As a lifelong Minneapolitan and a progressive, consistently voting DFL or left of DFL, I don't generally look to Senate Republicans as a fountain of truth. And yet their latest report, at least in the Star Tribune's Oct. 14 summary ("GOP says Frey, Walz failed to quell unrest"), sounds pretty much like what I watched on TV (on multiple local stations) after dark on May 27 and 28.
It's no surprise that this Republican report would have minimized underlying factors such as historic racial injustice. But Gov. Tim Walz's description of his National Guard and State Patrol's "noble and heroic" response doesn't fly any better than Mayor Jacob Frey's, which was essentially that the only way to avoid killing protesters was to allow rioters free rein.
Many of the stores burned or looted were small businesses (including franchises), most locally owned and many minority-owned. I assume these businesses had been paying taxes and therefore were entitled to police and fire protection — which they did not get. Just because I vote DFL doesn't mean I don't expect accountability from DFL-affiliated elected officials.
John Trepp, Minneapolis
• • •
Perhaps nothing in the state government this year has been more disheartening that the partisanship that prevented the passage of a normal bonding bill. So, reading that it finally passed was a breath of fresh air ("A record $1.9B for MN public works," front page, Oct. 16). The bonding bill reflects bipartisanship. It included Republican Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka's provisions on tax deductions, and the $1.9 billion was roughly divided between the Twin Cities, where most of the people are, and the rest of the state, where most of the water treatment plants, roads and bridges are. The passage of this bill is the finest hour of our state Legislature, and it infuses hope in Minnesotans who long for constructive bipartisanship working toward the common good. Thank you, Republicans and Democrats.
David Koehler, Minneapolis
DISTANCE LEARNING
It's working well for us, actually
I appreciate the recent letter writer sharing the experience of his wife, who is a teacher trying her best yet struggling with distance learning, but I'd like to share the counterpoint of what's going on with distance learning in my house, where my wife is a junior high school science teacher: It's going really well. ("Little help over here," Readers Write, Oct. 14.)
Here are a few of the benefits we've seen so far: My wife is teaching students who are better rested and more interested in engaging with her in class than they were in traditional in-person schooling. Synchronous learning has all of her students logging in for class on time, day after day, a great improvement to the haphazard distance learning of last spring. Of particular note, her students of color are participating and passing their classes at a higher rate than before.
Like the original letter writer's wife, my wife has a master's degree, in education, and I trust her perspective when she tells me that these benefits are showing themselves because students in 2020 are particularly well prepared for distance learning. They've grown up on the internet and know how to use it to meet their needs as learners and young adults. My wife is also notably young — at 31, she grew up in the Information Age and actively leverages technological tools that turn public education into the student-focused, outcome-driven institution that it needs to be.
I feel for teachers, my wife's co-workers included, who developed their teaching methods in the Industrial Age, when gathering together in shifts regulated by bells from early morning through midafternoon made sense. But now it's the Information Age, and K-12 education was in deep need of an overhaul to match our technology-driven era. My wife's previous understanding of how to leverage the internet for learning has made her job easier and less time-consuming in the pandemic, not harder, and there's evidence that it's having a net-positive impact on her students as well.