Monday, April 24, 2017

Extra, Extra - Another Day, Another Issue at Garfield

From the Seattle Times:
One of Seattle’s flagship high schools is under investigation for possible football recruiting violations tied to a youth from Texas, who says he was flown north to Garfield High with promises of athletic opportunity.

Will Sanders, 19, spent last fall’s football season as a running back for the Bulldogs, where he was the third-leading rusher — even though poor grades would have made him ineligible to play the entire time. While here, he bounced between the residences of a track coach and team parents. 

Meanwhile, the team racked up its best season in years.
Well, echoes of Hale because they,too, had their best basketball season ever with imported players.

Who's involved?


- Sanders said he originally came north after talking with the school’s football coach, Joey Thomas, who discussed a glowing athletic future that would await him in Seattle.

If that account is accurate, Thomas would have violated rules set by the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association (WIAA) that prohibit promoting a school’s athletic program to attract particular students.

- The man who originally saw Sanders’ video was John McKinney, father of former Garfield football standout Cameron McKinney — another youth from Beaumont who found success at Garfield and earned an athletic scholarship to the University of North Dakota after playing one season with the Bulldogs.

McKinney connected the boys with Garfield’s coach, Sanders said. 

McKinney said he then paid for their tickets to Seattle, listing himself as “guardian” on Sanders’ school-district paperwork. He maintains that he was simply reaching back to give the youths the same kind of life-changing second chance his son had received.

I'd think that putting down "guardian" when you are more of, say, a facilitator in a student's life would also be against some kind of rules.

- The two boys arrived in Seattle in early September. Within days, Garfield’s then-Athletic Director Ed Haskins temporarily authorized Sanders to join the football team despite poor grades from Texas that would have made him ineligible.

- The following month, school records show, Garfield Principal Ted Howard approved Sanders’ status as a homeless youth, which is considered a hardship and can allow students to play despite poor grades. 

Rules governing the WIAA say students listed as homeless are supposed to be reviewed by a district-level committee to ensure the legitimacy of that status. But no such hearing took place in Sanders’ case, said Sam Jackson Jr., who oversees player eligibility in the Sea-King district.

“Absolutely there should have been one,” he said. “I’ve been doing this seven years, and that’s unusual at best — extremely unusual.”

- Other than McKinney, the adult most closely associated with Sanders’ time at Garfield is Mike Nall, father of this year’s Bulldogs’ quarterback, who says he housed Sanders and eventually bought plane tickets for both youths to go back to Texas.

“They didn’t act right,” Nall said, pointing out that the boys rarely attended class. “The only story here is about how these kids screwed up a great opportunity.”

I'm not sure if Mr. Nall is talking about a great academic opportunity or athletic opportunity.

What are the two saddest parts of this story?

One:

After the holidays, undeterred by the chilly reception Sanders and his buddy say they were receiving from Thomas, the youths raised the money for return tickets on their own — neither would explain how — arriving back in Seattle last month. They phoned Garfield track coach Kwajalein Griffin, who helped enroll both at Seattle’s Interagency Academy, an alternative school.

Interagency staff have floated the idea of the youths starting next fall at Rainier Beach High, which has a well-regarded athletic program.

But Sanders appears worn out from using his talents on the field. A few weeks ago, he asked a counselor at Interagency: “What if I don’t want to do sports?

It would appear that Sanders actually does want an education and yet the district wants to find him another sports placement.

Two:
That year after year, scandal after scandal, Principal Howard never has to account for any of his actions or how he leads Garfield.   This time will be no different because the district continues to look the other way.

55 comments:

Melissa Westbrook said...

From my letter to the Board and senior management:

Principal Howard's deliberate disregard for any kind of district rules or state rules is one day going to land this district in court. I perceive it will be over loss of life (that seems to be the next thing coming given how Garfield doesn't not regard field trip policies as important). So there will be no settlement and every single thing that Howard has not been held to account for will be aired and viewed in court.

Are you really going to let this happen or will another hand-slap do? Because if that day comes, I'll call the plaintiff's lawyers and volunteer to testify. Against the district. And I have a long memory and a lot of threads on my blog about Garfield.

This has to stop and I would suggest now is a good time.

Ribacco said...

Talk about putting the McKinney in the McKinney-Vento Act! Seems like a quick look at the boy's taxes could show where the plane ticket money came from. I smell the need for an audit. Betcha anything he's not paying taxes on his income.

I am disgusted that SPS can't do the right thing academically for so many students but can import football players from Texas and then abuse him. Disgusting. They dissolve the Spectrum program with no replacement and can't buy a decent middle school math curriculum but they can fly athletes around? And put them up for four years? There's supposed to be a district-level committee hearing to see if he's really homeless? How much you want to bet that he's not really homeless. Oh, well, I guess we'll never know.

The poor kid is at a major disadvantage. He can't report any abuse he suffers, because they've got him over a barrel. He's a sitting duck. Probably not a homeless one, though, right? And maybe not even a high school diploma.

dan dempsey said...

I am with Melissa. I am NOT with Ted.

What will Dr. Nyland do?

Elsa said...

Nyland will do NOTHING!

Mark my words.

"Strategic community partners" will see to that.

Ted has enablers all over the superintendents wing.

Sigh....

Anonymous said...

These kids end up feeling used. Sad!

--Paul

Anonymous said...

Ted Howard sets up his kids for failure by emphasizing sports over academics. Garfield kids should know that - he doesn't have their backs.

-Scrutiny

Anonymous said...

Imagine if a parent paid for a math wizard to come to Seattle and take part in a math contest while staying with various coaches or booster families, along with a sidekick friend. Can't imagine that?...
MomGHS16&21

Anonymous said...

This is a really sad story. The kids are being taught to work the system by adults they want to trust and look up to. I hope these students stay at interagency and get their grades up and graduate, or go home. Sadly, it doesn't sound like they have much of a home to return to. This is a heartbreaking story and it's too bad the students didn't go to class. The guardian can't follow them around making sure they don't skip, but there should be expectations for grades and attendance. These kids need some nurturing and different role models.

The Garfield coach and principal need to be called to the carpet and held accountable for this activity. They used to make students wait a year to play varsity, I thought..... Garfield is so disappointing and our District and their lack of support for student learning (curriculum, teacher supports, differentiated learning/walk to programs) is a problem.

Crack Down

Anonymous said...

Such sanctimony! I guess no one here crowed about the Seahawks when they were champs or would crow if the Mariners ever won something.

Sports is big, big money and Joey Thomas and all the other adults, including the parents of these boys, see dollar signs in football. Because they are there. Joey got kids scholarships while at Ballard and will get kids into colleges in the future at Garfield or wherever he lands.

Kids are just fodder for adult ambitions and financial reward and yes it happens with math kids too. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but don't we have a "premium league" for promising academic talent in SPS? Some kind of "cohort" for the "highly capable"?

Where there is money to made and advantage to be gained, "adults" will find a way to create special opportuntiy for their kids and other adults, whether coaches, tutors, test preppers, or other "teachers" will find a way to skim off some bucks.

Capitalism folks, if you don't like it move to North Korea!!!

Emu Tulips

Melissa Westbrook said...

Emu Tulips, the Seahawks and the Mariners are professional teams. The Garfield Bulldogs are not.

You are mostly wrong on math kids (HCC) versus athletic kids but if you have a story that proves that, please let us see it. You are making a completely apples and oranges comparison.



Anonymous said...

You are equating HCC, a service provided as part of basic education, with "recruiting" a player for a season? It's comical to think of promising academic talent coming from out of state to SPS just to up their resume. Did Hale's basketball star even attend SPS? He was homeschooled K-8. They didn't feel compelled to stay long.

Anonymous said...

Emu, capitalism can come with or without corruption.

Teach Everyone

Mike C said...

Ok, wait. As of December, Cameron McKinney's dad John was a homeless recovering alcoholic and drug addict. In John's own words:
"I was a silly project kid with a drinking problem and addiction," said John, an '84 graduate of French High who played college football at Knoxville College before "wasting it away" with alcohol and drug addiction, which included crack cocaine. "I was lost in my addiction from 1997 until (2006)."
By 2014 John was sober and living in a recovery center in Seattle's Central District. But his own son, Cameron, couldn't live with him. When Cameron came to Seattle after his brother was murdered, John said, "I didn't bring him here to live with me."

So, this is the man who was allowed to be guardian for two 18-year-old boys? One of whom is now going to the Interagency Academy, which is the SPS school for kids trying to get an education while recovering from addiction. So, who lets a kid with addiction issues live with the homeless recovering addict? Where was CPS? And the kid wasn't going to class? And now the kid is 19 but still in high school? And thinking about switching to a 3rd high school? This story makes less sense the more you look at it. But someone sure wasn't looking out for that kid. And the procedures in place to protect his interests sure weren't followed.

Way to support and mentor and look after young men, Principal Howard. Such a disappointment. So not a roll model.

Anonymous said...

I have an idea! Let's use this story as a way to talk about inequity at SPS and dismantle the last remaining advanced learning available to any student interested and able to stretch academically. Yes! Let's drum up anger at the elites supporting and loving their children, rather than taking a look at what went wrong with this actual example of students academically falling through the cracks while SPS administrators and leaders helped.

You people.

XXL said...

I thought the whole focus for SPS was equity and eliminating the opportunity gap. So, I'm confused how Principal Howard can't follow the bare minimum of procedures set up to protect students like Will Sanders. The kid was encouraged to play football for Garfield even though he didn't qualify. And the things that actually would have helped eliminate the opportunity gap (like getting the kid into Interagency sooner rather than later, helping the kid find a stable place to live, not letting the kid play varsity sports if he wasn't meeting minimum academic requirements, etc.) fell by the wayside.

Garfield USED this young man. And then dumped him in Texas??? What the heck? What part of equity is Principal Howard missing here? Here's a young man, a promising athlete, who could have really used some mentoring. And probably some tutoring. But the school just milked him for his sports talent and dug the opportunity gap deeper for him. Addressing equity issues is supposed to be THE MAIN FOCUS for the district. And they botched it. This kid needed a mentor. And he got used.

Anonymous said...

And what about the friend of the athlete? Did his learning matter? What happened to every student learning every day? And honors for all, supported by remedial education?
MomGHS16&21

Patrick said...

Emu Tulips, even pro sports is not capitalism. Under capitalism, there's competition to provide goods or services, but leagues keep the number of teams at a fixed low number preventing competition. Under capitalism, owners use part of their profits for capital improvements, but pro sports depend on the public treasury to make their capital improvements for them.

Anonymous said...

Not all Interagency High Schools are for former drug users. The one on Queen Anne is.

The Porter brothers were home schooled in MO. They were home schooled when they moved here, though they did attend Hale for Spanish class. They will continue to be home schooled now that they are back in MO. They would have stayed had the UW basketball coach not been fired. They weren't sent here on their own to be listed as homeless. Their parents were here.

HP

Anonymous said...

If I'm not mistaken, monopolies exist in the definition of Capitalism. Indeed, Fascism comes under the umbrella of Capitalism.

Mexican Immigrant

Anonymous said...

That's right (except most of the family remained in MO). The family values education first, and sees athletics as a means to college scholarships. College is the main goal. So different from the Garfield story.

night&day

Melissa Westbrook said...

HP, but it was never clear where the Porter brothers lived. That's something the district should have checked and I don't think they did. As well, news reports indicate their mother stayed behind and only the father - the one who needed a basketball job - came with them.

Anonymous said...

This is becoming an all too a familiar story--using children to promote the success of a school sport. I hope that both the GHS principal and the Coach suffer consequences and make another principal and coach think twice before playing with the life of a young athlete.

Send message

Genesee Dad said...

"Other than McKinney, the adult most closely associated with Sanders’ time at Garfield is Mike Nall, father of this year’s Bulldogs’ quarterback, who says he housed Sanders and eventually bought plane tickets for both youths to go back to Texas."

You know what's interesting about Michael Nall. If you do a public records search on him, the site says he bought:
2011 JAGUAR XJL, VIN: SAJWA2GB3BLV01090
2011 CADILLAC ESCALADE, VIN: 1GYS4AEF4BR268011
2011 MERCEDES-BENZ E-CLASS, VIN: WDDKK7CF9BF043169
2007 PORSCHE 911, VIN: WP0CB29987S777464

Sure makes you wonder what the dad of this year's Bulldogs' quarterback does with so many fancy cars. Weird. Maybe he gives cars to homeless students along with the plane tickets to visit their parents and a place to say. What a generous man!

Anonymous said...

Nall's address appears to in Magnolia. Did his kid come through the HCC pathway? If not then how did he get into GHS?

Send message

That's All said...

Very sad what happened to this young man.

I believe one person is making multiple posts. Stick to one moniker.

K.S. said...

Mr Howard seems the All Time Champion of working "the" system.

He continues to work it.

Anonymous said...

I am a former Garfield parent, but I know nothing about this situation other than what the Times' article said. Quite frankly, it strikes me that it tells only half the story, and that many people are willing to assume the worst about how Garfield handled this. We need the rest of the story - and give the investigation a chance.

Let's review the facts in the article:

1. A homeless kid in Texas was struggling in high school
2. He had athletic connections and used them to get a fresh start in Seattle
3. The principal approved his status as a homeless student (which no one disputes), but possibly should have asked for District review. [Note: the District representative said it was "unusual" to have no review, which seems to imply it's not unprecedented.]
4. The hardship exemption for homeless students to play athletics w/ bad grades is allowed under District and WIAA rules.
5. The student played in 6 of 10 Garfield football games.
6. Someone paid to fly him home to Texas at Thanksgiving, but did not provide a return ticket (?). This part of the story is murky. What happened? Where there disciplinary issues at school or home? Did his benefactor simply not want to spend more money, or was no one willing to continue to provide a home?
7. According to the parent who provided a residence for the homeless students in Seattle, the kids "screwed up", including not attending class.


My main questions are:

1. Was the District review of "homeless status" required, and would it have changed the decision? If it simply would have confirmed the kid's homelessness and validated Howard's decision, then it's no harm, no foul. If Howard broke a clear rule, the District should take appropriate action, but the impact of the violation will be a factor in the discipline.

2. What oversight did Garfield have on the student's academic performance during football season? The article does not touch on this, and it seems to me this should be a core issue in the investigation. If the school took in a homeless kid and approved him to play athletics with poor past grades, which is all apparently allowed under District rules, can they ignore his ongoing academic failings? Did they? The articles tells us nothing about this, except that he played in 6 of 10 games. It is possible that academic performance or other behavior caused Garfield to keep him out of some games. We don't know.

3. Should the District and WIAA revisit it's hardship rule that can allow homeless students with poor grades to play athletics? Maybe. I'm sure many would argue that they should, but others would argue that hardships outside of a child's control should not prevent them from participating in the full range of activities that are available to high school students - at least, a grace period to prove themselves is not unreasonable. This student was given a second chance by Garfield for barely 3 months, and apparently he failed to prove that he could responsibly manage academics and athletics at the same time. Maybe the rule should require closer oversight, and the plug should have been pulled earlier. Hard to say - we have very little information about the student's conduct during his 3 months at Garfield.

I certainly hope the public and the District can focus on the right things in this investigation, and not simply jump to the conclusion that Garfield cared about nothing more than exploiting a student's athletic skills. Let's get a better understanding of how the Garfield community, the parents involved, and the student himself handled the opportunity he had in Seattle. We don't have the full story.

Anonymous said...

Reposting for Anon 4/25/17, 6:18 PM

Anonymous said...
I am a former Garfield parent, but I know nothing about this situation other than what the Times' article said. Quite frankly, it strikes me that it tells only half the story, and that many people are willing to assume the worst about how Garfield handled this. We need the rest of the story - and give the investigation a chance.

Let's review the facts in the article:

1. A homeless kid in Texas was struggling in high school
2. He had athletic connections and used them to get a fresh start in Seattle
3. The principal approved his status as a homeless student (which no one disputes), but possibly should have asked for District review. [Note: the District representative said it was "unusual" to have no review, which seems to imply it's not unprecedented.]
4. The hardship exemption for homeless students to play athletics w/ bad grades is allowed under District and WIAA rules.
5. The student played in 6 of 10 Garfield football games.
6. Someone paid to fly him home to Texas at Thanksgiving, but did not provide a return ticket (?). This part of the story is murky. What happened? Where there disciplinary issues at school or home? Did his benefactor simply not want to spend more money, or was no one willing to continue to provide a home?
7. According to the parent who provided a residence for the homeless students in Seattle, the kids "screwed up", including not attending class.


My main questions are:

1. Was the District review of "homeless status" required, and would it have changed the decision? If it simply would have confirmed the kid's homelessness and validated Howard's decision, then it's no harm, no foul. If Howard broke a clear rule, the District should take appropriate action, but the impact of the violation will be a factor in the discipline.

2. What oversight did Garfield have on the student's academic performance during football season? The article does not touch on this, and it seems to me this should be a core issue in the investigation. If the school took in a homeless kid and approved him to play athletics with poor past grades, which is all apparently allowed under District rules, can they ignore his ongoing academic failings? Did they? The articles tells us nothing about this, except that he played in 6 of 10 games. It is possible that academic performance or other behavior caused Garfield to keep him out of some games. We don't know.

3. Should the District and WIAA revisit it's hardship rule that can allow homeless students with poor grades to play athletics? Maybe. I'm sure many would argue that they should, but others would argue that hardships outside of a child's control should not prevent them from participating in the full range of activities that are available to high school students - at least, a grace period to prove themselves is not unreasonable. This student was given a second chance by Garfield for barely 3 months, and apparently he failed to prove that he could responsibly manage academics and athletics at the same time. Maybe the rule should require closer oversight, and the plug should have been pulled earlier. Hard to say - we have very little information about the student's conduct during his 3 months at Garfield.

I certainly hope the public and the District can focus on the right things in this investigation, and not simply jump to the conclusion that Garfield cared about nothing more than exploiting a student's athletic skills. Let's get a better understanding of how the Garfield community, the parents involved, and the student himself handled the opportunity he had in Seattle. We don't have the full story.

4/25/17, 6:18 PM

Reposter

Anonymous said...

OMG. Sanctimony and crocodile tears. The HCC lovers are out in droves. Let's cry a river about a homeless kid at Garfield (presumably breathing air deigned for them alone, not some loser homeless kid). Nobody at Garfield has anything to be accountable for - and they won't have to.

Look. Not everyone has the same values - and we as a culture value sports IN ADDITION to academics. The only problem here - a kid who wasn't taking advantage of all the academic opportunities in the state of Texas, comes to Seattle and doesn't take advantage of his opportunities here. Garfield provided him an opportunity - and he didn't fully capitalize on that opportunity. Like loads of other kids - he failed. Who knows? Maybe he'll succeed at Interagency. Why aren't people complaining about him there?

If a student athlete seeks a good program in his/her particular sport in some high school, or if a coach talks up their athletic program seeking talented student athletes, that should be ENCOURAGED. It's certainly no problem at all if a drama teacher, music teacher, art teacher, debate advisor or even an IB director or Spanish teacher touts their good program and invites students to attend their school and come to their program. Somehow nobody complains if the talented percussionist or actor or math wiz from the other side of town transfers into their school and displaces them at first chair, the lead in the play, or in the running for valedictorian, or complains that X school gets all the top musicians, actors, academically gifted students and wins all the band competitions, puts on better plays or wins at High Q. 

It should be no different with athletics.

Get over yourselves. Go back to the regularly scheduled whining about honors-for-all.

Crocodile Tears

Melissa Westbrook said...

Anonymous, you need to go back and reread the article in the Times as you seem to have gotten things wrong.

Garfield started the school year with at least 200 homeless students - do not ever, ever call any student, of any background, a "loser" here. Garfield has been very supportive of those students but it is unclear that this particular student was homeless when he left Texas. Of course, he was "homeless" here; he had no family.

You don't bring a kid from Texas to Washington state on a whim. What was the end game? Doesn't seem like it was academic opportunity.

Yes, the U.S., unlike most other countries, values athletics at schools almost as much as academics. But academics is education so there's that.

It doesn't sound like bouncing around from bed to bed would exactly afford a kid good academic outcomes. And these adults brought him here for an athletic opportunity, not an academic one.

I have to laugh at the idea that some bright kid is displacing another bright kid. Hilarious.

Lastly, do not hijack a thread topic. This story has zero to do with HCC. You are the one who brought that up.

Adan said...

This actually is just what School Board Director Jill Geary was talking about a couple of weeks ago. She would like to see more opportunities in Seattle Public Schools for students who are gifted in a single domain (like the arts or athletics). At the same time, other commenters have also been adamant that high school sports are very important for some students, that it's the only area they might really excel in.

What's troubling is that
(1) deserving local athletes are losing spots on varsity teams to imported players who are ineligible to play
(2) a school board director says she want schools to foster single-domain gifts and talents (like football). But does she mean while completely disregarding academic subjects (he rarely even attended class)?
(3) it sounds like this student was used, loved for his strengths, hated for his weaknesses.
(4) shouldn't the opportunity gap be closed by educating students like this one (and not only in football)? Or has SPS just written him off?

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

I urge readers to read and follow the comments policy before posting.

not mc t said...

ted howard needs to understand that this is a firing offense. so does nyland. fire him. fire him now. why? million bucks here a million there. it all adds up. howard is divisive and inept. nough said.

no caps

Anonymous said...

Melissa,

Talking about a student like this, speculating about his family and home life,
while he is still a student is completely unethical and way beyond the pale.

Ted Howard is fair game as adult public servant.

You really have gall to scold anonymous, who was using "loser" to describe how he is being depicted on this thread, while allowing the dissection of this young man and his life on this public forum.

FWIW

Anonymous said...

Concern Troll.

-NuffSaid

K.S. said...

The "loser" in this story SHOULD be Mr. Howard.

He should be found a job downtown and told not to touch anything.

Like the others.

Anonymous said...

@ FWIW, this student is a 19-yr-old adult who went on record for a Seattle Times article. I think it's safe to discuss the situation.

@ Anon former GHS parent 4/25 @ 6:18pm, from the article it does not sound like this student was homeless in Texas. It mentions that his mom moved into a smaller house after he left. Garfield seems to have created the student's homelessness by encouraging him to come out here even though no family or stable place to stay. As to the "murkiness" of why he was given only a one-way ticket back home, maybe you missed the part where the article said the football season was over? They had gotten want they wanted from him and were no willing to invest more--to do the hard work necessary to help this academically struggling young man.

Bulldog BS

Anonymous said...

Choosing to go on the record about an issue doesn't mean it's open season on the student, like having a poster on this blog (not deleted) call you an addict and another saying you are "bouncing from bed to bed".

Students who go on the record about an issue still have the right to privacy about details they didn't divulge. Being 19 (or 18, as many seniors are) doesn't mean you don't have privacy rights as a student.

Isn't this the blog that continually touts student privacy? It's really a matter of decency.

FWIW

Melissa Westbrook said...

First, I didn't write the article - the Times did.

Second, he is over 18 and again, he gave his name to the Times and the Times used it.

Third, my thread says nothing anything about his family.

Fourth, I did delete that unfortunate comment; sorry you missed that.

I think you might contact Claudia Rowe at the Times with your concerns.

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

Ps. "Bouncing from bed to bed" isn't conducive to athletic performance any more than it is to academic performance. Absurd to indict a kid for being homeless. Homeless kids have preferences in education, just like everyone else. Respect it. It's their right.

Croc

Anonymous said...

"One of whom is now going to the Interagency Academy, which is the SPS school for kids trying to get an education while recovering from addiction. So, who lets a kid with addiction issues live with the homeless recovering addict?"

from Mike C. still on the thread

FWIW

Anonymous said...

"What does a coach, paid nearly nothing, gain from recruitment? Nothing."

Are you kidding me???? A winning season is a stepping stone to career improvement with greater pay. For the coach.

-GetReal

Lynn said...

He's not a Magnolia parent. He sold that house 7 or 8 years ago. His kids went to St. Joe's - so it's likely they do live in the Garfield attendance area.

Coach Sparks founded a nonprofit called House of Champions to address the homeless crisis in Washington State. The organization provided housing for up to four homeless high school students in a condominium he owns in Kent. Students served (names and pictures on the HOC website) include some of those mentioned in the article and another student previously identified as homeless by the Seattle Times.

I'm struck by the differences between the way athletes and other students are treated at Garfield. When it comes to Ted, the rules don't apply to athletes, as one of my kid's teachers expressed it.




Anonymous said...

Hmm, sounds a bit like a recruitment incubator. It is great that the coaches are stepping in to solve the homeless crisis in Texas as well though. How altruistic.

-GetReal

Anonymous said...

If the coach is trying to address the homeless crisis in Washington state, as the House of Champions website says, they shouldn't recruit athletes from other states, bringing them here alone and making them homeless.

If the coach wants to run an organization that finds promising athletes nationwide who are struggling as students so his organization can provide housing and extensive wraparound services to support their academic, athletic, and life skills development, great. But it shouldn't be associated Garfield, and he shouldn't place students at his own school. It's possible that an investigation into what's going on here may jeopardize the nonprofit status of his organization.

Bulldog BS

Anonymous said...

Below is a video showing Max Nall playing for BHS the same time Coach Thomas was there.
Looks like he moved to GHS same time as Coach Thomas.

Makes me wonder if rules were bent to get this kid a seat in an over-enrolled school?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRMs7-04FUE

send message


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

Canadian,
Long before "Honors for All", which started in fall 2016, some people see special treatment for athletes at GHS--nothing to do with HCC. For example, in exceptions for the very strict PE waiver rules. If a coach forgets to turn in stuff, the athlete still walks. But if a non-athlete forgets an on-time waiver that that student qualified for, there are no late waivers and no exceptions to the rule. So no walking, no on-time graduation, since there are no exceptions to the late waiver. This is all before Honors for All. I personally think Howard is doing a good job with a difficult task. I think he is trying to promote equity. But in this case, my personal opinion is that the students should have been provided with tutoring help, and not allowed to play if they didn't attend class.
MomGHS16&21

Anonymous said...

Yeah right. High school coaches are moving up the great invisible ladder by wrecking student's lives? The high school coaches are all getting rich, and being promoted to what? Mentor coach? Manager coach? Executive coach director? Chief of coachdom? News flash!!!! There's no such position. If they aren't fully certified teachers of academic subjects, they can never even become ADs. And that pays exactly a teacher salary. Are teachers all getting so rich too? The only motivation possible for a coach, is providing students with opportunities. You people have your undies in a wad because somebody besides your kid might just possibly get an opportunity, or get recognized for something other people care about. Coaches are tremendous volunteers in our schools, paid far below minimum wage. Where were all of you when the kid could have used academic volunteers? Oh yeah. At your own kid's school writing checks. How many have taken in homeless kids? Until you've reversed someone's life, you ought to leave those who are trying to do that alone. And it isn't always a success, but is the kid really worse off now?

Crocodile Tears

Anonymous said...

Mrs. Porter was at Hale's games. She may have had her house in MO still, but she was spending a significant amount of time in Seattle.

I tend to believe that the Porters lived in Hale's school zone because if they didn't, someone would have tracked down where they lived and shouted to the media about the Porters living outside of Hale's boundary. Living in Hale's boundary makes sense if you work at the UW. It is a very easy commute from there to the UW and it is less expensive than Roosevelt's or Garfield's area.

HP

Anonymous said...

One of the Garfield coaches now coaches for WSU. That is certainly a step up in pay.

HP

Melissa Westbrook said...

The student in question seems to not want to play anymore. Some of you seem to have missed this.

Again, I will be deleting all comments not on topic.

Coaches ARE great people but yes, like all other staff, there are also those who do not seem to be doing their jobs properly.