Tuesday Open Thread

What's on your mind?


Christina said…
Rainier Beach High School has hired an SPS assistant principal, Rhonda Moore, to assist its new principal Dwane Chappelle.
Anonymous said…
Ms. Moore is great. She's been our Asst. Principal at Jane Addams and we're sorry to lose her.
- JA mom
Anonymous said…
Does anyone know when the '10-'11 School Reports are supposed to come out? I thought it was early this month but can't remember where I read that.

-just wondering
dan dempsey said…
It seems to me that not too long ago we were hearing about the huge change in dropout numbers and graduation rates in Everett.....

Now comes THIS from WA Policy Center's Liv Finne.

Everett's OSPI data can be found HERE.

Try the MSP/HSPE for grades 4. 7, and 10 for Low Income Students ... nice improvement over the last few years. .. This should not be discounted.

Everett End of Course Math #1 Algebra results for Low Income 9th graders taking an Algebra class in 2010-2011.... are piss poor.

Pass rate = 33.1%

At level 1 far below standard = 40.6%

Same for Seattle shows

Pass rate = 38.5%

level 1 = 36.7%

Same for State shows

Pass rate = 43.8%

level 1 = 30.8%


Same for HOLT using
Clover Park School District shows

Pass rate = 56.7%

level 1 = 19.7%


So what is Everett's High School Algebra Problem?

Just follow the links
First Link

Taking you to second link .. Parent/Student/Teacher resources

at Key Curriculum Press ...

Interactive Math Program ... the texts used in the Great unmonitored Cleveland School-wide Math fiasco from 2006 - 2009

and Discovering Mathematics .... which is used in Seattle. ... I think this is what is being used in Everett.


Key Curriculum Press is getting out of the Math textbook business. It recently sold "Discovering" to Kendall-Hunt but KCP has been unable to find a buyer for "IMP".


SPS spent $800,000 for Discovering Textbooks and $400,000 for the first year of Professional Development.
Po3 said…
How the WSS budget allow for an Asst. VP at a school with less than 500 students?
WS said…
capacity plan for West Seattle has been pushed, leaving even less time for people to make decsions.

dan dempsey said…
More on the Teach for America granting of Conditional Teaching certificates... from Associate Director of Certification...

Mr. Dempsey,

I appreciate your interest in this issue, but I’d like to clarify the scope of the Professional Certification Office’s responsibilities in the matter of the WAC 181-79A-231 regarding conditional certificates. So that we are all on the same page, I encourage you to carefully review WAC 181-79A-231 and the application form that must be submitted when a district requests a conditional certificate. Note especially the form titled “DISTRICT REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE.”

As outlined in the administrative code, the school district is the entity required to verify that the conditions for this type of certification application have been met. On the DISTRICT REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE form, the district confirms compliance with relevant conditions, verified by the signature of a district official. In this particular case, for each conditional certificate that our office has issued the Seattle Public Schools has verified that all conditions have been met.

The Professional Certification Office reviews each conditional certificate application and issues the certificate only if we have verification in the file from the district verifying the conditions have been met. If the certificate has been issued the certificate itself is proof the requirements have been met.

If you have questions regarding the verification provided by the district to issue these certificates you will need to work through the Seattle Public Schools.

If you have concerns regarding the rules as they are written you will need to address those concerns with the Professional Educator Standards Board.

Sincerely, David E. Kinnunen

So why did the Directors keep approving these requests?

And who signed the form indicating that ....
the conditions had been met?

The required careful review of all options to TFA for closing achievement gaps never was performed... and here we go again off to Superior Court. It would be so much easier if the Superintendent, the Board, and Holly Ferguson would pay attention to the rules and follow them

The initial filing of Joy Anderson's Appeal is HERE.
dan dempsey said…
Most all of the Public High schools I know of in the 350-500 student range have a principal and an assistant principal. Many also have exactly 2 full time counselors. I worked in Blaine and Castle Rock when each was in that 400-500 range. there were a lot of schools in the Whatcom County league in the 1990s with the same setup.

Sure seems reasonable to me that RBHS given the situation would require at least one Asst. Principal.

Good Luck to Mr. Chappelle.
dan dempsey said…
TFA Action report of September 20 is HERE

There were no attachments. It is from Dr. Enfield and Holly Ferguson is the lead person. So who actually signed the application that Divid kinnunen refers to that .... confirms compliance with relevant conditions, verified by the signature

I do not know.
Eric B said…
@WS- I believe the FACMAC will be putting out some recommended options in late November or early December. As I recall, the delay in the schedule was to allow for more community input.
Anonymous said…
Most of the applications for conditional certificates can be found on SPSLeaks

WS said…
@Eric B. I believe you are correct. I have to wonder though if they didn't think they could get proposals out and community input in before why provide those timelines. it seems like they have not even worked on proposal. there has been nothing since the West Seattle meeting. fr those potentially impacted by boundary changes with incoming Ks, time is important. before and after care needs to be worked out etc... uncertainty in knowing what schools are being created and what lines are being moved have caused my family to discuss private again even thoughwe want to utilize public schools.

WV says psynesse, maybe thats my issue
Charlie Mas said…
Someone was looking for a succinct statement of why people should vote for the challengers. I would refer them to my comment on Rueven Carlyle's blog thread about paying School Board Directors.
dan dempsey said…
So in regard to an Emergency Certificate for Kenneth Maldonado, Dr. Enfield signed it HERE. It is questionable as to whether conditions warranted applying for an emergency certificate for Mr. Maldonado.

NOT quite a BINGO on my TFA conditional cert question on who signed saying WAC 181-79A-231 conditions had been met. ... Here ... Here is a District application for Katie M. Schmidt in regard to conditional certification.

District Request for Conditional Certificate signed by Dr. Enfield.

But this application says ....
The applicant is highly qualified and experienced in the subject matter to be taught and has unusual distinction or exceptional talent demonstrated through public records of accomplishments and/or awards

Note nothing about closing the achievement gaps.

So the search continues for the Conditional Cert applications submitted for Daniel Calderon, Kenneth Maldonado, and Desiree Robinette.

Ms. Robinette's emergency substitute cert application is HERE.

Interesting reason for justification of need for emergency substitute certification provided by Dr. Enfield... (see page 8 of 10)

Does that meet these WAC requirements -- for an emergency cert ....

WAC 181-79A-231 on Emergency certification ...

(3) Emergency certification.

(a) Emergency certification for specific positions may be issued upon the recommendation of school district and educational service district superintendents or approved private school administrators to persons who hold the appropriate degree and have substantially completed a program of preparation in accordance with Washington requirements for certification: Provided, That a qualified person who holds regular certification is not available or that the position is essential and circumstances warrant consideration of issuance of an emergency certificate:

WOW not much compliance in regard to Dr. Enfield's plans and WAC 181-79A-231 requirements for conditional certificates or Emergency certificates.

Oh what a tangled web they weave when first they practice to deceive.
dan dempsey said…
HERE is The LINK to charlie's comments on Rueven Carlyle's Blog.
Eric B said…
@WS- The way I heard it was that the School Board came back to staff and asked for more time for community engagement. Staff's original timeline wouldn't have allowed much engagement time (maybe the 2 weeks between meetings?), but they had to revise to allow more time.

One way to read this is that the Board is finally getting the message that there needs to be adequate community engagement time, and that this message is being sent down to staff.

PS I don't know where you live, but the FACMAC was given fairly clear guidance that boundary changes were not desirable for solving capacity issues. Obviously, with new schools opening, boundary changes are necessary. Unless they're option schools, which is a whole different issue to solve.
Eric B said…
NB "The way I heard it" means that I could have mis-heard, and the speaker could have mis-spoken. Please don't take this as gospel.
dj said…
I got an email this week from "Vote the Moms" asking me to vote for three of the four challengers. I may have missed a prior discussion about this, but (1) who is vote the moms? (2) where are they getting email lists? And (3) is there a reason they are only supporting three of the four challenger candidates?
Anonymous said…
I also received the email and it was on an account that I use primarily for kid/school use so I'm not sure how my email was obtained. The PTA is not allowed to campaign, so I certainly hope someone didn't use the PTA directory for this use.

Eric B said…
I believe Vote The Moms is Michelle Buetow and Sharon Peaslee (maybe also Marty McLaren). The only reason I can think of them not endorsing is that in the Carr-Martin race, there are two mothers in the race.
dan dempsey said…
I know understand David Kinnunen's analysis of WAC requirements are met. ((I am not saying he is correct .. but I understand it.))

When a District official checks the BOX for

No person with regular teacher certification in the endorsement area is available as verified by the district or educational service district superintendent or approved private school administrator, or circumstances warrant consideration of issuance of a conditional certificate.

He is stating that WAC 181-79A-231 requirements have been met.

This certainly was the position expressed by Jennifer Wallace in her email of December 2009. ... BUT does conditions warrant ... actually say that a careful review of all other options has been performed? or that a conditional certificate should be granted?

A reading of WAC 181-79A-231 may provide an answer.

"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 WAC also includes--

(b) Conditional certificates are issued upon application by the local school district, approved private school, or educational service district superintendent to persons who meet the age, good moral character, and personal fitness requirements of WAC 181-79A-150 (1) and (2), if one of the following conditions is verified:

(i) The applicant is highly qualified and experienced in the subject matter to be taught and has unusual distinction or exceptional talent which is able to be demonstrated through public records of accomplishments and/or awards; or

(ii) No person with regular teacher certification in the endorsement area is available as verified by the district or educational service district superintendent or approved private school administrator, or circumstances warrant consideration of issuance of a conditional certificate.

So is Mr. Kinnunen's argument that a signature that verifies "conditions warrant" in fact is a claim that a "Careful Review of All other options" has been performed? -- that might be a bit of a leap. ( I just do not know.)

What I do know is that the District did not meet the WAC requirements to request conditional certificates because it never performed a careful review and (99% sure) that Dr. Enfield signed the applications.

The requests for emergency certificates were just as bogus.... WAC 181-79A-231 section 3 requirements were not met. .... but Joy Anderson does not have a legal appeal filed over those actions.

Please elect new school directors that will pay attention to the rules and will get a Superintendent that follows the rules.
dan dempsey said…
So here is the letter to the Directors that asked the following:

Can you point to any evidence that a careful review of all other options to the use of Teach for America corps members to close achievement gaps ever took place?

It seems foolish to spend thousands of dollars on legal services because at several school board meetings you repeatedly failed to answer this question. Why not answer the question now?
dan dempsey said…

2011 - NAEP scores are available at
Anonymous said…
Why is RBHS getting an asst principal? Aren't there less than 400 students? Do Nova and the center school have assistant principals?
-asking, not judging
Anonymous said…
Here's an interesting article on the history of Stand for Children. They've come a long ways since their days of advocating for health care for uninsured children and quality after school programs. A sad reminder that well-meaning organizations can shift, and/or be co-opted.


Charlie Mas said…
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.
Charlie Mas said…
The FACMAC is farming out the advanced learning program siting decisions to the Advanced Learning Advisory Committee. The District has not yet even begun to solicit volunteers for it.
Anonymous said…
"As I noted elsewhere, Board President Steve Sundquist was yet again AWOL from a public event. Standing in was Vice-President DeBell."

Steve obviously doesn't want any photo opts next to the prosecutor.

He was on a rock tour with Susan after the MGJ firing.

This guy is such a self promotor and fugitive from responsibility.

--just waiting for election day
Anonymous said…
"promotor" was intentional, BTW

--just waitin'
dan dempsey said…
Dear Asking not Judging,

Check the current Demographics
You can find RBHS HERE.

With Low-income at 79.2%
a Black population at 58.8%
and 26.8% Bilingual

a comparison with Center School is not appropriate.

I would like to see Mr. Chappelle say around a while, and like I mentioned about Whatcom County a comprehensive high school of 400 to 500 normally has a vice principal. Given the Demographics at RBHS and the need for program decision-making to positively impact poor performance .. Mr. Chappelle needs at least one vice principal.

The Center School Demographics are HERE

With Low-income at 20.4%
a Black population at 8.4%
and 0.7% Bilingual


With Low-income at 28.2%
a Black population at 7.2%
and 0.0% Bilingual
dan dempsey said…
HOLY SMOKES .. Lynne Varner is at it again..

uxolo said…
Does anyone know what the responsibility of the district is regarding Requests for Public Information? What can be done if the answers come slowly, past the originally promised delivery?
Jan said…
Stop TFA -- that is spot on one of the absolute best critiques of TfA that I have ever ever read. Thank you, thank you. I am going to go off and send it to all the kindly folks I know who can't figure out why I get my knickers so twisted in a bunch over TfA.

There may be better analyses out there in "number land" -- but for just straight up, from the heart, thoughtful criticism, the author really nails it all -- the issues, the possible fix. I LOVED it.
Shaida Lalji said…
so much similarity in the slant and responding comments of this evening's l├Ącherlich Seattle
Times editorial to this 17-month-old relic.
Jan said…
Shaida Lalji: my goodness. I had all but forgotten that gem of Varner toadyism.

"Leadership style matters because even if the chief is overseeing the school system ably — and we believe she is — the community must be brought along. Parents must be helped to understand the sacrifices they are being asked to make."

Yeah, she was ably overseeing a system that gave away MLK at a pittance, over the objections of those tasked to oversee a fair process that was in the District's best interests. She ably oversaw (three levels down, MGJ reminds us) the great Potter give-away of tens of thousands of dollars to his buds. And she ably oversaw Brad Bernatek's creation and misuse of the famous "17% of graduates prepared for four year colleges" disinformation campaign -- to just scratch the surface.
So, Lynne -- how ya doin' with that "ably overseeing chief" thing these days?

"In a smattering of the city's 90 schools, teachers have signed petitions expressing a lack of confidence in Goodloe-Johnson. This misguided effort appears to be more about policy issues such as charter schools."

Ah yes. And then that pesky "smattering" turned into a wholesale vote of no confidence by ALL the District's teachers just three months later -- and it was about a heck of a lot more than "policy issues such as charter schools" -- which, in fact weren't an issue at all, either in June OR September.

Oooh. Here is my favorite: "Criticism found on one petition that Goodloe-Johnson is "corporatizing" the schools is puzzling. Anywhere else, the schools chief would be lauded for leveraging educational and philanthropic connections that provide badly needed money for the schools."

Ah, yes. The heads of the "wise" get so very puzzled when the "silly little ones" get it so very mixed up -- my, my, -- it's just so hard to figure out what their fuzzy little heads want. Well, Lynne -- for one thing -- where is all that "badly needed money." And, where is all this leveraging? I saw "placement fees" being sucked out of pockets (thankfully, corporate ones) to merit the placement of TfA trainees here. I have seen millions spent on MAP testing of very dubious value (at least for the money spent) and NTN contracts, and lots of other silliness. But writing checks to corporations is not money IN; nor is it leveraging. Too bad you couldn't stop chuckling over how puzzled you were to actually explain how any leveraging ever occurred. Because, it didn't.

Jan said…
Lynne's solution was? "Rather than fighting against nonexistent charter schools or criticizing the superintendent for hustling private money sorely needed, critics should invest considerable time and energy into helping Goodloe-Johnson succeed." Ah, yes. I guess we should all have been out there helping Silas teach those classes. Or maybe helping Sharon Tomiko Santos drum up state tax dollars to give to FAME so they could underbid everyone else in getting MLK, only to have them do nothing with the property for months afterwards.

Lynne intones: "Leadership turnover comes at a steep cost to classrooms. For a public holding its breath amid the churn of educational transformation, continuity and renewed efforts are better choices than starting over."

No, Lynne, the steeper cost is the discrediting of a District through the use of bogus and unsupportable, "spun" data -- like the 17 percent figure, the daylighting of fraud and corruption costing the District hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars, and untold amounts of credibility in the minds of taxpayers and voters, the slimy feel of deals that are done with thumbs on scales and predetermined outcomes in mind -- to which any set of facts will be made to fit (that would be MLK). And this doesn't even scratch the surface -- there is the audit, the NWEA conflicts of interest, the retaliation issues last spring at Lowell, the school closings --

I was going to write to Lynne today to tell her she should be ashamed of the poor analysis and obvious bias of today's article -- but this reminds me -- it has been going on so long -- she is totally co-opted. The shame belongs to the Seattle Times, for keeping her in print.
dan dempsey said…

You are completely all over the facts. Fabulous job.
Today's riddle:
What is worse than a ZERO newspaper town?

A one newspaper town, where the Seattle Times is the paper.

I especially liked this....Times Varnerism: "Anywhere else, the schools chief would be lauded for leveraging educational and philanthropic connections that provide badly needed money for the schools."

RIGHT Lynne... just like Dr. Enfield leveraged Foundation Money to bring in TFA to teach in Seattle. All she needed to do was fraudulently complete the application requesting Conditional Certs for TFA members.

Of course the Professional Board authorized her to complete the fraudulent action.

The Teach for America Scam

Superintendent Enfield by signing the application requesting "Conditional Certificates" for Teach for America corps members made a fraudulent claim.

With her signing of the request, she made a claim that "conditions warranted" using Teach for America corps members to close the Achievement Gaps.

This was a fraudulent claim because Dr. Enfield failed to analyze the conditions in the manner required by WAC 181-79A-231.

Without the WAC required careful review of all other options, to using TFA, to close achievement gaps, there was no possible way that Dr. Enfield could claim that conditions warranted anything.

The Board repeatedly failed to respond to "when the WAC required careful review took place". The reason for this is that the required review "never took place".

Board members authorized the Superintendent to request the Conditional Certificates when they knew the required review never took place.

Board members are now in a position of needing to provide an honest answer.

When did a careful review of all options for closing the achievement gaps take place?

If the Directors cannot answer that question, they are still likely to go on to toss away public funds in an attempt to legally defend the District's indefensible actions.

So the Directors should either answer the question honestly or resign and let the challengers running for director seats begin an era of badly needed honesty and accountability.
anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Uxolo, what can be done about late requests for public disclosure information? There may be legal measures but I'd have to look into that one.

I think it depends on the depth and breathe of what you asked them to send you.

If you have one burning question, "I would like to see document X" - you can ask them to expedite your request. But if you have an expansive request, patience is a virtue.
Anonymous said…

Here's some cites on the WA public records law:




The law is clear on delay:

"Time limits

Washington agencies are required to promptly reply to requests for records. Within five business days of receiving your request, the agency must respond in one of three ways: (1) by providing the record, (2) by acknowledging your request and providing a reasonable estimate of the additional time the agency will require to comply with the request, or (3) by denying the request. See Wash. Rev. Code § 42.56.520. "

and further reading of the interpretation of that rule does not allow for repeated missed deadlines (i.e. saying that they will respond in two weeks, and at two weeks, sending you another response that says they will respond in another two weeks, . . . .). Agencies have had to pay "damages" because of such repetitive delays.

However, there is no simple mechanism to complain. If you are serious, you can complain to the attorney general/up the ante. But, the tack you take would depend on whether your main goal is to get the information, or to change the agency's behavior on delaying tactics.

Anonymous said…
"But if you have an expansive request, patience is a virtue."

True, but they are required to provide you a realistic estimate of the timescale. There are a number of government agencies in WA that really, really don't like the WA public records law (the universities, for example) who seem to use repetitive delays. This is not the intent of the law or the interpretation by the attorney general:

WAC 44-14-04003 states that "An agency should either fulfill the request within the estimated time or, if warranted, communicate with the requestor about clarifications or the need for a revised estimate. An agency should not ignore a request and then continuously send extended estimates. Routine extensions with little or no action to fulfill the request would show that the previous estimates probably were not "reasonable." Extended estimates are appropriate when the circumstances have changed (such as an increase in other requests or discovering that the request will require extensive redaction). An estimate can be revised when appropriate, but unwarranted serial extensions have the effect of denying a requestor access to public records."

There is room for interpretation in that text -- hence the lack of simple recourse. For example, asking for extensive records might indeed require a year's worth of work, and furthermore, might require revision (from 6 months, to a year) as the depth of the information requested becomes clear. However, if a request is sent on Jan 1, and the agency sends back delays of four weeks, consistently for a year or two, that shows bad intent, in my opinion, worth fighting.

But, again, the question is what one's goal is -- are you worried you aren't going to get the information? do you need it more urgently? are you upset about what looks like purposeful delay?

Jack Whelan said…
It's interesting that the LEV/Steven Brill event got the Seattle Times coverage this morning: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016666090_brill02m.html. I can't find anything on the League of Women Voters event at Town Hall featuring Randy Dorn, Susan Enfield, WEA's Mary Lindquist, some UW profs, and Frank Ordway from LEV. I was at the latter.

The theme was the impact of Federal Policy on public education, and we were told by Dorn, Enfield and Ordway that federal programs are good, but they need higher levels of funding, better integration, and to allow states and districts more flexibility. The UW profs were Ed historians, and the takeaway from their presentation, was that good ideas never have much of a chance in the political meatgrinder of federal politics. Lindquist was good on pushing back against the testing theme, and also about how disgusting it is that the Feds have schools competing against one another for the money that all schools need. Has it struck anyone else as ironic that the Republicans coined the communitarian sounding "no child left behind" while the Democrats have adopted the social darwinistic "race to the top". Isn't the whole point of racing to the top to leave others behind? Lindquist showed how that plays out in real time by contrasting Seattle's Hawthorn elementary with Everett's Hawthorn Elementary.

In any event, whether NCLB or RttT, they both mean the same thing, greater levels of Federal centralization, and I think that Seattleites have got to think about whether they accept that this kind of centralization is good or needs to be resisted, even if it means less money.

Anybody who has observed the trends in our national politics over the last thirty years and thinks that good policy has any chance of being developed within the Beltway is seriously deluded. It's hard enough to talk sense to the people on the local level without having to deal with all the Federal nonsense. I don't see anything good coming out of Washington in the near future, no matter who wins in 2012.

Better we work things out for ourselves locally. We have the resources locally; we just need the will and the imagination to do something really wonderful with them. And it starts with a wholesale rejection of the technocratic frame that has dominated the conversation since NCLB.
Maureen said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Maureen said…
Jack, Thanks for that summary of the LWV event. I tried to watch the Brill event online (LEV posted a link for a live stream)but the LEV channel never activated. Now I wish I had gone downtown to watch it--I would like to know what the mood in the room was. Can anyone out there report on it?
dan dempsey said…
Jack ... Thanks for the Report.

It is good that some heavies are exposing The Race to the Bank and No Vendor Left Behind for exactly what they are.

NCLB reporting has enabled us to see the disparities present for low-income learners and a lot of different ethnicities .... but has done little to do much about the situation. In Seattle the NON-performance on the part of the school district to close achievement gaps has been stunning. I've been puting data up for several years about the failure of the district to use practices known to work for Low Income kids etc. .... OSPI's Dorn still employs Greta Bornemann the Math Director of Teaching and Learning that gave Seattle this 12 minute presentation ... carefully neglecting to mention that "Discovering" was "Mathematically Unsound" and then Discovering gave us "THIS for Results in Algebra".

Remember the last few years of confused and disorganized leadership of the AIAN (American Indian Alaska Native) program in the SPS ....
It was accompanied by lousy results reported by Mark Teoh for AIAN kids in Seattle at a recent Board meeting.

Now we have the 2011 NAEP results available for WA State. I have no idea what portions of the WA American Indian population were tested to get the 8th grade results .... but it is not a pretty picture for 8th grade math American Indian students in WA.

2005 273 with 4% advanced
2011 256 with 2% advanced

2005 - 26% at proficient or better
2011 - 12% at proficient or better

The comparison of American Indian WA scores with Low Income student scores is shocking for 2011:

2005 273 is better by (+4) than L-I 269
2011 256 is (-17) to L-I 273

I would like to point out that It was Kate Martin that managed to get an email out of Ms. Bornemann in regard to her ignorance of the NMAP report at the time of her 2009 Testimony before the SPS Board. I used Ms. Martin's work in drafting of this Randy Dorn Recall filing.

See page 6 for this:

Mr. Dorn has continued to employ Greta Bornemann as OSPI Director of Mathematics. Yet she stated in an email:

For far too long Special Ed and ELL students were ignored in the math world. There wasn’t good evidence for how to support teachers, and quite frankly for many districts with limited funds, reading has been the focus. But much of that is changing. I believe, with all its faults, part of the reason people are paying attention is because of No Child Left Behind. We’ve always had a problem supporting teachers working with Special Ed and ELL kids, but we are beginning to shine a light on this issue.
Thankfully, we do have some new research to guide our work.

The National Math Advisory Panel (NMAP) is one such landmark document. I have a copy of the document close to my desk and use it constantly to guide my thinking.

Kate Martin got the above out of Greta ... and Carr, Maier, and Sundquist voted for Discovering.
dan dempsey said…
Jack W reported that:

I can't find anything (in THE Seattle Times) on the League of Women Voters event at Town Hall featuring Randy Dorn, Susan Enfield, WEA's Mary Lindquist, some UW profs, and Frank Ordway from LEV. .....

Little wonder on why the Times either failed to report on it or makes it hard to find.... the Times is NOT in the habit of reporting diverse opinions or facts about education ..... as that would interfere with the selling of the Seattle TIMES Education OPINIONS to the public.
dan dempsey said…
Here is the Hyper LINK to the Brill/LEV event to which Jack W. referred.
BagleyParent said…
Alliance for Education is calling people who donated via credit card to a our school PTA and soliciting donations for A4E. They are using the information that they received from processing the credit card donations, including dates and amounts of donations. They DID NOT notify the PTA or members that they going to be using the private information gathered from processing credit card transactions as a fundraising tool.

I am pretty upset at this invasion of privacy. Has this happened to anyone else?
Anonymous said…
You have NO right to post the personal information of people. Save Our Schools blog administrators, I hope that you know that this is morally deplorable and will remove any TFA application or any application of any teacher.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
LG said…
@asking not judging-
Center has one principal and a part time counselor and that's the entire administration. 300 students.
StopTFA said…
I beg to differ. The documents posted are public records, had portions redacted under statutory exemptions, and have been released by OSPI. ALL teachers who apply for certification are subject to public scrutiny.

In the case of TFA, who are in our schools thanks to the conspiratorial efforts of the PESB Executive Director, the OSPI Certification Office, UW's Tom Stritikus, Sundquist and friends, and the interim superintentendent: they were sold as being superior to beginning teachers like Stritikus' own MIT grad students. We can judge for ourselves if that is the case. As it stands, scary how it takes next to nothing to plunk an adult with, say, four months "work" experience coaching soccer, in front of a classroom of children needing to learn so they can get real jobs someday. All this while certificated teachers and substitutes are available to teach.

Section 1111(6)(A) ESEA


(A) QUALIFICATIONS- At the beginning of each school year, a local educational agency that receives funds under this part shall notify the parents of each student attending any school receiving funds under this part that the parents may request, and the agency will provide the parents on request (and in a timely manner), information regarding the professional qualifications of the student's classroom teachers, including, at a minimum, the following:

(i) Whether the teacher has met State qualification and licensing criteria for the grade levels and subject areas in which the teacher provides instruction.

(ii) Whether the teacher is teaching under emergency or other provisional status through which State qualification or licensing criteria have been waived.

(iii) The baccalaureate degree major of the teacher and any other graduate certification or degree held by the teacher, and the field of discipline of the certification or degree.

(iv) Whether the child is provided services by paraprofessionals and, if so, their qualifications.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
StopTFA said…
Okay, I'm not a TOTAL hard *ss (but just about). Just got off the phone with the public records officer at OSPI and she confirmed that the proper redactions were made, given the statute and case law. The legislature mandated, and agencies must comply with the RCW 42.56.030 to the maximum extent possible:

"The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created. The public records subdivision of this chapter shall be liberally construed and its exemptions narrowly construed to promote this public> policy."

Be that as it may, I concur that applicant address and phone info does not contribute to issue at hand and does nothing additional to protect the public's interest. What the public SHOULD know is the extent their public servants have bent and subverted the WAC for Wendy Kopp and friends.

The public records have been edited.
Anonymous said…
StopTFA -- I'm with you on the public records law. It's clear that the WA law is very broad and gives the right to have (and publicize) a very broad array of information. Furthermore, it's apparent that the state isn't required to redact very much information. I'm actually pretty surprised that the information in the conditional certificate application really is releasable (for example, email addresses & addresses of the candidates & of their recommended & even former employers & their transcripts).

I might go so far as to argue that some of that information really should be redacted and the state agency is being lax in its protection of the privacy rights of the individuals interacting with it.

So although I think the posting of the info is completely within your rights, I respectfully suggest that you consider redacting a bit more info (mostly addresses/phone numbers).

I can imagine many of us would be pretty upset if our transcripts were publicly posted on the internet, but I do see our argument that transcripts are relevant to this discussion. Phone numbers probably aren't.

StopTFA said…
As WonderWoman at OSPI explained it (and she has a hard job), "applicants" are not protected under any existing exemption or case law. Now once they're certified (and I expect that means resident or professional certification), much like an employment file, there's precedence exempt the data.

In some cases, third parties are informed that some of their records are set for release. They are given the opportunity to file an injunction to bar release (cost-prohibitive, I'm sure).

I've gone through and reposted (as anyone can who emails spsleaks@gmail.com) sanitized documents. I hope that the essential nougat remains, that SPS and OSPI completely ignore the WAC and make up their own "legit" reasons to waive in the favored few.
StopTFA said…
BTW, my transcripts would show a clear "party" quarter when I was placed on probation. : )
Charlie Mas said…
I reviewed the documents and they were redacted. The applicants' addresses and social security numbers are not provided.

Gina, can you tell us which bits of personal information you think was over the line?

In addition, the documents are not on our web site. They are on the SPSLeaks Scribd pages. We couldn't remove them from there. We could, I suppose, remove the link, but this is a publicly available document. Information wants to be free.
in the name of safety said…
@Charlie Mas,

Last night & today, the documents clearly showed the addresses, phone numbers, and personal email addresses on the applications. I am glad that someone had the sense to finally redact this information, but Dan Dempsey should have known better that to post such information in the first place. Yes, he had the right through OSPI, but morally that was wrong.

Thanks again to whoever made the change.
Anonymous said…
I was referring to the personal information of the TFA teachers, which has nothing to do with proving their certificate level. I am glad they are now redacted, but they were not for a couple of days. Just because it is public information, does not mean you should endorse it. How would you feel if your address, email and phone number were posted for all to see? I would imagine you would see it as a huge invasion of privacy.

The personal attacks on these teachers must end. It is one thing to talk about the organization, but it is quite another to attack people about whom you know nothing. I can tell you first hand that these teachers work extremely hard and should not be written about in your blog. You do not know them, are not in our schools working with them and do not know how hard they work with children every day.
StopTFA said…

What you view as an attack, I view as my right to decide for myself whether these individuals are truly the "best and brightest", as sold. Someone with the education, GPA, and work experience to place them head and shoulders above Masters in Teaching graduates with student teaching under their belt, should have nothing to hide. They're qualifications must clearly place them in upper echelon, particularly if they are teaching disadvantaged learners.

What is evident from these skimpy applications is that the OSPI Certification Office requires next to nothing to give someone the okie-dokie to step into a classroom as a substitute. Scary.

Finally, if these individuals are in the phone book - there's their address. Their phone numbers and email addresses are in the UW student directory under Department U-ACT. This is also public information, but likely concerns very few.
Charlie Mas said…
Gina asks: "How would you feel if your address, email and phone number were posted for all to see?"

Funny you should ask that, Gina. My information is out there and publicly available. You can get my email from my Blogger profile and the White Pages of the telephone directory has the rest.

So I would feel perfectly normal about all of it.

As for the "attacks" on the individual teachers, I haven't seen anyone suggest that they don't work hard. I haven't seen anyone even question their effectiveness as individual teachers. Can you point that out to me?

I am curious about how you can have first hand knowledge about all of them when they are in multiple schools.
Anonymous said…
Put TFAs in rural communities and urban areas with teacher shortages. If you are going to put TFAs in Seattle, then you are going to have be convincing with your applicants and that means having the very best in town. You can't be indignant about the vetting TFAs are going to get. TFAs themselves must understand that. If they don't, then consider this as part of on the job, real life experience.

I believe professional teachers and school staff will support TFAs in their respective schools, but it is right that TFAs' performance is under the microscope. This is still about what is best for the students. If you get a special pass, you should expect that probationary period. Much of this can be place at TFA's own public branding. They touted it. Those TFAs must now live up to it. On a positive note, they have jobs, good ones in this tough economy. So work very hard TFAs, and hope that you are the teachers your organization and most importantly, your students expect you to be.

-wishing TFA teachers well

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

Weirdness in Seattle Public Schools Abounds and Astounds