Disqus

Friday, April 01, 2011

Open Thread Friday

I thought about putting up a couple of April Fools jokes but I thought the concern about our district, its ethics, the budget and everything is so serious, it's just not worth it.

One story (that I had hoped WAS a joke) is that one of the Jersey Shore denizens, "Snooki" is getting paid, via student body funds, $32 to talk to Rutgers University.  Meanwhile, Rutgers is paying Nobel prize-winning novelist Toni Morrison $30K for their commencement address in May. 

You can't make this stuff up.

65 comments:

Salander said...

April Fool's joke? The SEA reported to members yesterday that the some folks in Olympia are proposing to cut the school year by20 days.

Has anyone else heard this?

mirmac1 said...

Anyone know why there's two Audit & Finance committee meetings next week?

Anonymous said...

Transportation letters have begun arriving. I bet some people are hoping it is a joke.

-slp

Chris S. said...

Just a reminder about Monday's forum: We are having a gathering for SPS families to learn about and discuss standardized testing (MAP, MSP, HSPE.) The location we got is not all that convenient for south & west Seattle residents, but I hope some of you will come. We would like to hear from representatives of every school, and are compiling information about how the tests are administered (in what space? who is the proctor?) so even if you can’t make it physically, contact me at stewcc at hotmail d0t c0m to have your voice heard. We'll also have some terrific materials including information and charts a parent has made from NWEA data correlating RIT scores with WA grade-level standards.

Meeting info:
Parent Perspectives on Standardized Testing
Monday Apr 4, 6-8 pm, Thornton Creek cafeteria, 7711 43rd Avenue NE

Agenda:
~6 ~10-min presentations:
National perspective
Classroom assessment: the big picture
Direct & indirect costs of MAP
Usefulness of MAP to parents
Opting out/ Parental Rights
Interpreting student’s MAP scores, relationship between MAP and MSP

~60 min for discussion

Lawton Spectrum Parent said...

Spectrum at Lawton for next year will be changed from self-contained to cluster grouping. Dina Brulles from Paradise Valley SD in Arizona came to Lawton and explained her approach regarding gifted ed to staff and later to parents. Spectrum parents in general are not pleased and the district will change the program back to self-contained if Spectrum scores suffer as a result of this new delivery method. For the details:
http://lawtonelementary.org/2011/03/spectrum-at-lawton-and-spectrum-proposal

Salander said...

A GRAND BARGAIN for education reform.
http://www.cgp.upenn.edu/ope/22_tfft.html

In an earlier thread there was discussion about "coaches" and what their function is. SPS bought into the Danielson Group as their new Holy Grail for training and evaluating teachers. The coaches exist to support the principals in this wholesale conversion of the entire teaching staff--starting with the most senior teachers.

Lori said...

Salander, I had heard from a few parents who lobby in Olympia that a school year cut of 5 days was in the works, but this was back when the legislators were revising the current year's budget.

I have not heard about a 20 day reduction in the school year, but, honestly, it doesn't shock me. The budget forecasts are even worse than projected a few months ago. I certainly hope it doesn't come to that, but maybe that's just the sort of shocking change people need to see if we ever hope to have our citizens recognize that our tax structure in WA is a complete joke. You get what you pay for, and if you don't pay for anything, you get nothing.

Salander said...

Lori-

I can't imagine that parents would put up with a 20 day cut. Talk about a child care nightmare!
But maybe that is the kind of shock that is needed in order to get funding sufficient and stable.

Anonymous said...

20 day cut! Talk about lowering the bar!

Mr Ed

Melissa Westbrook said...

The Death of Spectrum, from a letter from Dr. Vaughn to Lawton parents:

"The district’s Advanced Learning Office considers Cluster Grouping a well-founded approach for
serving smaller than classroom-sized groups of our Academically Gifted students. This model is also a reasonable compromise between those at Lawton wanting only self-contained Spectrum
and those wanting no grouping at all. Our office is also working with other schools that are developing Spectrum programs to implement the same model."

Spectrum&GenEd Parent said...

i was somewhat on board with the lawton's concept.. as a parent of specturm and non-spectrum kids, i can see both sides of the argument. spectrum as is today (+1 grade reading and math curriculum only in elementary) really doesn't do much towards making self-contained classrooms beneficial. however...

1) this is a badaid for the fact that at popular "spectrum" schools, there aren't enough spectrum seats available for all spectrum kids. This is the problem. As is addressing the kids that are "high achieving" in just reading, but not math, or vice versa. unless they qualify for spectrum (and now must have the 87+ in reading PLUS math MAP to do so), in most schools they cannot receive the instruction they deserve in their stronger subject.

2) what is up with that class room grouping?? am i really reading it properly that Spectrum-identified kids will ONLY be placed in classrooms with underachieving kids (classroom 1 and 2 in the 2nd letter example)? then go walking to a +1 grade math class? and the kids aren't going to realize who is which in that classroom? i thought the whole idea was to remove barriers/labels of spectrum, vs non, etc? basically that turns spectrum kids into TA's, right?!

Spectrum and GenEd Parent said...

Melissa - I hear View Ridge is close to following suit. Not sure if that is a rumor, or ??

But it would have been nice for these things to have been finalized before choice open enrollment, and parents made choices to move their kids to those schools expecting self-contained next year.

GreyWatch said...

We received transportation notices for our two kids the other day. The kids are one grade apart, attend the same school, and live in the same household. One's transportation status is "Walk" and the other's is "Neighborhood Bus."

They both currently walk, use metro and/or carpool with neighbors to the school, the same one they'll be attending next year. Was surprised we rec'd a transportation notice at all.

SP said...

Salander- can you find out more from SEA about the proposed cut of 20 days? (a bill # would be best, or who the proposal was coming from)? 20 days cut is insane- that's almost 10% of school days.

I do know that there has been a proposed cut for 5 days in the legislature which still was being considered, optional for districts. But it could NOT be used in Seattle, as all the waivers which were just approved by the state (SBE) had a condition that if the legislature passed such a bill, that the approved waivers would have to be cut by the same amount of days (rather than cutting more instructional days).

SP said...

re: High School Open Choice Seats (revised, once again!)

The SPS Enrollment page at the bottom now has an updated version of the HS Open Choice seats, completely different. It appears that the 1st version did not "project" any kids leaving the area schools, so the results were not even close to being a "best effort" estimate. Garfield is the only school which stayed the same, at 0% available. Sealth is now listed as projected 19% available open choice seats (instead of 0% originally). RBHS, Hale & Ingraham now are listed as 48%-49% (instead of 10%). What a difference!

From the new cover letter:
HIGH SCHOOL OPEN CHOICE SEATS FOR 2011‐12 (updated March 29, 2011)
• The original posting of the HS Open Choice chart included only the guaranteed Minimum
number of available seats if NO attendance area students go to another high school
through Open Choice.
• The Minimum information by itself does not reflect the whole picture. The chart has been
updated to include the Estimated Available number of seats, taking into account that some
attendance area students will leave their attendance area school and go to another
attendance area school through Open Choice. (See pages 2-3 below.)
• With this additional information, families will have a more accurate picture about availability of
Open Choice seats for 2011‐12 assignments.
• Following the updated chart, information is also provided showing the actual Open Choice
assignments for 2010‐11. This shows the “in/out” impact of high school students changing
schools through Open Choice. This information is taken from the Annual Enrollment Report:
2010‐11 Data (January 2011). (See page 4 below.)

Melissa Westbrook said...

SP, I was going to do a separate thread on that.

Spectrum and Gen Ed parent, View Ridge already has their own version of semi-self-contained Spectrum.

I have to laugh at Dr. Enfield saying we want "Spectrum to be Spectrum to be Spectrum" and this kind of crazy quilt stuff is happening.

Anonymous said...

View Ridge has "blended Spectrum" at least in the lower grades.

StepJ said...

Have school bell times been posted yet?

To clarify - not looking for bus arrival/departure but the actual bell times for next year.

Thank you!

Unknown said...

Complimenting SPS here. In the past, when using open enrollment the whole District got sent their letters telling them of their new school assignment on the same day. Typically in May, as I recall. This is obviously necessary when the desired school is one that always overenrolls, but it made no sense to me that those of us choosing unpopular options would have to wait.

Today my daughter got a notice confirming her HS assignment. We completed the Open Enrollment paper work on the first day. Our reference area school is the over-popular Ballard, and she wanted the IB program at Ingraham. We're happy, because we have certainty. She's happy, because she can sign up for classes "for real." Ballard is happy, because it knows for sure that her seat is now available for a student who wants that school.

Nicely done SPS.

seattle citizen said...

Rosie, it sounds like the kerfuffle over published available seats might be merely that the district published what was thought to be available before they got enrollment forms, and now they have published revised numbers, saying with more exactitude what is open? I agree with you, if this is the case, that hat would be a good thing. Unless I'm missing something; I'm always suspicious these days that I'm missing something. Thanks for sharing

SP said...

Open enrollment is from March 15- April 15th, so enrollment time is still open. Does that mean its now first come/first serve on open choice seats? I'm glad to hear for Rosie's daughter getting her HS acceptance letter, but for parents waiting until closer to the deadline does that mean no equal chances for those seats? When did they change this system?

StepJ said...

Per the Bryant website, Gayle Everly will not finish out the year or return to SPS.

Kim Fox will be the only Principal at Bryant.

anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
anonymous said...

Wow. Gayle Everly won't even finish out the year at Bryant? And she's not coming back to SPS next year?

Bryant will only have one principal next year, as will RBHS!

Could it be that Dr. Enfield is being responsive to what the community has been asking for? Is she rolling up her sleeves and doing what needs to be done?

How refreshing!

dan dempsey said...

Salander, Thanks for the Heads up on the GRAND BARGAIN.......

Danielson Group:

Charlotte Danielson has taught at all levels, from kindergarten through college, and has worked as an administrator, a curriculum director, and a staff developer. In her consulting work, Danielson specializes in teacher quality and evaluation, curriculum planning, performance assessment, and professional development. She is the author of Enhancing Professional Practice (2007), Teaching for Understanding (1996), Teacher Evaluation to Enhance Professional Practice (2000), Enhancing Student Achievement (2002), and Strengthening the Profession Through Teacher Leadership (2006), all published by ASCD. In addition, she has written several Collections of Performance Tasks and Rubrics, published by Eye on Education.

NOTE THIS IS A GRAND BARGAIN for
Education Reform

and notice the reference to:
CHOOSING A VALUE-ADDED MODEL
"Case Studies: Overview | Dallas | Houston | Plano

THE NEW REWARD STRUCTURE

===============

So it is as if MGJ never left.......

Exactly why Director Patu voted against Enfield as Interim Superintendent.

seattle citizen said...

Salander and Dan, the Grand Bargain website Salander posted has, in teeny letter at the bottom, a link to sponsors, wherein we discover that it is sponsored, the "website is the product of a year long effort by OPE, underwritten by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to provide policy makers and practitioners with the resources they need to implement and sustain fundamental reform. In earlier stages, the effort has also been funded by both the Annenberg Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation."

I'm shoked, shocked, I tell you!

TFA Tacoma said...

TFA extends into Tacoma.

See LEV web. site.

seattle citizen said...

That shocks me too, TFA Tacoma. I'm shocked! TFA in Tacoma? NO way! Who'd a' thunk it?

Spectrum and GenEd Parent said...

Melissa - re: VR, grades 1-2 is blended (with walk-to-math), however 3-5 has continued to be self-contained, and that is what I'm hearing could go the way of Lawton next year (and could be what Vaughn is referencing?)

My point is the situation is so flawed either way, particularly now that parents are filling out choice forms expecting one program, potentially getting another.

SP said...

Rosie,
Are you sure that your letter isn't a "confirmation" of registration letter (as opposed to assignment confirmation)? I just talked with several parents who also got a confirmation of registration letter today, but not an actual assignment to a different school.

Anonymous said...

VR does not have a model, they adapt according the their numbers in any particular year. Walk to Math has been implemented in 1st and 2nd grades for the past three years only. In the past grades 3-5 were pull-out for Spectrum kids, currently it is self-contained classrooms. Next year? Not even the principal knows what it is going to look like.
VR parent

anonymous said...

I don't see how Rosie's child could possibly be "assigned" to any school other than her neighborhood school, since open registration is ongoing through April 15th. The district has not yet received all applications so couldn't possibly have begun making assignments. Open enrollment is not first come first served. After open enrollment concludes the district processes all "on time" applications at the same time. I think Rosie must be mistaken.

mirmac1 said...

Hey,

I just got a really nice email from Robert Boesche, thanking me for my budget idea! He said he would consider it! :o)

anonymous said...

Wow mirmac1! First Gayle Everly ((Co-principal) leaving Bryant and SPS immediately. Then the announcement of RBHS moving to one principal next year. Now a reply from boesche thanking a citizen for their budget recommendations.

Could there really be a culture shift happening?

I'm getting goose bumps!

mirmac1 said...

Yeah I know! I think I'm going to have happy dreams tonight!

seattle citizen said...

Though I continue to be critical and cynical about the external forces injecting themselves into SPS, after reading many of the comments the last month or so, I, too am hopeful there is a culture change going on.
Yea!

Melissa Westbrook said...

Not to be a cynic but I believe Ms. Everly will be work in administration next year. So they just moved her.

anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
anonymous said...

Melissa, what makes you believe that Gayle Everly will be working in administration? Where are you getting this information?

Here is an excerpt from her goodbye letter. It is posted on the Bryant website.

"I want you to know that I will be on leave for the rest of the school year and I will not be returning to Bryant or Seattle Schools."

Lori said...

Neighbors who attend Bryant told me that Ms. Everly had been on medical leave for several weeks before announcing her resignation/retirement. I'm not sure this change represents the new administration doing anything proactive about personnel costs as has been suggested here.

Truth be told, the community never asked for or expected a co-principal and had been interviewing for a vice-principal last year when MGJ made the appointment.

I've heard that the logistics didn't work well, as you can imagine. If principals needed to attend a meeting downtown, both would have to go, whereas in the past, if the principal was off-site, the head teacher was still in the building. That's just one example. Hopefully the district has learned from this experience that co-principal positions are probably not ideal, from a management or HR/cost perspective.

Anonymous said...

Rosie,

Is your daughter in the Hamilton International program?

This might account for her getting into Ingraham early through the International pathway.

Your daughter will love Ingraham.

Ingraham Parent

Anonymous said...

An actual thoughtful response from SPS!

I wrote Dr. Enfield about the incoherency of the order of events for entering 9th graders next year.

1) Open choice enrollment begins
2) Misinformation about seat availability provided.
3) Transportation information provided.
4) Students sign up for classes at a school they have no intention of attending.
5) Information about open seat availability revised.
6) Open choice enrollment ends.
7) Private school decisions due.
8) SPS assignments finalized, or
9) Waitlisted for a long, hot summer.

She actually acknowledged this needs some work! Sure beats the "you must be too stupid to understand our logic" of the previous super and still employed staff!!!!!!!

Signed, too close to home

seattle citizen said...

Nice, Too Close! A reply from the superintendent AND an acknowledgement that things need attention.

Becoming more hopeful.

dan dempsey said...

Melissa,

Good call on the rejection of April Fools’ Day Jokes. The concern about ethics, budgets, and processes is not just an SPS concern. I have the same concern for the legislature and the judicial system.

At least a person or two has taken serious issue with my actions and views, consider the following, which I believe supports my actions => former WA Supreme Court Chief Justice Phil Talmadge wrote:
----
”Washington courts have uncritically employed an artificial paradigm for statutory construction. Despite ferment in the federal courts and scholarly journals on the proper role of the judiciary in interpreting statutes, Washington courts have not assessed whether its existing
paradigm adequately implements legislative intent,
the theoretical touchstone for the courts. Moreover, the courts' application of the paradigm is inconsistent and episodic. Hence, it is difficult to determine what rules actually apply at what time.


Additionally Talmadge wrote:

[t]he dictionary definition rule, which says a court should follow a recognized dictionary's definition of terms unless the legislature has provided a specific definition;

and the "shall" rule, which indicates that the term "may" is permissive, and does not create a statutory duty, but the term "shall" usually creates an imperative obligation unless unconstitutional or contrary to legislative intent
.

dan dempsey said...

The King County Superior Court has neglected the “shall rule” and has not offered even an explanation of why it has done so. It is particularly difficult to see how in the failure to enforce the imperative obligation of RCW 28A 645.020, the court saw either unconstitutional or contrary to legislative intent.

RCW 28A 645.020: Within twenty days of service of the notice of appeal, the school board, at its expense, or the school official, at such official's expense, shall file the complete transcript of the evidence and the papers and exhibits relating to the decision for which a complaint has been filed. Such filings shall be certified to be correct.

As the legislation contains an 8-word last sentence with the “Shall” imperative, how can the Superior Court choose to ignore the statute and without explanation?

Within twenty days of service “Shall File” has also been ignored without explanation by King County Superior Court judges.

dan dempsey said...

I am going to spend the $280 to appeal the Randy Dorn recall sufficiency hearing decision.

Next I shall find out if the Court thinks the Governor has an obligation to follow the Constitution Washington State.

Anonymous said...

Put me in the "barely hanging on" category, but, Dan is there a way we could send you something to help with some of these fees?

Signed, barely hanging but would like to help.

Atlanta Roofing said...

Snooki doesn’t even deserve the right or privilege to have her name in the same sentence with Toni Morrison!! And never thought in my entire life that I would read anything that included both Snooki and Toni Morrison in the same vein of discussion, but props to Rutgers for making it.

dan dempsey said...

Here is my third try to get this to stick. Seems to be going to Cyber-Wasteland....

Now we have a similar action in Pierce County Superior Court in the Randy Dorn “Recall Sufficiency Hearing” of March 30, 2011. RCW 28A.655.071 contains the following:

(2) By January 1, 2011, the superintendent of public instruction shall submit to the education committees of the house of representatives and the senate:

(a) A detailed comparison of the provisionally adopted standards and the state essential academic learning requirements as of June 10, 2010, including the comparative level of rigor and specificity of the standards and the implications of any identified differences; and

(b) An estimated timeline and costs to the state and to school districts to implement the provisionally adopted standards, including providing necessary training, realignment of curriculum, adjustment of state assessments, and other actions.


Judge Beverly Grant ruled the “By January 1, 2011” was directory and not an imperative. Her justification was Niichel v. Lancaster, which I see as an attempt to apply “Case Law” where it does not apply.

The legislature writes laws, which are apparently unintelligible to the judiciary as well as former Chief Justice Talmadge and me.

More information on this is available at the bottom of this webpage.

Unknown said...

SP -- Specifically, I got an enrollment package from Ingraham HS. Again, it's not a "popular" school. It's not surprising to me that SPS would quickly respond to those of us who want into a school that is less popular. It makes equal sense that they wait until the deadline passes to figure out who gets to go to the "popular" schools in their choice seats.

dan dempsey said...

Dear Barely Hanging on,

If you wish to send a few bucks, you can PayPal to dempsey_dan@yahoo.com or my address 1330 7th Ave SE, Olympia, WA 98501-1622

I have the Gov. Gregoire recall coming up in a couple of weeks. {Note Recalls are free but appeals cost money} I will be filing the Supreme Court appeal in the Dorn recall case in about a week.

Anyone who finds my recall filings for Dorn or Gregoire as harassment.... Read the filings and explain how these are not legally justified.

I would say that Dorn's was in fact legally sufficient, which is why I am appealing.

Megan Mc said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rufus X said...

re: Rosie & Ingraham enrollment -

I'm really confused. The district's open enrollment site still says "Open Enrollment is March 15-April 15, 2011. Applications may be submitted at any time during that period, there is no benefit to submitting an application either earlier or later during Open Enrollment. All applications received during Open Enrollment are processed together after April 15, 2011."

Can someone point me to information that Ingraham's new program is playing by different rules than the rest of us applying during open enrollment? Or are there facts I'm missing, like maybe there was a boundary shift that incorporated Rosie's home address into the Ingraham zone when it had previously been a Ballard zone? I don't want to call the enrollment office and be all "I hear you're already assigning open enrollment students, whassupwithdat?" if we're missing some key info points here.

Rufus X said...

Also heard - 8th grader rising to 9th (not APP) whose assignment for 9th would be Franklin due to the boundary shift northward effective 2011-2012 (NSAP Area 1 Garfield/Franklin boundary), but applied for and has been assigned to Garfield.

I have little confidence that the district is following their own "we process the applications all at once after Apr15" protocol.

anonymous said...

"SP -- Specifically, I got an enrollment package from Ingraham HS."

OK, so Rosie's daughter didn't get an official school assignment letter from the district. Whew. She got an "enrollment package" from Ingraham. Those are two very different things.

Maybe the district advised the school of whom, thus far, requested Ingraham as their first choice? Since Ingraham had almost 200 empty seats last year, the school could pretty safely assume that these students would be assigned to them, and perhaps they were being proactive in sending out the enrollment package??

Who knows?

Unknown said...

I stand in awe of how the conspiracy theorists at this blog worked so hard to turn my own bit of personal good news into some "the District isn't following its own rules (again!!!!)" scandal.

Maybe that's why this blog has so much whining and griping -- because even good news gets morphed beyond recognition in just a few comments. Sure makes me leery of ever saying anything positive here again.

Bird said...

Rosie,

Is the IB program traditionally underrolled at Ingrahm?

Dorothy Neville said...

Rosie, I am not sure it is conspiracy theory here whining. I think it is mostly befuddlement as to the timing. How can they possibly send out enrollment packets before open enrollment is over? They haven't done a good job historically predicting what schools will fill, so it seems premature to send that out. It doesn't fit with any stated procedures. If it is a new procedure, when was it developed and what is their metric for deciding who they can accept before open enrollment is over?

That's how I read Rufus X in particular. If his evidence about a student in the Franklin area who has already gotten accepted to Garfield is accurate, then eyebrows really ought to be raised.

So is it good news that you got enrollment package from Ingraham already? Does that ensure that your child is accepted? I think folks here are more skeptical than whining. Your interpretation may vary, of course. Time will tell if this is a phenomenon that is good or shows some process issues somewhere.

Rufus X said...

Nobody's belittling anyone's personal bit of good news. Just because someone points out a possible discrepancy in what the district says and what their practice is or may be and asks questions, that doesn't mean the person is a conspiracy theorist nor are there any veiled insults for the one whose story pointed out the possible discrepancy.

I went through the process a few years ago and now that I'm here again, the process is different. That previous point of reference has shifted. So when the district says A and someone else says actually it's B, it's reasonable to ask questions. Asking those questions doesn't mean anyone needs to take it personally. Sheesh.

Unknown said...

Bird -- the IB Program has no upper or lower numbers limit. No one is "admitted into" the program as a freshman, in the way that, for example, Ballard admits students into one of their various well-loved academies. My understanding is that over 60% of the students at Ingraham take an IB class during their tenure there, so in that sense the majority of kids are in the IB program. A smaller number complete the full requirements of the diploma, a number that has varied between around 40 to around 70 in more recent years.

If 300 incoming 9th graders all asked to take honors courses, they would add more sections of honors classes, and offer fewer traditional classes. Again, confirm that with the principal, but that's always what I've heard at PTSA meetings.

Unknown said...

Dorothy, thinking about your "befuddlement about timing," at least one HS (Ballard) has sent counselors out to at least one MS (Salmon Bay) to get kids who received Ballard assignment letters signed up for classes. This happened about 2 weeks ago.

Personally, it makes sense to me. You can't always do things in a perfectly linear order. Since the vast majority of kids who got an assignment letter will end up at their assigned school, getting a start on understanding what courses those students are going to take makes sense to me. Waiting until whenever the final letters goes out makes an already busy time for counselors (year end/graduation) beyond crazed.

Similarly, letting kids who want to go to an underenrolled school know they are in makes equal sense to me. But then I've never been a person to define fairness to mean "absolutely lock step equal treatment for all at all times." Fairness is context dependent, and sometimes, being efficient when possible is the most fair option.

Unknown said...

One final thought, I take with a complete and large grain of salt any second hand story about what happened to some other student. Thus Rufus's report of what he/she 'heard' happened to someone else, not his or her own child, is entirely likely to be wrong, and certainly shouldn't be the basis for speculating about what the District is up to.

Mine was a first person account, so I was able to clarify when asked. Using a fact, (my story) , adding what might or might not be true, then speculating about what the District is or is not doing is where I move towards conspiracy.

Sorry for three separate posts.

Maureen said...

Rosie, I'm still not completely clear. Did you get a letter telling you that your child has been assigned to Ingraham or did you just get materials so you can say which classes she would like to take if she does get assigned there?

Unknown said...

Maureen, the latter. We got a packet that appears to have been mailed from Ingraham HS that contained all the necessary info for my student to select courses.

Rufus X said...

Rosie, I know you've got your feathers all ruffled up, and I'm not trying to rain on your parade. But I believe that if you have not received a letter from the district itself saying "Rosie Jr. has been assigned to School XYZ", then Rosie Jr is not assigned to School XYZ yet. Is it possible the enrollment packages were mailed to prospective students, based on a previous list you may have signed up for? Maybe the school gets the contact info from the district of who has applied so far and sends material early?

Despite my lack of confidence in the district's ability to follow their own rules, I want to believe that they do. Maybe others do as well, and that's why we're asking so many questions. It's not to burst your bubble, and it's likely Rosie Jr. will be assigned to Ingraham. That will certainly be good news for you. But it's not really justified to fault the skeptics who want the district to do what they say they'll do. And the district has said they will not make open enrollment assigments until after the Apr15 application deadline. If the enrollment office has said or is doing something different, hell yes I want to know.