The Long-Awaited Student Assignment Plan
Here's the agenda item from the upcoming Wednesday Board meeting.
I have not had the opportunity to compare the red-line with the green printed (clean) versions of the SAP. (And actually, it would be interesting to compare the last red-line version with the current one and see what differences there are.)
Here's the agenda for the entire meeting.
I note one interesting thing on the agenda. The Board is to vote on the SMART Goals that guide the Superintendent's work. There are two amendments to this BAR; one from Director McLaren and one from Director Peaslee and Director Patu. It involves wording over who are the groups in "students of color."
McLaren
I move that the Board amend the 2015-16 Superintendent SMART Goals #1 and 2, to replace the
“for all historically underserved populations” language African American males and other students of color,”as noted in the attachment to the Board Action Report.
Peaslee/Patu
By identifying the other groups of historically underserved students in the goal it makes it very clear
that these students will also benefit from the work behind this SMART goal.
The focus on African American males is not removed and there is no dilution of the strategy of “targeted universalism” in the goal or strategy as laid out in the rubric.
This inclusive language recognizes all of our most historically underserved students and conveys to their parents, communities and leaders that we are focused on improving outcomes for each and every one of them.
So it seems to me that the disagreement, such as it is, is in actually calling out the groups affected and whether "African American males" should be called out over all other groups.
This should be an interesting discussion.
As well, the Board is going ahead with the Superintendent's raise AND extension based on these two reasons NOT to do so.
I have not had the opportunity to compare the red-line with the green printed (clean) versions of the SAP. (And actually, it would be interesting to compare the last red-line version with the current one and see what differences there are.)
Here's the agenda for the entire meeting.
I note one interesting thing on the agenda. The Board is to vote on the SMART Goals that guide the Superintendent's work. There are two amendments to this BAR; one from Director McLaren and one from Director Peaslee and Director Patu. It involves wording over who are the groups in "students of color."
McLaren
I move that the Board amend the 2015-16 Superintendent SMART Goals #1 and 2, to replace the
“for all historically underserved populations” language African American males and other students of color,”as noted in the attachment to the Board Action Report.
Peaslee/Patu
By identifying the other groups of historically underserved students in the goal it makes it very clear
that these students will also benefit from the work behind this SMART goal.
The focus on African American males is not removed and there is no dilution of the strategy of “targeted universalism” in the goal or strategy as laid out in the rubric.
This inclusive language recognizes all of our most historically underserved students and conveys to their parents, communities and leaders that we are focused on improving outcomes for each and every one of them.
So it seems to me that the disagreement, such as it is, is in actually calling out the groups affected and whether "African American males" should be called out over all other groups.
This should be an interesting discussion.
As well, the Board is going ahead with the Superintendent's raise AND extension based on these two reasons NOT to do so.
IX.VIII. ALTERNATIVES
[Alternatives will be drafted and made public after the Superintendent’s evaluation is performed,
which will give direction on alternatives, which will be drafted and made public prior to Board
action on November 18, 2015]. Not provide a salary increase. This is not recommended as the
Board wants to keep its compensation package competitive now and for future superintendents
and the Board wants to recognize the Superintendent’s service to the District from February 1,
2015 until now.
So no "alternatives" done. He gets a raise because to not do so would somehow trouble superintendents of the future. His compensation package IS competitive.
What?! First, the Board has proved ZERO information on the Superintendent matching "the Board's expectation." Where is that?
And, he himself SAID, from the beginning, that he wasn't going to stay but now is? The point is that someday he will leave and has to give something like six months notice. Isn't that going to "
create organizational and senior leadership instability?"
I still say no to this and believe that the Board is simply trying to shore him up as the majority leaves office . I do not believe this is being done based on merit and/or performance.
So no "alternatives" done. He gets a raise because to not do so would somehow trouble superintendents of the future. His compensation package IS competitive.
Not provide a contract extension. This is not recommended because the Board is granting this
extension based on the Superintendent’s performance and historically an extension has been
granted when the Superintendent’s performance matches the Board’s expectation. To not grant
an extension would signal his likely departure in 18 months and this could create organizational
and senior leadership instability.
What?! First, the Board has proved ZERO information on the Superintendent matching "the Board's expectation." Where is that?
And, he himself SAID, from the beginning, that he wasn't going to stay but now is? The point is that someday he will leave and has to give something like six months notice. Isn't that going to "
create organizational and senior leadership instability?"
I still say no to this and believe that the Board is simply trying to shore him up as the majority leaves office . I do not believe this is being done based on merit and/or performance.
Comments
We only have proof that black males under perform and that perhaps it's due to a myriad social problems.
The liberals in Seattle never articulate solutions, they only squawk about how various races can only make it with their handouts. The excuses flow like Seattle rain, but nothing seems to improve, no matter how much money they throw at their pet problem.
Libs want the title one cash and they will tell you what's best to do with it.
Broken record
reader47
He has also messed with math curricula and the assignment plan. Bad things are happening under his watch.
S parent
I did and I think people would be shocked by the responses. You could email each and ask, but I doubt they will be as candid in a documented response.
NB Parent
I do know Rick Burke and he does not have a social agenda. He wants more effective curricula, a subject often lost in other discussions. The focus for SPS should be to educate students effectively, no matter what neighborhood they come from.
S parent
Also, this putting up of tales about what any candidate said during the recent campaign needs to be documented. If you can't do that, do NOT put up false allegations. That goes for any other person in leadership for or in Seattle Schools.
In this version a student only has a guarantee to switch if they reside outside the walk zone of the K-8.
This is a big change, especially for the students at attendance area K-8's.
-StepJ
"
Students Currently Attending a K-8 School
Students entering 6th grade and attending K-8 schools will be assigned to continue at their current K-8 school for 6th grade, as long as the school offers the services the student needs.
If they apply for their attendance area middle school during Open Enrollment through May 31 they will be assigned to their attendance area school as long as the school offers the services the student needs (unless they apply for and are assigned to a higher ranked choice)."
Do you see something else?
I should have read through it again before making comment. But, also think the Section A and Section C language should be cleaner.
Sorry to alarm.
-StepJ
The above perks are in addition to $24K/year annuity, benefits, vacation time and $700/month car allowance.
Taxpayers are getting robbed. You would think that the Superintendent would at least pay for his own professional associations.
I guess this is the outgoing board's last gift to the superintendent that had the first teacher's strike in 28 years.
a weighted average of District employees represented by bargaining units and non-represented
employees. This year the weighted average increase for all employee groups was 5.8%."
This policy needs to be changed. We have highly paid administrators consuming disproportionate amount of taxpayer dollars. I don't deny teachers a raise, but these highly paid administrators are a different story.
From:
"[Alternatives will be drafted and made public after the Superintendent’s evaluation is performed,
which will give direction on alternatives, which will be drafted and made public prior to Board
action on November 18, 2015]."
To:
"Not provide a salary increase. This is not recommended as the
Board wants to keep its compensation package competitive now and for future superintendents
and the Board wants to recognize the Superintendent’s service to the District from February 1,
2015 until now."
Has the superintendent's evaluation been made public?
I'll be glad when they are gone. They have no respect for incoming board members.
Solvay Girl
I would require extensive weekly meetings with the public. Hell this might be the best admin we have had for a long time.
_really?