Thursday, December 08, 2016

Oh, those Friday Memos

Friday memos, the gift that keeps on giving.

The Superintendent's letter mentioned the report card conferences at Garfield. He wrote: "Through asking questions, volunteers assisted students in self-reflecting, self-advocating, and setting goals". So I guess he thinks the adults were volunteers rather than visitors.

The District will offer NOVA as a service school next year. This way students will have more opportunity to transfer to the school than they have under the enrollment rules for option schools.

There was some progress on the implementation of MTSS. As you know, the District is now in year five of the three-year MTSS implementation process with only six years to go. "A cross-departmental group of leaders gathered for two days this week to collaborate on the creation of key resources and tools for Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) implementation in schools". Woo-hoo, they discussed making plans for developing tools. It only took them five years to reach this point. I continue to be optimistic that they will get this done in just another eight years.

Great news everyone! The district staff have finally agreed to conduct the review of advanced learning programs that policy requires annually but they have never done. They say that this review should only take them two or three years. And, to emphasize their sincerity, they provided a detailed timetable.

More advanced learning news came in a sort of progress report on the HCC/General Ed combined Social Studies at Thurgood Marshall. According the Friday memo, grade level teams got together and "Each team has developed a baseline assessment to measure each grade level’s initial understanding of their social studies grade level standards". First, how was this not already in existence? Second, are the standards for HCC the same as the general education standards? Right now this effort appears to be more about learning for the teachers than the students.

There's a report on Close the Gap spending. It includes $368,379 for 3.0 FTE in the Race and Equity office. That's an average of more than $122,500 per person. Nice work if you can get it, but there's better. The Eliminating Gaps job is allocated $145,000 for one person. Teachers get $2,000 in incentive pay to work at Title I schools.

There was some talk of siting the former Pinehurst now Licton Springs school at Cedar Park instead of putting it inside the Robert Eagle Staff building. Inside REMS, there is only space for 150 Licton Springs students while the school wants 300 seats. Licton Springs would have the amount of space it wants at Cedar Park, but not the location it desires. Discuss.

There is call for the restoration of Indian Heritage High School also within REMS. And, of course, the District wants to place HCC at REMS. Here's some historical data about Indian Heritage. There are numerous students looking to crowd into every space.

Except at Madrona K-8, where the District has plans to return the school to a K-5 elementary since it has so few middle school enrollees.

125 comments:

MTSS-Questioning said...

As a parent, I feel like SPS is using MTSS as a way to avoid identifying kids who need diagnosis for learning disabilities. Are they actually using MTSS for any non-evil purpose?

Anonymous said...

Sounds to me like there's a lot of need for RESMS space so there's no need for SPS to force Whitman students into RESMS. I think that's a good thing, because there's little to no interest at Whitman to make the move.

SPS needs to adjust the RESMS attendance area before February 13th.

NWesterner

Anonymous said...

One point that was not brought up specifically in any testimony last night, is that our school was promised space (by a vote of 5 to 2) for 350 students at Lincoln, but then limited to 150 by the district. Yeah, they did that.

Our school also added more special education programs during our time at Lincoln , but resources for special education were not planned for our new site. I am sorry to say that staff probably thought that these students could just be taken from our community and fit somewhere else. For whatever reason, special education students seem to be expected to just go where resources are available, regardless of their need for a sense of community.

I think we need the space we were promised, and to have appropriate resources for all of our students.

14all


Anonymous said...

Melissa, would you do a thread on MTSS and students with learning disabilities? Many teachers believe the rule is that a student has to be two years behind in reading, writing or math before they can even be evaluated for special ed services. This wait-to-fail approach is not actually the law. Will MTSS delay the identification process even further? For disabilities like dyslexia, the research agrees that early intervention is critical.

LD

Anonymous said...

@14all

Just clarifying that "our school" means Lipton Springs.

Ashley Davies said last night that Licton Springs has never been capped at 150. It has never had a wait list. Perhaps you can add further perspective.


Optimistic

Anonymous said...

From the BEX IV overview of Cascadia/RESMS on SPS website


The Licton Springs K-8 program, which is also temporarily located at the former Lincoln High School, will be co-located within the middle school building and include up to 150 students

reader47

Charlie Mas said...

For information on how MTSS is supposed to connect students to Special Education services, see Superintendent's Procedure 2163.

Anonymous said...

oops - hit enter too soon - meant to add:
Clearly Ms Davies needs to do her homework a little bit better. Quelle surprise!

reader47

Anonymous said...

@reader47

The point is that they were not capped at Lincoln, at least according to Ms. Davies. They seem not to have organically grown beyond 120-150 average, thus the future room number allocation. It seems that Liston Springs are advocating for more space in which to grow, but to date they don't have the historic numbers to support that. Does the district allocate that space now in a kind of "build it and they will come way", mindful that there is a shortage of actual space or does the district allocate based on previous enrollment trends for LS. Or is it better for LS to become the seed school for Cedar Park. There could be a lot of opportunity for LS by making such a bold move as a dedicated building is a great stabilizer for enrollment.

Optimistic

Anonymous said...

Whomever it was at the Board meeting trying to explain why they needed a fully populated RESMS come September was not clear or close to being convincing. She kept using the term about 8 graders missing out on opportunities if the 8 grade class size was below full. What about those 8 graders left behind at the donor Middle schools, what about their enriched 8th grade experience, like being part of the music group they have been apart of for the last 2 years.

News to SPS, Whitman is fully functioning with happy healthy students, leave them alone. Stop hurting children and families with your hair brain forced busing ideas.

Note to board, no 7th or 8th graders are moving from Whitman to RESMS, deal with the reality of it.

Not Joking

Anonymous said...

"Licton Springs K-8" has a "historical enrollment" of under 150, because it has been called Licton Springs for only about two years now.

It was formerly known as Pinehurst K-8 and prior to that AS-1. Back in 2005/2006, before multiple rounds of school closure threats and when housed in their own building at the Pinehurst site, the program had an enrollment in the 270s (this information is available on the OSPI website).

-North-end Mom

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Charlie, for posting the link to the Friday Memo.

This was posted in the document discussing Licton Springs, RESMS, etc...

"Cedar Park: Based on the above preference to move Licton Springs to Robert Eagle Staff, we will talk with the Cedar Park community about a specific theme or an opportunity school (figure out the theme later)."

What is an "opportunity school?" How would that work?

CP Puzzled

SusanH said...

Melissa, that write-up was a pleasure to read. I laughed out loud several times. Thanks for the entertainment. :)

Melissa Westbrook said...

Review of advanced learning programs? It'll take 2-3 YEARS? I smell a rat. They are just going to continue allowing principals to systematically dismantle the programs and THEN claim that they are all doing so well with everyone (mostly) in the small class, no need for anything new.

I call BS on that one.

14all, I called out the issue of Licton Springs promised space at both the SAP meeting (noting that Ms. Davies was new and may not know the history) AND in my testimony at last night's Board meeting. (And boy, I almost leaned over to tell former Director Peaslee who was scheduled to testify, "You're welcome.") I don't really care that LS has space at Lincoln; the district has never lifted a finger to advertise this program. I think it could grow but new parents will not come if the program is crammed into a small space at RESMS.

Susan H, the writing kudos go to Charlie. It was entertaining.

SusanH said...

Sorry Charlie! I missed that you were the author of that particular post. :)

ConcernedSPSParent said...

Since the district is only on track for 50% of its tasks (by the district's measure) they could easily spend 5 or 6 years on this.

seattle citizen said...

Licton Springs was promised space for, if I recall, 300 students in Robert Eagle Staff, a facility near sacred grounds named for a wonderful leader of Indian Heritage. Indian Heritage at WP was demolished to make room for this shining new facility, and AS1/IH became Licton Springs and was promised capacity to move into this shiny new facility, with space for 300, named after their leader of some few years ago.

Move it to CP? Really? Like we moved the Native peoples out of Seattle (passed a law, in fact) and onto Ballast Island offshore, burning their longhouses, not giving them the promised reservation....

Or, better: Keep the promise and build a wonderful, collaborative program utilizing the skills and knowledge of the peoples of AS1 and Indian Heritage. Keep the promise; treat people with respect.

Sure, why not, push the indigineous peoples out of ROBERT EAGLE STAFF, away from their sacred springs. Move them along. They're used to it, right?

Anonymous said...

It's all native ground and it's short-sighted to fixate on one spot. Refusal to be pragmatic and merge with Summit fundamentally damaged AS1. It will be challenging for LS to grow at Eaglestaff and it will be easy to cannabalise their space. If Cedar Park is an option, it may be in the long term best interest of everyone.

Optimistic

Charlie Mas said...

It's hard to argue against keeping promises.

Keeping promises, even if it hurts in the short term, pays dividends in the long term. I don't expect the school district to know that because I can't think of a single promise they have ever kept.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Seattle Citizen. Pragmatism? The word that keeps on giving to the privileged and taking from the powerless. The self-interest on this site is concerning.

checking in

Anonymous said...

@checking in--everyone on this site has advocated for the Licton Springs and Cedar Park communities to be treated fairly (with the exception of Blanford when he "checks in" with his sort of disguised comments)

Hopeful

Anonymous said...


Regarding Licton Springs


Could someone tell me when approximately in the meeting Ms. Davies made the assertion that we were never capped at 150?

Why would our principal tell us we were capped if it weren't what he was told?

I have heard from many families that were told by enrollment that we were full. They were only admitted to the school because they called and asked the school directly if we had room.

We did have some waiting list numbers at the beginning of this year.

The promise was space for 350 and 14 classrooms

14all


Anonymous said...

@14all
Perhaps the access program was full but not the generally enrolled.

I can't tell you exactly where Ms. Davies statements about LS numbers are. It's a long meeting and her statement is in response to board questioning. She was up and down for questioning for a good part of the night so it's hard to pinpoint when these remarks occurred.

I'm not sure that LS was ever promised what you state. Sharon Peaslee arranged, through amendment I believe, for what was then Pinehurst K8 to be reallocated at Lincoln. The board voted in favor though I don't think it was unanimous. If you have documentation that describes in more exacting detail that "promise" then I think it would be helpful to daylight it.

Rick Burke suggested last night that he could be supportive of creative solutions for Licton Springs. If a creative solution is a move to Cedar Park and directors are supportive of that, then it is something the community should consider carefully.


Optimistic


Carol Simmons said...

Thank you to all on this forum who have advocated for the Licton Springs/Native Emphasis School. And thank you to Melissa for setting the tone of advocacy for Licton Springs at the Board meeting last evening. As I was unable to attend, I sent in my testimony which included the following points.

The Licton Springs school community is very clear in their desire to be placed at the Robert Eaglestaff Building. This was a promise made and must be honored. Additionally, it is important that the Native students at Licton Springs School are placed at the Robert Eaglestaff Building. Native students deserve this placement and should be welcomed by the District to their new school rather than displaced again.

Thank you to Former Board Director Peaslee and current Director Patu who were both on the Board when the action was taken and the promise was made. Former Director Peaslee testified regarding this promise and Board Director Patu also spoke supporting this testimony regarding the District's action.

There must be at least 14 classrooms provided for the Licton Springs School that now houses Special Education students as well. A capacity of 350 students at least should be honored. Licton Springs School students should be welcomed by the District. Classrooms, capacity space and Human and Financial resources should be provided by the District.

Native students deserve to be on the sacred site of their cultural heritage and with the legacy and images they hold dear. This placement should not be debated any longer.
The District must make the promise good and provide resources to support it.

Anonymous said...

@Carol-great letter. I don't understand why this is still a debate? Redraw boundaries to Whitman or move HCC to Whitman.

Case Closed

Anonymous said...

@ Optimistic
Perhaps you could daylight how you know it wasn't gen ed students that were turned away when trying to enroll at Licton Springs.

When an 'arrangement' by amendment is voted in by a majority of the board it is a promise.

The board has access to the appropriate documents,and so do you,through a public records request.

Good night, and enjoy the snow.

14all

Anonymous said...

You are being very specific about what was "promised." If those specifics are indeed spelled out, then documentation will bolster your case. The district does not operate on hearsay.

Also, note that I said "perhaps" in my previous post.

Finding space for a program at the behest of the board is very different to a guarantee in perpetuity. Those the district does not make, nor should they. Extravagant claims about promises might need to be tempered with a more realistic appraisal of what is in the long term interest.

Optimistic

Charlie Mas said...

The fact remains that district officials make promises to communities and then routinely break them. They come up with a number of excuses for breaking those promises, excuses like Optimistic as just offered. But when those promises are codified in votes by the Board, then none of those excuses are valid. Those promises require another vote of the Board to undo.

Licton Teacher said...

Thank you to Carol, Melissa and others for advocating for Licton Springs.

Room allocations at REMS are a very blatant and clear example of institutional racism. The board, in 2013, created a partnership with AS1 Pinehurst/Indian Heritage community for a 14 room/350 enrollment k-8 at the Wilson Pacific Site. This site was chosen specifically due to the cultural and historical importance of the springs (a traditional healing place for Native people before they were forcibly removed from Seattle). The school board recognized that we served neglected populations in SPS and wanted to support and nurture our efforts. Then staff, without board knowledge, changed the room number in the ed specs for the new middle school building. It was buried on page 76 of a long document. As Sharon P recalls, she did not realize that the staff had changed the specs and would have never approved the specs for the new building when they voted on the BAR for the ed specs in 2014.

The board tried to allocate resources for underserved populations, staff takes them away. The 150 cap is really good example of dishonesty. Staff say there was no cap. We have families that could not enroll. I thought the 150 cap was because of space constraints at Lincoln.

I wish we would have started the fight sooner. However, when you have to teach a split grade, with 26 kids and 66% below grade level in reading, it's really difficult to find the time to examine closely documents that come from staff at SPS. We have kids that need warm coats, books that are culturally appropriate for Native kids or kids of color, housing support, emotional support, etc. That is my priority.


We have had 30 new Native kids enroll in our program since we came to Lincoln. We have other Native families that wanted to enroll in our program but could not get transportation from SPS. This gives us the highest percentage of Native students in any elementary or K-8 school in Seattle.

The Native partnership is now in it's third year. There is no curriculum in place for something like this. It requires relationship building with Native elders, Native families and local tribes for guidance and support. There is a lot of mistrust and historical trauma we battle daily. Kicking us off the sacred Native site will add to the hurt.


This site is very important to many of our Native families. Some students live in the Licton Springs neighborhood, they have parents and grandparents that went to Indian Heritage High School. The Native murals are there. It was a traditional healing place due to the presence of the springs. The new building is named after late Robert Eagle Staff to honor his legacy.

Why 14 rooms? We cannot grow or close the achievement gap with split grades. When you have 60% needing remedial support in academics, it is much more efficient to have single grades. We finally got single grades at Licton Springs this year (first time ever in my 14 years working there) and it has made a huge impact. More time for depth and breadth in content areas. This provides clear learning targets for one grade level throughout the day. No more "walk to math" means you can teach math several times a day. Our kids need that.

After we moved to the Lincoln building, the school district added 2 Special Ed programs to our school- the SM4 program and the Access program. They require their own learning spaces. Staff placed these programs at Licton Springs knowing there was space constraints at REMS.

Our requests are reasonable ones and are in line with district goals to close the achievement gap. Single grades at every grade level. Rooms for our Special Ed programs and our Title One program. An Art room. The district needs to allocate appropriate resources for Native kids.

Thank you for reading and thank you to all our allies on this blog.


Kind Regards,
Licton Teacher

Anonymous said...


Here's a resource for all families, a new gift from a Seattle family that keeps on giving, age 13+, K-12 parents

Sexual Harassment: Not in Our School a 75 minute video on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z9d7gnEuxI

Reported on in EdSource and Huffington Post "With Trump’s Title IX stance unknown, video aims to educate about sexual harassment at school" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5845fab2e4b0e0184289f02b?timestamp=1481050297340

The video includes national experts and students to talk about how to address sexual harassment in schools and comes with a presentation guide for group screening at ssais.org/video The Youtube description box has timings and links to specific content.

The nonprofit is looking for individuals and organizations to bring this to schools, parent teacher orgs, etc. Go to ssais.org/video to help.

--Shoreline equity activist

Anonymous said...

Licton Teacher, thank you for the background on Licton Springs--much of which I was not aware. This makes is all the more important why the board should pass the SAP amendment revising the feeder patterns to REMS, which will open up more space. I wish you luck.

--Greenwood Parent

seattle citizen said...

Optimistic, your facile downgrading of Licton Springs' status ("it's all native ground," not "sacred ground") is, sadly, a ploy oft repeated in our tragic history of interacting with our indigenous peoples. It ISN'T just "native ground"; it's SACRED ground, just as the Black Hills were sacred but were treated as mere gold mines by greedy newcomers.

Just as the Black Hills were deeded by treaty to the native peoples there and then taken away, so the Duwamish were promised a reservation HERE and then never given one. So yes, it IS all "native ground" - still; until that treaty is fulfilled - yet Licton Springs is SACRED.

You want the entire RRSMS complex, so it suits you to blow off the fact that the grounds are sacred and relegate them to the status of mere land, like all other land around here, that once were the home of indigenous peoples. Perhaps this eases your conscience as you advocate for yet another broken promise, but instead let's be honest and state it as it is: You want them to quit claim ("sign the treaty") on the school named after an important indigenous leader, a school prominently displaying huge portraits of other Native leaders, on land sacred to the Duwamish....apparently to make room for your preferred population. Imagine that: a school with all this important Native history and spirit attached where the natives themselves have been pushed out. Imagine that.

This time, the indigenous peoples will not be pushed aside. Promises were made that will be kept. The days of broken treaties are long since past.

This is not just "native ground":
Licton Springs A Sacred Site of the Duwamish Tribe Ancestral Homeland By leI?elás (Thomas R. Speer)

Anonymous said...

If people will donate 6+ million to Jill Stein for a half witted re-count effort and others will camp out in freezing weather over a pipeline just maybe there's a chance people will donate enough for LS to purchase the RESMS building from SPS. It seems to me the school and tribes could receive direct funding to LS school district as it's own LED?

I would support the sale of the building, just start the go fund me and get the school board to agree to terms, I very confident the money can be raised and there are other sites the SSD could expand on.

Next we need to apply pressure on the city to clean up the Aurora corridor, there's more to Seattle beyond south lake union.

Pro LS

Anonymous said...

@reader

You misunderstand my intentions. Licton Springs with its low enrollment is vulnerable. It needs to look at where it can have more stability. If that includes having a conversation about Cedar Park and the district is supportive, then that shouldn't be ruled out. I'm not sure that the cultural arguments that you make will be strong enough to result in more physical space at REMS when there is already a space crunch in the district at large. If LS is successful and gains that extra space, then that's great, but it is risky. Program survival trumps location in my opinion.

Optimistic

Anonymous said...

Licton Springs families have been far too Seattle Nice on this issue. Take a page from Sawant. In fact, go track down Sawant and explain to her people the bait and switch being pulled here. Licton Springs not only deserves to stay put at RESMS it deserves the full allotment of classrooms initially envisioned. It needs some very loud pro-Native American voices to make this into a 'you are not displacing us again' story on a tv or newspaper article. The Stranger seems a good place to call to get it rolling. Go get some allies and don't back down.

"No steamrolling"

Anonymous said...

It's super interesting that in the notices that Seattle Public Schools is giving out to the media that they don't mention they are refusing to provide any transportation to students with disabilities on any day when snow or ice causes a late start. Thousands of students who receive "intensive" instruction are systematically denied the transportation that is called out as a related service in their IEP's. Discriminatory? Yup. Illegal? Yup. Expensive? Yup. Because now the district owes all those students compensatory services for denying them a Free Appropriate Public Education. Check out the new Snow/Ice Transportation Plan https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Transportation/ice_snow_trans_plan.pdf, which was never formally communicated to parents. Did anybody with an inkling of knowledge about disability law vet this policy?

-- NO BUS

Cap hill said...

I have a question: in usage, I feel like I see the concept of equity being used interchangeably with achievement gaps. As in "we have the highest achievement gaps in the nation, so we need to focus on equity". Which suggests to me that the people saying that believe that as long as there is an achievement gap, there cannot be equity.

I had previously understood equity being fair and equal access to resources. Which you could theoretically have and still have an achievement gap. It would seem to be (and perhaps I am being naive), that ensuring equity under that definition would be fairly straightforward (comparably) than closing the achievement gap.

To me, when you say closing the achievement gap, I hear "equality of outcome" versus equitable access to services. And equality of outcome contemplates a whole bunch of variables outside of the control of the school system (such as parental involvement, nutrition...).

And yes, I am white. Bonus points for explaining without referencing an unpacking of privilege or other Seattle passive aggressive speak.

Anonymous said...

Invoking Sawant or Sawant tactics would be a poor choice. Buy the school, become a distinct LED. Become self determinate and gain back the pride. It's the only way.

Forget Sawant

Anonymous said...

No LEV has determined that equity means that getting to point A from point B has different requirements. We want every student to get to point B so some students need more resources to get there.

MJ

Anonymous said...

"
I had previously understood equity being fair and equal access to resources."

Fair, yes. Equal no. That's the point of equity. Those who need more or different get more or different. As in: the populations of children who consistently underperform other populations should get the focus and resources they need. Yes, in a finite pie it means less for other populations. Not a comfortable fact for Caucasians who are not economically struggling.

Getta Clue

seattle citizen said...

Yeah....no, Optimistic:
First, you didn't acknowledge your bias. Your intentions seem clear, even though you say we misunderstood them: You continue to argue that LS may easily be moved out of RESMS. Your intention, whether you acknowledge it or not, leads to the breaking of a promise. That you so easily negated the sacred aspect, and the promise made, speaks volumes: Why AREN'T you arguing for a promise kept on sacred land?

They were promised 350 seats, 14 rooms, that's what they get. They can grow into that space or not. So what if it's in a shared building? Schools don't "cannibalize" each other's classroom space; no need for any other program to take LS's space. Find room elsewhere. It was a PROMISE.

Low enrollment? They are temporarily stuck in Lincoln; of course there is low enrollment...now. And let's look at the history of both IH and AS1, which saw District shenanigans that diminished the size of THOSE programs over time. We know that the District will now support LS at LS, so, as the school comes together and people see its worth it will grow.

The district promised LS 350 seats; that's what they get. There will be no cannibalization, there will be no moving LS away from Licton Springs because others want their space.

Owler said...

Licton Teacher, I know several families who would like to donate books to the LS library. Is there an Amazon wishlist or book list you could share? We could target our donations better with a list of what's desired. I can share an email address if you would like to contact me directly, but I hesitate to post it if you don't need it.

I think Optimistic is coming from a state of mind where many of the Cascadia families are, which is wanting to have SPS give our program a building and then allow us to exist under their radar. If Cedar Park were large enough to accommodate Cascadia, I'm sure we would gladly move there. Lowell and Lincoln have both felt temporary, and our HCC program always feels so precarious that we would just like a space where we can be ignored by SPS—it's not as if the Advanced learning department does any program alignment with the various AL schools or anything beyond a screwed up testing program.

But I do think that the historical value of acknowledging past broken promises to the Native population and encouraging the program to be at WP are greater than wanting a dedicated space.

Anonymous said...

"Not a comfortable fact for Caucasians who are not economically struggling." Wow really so you claim someone has to be "economically struggling" to deserve equity?

A child has no control over their parents finances, so there should be no means test to determine the quality of education a student gets.

How about we determine services based off the parents taxes, the more taxes the more services. Would you think that's ok? I don't, but nor do I agree with your bigotry.

MJ

Anonymous said...

Wait is someone here switching it up because they are going to run for school board, more specifically Blanford's seat?

--EYES WATCHING

Watching said...

RESMS is located near a community college. At one point, the former board had thoughts of potentially partnering with the college to create opportunities. A former board member had great hopes for this school. I hope this vision does not get lost in the shuffle.

I consider RESMS grounds to be sacred. As the property was being developed, great care had to be taken.

Wonderful that former board member Sharon Peaslee showed-up to testify. I"m glad the amazing Director Patu remains on the board and holds institutional memory for promises that were made..

Anonymous said...

Sorry, Getta, I just don't buy your hypothesis that white parents are holding black kids in the district down.

The district has worked its A$$ off the last 10 years to ensure that ALL SPS students get the same crappy curriculum, weak science education, diluted math education and poor training in writing. Give them some credit.

-PuhLeeeze

Cap hill said...

Getta clue, thank you for answering my question, and I think you added some bonus snark!

I kind of wonder whether the formulations you are stating are not intrinsically self-defeating. The most glaring example: if you were a parent in (and I will use your criteria) white/affluent family and the stated intention of the schools was to focus relentlessly on "equity" alone, why would you send your kid to that school system? Clearly it would not seem a priority of that system to do the best for your kid. And if people like you opted out in mass numbers, would that not create a severely underfunded and under supported public system, and a well-funded and well supported private system? Because that is exactly what I see in Seattle. I can't imagine an more inequitable situation than 25% of the students having $25/K per year spent on them and 75% of the students having $8/K spent.

I guess the second formulation is the point A to point B one. I have to ask - does anyone in SPS have the remotest clue what level of resource it would actually take to get achievement scores on par? It doesn't seem so. And, is it possible that the factors out of the school system's control are so dominant in determining the outcome that the system could allocate more and more of its resources to the problem (and enhance the cycle referenced above) but actually only achieve diminishing returns?

I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I'm just saying that the approach is self-defeating. And I don't see any of SPS leadership acknowledging the (potentially) larger equity issue that gets created.

Anonymous said...

Gee Optimistic - you are really a culturally aware kinda thinker aren't you. In the case of LS, location is paramount. That's been pretty nicely detailed by more than one commenter. Haven't we screwed with native populations enough in this country's history that we can't keep one promise, when the location is so very very important to Licton Springs students & families? Its a pretty small ask frankly, and I'm sure there are ways to make it happen.

While I don't agree that Ms Sawant is the person to use, a publicity campaign surely is warranted in this situation. That program has been slapped around enough. They deserve better treatment now and forever.

reader47

Anonymous said...

Can someone point me to documents that show SPS promised Pinehurst/Licton Springs 350 seats at REMS? All I can find are BEX planning documents that reference 150 seats, going all the way back to March 2014 at least.

Why is there suddenly all this concern, two-and-a-half years later and after all the planning is done and the building is under construction, that there are 150 seats? Hasn't this been known for ages now? It seems like the time to advocate for more seats was a few years ago, when the building was being redesigned to integrate LS.

unclear



Melissa Westbrook said...

"I had previously understood equity being fair and equal access to resources."

"Fair, yes. Equal no. That's the point of equity."

Exactly - equity does not mean equal.

I will say again - of course the district should devote resources to students who are low-income and struggle. BUT their job is absolutely to serve ALL students.

And there's Cap Hill saying out loud what may need to be said. I'm going to write my 10,000 overview of what I see happening in this district and those remarks are very much part of it.

It almost sounds like some want Licton Springs to become a charter school. Hmmm.

I'll be honest; I worry far more about the Native Heritage program than Licton Springs. But I don't think the district has the commitment - even with Director Pinkham on the Board - to Native Americans that they should.

The district pays a lot more lip service to saying what they will do than actually doing it.


Anonymous said...

@ Cap hill, the way I see it is similar to Getta Clue, but not quite so black and white (and without Getta's racist overtones).

I agree with Getta's statement that it's about fairness rather than equality. Your original comment said you "previously understood equity being fair and equal access to resources." The thing is, "fair" and "equal" aren't necessarily the same thing, and their definitions in any instance aren't necessarily clear in the first place. Take HCC as an example. Equal access might mean that any student who meets the eligibility criteria gets in--equal access, regardless of race, income, language, etc. You get the scores, you get in. Equal access. But is that necessarily fair? What if some students WOULD have qualified had they been able to go to a quality preschool, or if they have a book-rich environment at home, or two parents who had college educations, etc. Is it fair to such a student with high cognitive potential that because they were born into an environment that didn't promote cognitive development to the same extent, that they should then be denied access to HCC? I don't know. In some cases it might be UNfair to place them in HCC, because they didn't have the background and home supports necessary to thrive. Would it be more fair to provide some special support services to help them make that transition over time? That's the approach I would favor, but it costs money--and it singles some groups out for special treatment, which is not cool these days. It's a tricky situation, but efforts to mitigate the obstacles that make the theoretical "equal access" play out in disparate ways can make actual access more equitable, if that makes any sense...

Your recent point is well-taken, that schools shouldn't focus on equity alone. After all, the easiest way to get equity is to deny learning opportunities to those who are doing ok or well, hoping that over time their level of performance comes down to the level of those who are struggling. Voila--equity! What needs to happen--and what I believe schools try to do to at least some extent--is educate everyone at least a little bit. Keep the acceleration opportunities to a minimum, keep the basic curriculum only a little challenging, etc. Try to give the students who do well "just enough" to feel like they're learning, so they continue to participate (and to fulfill the the mandate of public education). Then focus additional resources on those who struggle, hoping to compensate for gaps and missed opportunities and accelerate their growth. We don't do a great job at that, but I think it's the goal. I feel SPS has gone a little too far in pushing equity (without ever clarifying what they mean, and they often DO seem to mean equality of outcomes), and isn't doing a great job of providing the more intensive supports that struggling students will need to really get there. Equality of outcomes should be the goal, but not at the expense of allowing everyone to thrive. There needs to be greater discussion of the root causes behind the achievement gap if we're ever going to succeed in eliminating it in a way that works for all.

Half Full

Cap hill said...

@Half Full, I think we could do much better than just educating everyone a little bit. If you do the math on how much is actually being spent on education in Seattle (25%@$25K + 75%@8K), you can see that we're actually probably net spending 2X per student overall versus what is actually getting spent in SPS. And, if the public schools were well run and had good governance, we would probably see some heavy participation by the likes of Amazon and Microsoft. So there is actually enough resource there to serve everyone pretty well in a way that provides for social good (i.e. very fair access versus today's highly tiered access). Plus, think about how much political capital and positive parental involvement we lose to private schools. Warren Buffet has said that the best way to ensure great public school is to outlaw private schools and randomly assign students (which ensures all of the resource flows to the public school system and is equally distributed).

We're at the opposite end of that spectrum right now. Ironically, if you really care about equity, perhaps your approach might be to stop focusing on equity to the exclusion of all other things and focus on creating incentives to increase the inflow of all of those private-bound families into SPS.

On the acceleration topic - someone made a great point here a ways back - stop treating advanced learning like it is scarce or expensive. Enable all students to sign up because AL is actually less expensive. The notion that it somehow makes sense to teach kids less than they are willing to learn is just cray.

Anonymous said...

I'm not saying LS should be a charter school, I'm promoting the idea that the building becomes part of the Heritage educational district. Like the sovereign nation thing, but with the Heritage educational district (HED) receiving funds directly from the state. LS would be the first of possible many schools operating in the HED.

The HED could possibly petition the FEDs for a block grant to get the ball rolling.


MJ

Anonymous said...

Dear Owler, thanks for the offer of helping purchase books for kids. I will follow up with you on our wish list next week when I am back at school. That is a very generous offer. You can reach me at lictonrites@gmail.com

Dear Unclear, I hope this works - but here are links to two important docs relating to Licton Springs/Indian Heritage Partnership.

One is the BAR from 2013 that created our partnership with the Indian Heritage Program. It specifies in the narrative on page two the room number (14) and size (350).

The second BAR from April 2014 shows the 150 number. It came with a thick document where buried on page 75 was the ed specs for our building. According to Sharon P, (former Board Member) she said that staff never told them that they had cut rooms and capped the enrollment for our school. She and others assumed they were following the boards directive from 2013.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B51B3wC0qujSWkloWm1GejNJdG8
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B51B3wC0qujSNEUxSXhJelN3eEk

Thanks for your care and concern,
Licton Teacher

Anonymous said...

@ Cap hill, I disagree somewhat. Advanced learning SHOULD be scarce. Not in the sense that challenging opportunities shouldn't be available to all--in other words, rigor SHOULD be the norm, and maybe that's what you meant--but "advanced" learning opportunities should be advanced relative to something. If all students were in "advanced" learning, it would no longer be advanced. It would also no longer be inexpensive, because many more of the students would need additional supports to succeed, and more differentiation would be necessary. You can't simply make everyone have the same ability by making the curriculum harder and calling it advanced. A one-size-fits-all system just doesn't work.

Warren Buffett may know investing, but that doesn't make him an authority on schools. Spreading kids around so we have a wider range of abilities and needs in every school just makes it more likely that those who don't fit the mold will not be well-served. Money lost to private schools would not suddenly flow to public, either--because why would you pay that much for large class sizes that aren't going to meet your student's needs?

My child's public elementary and middle schools both had a lot of money, and didn't meet our unique needs. Why would we think they'd do a better job if they had less money and a more needy population? That doesn't make sense.

Half Full

Anonymous said...

Another reference doc for Licton Springs at RESMS are the meeting notes from the final SDAT meeting for the Wilson-Pacific site schools (SDAT-09), which was held in Februry 2014.

http://bex.seattleschools.org/assets/bexiv/140224-MA-SPSweb-SDAT-meeting-9.pdf

It looks like one of the first questions asked by the SDAT participants concerned the 150-seats set aside for Licton Springs.

"SDAT-09 Questions/Comments:
1. School Board decision added the 150-student Pinehurst K8 to the middle
school while maintaining the 1000 student capacity.

a. SPS Response: If Pinehurst K8 reduces much in program size or
grows in program size is will likely not be located in the middle
school. This program has been at this capacity for a while now and
we needed a number to use for the basis of design. Capacity of the
school as a while stays at 1000-students as there is no budget to add
square footage.

It is also worth noting that the schematic diagram of the interior of the middle school building shown during the final SDAT meeting is much different than what was presented in a community meeting in May 14 (after the Board approved the ed specs). Some of the classroom spaces on the floors reserved for Licton Springs became administration spaces, shared learning spaces, etc... The 10 classrooms on the lower two floors of the SW wing in the final SDAT presentation were reduced to 7 classrooms in the approved ed specs.

February 2014 SDAT meeting presentation: http://bex.seattleschools.org/assets/bexiv/140224-MA-SPSweb-SDAT-meeting-2.pdf

May 2014 Community meeting: http://bex.seattleschools.org/assets/bexiv/140513-WP-Community-Mtg.pdf

The ed specs went through the Operations Committee prior to being introduced and approved. It's strange that all this wasn't caught earlier.

-North-end Mom

MTSS-Questioning said...

@Charlie Mas
Thanks for the link to how MTSS is supposed to funnel students who need special ed to special ed services. (http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/School%20Board/Procedures/Series%202000/2163SP.pdf)

That document confirms my belief that the way MTSS is being implemented by SPS is bull-pucky. If a child is on track toward meeting year-end benchmarks, that MTSS document says they don't need to be referred for learning disability testing. My kid has a high IQ AND a learning disability. She walks into school already meeting the year-end benchmark goal every year. Her school (which did adopt MTSS several years ago) won't even assess her reading level beyond saying "meets year-end goal." And because they fail to even assess her reading level, they are not able to give her books to read at an appropriate level. Because they didn't know what an appropriate level would be. Because they won't assess her other than "meets year end goal." There actually are only a handful of books at an appropriate reading level available in her classroom. Turns out my child has a learning disability. But there's no way SPS would ever determine that because she's ahead of benchmark. Although well, well behind where she would be if she were learning anything during the school day.

Learning disabilities need to be diagnosed in children who have them and addressed, not just in children who are falling behind.

MTSS doesn't work for a whole subset of children. There is absolutely nothing that precludes a highly capable child from also having dyscalculia or autism or dyslexia or dysgraphia or any of the other conditions that IDEA requires schools address.

How is MTSS identifying those children to diagnose and address their learning disabilities?

It's not.

Plus: my daughter had nothing to read. At school.

Anonymous said...

yeah 2e is the worst scenario. need to be functioning 2 grade levels behind but what if you have an iq of 140 and should be functioning 2 grade levels ahead? it sucks.

so you are either pushing the peddle to get achievement above 95% to match their iq or and then hope to get a 504/iep to accommodate their disability. or you are getting testing to prove that there is an issue... then appealing based on that. those pesky parents pushing their kids into hcc with private testing. what is the world coming to. it is coming to a district that only sells oranges and if you don't tolerate oranges well then too bad.

it is a hot mess mtss. and sorry for your kids experience.

-hc

Anonymous said...

Our child was in MTSS last year. We were told that our child did not qualify for testing, because our child was not 2 years behind. We were told we could demand testing, but that our request would be denied. Our child received no specialist intervention, just more time using a computer module, and being required to take MAP a third time (winter). Our child lost more instruction time in order to take an extra MAP test that showed our child was not doing well. Let me repeat, my struggling learner lost instruction time to take an extra MAP test. IMHO, MTSS is a massive time suck for a teacher to collect data on a child rather than providing that child more one on one time with a teacher. It seems like MTSS is used to delay services. If people are so concerned with the school to prison pipeline then we can not afford to wait until children are 2 years behind their peers in order to provide testing and special services.
MTSS Disservice

Anonymous said...

i would have no idea of 2e if i didn't know about hc kids. my oldest was off the charts so we needed to look into that... our local school said wait ( to reserve a seat for our next child in a desirable local school) we looked at lowell then and it was pretty cool. they were more really prepared to deal with a wide range of hc kids. they had a set curriculum. years later they went split lowell and i was shocked to watch the admin scramble for footing at tm that she was not prepared for. too soft. too used to kids that listened to her.

but if i didn't know hc i would have never learned 2e. i assume that in the pool of kids not making it into hc there a lot of 2e kids as well as those slowly declining in class.

if sps wants to increase diversity lower the 2e barrier. straight forward will raise all those kids not currently identified; or just add everyone who has 98+ iq regardless of achievement you will get ses, 2e and frl kids which will increase racial diversity too.

nc

Anonymous said...

mtss would not have helped my kids. the research is settled that tracking works and is less expensive than mtss in every school. good luck teaching kids at these hostile schools who don't even believe that there are different learners and that implied bias is what is controlling parents attempts to teach hc kids in tracked programs.

tolley
blandford

good luck getting around these folks. but fight on.

nc

Lynn said...

The last time I heard this idea discussed the AL office reported that dropping achievement scores from the requirements for HCC would increase the proportion of white children in the program.

NESeattleMom said...

I think this is a time to advocate for our Native American students. Switching what was offered is unjust. Removing classrooms and burying the changes is dishonest. If our city wants to close the achievement gap, we should help provide the basic necessities to Native students who deserve extra help not pushing to the side. The shared spaces at HIMS when we were there 4-5 years ago were not really used. Since then I heard that the sharedspaces were being repurposed for classes because of overcrowding. Not sure of those exact details. But taking away classrooms and substituting shared space is an architect's idea, not a teacher's need, in my personal opinion.

Anonymous said...

@ Licton Teacher, thank you for the links. The way I'm reading them, 14 rooms (for 350 capacity) were temporarily available to Pinehuest at the Lincoln building, but the details of how many rooms and what capacity would be available at the Wildon Pacific site were left open--the BAR directed staff to engage in further planning. This further planning, then, led them to the 150-student size, based on historic numbers? I could see that happening, especially given space constraints in the north end.

Do you have information on how many classrooms LS will get at REMS this fall, or is still TBD? You mentioned a decrease from the 14 you believe were promised (but that was apparently only true for Lincoln), down to 10in one plan and down to 7 in another. Are they labeled LS in the plans or elsewhere, or are you basing this on a particular wing of the school? Is it possible that even if the layout changed, rooms could be available elsewhere? For example, designing a building fit this shared use of space might not be the best idea for the long term--from a facility design perspective, so maybe they reconfigure it to a more traditional layout, assuming LS might have a few classrooms on another floor as well? Is that one possibility?

As to size, I'm curious why so many rooms are needed in the first place. For 350 students you say 14 rooms, so average 25 students percent room. If they limit you to 10 now, wouldn't that be about 250 capacity, not 150? Or is the concern that you think LS will really only get 7 rooms now?

Unclear

Anonymous said...

@Unclear

According to the approved educational specifications, Licton Springs K-8 will be housed on the lower two floors of the south wing of the RESMS building (which appear to be configured as 6 classrooms, a small lab space and two shared use spaces that are open to the hallway). There is no mention of additional space available for the program within the building. At the last school board meeting, Michael Tolley spoke to the opportunity for middle school students in the K-8 program to take classes with RESMS students. I believe they will share some common spaces with the middle school, such as the library and gym, as well.

-North-end Mom

Lynn said...

That classroom count appears to be based on current enrollment.

Here's the November enrollment at Licton Springs followed by the 2016-17 student to teacher ratio for each grade for a high poverty school:

K - 16 (20:1)
1st - 16 (20:1)
2nd - 14 (21:1)
3rd - 17 (24:1)
4th - 15 (27:1)
5th - 12 (27:1)
6th - 10 (30:1)
7th - 16 (30:1)
8th - 12 (30:1)

Using the current WSS, the school should have 4 elementary classroom teachers, 1.4 FTE for the middle school grades and a total of .9 FTE in art, music and PE teachers.

Is it more reasonable to set aside classrooms for the current enrollment or to trust that enrollment will increase next year to allow for allocating one classroom teacher per grade? It doesn't really matter - because we will have excess middle school space in the north end for the next several years. A school or two should be moved back to Whitman to enable them to retain their current programming. This would allow setting aside extra classrooms at REMS for Licton Springs. If it they can't increase their enrollment within the next five years, those rooms would be available for the middle school.

If Licton Springs is going to be allocated one teacher per grade, the WSS should be updated to reflect that. The school can't be left hanging every year waiting to see if remediation funds will be available. That's a sure route to declining enrollment and school closure.

Anonymous said...

HIMS: -164
JAMS: + 82
REMS: + 666
Whitman: -366

That's a projected net increase of 218 middle school students for north end middle schools next year. Since REMS is adding significantly more seats than that, it seems like there's room to give LS more space. Since removing a feeder school or two from the REMS pathway and keeping them at Whitman helps Whitman and doesn't hurt REMS, that seems like it would make sense all around.

If REMS gets its projected 296 HCC students next year (although if there's grandfathering of 8th graders, they won't), and since they have a projected 666 total, that's 370 GE students--so HCC won't be the majority. Plus, there will be a K-8 on campus, with some of the Licton Springs 6th-8th graders integrating with REMS middle school students to some extent--making HCC even less of the overall school(s) population. Giving LS more room to grow would even further reduce the HCC percentage down the road, too.

Why is the district so resistant to keeping a few feeder schools at Whitman where they fit, and giving LS a little more room to grow, which they want? I don't get it.

unclear

Lynn said...

I don't think Licton Springs middle school students will be integrated with REMS students at all. REMS won't be given any extra funding or teachers to teach Licton Springs students. They will be separate schools with separate staff and budgets.

I'm curious about how many of the students coming out of the language immersion schools to HIMS are HCC qualified. They won't have to move to REMS because they're still guaranteed seats at HIMS.

Carol Simmons said...

How about this for an idea.

Let's resume Indian Heritage High School and include Licton Springs,Native partnership within the Robert Eagle Staff building.

Let's fund Indian Heritage High School, recruit students and make the entire site at Wilson Pacific dedicated to Native education.

This will no doubt produce some discussion. It makes total sense to equity, historical redress, school board "lip service" and District staff attempts at misunderstandings of adequate space, classrooms, promises BAR's,etc. or shenanigans.

Anonymous said...

@ Lynn, since JSIS and McDonald are both in the HIMS zone and have geographic zones as a tiebreaker in placement (and and are in high demand, so likely don't often get to the "lottery" stage), I expect most HIMS immersion students live in the HIMS zone so wouldn't be split to REMS regardless of HCC status. HIMS will retain an HCC program and is likely the HCC pathway for most immersion students.

kitty

seattle citizen said...

I'm game, Carol. Let's do it!
: )
We've needed a high school just like that in the north end, ever since they closed Summit and Marshall. A high school for students wishing to do something different. A new Indian Heritage HS with Licton Springs at WP would be a fantastic idea.

Anonymous said...

@ Carol, how would Hamilton get the relief it so desperately needs under your proposed plan?

Kitty

Anonymous said...

It's not just Hamilton...

The previous person who posted about projected enrollments for north-end middle school left out Eckstein, which is projected to add 139 students over the next five years, with a projected enrollment of 1094 in 2020-21. The school has handled more than that in the past, with portables, so maybe Eckstein will be OK.

What concerns me more is Jane Addams MS, where they are projected to add 259 students over the next five years, for a projected enrollment of 1196 in 2020-21. JAMS is projected to become the biggest middle school in the District, but it is not the largest middle school building. The building is designed for a capacity of 960 students (which it is about 20 students shy of this year's enrollment). They must be planning for a lot of portables in the parking lot at JAMS.

What I'm trying to say is that there was a reason for opening two new comprehensive middle schools in the north end. RESMS is not just a bunch of extra space. Relief for Hamilton is an immediate need, since the portables there are an emergency placement. In a few years time, there may be a need to provide relief for JAMS and perhaps Eckstein.

-North-end Mom

Anonymous said...

Not Joking said-

"News to SPS, Whitman is fully functioning with happy healthy students, leave them alone. Stop hurting children and families with your hair brain forced busing ideas."

Not Joking and any other families who want to stay at Whitman and have transportation. I suggest you connect with your PTSA at Whitman who is unethically actively working with others against grandfathering middle school students without a parent vote.

If grandfathering is not passed, no transportation will be provided. The Whitman PTSA person is working with a couple of 5th grade Cascadia parents (in no way representative of Cascadia parents!) who want to move all of HCC from Hamilton (including QA/Magnolia/Wallingford students) to Whitman or divide them between Eaglestaff and Whitman.

Many with 7th graders HCC at Hamilton are completely opposed. These people are ignoring the matriculation and other issues raised by 8th grade parents who went through JAMS geosplit, as well as other issues raised by board members such as "mitigation funds being on the table to be cut". There will not be money to run small classes (math, foreign language, band etc) for the 8th graders if they are not grandfathered.

-north end parent

Anonymous said...

The link for the projections I stated above (if anyone's interested).

http://seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Enrollment%20Planning/Projections/5_Year_School_Projections_2016-17.pdf

Overall, the enrollment for North Seattle middle schools is projected to grow by 905 students between 2016-17 and 2020-21.

-North-end Mom

Lynn said...

The Curriculum and Instruction Policy Committee will be discussing Native American education options at their meeting tomorrow. Information provided to the committee begins on page 131 of the agenda.

A list of schools with approved waivers of basic instructional materials is included on page 127. My child's elementary school uses a math curriculum purchased by the PTA but is not included on the list. (25% of our students have been identified as needing Tier 2 intervention support during core math instruction. I wonder if Math in Focus would have been more effective.) Is anyone else at a school that is ignoring the waiver requirement?

Anonymous said...

I would like to know the names of Whitman PTA members working against our students staying at Whitman. I will deal with them directly.

old school

Anonymous said...

Wow, “North-end Parent.”  Let's be community-minded and look at the big picture instead of rumor mongering, impugning people’s intentions, and stirring up trouble. Perhaps when you have only your special interests in mind, it's hard to recognize when others are being opened minded to possible solutions for complex problems facing their schools, students, and the broader north-end community. Fear mongering and spreading rumors with just grains of truth is divisive and takes things to a dark place. Please step back, calm down, and try to be your better self. 

-Fellow HCC parent

Anonymous said...

Regardless of the position of Whitman's PTSA, it would be a good idea for the parents at Whitman and the PTSA to identify and be clear about their school's position. And it may very well be that the school community is divided on an appropriate response to REMS, grandfathering etc. However, there certainly should be transparency, equity, and clear communications so that no one in the community is blindsided or feels misled. - NP

Anonymous said...

Whitman parents should be aware the the city is placing 70-80 hi-risk street people in a camp located just 527 feet from RESMS at 89th and Nesbit.

The area of 90th and Aurora is one of most notorious for drug dealing, open drug use, and prostitution. If you doubt it then call any of the local businesses and asked them about the safety issues.

There is already a notorious attraction near the school that SPD responds to several times a week. It's called the Awake church. Please go and walk around the area and you will see the most downtrodden members of society all converging around 90th and Aurora. The local parking lots usually have 30 to 40 used needles a day in them.

SPS is putting children in danger.

Staying @Whitman

Anonymous said...

@old school, please feel free to contact me at president@whitmanptsa.com. I'd be happy to speak with you regarding the topics discussed yesterday at Rick Burke’s community meeting. Please know that in collaboration with the school staff I put together an information sheet and formal survey for Whitman parents who will be assigned to Eagle Staff. This is something I've worked hard on over the last couple of weeks to inform our parent community of the changes next year and it includes details on the existing promise for families to opt back into Whitman during open enrollment, transportation, upcoming dates, and how much Whitman would like for all students to stay if that is what works best for their family.

For those of you concerned about grandfathering or bussing, I'd be happy to discuss the nuances of the issues with you. You can reach me at 206-854-4170.

Jenny Young

Anonymous said...

@Jenny Young

Can you post the information here and on the Whitman FB page.

old school

Anonymous said...

Hi Jenny Young-- Do you support the grandfathering of Whitman students which will provide transportation to those at Whitman? Please let us know if you have taken a formal position to support us parents. Some of us have heard you would rather have an HCC population move to Whitman?

-another Whitman parent

Anonymous said...

The following information has been made available at recent school events and in the school office. This information, along with the survey, is also going out to all families who will be assigned to Eagle Staff. The dates of the Eagle Staff community planning meetings and the SAP community meetings have been listed in the Whitman e-newsletter. The information has not been updated to reflect the latest proposed amendments.

Sigh. The blogger is not allowing the full post (up to 4096 characters). Text me your email address and I’ll send it to you. I’ll also post on the Whitman PTSA FB page.

Jenny Young

Anonymous said...

@old school, additional information will be sent out to the entire WMS community after the board votes on the amendments and the SAP is finalized.

Information sheet
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5bBT3tMyptdOGo1S2lRQjdpTXM

Survey
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5bBT3tMyptdNmFHQ294c2RGdG8

@another Whitman parent, the Whitman PTSA has no official position on the various ideas and proposals being discussed related to the SAP. However, as PTSA president and Seattle Council PTSA Northwest Area Director, I talk with and hear from people representing a range of communities and interests both inside and outside of Whitman.

If you have further questions, please contact me directly.

Jenny Young

Anonymous said...

@Jenny Young, what is your motivation here?

I'm telling you no one I know with a 6th or 7th grader want's to move to a toxic RESMS. I hope that's is clear. So, survey say's SPS go FO!

Jenny please take a walk around the RESMS area and look closely at all the filth. Take a look at the prostitutes and the drug attics. It's a debacle that SPS stupidly spent hundreds of millions of dollars to build a complex in one of most disgusting locations in Seattle. Take some photos and get the SPD crime statistics for the area. Do that and then bring all that information to your meetings so all the parents can get the real picture.

Now SPS is trying to rip children out of Whitman and forcibly bus them into a school that should not have been built there. Seriously driving up aurora is like driving up a human sewer that this city has allowed to flow. Adding in 80+ derelicts, professional beggars is a clue that Seattle intends on driving the area even further down.

I hope for your sake what "another Whitman parent" wrote is not true. I will not tolerate your HCC group's actions.

Staying @Whitman

Anonymous said...

Why is it always UW employed parents trying to manipulate the schools for HCC.

I've seen this over the last 10 years mostly in the North End schools.

old school

NESeattleMom said...

Old school, just like you and staying@whitman, the parents you are asking about feel great concern abou where there SPS student will end up and how that will work for them. I am not at Cascadia or at Whitman or at UW, but I do understand the worry. I'm sure parents who are aware of what SPS is considering for changes are similarly concerned, sometimes people forget that SPS has to make city wide decisions. Trying to inform them of possible consequences of upcoming decisions could help avoid them making mistakes.

seattle citizen said...

Staying@Whitman -
Could you moderate your hyperbole? These are human beings you're talking about. Yes, crime rates higher around there, yes, perhaps there are issues, but is it really necessary to cast these people into the gutter with your descriptions? Do you have to dehumanize them to make your point?

"...filth...prostitutes and the drug attics [sic]...disgusting...human sewer...derelicts, professional beggars..."

These are people's mothers and fathers and sons and sisters.

Anonymous said...

Is the Whitman PTSA president really advocating that ALL of north end HCC move to Whitman, or that they divide them between Eaglestaff and Whitman? If so, what a stupid idea.

Whitman been hostile to AL in the past. Also, the information sheet Jenny Young posted says Whitman is projected to have 485 students next year, but their goal is 600. Hamilton HCC enrollment is projected to be 624 next year. Does Whitman really want add 624 HCC students to their smaller non-HCC population? I have a hard time believing most Whitman families, teachers, and administrators want HCC to come take over the school...

So what about moving half of HCC to Whitman and half to Eagle Staff? First of all, what's the motivation for this proposal? Is it just a way to keep Whitman's numbers up next year, to avoid program cuts? I suspect yes, but it's so blatantly selfish and illogical that it's hard to believe. Illogical because Whitman hasn't been supportive of AL, and because there are simpler--and much better--solutions out there. Selfish in that she is allegedly willing to throw Hamilton under the bus in a way that would cause majorly traumatic disruptions in order to spare Whitman from real-but-much-less-painful consequences. Wow.

HCC is about half of Hamilton's population. Pulling HCC entirely would cause huge cuts in staffing. The music program would suffer, PTSA funding would significantly decline, etc. Language immersion would also suffer, since many of those in the immersion program are also HCC-qualified (and given the general weakness of language immersion at HIMS, most would likely opt for HCC over immersion if forced to make a choice). Hamilton would be a shell of its current self.

The thing is, there's no reason to throw Hamilton under the bus like this. Why screw over Hamilton and force Whitman to completely change its culture and orientation by becoming an HCC site, why not just do the simple, logical thing and advocate that Whitman retain a feeder school or two, while the HIMS HCC program splits as planned, with a smaller cohort remaining at HIMS (providing capacity relief) and another cohort moving to REMS (providing start-up bodies)? It's the most logical solution, the least disruptive overall, and it provides for the greatest continuity for the existing schools since they'd be able to maintain their programmatic approaches, staff familiar with their offerings and populations, etc.

I feel like there must be something else going on... Maybe those who believe the Whitman PTSA president is advocating for these plans are mistaken? Or could she really be promoting such an apparently self-interested plan? Oy.

DisAPPointed

Anonymous said...

@ Staying @ Whitman, you do understand that we live in a city, right? You and your students may have been sheltered from prostitutes and drug addicts in the past, but they are a reality. Do you seriously think there aren't other schools in the district that are in close proximity to crime, filth and even (gasp) beggars? I guess it's ok for families in "those" schools, just not your own? Sheesh.

Your passion on the issue might be better directed toward working on strategies to ensure the safety of students who WILL be at these schools, or working on neighborhood crime prevention or environmental cleanup projects, or fighting to ensure adequate services for our community members suffering from mental health issues, addiction, homelessness, poverty, etc.

HF

Another NW said...

Please be respectful that this will be a neighborhood school for many families and they will not have the choice whether they go or not. And maybe they are even excited about a brand new school closer to their home with many people putting a lot of work into making it great. You are talking about other people's homes and their community. You clearly haven't walked around the surrounding neighborhood - yes, homelessness, poverty, etc exists mainly near Aurora but there are lots of nice homes and businesses to the north, south and east. Blanchet, NSCC and Greenlake are very close. I have a business not far from the new school site and there is a huge community of folks working to make the area better and actually help people and build community. I've been surprised that the actual crime around our business isn't that different than around 85th/15th and there is much more of a police presence.

Anonymous said...

@DisAPPointed, I’m on the record saying Whitman is a welcoming school for all students. If you start to tell me you don’t think Whitman is a good school and can’t meet your students’ needs, I will tend to dig in and tell you what a great school it is because I so strongly believe in Whitman.

It’s up to you to advocate for HCC. I’m promoting our school and hope to reach an enrollment goal of 600 for 2017 to minimize disruption. It’s up to the district staff and school board to get the balance between the middle schools right and it’s up to families, parent organizations, school communities, and other impacted communities to share their thoughts with the board on getting that right.

Take the information I’ve posted at face value and know that working on behalf of the students and families at Whitman is where I devote my energy and time. I’ve heard from far too many people that they think they know all about Whitman without ever having had a student attend. And you might be disappointed in APP but I’m not disappointed in Whitman.

Jenny Young

Anonymous said...

Whoa--moving HCC to Whitman? Is this all going to happen with the SAP? These sound like some pretty big, disruptive, last minute plans to have happen over Christmas break when families are not paying attention. It's one thing to change feeder plans in a way that keeps kids at the same school they already attend (i.e., Amendment 2--a change many families saw coming). It's opening a whole new can of worms to rearrange the HCC feeder patterns. Families will be blindsided. Are Whitman teachers and staff really ready to transition culture and curriculum to becoming a HCC school? If HCC moves to Whitman, how will this effect current Whitman 6th and 7th graders who have been told they can choice into Whitman next year because there will be plenty of room for them to stay?

Stick with SAP Amendment 2 to balance REMS/Whitman enrollment.

Whitman Parent

Ragweed said...

I a not a Whitman parent, but I have had several conversations with PTSA president Jenny Young about feeder patterns, HCC and related impacts on the Eagle Staff and Whitman communities. I have been extremely impressed with how careful and thoughtful she has been to make sure that any decision would involve input from the impacted communities. She is working to make sure the survey goes out to as many people as possible, and having it translated into different languages. Those who are trying to imply there is something underhanded or impugn her motives are way off base.

Staying @ Whitman - I have seen parents argue just as forcefully that they want their kids to go to RESM, and are angry about potentially being assigned back to Whitman. If you don't know any parents who want to go to RESM, then that is an indicator of your limited exposure to other families. The reason why there are surveys and community meetings is to gage the range of parent opinions. So it is fine to have an opinion on which school would be a better fit for your child, but please get off the attack mode.

So far in discussions about REMS, I have heard proposals to:
Keep Whitman and REMS attendance area HCC at Whitman,
Keep Greenwood and Broadview Thompson at Whitman (which actually has an amendment)
Arguments both for and against rising 8th grade grandfathering
Arguments for and against universal MS grandfathering.
Discussion of the transportation impacts on families for grandfathering vs opt-ins.

I don't recall anyone advocating for all of MS HCC to go to Whitman. There may have been a suggestion to split Hamilton HCC between REMS and Whitman, in order to relieve overcrowding at Hamilton, but I don't know that anyone was strongly advocating for it.



Anonymous said...

Think about which would have a greater negative impact on students and schools in the north end: Hamilton losing its entire HCC population (624 students this year, per SPS projections data updated in 10/16...in other words, OVER HALF the school), or Whitman retaining a couple feed elementary schools and allowing grandfathering so that it doesn't experience significant population decline. It's pretty straightforward.

Yes, I get that you're working on "behalf of Whitman," but boy are you sure playing into the "let's pit families against each other" hand. It's a shame, because there are REASONABLE options out there, options that don't screw over other school communities in order to protect your own. At least you're honest that you don't really care about other schools, only yours.

@ Ragweed, you say you've had several conversations with the Whitman PTSA president about feeder patterns, HCC and related impacts on the Eagle Staff and Whitman communities and that you've been extremely impressed with how careful and thoughtful she has been to make sure that any decision would involve input from the impacted communities. Really? Since she won't share details of her plan proposal here, will you do it? What did her impressive comments reveal about her analysis of these feeder patterns and HCC? As well, how exactly has she engaged the Hamilton community--both HCC and non-HCC, since the whole school would be negatively impacted--about these ideas of hers, since she'd apparently been so thoughtful and careful in getting impact from the impacted communities? As far as I can tell, Hamilton families don't know anything about this below-the-radar attempt to try to destroy the program.

HF

NESeattleMom said...

I agree with HF and another NW parent regarding the point that the new school will house SPS students who are just as important as "our" or "your" child. If you, staying@Whitman, don't want your student to go there, that is the way it is, but disparaging it is not kind or holistic. The school is built. It will be a school home. If you don't like the illegal activities nearby, I think it would be good to change the neighborhood for the sake of all children. That takes influencing the mayor, city council and the police.

Anonymous said...

@Ragweed,




I can back you up on everything you have conveyed about Jenny (WMS PTSA). I have also talked with her and I think your assessment is spot on. I do not see her advocating for or against a move of HCC to WMS. What I heard from her was a welcome to HCC if the program decides to move there (I would guess it would be partial if it happened and as far as I know there is no actual plan for this to happen).




@HF - I would suggest that you actually speak with Jenny personally in lieu of letting your dark fears conjure up conspiracy theories about her intent. She gave her contact information out in this post. Seriously, she is a pretty straight up person. And yes, she is very careful in the sense that she does not advocate for what feeder schools are assigned to WMS or whether HCC should move to WMS. She does not do this because she believes that those communities need to advocate for themselves for their needs and she does not want to get in the middle of what she sees as their business. I believe that was what she was trying to convey in her last post here. It is pretty much the opposite of what you seem to be thinking.




My impression was that she has been working very hard to provide information to parents of students that are slated to move to REMS next year and let them know that they can, if they choose, opt back in to WMS, as well as being up associated issues with either choice that the parents should consider. Yes, she would like Whitman's enrollment to be higher, for obvious reasons, but she is not plotting against any other school communities. I am disappointed to see a fellow HCC parent make up and spread these types of theories based on nothing but your own surmising. Really, we should be better than that. Talk to her about your concerns. She is making herself completely available...




I have two kids that were HCC at HIMS. One is still there. We also lived through the split with JAMS. My youngest was supposed to spend his last year at a different MS. It would have been certainly less than ideal but I would have been okay with it because HIMS is undoubtedly crowded. And I also don't see consensus from HCC parents about where HCC should move to. I too have seen different HCC parents strongly want REMS, strongly want WMS, and strongly want it all to remain at HIMS. But who knows for sure what the percentages are. Maybe someone for HCC can step up, like Jenny, and create a survey? I personally don't have any skin left in this game because we will be moving on to HS next year. But I do get frustrated at the drama in these threads. Accusing someone of a below-the-radar attempt to destroy the program is a bit cray cray without having even talked to her personally. I hate seeing a person who volunteers their time unselfishly then get treated so unfairly. No good deed goes unpunished...




Ballard Dad

Ragweed said...

HF - I don't think anyone has any plan to move all of HCC out of Hamilton and I don't think anyone is trying to do that. Whitman and Eagle Staff area HCC families are going to be split out of Hamilton, which is well known. Some HCC families are advocating for Whitman to be the 3rd HCC site instead of Eagle Staff, which is also on the public record and not

Everything I have heard from Jenny, in both private conversations and community meetings, is concern for transparency and input from anyone affected. Concern that any change to the feeder schools is done with those school communities knowledge and agreement. Concern that any change to HCC is done with those communities knowledge and agreement. Concern that the Whitman families assigned to Eagle Staff know what school they are going to, including the many families where English is not the primary language. Concern that community surveys are well written, broadly distributed by multiple methods, and translated into multiple languages. Concern that the January 4th vote is too soon to get enough community input. She is the last person I would accuse of being part of a conspiracy to pit one community against another.

That is why I think this whole conversation has gone off the rails. People are spinning off rumor and conspiracy theories that have no basis in reality, and attacking the very people who are working to make sure decisions are made with everyone's input.

Anonymous said...

Ragweed-- " don't think anyone has any plan to move all of HCC out of Hamilton and I don't think anyone is trying to do that."

There is indeed evidence (sent to multiple people) that did state certain PTSA people (including someone from Whitman) and other parents have been advocating for that very idea. A move of all or part of HCC to Whitman to "solve the middle school capacity crisis".

If you agree this should happen without full community engagement, please write the board.
-JR

Anonymous said...

I'm not spinning anything except that I will be contacting a lawyer this week and preparing to sue SPS over what is akin to forced busing of some current Whitman students.

I have had enough of this type of BS over the years. This is probably a civil rights issue. "HCC if the program decides to move there" so it's up to HCC to displace Whitman students...we will see about that.

Staying @Whitman

Anonymous said...

"My impression was that she has been working very hard to provide information to parents of students that are slated to move to REMS next year and let them know that they can, if they choose, opt back in to WMS, as well as being up associated issues with either choice that the parents should consider. "

@Ballard dad--

Why is Jenny Young and the Whitman PTSA not formally endorsing grandfathering of students at Whitman, a school without a capacity issue?

A school that is under capacity that will lose so many additional students otherwise. The amendment which was introduced will provide transportation for kids who otherwise may not have a choice. Whitman parents want to know what is going on and why their PTSA is not representing them on this issue.
-not clear

Anonymous said...

One more thing,

Why should it be the parents responsibility to contact the city or the Seattle police dept regarding the illegal and dangerous activities around the RESMS site. Why would the City be so careless and derelict of duty to force the neighborhood to take on even more crime by installing a 80+ person street encampment right there? I can tell you that both the City's health and human services and SPD are well aware of the enormous safety issues and are NOT intending to make any changes to stop those activities, because the Seattle mayor is blocking them from doing so. So to be clear I don't give a FF if the criminals are people or dogs, because we should not subject children to those types of activities or those type of individuals.

Staying @Whitman

Anonymous said...

@ Ballard Dad,

Sorry, I wasn't conjuring up conspiracy theories but was simply responding to a comment made above, in which someone reported "the Whitman PTSA person is working with a couple of 5th grade Cascadia parents (in no way representative of Cascadia parents!) who want to move all of HCC from Hamilton (including QA/Magnolia/Wallingford students) to Whitman or divide them between Eaglestaff and Whitman." If she is advocating for the former--moving all of HCC out of HIMS--she really should be consulting with the HIMS community, too, and if she's not, yes, I see that as a below-the-radar effort to destroy the overall program at HIMS in favor of saving Whitman from a threat that could easily be solved through more reasonable measures (e.g., retaining a couple feeder schools).

The Whitman PTSA president may in fact be doing great work on behalf of the school, and I commend her for that. However, it's a little disingenuous for her supporters to insist she's engaging all the impacted families IF she's proposing to pull ALL of HCC from HIMS and if she's not seeking input from HIMS families and educators. Now, I don't know for a fact that she is pushing for that as an option, but multiple people here have mentioned it. Notably, despite many follow-up posts here, Ms. Young has also not denied that and has instead made it clear she'll do whatever she can for Whitman. Based on that, it's logical (not cray cray, although that does sound fun!) to assume that means she's willing to throw HIMS under the bus. If she's not, I wish she'd say as much here. Or be clear about what she is pushing for, since everyone is so convinced she's all about transparency.

HF

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure what people expect a survey to accomplish SPS has made it obvious they are willing to demolish the Whitman community for their agenda.

I think SPS should leave Whitman out of the RESMS fight. If you float a $100 bill in the middle of a sewage pond not many people would swim out to grab it.

Let HCC and LS have the entire RESMS school, it sounds like those groups are willing to swim for it.

SPS just needs leave all the students that want to stay at Whitman stay and leave all the programs at Whitman intact along with transportation. As you will soon learn, it's not just the south end parents that can raise hell.

old school

Anonymous said...

@old school--it's the northend parents who are notorious for "raising hell"...that is the biggest complaint District-wide.

Read up

Melissa Westbrook said...

So, this is not a pretty picture. School against school, program splits and shifts.

And yet, where is the district communication on all this? Why is there such a swirl of mystery? If an easy-to-read document was created - on that would explain all the options, costs and possible outcomes, that would be a big help.

Naturally, this will only get settled directly after the holidays (when people's attention is at its best).

You have to wonder.

Charlie Mas said...

@Staying @Whitman wrote: "I'm not spinning anything except that I will be contacting a lawyer this week and preparing to sue SPS over what is akin to forced busing of some current Whitman students."

Your call to a lawyer will be very brief. While your child is entitled to enroll in Seattle Public Schools, there is no right to enroll in any specific school or building. None.

"This is probably a civil rights issue." It's not. Students with disabilities are moved all over the district and their families have no say in the matter. It it were a civil rights issue, it would be an issue for them, not for your typically developing child.

"'HCC if the program decides to move there'" so it's up to HCC to displace Whitman students...we will see about that." No. HCC does not control it's own fate. Those students are moved around the district like pawns just like every other student and program. Don't pin the blame on the HCC community for the District's program placement decisions.

And, if you can, try to settle down. You're only going to hurt yourself. Your children will be just as successful in whatever school they are assigned to.

Anonymous said...

"Why is Jenny Young and the Whitman PTSA not formally endorsing grandfathering of students at Whitman, a school without a capacity issue?"

Why would you assume grandfathering is the best thing for all students at Whitman? Are you purposefully trying to mislead readers by not stating that the grandfathering and transportation amendments would be for one year only, and only for 8th grade students? Applying during Open Enrollment to stay at Whitman is already a choice Whitman families have and is not the same as “grandfathering". Eagle Staff will be closer to home for many current Whitman families, some will have siblings at the new school, many will find it walkable and it will become part of their community. Being closer to home, more will have the opportunity to participate in after school programs. In contrast to HIMS, Whitman does not have levy subsidized after-school activities or transportation home. Again, bussing for grandfathering is only for 8th grade students for one year and would not necessarily be available to younger students or siblings who stay at Whitman.

Below is a sample of reactions from parents during the multiple Whitman events where the growth boundary maps have been on display:
-Aware of the changes and have a plan
-Not aware there is a new school opening
-Not aware they will be assigned to the new school
-Not aware they may apply to stay during Open Enrollment
-Excitement over having a neighborhood school
-Assumptions that the changes will not impact their student, until they realize next year’s low enrollment
-Transportation is very important to some families who may their student to stay at Whitman (all grades)
-Want assurances on offerings and strength of either school

So, while we are encouraging families to stay at Whitman, we are highlighting how Eagle Staff will have a seasoned principal and a beautiful new building. Transportation is less of a barrier to participating in after-school clubs when a school is closer to home. Parents have easier access to volunteering during the day and are more likely to attend after-school family events. It is very presumptive to assume that all Whitman families have the same need or desire to continue to be bussed out of their neighborhood, especially when our schools are such an important part of our community. Thus my effort to inform families who aren’t in the political loop by sharing information and sending a survey for two-way communication. A summary of the results will be shared with the district staff and school board to help inform their decisions.

So, what do I personally want for Whitman? I hope at least 600 students are enrolled next year. I’d love to see bussing for ALL students who want to stay at Whitman. I want an activity bus to take our students home so ALL students who want to participate in after-school activities have the opportunity—a disparity with the luxury available to HIMS students. I want it to be clear to parents who have a rising 7th grader that the grandfathering amendment and bussing don't apply to them, even if they stay at Whitman by applying during Open Enrollment. I wish I could more easily explain the possibilities and nuances to a bilingual student trying to interpret for their parent, because I’m limited to English. I want literature to hand out about Licton Springs K-8 for families to consider. I want new Eagle Staff families to be able to focus on building the school community now, because June comes so fast and many volunteers take time off during the summer. Above all, I want the state to amply fund basic education.

I’m happy to talk about school issues with anyone who is interested. You have an open invitation to contact me.

Jenny Young

Anonymous said...

P.S.

Regarding HCC: I know parents who strongly support the idea of HCC at Whitman and I’ve also discussed the possibility of Whitman welcoming HCC to parents who are strongly opposed to it. All of these discussions have occurred in the context of what ifs. Again, I hear from and am looped into conversations with many communities. Eagle Staff families will be mostly former Whitman students and our northwest neighbors in HCC, for whom Whitman and Eagle Staff are attendance area schools. This is not a zero-sum game.

Jenny Young

Anonymous said...

"I’d love to see bussing for ALL students who want to stay at Whitman."

@Jenny- How can this happen? If the grandfathering amendment passes, it will (at least) provide busing for 8th graders. It does not take away anything, just adds an an option for 8th graders who want to stay, but cannot due to transportation. Why would you and/or the PTSA not support it if you are hoping to keep enrollment up?
- not clear

Anonymous said...

just thinking about a new movie coming out -

Blog Wars, A New Troll.

Then I put two and two together and realized it was the same old troll.

trollwatch

seattle citizen said...

Staying@whitman, you are selfish and uncaring. Selfish, I get: people get that way when their kids are involved. But that uncaring attitude of yours is truly sad, and won't do you much good when advocating for your kids in our public schools.
The parents of some kids in OUR public schools are the people you are calling less than human.
Show some civility and compassion or take a hike. Please.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Troll Watch. Staying@Whitman seems so off the charts freaked out--I bet they are making up this dialogue to mess with people.

Unreal

Melissa Westbrook said...

Ms. Young, thank you very much for wading/weighing in. As a former PTA co-president, I know the pressure and am grateful you are trying to look at the big picture for all the students involved. Nothing happens in one school/region that may not ripple out and it's a wise person who recognizes that.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your hard work Jenny. I have a Whitman student (still within the zone for Whitman), and am definitely concerned about losing great programs and teachers next year if student numbers are reduced. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Whitman Parent South of 85th

Anonymous said...

Jenny, unlike Staying@Whitman you are a class act. Thank you for working for more than your own child within a system that eats up volunteers and spits them out. It's thankless but necessary work, and the students of our city are better off because of efforts of people like you.

Another Volunteer

Anonymous said...

Any parent that subjects their child to the current environment of 90th and Aurora is in my opinion negligent. I'm sure there is a tragedy in the future unless drastic changes are made, end of story.

I just about wet myself reading this,
" we are highlighting how Eagle Staff will have a seasoned principal and a beautiful new building"

I'm not sure Jenny is aware of the history, so nothing personally against Jenny.

I would say the seasoning is subjective. Not really seasoned for my taste for sure. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder so true, because looking around at RESMS it sure looks like SPS used the cheapest possible construction materials, I'm sure the building will be full of toxic fumes for a few years. It also looks like the lion share of the cost went into site work and not the building, but I could be wrong.

Staying @Whitman

Anonymous said...

It's obvious people here have not visited the RESMS site or hung around 90th and Aurora much, before you shoot the messenger I suggest you pay a few visits and get to know the street people and other unscrupulous people that will become your children's best friends. Give the local business ProSki a call and ask them why the front door is permanently locked.

old school

Anonymous said...

Comments in quick succession, same message, different sock puppets. Confrontational and pejorative language, attacks on other school leaders, threats to sue. Have we heard this from someone before?

trollwatch

Anonymous said...

hyperbole coming from stay@ reminds me of someone... who was that again? and they liked to use several names to seem they were supported. gosh. i am sure if thought about it i would remember them. i think they were so unhappy about the last sb election.

and they were the type who mistakes drug addicts for drug "drug attics." ha ha i got a nice visual from that one actually. lol. oh and they hate hcc because who knows.

-nc

Anonymous said...

oops trollwatch i guess we saw the same thing, you were just sooner. did you see the drug attics right above the medicine cabinets? i hope it brought some joy to you too.

-nc

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

i didn't criticize any for being dyslexic. that would be self hate. and that wasn't poor spelling it was just not knowing. no big. i got a chuckle. still no big but based on your constant dribble you really should consider either toning it down. otherwise we know who the dyslexic sped advocate is who hates hcc.

no big. your words are filled with hate to smash who down? sorry. it smashes us all down.

i appor your constant hyperbole if anon was the anon who constantly degrades people to suit their own aims.

don't be an such a >>>>

-hc


Melissa Westbrook said...

I think we have said enough here but thanks for the comments and discussion.