Over at the sleepy T editorial board, they woke up and decided (probably via Councilman Burgess), that they don't like the Creative Approach MOU. The title of this missive? "Seattle Public Schools' Innovation Plan Requires Tweaking, Scrutiny"
Here's what I wrote in the comments:
"The Seattle Public Schools' pursuit of innovation is a work in progress that would benefit from wider, sharper scrutiny."
Hello Times! Where have you been? Over at the Seattle Schools Community Forum blog, we have been discussing this over and over. Many us spoke out against it at Board meetings.
First, it isn't hard to get 80% of people to agree if you have a good plan. It's the details that count and clearly this detail got missed by the Times and Councilman Burgess who sat silently through the entire Board meeting where it was discussed and voted on.
Very funny as well mentioning the education levies have a simple majority. Parents and teachers had to fight to get that to happen. It wasn't always the case and it still isn't for education bonds.
"School turnarounds sometimes require a change in leadership and teachers. "
You mistake what the Creative Approach schools agreement is for. It is not a turnaround plan (that was embedded in the late charter school legislation - what did happen to that?). I have no idea why President DeBell would think that was its sole purpose.
"The board's oversight role needs to be clarified."
Again, where has the Times been? There is NO oversight from the Board because, unbelievably, they voted it AWAY. Oh they can see the applications and give input but oversight? Nope.
"The teachers union, a strong opponent of charters, is enthusiastic in its support of Seattle's plan."
And that may be because they also cut parents out of any kind of oversight or vote. District staff and the union will decide the fate of your school, not parents. Again, like the Board, parents can give input but no vote and there is not a single parent on this CA Oversight Committee.
Also district staff stood side-by-side before the Board for their support of this plan. Don't you put this all on the union - district senior staff WANTED it this way.
Hilarious. Again, Times, do keep up.