The Letter's in the Mail

Hopping over to Denise Gonzalez-Walker's PI blog, I see that last Friday the district sent out assignment letters. Boy, I'll bet there's a lot of people rifling through their mail today.

Here's some other info:

"Waiting List Information
Waiting List Moves Will Begin May 1. If your child has been placed on a waiting list, the waiting list school is included in the letter. Waiting lists are maintained until October 31.
To find out your child's place on the waiting list, call our Automated Student Information Line at 252-0212. You will need the child's birth date and the student ID# from the assignment letter."

(Also, only new to the district students can take open spots after the waitlists are dissolved so even if a spot were to open up, it's not available to previously enrolled students. This is what I was told by Tracy Libros in Enrollment.)

Speaking from the high school perspective, this year is certainly a wild card. Garfield is reopening which is great and I'm sure they'll have a waitlist out the door. (Roosevelt's crashed the system last year.) However, since Hale is going into renovation - for 3 years on-site - that may turn some people away. Sealth, as well, is exiting their building for 2 years over at Boren only to come back and then be a worksite for Denny for another 2 years. That might turn a few people away (not to mention people who might wonder about the unity in that building between the principal and the staff).

I can't speak for Garfield or Ballard but Roosevelt is certainly going to try to hold the line against any increases (and we're actually hoping for a smaller freshman class than in the past 2 years). We just have too many kids for our building and too few resources. I'm sure there are parents out there who would rather have their child in a school they preferred, even if packed, then a different choice. But the kids are complaining, the staff is packed into every space (some have to rotate out of classrooms and there are no extra rooms there at all for any purpose) and the seniors don't get lockers. But the first round of assignments goes to the district so we'll have to see how many they put into Roosevelt in the first place and then go from there on the waitlist.


Anonymous said…
I checked the automated wait list number today. Even though we have not received our assignment letter in the mail, we could access the info on the phone line.

Nice to know that SOMETHING for the district worked the way it was set up to do.
Anonymous said…
I don't know how all of the numbers are going to shake out, but our sons best friend who lives 2.96 miles from Roosevelt got in!!! That's much better than last year where only kids who lived within 1.8 miles of the school got in (and sib preferences).

That's hopeful for those of us in the NE who were hoping for access to Roosevelt. I think the numbers vary so much year to year. I have a 7th grader this year, and he is in a bubble year where there were more than normal kids, and schools have been very difficult to get into, we we'll see what happens next year, but for now......there's hope...
Anonymous said…
My son got into Eckstein for 6th grade next year.....we live accross the street from Nathan Hale, and i really wasn't sure! Our daughter was wait-listed last year for 9th grade at Roosevelt, but did get in before the end of the school year.....I did find out that the wait list at Eckstein is at 118 for the regular program at 6th grade and 31 for Spectrum. Roosevelt has 204 kids waiting for the regular 9th grade, as opposed to 400+ last year. Our daughter was # 84 last year, though she may have been one of the last ones. It sounds a bit like some of the pressure is off at RHS, that's for sure.
Anonymous said…
From the preliminary list of the TOPS kids who got into Garfield, (small data set--but that's what I have access to) it looks like the circle is much bigger than Roosevelt's famous 1.8 miles last year (but probably much tighter than last year's 4 or so miles).
Anonymous said…
Our assignment letters came last Friday. Both my daughters got into Garfield. One is in APP, one not -- they were linked, which is different from sibling preference, so there was a not-insignificant probability that my daughter who's not in APP would get waitlisted. I read that as meaning that everyone who had sibling preference or lived close by probably got in. I may have misunderstood the rules, though.

Helen Schinske
Jet City mom said…
Neighbors who have a young child entering K- have an older child at a school on the other side of Greenlake, specifically, because they felt that was the best fit for their younger child who has certain needs.

However, district didn't assign the younger child to same school as sibling but one that wasn't on their list at all. Older sibs school is about 15 minutes away with moderate traffic, younger sibs new school will be opposite direction and about 30 minutes away from their home.

Things like this, push parents out of the city/public schools.Its not that the 2nd school is a bad school, but especially when your kids are young, you want them at the same school.
They should appeal. I can't understand why, if the older sib is there, and they said so on their application, that the younger one wouldn't get in. That would have to be one crowded school for a sib to not get in.
Anonymous said…
Siblings not getting in??? Happened to me a few years back. We're now in private, thank you very much! And very glad not to have to deal with the BS.
Charlie Mas said…
If you didn't get into a school and you believe you should have, you can appeal the decision. Mistakes sometimes happen, but the enrollment people are pretty good at fixing them. Of course, you may discover that it was you who made the mistake.
Anonymous said…
We have a child starting K next year, and we got into our first choice school, which is not our reference school but almost as close. Out of the 6-7 friends we know enrolling in kindergarten (all in NW), only *one* other got their first choice school, and 2 didn't even get their reference school. 3 were placed in schools not even on their list.

This makes me wonder if there is a larger population going to K this year, or perhaps because of the downturn, fewer parents able/willing to pay for private school. (Neither of the two families who applied to private, non-denominational school got in).
Anonymous said…
Helen: re Garfield, my understanding of linkage is that, since APP freshmen must be assigned before the rest of the freshman class, your 2nd twin was, in effect, a sibling. If both twins were not APP, then even if one got assigned, there is no 'time' for the list to 'reset', so the 2nd twin wouldn't necessarily get in (but they might move up the waitlist).

This is true of sibs in different grades too-so if K assignments were made before 2nd grade a kindergartener could bump their linked sib to sibling status, but if the 2nd grader got in, that wouldn't help the kindergartener.

Classof75: Could the kindergarteners 'needs' have impacted their assignment? Did the District assign them to a program that wasn't available at the sib's school?

I keep wondering what schools everyone is talking about (e.g., NW, so Whittier?) It would be especially interesting to know which schools don't have room for all of their siblings so we could tell if bubble classes or class size buy down might have been involved.
Anonymous said…
"Helen: re Garfield, my understanding of linkage is that, since APP freshmen must be assigned before the rest of the freshman class, your 2nd twin was, in effect, a sibling."

Not according to what Tracy Libros told me -- she said "If the sibling (twin) doesn’t get in based on her own “tiebreakers” she will be linked with the student who was admitted. This will pull the sibling up toward the top of the waiting list. However, there is not a guarantee – it depends on the applicant pool and the tiebreakers of that applicant pool." That suggests to me that the link is not a tiebreaker in itself, while sibling preference is.

I see on that the final tiebreaker is by lottery, though, so we may just have gotten lucky that way.

Anonymous said…
Principals sometimes "close out" certain grades other than K. That happened to us. I had one child in a school, but couldn't get the other in because the principal had "closed out" my child's grade. It's absurd that they should have that discretion. Yes, you can appeal, wait for waiting lists to resolve, or diddle around endlessly, but private school contracts are due in spring, with a good chunk (if not all) of the tuition contractually obligated. So, the whole hassle and promise of other future hassles is totally not worth it. Now, the grade my child would have been in, is completely underenrolled. Go figure.

No, private schools are bulging at the seams this year.
whittier07 said…
Can anyone explain how children are assigned to the Spectrum program? Our daughter currently attends Whittier, passed the test, we turned in our paperwork on time and she ended up on the wait-list for next year ... just wondering how the placements are made.
Anonymous said…
Spectrum is different from APP in that eligable students are not guaranteed a seat.

Open seats in a Spectrum program use two tiebreakers - first, students with siblings at the same school and then students who live in the same cluster or reference area for the school requested. Then it goes to lottery. And when open seats are filled, students are wait listed.

We got waitlisted for Spectrum at Washington. Very disappointing as the other choices in SE are quite limited.
Anonymous said…
Spectrum families should gather and make your case that there should NOT be a waitlist for Spectrum. Your children need a special education.
Anonymous said…
OK, so we have a child in a Shoreline school that offers honors to ALL students who test, no wait lists. I asked the principal how they do it?? How do they accommodate EVERY child?? She said it's easy they just reallocate resources based on the needs each year. If they have a larger amount of requests for honors English they simply move one of the regular ed English teachers to honors English. Why can't Spectrum do the same?? Why does Seattle stick Spectrum students in a regular ed class?? I understand that reallocating resources is much harder to do at elementary, but at middle school it should be doable
Anonymous said…
I have spoken to many parents this year who have had their children privately tested into Spectrum after they didn't make it through district testing. Why doesn't the district just raise the bar for everyone and get rid of this charade? The families that test in privately can afford from $300 to $2000 in fees to prove the district wrong. Shoreline's model sounds like a perfect template. The only people complaining would be the psychologists who are making a bunch of money in this system that rewards those who can appeal in a timely manner and who have the funds to challenge the district with private testing.
Anonymous said…
I do agree that families with money to spend on private testing have an edge in using the system to their advantage.

On the other hand, just because a family pursues private testing does not mean that their kid will achieve the needed test scores. And, the WASL is not a good choice of tests to determine advanced learning eligability - as has been pointed out in several other threads on this blog in the past.

I would agree that the Shoreline model makes sense. My understanding is that the Shoreline district is different to Seattle in that the make-up of the student population is pretty consistent from school to school. That would make it easier to move teachers around and reallocate resources if overall needs are pretty much the same in most schools. Seattle would need to get all schools performing at an adequate level in order to implement the system for a Spectrum-like program in SHoreline.

Of course, that's what they should be doing anyway.
Anonymous said…
Yes, this testing into Spectrum business is stupid, especially beyond elementary school. We will likely go private next year because our child doesn't test into Spectrum, but was bored silly in regular 6th grade classes. When a child is asking for more challenging work, why not allow it?

Maybe we could have done private testing and gotten into Spectrum, but the money on that seemed like a crap-shoot, whereas the money for private school nearly guarantees a better result.
Anonymous said…
I just read that there are 38 kids on Bryant Elementary's wait list who live in Bryant's reference area. Bryant was one of the only schools in the NE who was not asked to take on an additonal Kindergarten classroom and it has the largest reference area so that combined with the 25% increase in Kindergarten applicants for this school year spelled trouble. Many of these kids were assigned to John Rogers, one of the farthest schools from them and not on their list.

What a crazy bubble of kids in NE Seattle this year. There are a lot of really upset parents who felt like they would get into their reference school if not a school close by outside it (including Thorton Creek).
Anonymous said…
Bryant is a huge school, should it be asked to grow even larger??? It already has over 550 students and is only a k-5. That's pretty big.

I don't think the answer is to keep squeezing kids into existing schools making them burst at the seams, like at Bryant, and Eckstein and Roosevelt. I don't think families should be turned away from their reference schools. YUK!

The answer is more capacity for the NE cluster. We need a new k-8 school to relieve the elementary and middle school pressure in this cluster. Jane Adams has a capacity for holding over a thousand students, yet is severely under enrolled as the all city draw, Summit k-12. It's time to move Summit to a more central location for all city busing, and use this space responsibly, for a new k-8 school in this cluster.
Anonymous said…
I think it is ridiculous in Seattle that children can test into Spectrum and be waitlisted. To me, that is the same as saying that a child qualifies for Special Ed but won't get it because there isn't room. If the kid would benefit from services, offer them. Whittier consistently has a very long Spectrum waitlist. I'm not sure why they can't build a second Spectrum classroom or offer a Spectrum class at a nearby school (Northshore or West Woodland) that could take some of the load.

I think the closest Spectrum school to Whittier is Broadview. That isn't in the same cluster and it is a very different type of school than Whittier. Much, much bigger with very different programs. Of course, that Spectrum program is never even close to full.

Just to clarify about Shoreline... There is a test-into High Cap program at the elementary level. At middle school/high school, those kids just re-enter the general population and all kids are eligible to take honors classes. If a parent pushes for honors classes and the teacher thinks the child isn't ready, that is usually made clear to the parents.

There are only two middle schools (and one alternative K-8 which is a good school but very small) in all of Shoreline, so it is easier to create consistency across the programs. Also, there isn't a huge demographic difference between schools the way there is in Seattle.
Anonymous said…
>>>>To me, that is the same as saying that a child qualifies for Special Ed but won't get it because there isn't room.

Uhhhh, except that there's no law requiring that service. That is, there's no law requiring special service to the slightly above average. And there's a reason for that. Special education laws are in place because of HUGE inequities... like students with disabilities not even being allowed to go to ANY school until 1975. And now, students in special education being in portables with the same teachers 100% of their school careers. Like 5 year olds in the same classes with 12 year olds. Wanting an optimal education is commendable, but isn't a legal requirement.
Anonymous said…
I agree with the above poster, it's not a legal issue that there are not enough Spectrum seats to go around. But the question is raised.....why?? Why is there not enough room?? If Whittier and View Ridge and Eckstein (to name a few) consistently have huge wait lists for Spectrum, why not re allocate resources?? Why not serve the population you have?? Why offer Spectrum if it can't be offered to everyone that qualifies??

As far as Shoreline goes, I will comment because we are in a Shoreline middle school. ALL, any, every kid who wants honors can take it in middle school AND high school. All, and, every kid who wants to take an AP class in high school can take it. No wait list....every. They move staff around to accommodate their students needs. I have NEVER heard a teacher discourage a student from taking honors. In fact they encourage every student interested to give it a try. The only requirement in MS is that they maintain a 75% or they can be bumped into a regular class. Very civilized, huh.
Anonymous said…
I am sure Charlie Mas or Melissa has a better answer to the Spectrum capacity issue than mine, but I think, in reference to the above posters: the district will not even bother with making sure there is appropriate capacity for spectrum in the north end, because they are so busy diverting all the resources to the south end. That is the way is has been since I have been in SPS (14 years now), and I certainly don't see it changing in the near future.
Anonymous said…
To the above poster at 10:46 -

Could you be more specific about what you mean that the district focus is on diverting resources to the Southend?

As a SE family, we really don't see too much evidence of that and in fact I see fewer choices and not more for quality programs and
fewer good advanced learning opportunities.
Anonymous said…
Part of the argument here about spectrum, though, is that it shouldn't require any more resources. Why can't View Ridge or Whittier, to use two examples just make 2 classes of Spectrum instead of one? Is the problem a rounding error? That is Whittier & View Ridge have a need for 1.5 Spectrum classes? And, I guess that you have to continue to have a "regular" class, so you can't solve the rounding problem by making both classes at View Ridge spectrum (getting some other kids from elsewhere) and then telling the non-spectrum kids at View Ridge that they have to go elsewhere.

I continue to think that "spectrum" level instruction should be available to any child who wants it (and who can do the work). Who is it that opposes that solution? As I started with, I don't think it's a resource allocation issue, since the kids have to be taught anyway.
Anonymous said…
A few questions:

Does it cost more to offer a Spectrum classroom than a regular ed classroom?

Who decides how many Spectrum classes will be offered at a school? The principal at the school or the district?

Why can't any student take Spectrum classes? Why MUST you test in? Can't it be offered to any motivated student and just have a requirement to maintain a certain grade or GPA?

Why is Spectrum limited to only a couple subjects? Why doesn't it include social studies, science?? Why are there no honors options for these other subjects??
Anonymous said…
Start a letter writing campaign now. Tell the new supt. your children need a Spectrum education. Until recently, the qualifications for Highly Capable (under the state grant) included Spectrum. Your child probably still fits within the WAC guideline.

Make your case - swamp the supt with letters before a decision is made regarding the change in Advanced Learning programs. Copy the Board. You can use email. Unless you tell the supt, she doesn't know about this condition. She doesn't know there are waitlists and she doesn't know how much you'd appreciate a reasonable person addressing this need. The new Bd. doesn't know about this either. Ask a question or two - such as, how many children are on waitlists, doesn't the number of children exiting the public schools warrant a change in service, etc. Asking a question may initiate a conversation between the supt and the new Advanced Learning team. Just because this condition has a long history, doesn't mean it needs to remain a problem.
Anonymous said…
There are two Spectrum Programs located in the NE, Wedgewood and Viewridge. Also, there are two in the NW,Whittier and North Beach. In addition to the two Spectrum Programs in both regions, there are several schools with what the district describes as Advanced Learning Opportunities. West Woodland, Adams,and Laurelhurst, to name a few. There are more, but I won't name them. I don't mean to sound anti-Spectrum but it looks to me as if that there are enough opportunities for the Spectrum qualified in those neighborhoods.
Anonymous said…
Well then how do you explain huge wait lists at View Ridge, Eckstein, Whittier....???

Spectrum should be in the schools that demand it. Why should someone who lives in the View Ridge neighborhood have to rip their child out of their neighborhood, away from their friends, and bus them across the cluster to Wedgewood to get Spectrum, when View Ridge OFFERS it?? Does that make sense????? And how about Eckstein?? It is THE ONLY middle school in the NE cluster. If you are put on their Spectrum WL, I guess you are just out of luck. Just because there are multiple offerings in the cluster does not mean that there is enough Spectrum seats to accommodate all the kids that are Spectrum qualified, as is obvious by the huge wait lists.

Also, if we had more access to Spectrum seats, maybe the district wouldn't have to keep such a tight leash on who "gets in", and they could do away with the expensive tests, and let all motivated students who want to give it a try. Hey now that's a concept isn't it.
I'll give this a shot.

My broad comment is that, sadly, this district does not like have to serve gifted kids. I'm sorry and you can disagree but from my experience, my view is that the district does understand the need to offer something but really, they don't have the time, inclination or belief in gifted education. (But Bob Vaughn in Advanced Learning is a highly qualified guy; it's just that you need someone in leadership to step up and that have never seen that happen.)

Indeed, I don't even think it's just the district; it's parents as well who perceive any parent saying their child is gifted is (a) asking for more for that child and (b) believing their child is more "precious" than other kids. What is missing is the link that gifted kids need their academic needs met just like any other student, no more, no less. They are NOT there to act as the calming presence for other students, they are NOT there to be teacher's helper and they are NOT there to quietly sit and wait while the teacher has to take longer with other students.

You can bitterly disagree with those statements but that's my experience. What I do know, for a fact, is that in other parts of the country there are public magnet schools just for gifted kids. No apologies, no excuses. That's where a lot of the Intel Science competition winners come from. There are states that don't have enough gifted schools in each town and thus have state boarding schools for gifted students. Why? Because those states perceive it to be necessary.

I've said this before, I'll say it again. We recognize talent in music and the arts and in sports in our schools but say a kid is academically advanced and parents get very upset. I don't get it.

I do sincerely wish that the audit had covered Spectrum and Advanced Learning Opportunities (and not just APP) because I think some detached observers would have clearly seen and explained the problems to the Super.

To try to answer questions:

-Spectrum, while a decent program, is not conducted in the same manner throughout the district. Each Spectrum school gets to decide how much they want to do and how the delivery is. Spectrum at Whittier is not the same as at Lafayette or at Viewridge or any other place. How the district can make any clear judgments on the success of the program (except that people value it and, clearly, fight to get in).

-ALOs are NOT the same as Spectrum. Again, the district allows each school to do as much or as little as they want in having an ALO. It doesn't really solve anything but is a good thing to have for kids who do want to reach a little higher.

-why can't Spectrum-type rigor just be incorporated into a regular ed classroom where it can benefit all students? It could and I for one would have no problem with it. I'd still want separate classes, though, for kids who test into them. Why? For a couple of reasons. One, there's a certain number of APP kids whose parents, for whatever reason, don't choose to send them to Lowell. They, like some of the Spectrum kids, are a different breed of learner. An analogy I read was putting a racehorse in a corral with regular work horses. All these horses are healthy and good at what they do but the racehorse is getting nothing out of standing in a corral. These kids need a cohort. I will never forget the day in elementary school when one of my son's friends said he liked his class because it was okay to be smart.

Two, there are always a number of parents who believe all kids should just stay together and thus you will never have all the gifted kids in one class. There will always be a spread of abilities in regular ed classes.

-I don't know why, if the waitlists exist, that the district doesn't fill that demand. But it's probably because they don't have to (as another person here pointed out).

-No, it does not cost more to have Spectrum. Most of the teachers have received some professional development in teaching gifted kids but there is not a different curriculum.

-How Spectrum kids are assigned is one I won't touch because my kids have been out of the program for awhile. It used to be completely random from whoever was eligible and applied to that school. You do end up with some odd configurations (which continue on for years as most Spectrum kids don't leave that class). My son was in a Spectrum class with 6 boys and 16 girls for 3 years and then 6 boys and 26 girls for 2 years.

-Technically, the district could assign a school to be Spectrum but there are some very resistant principals out there so it is principal driven. My observation is the more the principal supports the program, that's where the better programs exist.

-Spectrum in elementary covers all subjects except music and PE. Why that changes at middle school is a mystery and why Spectrum isn't available in high school is also a mystery. Some middle schools do social studies, LA and math (although most middle schools have kids take a math placement test and every kid just gets placed and it isn't based on whether he or she was in Spectrum before or not). I assume there is no Spectrum in high school because of the availability of AP and honors. (There's technically no APP in high school either although APP students have an "in" to Garfield.)

I see many queries about why rigor like Spectrum can't be found in most classrooms. That's a good question to ask your teacher, your principal and the Superintendent.
Anonymous said…
I'm one of those who live .72 miles from Bryant (according to the district), and even though it's our reference school, and I put it first, my daughter did not get in for kindergarten. In fact, we're 21 on the waiting list, so I think our overall chances of getting in for fall are pretty slim. We didn't get into our other choices, either, and were assigned to John Rogers, which is the absolutely farthest school from us (15 minute drive each way).

This makes no sense, and I have been struggling for the past couple days with this. I've come to understand that even though I bought our house in the Bryant reference area, there are some bubble years, like this one, where some kids can't get in while friends across the street can. Furthermore, because we are on the edge of the cluster, we have fewer options than those who live in the central part of the cluster. For them, the distance tiebreaker works in their favor. I know someone who lives in Meadowbrook (John Rogers reference area) and got into their second choice, Wedgwood. Even though Wedgwood was one of our choices, I guess we were a few tenths of a mile farther away. So now my child is being sent to my friend's reference school.

My daughter's preschool teachers have been telling me she's bright and might test into Spectrum (or APP), so I suppose I should just get used to disappointment (after reading the other posts here).
I forgot one thing. There was one school in the southend (I think it was Maple; help me out if you remember differently) that decided to do things differently. They focused all their resources to teaching to the top and try to pull up kids as they went. It was a laser focus on that and nothing else. And guess what?

It worked and their WASL scores went up.

Did we see this being piloted elsewhere? Nope, a great story of success that went nowhere in this district.
Anonymous said…
To anonymous at 3:16, I'm sorry to hear about your assignment nightmare. This is exactly what drives people from SPS.

The good news is that many people who choose Bryant as their school also have the means to go private. Many families don't know which if any private school will admit their children so they apply for Bryant too. Once they find out which private school accepts them, they let their spots at Bryant go, and the wait list moves. It is not uncommon at all to move 21 kids.

Another piece of advice would be to call the enrollment center and find out which, if any, schools have a wait list where your number would be less that 21. If there are any, and the school is acceptable, move your child to that wait list.

And, lastly, it is much easier to get into popular schools at later grades. We live in Meadowbrook and when our son was in 2nd grade we decided to change schools. We called the enrollment center AFTER on time assignment and still found that there was space at View Ridge, Bryant, Sacajewea, Laurelhurst and John Rogers (we were at Thorton Creek). We ultimately chose Bryant and have been happy there since.

Good luck to you.
Anonymous said…
So anyone else want to share their stories about whether they got into their first choice school? I've been reading the analysis at SPS, and it never quite rings true to me, that 90% of folks get their first choice.

The Bryant situation sounds pretty dreadful (especially the part about the neighbors across the street getting in and you not). It breaks up and disrupts neighborhoods.

my interest is academic, but I should wish everyone good luck, and hope that things work out for everyone.
Anonymous said…
Central district neighbors have struggled for some years now with the same issues that the neighbor in Ravenna is bemoaning. This is why we want assigned schools at the grade school level. But of course, that's another 3 years off or whatever date the district has now moved it to
Anonymous said…
My daugther got into her first choice middle school, which was nice.

Just wanted to say good luck to the person on the Whittier Spectrum wait list. My daughter tested into the Spectrum program at Whittier, took the test in first grade to get in in second grade, and was on the waiting list for the next 4 years; she never made it into the class. I recently discovered 4 other kids in her 5th grade class that had been on the waiting list the entire time as well. There are just many advanced kids there, apparently. All four of these kids did not have a sibling in the school. Again, I see the sib preference for getting into a school, of course, but I will never get why there is sib preference to get into Spectrum as well. It makes absolutely no sense to me. I did get a letter saying that North Beach had room in their Spectrum program, but we lived three blocks from Whittier and ultimately decided being there was more important than being in Spectrum.
whittier07 said…
Thanks for your "good luck" wishes Jane - looks like we'll need it! I called the enrollment center and they assigned 27 kids to the 1st grade Spectrum class at Whittier and there are 11 kids on the wait-list. I asked about North Beach and there are 4 kids on the wait-list for 1st grade Spectrum. I don't understand using sibling preference for Spectrum placements either but maybe it'll help our younger child in the future. :(
gingee said…
Anyone know how amny kids the Eckstein Spectrum wait list moved last year?

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools