SAP - Elementary Schools
Open Thread
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.)
Comments
When does the SAP go into effect? Next fall? What's the provision for students between then and when these schools open? Are there "temporary' assignment maps for the interim?
i wonder if someone might be able to scan the copies of maps out already and post?
I find this withholding of information, where some get access and others not to be incredibly frustrating.
Lowell/Stevens -- It looks like it is 14th to the N/S and the street adjacent to Volunteer park running E/W. Not all the boundries on the map are labeled.
SP/VW -- Looks like 65th St. It jogs over at one point before Magnuson up to 70th, but I don't know the street.
Madrona -- Not listed as an option school. Cherry to 23rd, and then
23rd, to (I think) Denny.
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/boundarymaps/index.dxml
It also looks like Montlake is going to be VERY full.
Do you think it might be Interlaken park the current boundary for Stevens and Lowell walk areas (a squigly line)? And what is the e/w south boundary?
where are the walkzones for the alt schools. can't see em.
I did get a peek and for Lowell/Stevens it is Interlaken park on the north and I believe it was cherry on the south.
Not too surprising.
So what happens to my incoming (2010) kindergartner if the school we're assigned to doesn't open until 2012?! No interim school has been identified. I won't know whether she'll be grandfathered to her sibling's school until the board deals with implementation later on. Is my child "school-less"?
Also, the updated Sacajawea boundaries make sense as well for similar reasons. This is great news!
So much for the idea of bringing Lincoln online as a comprehensive high school serving QA/Magnolia.
Curious to hear about other big changes ...
As I understand it, the SAP leaves students in their current school and only applies to incoming students. Doesn't the NE currently need the full use of that Sandpoint capacity?
I think it would make sense to place high demand programs in these new schools to encourage families to switch over. It seems to me a like an international school in Sandpoint would be a good fit and would encourage families to move in. I don't live in that cluster. Anyone have any idea how that would be received?
MacDonald won't be a good place for an international school because of its proximity to JSIS, but I take it that there is Spectrum demand that is unfulfilled do to limited space. I think a Spectrum program would be a good fit there.
I don't know enough about the situation up around Viewlands to comment. Does the district need the full capacity of that school immediately, or is re-opening appropriately far-sighted?
I also don't know what to say about Old Hay if it has some alternative designation in the plan.
Of course, I wonder how establishing high demand programs in conjunction with opening four new schools would fly politically, given the disproportionate impact of the recent closures on the south end.
I would very much hope that as part of the new SAP the district would be working very actively to make sure that all parts of the district have access to popular programs.
Even ALO (which may be of marginal value) needs to be rolled out across all schools in the district for equity.
Back when people supposedly could "chose" schools, the district had some measure of excuse for the inequitable distribution of programs. Now with assigned schools, there is no excuse.
I don't like the variability in afterschool programs. Why do some schools have on-site after school programs, while others bus the children elsewhere. Notable, for example, for Wedgwood's program at Ravenna community center.
...
Wedgwood and Thornton Creek both have on-site after school programs ("Kids Time") which are administered by the Ravenna Eckstein community center. There may be additional options off site, but there is on site care at Wedgwood (though not enough to meet demand).
-- Elizabeth
I want to know how many kids are in the new Lafayette area? Are there any numbers associated with the maps?
Schmitz Park tightens up and squares off, Alki picks-up a little strip of land South of Alaska St and a triangle of land north of SP now split between SP and Lafayette. Arbor Heights, Gatewood, West Seattle Elementary and Roxhill now meet at 4 corners divided by 35th Ave and Thistle. That moves a chunk from Gatewood to Arbor Heights. It has a very small area for Roxhill. I'm not sure they can fill the school.
Steve
Regarding new elementary schools, it provides a timeline for new schools:
Projected enrollment growth can be accommodated by bringing the following buildings on line:
• For 2010 school year: Sand Point
• For 2011 school year: Viewlands, Old Hay, Rainier View
• For 2012 school year: McDonald
There is a short section on transition planing, which states:
The information in this document, including assignment of students to attendance area boundaries, describes the “future state” at full implementation.
The report specifically puts off a decision about incoming K siblings.
Open Enrollment for 2010-11 assignments is scheduled for March 2010.
So any transition plan will need to be approved and in place before then.
In my opinion, that's a bad move on the District's part. If assignments are as late as they were this year, a number of families who are "on the cusp" of being able to get into a school they want will find themselves needing to commit to a private school before they know their public assignment.
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/newassign/NSAP_ProposedBoundaries_Appendix_F.pdf
Look at page 2.
That must be a glitch in their data, right?
Something the district should be mindful of.
I'm concerned there are big flaws in all that data. If they couldn't adjust attendance and demographics for their own proxy address, what else did they miss?
It could be West Seattle for Denny, but almost any other school in the area would be better. It is Lafayette for Madison, Wing Luke for Aki Kurose, Muir and Leschi (maybe just Muir in future) for Washington, Lawton for McClure, Whittier and Broadview-Thomson for Whitman, and Wedgwood, Jane Addams, and View Ridge for Eckstein. There is no elementary Spectrum program in the the Mercer service area. So who is going to get it? And, once that school is identified, won't the attendance area have to be adjusted smaller?
Wouldn't it be easier to just move the line so Muir is in the Mercer service area?
The NE would swarm any immersion program. we've been suggesting it for years! of course, all such programs should be option schools, to allow anyone equal access....but I know it would be a huge draw. was requested/considered for jane addams, but not executed upon for lack of time/funding. qualified staff are harder to find. same issue will apply for SP i would guess. still no reason not to do it, just phase it in over time. Could still be done for JA!! better late than never.
NE definitely needs more seats, but as JA for example, new schools take time to fill. unlikey upper grade kids will jump to SP either.
if intl school, then they should go to hamilton...
Re Appendix F - On the other thread MoneyPenny said she asked and that Wilson Pacific is the proxy address they give homeless students and those who require address confidentiality. I live near there too, and while there are lots of townhouses, the hot spot is directly over Wil-Pac and there are not that many kids in this neighborhood.
...
I can certainly see why this information would raise questions, but...
Take a look at City of Seattle's population density map (http://www.cityofseattle.net/dpd/cms/groups/pan/@pan/documents/web_informational/dpds_006728.pdf).
It shows that census tract 13, which overlays the "hot spot" in the new Daniel Bagley reference area, is not sparsely populated compared to the rest of the area North of the ship canal.
At the U.S. Census Bureau's web site (http://factfinder.census.gov), you can explore the census tract maps for 2000, and discover that tract 13 has:
* slightly more than the average proportion of children under 5 years old (4.8% vs the city's average of 4.7%), and
* is second only to the University District (tract 53.01) in percent of families in poverty.
To me, this says that there are plenty of children there and most of them are not going to have options other than public school.
We bought a house in Bryant in 2001. At that time, there were 8 children on the block. Today, there are 20! And this is just one block! Most of these families are in public schools or will be within another year or two. (Of course, why SPS didn't see all of this coming 2 years ago when my daughter's cohort entered K is another story).
I would caution against relying too heavily on 2000 census numbers to gauge where children currently reside.
...
Just to be clear -- I'm not suggesting that the 2000 census data is the best data to use. I hope the district has made use of more recent data.
That said, the 2000 Census data is freely available to anyone with a fast enough internet connection and does provide evidence supporting the claim that a concentration of SPS students lives in the area in question.
I understand that trust in the district is very low for many people. I do find this an understandable reaction to past events. However, I also think that many of the stories folks are telling each other here are trending dangerously toward rumor fodder. This was my attempt to inject an independently verifiable "reality check" into the debate.
I think it's good they have tried to reduced the inequity at the different schools in West Seattle. I'm concerned about the large increase of FRL students at Sanislo. It will be pushed way over 50% if the number are correct. That is very hard to overcome.
I still don't trust the demographic projections. They were 30% low in their Kindergarten projections for 2 of the 4 elementary schools in West Seattle North this year and had to add classrooms after the enrollment numbers came in. I think they are using the same data and assumptions for these numbers.
Infrastructure already exists at John Stanford. There is already an active PTSA, after-school programs, and school fundraisers, etc. All of this would not need to be reinvented for McDonald. Teachers and a curriculum are already there, and would just need to be expanded. Even the bus routes could be coordinated; maybe start times could be staggered by 10 or 15 minutes to accommodate this.
Parents all over the city clamor for international programs. This would give an enormous appeal to those of us already happy with our current school assignment. It would solve the problem of lack of capacity in north Seattle while also giving families another desirable international school--and they wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel, just expand on an existing successful program.