Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the K 12 Education Carnegie Mou topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board declines to join Carnegie Future of High School Network; members split over data and 'guinea pig' concerns
Summary
The Mesa Public Schools Governing Board voted 3-2 against a memorandum of understanding with the Carnegie Foundation's Future of High School Network. Supporters said the program would provide professional learning and data tools; opponents said it risked treating students as experimental subjects and questioned data-sharing safeguards.
The Mesa Public Schools Governing Board voted 2-3 against approving a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to join the Carnegie Foundation's Future of High School Network.
Supporters described the MOU as offering $100,000 in professional learning, access to national cohorts and tools to improve data systems that track student learning and outcomes. Board members and district staff said participation could provide technical support to measure whether recent changes to high-school scheduling and programs are achieving desired outcomes.
Opponents raised repeated objections about data sharing, the proposed research methods and whether students would effectively be used as "guinea pigs" in an experiment. Board Member Walden said she could not support using students as data subjects without clearer evidence the district was ready and warned against inviting large-scale experimentation before district-level metrics and supports were in place.
Public commenters also addressed the item. Ed Steele called the proposal "another unproven, untested education experiment" and urged the board to vote no. Board members asked district staff detailed questions about how participating schools would be selected, how data would be anonymized and whether participating teachers and schools would be compensated for extra work.
District staff said the MOU would include standard data-sharing agreements and that the district's research and evaluation team would anonymize student-level identifiers prior to sharing with the Carnegie Foundation and partners. Dr. Strom (Teaching & Learning) and other staff explained the network's focus was to help design metrics and tools and to build a national cohort to compare different approaches.
After more than one hour of discussion at the board table, the board voted 2 in favor and 3 opposed; the motion failed. Members opposed cited concerns including the word "transformative" in the Carnegie materials, the risk of undertaking sweeping changes while district proficiency remains low, and the possibility that student data would be shared even if anonymized.
Ending
Board minutes show the district will continue to pursue professional development and supports for teachers; the failed MOU will not move forward. District staff and some board members indicated they will continue to pursue other partnerships and will seek to strengthen internal data systems without joining the Carnegie-led network at this time.
