Open Thread Friday
The end of another interesting week in SPS.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
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
Check on later in the day or over the weekend. Save Aunty's channel in your favorites.
Sneak Peek
Aunty's getting kinda old and sometimes needs a nap before posting.
I agree with Steve. I have a hard time figuring out what's what in "Aunty's Channel".
I take it that that District Scorecard I linked to was for last year?
Mathematics
and
Reading
As an assessment tool, MAP is not intended for this purpose.
My guess is that this was still in draft form. Don't know for certain.
I have often wondered, although use of evil doesn't seem to start in earnest until middle school or so.
Seriously, what is that? Peer Evals? Repeatedly misspelled? Or misunderstood?
Is that the whole score card? Just MAP scores? As someone else pointed out, what about other things?
Oh, that's right, TFA only, it appears, trains its people to use data and these sorts of testing systems to measure growth. That is the ley factor in their curriculum and their assessments, apparently, and also the way TFA, in training, are measured and counseled: "So, prospective conditional-cert recipient, how did that summer school lesson go? Let's look at the data. Please get out your MAP-like scores, your curriculum derived from the test questions, and we'll look at ways to make those numerical indices go up up up!"
shudder
I wondered about the elephant picture on page 15 (tansition Plan) of the PDF for the Board's Integrated Planning Workshop
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/board/10-11agendas/110310agenda/sappresentation.pdf
the image seems weirdly out of place per the contents and context...
crazy.
See it now before they pull it, people!
There's the new Transition 2011-12 link now on the Enrollment page (look for the orange circle).
Check out the 53 page "Key Facts & Data"- which has everything (by school/by grade level incl. in area/out of area) except for actual projections for next year & beyond (Tracy says they still working on it).
This will keep a lot of you busy for the weekend!
Does anyone know why it is on the chopping block (I can imagine any number of reasons, but don't know what the CA says is the reason)? Are there any meetings where alt loving parents can go advocate for it?
If they pull it, someone will complain that they've tampered with the record. It'll have to be there forever...
In that view, MC is a luxury. It's unfortunate, because MC is a great school for students to pull success out of what might have seem to be hopelessness.
Ah well, if the MC students would just stay in their regular ed classrooms, where they will be fully supported by gen ed teachers in every way, we wouldn't have this problem. Those dang gen-ed teachers! Why can't they keep kids in class, or in school! Must be that lack of quality everybody is talking about.
I offer introductory classes in architecture to students of all ages and I am offering a class this coming Thursday for students grades 3 through 8 on monuments.
This is the class description:
Monuments: We will look at monuments around the world and discuss why we build monuments.
There will be discussion on what is important to us as individuals, as a community, as a country and as world citizens. We will also talk about what gives a monument the appearance of importance, whether it is it's size, location, it's artistic form or other factors.
The students will then have an opportunity to design and build a monument in a location that is selected by the student.
There is additional information on the classes and a special walking tour at Architecture 101 .
It is based on the idea that an elephant in a room would be impossible to overlook; thus, people in the room who pretend the elephant is not there have made a choice. They are choosing to concern themselves with tangential or small and irrelevant issues rather than deal with the looming big one.
from wikipedia
TFA's pros and cons should not be the takeaway of this week. The larger issue is the disgusting backroom dealing that went on right under our public noses and under the noses of the teacher's union while they were in negotiations.
Like MGJ, who refuses to see that her NWEA board membership was WRONG, I feel certain that most members of the board, the staff, MGJ and the Gates Foundation, as well as TFA, unfortunately see nothing wrong with deliberately excluding parents, taxpayers and teachers in a District matter for no reason other than they didn't want the hassle of the conversation. Because that's what it comes down to. And that attitude is very scary as it is the OPPOSITE of what a public, democratic institution should be. You know...the PUBLIC in public schools.
So how to effectively make all parties listed above change their ways?
Someone enterprising (Melissa) ought to pitch this story to EdWeek, to The Washington Post and New York Times (which both cover a lot of national education matters.) It should be pitched as "Seattle School District Tries to Sneak TFA into Town." It's a juicy headline that should interest the national press.
The ensuing publicity wouldn't do any harm to the kids in our classrooms. That's paramount. But the PUBLIC embarrasment would sure be a corrective slap to the reputation of our superintendent, her staff and most of her board, the Gates Foundation, and frankly TFA.
So let's get smart. What other national blogs and media sources might pick this up? Huffington Post? Daily Kos? Readers, *please add to this list*. Melissa and Charlie, write down all the possibilities and start dialing and writing prior to the next board meeting. It gives this blog more exposure and it will prove to be a very effective means of getting us to a more democratic Public School system.
-skeptical-
What's interesting is these reports are likely always intended "for internal use only". Too bad this is a public agency that has to abide by "sunshine" laws.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/11/05/seattle-schools-to-unveil-report-cards-to-flag-failing-schools
feeble, stupid, unimaginative, unprofessional, not in keeping with the style/format...
dont know who taught Ms Libros that at such and such a point, place an unusual graphic hopefully to produce a bit of levity and to respark interest in your flagging audience....
Public speaking/presentation 101: if you cant pull something like this off well, better not to attempt it at all...
Absolutely bizarre...
And let me say that if you are gong to be "Anonymous" please give yourself a number so I and others are clear on who we are responding to...anyway, I've been thinking about this "community engagement " that TFA had with the faux roots organizations in Seattle because either De Bell or Maier brought up the question at the board meeting whether TFA had done that.
Ferguson and the TFA rep assured the board members that yes, they had spoken to the Alliance (you know that was a walk in the park), Seattle Foundation (trying to get funding), LEV and others. There was a ripple of laughs in the audience because it was so transparent that this was just a silly formality and god forbid they should speak to anyone IN the community like parents or other REAL teachers!
What is so ironic to me is how they reached out to all of the Gates and Broad backed organizations but have not, repeat NOT, engaged with parents in the schools who would be receiving these novice teachers.
Geez, I wonder why? Do you think some of the parents on the south end of town might get more than a little upset that they are getting basically second-rate glorified teaching assistants rather than experienced, trained and certidfied real teachers?
What is making me more furious by the minute is how they are so willfully ignoring the community of parents who are truly the stakeholders in the decisions made by the board.
Case in point, I was part of an e-mail thread that a TFA rep was on with board members, I asked a couple of questions and the rep apparently decided that I did not merit a response.
Well excuuuuse me!
My questions will be in the next post because I know that I am running out of space on this one.
(I am providing her e-mail address because she might respond to you, or maybe she won't. I think it depends more on whether you plan to give them money or not.)
"Janis,
I don't understand the relevance of the 2/3 number that you give.
In what capacity do these TFA, Inc. grads remain in the field of education? At what level? And how does that relate to having TFA, Inc. in Seattle?
From the Great Lakes study:
"Experience has a positive effect for both TFA and non-TFA teachers. Most studies find that the relatively few TFA teachers who stay long enough to become fully credentialed (typically after two years) appear to do about as well as other similarly experienced credentialed teachers in teaching reading; they do as well as, and sometimes better than, that comparison group in teaching mathematics.
However, since more than 50% of TFA teachers leave after two years, and more than 80% leave after three years, it is impossible to know whether these more positive findings for experienced recruits result from additional training and experience
or from attrition of TFA teachers who may be less effective."
One of the concerns that our community has is that these recruits make a commitment to TFA, and interestingly enough, that is what is stated, the commitment is not to our children or Seattle, the contract and commitment is with TFA, for two years. Then another recruit comes in for another two years. Our schools and communities need teachers who commit to the long haul with our children and their families and provide continuity in the child's life.
One other question while I have you here, the $4,000 for each recruit that is to be paid for training, is that per year or over the two year period?
Also, I heard the number of $40,000 come up last night during the Q and A period. What is that number regarding?
Dora"
Well, no answer for me because I guess that I don't count.Community engagement can only go so far as far as DeBell, the supe and TFA are concerned.
Below is their promo e-mail that they sent out.
"Seattle City Council member Bruce Harrell will join Tony B. Now is YOUR opportunity. If you feel as though YOUR voice has not been heard, call. If you've been waiting for the opportunity to express YOUR feelings, call. If YOU have experienced a bureaucratic nightmare in YOUR attempts to ensure that YOUR child is treated fairly and receives a safe and quality education, call. For WHATEVER your reasons, call and set the agenda for our upcoming shows examining the Seattle public school and Washington state public school systems!
This Sunday morning on StreetBeat hosted by Tony B, 8:00 am - 9:00 am
Call 206 421-9393 or toll free 1-877-933-9393
Listen at 93.3 on the FM dial!"
I would suggest calling in and letting this councilperson know what's going on. The best part is that it will get out to a larger audience this way.
Lots of weird stuff here but I need a clearer head to read it (when I'm not tired).
ALO, NSAP, VAX, LEV.... I try to keep up but as a semi-involved parent I'm often in the dark when I read these blog posts and comments. I can just imagine what a parent who's new to the blog must feel.
Thanks!
~Truly Scrumptious
And your idea is a great one. Sounds like something right up Charlie's alley.
See the data yourself
I think we should all send this link to the School Board.
Their true motivation
Yeah, that description they give for themselves is certainly one thing that makes me think that we should be in no rush to get Teach for America in our classrooms.
Teach For America is the national corps of top recent college graduates who commit to teach for at least two years in urban and rural public schools and become lifelong leaders in the effort to expand educational opportunity. Our mission is to build the movement to eliminate educational inequity by enlisting the nation's most promising future leaders in the effort.
The basic message TFA promotes over and over is that they are about building "leaders" to work for change rather than improving the quality of teachers in the districts where they serve.
If you look on their website they explain that they experience working with children is not important in a TFA applicant's history.
Experience working with children or teaching does not directly help or hurt a candidate's chances of admission
Experience leading organizations is.
The whole thing gives the impression of using kids in high poverty schools as stepping stones to leadership positions in education.
I know they mean to help kids in the long run. I'd rather we focus on doing what's best for the kids in those schools.
"Transition Plan 2011-12" link-
http://www.seattleschools.org/area
/implementation/index.dxml
(note- to find this link you have to go to the enrollment page, then another click on "Transition '11-'12")
New- (almost) link- there's now a "placeholder" link for last week's 11/02 Budget workshop materials on the Budget page. This link was promised to be online/live on 11/03. What's the hold up?... it's the same materials already presented at the workshop.
Budget 2011-12 link-
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/budget/
index.dxml
Why don't they have links to both of these hot issues on the SPS home page, like last year? Is there something to to hide? What happened to "Community Engagement"?
Wouldn't the Regional Enrollment meetings be a lot more meaningful if families read these reports in advance & had time to study the issues? Why the resistance?
(I was told that there are too many hot issues and everyone wants their favorite to be linked from the home page, so enrollment/transition won't rate a home page link!)
From Steve Zemke ( who is up for the chair of King County Democrats)
The NW Tree Grove of Douglas fir, western red cedar and Pacific Madrone trees at Ingraham High School is finally having its day in court after almost three years. The Hearing starts at 10:30 in King County Superior Court before Judge Doyle. Wish the trees well.
Experience working with children or teaching does not directly help or hurt a candidate's chances of admission
But the WAC for limited certification states:
(1) Conditional certificate.
(a) The purpose of the conditional certificate is to assist local school districts, approved private schools, and educational service districts in meeting the state's educational goals by giving them flexibility in hiring decisions based on shortages or the opportunity to secure the services of unusually talented individuals. The professional educator standards board encourages in all cases the hiring of fully certificated individuals and understands that districts will employ individuals with conditional certificates only after careful review of all other options. The professional educator standards board asks districts when reviewing such individuals for employment to consider, in particular, previous experience the individual has had working with children.
Yet the contract with TfA states:
C. Requesting Conditional Certificate
i. Seattle Public Schools agrees to request conditional certificates for all Teach For America corps members on the grounds that circumstances warrant the issuance of such certificates, as permitted by WAC 181.79A.231.
=================
This entire venture is just total BS.
The contract continues with:
Specifically, the circumstance which warrants the issuance of the conditional certificate is the district’s commitment to partnering with Teach For America as one of the strategies the district is employing to address the achievement gap.
======================
Are you kidding me?
That is the circumstance for conditionally certifying marginal training as adequate?
Where is the evidence that this is anything other than a "Fraud" to attempt to skirt the existing laws.
There is ZERO evidence that this is likely to positively impact the Achievement Gaps in Seattle.
Want to help close the Achievement Gaps? Then fire MGJ.
It's only got data for fall and winter of last year, but does rank the schools based on the percentage of students meeting "typical" growth. I take it that this is going to be the measure that SPS will use to measure teacher effectiveness.
What I notice with a cursory look over the data is that schools with very low performance overall often fall in the "above average" typical growth.
My take away from this is that this performance management push isn't going to have much of an effect on reducing the achievement gap.
The problem with the schools with low achieving students isn't really that they aren't meeting expected growth. The problem is that they have low achievement overall.
Resources should best be spent addressing the low achievement, not the growth metrics.
"Ah", but I hear you say, "wouldn't the growth metrics have to go up for achievement to increase?"
I suppose that's true, but from the data that I see just using performance management measures doesn't look like it can push the growth up to the levels needed.
I think what's need is probably more instructional time for kids who are way behind - summer school, significantly extended day, additional periods in middle and high school. Twiddling around with the details of instructional delivery within the normal model just isn't going to lift these kids up enough.
It may be that all this money spent on performance management should be better spent on increased instruction for kids who are behind.
Why don't we focus on that?
I'd like to see the responsibility and measures be pushed up to the district. The district holds the purse strings, as well as constrains the curriculum offered.
I think it's a change to the allocation of resources ultimately that will be what will help lift up kids who are falling behind. That's a district level responsibility.
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/newassign/garfield_book.pdf
Yes, there was mention of moving the Ballard HS line further south than 85th. This was mentioned in an attempt to alleviate Garfield crowding- Denny area would move to Ballard.
WSNorth- I am afraid you are correct. The District keeps trying to move Ballard into the Ingraham neighborhood.
Glad we're watching.
What school are your kids at?
There is time to organize your community, write board members, attend meetings, testify etc.
I don't get the logic of this proposed change. It displaces about 100 potential Ballard students to Ingraham, while only removing about 30 from the Garfield area. Seems to inconvenience many families while having minimal impact on the Garfield situation. Bad idea.
Ballard Parent
Glad to be of help. I've come to understand the workings of the district. Despite the fact that Garfield was having troubles...my instinct told me to check in with the district. My instinct was correct.
Yes, Melissa- it is always best to keep tuned! Who would of thought Garfield's overcrowding would attempt to displace Ballard residents.
The District wanted families to predictable a HS. Now while some families have predictability...others do not. don't think rigid HS boundaries will ever work.
But it really does seem the district is trying to sabotage high school APP by suggesting the Ballard boundaries be moved.
The only high school north of the Ship Canal with any space is Ingraham, which would be a poor choice as a half-city draw because the school is very poorly served by METRO.
The District could do what it is doing at the elementary level and make Garfield the north-end school with Rainier Beach or West Seattle the South-end school. Does anyone think that's a good idea? Anyone?
Moving APP would confirm every paranoid delusion of the APP community. So, of course, the District will do it.
"Anything and everything to keep APP at Garfield!"
Very good. This is exactly what the district wants. Parents against parents instead of putting the blame squarely where it belongs...on the district staff.
I have no idea if the APP community would prefer to be split in two or just dissolve at the end of 8th grade and each student choose which school will work for him/her. But yes, I believe the district wants APP out of Garfield (unless there are kids that live in that area).
But the district likes to just put something out there and watch as a program disintegrates, a program gets eliminated or whoops, one part of the NSAP makes life hard for more schools.
The classic line was Dr. Goodloe-Johnson saying the Montessori program at Ballard wasn't eliminated but there wasn't room for it anymore. Oh.
I am not advocating what should or should not happen. APP is not my forte. However, don't be fooled. This is exactly what the district wanted to happen.
It isn't the district pitting parent against parent. The district has had the right idea about this for many years.
Ballard Parent
Melissa: I was asking for an acronym glossary here on this blog, where the acronyms are thrown about freely and without definition within the post.
Thanks,
~Truly Scrumptious
:But the district likes to just put something out there and watch as a program disintegrates, a program gets eliminated or whoops, one part of the NSAP makes life hard for more schools."
If anyone wonders about this, take a look at what the District did to Summit, and what they're still doing to AS1.
Threaten closure and the program starts to come undone.
~Truly Scrumptious
Any of the first three fits with the district MO: crap on poor kids; crap on gifted kids; or create a problem and come up with a half-baked non-solution.
Signed, A skeptic
"Assessing every student and placing them according to ability sounds like tracking and discrimination…and we’ve moved light years away from that." HERE.
The dismantling of APP would surely match the MGJ agenda. Look for the demise of many of Garfield's current and past academic programs and decline in academic status in the future, under MGJ's faux leadership.
So, sure, you may relieve the overcrowding. Because many people who are right now very happy to get a berth at a well-regarded public high school may decide not to use it after all.
I am writing to you because your son or daughter is in the Accelerated Progress Program(APP) in 8th or 9th grade, and we have important, time sensitive information to consider. This fall Garfield High School is over capacity, and this has important implications for APP participants. On November 3, the School Board was briefed about the extent of the over-crowding and the likelihood that things will worsen unless changes are made. The Board plans to make a decision to resolve this issue in January. With an enrollment of 1788, there are 156 more students at Garfield than its functional capacity. APP enrollment in grades 9-12 has increased from 375 in 2005, to 455 today, and it could be 544 next fall. There are also large classes in the pipline at elementary and middle schools. Although many factors contribute to Garfield's overcrowding problem, APP will likely be a part of the solution. APP-related solutions that wre presented to the Board include creating additional APP pathway in 2011-2012:
1.For new 9th graders, based on residence, to another school
2. For 9th and upper grade level students, based on residence, to another school
3. For 9th and some 10th graders, based on choice, to a new program at another school
A new APP pathway based on residence(solutions 1&2) means redirecting students who live in one area of the city to a different high school with sufficient space and the availability of appropriately accelerated classes for these students. The pathway could affect only new 9th graders next fall, or it could be applied to upper grade students, as well.
A new program based on choice (solution 3) means establishing an alternative advanced option at a different high school. Offering a new challenging and attractive program would allow APP students to divide themselves by choice and thereby help create a new option for academically highly gifted students while preserving a strong yet manageably-sized program at Garfield. The new program being strongly considered is to off APP students the choice to enroll in the International Baccalaureate (IB) program at Ingraham High School at an accelerated pace.
Five years age, Bellevue School District developed a high school option for their highly gifted students. At the Gifted High School Program (GHSP) at Interlake High School, gifted students take core academic classes together and electives with other students. In 10th grade, they begin the two-year IB Dipolma program that all other students typically begin in 11th grade. Earning the IB Diploma requires completion of six college-leve courses and exams, as well as a 4000 work essay. In 12th grade, GHSP students take two college courses at Interlake as well as electives, and complete an internship with a partnering business or institution.
(continued on next post)
In 2010, GHSP sent its first seniors off to many selective colleges. Interlake HS is now producing more National Merit Scholars than Garfield. GHSP has sparked a level of rigor at Interlake that has led to a higher standard of academic excellence than a neighboring Bellevue and Newport High Schools, schools recently recognized by Newsweek as among the top high schools in the US. Along the way, GHSP students have woven their way into all aspects of student life at Interlake.
Ingraham High School started its IB program seven years ago and now graduates 30 diploma candidates annually. Approximately half of their 11th and 12th grade students are enrolled in one or more IB courses. Their faculty has the training, interest, and expertise to accommodate many more. Additionally, their IB Diploma candidates have a strong record of gaining admission and scholarships to top local and national universities and being leaders in a wide variety of co-curricular activities. Recently, I joined a leadership team from Ingraham and leaders from the APP Advisory Committee on a visit to Interlake. We interviewed their principal, IB coordinator, gifted parent liaison, and a number of seniors in the GHSP. We also visited classrooms and have reviewed their student achievement data. There can be a little doubt that a similar program offered at Ingraham could become an exciting alternative to APP at Garfield.
Offering choice would allow interested students to continue to attend Garfield and also provide an opportunity for students intrigued by the challenge of the IB program to attend Ingraham. The proposal to offer students a choice, however, critically depends on a sufficient number of students interested and willing to make a commitment.
This letter is an invitation to all 8th and 9th grade students and their parents to work with the Advanced Learning Office to explore your interest and input in the development of an IB option for highly gifted high school students similar to Bellevue's GHSP at Interlake. A new program is best developed by those who are excited by the prospect. In the absence of interest, APP pathways to different high schools sites may simply be based on where students live when the School Board make assignment plan changes in January.
To learn more about the possibilites of a new program at Ingraham, please come to an APP community forum to be held from 6:30 to 8:00 pm in the auditorium at the Ingraham High School, 1810 N135 ST, on Wednesday, November 17. We will discuss the option more fully, answer your questions, and work to summarize your interests and concers as we move forward.
I can see worrying if you have an APP-qualified kid and you live in the south end, but if I were one of those "who have kids who would attend Garfield who may not be APP-qualified" I think I would find something else to worry about (Your kids are young, right? There's plenty.).