the breadth
of courses a larger district can because of
revenue limits, are sending more of their
students to Youth Options. It is taking dollars
away from the districts, which may eliminate
even more course offerings. Small high schools
are reluctant to publicize the program for
fear of losing staff dollars. We will need
more data. Is this occurring now or in the
future? It is more of the fear that it
can happen. Brillian, WI near Appleton has
under 2000 students. Out of its $200,000 budget
it sends $17,000 out to separate colleges.
With declining enrollment and revenue caps,
that hurts. What is the school districts'
payment? This can be figured backwards.
Does the district lose money? What is
the impact on the district? What about funding?
Is this an educational opportunity based on
where you live, an accident of birth?
What
is the racial, ethnic and gender makeup of
students enrolled in Youth Options? Research
needed.
What
is the 11th and 12th grade breakdown? Research
needed.
Does
DPI collect data by district? No. The technical
colleges do.
There
is a three-front storm brewing with revenue
caps and declining enrollments coming from
one direction and quality education from the
other.
As
a Council, what can we do to for public schools?
The
Council should take a position and state that
K-12 and the quality of overall education
is at risk. We need to stop sidestepping.
We need to walk before we run. Important
discussion needs to take place first, but
point taken.
Who
is the clientele? Students or the state? Is
the program to supplement what we cannot give
the student in K-12, is it for career exploration,
is it to provide a more rigorous curriculum,
or do we target students for the economic
development of the state? All of the above.
Then what is our basic goal? Look at Milwaukee's
unemployment.
Now
that we have this information, what do we
do with it?
We
need to look at the positive and negative.
One big negative is the money. How do we fund
this and other programs? What are the issues
that have been identified?
Remember
who we are as a council. It is good that the
issues are brought up for discussion, but
we have an opportunity here to think differently
about education in Wisconsin. We need to not
act so vested in our other role, in our constituency.
We need to look at how seamlessly Youth Options
promotes education.
Does
Youth Options advance seamlessness? Yes.
Does Youth Options provide opportunities?
Yes. Is it good for the students? Yes.
Then we need to figure out how to promote
it.
Strong
support, but what are the barriers?
- Funding
- Program
erosion, is it happening, need data
- Labor
Day start calendar. There is a two-week
gap between the start of higher education
and public school.
Other
comments:
Had
no idea what Youth Options was, it was never
offered as an option.
Large
population of students not served, need to
reach parents, get the information out.
Keep
parents involved and keep parents informed.
Funding
is an issue. K-12 staff find it hard to promote
something that they believe would jeopardize
their programs.
Should
not be only a way to move students into the
labor force, but also a chance to do some
looking and to prepare for lifelong learning.
This
is not the only program for high school students.
Next
steps:
Data
requests:
- Number
of Youth Options participants that go on
to other postsecondary education
- Race
and gender breakdown by school district
- 11th/12th
grade breakdown
- Program
array erosion
- Areas/students
not being served
- Costs
to district
Policy
questions:
- Comparable
program or more rigorous curricula
- Start
of school and congruence of calendar
- Target
to address state economic issues
- Funding
- Certification
to instruct
Again,
issues and questions not address today will
be researched over the next few months and
reported on at the next meeting in October.
The
meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Reminder
of dates for the rest of the year:
Wednesday,
October 2nd, 2-5pm
