Strategic Plan
The revised Strategic Plan for Seattle Public Schools is scheduled for introduction at the Board meeting on June 19 and for a vote at the Board meeting on July 3.
You can read it here.
You can read it here.
Tuesday Open Thread
The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested. It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio. (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Comments
From page 4:
"As we implement this plan, we will hold regular 'check ins' with the community, staff and Board to monitor whether our strategies and initiatives are moving us toward our goals, or whether we need to amend certain elements to course correct."
I wonder how long they will actually conduct those regular check-ins? Last time it didn't even last a year.
There are over 30 metrics, with measures like % of schools aligned to CSS and % of teachers completing cultural competency course put at the same priority as increasing % of students graduating who meet standards for going to college.
Really, the only metrics that matter are increasing test scores and graduation rates. All these other metrics are not goals. At best, they are possibly means to reach the goal of increasing test scores and graduation rates.
It's a poor plan that gives no sense of priorities. A plan like this is meaningless in terms of direction and accountability, but it will allow them to talk about the metrics that increase over the next few years, ignore the ones that drop, and declare success no matter what happens. That is not what the Board should want.
The plan should be much shorter, much more tightly prioritized, and much more focused on the Washington state measures of academic performance of Seattle Public Schools.
The Strategic Plan indicates elimination of popular programs. Your thoughts? If not language immersion, than what?
The popular programs that's closing is Spectrum. It will simply go away when advanced learning is re-done as a manifestation of MTSS.
MTSS has just three tiers: Tier I is the regular curriculum. Tier II is a modified curriculum delivered in the general education classroom (like ALO). Tier III is a specialized program (like APP). What's missing here is Spectrum.
Pretty please?
Timing is absolutely urgent. From Charlie's comments, looks like they are going to do away with it entirely. Differentiation doesn't happen, so it doesn't work.
Please, all children in Seattle schools deserve education, and that includes not just those hampered by physical or mental handicaps, or cultural or language barriers, but everyone, absolutely everyone, including those students who can perform at higher levels. But, those seem to not be the ones this district cares about. The floor is truly the ceiling. They don't care how fast you can run, just if you can get to the finish line. They don't really care if you're ready for the next level of challenge. It's always all rhetoric, no delivery. Spectrum has worked for my family, and can work for all spectrum families and kids. It's just that right now, it is in the crosshairs, and it's not about the kids. And it should be about the kids!
-spectrum dad
Can anyone clarify what they mean by "in all schools" and "for all students"? I doubt they really mean these will all be housed in all schools, and certainly not all students will qualify for all these anyway. For things like ELL, SPED or Highly Capable services, perhaps it simply means that all those who qualify will be able to access these somewhere? If so, how is this any different than the current status?
HIMSmom
What they mean by "Academic Assurances" is that all schools will offer the state required amount of general education, including art, music, and PE - a standard which a lot of schools are not meeting right now - and that all students with special needs will have access to those services.
For ELL and most SpEd students and academically advanced students this means that the services will be available either in their attendance area school or in a nearby school.
For BOC, low incidence SpEd, and APP this means that there will be a program accessible for them either in their middle school service area or in an adjacent one with transportation provided.
Just as Advanced Learning is being Re-Visioned, so is Special Education.
I'm not sure how any of this will look in option schools.
Does that help at all? The next level of detail would be to say which sites will be home to which programs and that remains undetermined.
Special Education programs should be closer to students' homes, but I wouldn't hold my breath.