Lakeville School Board Approves New Curriculum
TLDR
The Lakeville School Board approved 10 new ELA and social studies curriculum resources 6-1 on May 26
Director Brian Thompson voted no on both, arguing curriculum decisions affecting 12,000+ students for 10 years shouldn't be on the consent agenda
Staff said a two-week delay would disrupt summer teacher work that's already scheduled
Middle school ELA: Savvas picked over Amplify in a close call
Social studies aligns to Minnesota's new 2021 standards (effective 2026-27) and the C3 Framework
Tuesday night's Lakeville School Board meeting was supposed to wrap up a routine curriculum approval. It didn't.
What was scheduled as a quiet vote turned into a 45-minute debate about how the board itself does business — and whether asking 12,000 students to use the same English and social studies resources for the next decade deserves more than a thumbs-up on the consent agenda.
What Was on the Table
The district was bringing forward roughly 10 new curriculum resources spanning English language arts and social studies — covering everything from middle school reading programs to high school world history, economics, geography, and US studies. These resources will be used across multiple grade levels and stay in place for around 10 years.
For middle school ELA specifically, the choice came down to two finalists: Amplify and Savvas. Director Matt Swanson asked about it directly — his 7th grader, and another 7th grader he'd chatted with, both preferred Amplify.
Assistant Superintendent Tracy Georgie and Director of Teaching and Learning Sandy walked through the selection process. Resources go through a standards-aligned rubric review, get evaluated against multiple national and local platforms, run through the Minnesota Area Curriculum Leaders network, get teacher and student input, and are posted online for community feedback.
On Amplify vs. Savvas, the staff was honest: "It's pretty much broken fairly equally depending on which category that you're looking at within that rubric." Both had merit. The team's rubric pointed to Savvas. Some students preferred Amplify, some preferred Savvas. The recommendation went forward with Savvas.
Where It Got Tense
Director Thompson made the central argument:
"This is a strategic decision that's going to last for the next 10 years and it's embedded in a consent agenda and we're just voting yes or no."
His position: the board has detailed presentations on a $3 million levy, a $139 million levy, academic dashboards, and athletics — but is now being asked to approve 10 curriculum resources covering everything from world history to economics with no presentation at all. He pointed to the digital ELA curriculum earlier this year, which did get a full work-session presentation, and asked why this one shouldn't get the same treatment.
He proposed pausing for two weeks to bring it back as a working session item.
Why Staff Pushed Back
Director Sandy responded that delaying two weeks would create real problems. Teachers had already blocked off their summer schedules — they were scheduled to start aligning scope and sequence and pacing guides right after school ends. Without an approved resource, that PD work can't move forward as planned.
Chair Amber Cameron added that the board had been told about this process repeatedly through the year. "Friday Notes" — the superintendent's weekly board communication — flagged the consent-agenda placement on November 6, November 21, November 26, December 1, May 1, and May 15. Nobody had raised an objection until now.
Director Kim Baker put it bluntly: "It seems like the questions are revolving more around the process than around the curriculum itself." She agreed the process could be revisited for next time but wasn't willing to disrupt this round.
Director Carly Anderson defended the structure: "I have no expertise in evaluating this curriculum versus that curriculum or what is going to be the best curriculum to meet the standards. That is where I see our role as a board to make sure we have people who are knowledgeable."
Director Tony Reichenberger offered the most pragmatic framing of the night: the consent agenda exists for items where everyone agrees. Anyone can pull anything off it for separate discussion — that's normal procedure. "Perfectly fine to remove it from the consent agenda, move it down to regular business and discuss it there."
Which is exactly what happened.
What the Social Studies Curriculum Actually Includes
The new social studies resources align to Minnesota's 2021 Social Studies Standards, which take effect statewide in 2026-27. The standards lean heavily on the C3 Framework — short for College, Career, and Civic Life — which structures social studies around inquiry, primary and secondary source analysis, claim-evidence-reasoning, and multiple perspectives.
Director Thompson asked specifically about the "taking action" dimension of C3 — what does that look like in practice? Staff explained it's about communication and critiquing conclusions, looking at issues from multiple viewpoints, and developing problem-solving skills rather than just memorizing facts.
He also asked how teachers grade something as subjective as critical thinking on contested topics. Staff: the focus is on developing students who can analyze sources for bias, work with primary and secondary sources, and reason through complex topics. The high school 9-12 social studies courses use the same SAS platform across all courses so students see consistency from class to class.
And Thompson asked the question most parents would ask: what about the gap? Purchased curriculum typically covers about 80% of state standards. Staff confirmed the remaining 20% — notably the indigenous standards, which aren't well-supported by national vendors — gets filled in by teacher-developed units of study during summer writing work, sometimes supplemented with additional resources.
The Bottom Line
The new ELA and social studies resources are approved. Teachers start scope-and-sequence work shortly after school ends. The 2026-27 school year will be the first year of full implementation for some of these materials, and the social studies standards more broadly.
Thompson made it clear this fight wasn't really about Savvas or Amplify — it was about the board's role in curriculum decisions and whether "consent agenda" is the right home for a 10-year, district-wide adoption. That conversation isn't over. Other Lakeville school board recaps have surfaced similar process disagreements, and at least one board member is signaling he'll keep raising the issue.
FAQ
What curriculum did Lakeville actually approve? New resources for English language arts and social studies across roughly 10 different grade levels and content areas, including world history, geography, economics, and US studies. Middle school ELA went with Savvas; high school social studies will continue using the SAS platform across all courses.
Why did Brian Thompson vote no? He didn't say the curriculum itself was wrong. His objection was procedural — that a decision affecting 12,000 students for the next decade shouldn't go through on the consent agenda without a formal presentation to the board.
Why didn't they just delay two weeks? Teachers had already scheduled summer work to start mapping scope, sequence, and pacing for the new resources. A two-week delay would have disrupted that work.
Is ethnic studies part of this? Minnesota's 2021 social studies standards do include ethnic studies as a new strand. Districts have flexibility in how those standards are addressed in classrooms — they're embedded into existing social studies coursework rather than treated as a separate required class.
Will parents see what's being taught? The district posts curriculum resources online during the review period, and has a Teaching and Learning advisory committee that includes community input. Staff said historically very few parents take advantage of in-building curriculum reviews when offered.
