Profile of Learning has positives, negatives

By Barbara Brown
Ask nearly any regular Minnesotan on the street and they probably wouldnít be able to explain the stateís education standard called Profile of Learning.
The standards, dubbed ìProfileî by most educators and legislators, has caused a stir nearly every year at the Capitol since its development in the early ë90s.
This year is no different, except that talk in St. Paul has heated up as the Profileís fluctuating and controversial life may be cut short if the state Senate votes with the House to abolish the Profile.
The House voted Feb. 17 in a 118-10 blowout to abolish the ìshow what you knowî accountability system.
Minnesota high school graduation standards used to be solely based on a course credits system.
After much criticism, the Legislature, the former state Board of Education and the Department of Children, Families and Learning developed the Profile so school districts and teachers would have to held accountable for actually teaching what the curriculum said they teach.
The system of standards and testing includes 11 learning areas which expand upon the basic principles of reading, writing and arithmetic and build the required level of understanding of subjects and how they relate to the world.
Most of the profile standards, including making informed decisions, understanding the interactions among people and developing quality speaking and writing skills are more social success based than the old school style of book and classroom learning.
With the profile, teachers were supposed to be able to create flexible learning methods and students were supposed to be able to get credit for efforts they made outside the classroom.
However, the Profile has been riddled with controversy, and mountains of paperwork, which have required it to be bogged down to the point where the state cannot even keep up with its own requirements.
In North Branch and Rush City, both school districts are in compliance with all Profile requirements from the state, but both district superintendents agreed that the Profileís good points are outweighed by the time-consuming and confusing nature of the beast.
North Branch Assistant Superintendent Rodney Reisnouer said one major problem is the confusion brought on by the Profileís reporting requirements.
ìThe reporting is not so much to the state as it is to the parents,î Reisnouer said.
Regular report cards with grades may say a student gets a high mark on the A, B, C, D, F scale, but the Profile report card may show that a student only received a 1 or 2 on the Profile scale in a comparable standard, he said.
The Profile is scaled 0-4 and many parents do not understand why if their child does well in the classroom on a subject area, which they understand, that same student can do poorly in one of the state standard areas.
ìThe system right now is very burdensome in reporting and recording,î Reisnouer said.
He said many North Branch teachers spend hours after school plugging in scores for Profile standards grading as well as planning for the next day, grading papers, advising clubs and other things teachers do.
ìWe have one group of teachers that stays at school every Thursday night until 9 p.m. with Profile requirements,î Reisnouer said.
North Branch Superintendent Dr. Robert Stepaniak said the complexity of the system worked against whatever good it offers.
He said he sees validity in most of what the Profile offers ñ a chance for students to have a more flexible, socially-conscious learning experience.
ìThe complexity maybe gave rise to a lot of the complaining around the state,î Stepaniak said. ìIt seems like no one really understands it.î
Reisnouer said that despite the positive aspects of the Profile ñ like the emphasis on what teachers should be focused on in the classroom ñ are overshadowed by the mounds of paperwork associated with it.
ìIt hasnít been wrong,î Reisnouer said. ìKids havenít suffered. It has just created a lot of work that maybe we didnít have to do in order to accomplish the goal.î
Stepaniak said one of the Profileís goals is to hold the district accountable for what it is supposed to be teaching.
He said the administrations of nearly every district in the state would not argue with that part of the requirements.
ìThis district will never shy away from accountability to the parents and the tax payers about what we should be doing,î Stepaniak said.
He said, however, that the Profileís sometimes rigid requirements and the reporting process have restrained a lot of creativity in teachers.
ìMost teachers want to be left alone to teach in the manner they like,î Stepaniak said. ìIf you tell them what they are required to teach, theyíll get it done.î
Rush City Superintendent Tim Eklund said the Profileís requirements have turned it into a hungry monster.
ìIs it a bad thing to demonstrate what you are teaching and what you know? No.
ìBut when that becomes so all-consuming and that must be the only requirement, you begin to lose sight of the target, the goal.î
Eklund said an example is that the school district could not publish the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment test schools for the district from last year in the traditional method ñ the school calendar ñ because the state became so bogged down it could not return the scores to the district in time.
Reisnouer agreed.
ìRight now, Iíd much rather have a teacher after school working on how to make lessons better than sitting in front of a computer dropping graduation and preparatory standards scores into a computer,î he said.
ìIt seems everybody is doing their best to make the education system into something measurable, black and white, and itís not.î
Stepaniak said he can foresee some changes, but he did not believe the Profile would be completely dropped.
ìMy hope here,î Stepaniak said, ìis that the Legislature can help develop a more streamlined system of reporting. The system needs to be seriously modified to respect what our teachers are doing.î
Rush City Superintendent Tim Eklund said the Profile emerged because of pressure that the ìold public school system of the three Rs was broken.î
He said heís not sure the excuses given for changing the old system ñ one of emphasis on classroom time ñ were completely correct.
ìAll of us (adults) are the product of a broken system,î Eklund said, ìbut we put men on the moon, weíre the most powerful country in the world. I think America has done well for itself.î
With all its flaws, Eklund said, there are some things that could be learned from for Profile experiment.
He said the fact that the Profile forced school districts to refocus their curricula and make sure students are educated rather than entertained in schools has lead Rush City to raise some standardized testing scores by 100 percent in the past four years.
Eklund said, however that the Profile may just have been a legalized trend in education ñ one of many ìexperimentsî in improving classroom performance that have been abandoned over the years.
ìThe staff is flexible, but itís frustrating to go through all these changes all the time,î he said.
ìSometimes all these changes are like trying to change a tire on a moving car.
ìThe bottom line is: students will come to us every September and student will leave here every May, but it doesnít change the focused approach our districts will take to teaching the basic fundamentals of creating successful students.î

Top of Page

©ECM Post Review

6448 Main Street
North Branch, MN 55056
Telephone: 651-674-7025
Fax: 651-674-7026
E-mail: editor.postreview@ecm-inc.com