Community Conversation Meeting
I attended the Roosevelt Community Conversations meeting last night. There were about 50-60 people there with a slew of district administrators/leaders.
I'm not sure I heard anything new as Raj, Carla and Mark Green (COO) generally said what they have in the past. Here's what stands out in my mind:
-largely white crowd, a lot of familiar faces
-Mark Green talked about perceptions that the district is in financial trouble when it is not. He also said that there are on-going discussions about both the weighted student formula and the assignment plan. He said there will be no decisions on either this year and there will be public meetings on both subjects before any decisions are made. He also said that he was aware of the unhappiness of many parents whose students did not get into Roosevelt. (He wanted to make this statement as long as we were in Roosevelt.) He said the waiting list is the longest they have ever had for any school. He said that he was aware that some people were suspicious of living close to the school and not getting in. However, between the sibling and distance tiebreakers, many students (I'm thinking this must be Laurelhurst because of their unique geography) did not get in. He mentioned dropping the enrollment slightly (I think by something like 20 kids) from this year as they overenrolled last year. (This is true; we have 1700 kids in a 1600 seat school, lockers are not available to all who want them and they just can't keep squeezing kids in.)
-Carla did mention serving students at the top as well as at the bottom. It was a very clear statement and I felt it was deliberate.
-They put out the input from the previous community meetings. One thing that stuck out to me was a question about parent involvement. The answer was:
"Increased parent involvement has been a specific goal. Actions include developing a School-Family Partnership Advisory Committee, which has been instrumental in shaping a variety of strategies and actions; installing a family/community center at JS Center; and continuing to emphasize the expectations of parent and family involvement by the Super and senior leadership. Per the board policy, reporting is required on an annual basis related to specific metrics of family involvement and principals at every school now have a specific goal around family involvement as part of their evaluation process."
I had heard of the Advisory Committee; does anyone know who's on it or have you heard much about it? Also, the principal piece came as a surprise to me as I never heard they had to have a goal. Ask the principal at your school what his/her family involvement goal is.
-They also had available the Superintendent's Work Plan Priorities Mid-Year Update issued on March 7th. It was a chart with project description, what has been accomplished, on-track to complete by August. Each project description was dovetailed with the CACIEE recommendation it covers.
-I did speak to Sherry Carr (who just resigned as Seattle Council PTSA president) and she is running for School Board in Darlene Flynn's district. There is one other candidate, Lisa Stubing, also running. Darlene has not said if she is running again.
-There were small group conversations but because we were running late (and they ended promptly at 8:30), we only got to participate in one. I was at the Secondary Academics table. Our topic, like the Elementary table, was "What must we do to ensure all students learn deeply and value their ability to demonstrate what they know?" I thought it was a deeply dumb question because I'm not sure what they expected us to say. So, of course, it got abandoned and parents just asked questions. There were a number of concerns at our table about Special Ed and accomodations and vocational ed. Other parents were concerned about middle school. We had a discussion about year-round school (it's being vaguely talked about but Michael deBell who joined us said absolutely nothing about it), the number of late-start days at both middle and high school (turns out a lot more middle schools than I thought are doing this). Ruth Medsker, the middle school director, said there was a dynamic tension between the teachers needing the time and parents desire not to have many days where kids as young as 6th graders are on their own at 12:15 or until 9:45 in the morning. Between late-start days, early release days, holidays, vacations and weather days, my son hasn't been in school but a couple of full weeks this year. My question on this is that we didn't start having these necessary late-start days until the last 3-4 years. Why has it become such a priority and why can't a compromise be made between parents and teachers?
-The one glaring thing I heard was a parent who said that her son was a medium student whose skills fall off during the summer break. (This is what prompted the discussion of year-round schools.) She asked what she, as a parent, could do to support him in the summer. Now keep in mind, we had the middle school director, high school director, director of curriculum and director of math services at our table. The one lame answer was...make sure he reads. It was also offered to "ask your school". Whoa! All those people and there wasn't a better answer? I know more than that and I'm not an educator. I'm going to write Carla about this and ask if there can't be an information sheet for elementary, middle and high school about how parents can support learning in the summer. There is lots that could be offered and I was very disappointed in their answer.
-They mentioned the superintendent candidates in brief but I heard no discussion among attendees about them.
I'm not sure I heard anything new as Raj, Carla and Mark Green (COO) generally said what they have in the past. Here's what stands out in my mind:
-largely white crowd, a lot of familiar faces
-Mark Green talked about perceptions that the district is in financial trouble when it is not. He also said that there are on-going discussions about both the weighted student formula and the assignment plan. He said there will be no decisions on either this year and there will be public meetings on both subjects before any decisions are made. He also said that he was aware of the unhappiness of many parents whose students did not get into Roosevelt. (He wanted to make this statement as long as we were in Roosevelt.) He said the waiting list is the longest they have ever had for any school. He said that he was aware that some people were suspicious of living close to the school and not getting in. However, between the sibling and distance tiebreakers, many students (I'm thinking this must be Laurelhurst because of their unique geography) did not get in. He mentioned dropping the enrollment slightly (I think by something like 20 kids) from this year as they overenrolled last year. (This is true; we have 1700 kids in a 1600 seat school, lockers are not available to all who want them and they just can't keep squeezing kids in.)
-Carla did mention serving students at the top as well as at the bottom. It was a very clear statement and I felt it was deliberate.
-They put out the input from the previous community meetings. One thing that stuck out to me was a question about parent involvement. The answer was:
"Increased parent involvement has been a specific goal. Actions include developing a School-Family Partnership Advisory Committee, which has been instrumental in shaping a variety of strategies and actions; installing a family/community center at JS Center; and continuing to emphasize the expectations of parent and family involvement by the Super and senior leadership. Per the board policy, reporting is required on an annual basis related to specific metrics of family involvement and principals at every school now have a specific goal around family involvement as part of their evaluation process."
I had heard of the Advisory Committee; does anyone know who's on it or have you heard much about it? Also, the principal piece came as a surprise to me as I never heard they had to have a goal. Ask the principal at your school what his/her family involvement goal is.
-They also had available the Superintendent's Work Plan Priorities Mid-Year Update issued on March 7th. It was a chart with project description, what has been accomplished, on-track to complete by August. Each project description was dovetailed with the CACIEE recommendation it covers.
-I did speak to Sherry Carr (who just resigned as Seattle Council PTSA president) and she is running for School Board in Darlene Flynn's district. There is one other candidate, Lisa Stubing, also running. Darlene has not said if she is running again.
-There were small group conversations but because we were running late (and they ended promptly at 8:30), we only got to participate in one. I was at the Secondary Academics table. Our topic, like the Elementary table, was "What must we do to ensure all students learn deeply and value their ability to demonstrate what they know?" I thought it was a deeply dumb question because I'm not sure what they expected us to say. So, of course, it got abandoned and parents just asked questions. There were a number of concerns at our table about Special Ed and accomodations and vocational ed. Other parents were concerned about middle school. We had a discussion about year-round school (it's being vaguely talked about but Michael deBell who joined us said absolutely nothing about it), the number of late-start days at both middle and high school (turns out a lot more middle schools than I thought are doing this). Ruth Medsker, the middle school director, said there was a dynamic tension between the teachers needing the time and parents desire not to have many days where kids as young as 6th graders are on their own at 12:15 or until 9:45 in the morning. Between late-start days, early release days, holidays, vacations and weather days, my son hasn't been in school but a couple of full weeks this year. My question on this is that we didn't start having these necessary late-start days until the last 3-4 years. Why has it become such a priority and why can't a compromise be made between parents and teachers?
-The one glaring thing I heard was a parent who said that her son was a medium student whose skills fall off during the summer break. (This is what prompted the discussion of year-round schools.) She asked what she, as a parent, could do to support him in the summer. Now keep in mind, we had the middle school director, high school director, director of curriculum and director of math services at our table. The one lame answer was...make sure he reads. It was also offered to "ask your school". Whoa! All those people and there wasn't a better answer? I know more than that and I'm not an educator. I'm going to write Carla about this and ask if there can't be an information sheet for elementary, middle and high school about how parents can support learning in the summer. There is lots that could be offered and I was very disappointed in their answer.
-They mentioned the superintendent candidates in brief but I heard no discussion among attendees about them.
Comments
I had forgotten about the meeting- was thinking of going- but went to the gym instead- at least there I can tell I am making a difference ( not kidding- Ive lost almost 40 lbs!in the past year as opposed to how many hours have I put in at board meetings, community meetings- writing emails to board members- newspaper reporters et al.)
She asked what she, as a parent, could do to support him in the summer. Now keep in mind, we had the middle school director, high school director, director of curriculum and director of math services at our table. The one lame answer was...make sure he reads. It was also offered to "ask your school"
"foul language"
I can quote websites off the top of my head- what do these people get paid for?
If we don't have clear goals other than raise standards- how can we aim for them?
However- I am encouraged by an article that I read in the Chronicle of Higher Education re: Student readiness that was a dialogue between Gregory Thornton,Kati Haycock- director of Education Trust, Charles Reed Chancellor of California State University System, and I really liked what they had to say, particulary Mr Thornton ( I c&P part of it on an earlier post)
let me find your email & I will send it to you if you like
If you do subscribe, it is in the 3/10/06 issue
While I came with some specific input and concerns, more than anything I was at the meeting hoping to be convinced that it's worth it for us to keep our kids in Seattle Schools - we plan to move locally in the next few years, at the same time that our son will be entering middle school, and are exploring the idea of moving to another district. We don’t have the financial luxury of going private, plus have a strong belief in supporting public education.
Frankly, I feel discouraged by the district’s strategic direction that was outlined at the meeting: pending changes in both funding and assignment, along with what I perceived to be a push to standardize curriculum and teaching across the district. This top-down approach seems to ignore/jeopardize the innovations and successes of individual schools – I really wish the district would try to go out and learn from its most successful schools, its most sought-after schools, find practices that can be offered district-wide. I sometimes tell my friends outside of the district that in Seattle, individual schools succeed despite the school district, not because of the district.
It's interesting that you bring up the issue of top-down management and the funding and assignment. Michael deBell, School Board director, has an op-ed in the PI today about the tension between what people say they want (choice) but the problems it brings. He seems to imply the district could do better and individual schools could do better if we went back to a neighborhood system.
I hope that you choose to stay with Seattle public schools. I have to say that Kellogg middle school in Shoreline does sound tempting. I don't know what to say about middle school - we were Eckstein and were fairly happy.
Next time, look for me and say hi. I'm always the shortest woman in the room.
I was so upset that a Seattle parent, publically denounced and chose not to support the recent bond, that I decided to email you and let you know about it. While, I still disagree with your stand, and the publicity that it received, I want to apologize to you. Everybody has the right to their opinions, and as I have followed this blog and your activity, I find you to be very open minded, progressive, and inclusive. I appreciate all of the time and energy you put into making this district a better place, and I appreciate you sharing so much information with us all. Thank you, and....I'm sorry. Deidre
Sometimes you just gotta be the cheese who stands alone.
But just curious - when I served on the CAC, people didn't have any problem totally challenging the district's data, our reasoning, our proposals. That's to be expected.
But I did find it odd, during the bond campaign, at how so many people retreated from looking at any data. As Danny Westneat from the Times told me, "Melissa, we don't care where the money goes, we just want the money."
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here but I am curious. Is it that it would be bad form to say, "Why not our school instead of school X?" During school closures, people didn't seem to have a problem saying that but why is it different for construction? (Of the appr. 34 elementaries that have been rebuilt or renovated, 20 are in the south end. You could see why people in the north end might want to see some more in this area but would it be politically incorrect to ask for it?) Why would you believe Facilities' data more than data from the academic side?
I found last night's "conversation" really kind of amusing hearing about "transparency", and great communication. Sat in on the financial discussion and found the new CFO to be particularly engaging and he asked if we thought "office hours" where he was available to answer questions would be a good thing! Reinforced that a great deal and suggested that the web site would be really helpful if used correctly as a tool to publish information and really truly have a conversation on it - Mark Green was also at our table at that point and he agreed - the concept brought up that the snow closure survey was a huge success and that might be expanded. Suggested that the conversations about weighted student formulas etc really did need to be conversations and we had a long long way to go on that in terms of feedback, etc. - - - moving meetings out to neighborhoods and an opportunity for give and take and not the debacle of hearings we had on school closures. Here's hoping - - -
The concept of the complexity of different funds/regs, etc. was brought up by Supt. Manhas and how Olympia has been suggesting it needs to be much simpler - - -
Mr. Green also brought up the concept that there is no "standard for class sizes and that perhaps we ought to have one district wide for each grade etc." That together with Mr. DeBell's piece in this morning's paper made me think twice if not flinch. . . .
See: http://www.seattleschools.org/area/fam/PAC.xml
Like CACIEE, it's another strong committee that worked hard & made specific recommendations, but it's not clear if the district is going to implement them. Should be required reading for the new Superintendent.
By Policy, the Superintendent has 90 days to either implement recommendations from advisory committees or explain why he hasn't.
90 days after the School-Family Partnership Committee submitted their plan, the Superintendent delivered his response. That response contains the action steps that the Superintendent actually committed to making. It is a much shorter list.
I don't understand why the Committee's plan is distributed as if it had been adopted by the District while the Superintendent's response, which is the actual District plan, is rarely even mentioned.