Lowell Updates
The following was information sent by Kay Smith-Blum to Lowell parents. Please note these are considerations only. Also she still references an "Advanced Learning" taskforce so I'll have to ask her about that as the consensus here is that it is for APP only.
Staff has considered ALL of the following in recommending the move of majority of the cohort (sans the walk zone Lowell students, who will have the option of going to Lincoln if they provide their own transportation - similar to the way we handle matriculation to Hamilton as a choice without transportation for those students graduating Lowell now):
- the condition of Lincoln, making it “friendlier” for elementary students
- transportation for those south of ship canal, routes will cross Ballard bridge and Fremont rather than getting stuck on I5 for QA & Mag students
- library and other resource beef ups, mitigation funds will be used up to create the necessary materials
- costs of extra staff, the balance of mitigation funds for the Central Region will be used for this, along with other cuts yet to be determined
- physical challenge of making the move, teachers will be supported by central staff and I am hopeful a coordinated effort will be executed
- possibility of 5th graders being able to move into middle school, no capacity exists at either HMS or WMS to allow for this solution
- creating a 3rd pathway, we are just under the “magic” number for a third viable cohort, so this can be part of a long range task force conversation
- affects to Thurgood Marshall, first through third grade there is plenty of room at TM, 4th and 5th grade, we are assuming some students will provide their own transportation to Lincoln, and if so, TM should not need an extra teacher – if all 4/5 graders go to TM, we could use the computer lab as an extra classroom for 2011 only
- affects on leaving Lowell without a structured advanced learning program for ALO matriculation, Dr. Vaughan is vetting the idea of creating a truly central region Spectrum at Lowell. Currently the ONLY Spectrum in the region is Muir, which is too far south to truly serve central region students
- affects on the interactive programs at Lowell with SpEd students, Mr. King and staff will work to create the same interaction between the general ed students and SpEd students going forward
- Lowell’s viability as a school population going forward, our projections for Central region show the school’s capacity will be needed, and with attractive programs we are hoping that will mitigate some of the overcrowding at schools in the region as well
- Other locations besides Lincoln that would have capacity to house the cohort for possibly two years if necessary, all other buildings would not have the capacity if a second year was necessary
- ALO students being allowed to return to their neighborhood schools if they choose, staff will handle each request separately
Comments:
- possibility of 5th graders being able to move into middle school, no capacity exists at either HMS or WMS to allow for this solution. I don't get this as those APP 5th graders will have to go somewhere. Maybe she just meant the remaining-at-Lowell students?
- Spectrum at Lowell? Which version of Spectrum? Next thing you know, dogs and cats will be living together.
- ALO students going back to neighborhood schools if they choose and Enrollment will hand each separately? Well, good luck with that. If it isn't a blanket coverage, then you will end up with a lot of unhappy people.
I have also been told that Mr. King will be principal at both places (with an assistant principal being the feet on the ground at Lincoln). Is this what Lowell parents are hearing? It seems odd to me but the district probably doesn't want the cost of another full principal.
Comments
So there is a "magic number" for a this school? Would she mind sharing that? Where is it? What is it? How did they reach it? Who calculated it? Curious.
The part of this that made my blood pressure rise was this:
"Currently the ONLY Spectrum in the region is Muir, which is too far south to truly serve central region students"
The District has, for the past two years, rejected a proposal to move the Washington Service Area elementary Spectrum program to Madrona claiming that Muir was a better location because it was closer to where the students live. It is extremely frustrating to read a contradiction of that earlier claim. Pick a story and stick to it.
- signed, Just a thought
After languishing at Leschi where the principals hated it, Spectrum waived bye-bye to the Central Area when they moved it to Muir. If it's working at Muir, why not leave it there and start a new Spectrum at Lowell? I think it would draw plenty of families from the actual Central Area and be a great fit for the existing cohort.
Kay gets another vote for intelligence and reasonableness in my mind. WSDWG
The Lowell PTA created a FAQ:
http://lowelles.seattleschools.org/modules/cms/pages.phtml?pageid=236159
On it is says this about Mr King:
"Gregory King will oversee both schools as principal. Marella Francois and Rina Geoghagan will provide additional leadership at Lincoln."
Lowell families have not had any additional explanations regarding Marella Francois.
My favorite part of the FAQ is what the APP kids are supposed to call themselves - Lowell APP @ Lincoln. What kind of name is that? It's pretty awful.
A Surprised Lincoln Parent
There was a parent who was trying to get the district to leave APP at Lowell, but move the rising 5th graders into middle school instead of keeping them at Lowell. Aside from all the issues with that idea, removing the 5th graders would not have gotten Lowell's population down enough to solve the overcrowding problem. And, as we all know, Hamilton cannot deal with extra kids. Who knows where the 5th graders will go once they really need to go to middle school?
A Surprised Lincoln Parent
I know that new students are identified at each grade level each year so the upper grades can have more than two classes even as the lower grades may only have one. The number still applies.
...but as another parent mentions, they are paying for an additional administrator - Marella Francois.
New to SPS
--holding out hope
Really? More schools have ALOs? I'd like to see the data on that as I think it's pretty stagnant. Where did you see the data that more elementary schools have ALOs?
According to this source, there are 29 elementary ALO sites so far.
That's 12 more schools. So How many elementary schools do we have in total? Under 50, right? So kids in 41 of them can maintain their APP eligibility until 6th grade.
-does a rose smell so sweet?
- Diane
Also, to go along with what By Any Other Name said, just because a school has an ALO designation, doesn't mean there are actually advanced learning opportunities in the building. If the district can get away with calling differentiated blended classrooms "Spectrum", that bodes very poorly for ALO classrooms.
Charlie -- remember, this is Kay speaking -- not the District. I don't recall that Kay has ever ever voted for central Spectrum to only be available at Muir, or supported the fiction that the central area had accessible Spectrum, when it was only at Muir. Like everyone else, she has been busy running around pouring water on the flames of overcrowding at GHS (and elsewhere), the new need to open schools, Pottergat, the departure of MGJ/Kennedy, the MLK sale fiasco, etc. to have ever raised the issue -- but Kay is no idiot. I think she is just speaking the truth that MGJ wouldn't (and her minions dared not) -- in pointing out what we are knew was true -- that Muir Spectrum was a horrible, policy-defying placement decision. You can't REALLY want her to stick to that dreadful falsehood, can you?
That was Mercermom's point.
How long before there are so many APP kids that there is really no need to ship them all to Garfield? Certainly two or three high schools could be designated as-extra special super-duper AP-in-more-than-name-only sites for such a large population of APP kids. Maybe even four.
-Where all the kids are above average.
Director Smith-Blum's responsibility in all of this would be to demand that report and to question the rationale of the decisions which are not consistent with the criteria that are supposed to determine program placement decisions.
I recognize that the Board has had a lot on their plate this spring, however there is a set time to consider each item and during that time they should focus on the item before them.
SSD is making a mistake in "growing" APP. It is a political parlor trick that will leave outlying students in the cold, in an effort to appease the masses.
The growing numbers of eligible, and entering, APP students are part of the SPS plan to provide APP all over the city. News flash is, that will not be the same product as single, or even double site APP.
Now is the time to make noise about this. Move the cut off up to 99% and solve the capacity issue once and for all.
Changing the cutoff from an IQ of 140 to 130 makes five times as many students in the district APP eligible, moves the needle from 180students to 1068 students. The same ratio holds true as you move up and down the scale. Pick the point that fits the space.
not rocket science
Muir is nowhere near the center of the service area. The Muir attendance area dangles at the south end of the Washington service area like a uvula. It is a poor choice for location of Spectrum program to serve the whole Washington Service Area, but when it was chosen over Madrona (an alternative proposed location), the rationale - incredibly - was that the program should be placed close to where the students live. Yeah. How about that?
Meanwhile, the Mercer Service Area was left without a Spectrum site. The District chose Hawthorne (over Kimball) saying, incredibly again, that the Hawthorne site, despite being less central to the service area, was closer to where the students live.
I doubt the district wants to mess with admission criteria...
There are several compounding issues:
- Neighborhood schools are overcrowded with no guarantee of a Spectrum spot
- Spectrum is not even Spectrum even more
- There is no easy way for students to "exit" APP if it is not the right fit for them
- There aren't tracked classes in each middle school to allow for true honors level classes
- The District seems so dead set against tracking that APP is becoming the only option for many families
So the students that would be happy in their neighborhood school (with honors or Spectrum) are forced to choose APP and the students for whom APP is the only choice are not being well served. The outliers are becoming outliers in their own program."
[End of Anonymous's post]
These are all really good points. When there was a "workable" Spectrum solution for many, if not all, kids -- APP also worked much better, as it tended to separate the high end gifted kids from the middle/lower end ones (I have had one of each -- and in my case, there were noticable differences in learning styles and educational needs). With the district worker bees busy dismantling self-contained Spectrum (which in my opinion really means, dismantling any effective Spectrum program) as fast as they can, it is obviously having a destabilizing effect on APP numbers. As Anonymous points out, it may also affect the quality of the education for the highest end kids, who become more "isolated" from the median or average range of kids in their classes. Given that that high end is probably the hardest part of the program to serve (and they have the fewest other options), that is not a good thing.\
Any joint effort by APP supporters and Spectrum supporters has always seemed ungainly and not terribly effective. It may be that the time has finally come when the two groups will have to work together to try to save self-contained Spectrum -- which will in turn help to "save" APP.
School District policy requires the superintendent to make an annual report to the Board in which she provides a list of all of the program placement decisions and the rationale for those decisions including a description of how each decision rates on the program placement criteria. Director Smith-Blum's responsibility in all of this would be to demand that report and to question the rationale of the decisions which are not consistent with the criteria that are supposed to determine program placement decisions. I recognize that the Board has had a lot on their plate this spring, however there is a set time to consider each item and during that time they should focus on the item before them.
Ok, Charlie -- I am intrigued (and agree with your entire post). My understanding is that this report has either never been delivered or has not been delivered for at least the last few years (since before the last round of closures and NSAP, which moved around all kinds of stuff). Is that right? Is there a specific month, time, etc. when it is due, or is it up to the Board to set a time each year?
If Kay thought (and I suspect she does) that the Spectrum placements for Central (at Muir) and South (at Hawthorne) were unjustifiable (if not outright bogus), how does she change that? She can raise it at the meeting, but there isn't eally an action item there, is there? What does any one director (or two, if Betty is up for the fight) do?
Does the Board get to initially approve program placement decisions? If so, is that really their only bite at the apple?
In 2009 and in 2010 the superintendent did make these reports to the Board and the reports were delivered at Board meetings. In one of the years it was folded into the New Student Assignment Plan. This year it was delivered in a Friday update email. I'm not sure that even counts.
The report is due in advance of Open Enrollment since it can influence school choice decisions.
Director Smith-Blum couldn't directly change the Program Placement decision - these decisions are delegated to the superintendent - but she could peform oversight. It would take the form of asking how the program placement decision fulfilled the criteria set in the policy. When the superintendent claimed that Muir was closer to where the students lived than Madrona, as was the claim last year, Director Smith-Blum could have asked to see the data that supported thaat conclusion.
It simply is not credible that the superintendent could have provided data that would support the claim.
At that point, Director Smith-Blum could ask the superintendent to either provide other rationale for the decision or to make another decision.
There is no action item; the report usually comes in the Superintendent's update. If the Board does not raise concerns at that time, they get no other opportunity.
The Program Placement decisions were never reviewed in any of the Board committees.
I think it is reasonable to speculate about why APP is growing, but there is no substitute for the district, or the AL staff, actually providing data.
-disappointed with this thread