The Winona Area Public School District on first reading added language to Policy 6-13 to require personal finance as a graduation offering, and opened a broader discussion about whether to change the total-credit requirement for high school graduation.

Director Lueck presented the proposed policy change, saying the district needs “personal finance in our offerings” and that the course may be taught in multiple departments and must be taken in grades 10, 11 or 12. Superintendent Brzezinski confirmed the course is currently being taught in the business department for the 2025–26 school year but said the policy language allows flexibility in which department offers it.

Board members engaged in extended discussion about whether to keep the statutory floor of 21.5 credits or move the senior high requirement higher (options presented included 23–25 or a 24-credit senior-high standard with 21.5 credits at the Alternative Learning Center). Directors repeatedly requested targeted data analysis before advancing a second reading: cohort-level credit attainment, which specific courses most commonly prevent on-time graduation, failure rates by course and section, and comparisons with demographically similar districts rather than only the Big 9 grouping.

Superintendent Brzezinski and staff agreed to collect and return data, including the distribution of current seniors’ credits and which content-area requirements (English, math, science, social studies) are acting as barriers to on-time graduation. The board emphasized that Minnesota statute establishes minimum content-area requirements and that 21.5 credits functions as a legal floor.

Board direction: the policy language adding personal finance will proceed as a first reading; staff were asked to bring more granular student-credit and failure-rate data to the board operations committee and to the full board before any second reading or formal adoption.

Local context: board members noted differences between Winona Senior High School and the Alternative Learning Center (ALC), including schedules (seven-period vs. six-period) and student pathways, and cautioned that any change should account for structural differences so it would not disproportionately penalize ALC students.

Quotations in this article are drawn from the public meeting transcript.