Monday, October 05, 2009

October 1 Enrollment numbers

These numbers will be adjusted, but here is the current count.

Data of note:

Enrollment at Cleveland: Head count of 696, FTE of 674 (244 freshmen)
Enrollment at Rainier Beach: Head count of 500, FTE of 441 (117 freshmen)
Enrollment at The Center School: Head count of 290, FTE of 284 (101 freshmen)

Enrollment at Aki Kurose: 561
Enrollment at Thurgood Marshall: 455
Enrollment at Lowell: 463
Enrollment at Jane Addams: 345
Enrollment at AS#1: 189

Visit this page for updates.

26 comments:

Shannon said...

Jane Adams seems to have dropped about since my last look. Also, I am surprised that Lowell and TM have similar enrollments. I thought there was a disparity there earlier on. Is there any data on the APP vs general cohort numbers?

SE Mom said...

Where on the district website can I find out what the actual capacity is for a given school? I know I've seen it before but I cannot locate it now.

I am especially interested in finding out what the total number of seats will for Sealth when they move into their remodeled building next fall. Will the total number of seats increase?

uxolo said...

50 seniors at Center School - enrollment typically drops for seniors by end of year
School was targeted for 75 students per grade, they are trying to fill seats with freshmen but have not succeeded in holding on to students.

SE Mom said...

I answered my own question and located the data under capacity management.

adhoc said...

Jane Addams did lose enrollment. They were up to almost 500 right before school started, but lost a lot of students. We know several families that went private, and several families that went to Shoreline (including us) instead to going to JA. In addition a lot of the kids at Addams were on waitlists at other schools. As those waitlists moved, JA lost enrollment.

I actually think this is why the Eckstein waitlist didn't move this year (historically they are able to clear between 20-50 students each year). I wonder if staff told Eckstein not to move their list because they were worried that the JA middle school might collapse.

SolvayGirl1972 said...

Lisa Escobar, principal at the Center School, has stated that they lose students because some kids enroll there thinking it is an "…easy, artsy-fartsy school," which it is not. Consequently, they change schools for subsequent years. And, the school has a very distinct, two-year humanities curriculum that encompasses 9th and 10th grade, making it difficult for students to enter the school after Freshman year. Hence, their enrollment drops by Senior year.
With that in mind, the school still has high SAT scores and most students go onto 4-year colleges.

Sahila said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
another mom said...

Without analyzing each school, the total enrollment looks stable. It is up slightly from October 2008,and that is good. But it is not up as much as I expected especially in light of the economy and the hype given to the increased numbers reported during open enrollment. Does anyone remember what the projections were?

Sahila said...

nowhere else to put this, so apologies...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/news/2928729/Schools-go-too-far-in-bid-for-extra-cash

one of the pitfalls of underfunding of education...

so the rich parents can pay for enrichment for their kids

and the poor parents and their kids miss out


wonder where I've heard/seen that before????

gavroche said...

Shannon said...

Jane Adams seems to have dropped about since my last look. Also, I am surprised that Lowell and TM have similar enrollments. I thought there was a disparity there earlier on. Is there any data on the APP vs general cohort numbers?


Hi Shannon - I've heard the breakdown is something like this:

Lowell
APP 300
ALO 110
SPED 40

Thurgood M
APP 220
ALO 200
not sure about SPED or ELL

These are not precise, but what's generally true is that the Lowell APP cohort is significantly bigger than the TM APP cohort (despite the District's claim that the two schools would be equal).

Also, APP is a significantly larger cohort than ALO at Lowell, but about the same size as ALO at TM.

Lastly, Lowell principal Gregory King recently said that Lowell's total enrollment is 440 (which is lower than what the District is saying).

(I'll post more precise updated numbers as I come across them.)

TechyMom said...

Also of note, K is by far the biggest ALO grade at Lowell, with 2 full classes. There were 50 enrolled, but I'm not sure if that has shrunk at all. No other grade has 2 classes, and some are splits. The demographics in K are also significantly different, much more white and affluent. Most of the families I've talked to are in the Stevens and Madrona reference areas. There are also quite a few early entrance K kids, which makes sense for an ALO.

just-a-mom said...

Well the good news is that with the new SAP, all of the kids who would have been assigned to Cleveland will now be at Rainier Beach.

Yippee!

/sarcasm

Michael Rice said...

just-a-mom writes:

Well the good news is that with the new SAP, all of the kids who would have been assigned to Cleveland will now be at Rainier Beach.

Yippee!

/sarcasm


I can't tell if she is ripping Cleveland or Rainier Beach or Cleveland AND Rainier Beach or not ripping anyone.

However, my offer to everyone still stands. I am in room 266. I teach periods 2 - 5, which is basically 9 till 1:30. Please stop by anytime. Just check in with the front office and come on by. I would be honored to have any of you in my classroom.

adhoc said...

Michael you say you teach periods 2-5 and are done at 1:30PM. Does this mean you have a free period or two for planning time? I'm curious because I heard teachers don't have planning periods anymore.

Michael Rice said...

adhoc writes:

Michael you say you teach periods 2-5 and are done at 1:30PM. Does this mean you have a free period or two for planning time? I'm curious because I heard teachers don't have planning periods anymore.


I have two planning periods this semester. This is because of the SE Initiative. Next semester, I am pretty positive I will be back to one planning periods.

I can only speak for RB, but every teacher has a planning period.

gavroche said...

Michael -- Thank you for the valuable reminder to us all that there may be good efforts going on in all our schools that not everyone is aware of.

One thing I have learned from following this blog this past year is how much I didn't know about all the schools in the District.

Hearing from passionate teachers and involved parents affiliated with our many different schools and learning what they all have to offer despite the chronic underfunding of public education and bad management decisions at the top has been both humbling and inspiring.

It also has made me realize that by and large Seattle's Public Schools have many strengths and valuable offerings worth supporting and preserving.

Keep up the good work.

adhoc said...

Thank you Michael.

I asked because I was curious about Nathan Hale.

If every HS teacher has a planning period (or two), then why does Hale have a 1.5 hour late start every Tuesday? Why do they need "more" planning/collaboration time than other schools?

Michael Rice said...

ad hoc writes:

Thank you Michael.

I asked because I was curious about Nathan Hale.

If every HS teacher has a planning period (or two), then why does Hale have a 1.5 hour late start every Tuesday? Why do they need "more" planning/collaboration time than other schools?


Well, we have 16 two hour early dismissals over the course fo the year for professional development. 5 of those are district wide and the other 11 are from us. I have to say that I hate these. It takes away instructional time. I don't really have time to teach anything on those days, so I call it a work day, so the students can do their assignments or ask me specific questions on probelms they are stuck on. I would love to see all of these days go away

seattle parent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
seattle parent said...

Adhoc,
It's written into the teacher's SEA contract that all teachers at the HS level get one planning period each day. In a traditional 6 period schedule that's between 50 to 55 minutes, depending on which school you attend.
With blocked periods the teachers usually get one longer blocked session (ie a double period like Garfield has), but usually have no planning period on another day to balance out.

So, to answer your question (in other posts also)- yes, schools with site-based professional development have lots more extra planning time than schools with no site-based PD (but as Michael Rice points out, the kids get less time for instruction overall, and shortened classes on those days as well- a double whammy).

This applies for middle schools as well- there are some that have very high # of site-based PD early dismissals. Madison wins the prize, with 14 (plus the 5 district's), almost one every other week. The majority of other middle schools have none. This is always blamed on site-based management by the district, but the district does nothing to set a minimum standard that all schools must follow, which is within their right to set.

Melissa Westbrook said...

I hear you Seattle Parent. You ask your principal why your school is different than others and you get a shrug or "we need more planning time" or something about the district.

This business of site-based management as well as earned autonomy needs to be fleshed out to parents. Even if we don't get any part of the decisions, we need to know what can or cannot be a site-based decision.

Robert said...

I'm pretty sure that shows a significant loss for Lowell and gain for TM. Right?

TechyMom said...

Robert, yes, I think you're right. However, the strong K performance at Lowell tells me it won't stay that small for long. Will there be 2 ALO K classes every year? That would mean 300 ALO kids in 5 years (25 kids x 2 classes x 6 grades).

TechyMom said...

I found out at curriculum night last night that my daughter's K class at Lowell dropped from 25 to 20, which is just fine with me. I didn't ask about the other K class.

Robert said...

Yeah techymom but I anticipate that a percentage of the current Lowell K folks will migrate to APP in the next few years. However, being an assigned school now should fill up the both of the ALOs... If they got their numbers right. However, it might be worth considering the merits in keeping an APP qualified student in the ALO program if they continue to have such low class sizes.

TechyMom said...

Agree, Robert. We are going to test our daughter. I know we wouldn't put her in Spectrum at Leschi (don't trust it yet) or Muir (too far), but don't know what we'll do if she tests into APP. I don't think we'd go to Marshall, just because she's so happy at Lowell. But, would we do APP or stay in ALO? Not sure. Staying in ALO does give us the option of switching at any time. But then, I think that it might be easier for a Central, um I mean, Washington Zone, kid to get a Lowell APP seat in 1st grade than later after more North End families test in. It will also depend on the 1st grade teachers. I really like Ms. Sherwood, but don't know any of the other 1st grade teachers (APP or ALO). So, yeah, considering all the options...