DOCSLIB.ORG

Teacher Contract, Memoranda & Policies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Teacher Contract, Memoranda & Policies MINNEAPOLIS FEDERATION OF TEACHERS LOCAL 59, AFL-CIO, AFT, NEA AND MINNEAPOLIS BOARD OF EDUCATION TEACHER CONTRACT, MEMORANDA & POLICIES JULY 1, 2009 TO JUNE 30, 2011 MINNEAPOLIS FEDERATION OF TEACHERS LOCAL 59, AFL-CIO, AFT, NEA AND MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS Special School District No. 1 Minneapolis, Minnesota An Equal Opportunity School District MINNEAPOLIS BOARD OF EDUCATION Jill Davis, Chair Alberto Monserrate, Vice Chair Jenny Arneson, Clerk Carla Bates, Director/Treasurer Rebecca Gagnon, Director Lydia Lee, Director Richard Mammen, Director Hussein Samatar, Director NEGOTIATING COMMITTEES Union Committee: District Committee: Lynn Nordgren, Chief Negotiator, MFT Pat Pratt-Cook, Chief Negotiator, MPS Sue Backus, Seward Neil Bowerman, Exec. Dir. HR, MPS Jim Barnhill, South HS Steve Liss, Chief of Operations, MPS Brionna Harder, Henry HS Dan Loewenson, Assistant to the Supt. Bonita Jones, MFT Staff Ava G. Nielsen, Dir. of Total Comp., MPS Carla Korb, Northeast Mitch Trockman, Operations Specialist, MPS Janet Kujat, North Star Mike Leiter, MFT Staff Corinth Matera, South HS Frank Suppa, Dowling TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I. AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT .................... 5 ARTICLE I. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT, PUBLICATION, DURATION, BOARD RIGHTS ............ 8 ARTICLE II. TEACHER ASSIGNMENTS AND SCHEDULES ................................................................... 10 ARTICLE III. TEACHER RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................... 15 ARTICLE IV. SHARED LEADERSHIP FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ................................................ 21 ADDENDUM 1: SCHOOL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT CONTINUUM ..................................................... 49 ARTICLE V. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................... 55 ADDENDUM 1: FINDING TIME FOR THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS: ................................. 117 ARTICLE VI. STUDENT BEHAVIOR/DISCIPLINE............................................................................... 118 ARTICLE VII. BASIC SALARIES, RATES OF PAY, OTHER ASSIGNMENT, WORK, AND SCHEDULES ............ 123 ARTICLE VIII. RESERVE TEACHERS ................................................................................................. 132 ARTICLE IX. GROUP BENEFITS ..................................................................................................... 135 ARTICLE X. PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY BENEFITS ..................................................................... 147 ARTICLE XI. LEAVES OF ABSENCE ................................................................................................ 148 ARTICLE XII. WORKING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................ 163 ARTICLE XIII. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ........................................................................................... 172 ARTICLE XIV. JOB SHARE PROCEDURES.......................................................................................... 175 ARTICLE XV. TRANSFER, REASSIGNMENT AND RECALL .................................................................... 178 ADDENDUM 1: ASSIGNMENT SCHEDULING PARAMETERS ................................................................... 190 ADDENDUM 2: GUIDELINES FOR TRANSFER AND REASSIGNMENT ....................................................... 191 ARTICLE XVI. TECHNOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 194 ARTICLE XVII. SENIORITY .............................................................................................................. 197 SCHEDULE ―A‖ TEACHER SALARY EFF. JULY 1, 2009– JUNE 30 2011 .................................................... 198 SCHEDULE ―C‖ CO-CURRICULAR PAY SCHEDULES .............................................................................. 201 SCHEDULE ―C1‖ SENIOR HIGH ATHLETICS ......................................................................................... 202 SCHEDULE ―C2‖ MIDDLE SCHOOL ATHLETICS .................................................................................... 202 SCHEDULE ―C3‖ EVENTS SUPPORTING PERSONNEL ............................................................................. 203 SCHEDULE ―D‖ STUDENT ACTIVITIES AND PROGRAMS, COACHING AND COORDINATING........................ 204 SCHEDULE ―D1‖ ACADEMIC ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 204 SCHEDULE ―D2‖ CULTURE/SERVICE LEARNING/STUDENT LEADERSHIP/ACTIVITIES ................................ 204 SCHEDULE ―D3‖ INTRAMURAL/RECREATIONAL/SPORTS ACTIVITIES ...................................................... 204 SCHEDULE ―D4‖ HOMEWORK HOTLINE:.............................................................................................. 204 SCHEDULE ―E‖ RESERVE TEACHERS ................................................................................................. 205 SCHEDULE ―F‖ RESIDENT, DR. ED., AND MENTORS, LOCKER MGRS, SCH. PATROL ................................. 206 SCHEDULE ―G‖ STAFF DEVELOPMENT, OTHER HOURLY RATES, STIPENDS ............................................. 206 SECTION II. MEMORANDA OF AGREEMENT (MOAS) .................................................................. 210 RETIREMENT SEVERANCE PAYMENT – SPRING 2010 .................................................................................... 210 I&S FOR SPRING 2010 ............................................................................................................................. 210 SECTION III. APPLICABLE MINNESOTA STATUTES .................................................................... 213 122A.41 TEACHER TENURE ACT; CITIES OF THE FIRST CLASS; DEFINITIONS. .............................. 213 122A.44 CONTRACTING WITH TEACHERS; SUBSTITUTE TEACHERS............................................. 216 128D.10 CONTINUITY ON TENURE, PENSIONS, AND RETIREMENT ............................................... 219 SECTION IV. SCHOOL BOARD POLICIES .................................................................................... 219 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS ................................................................................................ 220 INDEX ............................................................................................................................ 223 3 4 SECTION I. AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT PREAMBLE Together We Learn The Goal The parties to this Agreement share a fundamental and abiding commitment to the education of the students in the Minneapolis Public Schools. We recognize and greatly appreciate the extraordinary commitment of teachers, administrators and other employees in the system. We work to create a system in which the staff can learn, grow, thrive and be healthy. We believe that the Minneapolis Public School system as a whole must do more to meet the needs and expectations of all students and of the community. In particular, this community of educators finds the gaps in learning between cohorts of students identified in No Child Left Behind as unacceptable. Therefore, we are rededicating our mission to raise the level of achievement of all students. This agreement is dedicated to doing better. Change requires intensive, carefully planned, and skillfully executed implementation. Strong, consistent leadership, system-wide communication and widespread training are needed to continue to transform the culture of the District so that all students learn effectively. To achieve real educational improvement, the parties and the community will have to work collaboratively to achieve an atmosphere of trust, innovation, and mission-driven purpose. In the spirit of a true learning community, The Minneapolis Public Schools ―exist to ensure that all students learn‖. We support their growth into knowledgeable, skilled and confident citizens capable of succeeding in their work, personal and family life. We invite the rest of the community to join them in this effort. Working together, success is assured. The Challenge Minneapolis children come to school from homes that are diverse in culture, language, and economic status. It is our chosen task to embrace all of these children and their families and to join with them in a community of learners. Everyone in the Minneapolis Schools works to foster the success of all students in all classrooms. Our purpose will be to make the changes necessary to make success a reality. However great the challenges may be in educating all Minneapolis students to their full potential as individuals, we are determined to tackle them. This agreement is designed to facilitate whatever change may be needed. We recognize that the work of teachers and students in classrooms is the only business of schools and must be the focus of our support and intention. Teachers acknowledge their need to learn as many are overwhelmed by the monumental task of providing support to such a diverse student body. Teachers may be unprepared or unsure how to most effectively communicate with, support and encourage students and parents whose linguistic, ethnic or economic background differs from their own. Teachers want and need continual professional development but also need the system to recognize and support their extraordinary efforts to educate all children. Some Basic Education Principles guide our work: The Strategic Direction for the Minneapolis
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A People's History of Computing in the United States by Joy Lisi Rankin (Review)
    A People's History of Computing in the United States by Joy Lisi Rankin (review) Kevin T. Baker Journal of Arizona History, Volume 60, Number 1, Spring 2019, pp. 126-128 (Review) Published by Arizona Historical Society For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/737859 Access provided at 9 Jan 2020 19:32 GMT from New York University the journal of arizona history A People’s History of Computing in the United States. By Joy Lisi Rankin. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2018. Pp. 336. $29.95 hardcover) When the World Wide Web exploded on the public scene in the mid- 1990s, journalists, historians, and technologists scrambled to explain the origins of the Internet, the machines that it ran on, and the people who built it. The narrative that emerged, and persists, focused on the exploits of young men working in the San Francisco and Boston areas in the 1950s through the 1980s. In popular histories that draw on this framework, the computers of the 1960s and early 1970s were room-sized, imposing IBM mainframes to which users had little or no personal con- nection. Then, around the middle of the 1970s, small groups of male hobbyists, tech geniuses, and innovators in northern California created the personal computer, “liberating” users from system administrators and the mainframe computers to which they controlled access. The heroes of this story are people like Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, people said to have popularized computers and brought them to the masses. Joy Lisi Rankin’s A People’s History of Computing in the United States joins a growing literature seeking to look at the history of computing and software outside the orbit of Silicon Valley and Cambridge, Mas- sachusetts.
    [Show full text]
  • MERITSS M. M. Skow
    MERITSS 1971 - 1975 by M. M. Skow • ucc 75003 October, 1975 University Computer Center University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Hinnesota 55455 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Our thanks to: Professor Earl Fuller Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Minnesota ************************************* Alice Wilcox Director, MINITEX Project University of Minnesota ************************************* Professor Thomas Hummel Education Career Development Office University of Minnesota for information supplied for the preparation of this report. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION • • . • • . 1 II. JUNE 1971 to SEPTEMBER 1971 A. Management Agent • . • • • • 2 B. Time Lines • • • • • • • • 2 C. Initial Configuration ••• • • 2 III. SEPTEMBER 1971 to JUNE 1972 • A. Statistics • • • • • • . • • 3 B. Configuration/Users •• . 3 IV. JULY 1972 to JUNE 1973 A. Growth . • • • 7 B. Statistics ••••••••••••••••. 7 C. Users......... ......... 8 v. JULY 1973 to JUNE 1974 A. Equipment. • • • • • .10 B. Users ••.••••• .10 C. Statistics ••••• . .10 VI. JULY 1974 to JUNE 1975 A. MECC • • • • • • .13 B. Equipment ••.• •. 13 C. Communications •..•• .14 D. Usage •••.•• .14 E. Statistics ••• . .15 VII. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PARTICIPATION A. Instructional Labs • • • • • • • . .18 B. Computer Assisted Instruction. • . .19 c. Agricultural Extension Service . .19 D. Simulation • . • • • . 21 E. Graphics . • . • . • • . 21 F. MINITEX. • • . .21 VIII. SERVICES A. System Availability ••. .25 B. Consulting •.• . • • 25 C. Newsletter •.•• . 25 D. MERITSS Handbook . 25 E. Users Association ••. 26 F. Operating System/Systems Staff • . .• 26 IX. SOFTWARE A. Programming Languages ..••.. 28 B. Applications Programs and Subprograms. • • 30 Appendices A Usage Summaries 1973-1975 B Comparison of low vs. high secondary school usage C Monthly Usage Statistics 1972-1975 D Terminal Hours by System E Stability 1974-1975 F MERITSS Library Entries G MERITSS Budget 1973-1974 H Summary Balance Sheets 1972-1975 I.
    [Show full text]
  • WE SALUTE WINNERS of the MINNESOTA GOVERNOR's SAFETY AWARDS for 2019. in Occupational Safety 2019
    WE SALUTE WINNERS OF THE MINNESOTA GOVERNOR’S SAFETY AWARDS FOR 2019. in Occupational Safety 2019 Abbott, Rogers Ellingson Companies Minnesota Specialty Health System, Abhe & Svoboda, Inc. Eye Kraft Optical, Inc. Wadena ACIRA, LLC Flint Hills Resources Pine Bend – NatureWorks LLC ADM Mankato – Refinery Pipelines & Terminals Northrup Grumman, Plymouth Air Liquide Electronics U.S. LP GCC, Lakeville Rachel Contracting Advance Equipment Systems Great Lakes Region U.S. Fish and Radiometer Minneapolis Anchor Block/Oldcastle Wildlife Service, Regional Office S-O-S, Inc. Antea Group Honeywell Aerospace, Coon Rapids Southern Minnesota Municipal Power APi Group, Inc. IBM Corporation Agency Aveda Corporation, Midwest Industrial Hygiene Services Stearns County, Administration Distribution Center Corporation Center BAE Systems Interstate Power Systems, Inc. Stearns County, Service Center Barr Engineering Co. John Kraemer and Sons, Inc. Syngenta Seeds LLC, Dassel Barr Engineering Co., Duluth Marcus Construction Company, Inc. Syngenta Seeds LLC, Stanton Barr Engineering Co., Hibbing Medtronic, Operational Headquarters TEL Manufacturing and Engineering of America Bay West, LLC Medtronic, Rice Creek Campus Todd-Wadena Electric Cooperative BH Electronics, Inc. Medtronic, Sullivan Lake Facility Valero Renewables, Welcome Bluestem Brands Medtronic, Inc., Mounds View Campus Verso Duluth Mill BTD Lakeville Merjent, Inc. Viking Gas Transmission Community Behavioral Health Hospital, Fergus Falls Milk Specialties Global Westinghouse Fuel Handling Equipment and Manufacturing, Continental Cement Company Minnesota Department of Corrections, Central Office Shoreview Egan Company, Industrial Controls DRIVE SAFE | WORK SAFE | LIVE SAFE 7 Achievement in Occupational Safety 2019 A.W. Kuettel & Sons Endeavor Air, Inc. Minnesota Specialty Health System, Abbott, Minnetonka B4 Fairview Range Medical Center Brainerd Abbott, Minnetonka B7 Frattalone Companies, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Dale Lafrenz
    An Interview with DALE LAFRENZ OH 315 Conducted by Judy E. O'Neill on 13 April 1995 Minneapolis MN Charles Babbage Institute Center for the History of Information Processing University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Copyright, Charles Babbage Institute 1 Dale LaFrenz Interview 13 April 1995 Abstract After briefly discussing his educational background, he relates his initial exposure with computing in the classroom while teaching at the University of Minnesota high school. He discusses their use of early BASIC through telecommunications to Dartmouth and the spread of computing use to local schools. LaFrenz recounts the formation of TIES, Total Information for Educational Systems, and his move to Honeywell to assist them in developing instructional time-sharing. The bulk of the interview concerns his role in the creation of Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium (MECC), MECC's early provision of instructional and administrative computing to Minnesota school districts, and the evolution into an educational software developer and supplier. 2 3 DALE LAFRENZ INTERVIEW DATE: April 13, 1995 INTERVIEWER: Judy E. O'Neill LOCATION: Minneapolis, MN O'NEILL: I like to start off these interviews by just getting sort of a general background of the person being interviewed. If you can tell me a little bit about your undergraduate degree, where you are from, that sort of thing. We know that you went to the University of Minnesota for your Ph.D., but prior to that? LAFRENZ: Well, I'm basically a Minnesotan. I have lived in Minnesota most of my life. I grew up in a small town in southeastern Minnesota -- St. Charles -- went to the University of Minnesota for a little while, then went into the military, ended up at Mankato State and got a bachelor's degree there in mathematics education.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Utility and Feasibility of Proposed Use of Plato Computer Equipment in Jamaica
    /4/ - 2 ASSESSMENT OF UTILITY AND FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED USE OF PLATO COMPUTER EQUIPMENT IN JAMAICA Final Report - February 3, 1983 Contract Number PDC-1406-I-07-1062-00 Project Team: Dr. Lascelles Anderson Ms. Elizabeth Defay Dr. Louis Woo Contributions by: Dr. John Bielec Dr. Robert Taggart THE PRAGMA CORPORATION 115 WEST BROAD STREET FALLS CHURCH. VIRGINIA 20 i 4703)2371303 TELEX 8"147 PRAGMA F5CH TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i I. Introduction 1 II. Review of the Literature 4 III. Survey of Users 40 IV. Resources and Costs of Training 52 V. Resources and Costs of Courseware Development 86 VI. Cost-Effectiveness Anaiyzis of Alternative Training Programs: CBE and Traditional 96 VII. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Courseware Development 115 VIII. Implementation 123 IX. Social and Economic Implications 133 X. Conoulsions and Recommendations 147 APPENDICES Appendix A List of Persons Interviewed Appendix B Report From Dr. Robert Taggart Appendix C WICAT Proposal Appendix D Sumnmary of Survey Responses Appendix E List of Tables Appendix F Resumes of Project Team EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document reports on a feasibility assessment of a Unified Curriculum Project (UCP) proposal to provide computer-based educational and vocational training in Jamaica using Control Data Corporation (CDC) software and equipment. The proposal was developed and submitted to the U.S. Agency for International Development-Jamaica by JOBS, Jamaica Opportunity for Business Success, Ltd., in cooperation with the Jamaican Ministries of Agriculture, Education, and Youth and Community Development. The Agency for International Development contracted with the Pragma Corporation to assess the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the proposed Unified Curriculum Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Pm DATE 78 GRANT SED-76-15399, NOTE 47P.; for Related Documents, See IR 010
    DOCUMENT itESUME_ ED 227 828 IR 010 621 ; . AUTHOR Hunter, Beverly TITLE Academic COmputing at Mankato University. A Case' Study. INSTITUTFON Human Resodrces Research Organization, Alexandria, Va. -SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, WashingtOn, D.C. Directorate for Science Education. - . pm DATE 78 GRANT SED-76-15399, NOTE 47p.; For related documents, see IR 010. 519-623. PUB TYPE ' Reports Research/Technical (143) EDRS PRICE MFOI/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Case Studies; *Computer Assisted Instruction; Computer Li_teracy; *Computer Oriented,Programs; *Computer Science Education; *Demonstration Programs; Educational Planning; Higher Education; Program. Administration; Program Costs; program Descriptions; Surveys IDENTIFIERS *Mankato Stite College MN 4' ABSTRACT This case study is one of a series focusing on everydaybaearning and teachin§ applications of computers which is, addressed to administrators, teachers, staff, and students who wish to plan or improve ihe usei of computers at their own institutions. Following a brief description of the purpose and selection of cases foi.the overall study, the report profiles academic computing at Mankato State University, a'12,000,-student institution in South Central.Mannesota and4one of seven state universities. The ,organization and management of the academic and administrative computing in the state university system is explained and student access to threemain computer facilities is described..--Also addressed are costs and budgeting, student accomplishments, applicativns, computer. literacy, computer science curricula, outreach, and plans and goals. Under the topic of lessons learned,"comments focus on regional timesharing, computer science education, and dual.computer usage bY-administrators and faculty. Contacts; nine references, apd a -list of. the 6ase study and exemplar institutions are.provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas J. Misa Charles Babbage Institute University of Minnesota
    UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PRESS 2013 Digital State: The Story of Minnesota’s Computing Industry Thomas J. Misa Charles Babbage Institute University of Minnesota www.cbi.umn.edu Topics today 1.Mn was Silicon Valley 2.“Silver mine” (impacts...*) 3.“Gold mine” (consequences*) 4.What to ‘see’ today? *(of Mn’s pioneering computer industry) California’s ‘Silicon Valley’ California’s ‘Silicon Valley’ Adobe Apple Cisco eBay Facebook Google HP Intel Oracle Yahoo Intel California’s ‘Silicon Valley’ Adobe Apple Cisco eBay Facebook 1982 1976 1984 1995 2004 Google HP Intel Oracle Yahoo 1998 1939 1968 1977 1994 Intel MN was Silicon Valley (1950s–1970s) • ‘stored program’ computer [1950] • magnetic data storage • computer industry • ‘supercomputer’ • early WWW Silver mine: MN’s computer industry 2. Engineering Research Associates [f. 1946] 3. Sperry-Rand Univac [f. 1955] Unisys 1986- ➾ 29 spin-offs 4.Control Data Corp. [1957-92] ➾ 45 spin-offs inc. Cray Research [1972] 5. Honeywell (computing = 1958-91) 6.IBM-Rochester [1956--] Silver mine: MN computer workforce MN by mid-1970s . •... 1.8% of US population •... 3.3% of US manufacturing jobs •... 12% of US $6B computer sales •... 17% of US computer mfg jobs Why ‘not’ Silicon Valley MN? ✓Technology & innovation ✓Computer-center ‘industrial district’ ✓Venture capital #2 [1958-63] ✓Sales to military + govt + univ labs + ATC Why ‘not’ Silicon Valley MN? ✓Technology & innovation ✓Computer-center ‘industrial district’ ✓Venture capital #2 [1958-63] ✓Sales to military + govt + univ labs + ATC ✦Less visible in commercial
    [Show full text]
  • Annex E- Emergency Medical Service- Administration
    UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Twin Cities Emergency Medical Service EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Revision 4.0 Annex E- Emergency Medical Service- Administration Purpose The purpose of this annex is to describe policies and procedures for mobilizing emergency medical resources in the event of an unusual or major incident involving the University of Minnesota and its campuses in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan region. EMS Response (Primary Service Areas) Emergency Medical Service for the University of Minnesota in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area is the primary responsibility of: ♦ HCMC Emergency Medical Services—Minneapolis Campus ♦ St. Paul Department of Fire and Safety Services (EMS)—St. Paul Campus Incident Command and Control The Minnesota Incident Management System (MIMS) is the basic structure used to coordinate the emergency medical response among EMS, fire, law enforcement, mutual aid providers, and other responding disciplines or agencies by employing unified command. The University of Minnesota will provide a liaison from the University of Minnesota to assist with questions and coordinating the University's response in support of unified command. Communications The University of Minnesota has limited capability for establishing radio communications with Incident Command or Branch (Sector) commanders. The University will provide a liaison to support the incident management functions described above. University of Minnesota Emergency Medical Service (UMEMS) The University of Minnesota maintains an emergency medical response
    [Show full text]
  • 04 Rankin.Indd
    )URPWKH0DLQIUDPHVWRWKH0DVVHV$3DUWLFLSDWRU\ &RPSXWLQJ0RYHPHQWLQ0LQQHVRWD(GXFDWLRQ -R\5DQNLQ Information & Culture: A Journal of History, Volume 50, Number 2, 2015, pp. 197-216 (Article) 3XEOLVKHGE\8QLYHUVLW\RI7H[DV3UHVV For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/lac/summary/v050/50.2.rankin.html Access provided by Yale University Library (15 Sep 2015 15:06 GMT) 197 From the Mainframes to the Masses: A Participatory Computing Movement in Minnesota Education Joy Rankin Historians have demonstrated how systems like Usenet and Minitel fostered the social practices that we now associate with the TCP/IP Internet, but no one has considered networked computing in education. From 1965 to 1975, Minnesota implemented interactive computing at its public schools and universities with time-sharing systems—networks of teletypewriter ter- minals connected to computers via telephone lines. These educational networks, created with different priorities from military-sponsored net- works, were user oriented from the start and encouraged software sharing and collaboration. Focusing on the educational setting gives us a history of the Internet firmly grounded in the social and political movements of the long 1960s. During the spring of 1971, teacher Thomas Duff reported that his stu- dents exhibited a roller coaster of emotions as they played a computer game. Duff taught business in Richfield High School, in a suburb just south of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and his students eagerly immersed themselves in a computer simulation called MANAG, whereby the stu- dents competed against each other to best manage a company. These students, many of whom had been written off as “low-ability,” “anxiously watched the print out for their team and alternately cheered and moaned as they received the results.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-2020 Water Power Technologies Office
    Water Power Technologies Office Accomplishments Disclaimer This work was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party’s use or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, its contractors or subcontractors. HYDROPOWER PROGRAM Acknowledgments The U.S. Department of Energy Water Power Technologies Office’s 2019‒2020 Accomplishments Report could not have been completed if it were not for the tireless efforts of all the national laboratory, university, and industry staff members who drove each and every one of these projects toward excellence. This document serves as a testament to their work and the continuing impact that it is having throughout the hydropower and marine energy industries. Additionally, in crafting this report, the following individuals were instrumental in writing, reviewing, and verifying the impacts of these projects: Sheri Anstedt Miles Hall Karen Petersen Libby Arnold Ali Hewett Betsy Stratton Hoyt Battey Allison Johnson Rebecca Harris Sullivan Kelly Brandner Hannah Lassiter Heather Queyrouze Kiki Carpenter Gretchen Moore Sarah Wagoner John Frenzl Kathleen Morton Sammy Giampetroni Liz Orwig Thank you to all.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding Aid to the Minnesota Educational Computing Corporation (MECC) Collection, 1967-2015
    Brian Sutton-Smith Library and Archives of Play MECC Collection Finding Aid to the Minnesota Educational Computing Corporation (MECC) Collection, 1967-2015 Summary Information Title: Minnesota Educational Computing Corporation (MECC) collection Creators: Don Rawitsch, Laura Gilbert, Susan Schilling, Mike Palmquist, Dale LaFrenz, and R. Philip Bouchard (primary); The Strong (secondary) ID: 2016.mecc Date: 1967-2015 (inclusive); 1973-1998 (bulk) Extent: 6.5 linear feet Language: The materials in this collection are in English. Abstract: The Minnesota Educational Computing Corporation (MECC) collection is a compilation of materials on the development of The Oregon Trail and other MECC educational computer programs, as well as various related news articles, journals, photographs, floppy disks, VHS tapes, and more. The bulk of the materials are dated between 1973 and 1998. Repository: Brian Sutton-Smith Library and Archives of Play at The Strong One Manhattan Square Rochester, New York 14607 585.263.2700 [email protected] Administrative Information Conditions Governing Use: This collection is open for research use by staff of The Strong and by users of its library and archives. Though the donors have not transferred intellectual property rights (including, but not limited to any copyright, trademark, and associated rights therein) to The Strong, they have given permission for The Strong to make copies in all media for museum, educational, and research purposes. Custodial History: The Minnesota Educational Computing Corporation (MECC) collection was assembled by The Strong using donations received from Don Rawitsch, Laura Gilbert, Susan Schilling, R. Philip Bouchard, Dale LaFrenz, and Mike Palmquist in 2016. The materials were accessioned by The Strong under Object IDs 116.1232, 116.1234, 116.1302, 116.1591, 116.1595, and 116.1669, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Moments in Video Game History
    Some Key Moments in the History of Video Games 1940 Edward U. Condon designs a computer for the Westinghouse display at the World’s Fair that plays the traditional game Nim in which players try to avoid picking up the last match. Tens of thousands of people play it, and the computer wins at least 90% of the games. 1947 Thomas T. Goldsmith Jr. and Estle Ray Mann file a patent for a “cathode ray tube amusement device.” Their game, which uses a cathode ray tube hooked to an oscilloscope display, challenges players to fire a gun at a target. 1950 Claude Shannon lays out the basic guidelines for programming a chess-playing computer in an article, “Programming a Computer for Playing Chess.” That same year both he and Englishman Alan Turing create chess programs. International Center for the History of Electronic Games • www.museumofplay.org 1 1952 A. S. Douglass creates OXO (a game known as noughts and crosses in the United Kingdom and tic-tac-toe in the United States) on Cambridge’s EDSAC computer as part of his research on human-computer interactions. 1954 Programmers at New Mexico’s Los Alamos laboratories, the birthplace of the atomic bomb, develop the first blackjack program on an IBM-701 computer. 1955 The long tradition of military wargaming enters the computer age when the U.S. military designs Hutspiel, in which Red and Blue players (representing NATO and Soviet commanders) wage war. 1956 Arthur Samuel demonstrates his computer checkers program, written on an IBM-701, on national television. Six years later the program defeats a checkers master.
    [Show full text]