Wednesday, November 02, 2011

School Board Agenda Update

Just heading out the door to the FACMAC meeting, I reviewed the Board agenda.  It has changed somewhat (and there are still open slots on the Speakers List, 252-0040).

The renewal of the MAP contract through the Northwest Evaluation Association has been taking off the Action items and postponed until the November 16th meeting per a Steve Sundquist request.  They are late on this subscription renewal (having overlooked it) and now they are waiting?  Hmmm, I wonder why.  

Also, the Intro Item on the exemption they are seeking from OSPI for the number of instructional hours for Cleveland High School has been radically rewritten.  It's almost like someone realized that there was a WAC attached to this kind of action and they needed more evidence to prove what they were doing.  I'm thinking this was the doing of some "activist" type person who knew the WAC and pointed this out to staff (but it sure wasn't me).    What is interesting is that it no longer says: "If approved Cleveland will move from an ALE classification to a traditional school classification and they will begin receiving full funding."   It now says, "If approved, Cleveland will begin receiving full funding."   I don't have time to read the whole thing to see why this is so changed.

Again, kind of odd.

16 comments:

Charlie Mas said...

Here's the line from the Board Action Report that disturbs me:

"Cleveland High School is classified as an Alternative Learning Experience (ALE) school because they do not meet the 150-hour requirement." Not because they are truly alternative, but for no other reason than their failure to meet the 150-hour requirement. That is profoundly wrong. That is an admission by the District that they are intentionally twisting the intent of the law in pursuit of loopholes.

"This item is being proposed for Introduction and Action at the same meeting." Ummm. Not any more. They did to update this line in the report.

It bugs me that the application still has no answer for the third question. This is a fatal flaw. The Board absolutely should not approve an incomplete application. They are going to play games with this and say that they are voting on the resolution, not the application, but I don't know how resolved they can be without a complete application.

Finally, the resolution - which has typos - includes this statement:

"RESOLVED, that the Seattle School Board declares that it is the policy of the Seattle School District that a block learning program which provides student learning opportunities in the manner of the Cleveland STEM program meets the requirements of WAC 180-051-050(b) for granting of high school credits;"

but this is the same Board that ended the block schedule at West Seattle High School saying the exact opposite.

Could someone please reconcile the change of opinion?

Charlie Mas said...

I notice they are still pursuing the approval of Cleveland STEM as an ALE. Which is it?

Anonymous said...

Maybe someone from the Board or the district read through all of the posts starting on the Saturday thread "School Board Agenda for the Nov. 2nd meeting" pointing out that only 2 of the 3 questions on the original application were answered, and almost nothing else from the application guidelines was addressed either.

So, a rush job produced this 11th hour redo (4x as many lines filled in- the redline version was omitted unfortunately). But, they didn't even take the time to edit and catch prominent mistakes such as WAC cites on both the Action Report and the Resolution (come on, how hard is it to get an 8 or 9digit WAC correct?).

The irony here is what everyone knows:
1. OSPI always has approved waivers
2. The 150 hour rule is being dumped this year so no waiver will be required next year by OSPI
3. Thus, no one will have to be held accountable to the goals they set for themselves in this waiver!

---still no fan of cutting instructional hours---

Anonymous said...

Charlie,
This was added into the Action report, re: the ALE status:

"If the exemption is granted by OSPI, it will not be necessary to submit an Alternative Learning Experience Plan for Cleveland. However, until the exemption is granted, it still will be necessary to ask the School Board to approve that plan."


---still no fan

dan dempsey said...

WOW .. so perhaps my emails to OSPI's Dan Newell (never heard back) and the the School Directors (never heard back) may have had some influence on the Cleveland waiver action.

Perhaps Joy Anderson's legal appeal induced them to pay a bit more attention to legal requirements. We also have a recall action in process for the Recall of Randy Dorn.

-----

Just to add the the chaos I receive this ....
from Susan Wilson
OSPI public records officer.


I have verified with the Certification Office and, as of November 1, 2011, the following individuals have not made application for and do not hold conditional certificates.
· Kenneth Maldonado
· Desiree Marie Robinette
· Daniel A. Calderon

----
WOW!!!

So what happened to the Authorizations of 9-21-11 and 10-5-11 ?? Authorizing the Superintendent to request applications for Conditional Certification of TFA corps members on the Grounds that conditions warrant granting these certificates. These are the folks that were to be getting the certificates.

So are these folks still teaching on emergency substitute certificates? and if so are they receiving substitute salaries?

The requests for Emergency Substitute certificates was also not in line with the requirements of the law.

I am so confused.... The District is to provide Joy Anderson with the Transcript of evidence used by the board in making the approval decisions to Authorize the superintendent to request the conditional certificates for TFA corps members on or before November 10.

So will that leave us even more confused?

What is happening with...


· Kenneth Maldonado
· Desiree Marie Robinette
· Daniel A. Calderon
????

dan dempsey said...

In regard to the above...

try an SBAR ... say this one.

So Enfield is the Author of the SBAR.

Request for PESB to grant conditional teaching certificates to 2 members of the Teach for America corps to teach in Seattle Public Schools

"Introduction and Action on September 7th is in the best interest of the district because it will allow the candidates to receive their conditional certificates sooner than if action were postponed until September 21st."

Well it was postponed to 9-21 anyway.

I move that the School Board authorize submission of applications for conditional teaching certificates for the following individuals:
Kenneth Maldonado
Desiree Robinette

.... So what happened between 9-21 and November 1.... after the Big Hurry ... 40 days later OSPI says what applications and what certificates????

Perhaps Dr Susan Enfield would care to explain ... or is OSPI just really confused?

dan dempsey said...

Tim Conway for Superintendent.... MGJ and Enfield would be hard acts to follow ... but I think Tim could do it.

Conway is best known for his role as the inept second-in-command officer.

mirmac1 said...

After learning of the 2009 NWEA SBAR switcheroo, the Board told staff that any edits to SBARS after intro much go back through committee. Interesting to find out if ANY committee reviewed these changes.

dan dempsey said...

Mirmac1,

After learning of the 2009 NWEA SBAR switcheroo, the Board told staff that any edits to SBARS after intro much go back through committee. Interesting to find out if ANY committee reviewed these changes.

Well ... that was way back in 2009. The Cleveland waiver switcheroo .... happened so fast ...(it was done on the same day as the meeting 11-2-2011).

I did not even know about the switcheroo until I drove home from the meeting and read about it on this blog.

http://www.seattlechannel.org/videos/video.asp?ID=5997

Board meeting line-up begins with:
1.. RBHS - Started by Principal Chappelle.
2.. Jackins on a lot as usual - Hooray.
3.. Dempsey on Cleveland waivers
4.. Mas on one meeting slam dunkings of actions
5.. Femiano on Reading
6.. LaCretiah Clayton on RBHS PTSA doing the job

dan dempsey said...

TYPO above

6.. LaCretiah Claytor on RBHS PTSA doing the job

mirmac1 said...

No, they didn't know of it until I told them May of this year.

Charlie Mas said...

The meeting went about as you would expect. No Board member answered my question about why they decided to repeal the policy that called for introduction of motions at one meeting and action on the motion at a subsequent meeting.

Maybe it's a question they will answer at their community meetings on Saturday.

I notice that some of them have scheduled their meeting for after the election. I presume the meetings will be cancelled if board member is not re-elected.

dan dempsey said...

Well all of them should not be elected.

As if the current TFA screw up was not enough, i watched the Board discussion of the Cleveland waiver online.

Then I went and ran HSPE Cleveland results to see how well this Huge Expentiure was doing in regrad to producing results.

THAT PICTURE IS HERE

Short summary =>

In May 2011, 76.3% of Cleveland Students were classified as Low Income.

In May 2011, 43.0% of Cleveland Students were classified as Black students.

2011 comparison results follow for Reading, Writing, and Science.

For Black students the 2010 to 2011 comparison changes with District and State show:

Reading worse with district -6.40% worse with state -3.00%

Writing worse with district -19.90% worse with state -21.20%

Science worse with district -9.80% worse with state -9.20%

For Low Income students the 2010 to 2011 comparison changes with District and State show:

Reading worse with district -0.10% better with state +1.40%

Writing worse with district -4.60% worse with state -4.60%

Science worse with district -4.00% worse with state -2.80%

These show a pattern of poorer results in 2011 than in 2010 on the 10th grade HSPE annual tests for Black students and Low Income students.

The District has put into action an expensive program that through the use of project based learning has widened achievement gaps.

Four Directors voted for this twice ...

Sundquist, Maier, Carr, and Martin-Morris.

Reelect NONE of the Above.

dan dempsey said...

To summarize:

(1) The District did not do a careful review of all options for closing achievement gaps.

(2) Board authorized Superintendent (on 9-21 and on 10-5) to request conditional certificates for three TFA corps members.

(3) The Three TFA corp members are teaching with "Emergency certificates", which only allow 30 days of continuous teaching in one position.

(4) As of Nov. 1, 2011 the Superintendent had not yet made the request for Conditional Certs for the three corps members ... two of which the Board had authorized her to apply for 40 days earlier.

(5) Now a waiver is sought for an expensive program at Cleveland that has significantly expanded achievement gaps for Black Students and expanded gaps for Low Income students.

(6) The only Four Directors that voted for the Expensive Program at Cleveland are seeking reelection.

Is anybody out there believing these are the actions of Professionals ... or am I just a Cyberbully?

seattle citizen said...

"No Board member answered my question about why they decided to repeal the policy that called for introduction of motions at one meeting and action on the motion at a subsequent meeting."

But Michael DeBell, unfortunately, decided to explain that he PROMISED they would USUSALLY do Intro one meeting, Action the next (or did he, in fact, say Action a month later with a meeting in between? That's what I thought he said.)

So it might not be POLICY, Charlie, but they PROMISE to have a lag time between intro/action. Even though, as you noted, at the meeting last night most of the items were intro/action. Go figure. I guess we can take their promise with a grain of salt: Policy is a rule, a promise is just...a promise.

WV has been drinking some new Budweiser product, maaxice.

dan dempsey said...

OK .. So I have now closely reviewed the revised School Board Action Report of Nov. 2, 2011 on the Cleveland waiver request from the required 150 instructional hours per credit. ...

The revision is just as deficient as the original SBAR I testified about.

HERE IS MY Letter =>
Sent to Michael DeBell, the Board, and OSPI's Dan Newell.