The taskforce was formed to review equity issues between the district's two high schools and make recommendations. It has collected data on enrollment projections, demographics, facilities, athletics participation, and conducted surveys. The data shows the schools differ significantly in diversity, with Chanhassen being less diverse, and free/reduced lunch rates. Most taskforce members feel these differences warrant action. Next steps include considering incentives to balance enrollment, gathering public input, and making recommendations to the school board.

1. HIGH SCHOOL
ENGAGEMENT
TASKFORCE UPDATE
March 21, 2014

2. HISTORY OF THE TASKFORCE
 Upon approval of the bond referendum to build a
second high school, the Board made a commitment
to review after a period of time.
 Engagement process last year with Dr. Jim
Rickabaugh
 This group is a continuum of that engagement and
promise by our Board and school district.

3. CHARGE STATEMENT
 To study and then make recommendations to the
School Board in spring 2013 regarding the following
issues:
 Consider allowing the high schools to develop
individual personalities within clear, consistent
parameters.
 Consider incentives or structural changes to
balance enrollment and student diversity in the
high schools over time.
 Consider issues of site capacity and equity of
facilities as outlined in the district facility report.

4. RESPONSIBILITIES
 Report to the school board on an on-going basis
 Review all pertinent data
 Seek public, staff, and student input prior to making
a recommendation to the school board
 Provide communication updates for district
dispersal
 Evaluate options and estimated expenditures
 Prepare a final recommendation to the school
board

5. GUIDELINES
 Optimize building space
 Ensure program equity
 Sustainable student attendance boundaries for
the next five to ten years unless there is a
significant enrollment loss or gain versus current
projections
 Boundary changes would be considered in light
of pre-school, elementary and middle school
capacity discussions and potential
recommendations
 Consider safety, transportation, and costs when
developing recommendations for consideration

6. MEMBERSHIP
 Carole Baab – School board
 Tim Klein – School Board
 Tim Dorway – Chanhassen Principal (co-chair)
 David Brecht – Chaska Principal (co-chair)
 Josh Omang – Chanhassen Teacher
 Jaime Schommer – Chanhassen Teacher
 Delphine Luzney – Chaska Teacher
 Jesse Longley – Chaska Teacher
 Chad Lea – Chanhassen Parent
 Rhonda Fletcher – Chanhassen parent
 Jill Anderson – MSE parent going to Chaska
 Michelle Hanson – MSW parent going to Chan
 Kelly Loosbrock – Chaska Parent
 Lynn Mattson-Little – Chaska Parent
 Daria Briol – Chanhassen Student
 Ryan Souza – Chanhassen Student
 Hannah Potter – Chaska Student
 Adam Hoxie – Chaska Student

7. DATA WE HAVE
COLLECTED AND
CONSIDERED TO DATE

8. THE RICKABAUGH REPORT
 50 students at each school
 46 Chaska community members, 28 Chanhassen community
members
 Chan students (page 4) ―Absence of the diversity present at
CHS resulting in educational disadvantage for students (at
Chan).‖
 Chaska parents (page 11) ―Create better demographic balance
between the high schools, possibly through boundary
changes.‖
 Chan parents (page 12) ―Consider strategies to better balance
diversity present in both student bodies.‖
 Chan staff (page 13) ―Absence of diversity is an important
missing element.‖
 Question from Community Engagement meetings: ―Are the
differences between the high schools of the magnitude that the
School Board should consider options to address the
differences?‖
 Chanhassen: Yes 19% No 81%
 Chaska: Yes 80% No 20%

9. ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS AND OPEN
ENROLLMENT DATA
2012 demographic study projection reported
that in 2022:
Chan HS enrollment = 1735
 capacity of 1731
 100.2% of capacity (over capacity)
Chaska HS enrollment = 1325
 capacity of 1779
 74.5% of capacity
Open enrollment out of the district--1200 total
students across the district including private,
parochial and public

10. FACILITIES REPORT AND TECH ISSUES
 Chaska High School needs a Black Box and a
Scene Shop for facilities to be equal
 Synthetic turf facilities should be added into the
district exterior facilities as often as possible
 Technology needs have not yet been discussed for
either school by the group.

11. BOUNDARY HISTORY
Integration at elementary model has been a
priority
Communication and input-gathering is critical
to the process

12. SCHOOL DEMOGRAPHICS – ENROLLMENT,
DIVERSITY, FREE AND REDUCED
 Current enrollment - 3/14/13 data
 Chan HS 1557 (25.8% more than Chaska)-
 Chaska HS 1238
 Ethnic diversity - 3/14/13 data
 Chan HS 7.9%
 Chaska HS 20.4%
 Free and Reduced Priced Lunch - 10/1/12 MDE
data
 Chan HS 7.5%
 Chaska HS 21.4%

13. ATHLETIC AND ACTIVITIES PARTICIPATION
 Total participation is different because enrollment is
different.
 Proportionally, our schools are very close in the
percentage of participants in athletics and activities.
 In 2012-2013 unduplicated numbers were as follows:
 Chaska MDE enrollment of 1210 with 609 students
participating (increase of 61 student participants from 2011)—
50.3%
 Chanhassen MDE enrollment of 1515 with 845 students
participating (increase of 75 student participants from 2011)—
55.8%

14. MSHSL FORMULA FOR CONSIDERING FRP
PARTICIPATION
Formula exists for recognizing the unique
socioeconomic needs of schools in the MSHSL
Changes are made to total enrollment to
account for FRP population and results in
school size designation (ex: AAA, AA, A, etc.)
Examples of impact from the formula
 Chaska went from 1210 to 1106 for class
assignment
Chanhassen went from 1515 to 1470 for
class assignment

15. SCHOOL DISTRICT ECONOMIC
CHARACTERISTICS
 Median household income data indicates a significant income
discrepancy, which influences the non-district funded financial
support for athletics and activities

16. BASED ON ALL OF THIS DATA, IS
THERE A SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH
CONCERN THAT WE NEED TO DO
SOMETHING?
5 – yes, and I will be a leader in helping do something different – 2
responded this way
4 – yes, and I will be and advocate of doing something different – 8
responded this way
3 – yes, and I am comfortable agreeing that we need to do something
but I may not be an advocate or a leader in the effort – 3 responded
this way
2 – yes, but I still have questions – 0 responded this way
1 – not sure, I have a lot of questions but will not block an effort
moving forward – 0 responded this way
0 – No, there is not an issue and I would block doing something
different – 0 responded this way

17. NEXT STEPS
 Incentives and structural changes
 Presentations/surveys to/for our constituencies
for feedback
 Making recommendations to the Board