Disqus

Tuesday, November 01, 2011

FACMA Updates

Here's some updates on FACMAC (capacity management).

As previously announced, there is a Board Work Session tomorrow (Wednesday, the 2nd)from 4-5:30 p.m. where Dr. Les Kendrick will be giving a demographic report and PowerPoint presentation.

On Thursday, November 3rd, there will be a full FACMA meeting from 3-6 p.m. in Room 2700 at district headquarters.  These meetings are open to the public as visitors.  Dr. Kendrick will make his presentation again although at a summary level since a number of the FACMAC members plan to attend the Work Session where he will give the report in full.   In doing it that way, at least half the meeting on Thursday can be devoted to options and solutions. 

The presentation will be posted online at the district 's Capacity Management webpage and they continue to invite comments at capacity@seattleschools.org.  

Timeline
  • November 10th, FACMAC meeting from 10am -noon in Room 2750 at headquarters. 
  • November 14th, FACMAC meeting from 4-6p.m. at Roosevelt High School (please note that the PTSA/district meeting on superintendent traits will also be held that night at Roosevelt High School from 7-8:30 p.m.)
  • November 17th, FACMAC meeting from 10 am to noon in the headquarters auditorium
  • December 1-12 - Board Engagement with community on Capacity Management
  • December 5,6, & 8 - Regional public engagement meetings
  • Jan. 4th - Board meeting - Intro on Transition Plan
  • Jan. 18th - Board meeting - Action on Transition Plan
There are more meetings after the action on the Transition Plan by FACMAC that we'll put up as more info becomes available.
 

9 comments:

kellie said...

The enrollment information presentation can be found here

Anonymous said...

where's the meeting to swear in new board members ... ;)

OutWid_daOld

ds said...

Would it be useful to consider part-time online learning as a capacity management tool for middle and high school? I don’t know what the demand for online learning is in Seattle (seems like it would be worth investigating), but I understand that the demand is growing nationally.

Although substantial planning would be required, having a portion of students taking one or more online classes at home would create space for additional students within a building. If students signed up to take online courses in the spring, buildings would have this information available when planning their staffing.

Under state policy, districts receive 100% of state funding for students taking online courses that have been approved through the Digital Learning Department (DLD). The district pays the online course provider through the DLD; most middle and high school courses cost $600-$700 per year (AP courses tend to cost more; see the course catalog at http://digitallearning.k12.wa.us/online_courses/catalog.php)

Although online learning should not be forced on anyone, it provides choice and has the potential to not only serve a subset of students very well (e.g., those who prefer more traditional math or who are not receiving adequate challenge through middle school Readers/Writers Workshop; those who want AP or other specialty classes not offered at their school; those who could benefit from a late start or flexible schedule), but also to relieve some of the pressure on over-crowded middle and high schools. Who knows, there may even be demand for an option elementary school in which kids take certain classes at home and then attend the brick-and-mortar school either in the morning or afternoon for certain subjects; thus, twice as many kids could be served in the same building.

From all reports I’ve read, the demand for online learning is expected to increase over time, so this solution seems like it maps on well to the problem of continued growth within SPS middle and high schools. It’s not a panacea, but I hope the FACMAC will give it some serious consideration.

Chris S. said...

Reposting Charlie's comment from last thread:
--
The original timeline for capacity management decisions for 2012-2013 had them done in November, 2011.

I can't speak to the reason that timetable has been revised - if it has been revised.
--
Cuz I'd like to know.

Eric B said...

So here we are at the due date of the capacity management plan. About a month ago, staff had a choice. They were months behind with a massive problem to solve. They could have gone two routes: (a) put something half-a**ed together and ram it down our throats or (b) actually involve the community, including activists who have been against their past choices for years, and try to do it right.

It's not a good thing that they were so far behind that the schedule is pushed. However, it's an enormous credit to District staff that they chose option B. I don't know who made that decision, but I certainly don't think it would have happened under a Goodloe-Johnson/Kennedy administration.

WV: I have many "whieshes", some of which are coming true.

Jan said...

I agree,Eric B. One of the things that gagged me most about MGJ's administration was the sense of just getting rolled -- over and over -- by a frantic pace of horrible, half-baked, unsubstantiated decision-making, which we will be unwinding, and paying for, for years -- while untold amounts of good work never happened.

If we want fact-based, reasoned decision-making, we are going to have to be willing to slow down and gather the facts and opinions -- even as the overpopulation train bears down. We have been down the road of "quick, quick, emergency -- do something -- ANYthing is better than nothing" for years now. We LIVED down that lane. Good, grown-up management doesn't operate that way, and the District shouldn't either.

Happy walker said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
dan dempsey said...

Well said by Jan....

If we want fact-based, reasoned decision-making, we are going to have to be willing to slow down and gather the facts and opinions.

But ..... we would also need school directors that wanted to make use of the facts in making intelligent decisions.

Jan said...

True, Dan -- but I will always wonder if at least a few of the bad decisions voted by the board during MGJ's tenure might have not happened if she hadn't set such a frantic pace (the NSAP, school closings, school sales, standardization of math, LA, science, splitting of APP middle schools, dumping of old SPED delivery models for new ones, new management structure (the Ed director realignments), massive principal reshufflings, SE Initiative stuff, Dashboards, websites, school reports -- what a freaking train wreck!). Everything was happening at once, and nothing was being given any thought -- which of course suited MGJ just fine, as she loathed any sort of oversight or questioning. Maybe you are right -- they would have goten it wrong anyway. But I will always wonder.