Friday Open Thread

For the artists in your house, two guys, feet, a rake and some unusual mediums to work in.  A thing of beauty is not always a joy forever.
Saturday Community meeting - Director Sue Peters' first one at Queen Anne library from 11 am to 12:30 pm.

What's on your mind?


Anonymous said…
I checked the source this morning to see the final exam grades coming in. And all I see is the next semester schedule. I can't get to the first semester. I know that my child had one missing assignment posted last night, now we can't see what that is.

Anonymous said…
Hmm...I just checked the Source and the screen includes all 4 quarters. The 1st semester class is listed just above the corresponding 2nd semester class. I can click on the Qtr grade to see individual grades.

My child's grade for one particular class is still based on only two entered grades...but that is not a Source issue.

Po3 said…
Frustrated - all 1st semester grades on source for my students. No finals, probably to soon.
Patrick said…
Disappointed with the high school geometry textbook, particularly that formal proof isn't covered until the last chapter. As I see it, geometry is just a playground for learning the reasoning of formal proof. They should be doing formal proofs all year, not just the last thing in June before they go away for the summer. I wonder if the teachers supplement at all.
Anonymous said…
Thanks, Now those previous grades are posted. They were not up at 6am. Whew.

-less frustrated
Anonymous said…
While I voted against Charter Schools, I am glad First Place will get the funding it deserves. As well intended as they may be, the SSD does not serve the homeless population well. These students and their families need the comprehensive integrated services that First Place can offer.

SSD Staffer
Eric B said…
I went to the Hamilton open house last night, and forgot to ask one question: how are electives assigned there? Do students have a reasonable shot at getting the electives they want?
Anonymous said…
I've heard that Geometry doesn't emphasize proofs anymore. I'm interested in Lihn-co's or any math teacher's input on why this is so? I loved proofs in Geometry and they were a big deal back then.

SPS mom
My reply at the Washington Post on Gates and other wealthy Yes on 1240 funders:

I ran on of the No on 1240 campaigns against charter schools. We made this point over and over. But Gates casts a very shadow in our state and has a "good guy" rep of sorts. That we had that issue and so many wealthy (and out-of-state) investors in this campaign is troubling.

Yesterday, the Washington State Charter Commission approved 7 of the first charter schools for our state (there is one other one from Spokane School District, the only other authorizer in the state). Once again, Gates, via the Gates Foundation, had a disproportionate amount of influence. Gates and/or the Gates Foundation:

1) funded the Yes on 1240 campaign for charter schools
2) funds the Washington State Charter School Assn.
3) the Washington State Charter School Assn. funds "leadership" for some charter applicants, again via the Gates Foundation
4) has given two charter applicants, Summit Schools (they had two of the approved charters yesterday) $4M (plus more to come)
5) is helping to create a capital loan group to help charters with facilities.
6) one member of the WA Charter Commission just took a job at a non-profit largely funded by the Gates Foundation.

It's all very cozy and just the way Gates likes it.

Sad but true.
Anonymous said…

The Nathan Hale Newspaper has a great editorial on the added school hours. I tried to cut and paste here but I couldn't get it to work so I have posted the link above.

Anonymous said…
Eric B.-

There aren't many electives at Hamilton beyond world language (Spanish or Japanese) and band/orchestra. Most language and band/orchestra requests are given, though some 6th graders are not put in language if there are enrollment constraints. If a student isn't in music, then they typically take PE and a semester of art. For most incoming 6th graders, it's "International Arts," which is performance based art, not visual art. There is only one visual arts teacher, so it's unlikely for a 6th grader to get visual arts. Some students TA for their elective.

It's hard to say how enrollment and scheduling will play out for next year as part of APP transitions to JAMS.

Anonymous said…
Do you support matching bell times to children's natural biorhythms? Do you support later bell times for high schools, middle schools? Now is your chance to make it happen for the first time ever! Jane Addams Middle School is starting this September. If it was to start 15 minutes before Nathan Hale, the high school that features an 8:30 am bell, that would put it at 8:15 am, which could prove to the District why sane bell times make such a big difference. Because it is a brand new school, the School Board ought to put their money where their mouth is, and at the very least, start this brand new school in the best way possible, and give it the bell time that will make the student learning experience the most successfully to bolster academic performance.

JAMS will have more than double the FR&L and ELL rates than Eckstein, academic outcomes and closing the achievement gap is going to be the critical priority. If the School Board gives a ** about this, and about the children of the north northeast who are getting pushed out of Eckstein, then let's see this Board DO something about it, do right by JAMS, and stand by their own stated principles and values, and start JAMS off with the right bell time.

This will be a test of Director Peaslee's strength as a leader, and her commitment to kids in her district besides kids who go to K8s. If she wants to fix bell times, for everyone but the kids of JAMS, that will be truly baffling.

Please, support JAMS, support smarter bell times; now is the chance. Please email the Board Mr. Banda to ask for Jams to have a bell time 15 minutes before Hale's baseline morning bell. The principals of both schools are supportive.

-better belltimes
Linh-Co said…
One of the biggest concerns of the Dicovering series was the Geometry book. It was rated mathematically unsound by Dr. Stephen Wilson, a Johns Hopkins mathematician, during the OSPI's review of high school textbooks. We also had one of our local UW math professor, Dr. Jack Lee, coming to the same conclusion. Dr. Lee sent his 2-3 page review of the textbook as well as testify at a School Board meeting during the High School Math Adoption. It was ignored. Patrick, Dr. Lee talked about the importance of proofs and how it was one of the few opportunities to teach inductive reasoning. He also noted that Discovering Geometry only covered it in the last chapter.

I'm not an expert in high school math but have heard that the new (fuzzy) geometry books do not teach proofs. Perhaps it's hard to teach and is perceived too formulaic. There is a certain discipline to math that the proponents of constructivism hate. It's the same thinking that makes them dislike standard algorithms. They think if students "discover" their own method that there is buy-in and therefore they understand it better. I've been to professional development trainings given by SPS math coaches who believe this and discourage teachers from teaching standard algorithms.
Lynn said…
better belltimes,

I support later start times, but I don't think 25 minutes will make much of a difference. A 9:00 start makes sense to me. How would you feel about that?
Anonymous said…
The idea is also to share with Nathan Hale for faculty sharing and the ability of Nathan Hale students, who have a large community service requirement, to get some of their community service hours mentoring middle school students after school. It would need to be closer than 30 minutes apart. Now the k-8 is 10 minutes apart. This would be a little more. It does seem like the district is falling short of its promises in many ways to support JAMS. Hiring in particular has been jammed up at the district, and they refuse to support the collaborative campus they sold us all on between the middle and high school, though they are willing to spend that same money on the k-8 for the convenience of those families.

Did I honestly just read that JA k-8 is being moved to tier 2, and is therefore the only school getting improved bell times, despite many schools asking for it with greater urgency, for safety reasons, or with many more middle school students who need the sleep just as much as the k-8's middle school students? And they are getting transportation for Eckstein and JAMS for two years, though other option schools are being denied? Is there any way to say with a straight face this is not preferential treatment? I thought commenters were exaggerating before, but I think I've changed my mind. This is the worst kind of back room politics.

NNE ParentofTwo
Anonymous said…
Better Belltimes, my understanding is that the proposed 3 tier system is a house of cards. Move one school's bus route times and buses aren't available for start times at the next school on the route. Maybe any push against what seems like a good idea for JAMS has to do with bus logistics? If so, good luck. Education seems to take a second seat to bus planning. I think it is a mess.

If my reasoning is right then either we need more buses or not this 3 tier system. My kids' experience is that it seems to work on paper but not in real life. Buses always always late in for the latest tier. Buses often not available for field trips starting in the morning. There is a lot of family and school dissatisfaction that the board seems not to hear about it because the complaints don't make it out of the transportation department.

And now we have some buses starting to arrive at 7:30 in the morning? That means little kids at bus stops at 6:45 or earlier? And kids not getting home until close to 5? The whole plan seems bat crazy.

In short, it looks like bus logistics are the push force behind bad educational and life outcomes. This is backward. Why can the board not stop this madness? Honestly, no busing except to the poorest families might net us better results than what we see. Put the money into crossing guards. Let all families start and end at sane times. Not ridiculously early or late for kids of any age.

Anonymous said…
And where did the NNE parent read that JAK8 is being moved to middle tier busing? If so, I would like to know the given reason. I hope it isn't the large distance they have to transport those students. Every K8 has the same problem. They have the longest routes because they collect over the biggest distances - so those kids all get the worst of this plan. The earliest pickups and latest drop-offs. It is a real slap in the face to all the alternative schools in the district.

Eric B said…
Thanks, HIMS!
Anonymous said…
It will be kids getting to their home bus stop AFTER 5. And then walking a mile to their house. I hate to play misery poker, but I really believe tier 3 is getting the very worst of this, especially since it is mostly elementary school kids.

Is the agenda up for the next meeting? I haven't seen it- are there amendments out? If it's long bus rides, then surely the APP schools need first consideration for school start times, since they have the biggest draws in the district (especially Washington, from west seattle, no alt APP program there).

Poverty Sucks said…
I'm hoping First Place will meet the needs of students, but what is the cost to other homeless students throughout Seattle?

Just seems we are robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I wish Gates were pouring his dollars into direct interventions. Instead, he pours dollars into start-ups and expects an underfunded system to fund initiatives.
Anonymous said…
There was an option proposed at Wed's work session on budget, in which "K-8s" are moved from tier 1 to tier 2. There is a $200K additional cost associated with this option (though it takes a bit of thought to figure that out, based on the way the costs are worded). I haven't heard if the School Board supported this option or not, so it may not be a done deal. Here is the presentation (see slides 16 and 17).

- North-end Mom
Benjamin Leis said…
I'll adjust but the prospect of having one child in tier 1 and one in tier 3 and having to manage morning drop offs is going to play havoc with my morning work schedule.

Ideally I'd like a minimum and maximum start / time and then have transportation build a plan around it rather than determining tiers and seeing what times fell out. The cost savings had better be real and significant when this is implemented.

Po3 said…
"I support later start times, but I don't think 25 minutes will make much of a difference."

25 minutes would give my kids 25 more minutes of sleep each morning - and that would make a huge difference.

Lynn said…
An hour would make a real difference for mine. 25 minutes is better than nothing.
Lynn said…
The savings is a one-time deal. The state funding for transportation is based on anticipated costs - with an upper limit of the prior year's actual expenses. Reducing 2014-15 costs by $3 million reduces 2015-16 revenue by that amount - and we're still stuck with the three tier system.

I wonder how much it would cost to move to reasonable start times for every school - and if it would be a one time cost (would state funding cover the increase the next year?)
Anonymous said…
Don't you have a kid in a k-8, Ben? Looks like they are thinking of moving it. I hope Pinehurst and APP at Lincoln are going to stay staggered, though, and would prefer Lincoln on tier 1, especially if Pinehurst doesn't want it. That is going to be more kids in that building than the Wedgwood neighbors were freaking out about at Thornton Creek, with a play area and cafeteria about half the size of Bryant's.

The problem to me is right now they do have a minimum and maximum start time, and try to build the plan around it, only it is completely unrealistic. Tiers 1 and 2 typically get relatively short, on time bus routes, but by the time it gets to tier 3 it's 15-40 minutes late every day in the afternoon because of traffic and earlier tier mismanagement (or every time that nice bus driver doubles back for your kid's coat or waits for the slow kid after school, the next hundred kids are a little later getting home). That will only be worse next year of they put more schools in tier 2, and especially every minute later into the afternoon they push end times as traffic gets heavier and heavier.

Honestly I don't buy staff's assertion that it would be that hard to switch tiers for middle and elementary students for 2014, but you can see by my moniker that I feel pretty strongly that this would improve outcomes for the district. This is what made me post the very first time, years ago!

Anonymous said…
I was at the budget work session last night. JA K8 was NOT the only school moved to tier 2. All of the K8's that were in tier 1 were moved to tier 2 in order to make sure that the K-8's as a whole were in at least adjacent tiers. The reasoning given was that the K-8's across the city participate together in afterschool activities and sports (and do not play in the comprehensive middle school leagues). Having the K-8's arbitrarily in tier 1 and 3 meant that there would be up to a 2 hour difference in school day end times, which would make it nearly impossible for any cross-city coordination.

As for transportation, from what I heard last night, there are multiple schools who are maintaining transportation to more than one middle school service area while they are in interim locations - not just JA K8 - and other option schools are getting at least "express stops" for transportation to their schools (including Thorton Creek who was advocating for this.)

~ was there
Anonymous said…
@was there

Thank you for your report. Was there any mention at the work session of aligning the bell times of JAMS with that of Nathan Hale?

- JAMS-bound
Lori said…
Did anyone else notice on slide 16 that Sharon Peaslee's amendment that she wanted voted on on 1/22 would have actually shortened the elementary school day by 10 minutes? That's how I'm interpreting the asterisks on that slide.

Back when it was introduced, we all thought the 3rd tier departures times were mis-typed, but apparently, the staff analysis was based on shorterning the school day. Wow.
Anonymous said…
Isn't JA K-8 at an interim location for the next two years to accommodate JAMS start up? I thought transportation was a given for interim sites.
Anonymous said…
@was there,

Your use of the word "arbitrarily", funny!!

Or, were you not trying to be funny? Oops.

Perhaps for your school, to get stuck with tier 1 or 3, it's arbitrary, but, for all of the rest of us, it makes total sense. Really?


Just a guess, you are a parent of children in JAK8? I don't know what kind of special abilities you all have, but I wish other communities had them too. Whatever you want, you get.

New building? Yes. (sorry, Pinehust, but we want your building). Combine with the prexisting school, as a school-within-a-school, in their property? You say no way, so then the Super says "close them down". They survive anyway, you find out, and immediately write a scathing letter demanding they NOT be put into the interim location that is closest to them, because that's the building you want to go to, and, you don't want to share. Check. So instead of 3 miles away, your neighbors are going to be shipped 5 miles away. What did they ever do to you? You can say it is not personal, but you can bet it is personal to these families.

Post-boundaries, you want your transportation grandfathered, even though for every one else, it is being cut-off. Oh, and now you demand to have your bell time to be perfect for you, so it is not 'arbitrary'. Even though it will cost the District $200M more, and, there is no specific educational reason associated with it. No doubt, you will get that too.

The overwhelming majority of children in SPS go to K5s or comprehensive middle schools. Boundaries greatly affected them, resulting in split siblings, who won't get transportation (except on a space available basis in some cases). On top of that, District-wide transportation sunsetting is also severely impacting many communities and many families.

So, what are your methods for getting what is wanted? I ask, because your methods seem to deliver flawless results. Others should be as successful as you in lobbying. However, for our communities with high ELL populations or high FR&L populations (less access to smart phones, less time to advocate), it will be tough to achieve. Schools like BG, with 96% FR&L, probably won't be able to follow your advice. Which is a shame, of course, because life would be so much more simple if the School Board would just be focused on all kids, and do their job, instead of on kids in buildings populated by world-class lobbyists.

Equity? The District's favorite buzz word? Also funny. If it comes down to lobbying to get what you want, what kids need, we all lose. Not sure the Board understands this, but, they should.

Anonymous said…
@was there

Just curious - $200K doesn't seem like enough to cover the buses needed to cover the Eckstein attendance area (in addition to the JAMS attendance area) for JA K-8 and Pinehurst, PLUS support the movement of 4 K-8 schools from Tier 1 to Tier 2.

Are there any Tier 2 schools being "arbitrarily" moved at the last minute to Tier 1 to accommodate the move of the 4 K-8 schools to Tier 2? I certainly hope not.

You left out a biggie. Due to how they are starting up JAMS, many NE families didn't just lose grandfathered transportation, their kids lost grandfathering to schools in which they were ALREADY ENROLLED (Eckstein and Hamilton). Assigned kids are treated like widgets.

Anonymous said…
Read the article on increased school hours. Hale may lose its 8:30 start time and have to start earlier.

Anonymous said…
Please provide a link to the article.
-North-end Mom
Anonymous said…
Someone needs to ask the board and the transportation staff to supply in writing their analysis around how these supposed transportation savings are achieved and how good service is being assured.

I would bet that most of this shifting is being done on a back of a napkin with little factual backup on costs or the viability of this three tier scheme.

If for instance someone asked how many buses were late last year, could SPS tell us? How about whether alternative plans to the one being presented were evaluated. Show us the analysis. Is there a backup idea or is this circus the finished product?

I bet the whole 'planning process' is two shots short of a Venti. And if the board accepts this kind of 'planning' then where does this leave us on the bigger budget cycle. In a pit of mud.

Someone with more skin in the transportation debacle needs to file a public info request. I bet it turns up yet another SPS disaster. Nothing changes.

DistrictWatcher, a couple of things.

"Someone needs to ask the board and the transportation staff to supply in writing their analysis around how these supposed transportation savings are achieved and how good service is being assured."

You forgot "in writing."

Honestly, this "savings" from transportation in past plans? Did that happen? Where did that money go?

The Board has GOT to stop taking staff's word on these kinds of plans. That they don't have their own researchers is problematic but only because parents don't have access to data that staff do.

And yes, nothing changes (and no one is more aware of that than me and Charlie). I am very weary of this all and wonder if there aren't other routes to change in this district.
Anonymous said…
RE: the JAMS/Hale coordinated bell times. Harium did ask about the issues around it. Bob W. indicated that one of the issues is that Hale only has SPED buses, so (from what I inferred) there weren't any savings to be had in consolidating transportation between JAMS and Hale. The issue didn't get pushed any further, at least during the time I was at the meeting.

~was there
Anonymous said…
Kudos to 'was there' for not taking the trollbait by 'non-lobbyist'.

As far as 'non-lobbyist' goes, your logical fallacy is STRAWMAN. Congratulations!

Anonymous said…
Melissa Stone, APP@Lincoln music teacher's video. My kids had her back when APP was at Lowell and she was fantastic! She made one for the school back then and the kids all loved it. This is one she made with a 1st grade teacher. One of the many ways our teachers build up a strong sense of community, and it's been posted by the Seahawks and Ellen! Finally, some positive press for our district!

Bob said…

I received a phone survey. It seems Seattle Times Education Lab is filling in for Lynne Varner.

Big, Bold headline, but smaller print tells that not too much should be read into the story.

Their answer: More data is needed !

Seems the only people getting things done are the teachers and administrators that are in the trenches.
Anonymous said…
Next week's board meeting agenda has been posted and in this version of Policy 1240 the last-minute language that had referred to Special Education appears to be dropped. Nothing in the newly posted Policy about access, procedure or who pays for services.

I watched last week's board meeting a few days ago and that wording along with the legal department's attempt to address these issues was exceptionally weak (to the point that I had to laugh as legal tried to explain its "due diligence".) Here is hoping there is significant outreach and thought put into a second go round on that point.

I am glad, however, that the district has finally come up with a coherent rental statement. Any group wanting to work with SPS has needed this for a long time.

Another word, though: the system of reserving a particular space online is awful. And good luck getting a live body on the phone to help. That is another huge area for operations to clean up.

Anonymous said…

I was completely wrong. The wording is still there. It is put into a Procedure Document that is listed after the policy itself.

Ahhhh. That way the Board can skirt the issue, as it is a Superintendent action not a Board action. I think.

In fact, the wording appears largely the same. The first parent meeting on this topic is happening next week I think at a Special Education parents group. But clearly this is something that needs communication and explanation to the full district not solely Special Education parents.

I think, but do not know, that SPS is trying to do the morally right and legally mandated right thing for our special education students. But in that special way that SPS has, it seems to be making a muckety mess. A muckety muckety muckety mess. Sheesh.

Anonymous said…
I went through the bus arrival time charts line-by-line and no elementary schools were moved to tier 1 in the proposal in which the K8's were moved to tier 2.

~ was there
Anonymous said…
@was there
Are you looking at a time table that was handed out at Wed's work session?

I'm asking, because there doesn't seem to be any changes made to the time table attached to the transportation BAR in the Friday post for the Feb 5th board meeting agenda, but there is a note on the agenda saying that there will be additional changes to the BAR posted on Monday.

- North-end Mom
Anonymous said…
Is that legal, to put new staff information crucial to a vote in on Monday? I thought everything that is up for a vote has to be posted earlier? If I am mistaken, I apologize. If I am correct, then that is another big issue with this transportation plan: insufficient public notification.

Anonymous said…
Yes, I'm looking at the 4 charts that were handed out at the work session last night.

~was there
mirmac1 said…
Gates is now funding the US DOE, to further more on his wish list:

U.S. Department of Education
Date: December 2013
Purpose: to support a conference on labor-management collaboration to help implementation of the Common Core State Standards

It's no surprise the the "model" for labor-management collaboration is...charter schools.
Anonymous said…
Idea: Allow families eligible for bus service to opt in or out at the beginning of each school year. Some mechanism for changing the option if the family moves or parent employment situation changes.

Opt in is free for FRL families, but they must still opt in. For the rest of us, the charge is, say, $25/month. A bit over a dollar a day.

This does a few things, I think:

1. Raises some money. I'm not sure how many kids take the bus, and how many would be eligible for free rides, but it could allow better scheduling decisions: ones made in the kids' interest rather than budget-driven decisions.

2. Many (how many?) families are bus-eligible but don't use the service for whatever reason. Maybe they like taking their kids to school either on foot, bike or car. Or the bus stop they have is way inconvenient in terms of location or time, and driving is just easier.

Getting these families to officially opt out would result in more sensible routing and timing, and maybe smaller/fewer busses.

Alternatively, if SPs transportation was making an effort to get more kids on the bus because that yields more $, they might make more of an effort to make routes and stops that work better for families.

People who know the district, tell me why this is a bad idea or how to make it better?

Bus Mom
bookie said…
My son is in Geometry Honors at Ingraham and they learned proofs and have been practicing since the beginning of the year. Textbook is "Geometry" by McDougal-Littell-Jurgensen, edition 5.
n said…
The busing situation is a lack of money. When will Banda reduce admin and put money back into transportation and schools? Buses should be a priority.

Upside-down Seattle.
Benjamin Leis said…
@sleeper - I did at one point and am contemplating sending my younger son to JA. Yes if they really change the tier for all the k8's to tier 2 (as I just saw as well), our personal scheduling will be a little saner.

Anonymous said…
Ingraham is an anomaly (in a positive way) - they don't use the Discovering series of math texts.

Anonymous said…
What Math text does Ingraham use?

- North-end Mom
Linh-Co said…
Ingraham uses Unified Mathematics for Algebra 2; IB math books for SL Math and HL Math; Algebra: Structure and Method for Algebra 1.

I can't remember which book for Geometry. I think it's either the Unified Math or the same author as the Algebra 1 book.
Linh-Co said…
I was able to find those books used for $6-10 a book. Enough algebra 1 and geometry books for the entire school.
Anonymous said…
I think, but do not know, that SPS is trying to do the morally right and legally mandated right thing for our special education students.

uhhh. What????? They are neither trying to be morally NOR legally right. They are trying to intimidate families into never seeking access to extracurricular activities. They are trying to save money by excluding students with disabilities. Extracurricular and non-academic activities are part of a free and appropriate education and something that should be discussed by IEP teams. The hopes of this legal department is that this half-baked stinker will keep people from exercising the right to even discuss the issue of extracurricular access at IEP team meetings. Really? The little old district is going to be really nice, and conduct "section 504" meetings? Not because they are responsible for equal access to extracurricular activity for students... but because they are just nice people trying to help. Puke. The only good news in this policy is that nobody actually writing IEPs ever reads a policy. And parents in the know will still exercise their IEP rights and force the district's hand.

The board should show some good faith and nix the policy - pronto.

-sped parent
Anonymous said…
Pretty sure these are the texts:

Algebra Structure and Method

Jurgensen Geometry

Anonymous said…
@sped parent: "They are trying to intimidate families into never seeking access to extracurricular activities. They are trying to save money by excluding students with disabilities."

This should be a no brainer for Supt Banda. Not only does this proposal intimidate families who have students with disabilities, it alienates us too. Nobody else has to go up to so and so's mom the PTA rep to gain access to a school enrichment opportunity. Why should students with special needs? Let's get going on the equity commitments here.

- reader
Anonymous said…
SPS is accepting bids on February 25th for remodeling another portion of Lincoln HS to house a second elementary.

Anonymous said…
Isn't that for Pinehurst K-8?

Second Elementary at Lincoln South Wing

Anonymous said…
2. RISER process. We will continue to share information on program services and locations that will affect enrollment planning for 2014-2015. This includes a new proposal by the District that Central Office staff will determine the service model that best fits your student, not your IEP team.

Above from SEEAC mailing.

SpEd worried
Anonymous said…
If anyone is trying to decipher what went on at Wed's Budget Work Session by accessing the agenda and presentation online, Good Luck! I tried to access the docs (agenda and presentation) this morning, and the links are dead.

- North-end Mom
Anonymous said…

Start times in the news. Nothing about Hale losing the great start time they are lauded for in there next year.

Anonymous said…
Actually, it is for Hamilton. They have to get the south wing of Lincoln ready for Hamilton; there is one year to accomplish this. Let's see, 675 Lincoln students, 150 Pinehurst students, 25 Special Ed older students, PLUS Hamilton 'annex' students. AND, not a field or playground in sight/site.

You may not be told that's the plan, but, that's the plan. They plan to isolate (or try to isolate) the Pinehurst school to one floor in Lincoln south, so, Hamilton can have the other. Sssshhh! Let's not tell anyone, though ;-), in keeping with our MO.

Oh, and don't even think about asking about "high school plans".

-scared and scarred
Lynn said…
The work on Lincoln's South Wing was originally meant to provide interim housing for Wilson Pacific Elementary students (staff proposed in September that it would have an attendance area population.) Director Peaslee noted in her November 20th amendment that the space was available for use by AS-1.

If Hamilton is losing 275 APP students next year to JAMS why would they need an annex?
Anonymous said…
District projections show it being more overcrowded in 2015 than it is this year, so they would need an annex. I don't believe their numbers- they include incredible, unprecedented, sustained growth in APP middle, but that's why.

This was also given as a reason app middle had to split this year, that they were going to need the space in 2015(and also that it would be impossible, absolutely impossible, to get the space ready for 5 classrooms by September, until oops, last second, we'll put another school there)

Lynn said…

Projections show that it'll remain crowded, but not get any worse.

Current year at HIMS 974 total 566 APP

The projections published in November for HIMS were:

2014-15 883 total 389 APP
2015-16 972 total 453 APP
2016-17 835 total 265 APP
2017-18 917 total 272 APP

Anonymous said…
We're in the beginning of the surge years with this 5th grade class, right? Presumably then, the class sizes from JSIS and MacDonald would also be bigger. So, it's not only growth in APP but in all the other schools feeding into Hamilton, hence why you had to split APP vs splitting the Int'l schools. Not agreeing with it at all. I just think it's about more than APP.

Lynn said…
Here are the enrollment numbers reported to the state each month.

There are about 600 more students in fifth grade than in eighth this year. There are expected to be 700 students at JAMS next year. I guess it does make sense then that the other middle schools in total won't see much relief next year.
Anonymous said…
I think it's about more than APP, too, kp. I just think the APP numbers are wrong; I don't have a comment about whether other projections are right or wrong. Does that make sense? And I think they are wrong enough that an annex could have worked(something needed to happen, though, I agree, because everywhere is growing.). We'll see soon enough, though. I seem to hear fewer families considering entering APP at the middle school level and instead sticking with their neighborhood school, but I don't know what will really happen. This is all people who would be going to JAMS, and I think that is more about unknown than anything else.

Will need to go look at the e-mails I got and those projections you posted, Lynn. I heard the exact quote I told you - that in 2015 they needed the annex because it would be more crowded.

Anonymous said…
Oh, I see. Lynn posted APP projections beside the total. What I meant was Hamilton overall is supposed to be more crowded again in 2015, with neighborhood, remaining upcoming and newly joining APP students (this is the number I think they have wrong), and international school students, even with 275 APP students taken out. I heard back up over a thousand; maybe it depended a little on where they drew the lines. Or maybe I was being fed a line.

Those k-12 charts are a terrifying eye opener. Twice as many first graders as twelfth graders. And I know that growth is not evenly spread out.

Joe Wolf said…
Re: Use of space in Lincoln South Wing

The project in the Lincoln South Wing will provide approx. 300 seats of capacity ("approx." because as most of you know, the caopacity of a given space/school is dependent on the grade levels and programs housed there).

On Nov. 20 the Board directed staff to relocate AS-1 and the Insian Heritage program (to be incorporated with AS-1) to the Sooth Wing space, as an interim site. They can be there through 2016-17 at the very latest. Lincoln needs to be vacated of its current occupants summer 2017 to keep on schedule the BEX IV Lincolh HS project.

As a sidebar, I worked with the project manager and architect to get the South Wing space as ready for HS occupancy as the budget and needs of the interim occupants would allow.
Anonymous said…
Interesting article about textbooks,

apparent said…

The projected APP numbers for both Hamilton and JAMS are entirely bogus. From the current 566 enrollment posted above, SPS planners projected a whopping 80% increase within a few years (without even waiting for any advanced learning task force reports) so as to justify splitting the APP program yet again without any true capacity justification. Personally, I am deeply saddened that they got away with this disingenuous political manouver, and I do look forward in coming years to charting the actual APP enrollment. In due course, actual enrollment figures will belatedly expose that cynical political stunt for what it really was.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools