Final Word on Coffee Chat
Okay, I checked when these times first came out for the Superintendent's Coffee Chats. The news release still says 8:10-9:10 a.m. I meant to call today and didn't but several people say it is 9-10 a.m. for tomorrow's Coffee Chat at Jane Addams (and have an e-mail from Phil Brockman, NE Regional director, that says so).
It would be nice if it were correct at the district's website but I'll go with the 9 am time.
It would be nice if it were correct at the district's website but I'll go with the 9 am time.
Comments
An angry parent, as we have tried to get the time right to communicate to our school and she has changed the time on the calendar four times now.
Per the Communications lady it was discussed today at a meeting with the Superintendent about the multiple - "mistakes" about the time.
Apparently, the Super. has a meeting at 10 am that they are currently trying to move.
Really long story short -- she (the Super.) will try to stay until 9:30 or later if possible.
As this is just the latest in a long series of back and forths -- of course don't know who to believe.
This is incredibly disrespectful and that it has gone on and on despite repeated requests for the "real" time.
She is doing all ten in the form of the Welcome Back meetings and the Coffee Chats. She will fulfill her commitment entirely in September, October, and November and then be allowed to go the rest of the year - until next August - without doing any more.
I'd like to hear what questions were asked.
Other topics as expected - ICS not receiving enough classroom support, overcrowding in NE at elementary and MS, dismal communication with families, future of Jane Addams (answer to the last one - we'll know by January the 3-5 year plan.)
Several topics about MAP - 1)as a prerequisite for spectrum/APP the timeline makes no sense (answer: apply now anyway then see what the scores are) and is inherently unfair, more about computer access in early grades. 2) Proctoring - varies considerably across schools, maybe even within schools. Parents who had witnessed testing at two schools confirmed very different testing environment.
MGJ will get back to us on how they arrived at the 85% criteria for APP, and the reliability/validity data from NWEA for K-2 and 3-5 tests.
She did refuse to answer Melissa's question about the sustainability of a TFA program that was "free" for now because some foundation was supporting it.
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/board/index.dxml
Link to Seattle channel 21 only has 9/15 meeting.
In regards to overcrowding in the NE and the request to be proactive in planning -- the Super. said that the 3-5 year plan out this Dec. or Jan. would outline plans for future MS capacity in the NE.
Also mentioned there "might" be boundary changes sooner than later.
If there are to be changes I respectfully request that consideration/rules be in place in regards to siblings so that the issue of split families will not be perpetuated with each adjustment -- causing grief for downtown and all of us families with more than one child.
The example I have is the boundary between View Ridge and John Rogers.
This year under the NSAP the boundaries for View Ridge were nearly doubled in size - extending largely north into the former realm of John Rogers.
This year per family survey - View Ridge was to have an out of boundary sibling problem -- and they did. Per family survey - next year John Rogers and also Wedgwood are due to have a big uptick in out of area siblings.
As these three schools share boundaries - any adjustment to the boundary of one will of course impact the others. If the 'parent known' sibling surge is not taken into account as one of the factors...who knows how much of a revolt might result?