Tuesday, December 01, 2015

Tuesday Open Thread

Funny article of the day (but a possible teaching moment for your children) from The New Yorker, Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans. I have found that presidential campaigns are a good time to talk to your children about what "facts" are, how to prove them and why some people might not actually use them when trying to get elected to office.  (Of course, discussing politics with your children may make them jaded before their time so use caution.)

Thinking of holiday gifts? Cross "Hello Barbie" off your list.

The Washington State Budget &Policy Center has a very good article on poverty and children in Washington State.  What is compelling about their argument is that it's a "two-generation approach."  Meaning, you need to help parents at the same time you help kids.  You will often hear ed reformers say all it takes is a good teacher but that's pretty much nonsense when you talk about poverty. It's not that poor kids can't learn (another argument ed reformers love to use if you try to talk to them about issues of poverty and public education) - it's that the effects of poverty are so dire on learning.

Generally, I'm not so much a fan of NY Times writer, David Brooks, but this was a good piece on building school communities.


Researchers at the Harvard Graduate School of Education asked 10,000 middle and high school students if their parents cared more about their personal achievement or whether they were kind. Eighty percent said their parents cared more about achievement — individual over the group.


But there are some schools that nurture achievement precisely by building tight communities.

From the Eastside Education Network, an article about the crowding in Lake Washington School District that will ring familiar to many SPS parents.  There are some interesting ideas for what they might do to alleviate this issue in the article.  Like:

The District should move preschools from elementary schools and consolidate them in other facilities to free up classroom space.

If you think SPS has now done the best it could for sleep-deprived teens, there's a headmaster in Great Britain with another idea - "no mornings" for teens.

What's on your mind?

56 comments:

David said...

Anyone have informed thoughts on what will or won't happen with the new school board in place?

Every time we elect new people to the board, I get hopeful for change. But, despite great candidates this time, I'm more cynical than ever that we'll see any changes. Is change even possible?

I don't want much. I'd be happy with regular and detailed auditing of the budget. and rigorous enforcement of existing policy (including censuring and ultimately firing the superintendent when policy is not followed, such as missing or incomplete required reports). This level of supervision and auditing is the basic job of the school board, but I don't have much hope that we'll anything close to this. Are others more hopeful?

Anonymous said...

Think this article from Kentridge about the inclusive cheer squad is worth sharing: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/The-Sparkle-Effect-inclusive-cheer-squad-looking-to-expand-in-WA-359091371.html.
One of the girls on that squad was voted the Homecoming Queen at Kentridge this year! (Full disclosure: she's the daughter of a friend of mine.)

Momof2

Anonymous said...

Thanks for posting that Momof2. Hale is looking into setting up a Sparkle Team. The Cheer Team at Hale has had several members and honorary (didn't try out) special ed members of the team. Looking into expanding it.

HP

Anonymous said...

David, I am hopeful the new board will improve curricula for students. The last board voted for a better elementary math curricula but it only lasted a year before the staff undermined it with something else. Rick Burke gets math so I hope he insists on the original Math in Focus textbooks. While he is at it, middle and high schools could use better math also.
S parent

Anonymous said...

On the topic of that New Yorker article--

Some friends of mine and I have been joking on Facebook about who was in the geekiest clubs when we were in school. I thought I had won, but a friend told me she was in a grade school Propaganda club.

Apparently faculty would quiz the kids on identifying the logical fallacy or rhetorical device in a list of arguments.

Check it out: http://agloa.org/propaganda/

--JvA

Watching said...

Principals say teacher shortage now a crisis.

"Inadequate funding we've seen for the last decade or two does make day-to-day life for teachers more difficult," said Butts. "It's a major problem."


http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Pricipals-say-state-teacher-shortage-now-a-crisis-359205001.html

The state has serious issues and Olympia should not be wasting time on charter school legislation.

Anonymous said...

Great article in Salon about Common Core math, how parents(some on this blog) ridicule the questions as well as "wordy" math. A lot of the resistance boils down to parents' feelings being being hurt by not understanding the math their kids learn.

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/28/youre_wrong_about_common_core_math_sorry_parents_but_it_makes_more_sense_than_you_think/

Modern

Anonymous said...

Article on the Rainier Beach High School Students victory - bus passes to get to school.

http://southseattleemerald.com/2015/11/29/transit-fare-victory-highlights-power-of-student-led-organizing/

HP

FUR said...

Polling the readers of this blog. If anyone has any stories or data please share.

My SPS 1st grader, for the second time this year didn't have a substitute teacher. When this happens, the class is dispersed and the kids get no instruction for the day. If this has happened to your child, or you have data on how often it happens please share your stories here.

I have looked why this happens. Haven't found what I feel is the central cause, but I suspect that money would help.

Second question: Is there any movement afoot to raise a levee to generate, say 1 billion dollars in addition revenue for SPS instruction from Seattle voters? We just passed a billion dollar levee for transit. I would much rather that we had spent that money on schools.

If there is any group anyone knows of actively trying to do this, please pass on some information.

Cheers,

Rob MacDonald

Unknown said...

I'm thinking of the new board members taking office tonight, and of Giving Tuesday!
We have some ideas and links to donate to give in our schools on the SfT website:
http://www.soupforteachers.org/news/2015/sft-gives

-Liza from SfT

No Chance said...

Rob,

Please pay attention to mechanisms to "fund" education. You will find a proposal on the table called a "levy swap", which means Seattle Public Schools would loose tens of millions of dollars.

Melissa Westbrook said...

Modern, here's the thing. That premise about parents being "hurt" might hold some weight (although I don't think "hurt" is the right word - probably challenged/confused.)

But this goes back to any kind of curriculum change. Schools have a responsibility to bring the parents along if there is that drastic a change. You cannot fault parents for wanting to support their child's learning.

Rob, we do have levies that support learning. Problem is, more money than it should goes to administrative programs and not to schools. The district will put up for renewal in Feb. their two levies, Operations (about $750M) and BTA IV (about $440M.) Unfortunately the Board already voted on how to spend the money BUT the good news is that levies are really a pot of money. If enough parents advocated for changes in how the money is spent, the Board could vote to redirect the money.

Anonymous said...

Still wondering if anyone has any insight into the purpose and use of Amplify, and why the test results are so difficult to get. My 8th grader reported that the entire math test this year comprised problems on slope. Period. Why? And why won't they release the scores. My kid's school gave me a major run-around, and I still don't have the scores.

Curious

Charlie Mas said...

I am optimistic about the new Board members, as I have been optimistic about every new Board. While some may not think that things are getting better, I assure you that they are. Even the Board members that you regard as disappointing have, for the most part, been better than their predecessors.

Lynn said...

Curious,

The Amplify assessments have been customized by the district this year to cover only the CCSS that have been taught at this point. (I believe last year's fall testing covered the entire year's material.)

The assessments are meant to be used to provide information to both teachers and parents. Have you made a request for your child's test results in writing? If not, I'd do that - and would direct it to your principal.

There's a discussion of Amplify Beacon on pages five and six of this
document.

Jan said...

Thanks, Charlie, for that reminder about prior board directors. I forget, sometimes, about the bad old days -- when DeBell, Sundquist, Maier, and Chow were all on the board at once -- and all more than happy to just be rubber stamps and shills for corporate ed and the Broad style of school district leadership. Problems abound -- but when I look at what has happened to other districts with really weak boards AND a Broad superintendent -- it has been far worse than here (although MGJ was taking our board on the exact same ride -- school building closings, curriculum standardization and fidelity of implementation, program terminations, principal firings, large outsourced contracts to Big Ed companies --

We were darn lucky to escape with as little damage as we did.

Jan said...

The Amplify changes are very interesting. On the one hand -- if we are actually talking about assessments for the purposes of assessing whether kids have mastered taught material, it makes way more sense than the way MAP, Amplify, etc. were used earlier. Test kids on what they have been taught (and thus should know) -- and not the rest.

On the other hand, if we are going to customize a fairly expensive testing product, has anyone looked at whether it would be preferable to just devise and administer our own assessments? I don't recall that Amplify was cheap. If you are just going to give kids a test to see if they have mastered slope, I wonder if we don't have lots of folks that are perfectly capable of coming up with assessments on their own for a lot less than the cost of purchasing, and then customizing Amplify.

It is pointing out the obvious, I guess, to note that assessments devised at the class, or school (or even district) level have the added benefit allowing teachers to test on more, or less, material, if there are classes moving faster or slower than the "norm" (and there should be such classes, if we are truly differentiating instruction).

Anonymous said...

I'm so glad that every email and text to and from each of the new school board members will be posted online. They're truly holding up the promise of transparency.


Hurray

mirmac1 said...

Here's what happens. There's no sub, or building admin decides they don't need a sub. The resource room/SpEd teacher is told they're the teacher in in X GenEd classroom today.

The SpEd students are presumed to: not need education; and, not need their specially-designed instruction. This happens everyday, in many classrooms across the district. What clearer message does anyone need that SpEd students aren't expected to learn, aren't expected to meet standard.

Under the law, the district owes these children their lost hours. But who's counting, right?

What happens to the the $200/day buildings get for subs they forego via this means? Does it go into a kitty for purposes other than SpEd?

I want to hold those who perpetuate this fraud accountable. It takes more than one person, however.

Anonymous said...

Kind of a geeky thing but there's some cool aerial views of new school construction attached to the 11/20/2015 Friday Memo to the Board

BTA IV Projects update

The Teaching and Learning update has some stuff re: HCC testing etc that might interest some.

reader47

Anonymous said...

You should send your comment directly to the entire new board. They should stop that practice by Friday the 4th of Dec 2015. Listen to the people, follow the laws. Isn't that what we heard over the election cycle.

Now it's time for this board to "man up" and start forcing compliance, especially our new in resident OSPI lawyer.

PPK

Anonymous said...

My child has had the prinicpal for a substitute twice this year. I assumed a substitute wasn't available - though we have an assistant principal now - so maybe she is just choosing to get to know the kids better this way? She has attended field trips with us this year too. (I'm happy to see her doing this.)

West Seattle

Anonymous said...

@Modern:

So, a Common-Core supporter writes an article in Salon, concluding: "A lot of the resistance boils down to parents' feelings being being hurt by not understanding the math their kids learn." (Talk about blaming the victims.)

Now why would that be a problem or have any bearing on how a kid does in school? Everyone knows parents don't matter to their kids' learning experiences! And their solution is for parents to "re-educate themselves" so they can help their kids. Does the author know what "resources" are, and that they include "time?"

This CC proponent view is nothing new. It's no different from the viewpoints held by inquiry-based math proponents, which over-complicates and confuses students, especially those struggling or below grade-level, as Dan Dempsey has amply demonstrated.

But don't just take my word for it. I dare anyone reading this to read that Salon article and see whether it enlightens, or further complicates, your understanding of CC math concepts. Judge for yourselves.

WSDWG

Dave W. said...

Last year Seattle Human Resources Department didn't even bother to respond to the survey sent by OSPI on substitute shortage.

I guess a year late is better than nothing.

Melissa Westbrook said...

"I'm so glad that every email and text to and from each of the new school board members will be posted online. They're truly holding up the promise of transparency. "

I really don't like vagueness. What is this referencing?

Anonymous said...

I cannot comment on the schools without subs unless there is a district required program then they overload the system on less than a day notice and many subs are not available.. that is one problem. The district knows but does not put the jobs in the system for whatever crazy reason they have.

Then we have the reason Mirmac has stated. The building itself decides that they want no subs.. their favorites are not available so rather than have a "stranger" which means more hands on work, etc.. and the costs as depending on the subs seniority the costs can eat a budget so they go without.. double up, send to library have teachers/admins cover..

Then we have the last reason and often the most discerning one - there are problems in the building. Many many subs just won't go to certain buildings for many reasons.. this can be lack of lesson plans, seating charts, building support with discipline issues, secretarial issues (these women wield immense power) or any number of problems that lead subs to go "f" it not going there as another job will come up.

That is the biggest reasons jobs go unfilled. Trust me they can ban me from any building without due process and I can do the same.. et tu brutus.

I love going to a building and not one adult speaks to me, acknowledges me by name, ignoring me in shared classrooms, lunchrooms, in copy rooms and calling me "sub" as if I don't have a name. They need to follow some of the bully lessons that they hoist on the kids...and you wonder where kids learn to treat subs as dirt.. it starts at the top.. I have personally experienced and witnessed manipulations on both sides of classrooms about the "sub" it is a nasty job with not one perk or benefit. Shortage? Well kinda sorta and it is across the nation where standards are low to have one sit in the room. Minnesota has eliminated subs in one district by having Ipads and PC's and online lessons with an adult observer in public areas such as library or lunchroom. Soon this will be the teacher.. but hey turnabout is fair play right?

- Sub

Anonymous said...

From the Friday Memo:

Math Placement Process Altered

Due to some changes in testing, the current middle school Math placement plan has been reconsidered. All SPS students will be recommended to take the next Math course in sequence in grade 6. That is, if a student was taught grade 6 standards in grade 5, the student will be recommended for grade 7 as a sixth-grader. The Math program manager will work with the elementary schools to identify the current standards being taught to grade 5 students so the middle schools know what Math course is next for students.

In an effort to reduce barriers to advanced courses, the option for students to “opt up” one course beyond the next in sequence will remain. Families will be guided to make this decision based on:

 * standards mastered
 * the student’s willingness to be challenged and perhaps even frustrated in a course that is well beyond the next in sequence

Ultimate placement decisions remain the right and responsibility of the middle school and may be made based on a variety of factors at that school.

This change will be communicated to principals next week.


fyi

Anonymous said...

"I really don't like vagueness. What is this referencing?"

Apparently the new SPS website has the capability for board members to elect to post their SPS emails and other documents with a simple click. Apparently there will be a button in each email and when clicked, the email is sent to the web site where each director will have their own community blog. From what I've read, the PR dept will moderate the postings to insure any necessary redaction is performed by legal.

This is voluntary, but I hope the whole board chooses to use it.


Hurray

Melissa Westbrook said...

Even as someone who likes transparency, this does not appeal to me. There are some e-mails that, unless requested via public disclosure, should between a director and a constituent.

And, a series of e-mails, out of context, is not a blog.

Melissa Westbrook said...

I have to say, I smell a rat. This JUST came out? Right when there's a new Board?

Anonymous said...

Nonsense. Chills frank communications and turns them all into "poser" statements and communications, neutered and white-washed of anything meaningful.

Rat Circle.

WSDWG

Lynn said...

Here's a new statement from the advanced learning website: Please note: Those who opt out of District achievement testing are also opting out of Advanced Learning eligibility.

Funny - they can post that - but if it's not in the official policy or the procedure, I don't believe they can enforce it. I wonder if it applies to students who are already identified as highly capable or advanced learners? It sounds like it does.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Melissa Westbrook said...

Lynn, I think the Superintendent makes the policy on how AL is directed. That said, it would seem that there should be a bigger effort to explain this.

Anonymous said...

"District Achievement testing" is different from "State Achievement testing." I'm not sure of the context of Lynn's post - was it under eligibility testing? I could not find the reference (could you provide a link to the page?). Isn't it just stating you need to go through district achievement testing as part of the eligibility process? You may be able to provide additional testing results as part of an appeal, but you can't sidestep the district testing.

The AL website states:

IMPORTANT NOTE: Students who became eligible for Advanced Learning Programs after September 2014 retain eligibility throughout their education at Seattle Public Schools. There is NO need to re-test to maintain eligibility.

and

Achievement Testing (if needed): Administered in January.
Students will be administered an achievement test if they do not have recent achievement results from their school (ERB, ITBS, MAP, SBA, etc).


I don't think opting out of SBAC or Amplify would change AL status, but clarification from AL would helpful.

-parent

Lynn said...

I saw that statement on this
page, both under the chart and at the bottom of the page.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Lynn.

I also wonder if they are saying that kids currently in HCC programs will be removed if they opt out of any District testing??? Talk about blackmail!!

Momof2

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Lynn. Since it's under "Eligibility Criteria," I'd assume it's for eligibility decisions, not for continued enrollment. Sounds like if your school doesn't administer MAP, and you intend to apply for AL services, then your child needs to take the SBA. You need one or the other. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me, but schools should notify parents before SBA testing that opting out could impact AL eligibility for those applying in the fall.

-parent

Anonymous said...

@ parent, while requiring MAP or SBA scores might not sound unreasonable, it's not clear that that's allowed under state law. Here are a few things in the WAC:

WAC 392-170-045 Referral process for highly capable students.
Each school district shall establish written procedures for the referral of students to participate in programs for highly capable students. Such procedures shall permit referrals based on data or evidence from teachers, other staff, parents, students, and members of the community. A district's referral procedure for students who are highly capable may include screening procedures to eliminate students who, based on clear, current evidence, do not qualify for eligibility under WAC 392-170-055.

? - So you can screen people out based on evidence of not meeting the criteria, but can you screen them out for not having specific evidence available one way or the other?

WAC 392-170-055 Assessment process for selection as highly capable student.
(1) Students nominated for selection as a highly capable student, unless eliminated through screening as provided in WAC 392-170-045, shall be assessed by qualified district personnel;
(2) Districts shall use multiple objective criteria for identification of students who are among the most highly capable. There is no single prescribed method for identification of students among the most highly capable; and
(3) Districts shall have a clearly defined and written assessment process.

? - So if the screening process is only used to eliminate those who don't qualify based on evidence that they don't meet the criteria (and not just based on absence of data either way), then those who are nominated--including by a parent--should not be eliminated from further assessment. That suggests that not having certain scores available for review cannot disqualify you from eligibility.

WAC 392-170-060 Nondiscrimination in the use of tests.
All tests and other evaluation materials used in the assessment shall have been validated for the specific purpose for which they are used and shall accurately reflect whatever factors the tests purport to measure. If properly validated tests are not available, the professional judgment of the qualified district personnel shall determine eligibility of the student based upon evidence of cognitive ability and/or academic achievement. This professional judgment shall be documented in writing.

? - Does this really mean if the tests aren't available, or if the test scores aren't available?

HF

PS - It looks like they are once again revising the Highly Capable procedures... There's a redline version over on the AL website, for those interested.

FUR said...

Re Sub and Funding issue thread

Thanks to Sub and other folks for your insights and reply's.

Dave W. wrote, "Last year Seattle Human Resources Department didn't even bother to respond to the survey sent by OSPI on substitute shortage.

I guess a year late is better than nothing." David, this is fascinating. Do you have any other information? Could you point me towards something on this issue you have read?

On Funding: Melissa wrote, "Rob, we do have levies that support learning. Problem is, more money than it should goes to administrative programs and not to schools. The district will put up for renewal in Feb. their two levies, Operations (about $750M) and BTA IV (about $440M.) Unfortunately the Board already voted on how to spend the money BUT the good news is that levies are really a pot of money. If enough parents advocated for changes in how the money is spent, the Board could vote to redirect the money." Questions for you.

Are you saying that SPS is funded adequately now? Or if they got more money it would be wasted? Please elaborate.

Second question, is there any movement afoot in the city to increase funding to schools dramatically (by say 1 billion dollars over 10 years) that you know of? I mean in addition to the Operations and BTA dollars?

The city just voted for nearly 1 billion in progressive transportation spending over the next ten years (we could argue about the validity of the adjective I used to describe that levee, but lets at least agree, it was sold that way). Clearly, the voters are ready to sign some big checks right now for progressive causes. I'm just wondering if there is any similar movement afoot right now do something similar for SPS?

Thanks,

Rob MacDonald

Chris S. said...

I have heard the idea floated, after the defeat of the statewide income tax, of some kind of income tax limited to Seattle or King County. I wouldn't say there is any movement afoot, and careful consideration would need to be given to such an idea. What might be the responses from the legislature and the rest of the state? Would they send even more money to rural counties thinking we don't need it anymore?

I have this picture on my wall
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/welfare-state/Content?oid=6686284

Obviously, I think it would be better to have a statewide income tax. I view that as a source of many problems. Michael DeBell once said just imagine if we pooled all our PTA donations into an ad campaign for progressive taxation and that has really stuck with me. Of course, our opponents would probably dig deep and outgun us.

Lynn said...

Does anyone know why there are four speakers signed up for tonight who want to address issues related to language immersion schools? What is the issue?

GarfieldMom said...

Lynn, the language immersion schools have been working together to bring more light to the needs of their particular schools. I know that at one school, they are seeing attrition of their upper elem students who leave because they aren't getting enough reading support. Maintaining a cohort is critical to the success of the programs, so they are concerned. They were advised to make sure they are on the radar of all the new and returning board members.

Melissa Westbrook said...

I actually do not think any student should have to take the SBAC or the Amplify test to qualify for AL. I have two reasons.

One, neither test is made for this reason. (At least SBAC and MAP weren't but I'd be surprised if Amplify is made to be used for this reason.)
Two,students are already going to take a test to qualify. It's part of the process.

I continue to believe this is just one way to keep those possible high test scores in the fold. As well, if your child's ability to continue in the program is dependent on taking the SBAC or Amplify test EVERY year, then you can could on this being the reason.

FUR said...

Chris S.

Thanks for the great link and the thoughts.

We do have the B&O tax. What would it take for Seattle to raise it's own B&O tax rate and funnel the proceeds to SPS, I wonder? It is a progressive way to do this.

I have a call in with the state department of revenue to see what they say on this matter.

If there is no such movement, maybe it would make sense to start one. Say start with a meetup group like "Seattleits who want to raise a billion for SPS" or something a bit more catchy?

Melissa Westbrook said...

Do I think SPS is adequately funded? No, I don't. I don't think ANY district in the state is adequately funded. Want to know why the achievement gap isn't moving a lot? I could name two things - one, lack of cultural competency and two, lack of resources to support kids of color who may also be low-income. (Poverty is a huge issue that many in the ed reform movement refuse to acknowledge but it's folly not to.)

I think some in senior management have a real disconnect between what they believe will move the needle in SPS and what is happening on the ground in our schools. But they control the purse strings (and various boards have allowed to them to act in that manner) and so much doesn't get done.

What is truly appalling is that there are all these "initiatives" that seem to quickly fall by the wayside when there are so many other things - simple, concrete things - that could and should be done.

The fact that operationally this district struggles and struggles should tell you something. That part of the district is not under control and that is precisely why we don't get ahead. But yes, the issue of money is just not that it's not being spent in more constructive ways but that there is NOT enough of it.

Rob, the district is already going to ask voters for about $1B in Feb. The City is getting about $235M for the Families and Education levy. While I think that we are underfunded, I don't believe in going to the voters of Seattle for more.

No, the money must/should come from the state. That is why when I hear Rep. Magendanz say he will hold McCleary hostage until charter schools get their funding, I get enraged.

You know there was this phrase used in Brown v Board of Education "all deliberate speed" and that appears to be what is happening in the Legislature. It was wrong for Brown and it's wrong for McCleary.

I get that it's an enormous task for the Legislature. The pressure of 131 doesn't help (but they are largely going to ignore it except for K-3.) But solve it they must and kicking the can down the road has only earned them the ire of the Supreme Court.

I do not support asking Seattle taxpayers for more. I support the heaviest possible pressure on all our legislators to get this done.

Anonymous said...

"lack of cultural competency"

To which culture are you referring?

"I get enraged.", really?

I get enraged when I'm asked to fund incompetency.


Broken record

WestSeattle Parent said...

Is anyone else having challenges with HCC test scheduling? Today I was sent another boys test schedule information instead of my son's.

Melissa Westbrook said...

WestSeattle parent, please report this to AL AND your Board director and Stephen Martin, head of AL. This is one of many instances that I have heard of and it needs an IT fix stat.

Broken, I am speaking of many cultures - African-American, Native American, HIspanic - we have many students of different cultures on our district.

And, I agree - I don't like funding incompetency, either.

Melissa Westbrook said...

"I'm so glad that every email and text to and from each of the new school board members will be posted online. They're truly holding up the promise of transparency. "

The district let me know this is just not true. So please, verify your facts before you post them.

Anonymous said...

People you just aren't getting it. The way McCleary is going to be funded is to take money from Seattle and redistribute it to the rest of the state school districts. Our own legislators appear to be in favor of it. Saying again: NOT more money to Seattle. School money leaving Seattle. Oh, and legislature wants to cap what Seattle can spend on certain areas of its school budget. In the name of equity the plan is funneling $$$$$$ to the parts of the state that never vote to give their own tax money to schools.

One more time: McCleary funding plan = less money for Seattle. Go ask any Seattle legislator or the SPS Supe to his-her face. Mayor knows it too.

McClearySCAM

West Seattle Parent said...

Thanks Melissa. I'm sorry to hear other folks are experiencing the same thing. Do you have contact info for Leslie Harris? She is our new WS district rep. Already emailed AL and Stephen Martin.

Anonymous said...

"The district let me know this is just not true. So please, verify your facts before you post them."

It looks like you choose to believe SPS on this, suit yourself.

Hurray

Anonymous said...

To be fair, before McCleary, the state had levy equalization (and levy cap for some districts) to help fund districts whose tax base is small and poor. It wasn't that those voters weren't willing to raise their property tax, it was because property was worth so very little to begin with. It may be hard to believe living here in Seattle and King county, but a job making $15/ hr is considered a good paying job elsewhere. But the whole red-blue divide plays well politically to stir the zombies to action.

reader

Anonymous said...

The achievement gap is far more strongly correlated to family income and the percentage of single parent households in each population segment than it is with
anything going on inside of a school. How can we ever be successful at addressing the achievement gap without an open and honest conversation about the role of family in education? Why are schools "held accountable" for something largely beyond their control?

All this talk of "lack of cultural competency" and school funding just diverts attention from the real issues.

Education Begins At Home

Jet City mom said...

Have you read this article about how early academic learning hinders intellectual development?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/201506/how-early-academic-training-retards-intellectual-development