Sunday, October 14, 2007

She said WHAT??!!

In the discussion of Mixed Support Over West Seattle HS, someone posted this comment:

"Anonymous said...

I agree with the last person and am also from a neighboring district, I feel compelled to respond as I was in a conference with Dr. Maria Goodloe and was a bit concerned when heard her statements about just HOW BAD Seattle Schools was and how terrible the instruction was.
The fact that she stated that she did visited 3 K level classrooms in different schools and thought she would not place her own child in Seattle Schools is telling and supports the above blog. The problem is not the schedule, it is instruction. Dr. Godloe suggested she would fire most of the folks she thinks are responsible for the poor education in Seattle; however, I would challenge that her school leaders are simply victims of the poor instructional leadership that surrounds her. If she wants to improve academics then she needs to do better research about those she has surrounded herself."

Where did these quotes or statements appear? Could you please provide a source for this?


Anonymous said...

At WASA: Washington Association of School Administrators.

Anonymous said...

Does this mean that the person who composed the comment is an administrator or teacher???

Anonymous said...

To be honest, I thought these comments were more shocking or
surprising than what Charlie wrote about "Auntie Cheryl".

BullDogger said...

If these comments are true I admire her honesty. When my family looked for elementary schools my wife came back from one saying "I feel sorry for any kid going to school there". Some lousy schools exist and I don't intend to send my kid there or force others to do the same. MGJ saying this just tells me she values education for her own children. That's a good sign. The people responsible for these situations should be fired and more appropriate people hired. I'll support MGJ down that road.

Note too though that I was merely amused by Charlie's Auntie Cheryl bit, not offended.

Charlie Mas said...

Were her statements at WASA recorded in any way? Is there a record of this?

Anonymous said...

I think what is offending about that comment is that she visited 3 K classes and said she would not put her child in SPS based on those 3 classes. I know it is awful that there may be some schools out there that aren't as good and it's great that she is going to want to change that, but to stereotype the whole district and say she would not send her child to any SPS based on 3 classes was offensive to me as I felt great about my oldest child's Kindergarten class. I know we're lucky to go to a good school, but I have friends with kids at several other SPSs that felt the same way. It makes it feel like she is insulting me for sending my child to SPS. Maybe she was misquoted and meant to say that she wouldn't send her child to those schools. 3 classes is hardly a representative sample of the district. Changes should be made to change the schools that aren't as good, but don't generalize the whole district - there are a lot of parents out there who choose SPS over private school who can afford private school because they feel good about the quality and the many other benefits of public schools (a huge thing for us was the community aspects and walking to school).

Anonymous said...

Administrators were at this gathering and several were a bit surprised by the comments. I collaborated with an administrator to see if it was true and she suggested it was, but sometimes we all say things we wish we did not say so I give her the benefit of being in that position.

Although, I would argue, that the bloggers above are right. Seattle has over 60 + elementary schools so there are lots of different approaches for different families and learning styles. She just needs to view more. Also, friends confirm that the weakest aspect of Seattle is the instructional leadership in the realm of central leadership. Maybe she needs to recruit experts and change out those she has in those leadership roles.

Dan Dempsey said...

Anon at 10:12 PM said...

Also, friends confirm that the weakest aspect of Seattle is the instructional leadership in the realm of central leadership.

Maybe she needs to recruit experts and change out those she has in those leadership roles.

Excellent idea - please start with Math. Most high school math department heads would be thrilled.

Anonymous said...

Part of me would love to ask her at the Seattle Times live Q&A today whether she said this - but I would not want to embarrass the rest of SEattle schools in the process...

Anonymous said...

"Maybe she was misquoted and meant to say that she wouldn't send her child to those schools."

That was my thought as well -- maybe she meant to say that she was looking at the schools with an eye to what her daughter would experience, and she's not seeing what she wants to see. I would expect her to be making that kind of rhetorical point, claiming solidarity with other parents, etc.

I do seem to remember her saying before that her child *will* definitely be attending a Seattle public school.


Anonymous said...

I found one of the quotations I was thinking of -- the reporter from Seattle's Child asked her if her daughter would attend Seattle public schools, and she said "Absolutely."

Helen Schinske

Anonymous said...

Helen, there is a difference of what an administrator says to the reporter and what s/he might say with colleagues. That is a known truth, especially in SEATTLE. You are a very kind person and that is very highly commended.

Melissa Westbrook said...

Well, I didn't have any problem submitting that question to the Seattle Times phone in today. I quoted the person, asked if it was an incorrect or out of context statement and asked if Dr. G-J would send her daughter to SPS.

I am hoping it's a wrong statement. I would feel the same way about Dr. G-J as I did about former Mayor Rice when he said he wouldn't recommend SPS to friends with children. Very disappointed. Whether or not she thinks she saw good things in a couple of classrooms, it does no good to badmouth the district. Even in a group of peers, she, as a new superintendent, should have known better.

I'll reserve judgment until I read her answer.

Anonymous said...

If indeed Dr GJ made the statements the anonymous poster accused her of, and if indeed she was appalled at what she has seen in the K classes she visited, can you blame her for not wanting to send her child there??

Her contract does not require her to send her child to a SPS. If she felt the schools she visited were inadequate, good for her. It's about time someone noticed! Hopefully, she will work hard to improve them. Sorry to hurt the sensitive feelings of the good people of Seattle, but we have schools that are miserably under serving our children.

As many of us know there is a huge difference in quality of schools and classrooms around the district. We saw absolutely appalling conditions and teaching in two central area schools, and chose to move to NE Seattle for better choices. We were very pleased with the quality that we saw in the NE cluster, and have been satisfied thus far. Perhaps Dr. GJ looked at some of our struggling schools (the majority of our schools), and was appalled like I was.

Now, let's think about this. What if she sends her kid to a school hat is perceived to be a "good" school?? A higher performing school?? Montlake, McGilvra, Bryant or perhaps View Ridge??? Then what's everybody going say?? She will be labeled an elitist. The only way the group of Seattle watch dogs will be happy is if Dr. GJ sends her kid to a miserable school like Rainier View. Well maybe not, Trish Dizko of TAF, and Microsoft millionaire, did that (TT Minor), and nobody believed in her vision to improve this district either.

Roy Smith said...

dan dempsey said ... Excellent idea - please start with Math. Most high school math department heads would be thrilled.

I'm curious - you spend half your time railing against excessive centralization in SPS and the other half of your time arguing against inquiry-based approaches to math. If the district was fully decentralized, and the math department of a school were to pick one of these math curricula you so despise, what would you have to say to them?

Anonymous said...

Dan needs his own blog.

Dan Dempsey said...


If the district were decentralized there would be a number of high schools without IMP or Core-Plus.

Take a look at Roosevelt right now.
For teachers -- there is always going elsewhere.

Teachers who did not like the four period day at WSHS transfered to other high schools.

Look at the number of teachers who leave the Seattle School District each year.

At this time West Seattle, Ballard, and Roosevelt would not be in the IMP - Core-Plus camp.

Rainier Beach had a lot of success with College Prep Math last year.

Cleveland used IMP and got additional assistance from UW via a grant and their WASL Math scores declined from 21.1% passing to 17.9%.

Garfield is clearly in the IMP camp. Hale uses IMP but with a lot of (non-IMP like) direct instruction I believe.

Ingraham and Sealth will have International B. but I am uncertain about their regular math. It could be the Math adoption from 1995 that few people liked. That is the one that West Seattle is now using since largely leaving IMP this year.

Anonymous said...

Dan, quite honestly I skip over all of your posts. I find them repetetive, as you say the same thing over and over and over again. It would be great if you only posted your view once, instead of driving it into the ground. Clearly, you are not interested in conversing, collaborating or learning from others. Rather, it appears that you are just looking for a sounding board. A place to rant and rave. I am much more drawn to conversation style blogging, where you can truly exchange information, and not have someone cram their views down your throat.