Open thread
How are things at your school? My kids are having a phenomenal year which proves to me that their school can handle just about anything the district throws at them and still thrive.
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
Open House, Thursday 2/25, 6:30p
300 - 20th Avenue East
SEATTLE, WA 98112
Come on out and meet staff, students and families... learn about life and learning at Nova.
Fashion Show, Friday, 2/26, 7p
@Nova
A fabulous fundraiser displaying Nova art and talent.
Nova absolutely rocks. My student had a mini-crisis heading into break and it's not only resolved, he spent the day doing homework and inventing work related to his classes. Really, the respect and inspiration between students and staff continues to amaze me. Glad your school is feeling strong, Megan.
Now comes the part I am frustrated with - Spectrum. B.F. Day has been designated the Sprectum school for the Hamilton attendance area. Great, because our kindergartener just tested into Spectrum for first grade. When I contacted our principal about the new program, she told me that it would really be in name only. Apparently SPS doesn't think enough parents will want to move their kids to B.F. Day even if they are Spectrum eligible. So, there will be no Spectrum classes, and the Spectrum kids will be treated as ALO. This is not a good option for our daughter as she really needs someone to push her to get the full potential out of her. We are going to apply to Whittier, but since it is out of our attendance area, chances of getting in our pretty slim. The principal did say that if enough people requested the Spectrum program at B.F. Day they would add a class. But, why would parents request the program if right now there is no plan to add a Spectrum classroom? Argh - so frustrating!!
Contact the Board. Contact them immediately and tell them that if they will not provide a Spectrum program in your service area that you fully expect them to provide you with access and transportation to the next closest one.
It is an equity issue. They are supposed to be committed to providing equitable access to quality programs, and that includes Spectrum.
Charlie -- are you arguing that every middle-school area should have a self-contained spectrum classroom at every grade? Or alternatively that every student should have access to a self-contained spectrum class (out of their middle-school reference area, if need be)?
Cluster district-identified students to form classroom rosters...Students who are academically gifted present different learning styles, learning pace, and curricular needs that require daily and systematic modification to a general education curriculum and classroom experience to achieve educational benefit.
The fourth core principle states:
Provide instruction by teachers familiar with the needs of students who are academically gifted
According to our principal, Spectrum students will be in regular classrooms, but will have Spectrum progress reports. There will be one Spectrum teacher that will be shared by the 5 new Spectrum schools. Meaning each school will have the teacher for one day per week to work with all Spectrum kids in that school.
The district absolutely needs to offer Spectrum classrooms for all grade levels at one school in each attendance area. Maybe View Ridge doesn't have self-contained classrooms until 4th grade because Wedgewood also has Spectrum. If you combined the Spectrum kids from both schools there would be enough for classrooms at all grades.
If they aren't going to offer this, then they need to re-write the core principles of the Spectrum program.
ZB - I don't know about Charlie but I'll put in my two cents, if that's all right.
What's the point in testing kids into a program and then not offering it? With this district, it's all about equity. The numbers don't always support having self-contained Spectrum classes in every grade in every school but I believe that, if a school can not offer Spectrum to a student, that student should have the right to go to the closest school that CAN offer that program . . . and I do feel the district should supply the transportation.
We're not talking about an alternative choice, or language immersion -- which is also inequitable, by the way -- but a district-wide program that identifies a certain type of student who is supposed to be getting a certain type of education. Telling one kid that they're smart and can take a class while telling another, who's equally smart but in a different neighborhood, sorry you can't take it . . . it's just wrong.
stu
Every school is a quality school
ohmmmm ohmmmmmm
Every school is a quality school
....ohmmmm ohmmmmmm
All better now?
I toured BF Day and liked the school. I really really liked Susan McCloskey. But I could tell she didn't think much of self contained Spectrum classes -- she basically said as much during the tour.
This was also true at View Ridge when we toured (though that was a number of years ago). The principal didn't think much of self-contained spectrum. And, at that time, View Ridge didn't have self-contained Spectrum, and not because there weren't enough students who tested into the program -- the principal said she thought a good 25% of the students at View Ridge tested into spectrum. She also said that there would be "spectrum progress reports" in 1-3.
So, I don't follow the details of the wording of what the Spectrum program is supposed to be, but I do know that affluent, desirable schools have also made the decision not to support self-contained spectrum. I'd be interested in knowing whether this will change in the future. Will there be a standard Spectrum model (there isn't now, as part of local control of schools)? As with other local variability, theoretical justification was available on the grounds that students could just choose another model at another school. The neighborhood schools plan decreases that flexibility. So, it's worth pressing the school district on what "standard" offerings will be available (including self-contained Spectrum).
I'd even go further to say that I wouldn't be entirely surprised if APP were phased out in the long-run, in the name of cost-savings (ie, no more busing children from all over to the two centrally located schools). If they can force special ed kids back into their neighborhood schools without adequate resources, why not APP, which is also a type of special education?
Thanks!
Good Luck with Dr. Vaughn. It took almost a year after I wrote him for PSAT results to appear and as Melissa well knows I was not the only one writing.
The eventual output was nearly worthless only mean scores no medians, not much of anything worth while. A quality product from Brad "Broad" Bernetek.
Dan
Isn't Spectrum in demand beyond capacity elsewhere in the north end?
Can't those kids go to BF Day?
I would think they could fill the program with kids who can't be served by the nearest Spectrum school.
There have always been a lot of South and Southeast Seattle students in the Spectrum program at Lafayette, including my own.
Therefore - a spectrum qualified out of attendance area child who is coming into say, Eckstein or Whitman, and has a sibling in the school already, can displace an attendance area student right out of the Spectrum program at that school.
Am I reading that correctly in the transition plan? If so, it stinks.
I'd even go further to say that I wouldn't be entirely surprised if APP were phased out in the long-run, in the name of cost-savings (ie, no more busing children from all over to the two centrally located schools). If they can force special ed kids back into their neighborhood schools without adequate resources, why not APP, which is also a type of special education?
Lori -- Your prediction is based on the false premise that APP costs more for transportation. In fact, because APP kids are categorized as 'special needs' this qualifies the District for extra transportation funding for them. Consequently, the District actually runs on a surplus when it comes to APP transportation.
This point was made to the District by APP parents when the District/Supt. proposed the APP splits as part of its allegedly money-saving "Capacity Management Plan." In fact, Lowell Elem., for example, was one of the most cost effective schools in the District in terms of per-pupil expense (in part because the building was so full). So closing or splitting that school made no sense financially.
I haven't seen any evidence that APP costs any more than any other option school.
Also, there are now 5 APP locations -- Lowell, Thurgood Marshall, Hamilton, Washington and Garfield -- not 2. And arguably, they are not all centrally located.
On a related note, if the District moved North-end APP to a truly North-end location instead of keeping it at Lowell in Capitol Hill, that would probably make many North-end APP commutes shorter and might save the District even more money.
Sorry- I couldn't let a few points go by.
BF Day has had a good reputation for years in north Seattle, especially because they have had longstanding working relationships with the local business community.
( B.F. Day is also the Seattle school districts oldest continually operating elementary school)
My daughter as an Americorps member, worked at BF Day in a 5th grade classroom- especially to provide needed support for the children whose families were struggling and possibly in a shelter.
She has great respect for the school and after she graduated from Reed College she is entering a masters of ed program, inspired in part by the community at BF Day
The decision to disperse students without a permanent address throughout the district, instead of assigning them to a school which had the structure and support in place so they could be successful was a bad one, IMO.
Why is it important for Spectrum students to be assigned together, but not for homeless students?
Also, BF Day has suffered for many years with having a bad reputation. Very few parents selected it as their first choice, and I know many people who moved rather than send their kids there. It's really too bad, since it is a great little school with a really strong staff.
I love BF Day. It is such a homey, warm school, both the building and the people. I think if Dr. Vaughn made sure there were strong Spectrum teachers there that some who don't get into JSIS and West Woodland would go to Day.
If I were homeless child I doubt I'd want to be sent across town to a designated "homeless school", with all the rest of the homeless kids in Seattle. That just seems so wrong to me. I understand that doing that could provide pooled resources into one building, and create a strong support system, but the tradeoff would be such a stigma for children attending.
Isn't it better for homeless kids to be closest to home (wherever that may be), and blend in as a normal child? Not shipped across town to the "homeless" school.
And if I wasn't homeless and lived in the BF day reference area and it housed the homeless program, I don't know that I would be so happy sending my kid there. It wouldn't feel like a neighborhood school (because a large cohort of kids wouldn't live in the neighborhood), playdates would be difficult, fund raising would be difficult, having advanced programs like Spectrum might have less of a chance of happening. There would be many bits and pieces that I would need to consider before sending my kid to a designated "homeless school", and I'd consider the same exact things if I was the homeless kid and was being sent there.
So it may not have all the bells and whistles? We have just accepted that we will need to supplement our son's public school experience with outside classes in language and art. It is a sad reality.
Maybe all BF Day needs is for a couple of enterprising parents to start the ball rolling.
The distinguishing factor on the tour between BF Day and the other schools in the cluster was not the quality of instruction or after school choices.
There were only two noticeable differences. One, there weren't very many parents touring. I take it that many in the reference area never even bothered to look at the school. And two, there weren't any parents helping with the tour.
The principal and the librarian did a fine job of conducting the tour, but it was notable that there wasn't a parent community supporting the school. Other than that I was impressed with the school at the time. I liked that they seemd to have a genuine commitment to their ALO program, unlike some schools I visited.
That said, if you are part of the BF Day community and you want the school to be more attractive for incoming families, I'd strongly recommend being there for the tour. I think that makes a big difference.
Yes, with a big popluation of kids communting by bus (and living far way) it is hard for parents to get involved. You are right that participation is lacking. I saw this firsthand when there was a playground clean-up. There were only two families out of the whole school that showed up to help. The PTSA board tries really hard to get parents involved, but it is hard. I think now that neighborhood kids will be assigned to B.F. Day, parent involvement could pick up.
Helen Schinske