Bell Times: They Will Be A'Changin'
This Wednesday's School Board meeting sees the Superintendent's introduction to change bell times. What has happened is that a large number of schools - primarily elementary schools - have shifted to Tier Two, leaving about 13 schools in Tier One (I think there are eight elementaries).
What appears -to me- to be happening is that the Super and staff are trying to get the "We want two tiers" out of people's minds. Staff doesn't really want to have to suss out the real costs and present them to parents. (Do I think it is truly $8M for two tiers? No.)
So how to divert parents off that idea? Whittle down the Third Tier to a handful of schools and let other parents attack Tier Three parents for being "selfish" to not think of the greater good.
Brilliant on the part of staff and not-so-lucky for the Tier Three people.
But I think so much time has gone by, that it's likely a done deal if only because people are probably now tired of talking it to death.
For the record, I think, for ALL students concerned, the district should have provided real numbers on the costs, found that money and had two tiers. This is real and vital part of the school day for BOTH students and parents.
What appears -to me- to be happening is that the Super and staff are trying to get the "We want two tiers" out of people's minds. Staff doesn't really want to have to suss out the real costs and present them to parents. (Do I think it is truly $8M for two tiers? No.)
So how to divert parents off that idea? Whittle down the Third Tier to a handful of schools and let other parents attack Tier Three parents for being "selfish" to not think of the greater good.
Brilliant on the part of staff and not-so-lucky for the Tier Three people.
But I think so much time has gone by, that it's likely a done deal if only because people are probably now tired of talking it to death.
For the record, I think, for ALL students concerned, the district should have provided real numbers on the costs, found that money and had two tiers. This is real and vital part of the school day for BOTH students and parents.
Comments
NEmom
Your later paragraphs have it right. There are <10 elementaries left in Tier 3. All others (except K-8s) are Tier 1.
Elementary school is a LONG six years. I can't support having neighboring elementaries (e.g., Bryant and View Ridge) start hours apart like this.
TWO TIERS
reader47
The latest proposal does not have any elementary schools in Tier 2. They are in either Tier 1 or Tier 3. High schools, middle schools, and some K-8s are in Tier 2.
-North-end Mom
No notice at any of the public meetings. And, not even any notification from the district to our school about this change!
Two Tiers is the best option for students and their families. The educational benefit of Tier Three escapes me.
-StepJ
-StepJ
-craziness
Craziness, you should tell the Board that because Sealth got a promise of not having the same start time as Denny because of their proximity.
I personally think the latest plan negatively impacts the least number of kids. Schools with high FRL and low transportation benefits should get to pick their start times and everyone else can get filled in after that. Schools with generous transportation benefits should be in the first or third tier without question due to daylight issues for walkers. Said another way, no school with a huge transportation zone and small walk zone should be in tier 2. Schools with small attendance areas should not be in tier 2, either.
I wish they'd quit changing things. I get tired of having to rearrange my whole schedule every few years when the start time at one school or another that my kids attend is changed (good thing my boss is flexible with this). Now my youngest child's 3rd tier school is apparently being switched to 1st tier - meaning the seven year old will be home an hour before any of her older siblings. At a school with no on-site after-care. Did they even consider day care arrangements into their choice of which school is on which tier? Seems like after-care would be pretty popular with any school ending at 2:10, but I guess we'll all have to make out individual arrangements.
We'll sort something out, but it would have been much easier for us to just leave the 3rd tier elementary in the 3rd tier where it was.
Mom of 4
Do you mean send HCC students to Hale for classes instead of offering them at JAMS? What, exactly, does "foster greater resource exchanges" mean?
-curious
No notice, after the LAST version said FINAL on it.
Ludicrous. Unhappy communities need to push back on the lack of notice or engagement with their schools.
-skeptical-
Sad as we were so close to improving the academic lives of MS and HS students.
This article is touting $3 million (not 8?). There shouldn't have to be a scenario where "glad it's not me". They shouldn't have said it was a no cost solution if truly there is a cost to getting all elementary schools and K-8s, all middle schools and all high schools on the same age group schedule. The Tier 3 kids are now paying the "cost" for everyone else to benefit. Doesn't matter who they put in Tier 3, it's not okay. And many parents in the Tier 3 scenario were helping contribute and advocate for the earlier start times since they have already been experiencing some of the latest times in the district. Sorry guys, your kids not only don't get the benefit but you've been isolated in your community and get to start even later.
-StepJ
HP
I would not ever want my kid to attend a school that started later than 9am.
It makes for too late of a day, and getting kids to pay attention after 3pm is more difficult than before 8am!
After school activities are also very important. I know a ton of kids whose after school sports programs enabled them to perform better in school. But those generally begin at 4pm for elementary kids.
I attended the JAMS Bell Times meeting. There were no parents that I was aware of advocating to keep Sand Point in Tier 3 (their assignment in the DRAFT Final Recommendations). There were a number of parents asking why the Tier 3 assignment contained all Title 1 and high FRL/ELL schools (Sand Point, John Rogers, Olympic Hills and Northgate were all in Tier 3 at the time of the JAMS meeting).
-North-end Mom
JAMS parent
StepJ and NE parents: half of elementary schools already start at 9:30 and in the NW, at least, some do and some don't. It hasn't been the death of our community. Generally speaking I think most parents prefer not to be in the 9:30 group (which is when my elementary aged kid starts), but I think many staff like the 9:30 start. Fine minds don't think alike about elementary start times.
I understand that once again SPS is failing at engagement (the list is so long) and once again, they are throwing out plans that are hard to keep up with (again, the list of times they've done this is so long). However, when I look at the latest plan it seems better - not perfect, but good.
I think we'd all like our kids to start around 8:30-9:00, but I don't think that's coming her anytime soon. I'd like to see the numbers, too, Melissa, but I'm not going to hold out (and hold off change) for that when it's possible to have middle and high schoolers starting at 8:50 next year. Start my elementary aged kid at 9:40 (10 minutes later than now) or 8:00. Pros and cons to both for any family or school, but they are outweighed by the pro of the middle and high school times.
Support It
NE mom
Box
We were told,several years back, that they had overhauled the system and saved millions. Was this transparently documented? No. Did they tell us where the "savings" went? No.
I think there are things that could be done to streamline the system but again - the district does not want to clearly explain where all the money is and where it goes.
That means we need a change on the Board and, sadly (because I personally like Superintendent Nyland), a new superintendent. We need people who want to bring down these walls and these silos.
And I just live in part of the walk-zone. A lot of it? Up and down Delridge. Simply a great place to send 5 year olds walking in the dark at 4:15 in the winter. I will give SDOT some props for finally (3 years after the issue was raised) putting in a crosswalk and light for families needing to cross Delridge (a 35mph major N/S thoroughfare in West Seattle). I don't know many adults who would walk up and down Delridge after dark. And, with the insane start/end times, I can guarantee that it will force many of the families in the walk-zone to make this trip unaccompanied. This is a very middle-class neighborhood with loads of immigrant families and lots of Section 8 and SHA housing.
As for schools with "increased transportation" such as Option Schools? Each of these schools has a walk-zone just as far-reaching as every other school (except Pathfinder, which I've never understood). So, you can't pull that card either.
Aren't the high school students the ones needing the latest start times to account for biological rhythms? How many high schools on Tier 3? ZERO.
Melissa has called it correctly. SPS is clearly doing a bang-up job of pitting schools against one another and every person just shrugging their shoulders at the fate of "others" is doing the district's dirty work very well. Good job. After the major support shown during the strikes and outpouring of nearly universal condemnation for their mid-October teacher swapping, now is the PERFECT time for them to successfully divide and conquer. After all, what does it matter if a few schools get screwed? People are tired and are just so relieved to have it "not be them" that they won't raise a fuss. Nice job.
intheknow
This 10am time is a rumor, and has no basis in reality; please get that out of your mind.
The latest proposal is head and shoulders above all the previous ones. It's not perfect, but waiting for perfect means waiting a long time, or maybe never. Schools at the unpopular Tier 3 have been reduced from 33 to 13; this is substantial progress. Virtually all middle and high school students are at times recommended by the AAP; this is also huge progress.
Logistics has worked hard on this, and has done much more than they said was ever possible before. There have to be considerable efficiencies built into this schedule to make it cost neutral.
We are seriously harming our adolescents; this needs to change, the science is so strong on this. Please ask for more, there are cases to be made, but please look at the big picture and send a letter of support for this proposal. The board needs to hear from us.
ls
Routes for regular ed students and HCC students usually have pretty full buses. Routes for SPED and homeless students often don't. Also, regular and HCC routes will have fewer students at the start of AM and end of PM routes as riders get on/off during the trip. So when you see a bus with few riders on board, you can't really know whether the bus is fuller at another point in its route or whether it's a route that serves a specific population.
There are far more routes in play than just the three tiers. Kids go outside the district for special services, or because they are homeless. There are early ed routes, half day K routes, routes for students who get therapy during the day, Team Read routes, routes for students in certain after school programs, skills center routes, routes for SPED kids in transition programs, etc. Some routes are regular M-F, some just one or a couple days a week, etc. Plus field trips and buses for athletics (which are not even included in the hundreds of routes in the database)... there's no two ways about it, we are using a lot of buses.
I looked specifically though last year's database searching for "frivolous" routes and I'm just not seeing them. Every route listed that made me say "huh, what the heck is that?" turned out to have what I would consider a reasonable explanation for its existence, at least on first glance. If someone has different info, I'm all ears.
There are inefficiencies in capacity usage for a lot of SPED and homeless routes, but I understand there are reasons they use buses vs. cabs or other smaller capacity forms of transportation even for small numbers of riders, having to do with how the state reimburses, I think. And I hope no one here is going to bitch about providing transportation for SPED or homeless kids.
It's entirely possible that our vendor (First Student) simply doesn't have enough buses/drivers to go to two tiers and still meet all our other transportation needs. We'll probably never know without a heck of a lot more transparency from the district, which I won't be placing any bets on.
Melissa, in District 1 it is Christofersen - not Pinkham - who will best fill these shoes you have set out. If you want to be considered an unbiased reporter then you should stop passing judgment on Michael. You have a personal issue with him that prevents you from being unbiased. I note that vitrually none of your statements about Michael's suitability for the office of School Director relate to Michael's positions and ideas.
Michael Christopherson has original and very sensible ideas about how to improve accountability and transparency. Here are links that document Michael's seriousness about addressing these issues.
1. http://info.kingcounty.gov/kcelections/candidatesonballot/pamphlet/pamphlet.aspx?cid=53876&listtype=FILING&eid=1266#c27435
2. http://christophersen4schools.blogspot.com/2015/10/ask-candidate-questions.html
3. http://projects.seattletimes.com/2015/election-guide/#/candidates/Cristophersen
Signed "No I am not Michael"
Categorically - First Student can not do two tiers alone. Back in the days when SPS HAD 2 tiers there were THREE Vendors, plus cab/speciality transports for SPED/McKinney Vento etc.
First Student just can't do it with their existing fleet and are already stretched very very thin for qualified drivers.
There are problems getting adequate drivers for several reasons. This is partly due to an upswing in the economy - it's a very low paying job with weird hours and no benefits. When the economy is bad, people will do just about anything. When the economy is better, they have other, more lucrative and attractive choices. That is the current reality. Can the situation change? sure. Will it? This is SPS after all. Who knows!
reader47
Can you tell me where you found bus route information? I suspect that if routes were planned carefully within each region the tiers could be shorter.
Regarding start times in 2017: The union contract specified that all schools would have 20 minutes added to each day, and that the fifth day would be either early release or late start by one hour. It also said they would bargain on the exact implementation of this plan.
If you are trying to add 20 minutes to the school day, you do not subtract 20 minutes from the morning; this would be totally nuts. I have attended many of the community meetings, Board committee meetings and Board meetings, as well as asked the question of negotiator Jon Halfaker at the SCPTSA meeting.
You can read the negotiation paper on this topic here:
http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/News/Whats%20New/sps-mou-20-minutes09122015.pdf
I think the real question about this whole plan, which somehow became a top priority negotiating item in mid-August, is how the District plans to pay for it. The price tag I have heard is $60 million, and also that no funding source has been identified to pay for it. I'm still trying to find the answer to this question. The other questions are what is the impact on teaching and families, is this the best schedule, and where is the public engagement on this plan anyway?
I can only think that something got lost in translation about the 20 minute addition to the day....
I did a Public Records Request for the transportation data set last June. I shared it with GarfieldMom and am happy to share it with you and anyone else who is interested.
No. Not Michael nor any member of Michael"s family. Michael does in fact have supporters.
I am not surprised to see misattribution by certain posters on this blog.
Christophersen Supporter.
Not Michael.
As far as the 9:40 start for elementary, my kids were in a school with that start time for four years. It wasn't our preferred start, but it ended up being fine. Sports usually didn't start until 5 or 6, since parent coaches needed to get home from work.
This current scenario isn't ideal, and I wish it were two tiers rather than three. However, the later start times for all middle and high school kids in this plan is SO important that even this imperfect solution is an enormous step forward for our kids and the district. If we rally against it and the district bails on the whole thing, they're unlikely to ever revisit it since the staff has been opposed to it from the start. If this gets squashed, and if your start time is already at 9:20, you'd still be at that time, but your kids wouldn't then get the benefit of the later start when they get to middle and high school. The bigger picture is more important than having two tiers instead of three, at least IMO.
-Seattle Parent
If we didn't have to second-guess numbers that we KNOW are inflated/inaccurate/pure fluff, then maybe we could be rational and less reactive!
I don't know the cost but yes, the district negotiated something they don't know how to pay for.
Folks, remember this is how SPS rolls. Pits communities against each-other- it's chess but our kids are the pawns.
tin foil
Gigi
Bailey Gatzert is the only ES that is significantly later at +1 hour. All others are a change of 10-30 min. Most only 10 min. The sky is secured tightly here folks. I do think the district threw some schools under the bus on this one but unfortunately until the State figures out its mess this is the best we will get.
Thanks again to all who fought for this victory. Now let's see how they solve the self inflicted wound of not enough HS seats.
APP Dad
If our bell times remain what they are now, not only will our teens continue to suffer with all the health, psychological, and academic penalties that go with constant sleep deprivation but many more of our elementaries will continue to be on tier 3 than under the new plan. The new plan is an improvement over the current bell times for most teens & most elementaries.
Yes, the district should hear that their transparency & manipulation through this process has been atrocious. But please do not sink this ship, there is not another one coming.
-Alum
~nimby
NE Mom of 3
And as M alludes to, the third tier has been moving a few minutes later year after year, so that they can say "Oh, it's only a 10 minute change" without pointing out that the cumulative effect is something like 40 minutes by now! I remember when the third tier started around 9AM.
I haven't looked at the complete list of third tier schools, but Cascadia at Lincoln is about 750 this year and uses more busses than any other elementary school. Kids in the northernmost neighborhoods have the longest rides and some have no sidewalks. How is transporting them at the height of the evening rush hour and dropping them off around 5PM - or later, with traffic - all winter okay?
And if you're in a K-8 that's moving to the first tier, how is that okay for your middle schooler? What a mixed message. We are moving bell times so adolescents can get more sleep because that improves outcomes, reduces accidents, etc, YET, some small handful of adolescents are being given an *earlier* time next year?
Someone at the Times said it's okay because K-8s are option schools and if you want a later start for MS, just transfer to the neighborhood MS. Is there room for all the grades 6-8 kids at, say, Broadview Thompson to suddenly transfer to the neighborhood middle schools next year? And even if only a small number move, how will that affect class offerings? Is this the best way to support our K-8s?
And what if Cascadia's late start affects enrollment there? Is there room at neighborhood schools for kids to stay? That hasn't been our experience in NE Seattle. The schools have been pushing kids out to APP for years now due to overcapacity.
At a time when capacity is brittle, introducing new variables that will affect parental decision making seems unwise!
Part of what I told legislators at their "listening tour" on Monday night was that back when I was in school - admittedly a long time ago - we had these "assessments" (called quizzes) that teachers generated themselves. These quizzes were quick and allowed the teacher to assess if he/she was reaching the students and make adjustments. It allowed students to know if they were understanding what was being taught.
We actually (and this is true), got a man to the moon - and back - with this system of teaching and learning.
So maybe we don't need that $3.5M assessment contract. Maybe we don't need to give the Superintendent - who makes more than the governor - a raise or bonus.
There's some money right there.
Isn't it the district's job to make parents happy with the school system and to do everything they can to improve academic outcomes for ALL students? Because parents who are happy invest in their child's education and don't become frustrated and detach from it. Students who get enough rest and feel secure in how they get to school will do better.
Why doesn't the district see this as a priority?
Elementary school is 6 years; middle and high school are 7 years total. PLEASE look at the big picture, and realize that even though it may be a pain for them to have a later start now (and my kids had a 9:30 start for 4 yrs!), it will DEFINITELY be worth it when they/you get to middle and high school.
For all of us who believe this imperfect plan is still a HUGE step in the right direction, we should be writing/calling the board today to express support of the plan, since the 3rd tier families are likely to be vocal at the board meeting today. The district will look for any excuse to kill this plan, and we can't let the only voice they hear be the voices from the 3rd tier who are against this plan. Again, I speak as someone who lived the late start for 4 years of elementary with 3 kids, but who now NEEDS the later start for them in middle and high school. The later start time will benefit ALL our kids when they get to middle and high school, so we should all join in supporting it.
-Seattle Parent
Please come and pay for the lost wages of parents who cannot get to work on a regular schedule with children waiting around for bus to school long after the regular work day has begun. The 13 schools that have been singled out for the 3rd tier include many FRL families and I'm sorry SPS, our world is a 9-5 world. It is ridiculous to ask families to have their kids wait around for school until nearly 10am. Get real.
Frustrated in the 3rd tier.
Cascadia and TM have always had late starts, because of the lengths that some families have to go to get there it would be impractical to have a tier 1 start. And next year start and end is only changing by 10 minutes.
Many of the other principals were asked which tier they wanted and some chose tier 3 so older siblings could provide child care.
This in no way can be considered a nimby issue as everyone of those ES kids will soon be going up to MS and HS. It's all of our back yard!
This is not ideal but I feel it is as close to that as it can be with current Admin and Board.
APP Dad
Before-school care is more expensive than after-school care and that's hard, but the science for middle and high school students is still the same.
From http://www.startschoollater.net/:
The healthy, safety, and equity benefits to starting middle and high school at times more in sync with the sleep needs of students are irrefutable. Benefits include:
• Improved alertness, memory, attention, and cognitive processing skills.
• Improved academic performance that may be twice as great in disadvantaged students
• Reduced tardiness, truancy, and drop-out rates
• More sleep per night and reduced fatigue
• Reduced depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors
• Improved athletic performance
• Reduced risk of obesity, eating disorders, and diabetes
• Improved mood and impulse control
• Stronger immune system
• Reduced risk of stimulant and other substance abuse, and high-risk health behaviors especially during early unsupervised hours in the afternoon
• Reduced delinquency
• Fewer car crashes and better psychomotor performance
• Increased visibility during commutes to school
• Long-term economic benefit. A recent report published by the Brookings Institution predicts that starting high schools one hour later would result in roughly $17,500 in increased future earnings per student in present value - a benefit:cost ratio of at least 9:1. (From: http://www.startschoollater.net)
Again, my family knows about the experience of the 3rd tier first hand, and it ended up being okay. The much bigger deal for all our kids is the need for the later start in middle and high school, which they will get with the current plan.
-Seattle Parent
-not sold
APP Dad
Voting this plan down will not improve anything.
-Alum
Furthermore, of those 13 schools, twelve of them are already on Tier 3. So ONLY ONE school in the entire city is slated to start more than 10 minutes later next year compared to this year. One.
M and frustrated, I admire your idealism, and I think if you look at the big picture you'll realize you already got what you are asking for. Twenty schools were moved off of Tier 3, and 6 of them were Title 1 schools. That's a win.
If you want to direct your advocacy effort, direct it on behalf of that one school that was strangely moved to Tier 3, Bailey Gatzert, a Title 1 school for whom the late start might be a true burden vs an inconvenience. But advocating in the context of one school is much less likely to derail the whole plan.
Tier 3
Tier 3
You say that the cost is too great to have any elementary students at 9:40 and it is better to leave the secondary schools early. Though that does not help the 33 schools on tier 3 currently.
I understand that you want to advocate for your child. But are you sure, it is better for your child? Do you know that it is more important for your child to have early starts now that to have late starts as a teen?
I remember the kids in elementary school. I was in the classroom a lot so I got to know them. I could never have predicted which one would become a cutter, or be hospitalized for anxiety, or be in a debilitating car accident, drop out, or give up on becoming an engineer because having math class 1st period for 2 years in a row was too harmful. They were all well adjusted, bright kids from supportive homes. Yet all of these things happened in high school to children that I knew from my kid's elementary.
Teens have very little executive function at the best of times, but when they are sleep deprived it becomes even riskier. They don't have even the scrap of emotional resources left to apply the self-discipline required in overwhelming situations. The risks are even higher for students who don't have lots of support at home. The risks for teens are higher than those for elementary school kids. None of us should assume that our children are immune to the teenage pitfalls. Those pitfalls are worsened and harder to recover from when teens are basically jet lagged all the time.
It may be hard to imagine now with an elementary school child, but getting your child successfully through teenagehood can be like walking a knife's edge. I hope you will have the advantage of later school starts when that time comes.
-HS Parent
Look at the big picture.
Think ahead
I certainly agree with making middle school & high school start later, having a teenager myself, but it is kind of annoying that everyone is assuming that everyone with elementary school kids wants Tier 1. People seem to assume that all younger children are bouncing out of bed at 6:30 AM & ready to board the bus at 7:30. Not the case at all in out house. I'll agree 9:40 is too late, but 8:00 is too early, and that is no improvement.
Maybe having schools in the same area with different start times would give parents some leeway to choose the schedule that works for them (assuming one can get in to any school other than one's neighborhood school, that is - I realize that is not the case everywhere).
Mom of 4
I strongly feel that while this plan isn't perfect, it is a HUGE improvement - one that provides equity for many more children.
Well said, Tier 3!!! I really appreciated the comment. I thought I was the only person left who could see the big picture instead of my elementary kid's sweet little face, which, in a few years will be full of zits and needing a lot more sleep. I can see the big picture.
BT
To NE Mom from several posts earlier, I am picking no fights with the generous transportation comment. I am not begrudging the option schools their bus service, I just think the middle school walk zones coupled with their start times are insane!
To answer your question about what I mean, please click on the above link. Then, scroll down to Salmon Bay K-8 or Louisa Boren K-8 and take a look at their transportation maps. There is a small walk zone at these schools and a huge area that gets transportation.
To put my comments further into perspective, click on any attendance area middle school that you are familiar with and look at how incredibly large their walk zones are. It's laughable to expect these children to walk that far to school - especially when kids need to be to school before 7:30am in many cases! They'd need to leave home by 6:30am or earlier.
So, I don't get how kids who choose an option school get "generous" transportation benefits and petition for the "best" start times while kids who are expected to walk some CRAZY routes to school don't get transportation and are saddled with the "worst" start times. To further that, the "best" start/end times are well within daylight hours, but they are also getting transportation. This unjustly gives "double-safety" to those kids. Meanwhile, some elementary, middle and high school students have "double-danger" by having a very long walk at least one way in the dark. Kids on the early start do their danger walk in the morning. Kids on the late start do their danger walk in the evening.
I hope the Boren K-8 PTA president's interview was heavily edited due to the above inequities of transportation, walk zones and start times. I could never be worried about my child's snack time while 1000's of children were in danger daily.
I hope that ramble makes sense when you look at the maps. People like M that are against their elementary kid starting at an undesirable time while middle school kids face these walks in the pitch black are so incredibly selfish or short-sighted. I don't know which one it is, but it's not looking out for the greater good!
Firstly, I think it is rather outrageous that the district has decided to adopt this extra 20 mins without any public notification/consultation and the only reason we found out was via the strike/teacher pay negotiations. But even more disturbing is the lack of information about they intend to implement it- for instance would they be:
-adding 20 mins to the end of the day = same start time, later finish?
- adding 20 mins at the start = earlier start time, same finish?
-adding 10 mins at both ends = 10 min earlier start, 10 min later dismissal
-doing the same at every school or would they have some start some earlier or some finish later?
Surely it is important to know now, otherwise in 1-2 years time we will all get a potentially unpleasant surprise that may even negate the changes we would be making for next year?
And anyway, what is the actual benefit of adding 20 mins x 4 days then taking away 2-3 hrs 1 afternoon per week = it pretty much cancels out!!!
Long term planning
-app dad
Tier 3's earlier comment showing the huge number of schools that will have improved schedules proves this is a huge step in the right direction! My kid's elementary will stay tier 3, but it almost has to due to the long bus rides of many students. It's really difficult, but we make it work.
Although not perfect, if you think this is at all an improvement over what we have now, send the School Board an e-mail. Don't assume other people are sending positive thoughts, but you can rest-assured the Board is hearing from many opposed.
-SPS Tired
There are also MANY fewer high schools than there are elementary. Why not make those 13 schools in Tier 3 high schools?
While I can no longer find it on the SPS website, they already have plans in place for the extra 20 minutes. In Tier 3, this means a 4:20 end time.
Again, why are the students who are the most in need and the most capable of self-transport, high schoolers, not being put in Tier 3?
I still think its better to go with this proposal and maybe tweak it in future than to stick with the status quo.
Thank ahead
But many parents complained. Middle schoolers travel longer distances through unsafe neighborhoods after dark & use public transit. Also programs like Team Read depend on ending the same time as high schools. They went to the meetings. So MS was shifted earlier. Frankly I am amazed that a whole bunch more elementaries weren't shifted to 3rd tier to make up for that. Seems like someone in transportation has seriously been trying to move toward 2-tiers.
There will not be any proposal that doesn't provoke many complaints. Every bell time will be a hardship for someone. Someone is going to make sacrifices no matter where this lands, even if there is no change. Even if it is 2-tiers. It is not a question of if, but of who & how many.
-also tired
I truly hope this change happens.
http://sps.ss8.sharpschool.com/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=2927552
Tier 3
I have always been in favor of later starts for MS and HS. Even before we got there, even when our elem school started later. Just from reading the research. Now that I have kids there, geez louise – it’s the right thing to do. And I agree, we don’t want this train to leave the station w/o headway because I doubt there will be another go round. A key aside -- this initiative has been in the works for YEARS. Surveys and committees and task forces and public testimony and public meetings/ community outreach. I know some families are new to SPS and are cycling in but the time to protest has past I think.
My personal feelings aside, how do we get around this roadblock?
Two ideas:
1. Would it work to have 13 schools who need to be in Tier 3 CHOOSE to be in Tier 3? With some incentive? Like class size reduction, or funds to go to before school programming, or library/classroom books or tutoring dollars or __________ (insert incentive here). And would this cost less than the figure to get us to Tier 2? That way the school community knows the benefits of the choice. Still might not fit each and every student/family, but nothing ever fits 100%.
2. I would be 100% willing to pay for bus service, just like I did for Pay for K and like I do for school lunche. It is a big convenience to have my child transported to and from school. I understand not everyone is in this position but should we at least talk about it? Check my math (not my strong suit) 53,000 SPS students minus 19, 610 (which are the 37% which are FRL) = 33,390 / $5million (one estimate to get to 2 tiers) = $150 per year per kid. (/10 months of school = $15 per month per kid) Right? Are there enough people who can and are willing to pay for bus service to make it reasonable. We could even have a scholarship system where families could pay more?
I’m just tossing out ideas.
signed,
eleanor
I'm also interested in allowing parents to opt-out of bus routes on an annual basis. Right now the buses are "full" but because of people like me, they have lots of space, typically. If we could have a way for some parents to just say that they don't want bus service for the year, then we could run fewer buses... Right now there's no way to do that. And you can't really charge people if they want to opt out entirely and can't...
Another transportation issue is what happens when families lose service based on the boundary restructures? With the new WP site schools opening up in 2017, there will be more boundary jockeying that will affect communities and bus eligibility. For next year Hazel Wolf families in the Eckstein service area are losing bus service but I hear there are currently 6 buses that come from the Eckstein service area to HW. What if those families were willing to pay? What if there were designated hub stops so the bus would only need to make 4-5 stops rather than a dozen stops? Some of those families will lose transportation in 2016-17 just to regain it possibly when the Eagle Staff Middle School opens in 2017 (in the Mapleleaf, OV areas.)
It's a complex issue, certainly.
~bussing madness
~bussing madness
I believe the district is only willing to make a change that is cost-neutral - so giving Tier 3 schools benefits in exchange is not likely to happen.
Only about 18,000 students were riding yellow buses last year.
State transportation funding is based on estimated cost for the current year and is limited to the prior year's actual cost (adjusted for schools that are opened or closed.) If we were to charge a fee for riding the school bus, the next year's funding would be reduced by that amount. The state funding calculation also takes into account efficiency - so if we were to switch to two tiers and increase our costs by $8M, the next year's funding would increase, but likely not by $8M. Staff has not provided any data on this. The other question is where we'd find additional buses and drivers. I hear this is also a problem.
Double rats that only 18K rode the buses.
Triple rats that charging for service would reduce our state funding allocation
more rates about the cost-neutral meaning benefits in exchange wouldn't work.
oh well
:( eleanor
Thank you for your email to the School Board regarding your support of the 2016-17 bell times for our District. We appreciate the time and effort you have made to contact us.
The most recent recommendation detailing proposed times at all schools was released on October 13, to schools and public, to allow for community review and send feedback before the November 4, School Board vote on the 2016-17 transportation standards. From the community input we have received, it is apparent that most families desire either Tier 1 (8am start time) or Tier 2 (8:50am start time). However, the District does not have the funding for only a two tiered- transportation system, which requires more buses and is estimated to cost between $8-15 million. Therefore, a Tier 3 transportation system must be maintained, while working to build a schedule to accommodate later start times. With limited funding, the Board has limited options.
In late September, the District held five community meetings to review and comment on a draft recommendation. The feedback received indicated that moving Title 1 schools to the latest arrival time (Tier 3) would worsen the opportunity gap for students who face some of the greatest challenges. Therefore the decision by the Superintendent and his leadership team was made to update the recommendation to move all Title 1 schools to Tier 1 or 2, and create a budget neutral scenario for the rest of the school’s bus routing system. In this way, there will be less schools in a Tier 3. Through implementing these priorities, the District will be able to reduce the current (2015-16) number of Tier 3 schools (33) to 13 Tier 3 schools in the current 2016-17 recommendation.
The District continues to take feedback on this recommendation at the arrivaltimes@seattleschools.org until November 2nd. Your input will help guide the district to make the best choice for our district.
-change BTs
The issue of ending up with reduced efficiency is hard to figure out. There's a formula for efficiency but Seattle's efficiency is always 100% apparently because we are so much bigger than anyone else we can't be compared.
GarfieldMom
I know many who read this blog don't think that sports are important; but high school team-sports can teach kids many valuable skills if the coach does it right (and the parents aren't vainglorious loons living through their kids' accomplishments) - kids learn to win gracefully, lose without falling into despair, resiliency, persistence, cohesiveness, unselfishness, team work, sacrifice, courage, pride of accomplishment. Some kids are late bloomers academically, sports can give them self esteem and confidence, teach them to work and play pwell with others. And it's also fun, healthy and keep kids out of trouble and bad choices. I had friends who stopped smoking so they could be better athletes. While I think we go way overboard with the win at any cost and the big money in football and basketball, I think it'd be a mistake to not have school sports. Many families can't afford the high costs and travel demands of club sports.
What are the district's plans for after school sports?
CCA
My son plays Ultimate Frisbee at Hale. Hale's school day currently starts at 8:40 and ends at 3:10. Ultimate practice runs from 3:30 - 5:00. If a game is scheduled after school, kids on the team are released early from 6th period. I don't have any experience with other sports, but they probably have similar practice times.
-North-end Mom