Cultural Communities Leadership Project: KLCC Twin Cities

1
Cultural Communities Leadership ProjectKLCC
Twin Cities

• Presentation at the KLCC Evaluators Meeting,
  February 6, 2004
• Houston, TX

2
Cultural Communities Leadership

• Setting the stage
• The experience so far
• Formative findings to date
• The road ahead

3
Building on what has come before

• Community Technology Consortium multiple
  agencies with strong cultural roots working on
  education youth development interests
• Work with other agencies serving communities of
  color

4
Issues to address

• Low graduation rates of children of color
• Rapidly increasing cultural diversity
• Previous school reform efforts lacked strong
  engagement/leadership from communities of color

5
Graduation Rates

• Four-year graduation rate by ethnicity   
• White 63
• Asian American 51
• African American 31
• Hispanic American 31
• Native American 13

Source Minneapolis Public Schools Measuring Up
Report 2002
6
Demographics
Source 1990 and 2000 Census
7
Demographics

• Highlights of 2000 Census
• Minneapolis population grew by 3.6 or 14,235
  persons
• Minorities and racially diverse immigrants
  provided 100 of the Citys gain
• White population declined by 13.8
• Non-whites increased by 68
• African American population increased by 43.5
• American Indian population decreased by 32.1
• Hispanic population grew by 269.3--the largest
  percentage increase for a minority group in
  Minneapolis

8
Demographics

• Minneapolis Public Schools enrollment 2002

Source Minneapolis Public Schools Measuring Up
Report 2002
9
Top Down Decisions

• Social policy is usually designed by government
  bureaucrats and professional experts. If the
  putative beneficiaries are asked their opinion at
  all, it is usually after the fact that is, they
  are invited to participate in programs that
  have already been formulated and organized by the
  above-named experts. Quite apart from the
  undemocratic and elitist character of this
  process, this type of thinking is responsible for
  many of the failures of social policy. -
  Robert Woodson

10
Vision

• Whos involved how they were to be selected
• Five cultural communities African, African
  American, American Indian, Asian, Latino
• Recruitment process broadly open and inclusive

11
Recruitment

• Information
• Nomination
• Application
• Review and Selection

12
Information

• Brochures Web
• Advertisements
• Word of Mouth

13
Brochures Web
14
Advertisements
15
Word of Mouth

• Conferences Meetings
• List Serves
• Phone Contacts
• Networking

16
Nomination

• Informant
• Self-nomination

17
Application

• Questions derived from Buffalo application
• What is the most important challenge to improving
  the quality of the educational systems in the
  Twin Cities?
• How have you been involved with educational
  issues, either in schools or with the school
  district?
• Why do you want to be involved in a process to
  improve education for your community?
• Give 2 or 3 examples of your prior involvement in
  community initiatives.
• What motivates you to do what you do in your
  community?
• What interests you about the Cultural Communities
  Leadership Project and what do you hope to
  contribute to the experience?
• Information collected through internet based form

18
Selection

• Individual qualities
• Community involvement
• Commitment to/passion for community involvement
• Leadership potential emergent leaders
• Interest in education
• Commitment to an 18-month process of meetings
  other work
• Written statement of support from employer

19
Selection

• Community balance
• Minneapolis St. Paul
• Various factions of cultural community
• Tribal, clan, national differences
• Class, economic differences
• Ideological, political factions
• Organization-based vs. non-organization
• Gender
• Age

20
Process Envisioned

• Full-group for 4 months
• build basic leadership skills awareness (e.g.
  MBTI)
• build knowledge of education system issues,
  policies, players
• Break into cultural subgroups for 4 months
• Deepen bonds of trust within subgroup
• Explore more deeply the specific education
  interests and issues of that constituency
• Reach out, build bridges to allies within
  aligned with that constituency
• Re-integration Plan to Gather Support

21
Outcomes targeted

• Build individual and group leadership capacities
• Develop urban education policy recommendations
  action plans, from 5 cultural communities
• Mobilize action around the policy recommendations
  developed
• Forge a common strategy and collaborative
  leadership for educational change, across 5
  communities
• Improve urban education for all students,
  especially those from these 5 communities

22
Evaluation component

• Audiences
• Fellows/participants
• Project coordinators (MIGIZI, coach)
• Kellogg Foundation, national evaluators, other
  sponsors
• Other interested practitioners, policy-makers,
  funders, current potential allies

23
Evaluation component

• Purposes
• To strengthen the Project, through critical
  reflection/analysis re progress, challenges, etc.
• To document the Projects results and lessons, so
  that its significance can be communicated.
• To contribute to emerging national knowledge re
  community leadership and urban education reform.

24
Evaluation component

• Focus
• Projects five goals
• Build leadership capacities of participating
  individuals and groups
• Develop urban education policy recos action
  plans, from 5 cultural communities
• Mobilize action around the policy recommendations
  developed
• Forge a common strategy collaborative ldrship
  for educl change, across 5 communities
• Improve urban education for all students,
  especially those from these 5 communities
• Kelloggs key interest increasing public will,
  and capacity to make a difference, for improved
  education systems.

25
Evaluation component

• Methods
• Observations of Project events (10-15 events,
  May 03 Aug 04)
• Peer reflective evaluation in groups convening
  reflective evaluation circles of participants
  to critique and reflect on progress,
  difficulties, and implications for next steps,
  two or three times (e.g. Jan, May, Sept 04).
• Interviews of a few key education policy-makers,
  after action plans are underway, to gather
  external perceptions re Projects effectiveness,
  strengths weaknesses.
• Cooperation with national evaluators interviews
  and surveys (Sept 2003 and 2004).

26
The Experience so far

• Key chapters to date
• Key adjustments

27
Key chapters to date

• Recruitment Selection of Fellows
• What was done
• Who was selected

28
Key chapters to date

• Recruitment Selection of Fellows
• What was done

29
Key chapters to date

• Recruitment Selection of Fellows
• Who was selected
• 10 Male and 14 Female (9-12)
• 12 Minneapolis and 12 St. Paul (12-9)
• 12 CBO, 6 School, 4 Higher Ed and 2 Other (9 CBO)

30
Key chapters to date

• Initial Large-group phase (April-June 03)
• Introduction
• Myers-Briggs
• Barrier Identification
• National Overview

31
Key chapters to date

• Small Group Phase
• Identity Clarification
• Role Individuation
• Associate coaches
• Cultural Mentor
• Bonding

32
Key chapters to date

• Chicago success factors
• Extended time together
• Topical break-out sessions
• President Richardsons remarks surrounding
  importance of this national effort
• Timing for transition from storming to norming

33
Key chapters to date

• Chicago relationship opportunities
• Fellow - Fellow (small, large and national)
• Fellow - Host Agencies (MIGIZI and others)
• Fellow - Evaluators (local and national)
• Fellow - Coordinating Organization
• Fellow - Funder (Kellogg and local)

34
Key chapters to date

• Current small-group phase
• Refinement of issues
• Community input
• Strategy identification

35
Key chapters to date

• Punctuation with large group meetings
• Youth Panel Luncheon
• National Evaluation visit
• Reflective Evaluation Circle

36
Key chapters to date

• Evaluation
• Observations (May, July, August, September,
  January)
• Reflective Circle (January)

37
Key adjustments

• Early large-group work cut short in favor of more
  intensive cultural group work.

38
Formative findings to date

• Results to date
• Emerging lessons, current questions and dilemmas

39
Formative findings to date

• Results to date
• Individual level gains in individual leadership
  capacity

40
Formative findings to date

• Gains in individual leadership capacity
• Expanded networks

41
Formative findings to date

• Gains in individual leadership capacity
• Knowledge of effective leadership principles

Im an outcomes-oriented person, but I have
learned through this that I must be attentive to
process, too to stay in touch with others in my
group, in my community. Im learning principles,
stories of great community organizing.
42
Formative findings to date

• Gains in individual leadership capacity
• Increased skills and confidence

Im learning from more-senior peers in
sub-group, who are already Executive Directors of
agencies. Im becoming better and more confident
as a public speaker.
43
Formative findings to date

• Gains in individual leadership capacity
• New understanding of public dimension of
  relationships

44
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level
• Gel as a group? Trust, relationships
• Developing a shared focus?
• Broadening the base of people engaged?

45
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Gel as a group? Trust,
  relationships
• Members of all 4 groups report having built much
  stronger bonds, raised trust comfort levels.
• All groups are convening on own now not waiting
  for Coach to call the meetings.
• They speak frankly in front of each other
  regarding their frustrations, doubts, criticisms
  arent keeping their views hidden.
• Hmong group members report frequent telephone
  e-mail communication with each other about this
  project and other topics as well.

46
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Developing a shared focus?
• Afrikan Improving students literacy. Via
  volunteer readers/tutors strengthening Afrikan
  cultural orientation of curriculum and school
  staff making link between elevated rates of
  suspension literacy lags and strengthening
  parent, community, political clout. Recognizing
  this is long-haul work, in Dec 03 they committed
  to work at least until Dec 04, or perhaps
  forever! Hennepin/Ramsey Counties focus.

47
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Developing a shared focus?
• Hmong Increase parent engagement in schools get
  teachers more involved in our community. Mpls
  focus especially, since Hmong are less visible
  powerful there than in St. Paul.

48
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Developing a shared focus?
• Indian Link support Indian educators to be
  change agents from within systems (within metro
  area now a state assn. of Indian educators, but
  not a metro chapter). Improve links, info
  communication among Indian education activists
  via website/listserv (under construction),
  outreach to existing parent education groups so
  they can act in concert and pool their power.
  Metro focus.

49
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Developing a shared focus?
• Latino/a Goal increase graduation rates.
  Analysis get parents more involved form
  alliances between parents, teachers, principals.
  Start w/focus on 2 schools 1 in Mpls, 1 in St.
  Paul, where administrators share goal of
  increasing Latino parent involvement. Plan
  outreach to parents at those schools.

50
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Developing a shared focus?
  Cross-cutting themes
• We want our culture history to be taught in the
  schools!
• We want school staffs to include more people from
  our communities!
• We want school staffs to be more knowledgeable
  about engaged with our communities.
• We want to increase parent engagement in
  education (at both children/ classroom level and
  school/district/policy level)
• We need to enlist more people to work with us, to
  have the power/capacity to change the system.

51
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Broadening the base of
  people engaged?
• Afrikan Goal is to expand to core of 30 people
  6 working groups each including a Fellow, HS
  student, parent, Black educator, and a community
  person. Fellows will lead/train their groups in
  Education System Community Organization.
• Hmong Want to enlarge to core of 16 4
  Fellows, 4 teachers, 4 parents, 4 students. Held
  1 meeting with 15 parents, educators youth so
  far.

52
Formative findings to date

• Cultural group level Broadening the base of
  people engaged?
• Indian Outreach to Indian educators especially.
  Held a meeting which drew over 25 educators.
• Latino/a Outreach to parents and sympathetic
  administrators. Have met with principals at 2
  schools, 1 in Mpls (HS) and 1 in St. P (grade
  school). Are planning parent outreach there.

53
Formative findings to date

• Full group level
• Trust, relationships are developing
• Open in principle to cross-group collaboration,
  but not ready to work together
• Sub-group visions havent developed enough, dont
  yet feel need to reach across groups
• Still havent resolved issues of how to decide
  together process norms for full-group

54
Formative findings to date

• Impact on education systems
• Continuing Education changes through 12-Point
  Plan committee
• Meetings with School Board regarding
  Superintendent selection
• Relationship building with school principals
• Creation of Twin Cities Indian Educator group

55
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Building trust relationships takes time, and
  cant be jumped over. A project starting without
  a history of working relationships among
  participants requires more start-up time for
  this.
• Corollary building trust, relationships, shared
  focus is easier in smaller more-homogeneous
  group than in larger more-diverse group.

56
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Fellows report lack of time, multiple prior
  commitments how to fit this in?
• Possible lessons
• Charge tuition?
• Provide stipend?

57
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Was high-profile Recruitment Outreach process
  worth the resources involved?
• Pro Public, open. Raised awareness of CCLP,
  was transparently fair.
• Con Generated few applications. Might a more
  relationship-intensive approach generate more
  applications? (Or maybe 41 is plenty, for 25
  slots.) Might redirecting resources for more
  coaching development for Fellows groups once
  formed be higher-impact?

58
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Some Fellows wish for more top-down direction
  others praise the open space w/responsive-supporti
  ve coachingPossible lessons

Some Fellows dont yet appreciate how framing is
a crucial and difficult leadership function. The
point is for them to give leadership, not take
direction! Maybe fine-tune our coaching process,
to strike best balance between open space and
direction, freedom structure, responsive vs.
directive
59
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Less experienced Fellows more appreciative of
  peer learning opportunitiesPossible lessons
• Retain healthy mix of newer/emerging and
  older/established leaders for dynamic peer
  mentoring
• Tilt mix to include more new/emerging leaders,
  wholl seize on this opportunity more actively

60
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Key polarities to be managed in this Leadership
  work
• Cross-culture / within-cultural group (includes
  large-group / small group)
• Structured process / open, self-defined process
• Individual / community-based leadership
• Using experience real work / classroom
  exercise methods for leadership development

61
Formative findings to date

• Emerging lessons, current questions dilemmas
• Establishing institutional auspices, and
  governance norms, is difficult!
• Should MIGIZI be director or convenor?
• How, when to build ownership by others
  individuals, organizations
• Existing organizations often have baggage,
  limitations as sponsors/incubators

62
The road ahead

• Through 2004
• Likely to continue mainly in cultural groups
• Groups recognize value in cross-group alliances,
  but arent ready for that yet

63
The road ahead

• Through 2004
• Work to focus on
• Base-broadening drawing more people in
• Issue research, setting change goals, developing
  change strategies
• Some work pursuing change goals - as
  opportunities arise

64
The road ahead

• Through 2004
• Evaluation
• More observations
• 1-2 more reflective circles
• Key informant interviews (summer 04)

65
The road ahead

• Beyond 2004
• MIGIZI is starting to identify institutional
  sponsors to provide sustaining incubation
  support post-Kellogg

66
Cultural Communities Leadership ProjectKLCC
Twin Cities

• Presentation at the KLCC Evaluators Meeting,
  February 6, 2004
• Houston, TX