Program Placement Policy

This week, a Program Placement Policy will be introduced for action by the Board.

The proposed new Policy reads:

"It is the policy of the Seattle School Board that programs be developed, replicated, and placed in support of district-wide academic goals that address systemic needs and support quality education for all students. This policy addresses the development of new programs, the replication of existing programs, as well as the closing and/or relocation of existing programs throughout the district. School Board Policy F21.00 delegates to the Superintendent the authority to make all program placement decisions. In making program placement decisions, the Superintendent should endeavor to:

1. Place programs in support of district-wide academic goals,
2. Place programs equitably across the district,
3. Place programs where students reside,
4. Consider input from stakeholders in the decision making process,
5. Utilize physical space effectively to assure that space needs are met across the district,
6. Ensure that fiscal resources are taken into consideration, and
7. Fully analyze the impact of any decision before it is made by using data, research and best practice.

On an annual basis, the Superintendent shall report program placement decisions to the School Board, including describing how the decisions work to achieve the above listed criteria.

Pursuant to this Policy and School Board Policies F21.00 and B61.00, the Superintendent shall establish administrative procedures that set forth the program placement process, including an annual review cycle, and distribute the same annually to the School Board, Principals, and Program Managers, and make them available to the community. Anyone, including principals, managers, teachers, students and parents can make a program placement request, in the manner set forth in the administrative procedures."

Comments

Anonymous said…
Charlie,

This line scares me:
--------
School Board Policy F21.00 delegates to the Superintendent the authority to make all program placement decisions.
--------
How does this affect the SLC's ability to override bad program placement decisions with highly capable programs - like the APP split last year?

Perhaps it's always been this way and D12 coexists and essentially overrides F21 in particular cases. Comments?
10/1/07, 9:31 AM
Charlie Mas said…
The Board has no authority to overrule a program placement decision by the Superintendent - with the singular exception of APP (per Policy D12.00). Actually, the Board was giving the Superintendent an extremely beneficial interpretation by not simply prohibiting the middle school APP split, as any ordinary reading of the policy would dictate.

Moreover, the new policy only says that the Superintendent "should" endeavor to follow the guidelines. It doesn't say that the Superintendent "must" follow the guidelines.

I'm not sure that it is all that enforceable a Policy.
10/1/07, 9:39 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more