"De-Tracking" on Track in SPS

The Times has an article this morning on "de-tracking" which is quite illuminating.

First, the expert they site, Carol Burris, is the head of a group I belong to, the Network for Public Education.
Carol Corbett Burris became Executive Director of the Network for Public Education Foundation in August 2015, after serving as principal of South Side High School in the Rockville Centre School District in NY since 2000.  Prior to becoming a principal, she was a teacher at both the middle and high school level. 

Dr. Burris co-authored Detracking for Excellence and Equity (2008) and Opening the Common Core: How to Bring ALL Students to College and Career Readiness (2012), and authored On the Same Track: How Schools Can Join the 21st Century Struggle against Re-segregation (2014).
She is one of the brightest lights in pushing back on corporate ed reform and a great thinker on public education.

The Times' article cites her work in New York where she helped her district's de-track middle/high school students and that work showed an increase for African-American students as well as white, Latinos and Asian students, for the Regents Diploma (for A-A students, the rise was from 32-82% in four years.)

I again note that Maple Elementary tried this in 2006 by having Spectrum-level teaching in all their classrooms. It worked but Maple had to fund this on their own and when they found they could not carry on, the district did not step in to support this pilot effort.  That's too bad.

Washington Middle School, in their own attempt, seems to be seeing results.   

The article cites "a districtwide plan to eliminate all Spectrum-only classrooms in elementary schools" by this fall.  Their link is to a late June Friday Memo authored by Michael Tolley.  The problem with this - that the Times' article doesn't state, either because they didn't ask or didn't know - is that PARENTS were not informed that this was "the plan." And shame on the district for that.


Here's what the article says happens in the classroom - teachers give an assignment - the same content/topic -  that has been differentiation for students with advanced vocabularies and those with lesser reading skills.

Principal Follmer at Washington says something that is key, "Role models are critical," "Take away role models and that's the best way to have low expectations."

First, it is absolutely true that teachers like high achievers in their classrooms.  Those students tend to drive interest and dialog.  (And, while some teachers may say they want all kids in the classroom for diversity, it also serves to help their teaching.)

But that second quote from the principal?  It does not speak well of either a principal or teachers to say that if the high achievers are gone, that means the school has low expectations.  Charlie says this over and over - there is absolutely no reason that schools cannot teach classes at whatever level they want.

But the key seems to be making sure the high achievers are in that classroom.  Studies show that it does help but the kids it helps are the students on the low end.  The students on the high end tend to stagnate.

Again, I have no problem with classes with multiple ability ranges.  But it takes a lot more work for teachers, the ability to know how to differentiate the curriculum and, I believe, smaller class sizes.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I forgot to sign.

Sad Mom
NESeattleMom said…
Ouch, I think Garfield Mom is real, and that her anecdotes are real. Students get influenced by the social changes that the teachers in the school try to effect, plus they can see with their own eyes the separation. But, at age 14-18, they don't know if the educational experiment will work. And, anonymous, you should name yourself. Sorry you are angry. I can relate, but other people also have a different perspective. I think this experiment will not close the gap, but will bring it into individual classrooms. I know that private school is not an option for many HCC families. And going 'back' to our neighborhood school is also not an option. The feeling I get from this plan is that the planners figure HCC kids will do fine no matter what. But if the experiment is not helpful for the kids who are achieving/surpassing standards in school, what is the consequence for them educationally and in their personal life? Does anyone care?

FWIW, Seattle Schools never used the word "gifted" (I think because of PR problems but yes, HCC is the gifted program.

Sped Parent, what do you mean by "some segregation?" Are you talking about AP classes?

No one is fooling them with appeals to the importance of "cohorts" or "rigor" or "academic challenge" for some but not for all

One, I don't think anyone is trying to "fool" anyone. Two, if it were true that there is only "academic challenge" for some then the district would have had a lawsuit on its hands a long time ago. You can certainly make the case (if this was your belief) that HCC uses a biased test to find students or perhaps students of color have not been encouraged/supported in taking harder classes. But I don't believe the district has done anything illegal.

This brings me to one other choice that the Garfield adm and teachers could have made; encourage and support more students to take the more rigorous classes. No one has said that has been the case and that might be another way forward.

Except, I don't think this is just about academics. I think it's about integrating students more. I'd be willing to bet it will happen in these classes but not in the halls. Time will tell.

Garfield Mom, personally I do trust teachers. But, even Jesse Hagopian, probably the most famous teacher in Seattle, has tweeted that the adm and teachers have been working on this all year.

So when you speak of trust, how come the students and parents haven't been told them? Why do they learn of it after school is out and from a newspaper article? I do not believe this is any accident and that the adm/teachers wanted to present this as a fait accompli. Problem is, this is a change that is a big change and could have ripple effects throughout the district.

Are HCC changes to be like Spectrum - death by a thousand paper cuts? And the silence from the district is quite noticeable. And those cuts are the MO of Michael Tolley so I think this is just one major step for changes in AL.



Anonymous said…
Death by a thousand paper cuts?

Please! Cut the drama, boss.

Spectrum was systematically removed as a self-contained program, starting at Lawton, then Wedgwood, Whittier, etc. Each school where it was removed has done fine, better in fact. The open sore of segregation by "ability" has been healed and the families and students are very happy that the labeling and animosity are gone.

Go to the website of any of the Spectrum schools and you'll find a content community where kids of a wide range learn and grow together.

Where are all the unhappy parents? There in the cohort! And they're still miserable!

Tom
Anonymous said…
GarfieldMom's post doesn't sound made-up to me. But it makes me sad to think maybe advanced learners should never have been put in schools like GHS in the first place, because the social differences get to be too hard for everyone. Being in a diverse school is wonderful, esp. for kids who aren't white, but maybe HCC is actually better off in less diverse places because it doesn't cause this stress. It's too bad.

If the kids themselves want blending then can't they opt for honors or non-honors themselves, without being all forced into one class? They're already allowed to do that, right?

The thing is, this has been handled so badly by GHS teachers that it really makes a lot of people not trust them (obviously, the FB post doesn't help). Maybe the stress of doing their job under those conditions is getting to be unhealthy. The odd thing is I'm sure most of them are white but maybe the environment actually stresses out white people more? Because they feel more to blame?

GarfieldMom, almost no one wants HCC "segregation" for racial reasons. I can't believe that's true. Especially in liberal Seattle. If HCC had a bunch more black and Latino kids I think most parents would be thrilled. I truly do.

Ambushed
Anonymous said…
Replying to GarfieldMom above,

My experience is the exact opposite of yours. I also talk to Garfield students all the time, both HCC and non-HCC, including my own child. And I also have heard that the school is segregated, both academically and socially. But not a single one of them I've spoken to recently (in my own informal "poll") believes that detracking or "Honors For All" is a realistic or desirable solution to that segregation, and every one of them stated that they thought the standards of the LA and Social Studies classes would be decline in quality (and they had many reasons why, some of which have been touched on in this blog).

And interestingly, none of them had taken or even heard of that alleged poll of Garfield kids mentioned in the latest mailing from GHS, stating that "students are overwhelmingly in support of this change." That is a broad and unsubstantiated statement, to put it mildly. Which students? Not the ones I've spoken to.

-another Garfield mom
"Spectrum was systematically removed as a self-contained program, starting at Lawton, then Wedgwood, Whittier, etc. Each school where it was removed has done fine, better in fact."

Parents in AL were never informed this was the case. The AL department never acknowledged this. It may have been "systematically" done but with no notice. As for your second sentence, what is the data to show that? As well, the numbers for HCC have grown and this is very likely because of the end of Spectrum.
Anonymous said…
Thank you for contributing a different perspective on the school Another Garfield Mom. Starting high school is a big step and it helps to get a feel for the atmosphere (esp. now that all this controversy has exploded!).

Ambushed
Anonymous said…
GarfieldMom,

I don't know anyone working to "maintain the segregation," nor is there anyone pretending it doesn't exist. (But remember, it's largely self-segregation, not SPS-imposed segregation. Honors and AP classes are not limited to HC students.)

I don't know anyone who is "appealing for 'academic challenge' for some but not for all," either. I think HC parents, probably more than any other group, value academic challenge for all. Most value it over social engineering even.

That's great that the GHS students with whom you talk are "not hung up on having blended classes at all." There are probably some incoming HC 9th graders who would feel the same, had they any clue this was about to happen. However, I'm pretty darn sure there's another group who would be very upset to hear about this. Not because they want or expect HC-segregated classes, but because they DO want the most challenging class available--and it's not clear that this change will provide that. Many of these kids have be bored beyond tears in HCC middle school, and they need--finally--some challenging work.

Are you serious that you "can't fathom why it is that some of the same people who criticize education reformers and standardized testing proponents for failing to respect teachers' professional experience and autonomy are now second-guessing those very teachers and deciding that they know better"? Have you watched the way this has played out, with the apparently premeditated "bait and switch" of class registration, the principal's comment about chipping away at a system that tracks gifted middle schoolers into AP classes, the teacher's obnoxious rant about HC students and their parents, and lack of a clearly communicated plan for how students will be appropriately challenged and supported under the new approach? Your disbelief of parent concerns is what's hard to fathom.

Finally, that's great that you have such respect for the teachers. You presumably have some knowledge of them and their abilities, so it's good to hear that kids are in what you perceive to be capable hands. But it's not really "THEIR school and THEIR student body"--as taxpayers and parents, it's OUR school and OUR student body. We are happy to let them do their jobs and will trust them to teach our kids, but only if they acknowledge that we are partners in these efforts. We also need to know that they are considering the needs of all kids--including those who are highly gifted academically. Blind trust in teachers hasn't always worked well in middle and elementary school, so why would we expect it to now?

Stunned
Anonymous said…
This is what's going to happen:

• All advanced learning is eliminated in the name of desegregation, including HCC
• Garfield enrollment plummets and becomes resegregated as kids choose neighborhood HS because there's no point to going to Garfield any more
• North end schools' enrollment continues to boom - yet with advanced learning gone, kids' needs aren't met
• Enrollment at private schools also booms
• Middle class parents who can't afford private schools look around desperately for another option
• Many of them move to the suburbs
• Most who can't or don't have only one option given to them: Charter Schools.
• Seattle sees mass privatization of its public schools, cheered on by parents of advanced learners

This all became inevitable the moment that defenders of the Garfield detracking plan chose to attack their critics, rather than persuade them and/or work with them.

-Done Deal
Anonymous said…
Agree with West.

This whole debate has gone off the rails into an anti-HCC rant. But there IS no HCC in high school. Anyone can take honors classes. Honors classes are opt-in. If the school wants honors classes to be more diverse, why don't they encourage middle school LA/SS teachers to counsel more students to opt in?

Also, high school is not the time to try to solve all of HCCs inequity problems. High school is the time all kids need to learn as much as they can and find where they excel (be it sports, drama, music, or yes, academics). Not everyone is going to be equally talented in all these areas. Why vilify the ones who are academically inclined?

Worried
Done Deal, that's pretty much the game plan for much of the country. Run public schools into the ground (in various ways), then complain how bad they are and that we would be better off with charters and vouchers.

Also, from the Sped Facebook page:

"I had a conversation with Wyeth Jessee this morning about his changing positions and the intentions around a new Executive Director of Special Education. Wyeth has been promoted to Chief of Student Services. He will continue to have oversight of Special Education but will also have oversight with ELL, HCC, and other services such as discipline, counselors, and mental health. It sounds as though his intention is working toward deconstructing the silos that exist in this district by integrating "special services" across different domains, increasing accountability and increasing strategic planning and data driven decision making. The hiring process for the position of Executive Director will be handled by Wyeth and he has started to assemble a hiring team, which includes parents. He sounds committed to finding the right person for this job, and has included a search for external candidates.

Again, I would urge those with concerns to go directly to Wyeth with your questions and concerns. If there are questions about my email, please let me know and I am happy to clarify what I know.

Lori Hiltz, President
Special Ed PTSA"

I will see if I can get an interview with him.
Anonymous said…
Can we find even one case, anywhere, from anyone... where Wyeth Jessee has been honest or helpful?

wondering
Anonymous said…
It might help to give details on my own life experience. I originally come from another part of the country. Growing up, we had posters left on our doorstep saying we didn't belong in the neighborhood and we should get out. My family was denied entry into a restaurant because "we don't serve your kind." I was routinely called racial epithets to my face in school. And I cherish my community. Yet I don't for one second want de-tracked classes for my HCC daughter. Because I want the best possible education for HER future.

Ambushed
Anonymous said…
I'm assuming the supplemental language arts class, Read 180, is replacing Read Right. The PTSA heavily funded Read Right. If I remember correctly it was the second biggest line item in the budget. Is the PTSA funding Read 180? Anyone know?

Old Bulldog
Anonymous said…

"Parents in AL were never informed this was the case. The AL department never acknowledged this. It may have been "systematically" done but with no notice. As for your second sentence, what is the data to show that? As well, the numbers for HCC have grown and this is very likely because of the end of Spectrum."

1st: parents were most definitely informed and as I recall the process at Lawton was exhaustive and well-documented.

2nd: look at the school climate surveys before and after the removal of self-contained classrooms.

3rd: the mass increase in HCC enrollment is most likely the result of herd mentality, i.e, parents see other students they want their kids around going to the cohort and follow them. Just wait until you see the numbers going into the cohort for 6th grade next year, it's a stampede.

Finally, yes, AL changed the delivery model for Spectrum to include cluster-grouping.

Tom
Tom, I meant in the systemic way that was referenced. That it was discussed school-by-school is not informing parents especially parents who read the website and believe that is what will be at the school. I know that principals did not tell people on tours at every school about this change.

Climate surveys are not academic outcomes. They ARE important but we are being told this is for academic outcomes.

No, it's not herd mentality. It's the inability to get their kid's needs met in their school.

Yes, AL changed that but again, without discussion or notice to parents at large.
Anonymous said…
Another Dad: Please consider sending your post to the School Board and District Administrators.

The information about CogAT should have been already known (probably is not).

Does the author talk about the validity of multiple testings or retestings within a certain window?

The high numbers of qualified students in the "hot zones" take on a new meaning with Lohman's explanation.

I also agree regarding the teachers: that this approach is a reaction of despair at unfairness that is otherwise beyond their control, rather than a correct, systematic approach to educating students (which should include groupings).

When the entire identification scheme is invalid and does not follow the discrepancy model that is intrinsic to proper scoring, the status of the current program itself is in doubt.

The silence of response to your information is interesting.

Many thanks for your post.h

FWIW
Lynn said…
Lawton claimed they were going to use Diana Brulles's cluster grouping model and then did the opposite - evenly dealing out the students so every teacher received a fair share of advanced, on-level and struggling students.

I saw somewhere that Olympic View is creating a classroom for advanced students in at least one grade.
Anonymous said…

"Climate surveys are not academic outcomes. They ARE important but we are being told this is for academic outcomes."

Prove that kids are doing worse academically. You can't.

"No, it's not herd mentality. It's the inability to get their kid's needs met in their school."

Again you have no proof, whereas I actually have a student in SPS and know parents who have moved into the cohort, some stayed, some left, some with HC status never entered. You hear from your pro-cohort friends and fans, I hear from parents without an axe on the grinder.


"Yes, AL changed that but again, without discussion or notice to parents at large."

It was posted on the AL website and each school affected had lengthy discussion.

Tom
Anonymous said…
I know several black kids who are HCC qualified by testing. However, they went, full scholarship, to private schools in the area. If the private schools are snapping up these talented kids to improve THEIR demographics - the district shouldn't be blamed for that. There are so many other things to blame the district for.......like moving the HCC kids around like a commodity to raise test scores at troubled schools (without actually helping at risk kids) and then removing the advanced learning options from those schools to avoid looking elitist. What a cynical, criminal way to treat both kids in need and our highly academically motivated kids.

-SPSparent
Anonymous said…
There was probably silence because we have heard another dad's info many times (so has the board, but it can always bear repeating). We are not using best practices but we are using the same testing scheme most districts do, except we don't test everyone, which is a big problem to me. We should test every second grader. Maybe you can self refer before that, I don't know.

I have often thought about having just the top few percent if each school go to hcc, because the hot zones thing is offensive as well as the outlier thing, but then we need to allow each school to meet the needs of the average kid who is there, rather than the average kid in Seattle. So North Beach will be teaching a much more advanced curriculum than Wing Luke. Which seems more inequitable than having more kids from one school or another come to hcc.

-sleeper
Anonymous said…
Gosh darn, effected not affected

Tom

BTW, Lynn, we're you or are you a Lawton parent? How do they follow or not follow the Brulles model? Do they do walk-to's or pull-outs? How about Whittier and Wedgwood, do you know how or if they follow Brulles' model?

Tom

Charlie Mas said…
Even if the community trusted the schools and the school district completely, the District still should make an assessment of the quality and efficacy of their programs. It's a fundamental duty of management. They don't. In fact, they aggressively refuse to do so.

We have teachers and schools claiming that they offer differentiated instruction in their classrooms to meet the needs of advanced learners. Do they? Maybe. What proof can they offer? None. When they teach advanced learners to a different set of academic expectations, what Standards are they using? We don't know. Where is that documented? Nowhere.

I'm really troubled by that. I would like it if the Board Directors were also troubled by that.

People say that the district's Advanced Learning programs are great. Really? What could possibly form the basis for that conclusion? I don't know how a family can be happy with the Advanced Learning services their child is receiving without knowing what their child is supposed to be taught. In the absence of any sort of advanced curriculum or Standards, what could form the basis for any evaluation of the service? How can you possibly answer that the schools are doing the job if you have no description of the job they are supposed to do?

I want to make it very, very clear. This is not a pedagogical problem. This is a management problem. Problem? No, this isn't a management problem; this is a raging management failure.

And it's not just Advanced Learning. The District spends all kinds of money on language immersion. Why? What is it supposed to achieve? And if we knew what it was supposed to achieve, how can we know if it is achieving it? Same for Montessori. Same for all of the option schools. I won't include Special Education in this list because I have been chastised for doing so. Where is there any evidence that any of the District's programs or services do what they are supposed to be doing? There is none. We do have the state test scores for the schools, but I have to ask, is that the purpose of the schools? To get kids to pass the state tests?

With the Garfield de-tracking of 9th grade English and Social Studies through the compulsory enrollment in Honors for every student, we see at least lip service being paid to the definition of Standards beyond the state Standards and at least lip service being paid to assessing the consequences of the change.
Anonymous said…
SPS used to have sample CogAT questions on the AL website. Maybe the info has been lost with the updated website (like so much other info that used to be posted). You also used to be able to see sample questions on the publisher's website (Riverside), but a quick search shows CogAT is now part of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

(Not everything is a conspiracy...)

-parent
Tom, you can't turn what you said back on me:

"Prove that kids are doing worse academically. You can't."

You said they were doing better. I said a climate survey isn't academics. So did you mean better from a school climate or academics? I don't have to prove anything.

Tom, info was posted AFTER the fact. I am talking about the district being upfront with the changes occurring. I also know there WAS pushback at Lawton and View Ridge because I got e-mails from parents at the time asking for help.

Ms. Brulles actually came to View Ridge to speak (and I never got an answer as to who paid for it) and said View Ridge was not following her recommended plan for integration.

SPS Parent, I have heard this as well over the years - the black kids who take and score well on the HCC test get recruited to go to Lakeside, etc.
Anonymous said…
Melissa, that letter about Wyeth Jessee is an important find, particularly this part:

"It sounds as though his intention is working toward deconstructing the silos that exist in this district by integrating "special services" across different domains, increasing accountability and increasing strategic planning and data driven decision making."

This appears to mean the total elimination of all advanced learning programs and possibly special ed programs too, combining all kids into one class, with one curriculum, and using testing and probably "personalized learning" (i.e. iPads) to provide differentiated instruction.

In other words, a total disaster.

-Done Deal
Anonymous said…
aA usual Charlie singles out AL for criticism but substitute gened, ELL, SpED, homeless services for AL in your post and nobody gets a detailed review of progress or efficacy of programs or plans for their student's learning.

Why should AL parents get special treatment?

And Melissa you brought up academics, not me, I said read the climate surveys, so ya, prove it if you think academics are down. Test scores from schools that eliminated self-contained don't show a drop so I don't know what you're talking about.

Parents were emailing you to help them? What kind of help and why do you side with those parents and not the gened parents who found the segregating by ability very harmful?

Tom
Tom, you clearly don't understand why I asked you about climate versus academics and this is the last time. You said:

"Each school where it was removed has done fine, better in fact."

Better in what way? I asked and you said school climate surveys were up. Okay but that's not academics. You now say they are doing better by test scores. How hard was that to answer? Naturally, I will be interested to see if that is "in fact" true.

I'm not really siding with one group or another. (And, for the record, I help ANY parent who writes to me. I don't control who contacts me and who doesn't.)

What I am saying - and you are not hearing - is that the district's website and its AL department has never made what they are doing clear on Spectrum for years now despite being asked (and again, I have the emails where I did ask and was told "nothing" was changing.)

I do support Advanced Learning programs especially for those in HCC. I do believe in the cohort model. But also believe all kids have things to learn from each other so some inclusion is fine.

But what Charlie and I consistent argue for is transparency, consistency and family engagement. I don't see this in the Garfield initiative. We have been around this district a long time and when you see something brought out as a done deal, it's the time to get suspicious.

You can believe whatever you want about segregated versus non-segregated. But it's the HOW rather than the actual that bothers me.

Anonymous said…
Gosh, Tom, why on earth would a family want to leave the neighborhood school when parents like you would obviously be so "welcoming"?

You said: Each school where it was removed has done fine, better in fact. The open sore of segregation by "ability" has been healed and the families and students are very happy that the labeling and animosity are gone.

You mean the schools are better after they've, essentially, forced out the students who most needed HC services? Better off once families of students for whom the school refused to meet their academic needs left for HCC? Nice.

Herd mentality based on who parents want their kids to be around? That's complete BS if you're suggesting they want a segregated cohort, as I suspect you are. But yes, I admit I moved my child to HCC not wholly for the academics, but also the people. He was tired of other kids making fun of his interests, his knowledge level, his "uniqueness", etc. He was tired of not having many friends he could relate to. He was tired of his teacher not letting him answer questions because it made the other kids feel bad. He was tired of the class celebrating if he made a mistake, since it was so rare. And I was tired of other parents trying to get their digs in, and tired of having to avoid talking about my kid so I didn't make them feel bad about their own, since parents are weird that way. But herd mentality? Hardly.

Stunned
GarfieldMom said…
Actually, ouch, I've been posting here as GarfieldMom for years, and a lot of people who post here know who I am in real life. Some even know me well enough to know how involved I am at the school. Does anyone here know who you are?
Kids, we're not here to out anyone. Back to the topic.

One comment of interest - posted elsewhere - is what the make-up of the high schools will look like after BEX IV and the reopening of Lincoln. It could be quite different and will likely have real and lasting impacts on schools.

What I hope would happen with this Garfield pilot (and I assume the district plans to do this elsewhere) is that the teachers will have such great content that students will be engaged and the lessons will be lively. Of course, with large class sizes and this district's history of NOT supporting new initiatives, I worry.

I feel there is a bit more of social justice programming in this move than necessarily straight academics but that the more engaging lessons will be beneficial to all. It certainly won't be the same as an AP class but AP is a much more specific kind of class that doesn't necessarily involve as much discussion as might happen in these new classes.

I am also being told that the PTSA knew about this effort and that the teachers had attempted to come to a PTSA meeting to talk about it but it didn't happen. So it is unclear to me if the school made any real effort to inform ALL parents (because we all know not all parents go to or are part of the PTSA). Would be a good question for Director Blanford except he cancelled his community meeting for Saturday.
Anonymous said…
Herd mentality normally refers to persons being influenced by the action of others. In this case families see some others going to the HCC and follow believing it's better.

dictionary user
Anonymous said…
"I do believe in the cohort model."

Me too.

guitar player
Maureen said…
I am also being told that the PTSA knew about this effort and that the teachers had attempted to come to a PTSA meeting to talk about it but it didn't happen. So it is unclear to me if the school made any real effort to inform ALL parents

Melissa, Oh my gosh, are you going to complain because the Principal and teachers ONLY tried to talk to the PTSA and didn't go door to door to make sure everyone knew about this "enough" in advance (whatever that would be.) Now you are really splitting hairs. Do you not hold the PTSA responsible for representing and communicating with ALL of the families at the school? If so (knowing you were a PTSA officer at some point) I am SO glad my kids' schools generally had PTOs not PTSAs. Gotta say, I was a PTSA member at RHS and I never felt particularly well informed there so heaven help the people who didn't pay their dues.
Anonymous said…
Oh my gosh, are you going to complain because the Principal and teachers ONLY tried to talk to the PTSA and didn't go door to door to make sure everyone knew about this "enough" in advance (whatever that would be.)

Uhhh, wouldn't the most appropriate group to inform be the families on incoming 9th graders? Did the Principal and teachers announce this at the open houses? Did the counselors announce it when kids were registering for classes? No need to go door to door when they have a list of who's supposed to be coming in the fall.

And THAT is what informing people "enough in advance" would look like (in case you actually wondered, which I doubt).

Common Sense

Watching said…
"Uhhh, wouldn't the most appropriate group to inform be the families on incoming 9th graders? Did the Principal and teachers announce this at the open houses? Did the counselors announce it when kids were registering for classes? No need to go door to door when they have a list of who's supposed to be coming in the fall."

Exactly. When did Garfield decide upon de-tracking? The district has a responsibility to inform all parents before enrollment. If the principal, PTA and teachers knew of this change...the change should have been communicated to parents during Open House visits.
Ms206 said…
I am fine with sports being no-cut, but there should still be varsity and JV. In college, the intramurals are for non student-athletes.
Maureen, how is it "splitting" hairs to expect that a school-wide change in academics would be adequately communicated to parents during the school-year? I clearly stated that many parents either don't belong/go to PTSA meetings. So it is important for the schools to make sure all parents - incoming and current - know of these changes.
Maureen said…
I'm sorry, I'm just getting impatient with the expectations here. Virtually no one is ever informed of any academic changes at any schools in Seattle in advance. And when they are informed, their complaints are virtually never heard. What happened when AP Euro was dropped at RHS in favor of Human Geography for all? What happened when all the APP programs were split over the years? What happens to virtually every Sped program in every school every year?

I find this whole "I'm shocked and angry that Ted Howard didn't send my HCC 8th grader a personal note about this in time for them to choose Roosevelt or Ingraham or Nova or the Center School or Cleveland or private instead of what is still the best HS in Seattle for advanced learners" really annoying.

I guess I get it. Some of you are new here. And most of you feel like your kid has lost something. But it's just another sign of privilege that so many of you have an expectation that your kid should get notified of something like this when the reality is that SPS has zero history of communicating effectively with families about anything the least bit controversial. I was actually pleasantly surprised that some attempt was made to talk to the PTSA. Guess I'm too old and jaded. Good thing my kids are done.
Anonymous said…
The Lawton mess was well documented on this blog. It was divisive, painful,and splintered the school. During this time, Lawton also had many principal changes and structural changes to its BLT.

Over one summer, one teacher and one parent went to Susan Enfield and got her ok to chang the spectrum delivery. There was no plan for what was to come. That actually came out from research and discussion a year later after the news broke and questions went unanswered. I was there and I watched how rough the next year was. People left. And not all because of the loss of self contained or were even spectrum parents. . I know personally quite a few left because they were blindsided by the news when it broke and surprised by the harsh vitriols. Some were nervous of staying because things got so divisive. Some left because it was too much drama and want more stability. Many of these people were vested in the school and were heavy lifters, volunteering with all the kids in the school, not just in their child's class. One parent told me before she left for a different school it was maddening to have people who never bothered to talk to her to all of sudden telling her what she was thinking as if they knew her, her beliefs, and her family. What they said was hurtful and ironically racist, because people didn't get they were repeating stereotypes to her face and had no clue about her family history. If people had asked what the spectrum parents were actually thinking, they might have been surprised. My friend didn't need self containment for her child. What she and many of the parents wanted to know was a clear plan in place with the dismantling. That wasn't there. It was a confusing time. The reasons to dismantle became one of classroom management, segregation and elitism. I'm not sure when parents submitted the paperwork for testing, this was what they were walking into. The instructions for the testing and the AL info gave no indication of this. What's even more ironic this parent didn't want HCC because she wanted her kids to have that diversity in her local school. Yet some of the parents who supported the end of spectrum and calling out fellow parents for being elitists ended up later with their kids in HCC.

That's how mess up this whole thing is.

weary

Common Decency said…
Seriously, Maureen? There are parents willing to have their kids commute to S.Seattle for a pathway and you don't think there is an obligation for the district to inform parents of a program change? Wow.


"But it's just another sign of privilege that so many of you have an expectation that your kid should get notified..." Wow.
Charlie Mas said…
Tom wrote: "aA usual Charlie singles out AL for criticism but substitute gened, ELL, SpED, homeless services for AL in your post and nobody gets a detailed review of progress or efficacy of programs or plans for their student's learning."
Actually, Tom, as usual, Charlie wrote about the failure to assess quality and efficacy in all those programs.

See this paragraph from my comment on 7/12 at 12:58pm:
"And it's not just Advanced Learning. The District spends all kinds of money on language immersion. Why? What is it supposed to achieve? And if we knew what it was supposed to achieve, how can we know if it is achieving it? Same for Montessori. Same for all of the option schools. I won't include Special Education in this list because I have been chastised for doing so. Where is there any evidence that any of the District's programs or services do what they are supposed to be doing? There is none. We do have the state test scores for the schools, but I have to ask, is that the purpose of the schools? To get kids to pass the state tests?"

This concern for evaluations of ALL programs has been a consistent theme for me for several years now. The only way for you not to know that would be through willful ignorance.

Do ever read what other people write or do you just presume that you know what they will write?

As for communication, the former HCC students entering Garfield are not the ones experiencing a change here and therefore not the ones who should have received communication about de-tracking. The former HCC students signed up for Honors classes and are getting them. No change. The students who should have been informed are those who signed up for regular English or regular Social Studies and have been forced into an Honors class that they did not want. They could have chosen the Honors class if they wanted it, but they didn't want it. Now that choice has been taken from them. Moreover, a number of them have also been forced into a non-credit English prep class. That not only takes away their opportunity for an elective as freshmen but also takes away an opportunity for them to earn a credit.

Yes, by all means, let's complain about the lack of communication, but not for the HCC students - for the students who chose against Honors.
Anonymous said…
West said: Using my kid as a role model is perverse, twisting his ego in unhealthy ways, and creating social resentment where there was none. Using my kid as a role model is perverse, twisting his ego in unhealthy ways, and creating social resentment where there was none.

Interesting. My HCC qualified child, in a MS "Spectrum" program that has become "blended", told me the other day that she thinks she's become arrogant about her intelligence. She's a great kid and it surprised me to hear it, but I think I notice it in her, too. She's treated by other kids and the teachers as the smart one. She ends up grouped for projects with kids that don't do the work. She is resenting it.

Qwerty


Charlie Mas said…
Also, as with the de-tracking at Garfield, any "discussion" of previous de-tracking decisions has always - ALWAYS - come after the decision was made. That's not community engagement, that's not a discussion, that's feedback. Let's not pretend that they are the same.

At Lawton, Wedgwood, McClure, Washington, and everywhere else that Spectrum was dismantled, the decision was announced, not discussed.

Again, this isn't special for Advanced Learning; it's how Seattle Public Schools does business. Garfield in particular has a dreadful record of community engagement - with all communities.
Charlie Mas said…
Unhappy with how your child's school has failed to communicate with you?
Unhappy to be shut out of discussions about your child's education?

Hit them where they hurt. Opt out of the standardized tests. Write a clear letter in which you remove your child from testing and make it very clear WHY you're doing it. Tell them that your child is not a pawn to be moved about on their chess board. Tell them that your child is not a resource for the school, but that the school should be a resource for your child.

Your child's test score is the one thing you have that the school wants.

Sure, one person might not be able to negotiate much through the control of one test score, but what if families bargained collectively? What if a group of families said that they would opt their children out of the tests if they didn't get straight answers? Then you would have something.

What if every ALO family in a school said that they would opt their child out of the tests and encourage other families to opt out of the tests until they received a coherent set of academic expectations for ALO, an enforceable description of the implementation, and an evaluation of the program's quality and efficacy? Mind you, not a promise of these things, but these actual things. In other words - opting out this year even if the school agrees, then, next year, after the work is done, the students start taking the tests again. Do not accept promises, do not give credit. Credit is for honest people with a track record of fulfilling their side of bargains. That's not the District.

Stop complaining that the District walk all over you. Do something about it. Opt out until they negotiate a settlement.
Anonymous said…
Charlie said: "As for communication, the former HCC students entering Garfield are not the ones experiencing a change here and therefore not the ones who should have received communication about de-tracking."

You are more optimistic than I am that this will really be an honors class. Not all kids want, or can, exert the effort it requires to succeed in an actual honors class. An honors class requires an honors curriculum, not just a name change. I don't believe that 100% of kids at any high school are ready for and capable of honors level work.

I fear that this is "honors" in name only.

-cotton
Anonymous said…
Right CHarlie. "Hit them where it really, really hurts. Boy oh boy."

Didn't Garfield just have the biggest MAP sit out, already documented and in the news? Yep. Hale got 100% opt out too. Some more HCC students, late to the party is going to make a huge impact. I notice they aren't opting out of SBA now that it's a grad requirement. And that starts this year for everything. Isn't opting out of SBA in other grades, all the rage? Yes. Write that letter. 500+ irate blog posts about your kids' suffering from Honors Deprivation isn't enough. We need letters, we need Opt Outs. Rally the troops. Storm the hill. You can win this one...

You are really

Outta Touch
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
Sure, one person might not be able to negotiate much through the control of one test score, but what if families bargained collectively? What if a group of families said that they would opt their children out of the tests if they didn't get straight answers? Then you would have something.

We need to start an online petition on this, and the situation at GHS. Many many people would sign.

DO SOMETHING
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
Just posted on HCC blog:

Melissa, here are the facts regarding this.

In May, one of the teachers reached out and said they wanted to get some time on the PTSA agenda for something unspecified. We were doing nominations, budget and other things and didn't have room. After a bit of going back and forth (and finding out what the teachers wanted to talk about) they were invited to speak at both the PTSA board and general meetings. I have all of this in my email.

They declined and asked for a smaller meeting. At that meeting, they talked philosophically about what they wanted to do, without specifics and at no time suggested that this was something they were doing for all students in 2016-17. After the meeting, the Principal told PTSA leaders that the teachers were not ready and this would not be implemented in 2016-2017. The feedback we gave the teachers in the meeting was this was way too late for implementation and they needed to start a process to share a detailed plan and get community feedback.

That is the last I heard about this (and I was the PTSA president) until Claudia Rowe told me what the Principal told her - that Garfield was eliminating 9th grade LA and SS.

July 12th 5:40 PM has this right: this is being done this way (during the summer, no notice) to avoid having to do the hard work of getting feedback, providing a detailed plan etc.

DO SOMETHING
"What happened when AP Euro was dropped at RHS in favor of Human Geography for all? "

Parents were informed. Want to know how I know? I was co-PTSA president and we made sure parents knew. The kids knew.

"What happened when all the APP programs were split over the years?"

We wrote about it here extensively. The district did discuss this because of facilities, not because of academics changing.

Also, no one here wants a personal note (and I'm pretty surprised you would put it that way.) I want this for ALL the parents and students at GHS, not just HCC.

Do Something, thank you for the explanation. That was not what I was told and I am disappointed to hear a quite different story.
GarfieldMom said…
The GHS PTSA was hugely dysfunctional this year, FYI.
Anonymous said…
GM-

What's your point? Are you saying that the post from the PTSA president is wrong?

That the PTSA was "dysfunctional" does not mean that the president was uninformed.

-persimmon



Charlie Mas said…
GarfieldMom wrote: "The GHS PTSA was hugely dysfunctional this year, FYI."

Which of the Garfield PTSA functions were not performed?
So Garfield Mom, you're going to drop that little flamethrow without explanation? Not particularly fair especially in the context of what we are discussing.
Anonymous said…
Tom, the NSAP went into effect the same year Lawton eliminated Spectrum. The loss of bus service forced many out-of-neighborhood kids to leave the school. You'd be hard-pressed to isolate the impact of the Spectrum change from the change in student body makeup.

I also agree with weary: that period at Lawton was divisive in the extreme. It could be a case study in how NOT to manage change. There was no principal during the summer when the change was proposed to JSC, and a very green principal who implemented the change. It was sad to watch.

Witness


Anonymous said…
I have had HCC kids in both honors & inclusive/non-honors high school English & history classes. AP LA is not very rigorous, so I think students can prepare for it in a non honors LA class. Roosevelt inclusive LA feeds into AP LA with no problem & all students take both, surviving the transition. AP History is all about memorizing copious amounts of material, if students learn to make flash cards, then they will be prepared.

I can see why parents are upset at not knowing about the change earlier, but honestly I think they would have been upset whenever they were told. So often in SPS change doesn't mean improvement. Though we are talking, I think, about 2 out of 24 classes. Most of the high school classes will be tracked, if that is the main concern.

In my experience rigor is more teacher dependent than honors dependent & given a choice I prefer a more diverse class (culturally, racially, ability & economically diverse), so I don't really care about having my children in an honors class. I care a lot about which teachers they get & can't choose that at all.

-done it
Watching said…
"At Lawton, Wedgwood, McClure, Washington, and everywhere else that Spectrum was dismantled, the decision was announced, not discussed."

Charlie makes some good points. Here is what is disturbing to me: School buildings have the capacity to dismantle advanced learning options.

Charlie also makes a good point about students that might now want Honors LA. A student may want an advanced math class and general LA, but that option no longer exists. GPAs count in high school.
drd said…
@Tom BTW, Lynn, we're you or are you a Lawton parent? How do they follow or not follow the Brulles model? Do they do walk-to's or pull-outs? How about Whittier and Wedgwood, do you know how or if they follow Brulles' model?

I know exactly how Wedgwood tore down their Spectrum program. Yes, I had a kid there, and yes, I know many families in follow-on years with kids there. I attended at least 3 meetings related to their elimination of self-contained, and spoke directly with the principal on multiple occasions. Are my 'credentials' good enough for you?

They actually flew Dr. Brulles here to Seattle to give a talk on best practices for cluster grouping, which I attended as well, and spoke directly at some length with Dr. Brulles.

What Wedgwood did was the exact opposite of the recommendation. Let me explain in simple terms what best practices according to Dr. Brulles model, which incidentally, has been shown to be very effective in her own school district as well as many others that follow their plan.

First, the best option from an academic standpoint is self-contained where possible. Read their literature (and many others).

Where that's not possible due to not having enough kids to fill entire classrooms, there is a very specific clustering model, which groups kids in 5 levels according to their current abilities. Kids from different groups are assigned to classrooms using very specific patterns to maximize the best outcomes for all groups. There is blending among different levels, but, for example, you do not group the very top kids with the very bottom kids in the same classrooms, because that has been shown to not work well for either group.

What did Wedgwood do? They classified the kids, then did the absolutely worst thing possible, which was to evenly spread all the Spectrum kids among each classroom, without regard to anything else. Their goal was to simply eliminate any possibility of maximizing anything at all, and they went for the worst configuration possible.

This maximized the challenges for the teachers, but they all had to deal with the same problems equally, which was part of the school's goal. Homogenization of classrooms and "equality" for teachers.

What happened? There was a terrible battle and the community was left in shambles. I personally know 9 Spectrum families that left the school the following year because of this decision. Most pushed up into APP, others went to Shoreline or other nearby schools. Most of the families that moved to APP would have been happy to stay in their neighborhood school if it was even remotely serving their kids, but it was very clear that was not the goal.

So what did the surveys look like the following couple years? They were probably fine, but it's really irrelevant to the discussion, because the affected kids/families were forced out and not part of any subsequent climate surveys. That's one way to get a good rating.
Anonymous said…
A recent Atlantic article http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/07/how-marginalized-families-are-pushed-out-of-ptas/491036/ suggests that PTSA problems at Garfield would not be unexpected.

LisaG
pm said…
Done it--

Isn't the point that only social science and English courses were tracked? This means that 8 out of 24 were tracked in the past, but only 6 will be tracked from now on. That is why parents are concerned.
Lori said…
I still don't understand how they will grade students in these detracked classes.

I strongly believe that the HCC kids need to work to get an A. It needs to be earned, which means stretching oneself, taking some risks, and putting some effort in. No one should get an A for showing up and doing the bare minimum. Honestly, that's sort of the point of the self-contained cohort - to increase the bar and make sure kids are learning how to learn and working at the edge of their current knowledge.

Yet, what an A might look like for an HCC kid may not be realistic for other students to achieve with the same amount of effort. So is it like Olympic scoring, where there is a "degree of difficulty" put into the rubric that the student is assessed against? And is that fair? So one person gets an A for significantly less effort?

I don't think colleges look at whether you were in APP/HCC, right? They just look at your GPA and what grades you got in the highest level courses, which suggests there needs to be only one scoring system in Honors classes - but then that doesn't feel fair either to the gen ed kids who might not have even wanted to take Honors LA or history.

Have the teachers addressed this? Seems important.
Anonymous said…
Colleges will learn quickly that the GHS "honors" LA class (and I can only assume more "honors" classes are coming) are NOT honors and will discount them. East coast colleges may take longer, but I bet the UW quickly learns of this change.

100% of kids cannot do honors level work and any sensible person knows this. We should have higher expectations of general education - where the majority of kids are - and not put this pressure on kids.

-crikey
Anonymous said…
Crikey,
Actually, according to last year's master schedule, there were 12 sections of honors English and 5 sections of general ed.

In social studies, there were 12 sections of honors and 6 sections of general ed.

The honors classes have a very wide range of students in them, not just HCC kids. So, the classes are heterogeneous anyway.
Anonymous said…
Pm

There are honors, advanced, audition only, AP and other advanced classes at Garfield for many subject areas. I personally don't think that means that each class will be at the academic threshold for every kid, but it seems to be what most parents who are choosing Garfield for advanced students want for their kids. Only 2 of those classes are changing.

-done it
Lori, what I'd like to do is ask how Hale does it. They have had a kind of "Honors for All" for a few years. Their Course Catalog doesn't seem to reference this. Their Student Handbook has this:

4. 9th Grade: 300 pages (reg. credit) 500 pages (honors credit)
10th Grade: 400 pages (reg. credit)600 pages (honors credit)
11th Grade: 700 pages
12th Grade: 700
Anonymous said…
Pages read? That's how honors is defined? Uncle Tom's Cabin is about 500 pages. That's one book. Is there more to it than that? What about text complexity? Or variety - drama, fiction, poetry, etc.?

-honors?
Anonymous said…
@ Melissa, is GHS proposing that some students can get "regular" credit instead of honors, by taking the honors-for-all class but doing less? I haven't noticed anything like that from the teachers.

Stunned
Anonymous said…
My child graduated from Hale 3 years ago, but Hale's philosophy is strongly equity-based, which means they have almost no separate higher-level classes.

Everyone takes the same classes and if you want honors credit you do extra work. For some junior and senior classes, if you want to take the AP test you are given a guide to do the extra studying necessary.

It seems to be a good level of rigor for general ed students, but for more advanced kids it isn't. Many students do Running Start if they want more challenging classes. Most HCC students avoid Hale, like my current high school student.

Momof2
Stunned, I just don't know. I think the issues that have been raised over the grading are valid.
Anonymous said…
Looking at the handbook - the reading is per semester, and counts toward 10% of the LA grade (needed to earn an A). They also do a 10 minute "book talk" with a teacher. That's about it.

-honors?
Maureen said…
Ok, to clarify. I'm not saying it wouldn't have been nice for Ted Howard (and yes, I'm putting it on him) to make sure this change was codified in the course handbook before the 8th graders registered. What I am saying is that changes like this happen all of the time here. What does "obligation" even mean to this District? If there isn't a lawsuit (or apparently Bill Gates' dollars or Ed Murray's name) attached to it, they don't find it obligatory.

Melissa, I know you publicized the AP Geo thing. I expect I read it here before I heard anything at all from Brian Whatshisname but I said: And when they are informed, their complaints are virtually never heard. You had a tremendous bully pulpit and it had no lasting impact on that change. None. (I guess I should have said "acted on," not "heard.")

Outrage may possibly have an impact. I don't really know, I can't really remember a time it has for SPS (certainly not for APP/HCC families). What I would recommend is analysis that goes counter to what SPS thinks you think your interest is. At TOPS (my little corner) we managed to get transportation extended a little while for our poor kids. It took a tremendous amount of effort and professional expertise because SPS thought we were whining about busing for our own kids (we weren't) and we caught them off guard and used real analysis to show that it was in their interest (and the school's and the poor kids') to create community stops and get those kids to TOPS. We (the generally white-ish, generally middle class-ish people) also thought it was in our interest because we valued diversity in the school, but that wasn't what swayed the decision makers.

So, if you think this is a bad decision for the kids at Garfield who read below grade level, then put together an analysis and a presentation and go at it sincerely. If you just don't want your kid to be in a classroom with those kids then I don't have much advice for you (except consider whether you would prefer for those same kids to all be REQUIRED to be in AP Lit with your kid as a junior, not having gone through Honors LA as a freshman, because that is the accepted model at other High Schools in the District.)

**

I agree with done it
GarfieldMom said…
PTSA dysfunction had already been alluded to before I said anything.

Talked with my son (GHS grad) earlier about this. He wondered what HCC parents do when their student in AP or Honors classes gets one of the less effective teachers for the class. What if the gen ed class is actually getting a better education due to having a better teacher? How do HCC parents solve for that?
Anonymous said…
Trump will be nominated for president ... Brexit will happen ... GHS and SPS are tragically dysfunctional. Shrug and throw up your hands. Nothing good people can do.

Oh Well
Thanks, Maureen, that perspective helps.

Garfield Mom, don't add fuel to a fire here unless you are willing to explain. I find that kind of thing less than helpful to a discussion.

Anonymous said…
GarfieldMom, I'd wager many families have already dealt with a "less effective" teacher in honors/AL classes in elementary or middle school. Really nothing new. It's not like AL classes have the market on the most effective teachers. I'm not sure what that has to do with the "Honors for All." Are you equating Honors for All to having a poorly taught AP or honors class? If so, then aren't you kind of supporting the concerns parents have with such a plan?

-confused
GarfieldMom said…
confused, my son was responding to what I described hearing from parents here -- that the only way their HCC child can get an appropriate education is by being in a tracked class. He questioned that. In his experience, those classes don't necessarily end up being the classes in which students learn the most, so he was skeptical that tracked classes automatically end up meeting the needs of the HCC kids, and wondered what parents do when they don't. I told him I don't know -- I don't relate to parents who place such enormous value on high school academic achievement. So I threw his questions out here.

And no, neither he nor I are equating Honors for All to a poorly taught AP or honors class. I'm not sure what gave that impression. More like the opposite, really. I'm probably not explaining his point well in trying to distill it for this forum.
Anonymous said…
I think the issue distills to differing views within the district on how to best serve Highly Capable students.

Students are tested and grouped for instruction in order to more efficiently provide appropriately advanced work. Many bus out of their neighborhood to access a program that is supposed to provide the appropriate acceleration. The cohort provides the critical mass of students needed for schools to offer advanced courses ("high school" biology and geometry in 8th, for example). The program accelerates their coursework, and up until just a few years ago, LA/SS was part of that acceleration. The Garfield pathway allowed for a continuum of the acceleration that neighborhood schools couldn't offer.

After years of this being the model, the district began to take away the acceleration. Spectrum self-contained is no more. Accelerated LA/SS courses were eliminated in most middle school APP/HCC schools as they were told to align to grade level standards. They are supposed to get differentiated assignments within the framework of grade level standards. In theory, that could work for LA/SS. But all students need to be taught, whether HCC or not. They all need some direct instruction in reading and writing and analysis, but the instruction for students working at grade level may be different from what's needed for those working above or below grade level.

So the message is what? The Garfield pathway is supposed to provide the continuum, but at the same time, the district is eliminating some of the acceleration (in the name of equity?). It's like they can't decide what to do with the students. The cohort makes it easier for the district to manage capacity or balance school demographics, but at the same time there is some kind of resistance to providing the accelerated coursework.

Meanwhile, HCC families are demonized for expecting the continuum that the district has set up. So now what? There is no clear vision for AL and the internal conflicts with HCC delivery continue. Students are caught in the middle.

-now what?
Anonymous said…
The process for testing students for HCC is invalid since they are over identifying students from higher educated demographics and under identifying students from lower SES. Many students whose parents are commenting on this topic would/should not be in HCC had the district followed the discrepancy model of the author of CogAT. Some students who these same parents fear are not up to par for honors would be in HCC if the district were not using a test that is not being scored accurately.

The discussion about pathways,etc. is now moot, folks. Your child's score for entrance into the program was invalid because the district doesn't follow the author of the test's scoring guidelines.

Those of you who are so worried about district procedures? Start with getting your student's test scores re-evaluated based on the school's demographics when your student took the test. You may not even have skin in this particular game.

FWIW
Charlie Mas said…
FWIW, if this is supposed to mean "for what it's worth" then let me tell you that it isn't worth a thing. If you want to argue the eligibility criteria for Advanced Learning then you'll have to do it in another thread. For this thread it is completely off-topic. I'm sure there are lots of alternative universes with a different set of realities, but in this reality, the discussion about pathways is not moot and the children in the programs are the children in the programs. It's time for you to become reality-based and deal with it.

And we all have an interest in public education - whether or not we have a child in the program or at Garfield.

Then there's the other off-topic issue, the one raised by GarfieldMom about less effective teachers. Variations in teacher effectiveness actually make the class Standards more of an issue. The academic standards for the class are enforceable and can form the basis for a legitimate complaint about a teacher. Since the Honors class has a defined and more rigorous set of Standards, families can compare student assignments to those Standards and make effective complaints based on objective facts. In the absence of specific Standards, such as in a class that only makes vague promises of acceleration, no legitimate complaint is possible.

Finally, if you're going to say that a group is dysfunctional, then you better be ready to explain how they are dysfunctional. Since you have not been able to do so, we can now dismiss your statement as false and even further lower our judgement of your credibility.
Charlie Mas said…
-now what? writes: "The Garfield pathway is supposed to provide the continuum, but at the same time, the district is eliminating some of the acceleration (in the name of equity?)." The teachers at Garfield have been very clear that they will not eliminate the acceleration, and that the Honors classes will be as rigorous as ever.
Anonymous said…
FWIW,

Oh sweetie, you're so excited to have this new point to argue. It's cute but sad. Lohman's point is that you look at the discrepancy model if you want to find the top 2% or 5% or 10% of students in each group. That gives you gifted classes that look like the rest of the district. The trouble is that those students aren't necessarily gifted. If you want to find and serve gifted students you have to use IQ tests and those are not normed by race or ELL status or income level. Only these ridiculous teachers at Marshall and Washington and Garfield care more about the color of the kids in advanced classes than whether students are being challenged in school.

Moving On
Anonymous said…
The page count and book reading is in regards to the summer reading at Hale. They have to read at least one book over the summer from the list for their grade. In order to get honors for that part of the LA requirement, the book has to be longer. During the rest of LA, there are assigned books to read. For Honors designation, you have to opt in and you get graded on a different scale and have more requirements. Your report card comes with your grade and an H behind it. The GPA gets weighted for class rank but not for the cumulative GPA. It is to be noted that you don't get to wear the 4.0 sash at graduation unless you have a 4.0 cumulative GPA so a 3.8 H is weighted more and indicates it is honors but it ruins your 4.0 cumulative and you don't get to wear the sash.

Honestly, it reminds me of high school gymnastics where it might be in your best interest to do a lower level stunt perfectly rather than a more difficult stunt less than perfectly. It is a numbers game.

Universities do look at the level of difficulty of classes, GPAs, class rank, test scores, etc. So you can have a lower GPA but if they see that H or AP listed, they give you a boost for that meaning a 4.0 with no honors or AP may very well be ranked lower than a 3.8 with H's and AP classes mixed in.

HP

Anonymous said…
Alternative universe: https://faculty.education.uiowa.edu/david-lohman/home

Using the discrepancy model is not a choice for cases to promote affirmative action; it is for designated scoring model in order to control for baises. The district has chosen CogAT as the gatekeeper test but producing using invalid scores and using them as qualification for HCC.

This is certainly not irrelevant to this topic or thread, but is the foundation of the discussion. Denying the origins is like a creationist arguing against evolution.

FWIW

FWIW, you could say nearly the same about using the SBAC because it is not statistically valid (at least not according to a national group.)

HP, thank you for that input for Hale. Very helpful.

FWIW, then your argument is with the district, not the parents. They are following the procedure the district uses for their program. Is it the right instrument for all students? Probably not and that's where advocacy comes in.
Charlie Mas said…
FWIW wrote:
"The discussion about pathways,etc. is now moot, folks. Your child's score for entrance into the program was invalid because the district doesn't follow the author of the test's scoring guidelines."

Whether the District's process is optimal or not, it is the District's process. In that context (that context being the one in which we find ourselves, you know, reality) the discussion is not moot at all and it's just goofy to suggest that it is.
Anonymous said…
I read this with great interest. I am from LI. My cousin sends her kids to school in Rockville center. Sorry, but you cannot compare the school demographics, size of district, taxes or class sizes to Seattle Public Schools!! My cousin pays 16000 per year in property taxes for a 2200 square foot house. The class sizes for her kids are 18-22 students per class. The districts on LI are very small. Rockville center has one high school for example. The free & reduced lunch population at the high school for example, is very low (10% last time I checked). It is very expensive to live in Rockville center.

Standford and other Educational research has demonstrated that the achievement gap has been narrowed greatly between blacks & whites past 30 years, but during the same period has doubled between classes. Research indicates income is the strongest factor in the achievement gap, not race. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/economy/education-gap-between-rich-and-poor-is-growing-wider.html?_r=0
-Jeannie
Anonymous said…
I read the article with great interest. You cannot compare Garfield to South Side in Rockville center or compare resources in the districts. My cousin sends her kids to school in Rockville center. I am from LI. It is very low free & reduced lunch (10%) and is mostly white. The school district (like many on LI) is small, only one high school for example. Class sizes are half Seattle class sizes. Her kids have 17-22 in their classes. Property taxes for her 2200 square foot house are 16000 per year, majority goes toward school taxes. There is also a state income tax in NY state. In contrast to Garfield, their honors classes previously were not opt in. Garfield allows kids to choose between honors & general ed. Standford research indicates class is the main factor in the achievement gap, not race. Standford Research indicates the achievement gap between blacks and whites has narrowed greatly past 30-50 years, while between classes has doubled in the past 30-50 years. Research indicates income inequality is the main issue causing the gap and African Americans are over represented in lower socio classes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/economy/education-gap-between-rich-and-poor-is-growing-wider.html?_r=0
- Theresa
Anonymous said…
I also want to highlight the fact that Garfield classes are not tracked, unlike the Rockville center school was on LI. Garfield offers opt in honors classes for all.
-Theresa.
Anonymous said…
@ z, several commenters have already noted that Garfield's classes weren't tracked in the first place, but GHS staff keep using that language regardless. It fits their narrative better.

Stunned
Anonymous said…
@ Theresa, another interesting thing about Rockville Centre's South Side High School is how few National Merit semifinalists they typically have, especially given the affluence, heterogeneity, and small class size.

Stunned
Maureen said…
Since the Honors class has a defined and more rigorous set of Standards,

Charlie, Do we know that this is true?

If so, do the standards cover what the teacher presents or what the student is expected to learn? I can imagine that it is often true that the standards for a class are rigorous, but not every student meets those standards. Does that mean the course does not meet the standard? Or is this where grades come in? So rigorous standards would lead to students who don't meet the standard necessarily receiving bad grades in the course?

Could a course be rigorous, but some students be graded on a less than rigorous standard than others so they can still do well (grade wise) in the class?
Anonymous said…
I asked a friend in college admissions about that last scenario, and he said without different designations, colleges would quickly come to view all honors classes at the school as regular, an attempt by the school to "Lake Woebegone" itself. Frowned upon. Colleges want to know that a course description has an approximate meaning, that getting an A means a particular standard of work completed.

NJP
Lynn said…
I expect you're right NJP. I also expect that the teachers don't care even a little bit about the effect this will have on selective college admissions for Garfield's "privileged" students. The staff feel they have the moral high ground - in their minds they're dismantling segregation and institutional racism.

Anonymous said…
Growing Skeptic-- I am from LI and have a relative who lives in Rockville center. The town is NOT equivalent to Ballard area of Seattle in terms of income. I chuckled when I saw that comparison! My relative pays $16,000 in property taxes per year for a 2300 square foot house & they have a state income tax as well. The majority of taxes are school related & one can see this info on the tax bill. Not only are high school class sizes below 20, they often ALSO have instructional assistants in the classrooms. I grew up on LI, much of it is VERY affluent and the school that reminded me most of my own LI high school is Lakeside. Rockville Center district is super small (like many on LI) & Southside is the only high school. Very small, focused on serving a mostly homogenous pop and very, very well resourced. Per pupil spending on LI last time I checked was close to $28,000 per student. 10% free & reduced lunch at Southside.
-Theresa
Anonymous said…
P.S. Median household income in Rockville center is 112,000 (Seattle is $63,000, Ballard $84,000),but median family income is actually $150,000 (Seattle is 94,000 Ballard is 107,000). It is more similar to stats of Mercer Island than Ballard or Seattle.
-Theresa
Charlie Mas said…
Wow, Lynn. You write with such authority and conviction about what is in the minds of the Garfield teachers. Can you read my mind as well? What number am I thinking of?
Charlie, I have now heard two teachers say (the one at Facebook and another I spoke with) that the ending of segregation of races is a big reason this is happening. I suspect that Lynn is right.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
Reposting for Anonymous at 11:43am 7/18/16:
Anonymous said...
@ Charlie Mas, absolutely, "desegregation" is the primary goal for the teachers. If this was a homogeneous school, we aren't even having this conversation.

This is part of a bigger issue with the faculty at Garfield - they see themselves as the vanguard of a social justice movement first and as educators second. Parents are a nuisance, particularly the "elitist, obnoxious, racist" HCC parents. Carol Burton decided the district's field trip processes were not sufficiently progressive and decided to just let students do whatever they wanted while she partied. These teachers didn't feel it necessary to do any community engagement or follow any kind of process in making a huge change.

The teaching quality at Garfield is uneven at best and highly suspect in many areas. The administration randomly veers from one initiative (restorative justice) to another (detracking) without any semblance of a longer term plan. Classrooms are staffed by long term subs (Spanish as an example) who can't teach their class.

There is no accountability at all. Lack of accountability is endemic in Seattle Public Schools - this is why so many families just opt out.

7/18/16, 11:43 AM

++++

This has also been our experience.

-more Garfield
Lynn said…
Another Garfield teacher talks about the change to Honors for All: https://mobile.twitter.com/JessedHagopian/status/753700886698860544
Oldest Older 201 – 303 of 303

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Why the Majority of the Board Needs to be Filled with New Faces

First Candidates for Seattle School Board Elections 2023