Capacity and its Difficulties
It's interesting, the difference a few years makes, but the stories of district overcapacity (meaning too many schools, too few students), which led to school closure, are changing. While still true across Seattle Public Schools as a whole, pockets of district undercapacity (meaning too few seats in certain geographic areas) are causing the district to look at things a little differently. Parents and community members should be aware of this situation, which CPPS has been following for a few months.
On the one hand, press for more classroom space in NE Seattle by elementary parents whose choices and educational experiences are limited by overcrowding in all non-alternative NE cluster elementaries has brought a new angle on capacity to public light. And it isn't strictly a NE problem. All elementaries and most middle schools north of the ship canal, as well as in Queen Anne and Magnolia are or will soon be facing space and accessibility issues. On the other hand, such crowding, limited access, and community support for neighborhood schools isn't the problem in the south, outside of a few neighborhoods.
So what's a district to do?
CPPS hopes that solutions can be found that will acknowledge the window of opportunity presented by strong community desire and support for local public schools in the north end. At the same time, the resources, strategic commitments, and of the whole district must be considered. Such solutions require the level of creative thinking and community engagement that many of us have long called for. Let's keep the pressure on by voicing the full range of our ideas in the forums provided:
To start, the district has scheduled two community meetings that will focus primarily on options to classroom shortages for the 2009/10 school year:
. Monday, September 15, 6:30 - 8:30pm - Catherine Blaine K-8 cafeteria, 2550 34th Avenue W; Seattle 98199
. Tuesday, September 16, 6:30 - 8:30pm - Roosevelt High School Commons, 1410 NE 66th St, Seattle, 98115
A SPS School Board work session is scheduled on the capacity issue:
. October 1, 4 - 5:30pm - John Stanford Center, 2445 3rd Avenue South, Seattle 98134
The district is also researching long-term solutions for the population increase it expects to continue in north end clusters through 2012. As the larger elementary cohorts move through the grades, middle and high school enrollment will grow and generate classroom shortages in the higher grade schools, some of which are already capacity-challenged. Certainly, the population increase will impact the district's new student assignment plan currently in development.
SPS will continue to update information on its website pertaining to the capacity issue and the new student assignment plan. For more info, you may want to review the following links:
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/strategicplan/capacitymanagement/capacity_faq.pdf
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities-plan/demo/longrange.xml
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/eso/hist_enr.pdf
On the one hand, press for more classroom space in NE Seattle by elementary parents whose choices and educational experiences are limited by overcrowding in all non-alternative NE cluster elementaries has brought a new angle on capacity to public light. And it isn't strictly a NE problem. All elementaries and most middle schools north of the ship canal, as well as in Queen Anne and Magnolia are or will soon be facing space and accessibility issues. On the other hand, such crowding, limited access, and community support for neighborhood schools isn't the problem in the south, outside of a few neighborhoods.
So what's a district to do?
CPPS hopes that solutions can be found that will acknowledge the window of opportunity presented by strong community desire and support for local public schools in the north end. At the same time, the resources, strategic commitments, and of the whole district must be considered. Such solutions require the level of creative thinking and community engagement that many of us have long called for. Let's keep the pressure on by voicing the full range of our ideas in the forums provided:
To start, the district has scheduled two community meetings that will focus primarily on options to classroom shortages for the 2009/10 school year:
. Monday, September 15, 6:30 - 8:30pm - Catherine Blaine K-8 cafeteria, 2550 34th Avenue W; Seattle 98199
. Tuesday, September 16, 6:30 - 8:30pm - Roosevelt High School Commons, 1410 NE 66th St, Seattle, 98115
A SPS School Board work session is scheduled on the capacity issue:
. October 1, 4 - 5:30pm - John Stanford Center, 2445 3rd Avenue South, Seattle 98134
The district is also researching long-term solutions for the population increase it expects to continue in north end clusters through 2012. As the larger elementary cohorts move through the grades, middle and high school enrollment will grow and generate classroom shortages in the higher grade schools, some of which are already capacity-challenged. Certainly, the population increase will impact the district's new student assignment plan currently in development.
SPS will continue to update information on its website pertaining to the capacity issue and the new student assignment plan. For more info, you may want to review the following links:
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/strategicplan/capacitymanagement/capacity_faq.pdf
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/facilities-plan/demo/longrange.xml
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/eso/hist_enr.pdf
Comments
I'm guessing that one reason many Seattle parents choose to send their kids to private schools is because of smaller class sizes. But if we somehow figure out how to do the right thing and reduce class sizes in our public schools (I’m not holding my breath), won't that exacerbate the capacity problem?
Also, as the economy continues to tank, will more private school families feel a greater need to attend public school, also driving the capacity crunch in some areas?
Why was the Viewland Elementary closed? It seems odd, if the N end needs elementary space to close a school of that size.
In some of the demographics I have seen the capacity for High Schools is more school than students. While Elementary is more students than school. It seems odd to me that the trend appears to be close elementary schools and add space to high schools. Isn't that a little backwards? The dropout rate may also influence the number of students to continue into high school, does anyone know what that might be?
Why isn't the district re-opening unused buildings? Or looking at other creative options? Summit has 500 kids and their population continues to dwindle every year, yet they are housed in the NE cluster in a middle school building (Adamms) that has the capacity to hold 1100 students. Why isn't Summit moved to a more central location that would be more cost effective for their all city transportation? Then Addams could be re-purposed to a k-8 school? On another blog I saw a suggestion that made sense. Co-house Summit and Madrona at the Madrona site. Madrona is also a k-8 and it only half fills it's large building. Parents get it. Parents have ideas that make sense. Why isn't the district getting it?
I see the over capacity issue as a good thing. More students make a healthy, thriving district. We need to accomodate these children and families. I live in the NE cluster and all I'm hearing from parents with younger kids is that they are choosing private school. They are appalled at how the district has handled the situation. There is no predictability as schools are so over crowded. They fear they won't get into THEIR own neighborhood school, and it is a legitimate fear. And to add insult to injury, the district has been well aware of the situation for years and has done nothing to prepare for it.
We just received a survey from the district yesterday asking for our suggestions regarding the lack of capacity. We were asked to comment on how we feel about adding more classrooms to our buildings and/or adding portables. IE stuffing more kids into over crowded buildings that are busting at the seems. Insane.
"The buildings, which the School Board declared surplus in June 2007, would be sold to the buildings' longtime tenants:"
* The Allen building would be sold to the Phinney Neighborhood Association, for $3.0 million.
* The Small Faces Day Care has offered $1.3 million for the Crown Hill building and the immediate area around it. The City of Seattle Parks Department would pay $5.3 million for the playground area.
* The city's Parks Department has offered $1.6 million to buy the Webster Elementary playground. (The Nordic Heritage Museum, which has been housed in the Webster Elementary building for more than 20 years, declined to buy the building but agreed to pay increased rent for the next 5 years.)
Meanwhile....32 kids per classroom.
You have to scratch your head.
Also, if it takes so long, then let's get started on it without further delay. Why keep these buildings if not to re-open them in case of a situation EXACTLY LIKE THIS ONE. Here it is - the entire justification for keeping the buildings - if we don't pull the trigger and re-open the buildings in this situation then we should recognize that we never will and we should just sell them.
A better location for Summit - which is a K-12, not a K-8 - would be either John Marshall or Lincoln. They have better transportation access for an all-city draw than Madrona, which is hard to reach from much of the city.
The Jane Addams building could then be used as a K-8, adding both the elementary and the middle school space so desperately needed in the Northeast. The District should also re-open Sand Point.
Additionally, the District should consider a number of other changes:
* Re-classify John Stanford as an alternative school and re-open McDonald as a neighborhood school for that area.
* Re-locate the AAA to T T Minor and make it a K-5. Re-locate The New School to the AAA building. Make the new Southshore building a comprehensive 6-8 middle school. Close Aki Kurose. Some of these moves may be required as the AAA and Aki Kurose are in Step 5 of federal sanctions which requires that the schools be re-constituted. The closed Aki Kurose could be used as an interim site in the south-end or as the location of a new alternative school - perhaps the District could work with TAF to site a program there. Or it could become the new home of the Secondary B.O.C.
* Re-purpose Lowell as a neighborhood school. Close Montlake. Re-locate elementary APP to Meany. Re-locate Meany students to Washington. Re-locate middle school APP to John Marshall along with a 300 student general education middle school program.
* Open a new 1000-seat high school at Lincoln. Place high school APP there. This creates 600 seats of needed high school capacity close to the Ship Canal for Magnolia, Queen Anne, and North Capitol Hill. It also frees up capacity in the South End that would allow the closure of Rainier Beach. Lincoln is huge; it will hold 1,600 students. The new high school could share the space with Summit K-12, or with a re-located Center School and a re-located Secondary B.O.C.
* If the Secondary B.O.C. moves to either Lincoln or Aki Kurose, Old Hay could be the new home of the Center School so the District could stop leasing space. Or it could be re-opened as an elementary school to help address the capacity crisis in the Queen Anne/Magnolia cluster. Are there no children living in all of those new housing units in Belltown and South Lake Union?
I don't know if the District is thinking about any of these things, or different things, or nothing. There just isn't any telling what they are thinking about at all. And that is weird and wrong. All of this sort of stuff should be out there and the District should be leading the discussions.
Helen Schinske
A lot of information on the current capacity issue was given, including commentary on why it takes so long to re-open closed buildings (with the exception of the 2 or 3 most recently closed, they lack city occupancy permits, and the city requires substantial - read $millions - updating before occupancy can be renewed) Viewlands is the least expensive option, but it is also the farthest option from both NE and QA/Magnolia. Repurposing buildings (changing K-8s to K-5s for a time), renting community center space, moving programs (alternatives, Spectrum sites, etc), modifying assignment and transportation to increase access to uncrowded buildings, and portables were all floated, either by the district or by community members present.
While the meeting was held in Magnolia (Roosevelt meeting tonight), and most attendees were from QA/Magnolia, all of the information and discussion encouraged broad, district-wide thinking in determining solutions. Break-out groups were asked to consider one-year "fixes" with the idea that a long term plan is forthcoming and related to the development of the Student Assignment Plan (both Capacity FAQs and Assignment Plan info were being updated based on input from the meeting)
Almost to a group, people asked that the district deal with the problem in a way that respects the greater significance of a strategic long term plan. That was an easier sell in QA/Mag, where overcrowding is only expected to be a couple of classrooms in 09-10. It will be much more difficult in NE, where this year's six new Ks will move through the system at the same time that the district must find space for 2-3 new Ks.
I'd love to hear feedback from tonight's meeting -- good ideas and bad!
It is a 9 mile bus ride from QA and Magnolia, the kids can handle it, especially if there are less kids per class room. And the North end isn't that much further away. Viewland is a good place to start deflating an overflated balloon of a problem.
As for Charlie's ideas..my head was spinning by the time I was done reading. But, if the kids are able to adapt, and get a better education, I am sure that some of those ideas are good. I am just not as well versed in all of the schools.
The District has already made some determined/costly decisions, and seems unable to change their mind. Unfortunately this is costing them the "extra" 10 million they have saved elsewhere.
I think what would really help, is a very honest appraisal of schools and their renovation needs, cost of getting more teachers, and a better head count of actual students not just numbers of statistics. Oh and quit closing and selling buildings one year and needing them the next!
I hear that the Montessori program at T.T. Minor has a waitlist. Perhaps this sort of program placement can work to encourage some of the kids who choose Stevens then St. Joe's to take a look at some of these public schools with room? Heck, maybe some kids from the U district would be interested in a Montessori on Cap Hill if there were bus service. It's closer to home than John Rodgers.
Can we please, pretty please, plan for this before it hits the same level of crisis as tne NE cluster?
Actually, Techymom, for Kindergarten this year, Montlake wasn't that tough to get into. After getting a ludricous initial assignment, we got on the waiting list for Montlake, with 12 kids ahead of us and got in. I can only interpret this to mean that anybody who made Montlake their initial first choice got in.
Maybe everybody was trying to get their kids into Stevens, Tops or Mcgilvra. Maybe parents are afraid that this Charley character has the ear of the School District.
While I understand advocating for your own child (parent first, advocate second), we should, when given the opportunity, advocate for the district as a whole. When you only think about your kid, or your circumstance it imbalances the system.
Not an expert on the waiting list. I was thinking that after the initial assignment, the waiting list was then first come first serve. Can someone enlighten me?
"I'm happy to hear that you (Rugles) got into Montlake, but remember many others did not get into the schools of their choice."
Just trying to provide some real world info, anecdotal though it may be, for future "others"
"How far away from the school do you live?"
Madison Valley.
"Maybe this was an atypical year, perhaps last year you wouldn't have gotten in?"
Agree.
"And what if you didn't get in this year? What if you had to go to your "ludicrous" assigned school?"
The school, the last choice, was ludicrous because it was outside school bus coverage, near Northgate. Madrona was the fall back option.
"...we should, when given the opportunity, advocate for the district as a whole."
I believe parents sharing information with other parents is advocating for the district as a whole.
"When you only think about your kid, or your circumstance it imbalances the system."
When parents exhibit rational behavior it imbalances the system? That doesn't sound like much of a system.
And rugles, please don't feel you 'wasted' your first choice on TOPS. Doing that had no impact on your chances at any other school. Your application is judged by your tie breaker values--whether you picked a school 1st, 2nd or 10th. I believe Denise Gonzalez-Walker (at the Chalkboard blog) is writing an article (for NW Child?) on this subject right now.
http://tinyurl.com/4ht45m
One other thing--the wait-list is initially organized by the same tiebreakers that apply during assignment. Later on, people can start jumping to different waitlists, but go to the bottom of the list if they switch, i.e. you don't get to take your #1 position on one list and use it for a different school's waitlist.
I will have a couple of articles in October's Seattle Child magazine on enrollment, too.
--Denise
I am assuming that if we picked Montlake first to begin with, we either would have gotten in, or been higher on the wait list, or if not that, at the very least, not have to bother faxing in change of waiting list form at 1 minute after midnight.
What I don't understand, is how some schools that are popular are able to keep their class size small when others can't. Is it a matter of principal influence? Does money literally change hands? If you look at Montlake's annual report and their web site, you see that they have about 35-40 kids per grade and they have four teachers (and four classrooms) per every two grades. So, in 07-08, class size ranged from about 18-20 per teacher (and classroom). Now if this were failing school, I would understand, but it's not. I just don't see how those teachers (who, I assume, are not being paid 2/3 salaries?) are allowed to teach classes that are 2/3 full.
McGilvra looks pretty much the same, 20 5th graders in a class, about 22 kindergarteners.
You know, I just looked at Laurelhurst, figuring their classes would be maxed out, but they have 3 teachers at every grade, for 70-80 kids that translates to 23 5th graders per class (26 kindergarteners tho). Bryant, with 3 teachers for about 85 kids, seems to be running at 28, big but not at contractual maximum.
How do some schools keep class size down when others can't? Can principals say no to more students (that used to mean less $, but not anymore) or do they have to take whoever the District sends them? How does the District decide how many new kids to send each year (they don't wait to see if there are empty spots, I know that much from experience)? Why do some wait lists move and others don't?
Waitlists are pretty much the domain of principals. What happens depends much on the principal. Once that Oct. 1 enrollment number goes to the head office, it does the school no good to add more kids because the money they get is based on the number of kids as of Oct. 1.
It's not always so that a smaller school has smaller class sizes. It depends on the school. Schools that have fewer students generally have fewer resources and thus have fewer teachers. Hence a larger class size. Some schools are small and have small class sizes but either have teacher's aides or help pay for another teacher and can "buy down" class size. (I had thought this was illegal but apparently not.)
McGilvra did this and much to their surprise the iron hand of NCLB came in. What happened? Under NCLB, kids at so-called failing schools have to be offered the opportunity to go to a better performing school. Well, Madrona was on that list (a year back, I don't know about this year) and some parents opted for McGilvra and McGilvra had no choice but to take them.
Because the district doesn't track PTA funding, it is very hard to know how much money goes towards these efforts.
One other thing at the Roosevelt meeting on Tuesday were parents who spoke of "fixing" up classrooms on their PTA dime so that the classroom would be more comfortable/usable, etc. for the increases in students. The district loves this because they are so far behind in maintenance and they know that parents who have the time and the money to help students will do it (bless them all).
Am I correct that you get waitlisted at your first choice school? And that if you change to be waitlisted at a differnt school, you go to the end of the line?
Years ago when we looked at TOPS, I was appalled that their class sizes were so large at 28 kids per class. What are TOPS current class sizes?
30 kids in a class is outrageous, especially when you think of California who mandates class size to be capped at 20. I know we need capacity, but lets point our fingers at the district, not the few lucky schools that have the resources to have manageable class size. Lets use them as an example of what can be accomplished with reasonable class size, and lobby the district to use our I-728 money for it's proper intent.
I've had two kids at TOPS over ten years and they have never been in a class smaller than 27 (including that K with 28). The 'worst' was 31 in 1st grade with a 1st year teacher and no aide. Thank goodness she was fabulous and lots of parents helped out. I think they have had a great education, but imagine what they could have done with 22 in a class instead of 28-30.
I have been told that the District assumes that turnover at TOPS is the same as at the average school so they assign new kids every year even if no one leaves. (One year 4th grade had 34!) I don't understand the logic of that, that's why I asked those questions in the above post.
I don't mean to imply that Bryant's class size is small--to the contrary, I wonder how Laurelhurst--in the same cluster --can justify taking fewer than Bryant does. Maybe it's the same low turnover effect that TOPS has? I have heard that 32 is the contractual max so that's what I call 'full.'
I don't see how the District can justify sending more kids to a classroom that already has 30 kids assigned when other schools have 23, but that happens at TOPS fairly often. I would just like to know if it's a software problem or something else.