Garfield High Updates
Field Trip
The proposed field trip last Friday to Vashon Island, an eight-year annual tradition by the Garfield jazz vocal group (about 70 students), had been pulled at what seemed like the last second. This confusion happened because despite the approval of the principal and the district's risk manager, approval was not given by the Executive Director, Sarah Pritchett.
They had only two weeks from the time that the ban on field trips at Garfield had been lifted and felt they had all the necessary documentation done.
The Vocal Music supporters sent a letter to Ms. Pritchett and Mr. Tolley to ask what happened. They are really upset because there are potential costs of $10K from breach of "various contracts." They maintain they repeatedly called Ms. Pritchett on Friday to get an explanation and she could not be reached. They want the district to help mitigate those potential costs.
Richard Staudt, Risk Manager, wrote them back today, explaining that:
"..submitting field trip paperwork at 3:15 PM when the trip is scheduled to depart at 4:30 that same day does not allow a reasonable opportunity for review." He said he told Principal Howard this. He also said it would need Ms. Pritchett's okay. He said he didn't believe the district was responsible for any costs.
There is no explanation as to why Ms. Pritchett was unavailable to explain this on Friday.
Garfield Staffing
From Superintendent Nyland:
After a review of the official state-mandated October 1 enrollment count, the district maintains its recommendation to shift the funding for one teacher from Garfield’s budget allocation to a school that is overenrolled.
Please know that this adjustment is not expected to affect a teacher of a core required subject and will not occur immediately; the affected teacher is expected to stay in place at least through the end of the first semester in order to minimize any disruptions to students’ schedules.
The district initiated a review after Garfield reported that 49 additional students appeared to have not been counted toward the official October enrollment. The review of each of those individual students indicated that 29 of them attend the Running Start program, which allows 11th and 12th graders to take higher education classes. That means they do not take any classes at Garfield and cannot be included in the headcount for staffing. The review also indicated that the remaining 20 students should not be included for a variety of reasons (e.g., they were athletics only, transferred to other schools and other factors).
The final enrollment count for Garfield stands at 1,586, which is 67 students fewer than the August estimate of 1,653. Staffing is based on a 30:1 teacher-student ratio. Garfield enrollment numbers, then, suggest reducing staff by two teachers, but the district is recommending reducing by only one to lessen impact to students. The data shows that Garfield High School is essentially receiving the same amount of money per student as our other high schools receive. The only difference is that Garfield does receive fewer dollars overall because the school has fewer students with special needs and fewer English Language Learners.
The reduction would take Garfield from 60 to 59 teachers. This is roughly the same number of teachers as last year. For the 2013-14 school year, Garfield was staffed at 59.3 teachers and had 18 more students (1,604) than this year’s October count.
1) Okay, but what was the agreement worked out with Hazel Wolf K-8 and is that option available to all schools on the list?
2) What does Garfield is "essentially" receiving the same number of $$ as other high schools mean in relation to "Garfield does receive fewer dollars overall?"
I'm having some concerns of this issue of "high equity" and what it means for ALL students.
The proposed field trip last Friday to Vashon Island, an eight-year annual tradition by the Garfield jazz vocal group (about 70 students), had been pulled at what seemed like the last second. This confusion happened because despite the approval of the principal and the district's risk manager, approval was not given by the Executive Director, Sarah Pritchett.
They had only two weeks from the time that the ban on field trips at Garfield had been lifted and felt they had all the necessary documentation done.
The Vocal Music supporters sent a letter to Ms. Pritchett and Mr. Tolley to ask what happened. They are really upset because there are potential costs of $10K from breach of "various contracts." They maintain they repeatedly called Ms. Pritchett on Friday to get an explanation and she could not be reached. They want the district to help mitigate those potential costs.
Richard Staudt, Risk Manager, wrote them back today, explaining that:
"..submitting field trip paperwork at 3:15 PM when the trip is scheduled to depart at 4:30 that same day does not allow a reasonable opportunity for review." He said he told Principal Howard this. He also said it would need Ms. Pritchett's okay. He said he didn't believe the district was responsible for any costs.
There is no explanation as to why Ms. Pritchett was unavailable to explain this on Friday.
Garfield Staffing
From Superintendent Nyland:
After a review of the official state-mandated October 1 enrollment count, the district maintains its recommendation to shift the funding for one teacher from Garfield’s budget allocation to a school that is overenrolled.
Please know that this adjustment is not expected to affect a teacher of a core required subject and will not occur immediately; the affected teacher is expected to stay in place at least through the end of the first semester in order to minimize any disruptions to students’ schedules.
The district initiated a review after Garfield reported that 49 additional students appeared to have not been counted toward the official October enrollment. The review of each of those individual students indicated that 29 of them attend the Running Start program, which allows 11th and 12th graders to take higher education classes. That means they do not take any classes at Garfield and cannot be included in the headcount for staffing. The review also indicated that the remaining 20 students should not be included for a variety of reasons (e.g., they were athletics only, transferred to other schools and other factors).
The final enrollment count for Garfield stands at 1,586, which is 67 students fewer than the August estimate of 1,653. Staffing is based on a 30:1 teacher-student ratio. Garfield enrollment numbers, then, suggest reducing staff by two teachers, but the district is recommending reducing by only one to lessen impact to students. The data shows that Garfield High School is essentially receiving the same amount of money per student as our other high schools receive. The only difference is that Garfield does receive fewer dollars overall because the school has fewer students with special needs and fewer English Language Learners.
The reduction would take Garfield from 60 to 59 teachers. This is roughly the same number of teachers as last year. For the 2013-14 school year, Garfield was staffed at 59.3 teachers and had 18 more students (1,604) than this year’s October count.
1) Okay, but what was the agreement worked out with Hazel Wolf K-8 and is that option available to all schools on the list?
2) What does Garfield is "essentially" receiving the same number of $$ as other high schools mean in relation to "Garfield does receive fewer dollars overall?"
I'm having some concerns of this issue of "high equity" and what it means for ALL students.
Comments
..."the data shows..."
It doesn't show anything! Because, we are NOT getting "the data"
"the data" is Oct 1 2014 enrollment BY GRADE BY SCHOOL -- with SpEd, ELL, and FR&L numbers of those grade numbers.
Only THEN can we audit the 'landing' of the WSS: was it applied consistently against ALL schools? If not, where was the deviations? What explain the individual deviations?
Dr. Nyland, get a grip. RELEASE THE DATA. THE SEATTLE DELEGATION IS WATCHING. I know you don't give a flying fig about what we parents think, that much is obvious, but surely you must care about what they think. They butter your bread.
#SPSWTF
Done w/clowns
I also would like to know if 1586 is jives w/ the principal.
I think GHS is getting screwed over, big time.
Pretty unimpressed with Dr. Nyland so far.
Garfield's fancy programs need to get a little dose of equity like everybody else..
Suffering Loves
Reader
-sleeper
Please provide the data that shows that Garfield is staffed at SPED ratios? We haven't seen any credible data for any of the decisions being made, so I would appreciate seeing the data that you are using to make your accusations?
Looking at the OSPI report card, I agree that Garfield does have a lower SPED % than the other two large high schools in the district:
Ballard: 11.20%
Garfield: 6.5%
Roosevelt: 11.2%
However, their FRL ratio is much higher:
Ballard: 17.8%
Garfield: 38.5%
Roosevelt: 14.7%
We can also look at the Transitional Bilingual ratio to get an idea of needed special services:
Ballard: 1.9%
Garfield: 6.3%
Roosevelt: 2.6%
All of these are used to determine staffing ratios and I don't see that Garfield is getting any preferential treatment when the district admitted that the school is funded at a lower level than other schools.
Not that the data really means anything to you.
I read this blog enough to know how much you just enjoy seeing your snide little comments in print.
-Moving On
Not the point of this thread and yes, very unkind.
Reader, you are saying that Mr. Howard and staff squeezed out Sped? How were they able to do that? What does APP have to do with it? Details please, no innuendo.
I read that Stevens PTA was able to fund the staff member. Any of the other schools on the hit list have similar outcomes?
- Steve
The problem with this is that it looks like a petty, bureaucratic move by a senior administrator. Sarah Pritchett should have sought to make what what already an approved educational trip happen, student learning and all, despite the completely normal event of a chaperone having a last minute issue and needing to be replaced. There is no legal risk here, no reason to go for the letter of rules over the spirit, and it is not unusual at all for a chaperone to get sick and not be able to make it on a trip. Canceling the trip is a completely unreasonable action by Sarah Pritchett.
What do these people do other than damage? The schools run well in spite of SPS headquarters, not because of them. These highly paid executive managers do nothing but cause problems. They certainly don't do their job, which should be helping teachers and students in Seattle Public Schools. The only reason district administration exists is to help the schools, but, as they are currently run and managed, all they do is cause harm.
Reader
- north seattle mom
I don't put much stock in Nyland's explanation of the GHS teacher transfer situation. GHS is about average in percentage of ELL students (8% vs. district-wide 8.9% in 2012-2013), though fairly low for SPED (5.9% in 2012-2013).
If it's true that the teacher would be able to stay through the end of the semester, why wouldn't SPS have said so earlier? There's nothing about the teacher staying through the end of the semester in the letter that Nyland sent out last Thursday. People are objecting primarily because GHS could be losing a teacher part-way through the semester (according to the PTSA), no so much because GHS might be losing a teacher period, so why wouldn't HQ address the first concern earlier?
Well, then, produce something from the school that disproves the statement from Mr. Staudt. Mr. Staudt is a stand-up guy who is not going to lie to cover for some overpaid suit in the superintendent's wing.
And, Melissa, since when is being "mean" or "unkind" not allowed? Many of your commenters are frequently mean" and "unkind" to those that do not agree with them. Those that actually say that something was "mean" on this blog need to grow up.
open ears
There is no "fest" that they were going to. I have been to Camp Burton more than once with HIMS orchestra. It is a no-frills camp with unheated cabins and a basic camp lodge. You are totally uninformed if you thought they were going to some fancy festival. (Not that there is anything wrong with a choir festival) But this was a retreat where they practice singing all day with a clinician. It is fun being away. It is motivational. It is a happy memory, but it is not "a fest". And this past weekend, it did not take place.
NEmom
If you have ever been to a Garfield choir concert, you would know that equity reigns. Anyone who wants to be in choir can be in choir. It is a great experience for all students. Why do you criticize Garfield if you aren't familiar with it?
GHSmom
A jazz program, open to all, is not a "fancy" program.
Go Bulldogs. WSDWG
Where is the data - the actual data - used to calculate the staffing at Garfield? Let's see it and let's see the formula. Let's also see the data for every other school.
What is the real story on the field trip? If, as the district says, the trip lacked Ms Pritchett's approval then let's hear from Ms Pritchett about why she didn't approve the trip. If she was not available that afternoon, then where was she and what was she doing? There's a perception that she clocks out early on Fridays. If that isn't true, then she needs to set the record straight. If it is true then she needs to explain it and disclose it to school officials who might need to reach her.
The problem isn't a lack of options or room. The problem is a lack of limits. If 12 kids really, really need some AP class, by golly they get it! At the expense of some other class stuffed full of ordinary Joes. That's why people take the staff cut pity party with a grain of salt.
Misanthrope
Can you come up with one equivalent to the Spanish class Ted Howard set up for three athletes? Garfield's cheerleaders are getting credit for a combination dance class/study hall this year. Are there 40 kids in there? How many students are enrolled in the nine periods of literacy support classes the PTSA pays for?
Just one more reason Misanthrope's "AP student vs. ordinary Joe" argument doesn't make sense.
HalfFull
As Charlie said, if Nyland want to build trust, transparency and actual data would help a lot here. I can't even verify the numbers Nyland claimed. The OSPI website says Garfield had 1640 students and 69 core teachers in Oct 2013 for the 2013-14 school year, but Nyland claimed 1604 and 59.3. Nyland also claims a 30:1 student-teacher ratio is standard, but that doesn't appear to be true either, as 1640 / 69 = 23.8 and spot checking other high schools shows even lower (Franklin High School had 1375 students and 61 teachers, so 22.5 teachers per student).
There's a basic issue of transparency here. People don't trust the District on these decisions because the District in the past has appeared to be untrustworthy, making decisions like these for reasons that, at least from the outside, appear arbitrary. The way to build trust is to explain why a decision makes sense in detail, showing all the enrollment numbers across all high schools, establishing that the student-teacher ratio is correct, explaining why the wait list didn't move, addressing the questions openly, and being willing to admit and correct any errors found. We don't have that here.
And your proof of this claim is? Could you please name those small AP classes?
And what does this have to do with the Garfield enrollment numbers being wrong?
David, I saw that as well. "We only cut one" as if they should be grateful. When was two ever on the table?
As far as special classes for jocks and cheerleaders, I guess that makes a boutique music program and tiny AP classes for the Ivy seekers OK?
I don't begrudge a strong music program but the whining while other kids play on cracked basses and dented and worn out brass and some schools have so much cash sloshing around they have two instruments for each kid, it's unseemly. And to the admins of this blog, how is maligning a person, Pritchett or any number of district staff, OK, yet noting the exclusivity of music trips is mean?
Still waiting to hear who else goes to this, not a fest-it's been made to sound like a veritable hellscape, other than Garfield prep(aka WMS or was it HIMS).
BTW have all these parents( no doubt many HCC) who know everything about Garfield ever been to the other high schools and seen how they compare?
Another Meany
God forbid people get off the couch and do a little extra for their kids.
Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one. - Bill Clinton Every time some whining miscreant bashes Garfield, I'm reminded of that quote.
WSDWG
God forbid people get off the couch and do a little extra for their kids.
Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one. - Bill Clinton Every time some whining miscreant bashes Garfield, I'm reminded of that quote.
WSDWG
I am sad that they did not know of a chaperone registration deadline. this kind of thing also happens more often to groups less 'in-the-know'. Remember Rainier Beach's dilemma with their production of The Wiz.
That is inequitable.
-choir alum
Surrealist
Misanthrope
And thank you for that dig. Says more about you than me.
Misanthrope
I have a 9th grade student in IBx, and 3 of his core classes have at least 34 students. One has 37 - not sure if it's been adjusted down since the beginning of October, but I don't think so. It may be that class sizes were small when IBx was first starting at Ingraham, but that is no longer the case.
I like the program at Ingraham, but I don't need to hear about how my child enjoys small class sizes, when the reality is that his classes are much larger than the "standard" ratio.
-factcheck please
I'm looking for his subsidized, vastly reduced class size . . . and not finding it.
-factcheck please
AP Calc 32 (Full), Enviro 30 or 31,
LA 28--some sections of AP LA are full (32). AP Gov, most sections full (32).
GHSmom
Did you read the title of this post? You might know everything there is to know about class sizes at Ballard - but Garfield isn't Ballard. Assuming all schools have the same priorities and practices makes you look foolish.
And really GHSmom, 32 is full? Not really, especially when those classes have 0 sped, ell, or poverty. Those burdes truly should be cost averaged in, and that would mean full would be way higher than 32. As it is, Joe average has all classes more than that.
Misanthrope
Do you seriously think every single middle and high school class is the same size? My son's photography class at Roosevelt had something like 18 kids. It depends on the subject. You don't cut AP classes because the class size is lower. Would you cut AP classes at RBHS because it's a small school?
And let's get back the topic.
I thought there was a maximum number of students that can be in a class. At HIMS my kid was in an LA/SS block class that had (I think) 34 kids. Two kids had to transfer out or the teacher would have to be paid more. It affected my kid because of my kid's schedule. Luckily two of her friends broke the block and did unconnected LA/SS to bring the class to the maximum size. What did you think the maximum size of class was for high school?
GHSmom
The size of the school is not the issue. A class size of 18 is significantly lower than a special education SM1 ratio, which is 22. The district is not funded to equitably support classes like this. Other people WILL and DO pay for these classes. Yes. I absolutely would cut classes that didn't have enough students to be funded by state or district funds and required dipping into special education or other funding sources to cover them. If RBHS has enough poverty funds to lower class sizes across the board - then great, offer go ahead and lower class sizes. GHS does not. (Wasn't that the topic of the thread?) To do anything else is inequitable and possibly illegal when other funding sources are used to pay for this. Union maximums are a guideline not a mandate. And the more undersized AP classes a school offers, the more offsetting it will necessarily have to do to reach budget.
Misanthrope
Utter bullshit. Care to give an example?
I'll throw a few more GHS facts out there.
- AP Stats? 32 kids with a waitlist.
- AP Chem? 32 kids with a waitlist.
- AP Computer Science? Both sections full at 32 as well.
I could run down a long list and prove you are absolutely, unequivocally wrong. Not every AP section is full, but for every AP class that comes in at less than 32 kids, there are more non-AP classes that aren't full. But I'm not complaining because that's life. It's not perfect for me, for you, for the staff or anyone else. For the most part, they're just doing the best they can.
And really GHSmom, 32 is full? Not really, especially when those classes have 0 sped, ell, or poverty. Those burdes truly should be cost averaged in, and that would mean full would be way higher than 32. As it is, Joe average has all classes more than that.
You're not making any sense at all. Classes are capped at 32, period. Your "Joe average" doesn't have ANY classes larger than that, let alone all of them. When you've been proven wrong (above), you attempt to change the assumptions, but we're not 8 years old here, so it's obvious. Many kids taking AP classes are simply shut out of them when they reach that cap, my kid included.
Nice job Misanthrope, you just keep digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole with your ignorance and lies. I'm not going to make any claims about Ballard, because I don't know the details at that school. Perhaps you should stick to commenting about buildings you know about as well.
There is no advantage to having a smaller size choir. My choir teacher had 3 choirs a day of 200 students each. Maybe those programs benefit other students by allowing some classes to be offered in years they don't completely fill. It doesn't make sense to me to punish the choir program because of some perceived privilege that isn't being demonstrated in this thread.
-Choir alum
The class sizes are based on school and district averages, with overage paid to teachers.
Collective bargaining agreement language:
SPS will maintain an average SPS building ratio of students to full-time equivalent teachers at no more than 26:1 for grades K-3, 28:1 for grades 4-5, and 150-1 for grades 6-12...An exception to the average ratios will occur when SPS ratios do not meet state mandated class reduction requirements.
Further, they Take actions to limit class sizes to thirty-two (32) students for core classes in 6-12. Teachers are compensated for an overload if they decide not to reduce the class size.
Collective bargaining agreement 2013-2015
Also, the class size reduction initiative may not reduce class sizes in Seattle. Districts with space restrictions are not mandated to actually reduce class sizes. From the voter pamphlet: "The measure would leave intact the statement in the school funding law that nothing in that law requires school districts to maintain a particular classroom-to-student ratio."
parent
So we can choose to not have classes that are college level for some schools and not others but you run into equity issues. You can disagree if that matters but apparently it matters to the district.
"Other people WILL and DO pay for these classes."
I have no idea what that means. The district does not charge for AP classes.
Misanthrope, I think I will end my discussion with you here. I'm not sure you know the facts on the ground so it's not helping to put out info that is not true.
I can't even verify the numbers Nyland claimed. The OSPI website says Garfield had 1640 students and 69 core teachers in Oct 2013 for the 2013-14 school year, but Nyland claimed 1604 and 59.3. Nyland also claims a 30:1 student-teacher ratio is standard, but that doesn't appear to be true either, as 1640 / 69 = 23.8 and spot checking other high schools shows even lower (Franklin High School had 1375 students and 61 teachers, so 22.5 teachers per student).
I was hoping someone else would comment on this. Is Nyland correct about a 30:1 student-teacher ratio being normal? Is he correct about the enrollment numbers and number of teachers? Why doesn't what he say match the OSPI data? Is this some definition issue where what he said is technically correct under certain definitions and assumptions? Or is he getting bad information from his own staff?
I think this is important. The entire justification for him cutting a teacher from Garfield is dependent on the 30:1 student-teacher ratio actually being what is normal, the count of students being correct, and the count of teachers being correct. Nothing he said matches the OSPI data, so I was hoping others might comment on it. Is Superintendent Nyland right on this or did he get bad information from his staff?
Weighted Staffing Standards
School allocations
SpEd, and ELL teachers are included in the teacher total.
Simply dividing the total number of students by the total number of teachers won't yield an accurate class size for say, LA/SS.
- North-end Mom
The SPS enrollment reports put Garfield at 1604 for the 2013 school year. The OSPI report is 1640.
This looks like a typo with just transposed digits.
The 30:1 ratio is the ratio used for building the budget for the school as the teacher contract is for 150 students, 5 instructional periods and one prep period.
A few things surprised me about the process. ELL students are only counted as a .6 FTE for general ed teacher allocations and most special education students are only counted as .8 FTE. (Because they're assumed to be out of the general ed classroom for a portion of the day.) Aren't these students in general ed classrooms as much as possible? (So potentially all day?)
The other thing is the AAFTE calculation. This reduces the projected enrollment by the number who are expected to leave during the year. (The projection differs by school and by grade.) For example, Garfield is expected to lose 162 students over the course of this year. This means that they were allocated 3.24 teachers less than needed at the beginning of the year. (81/25) I'd think it would make more sense to allocate more teachers to schools with lower retention rates in an attempt to decrease dropout rates.
Finally, Garfield was allocated teachers for two SM2 special education classrooms (staffed at a 1 to 9 ratio) even though their projected enrollment didn't include any SM2 students.
Perhaps I am being overly suspicious. Am I wrong that it is still unclear if Nyland is correct that Garfield should lose a teacher? Do we have the information to verify that Garfield has the correct number of teachers this year under a criteria that says they had the correct number last year? Can we verify that the criteria for teacher staffing has been consistently applied across schools and years?
At the core of this is that I think Nyland has told us not to worry, the calculation is correct, without giving information that establishes that, yes, the calculation is correct. And given past performance of the District on these kinds of things, I have little confidence and trust that the calculation was done correctly, so I'd like to be able to verify it.
Have others looked at this too? Am I wrong that the District staff have not made data available to outsiders to verify that the teacher staffing is correctly and consistently applied across high schools and years?
We don't know how many teachers each school has now - so we can't check the allocations. We do already know that the district chose not to pull four teachers from "high equity" schools. They were allowed to be overstaffed at district expense this year.
That's 5 schools that were allowed to be over-staffed, including Hazel Wolf K-8.
- reality check
HIMSmom
Anonymous said...
Students at Garfield were told yesterday that the Latin instructor will be gone at the end of the semester. I can't imagine where the district will place him. Is anyone aware of a school in the district that has 150 or so students who need 1/2 year of instruction in Latin?
October 30, 2014 at 10:14 AM
Ted Howard is brilliant, as usual! This targets the exact demographic at GHS (mostly APP) that can fundraise heavily and save the Latin teacher. The Latin teacher is going nowhere and the district will get the ransom they are demanding. It's only $46,000 for the second semester. No problem!
This is crazy. I wonder what the classes are that Running Start students are taking that may be reducing the load at GHS? It's not Latin. The Latin teacher has been there for about 5 years, so it's not a seniority issue. If it is true, this strategy is targeting parents with money to solve the problem, while absolving the district/TH of eliminating a core class for graduation requirements. World Languages are not a graduation requirement in SPS.
Disgusted
Ruthie
Garfield Parent
Ruthie
It was not made at the school. This whole thing makes no sense. There were over 100 students on the waiting list. If Garfield's enrollment was so dangerously low, why were no students moved from the wait list.
If you want to think about a conspiracy, then ... enrollment was deliberately withheld from Garfield. Then the adjusted full time equivalent was changes and viola ... the school that makes trouble loses a teacher.
GHSmom
Just encouraging everyone who cares to write an email or letter to the Superintendent and to the Principal, Ted Howard. They are most likely the people who will be making the final decision about this, but if anyone knows better, please do let us know.
-wondering
https://www.bfirstseo.com/ِشركة-مكافحة-حشرات-بينبع/
https://www.bfirstseo.com/شركة-تنظيف-بينبع/
https://www.bfirstseo.com/تنظيف-خزانات-بالمدينة-المنورة/