Program Placement Proposal Time
It is Program Placement Proposal Time.
This is the time that comes each year when anyone can propose a program placement change. A proposal can be for the development of a new program, the replication of an existing program, or for the closure and/or relocation of an existing program anywhere in the district.
Here's how it works:
1. Use the form on the District web site to write up your proposal. The form can be found here. Anyone can submit a form - a member of the district staff, a principal, a teacher, or a member of the public.
2. Send in your form before the November 24 deadline. You can send it in via regular post or via email.
3. The Program Placement Committee will meet over the late fall and early winter. They will discuss the proposals (although there is no evidence to show that they actually discuss proposals from members of the public.)
4. The Program Placement Committee will offer the superintendent a list of the proposals and recommendations about whether she should approve or reject them. The committee has only ever recommended rejection of proposals from the public. Although the committee is supposed to offer a rationale for their recommendation, the rationale is often thin. They have frequently recommended rejecting proposals because "the committee does not recommend the proposal be adopted." Proposals are often rejected for rationale that is not supported by data. Proposals are often rejected for rationale that did not prove an impediment to other proposals being accepted. The entire process is political and corrupt.
5. The superintendent, in her sole discretion and without any potential for appeal, discussion or reversal, will unilaterally decide which program placement proposals to accept and which to reject. She might also stick in a few new ones of her own.
6. The new programs are announced prior to Open Enrollment.
Despite the pessimism expressed in this description, I have submitted a number of program placement proposals each of the past two years and I will submit program placement proposals again this year. I may not get them all done, so if you see one on my list that you like, you should submit a proposal for it as well. Don't rely on me to submit it.
Among the proposals I'm thinking of submitting:
Move north-end elementary APP to a north-end location.
Move the Washington Service Area Spectrum from Muir to Madrona K-8.
Make the Language Immersion programs into Option Programs for enrollment.
Make the Montessori programs into Option Programs for enrollment.
Re-purpose Roxhill as a K-5 Option School, perhaps duplicating the successful Thornton Creek model, perhaps as a Montessori.
Re-Open Fairmount Park K-5 in the Madison Service Area.
Put a language immersion program (that feeds to Denny) in the re-opened Fairmount Park.
Move the S.B.O.C. into the Van Asselt building.
Re-open Wilson-Pacific as an attendance area middle school. The programs now at Wilson-Pacific can move to Meany if the S.B.O.C. moves to Van Asselt.
Extend Van Asselt at the African American Academy into a K-8.
Move the Mercer Service Area Spectrum program from Hawthorne to Kimball.
Add an international program at Mercer middle school.
Add a language immersion program at Wing Luke (that feeds to Mercer).
Add a language immersion program at Sand Point (that feeds to Hamilton).
Duplicate the successful TOPS program somewhere, perhaps at Rainier View, Viewlands, Roxhill, or Van Asselt.
Duplicate the successful Salmon Bay program somewhere, perhaps at Pinehurst, Roxhill, or Van Asselt.
Duplicate the successful Thornton Creek program somewhere, perhaps at Viewlands, Roxhill or Van Asselt.
There's another one around where to add language immersion programs in the north. I'll have to go back through some old stuff to remind myself of it.
This is the time that comes each year when anyone can propose a program placement change. A proposal can be for the development of a new program, the replication of an existing program, or for the closure and/or relocation of an existing program anywhere in the district.
Here's how it works:
1. Use the form on the District web site to write up your proposal. The form can be found here. Anyone can submit a form - a member of the district staff, a principal, a teacher, or a member of the public.
2. Send in your form before the November 24 deadline. You can send it in via regular post or via email.
3. The Program Placement Committee will meet over the late fall and early winter. They will discuss the proposals (although there is no evidence to show that they actually discuss proposals from members of the public.)
4. The Program Placement Committee will offer the superintendent a list of the proposals and recommendations about whether she should approve or reject them. The committee has only ever recommended rejection of proposals from the public. Although the committee is supposed to offer a rationale for their recommendation, the rationale is often thin. They have frequently recommended rejecting proposals because "the committee does not recommend the proposal be adopted." Proposals are often rejected for rationale that is not supported by data. Proposals are often rejected for rationale that did not prove an impediment to other proposals being accepted. The entire process is political and corrupt.
5. The superintendent, in her sole discretion and without any potential for appeal, discussion or reversal, will unilaterally decide which program placement proposals to accept and which to reject. She might also stick in a few new ones of her own.
6. The new programs are announced prior to Open Enrollment.
Despite the pessimism expressed in this description, I have submitted a number of program placement proposals each of the past two years and I will submit program placement proposals again this year. I may not get them all done, so if you see one on my list that you like, you should submit a proposal for it as well. Don't rely on me to submit it.
Among the proposals I'm thinking of submitting:
Move north-end elementary APP to a north-end location.
Move the Washington Service Area Spectrum from Muir to Madrona K-8.
Make the Language Immersion programs into Option Programs for enrollment.
Make the Montessori programs into Option Programs for enrollment.
Re-purpose Roxhill as a K-5 Option School, perhaps duplicating the successful Thornton Creek model, perhaps as a Montessori.
Re-Open Fairmount Park K-5 in the Madison Service Area.
Put a language immersion program (that feeds to Denny) in the re-opened Fairmount Park.
Move the S.B.O.C. into the Van Asselt building.
Re-open Wilson-Pacific as an attendance area middle school. The programs now at Wilson-Pacific can move to Meany if the S.B.O.C. moves to Van Asselt.
Extend Van Asselt at the African American Academy into a K-8.
Move the Mercer Service Area Spectrum program from Hawthorne to Kimball.
Add an international program at Mercer middle school.
Add a language immersion program at Wing Luke (that feeds to Mercer).
Add a language immersion program at Sand Point (that feeds to Hamilton).
Duplicate the successful TOPS program somewhere, perhaps at Rainier View, Viewlands, Roxhill, or Van Asselt.
Duplicate the successful Salmon Bay program somewhere, perhaps at Pinehurst, Roxhill, or Van Asselt.
Duplicate the successful Thornton Creek program somewhere, perhaps at Viewlands, Roxhill or Van Asselt.
There's another one around where to add language immersion programs in the north. I'll have to go back through some old stuff to remind myself of it.
Comments
If you want an inclusion program, you better fill out the form. At a minimum it is the document of needs unmet, and district failure to provide an equitable process. And proof that you tried to get something. You never know when you might need that proof, Mirmac.
Sped Parent
How 'bout Sped PTSA present it. I'll run it by...
-Susan Sturms
"Put a language immersion program (that feeds to Denny) in the re-opened Fairmount Park".
Charlie- If this happens, you would relieve some of the overcrowding at the elementary level in the north end of WS, but having a program which feeds to Denny would further add to the MS/HS "feeder pattern imbalance" in West Seattle. Basically, Denny/Sealth would then receive seven feeder schools, and still only four to Madison/WSHS!
I agree that some kind of a draw would be important to attract new families if FP were re-opened (just like the NE families have asked for also). As of the Oct. 1st headcount there are 262 kids over capacity just from the 4 north end WS schools- that would be a great base for a new school.
IB/International focus makes a great combo draw for Denny/Sealth, (the poster children of the district), but we all scratch our heads why Madison/WSHS don't also have the same support from both the district and the school board.
Instead, this latest imbalance of feeder patterns cuts Madison/WSHS programs and services even more to the bone than the district average. These cuts make it even less of an appealing draw when you look at the 2015 projections, which is what parents with middle & elementary kids should be looking at.
The bottom line is that most families will take their default assignment and that will kill off the Madison/WSHS programs entirely.
I was hopeful that the new assignment plan might retain more of the neighborhood students (instead of being an exporter), but the feeder patterns must be re-aligned for this to be a reality. The rest of the fluff offered by the district/board yesterday (more open choice, dual draws, etc.) does absolutely nothing to improve the enrollment inequities.
But, it sure would help to also have a proper Spectrum program at Madison and a rigorous program at WSHS which would help convince kids to go to their neighborhood school instead of jumping ship.
Madison is, for the third year in a row, a 'School of Distinction.' Why is the district diverting students to other programs and starving a building that proves to be working for kids? It seems short-sighted.
SPS thinks to "improve" a school, they must starve it to death. It seems to work well in the SE area.
I think a more critical concern is whether the growth of the Madison program won't come at the expense of the Denny program.
Advanced Learning
Current 8th grade students enrolled at WMS or Hamilton in the Accelerated Progress Program receive an automatic assignment to Garfield.***
Oh and hey, read the funny footnote!
***Other students (including AHG students who are not enrolled in the Accelerated Progress Program at WMS or Hamilton for 8th grade) may request Open Choice seats to Garfield following the new student assignment plan guidelines but do not receive an automatic assignment.
That almost, for a second, makes it sound like Highly Gifted kids who are identified after 7th grade can join the cohort in HS. Almost!
Charlie- There doesn't seem to be much ground to worry about that, because any student wanting to go to Sealth will be smart enough to sign up for Denny also (there's even a proposal to give out-of-area kids prioity to Sealth rolling up from Denny). That's the whole "seamless" linked idea. Besides, the District has given absolutely no extra funds or support to start the Madison Spectrum program, so I'm not clear about your "every reason to believe" that the Madison Spectum program will grow into a viable program (at the expense of Denny?). What specifically are you referring to for this statement?
Additionally, we see now in the new data just released online that this year's 6th graders chose their attendance area/default assignment much more in the Denny/Sealth area (86% and 70%), compared to the Madison/WSHS area (73% and 49%). People are choosing programs with their feet still.
Also, with the program deep into a redesign, it seems unlikely that they would even look at this.
- Bilingual Community Member