Looks like there is going to be a LOT of activity at the Board meeting on Wednesday. Apparently we may see:
- teachers who are unhappy about the possible class size increase
- community organizers unhappy about their exit from the Horace Mann building in order to make way for Nova to come back
- the so-called Our Schools group. Here's their reason to be at the Board meeting:
Nearly three years ago, the Seattle School District negotiated a collective bargaining agreement between teachers and the district that outlined strategies for closing Seattle’s opportunity and achievement gaps. Article II Partnership for Closing the Achievement Gap would develop and implement a parent/community engagement process, monitor stability of staff in low-performing schools, monitor data like discipline and attendance records in determining students at-risk for dropping out, and financially support school-level initiatives focused on closing gaps.
The Our Schools Coalition, a group of over 40 diverse community partners, helps influence contract negotiations by providing a third-party voice to the discussion. Its time again for communities to weigh in on our priorities for the next cycle.
Article II lists important strategies that have fallen through the cracks. There is work left undone from the last bargaining cycle. Join League of Education Voters and Our Schools Coalition at the Seattle School Board meeting to show support for the implementation of real strategies that can help close opportunity and achievement gaps in Seattle.
It's kind of cute because they want people to RSVP (to come to a Board meeting). Are they going to save seats?
Communities can tell the Board/Superintendent at any time what they believe about the teachers contract. I don't see the issue with the ability to do that.
But to say the parent/community engagement process "is work undone" is to not recognize the work of SPS's Bernardo Ruiz and his team. There IS still work to do but yes, a lot more outreach has and is being done and it's too bad the Our Schools front doesn't acknowledge that. (But for ed reformers if it's not their way, it's didn't happen or it doesn't matter.)
And "monitor stability of staff at low-performing schools?" Have they heard of TFA? Because that's the ultimate teacher mobility craze. Children in low-performing schools who may not have a lot of consistency and constancy in their home lives don't need a revolving door of TFA teachers.
And why do they think the district isn't monitoring data on discipline and attendance (especially in the face of public humiliation over discipline issues via the feds)? The City just had a very successful attendance program that the district was certainly part of. Did Our Schools miss that or it's not so useful to their narrative?
The district probably would "financially support" initiative to close the gaps if they weren't spending so much darn money on MAP and other ed reform driven initiatives.
At any rate, this is going to be a crowded and lively meeting. (Although, after public testimony, look for the crowds to all go away because most people just speak and leave.)