Student Learning Committee meets today

Today is the first meeting of the new Student Learning Committee. The SLC is different under this Board than it was with the previous Board. First, instead of having three board directors as members of the committee, it is a committee of the whole. In other words, every Board Director is a member of this committee. Second, instead of meeting twice a month, the new SLC is scheduled to meet quarterly. That's right - only three or four times a year. That's why the committee is only just now having its first meeting. The next one will be in June.

Here is the agenda for this afternoon's marathon session.

You will notice they will update one policy. Think of all the policies they will have to update in the wake of the curriculum audit. I can't imagine they will take 20 minutes for each of them.

They will discuss the High School Math Adoption for 30 minutes. That's not much time.

They will get an update on High School Reform (whatever that is) for 45 minutes.

You might be confused by the reference to the "Advanced Placement Program" because there is no such thing. This is actually pretty typical of how poorly informed people in the JSCEE are about this stuff. Instead, they will actually get a brief written statement (two sides of one sheet) about all of Advanced Learning (ALOs, Spectrum, APP, AP and IB).

Comments

Anonymous said…
See below for synopsis of agenda. Note "SpEd Contracts" - how much and to who? Who will be contracted with the responsibility of taking care of these children, who will monitor for best practices, and how much will it cost? Is it LRE (Least Restrictive Environment)?
Note Revision to D46.01 (sic): This policy deals with who grants credit for graduation.
Note "Grant Funds": why this focus? Who is granting? Why aren't we paying our own way? Grants without operational strongs, great. Grants that dictate curriculum or facilities...hmmm: Why surrender authority to outside groups?
Note "Safety Net": The ongoing "safety net" reconfiguration...Watch and see what happens to the children who are falling out (or kicked out) of comp schools. Will comp schools be supported in keeping students in them, rather than kicking them out? Will inclusion and in-house support supplant the farming out of children to "credit retrieval" schools? What part do special ed contracts play in all this? Possibility of positive changes regarding inclusion, but also of blowback as "comp" schools and parents bemoan the lack of standardization in safety net students, try to avoid housing them (as has happened in the past, hence the existence of "safety net" AND progressive alts)


For Action:
• Revisions to Policy D4601 20min
• SpEd Contracts 20m
• Fed Grants Approval Process 20m
• HS Math Adoption 30m
• Grant Funds 15m
Updates:
• High School Reform (45 min)
• Family Ed Levy Work (30 min)
• Safety Net (15 min)
• Special Education (30 min)
Notebooks to include Written Updates on:
• Bilingual Audit
• Curriculum Audit
• Advanced Placement Program
• Disproportionality /Discipline
3/5/08, 9:25 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