Curriculum&Instruction Policy Committee Meeting

Today is the C&I meeting which I reported on in Seattle Schools This Week.  Somehow I missed that it's two meetings.

The first one, starting at 4:30 pm is the regular C&I meeting and the other, starting at 6 pm, is a Committee Meeting of the Whole. 

Why is the Committee Meeting of the Whole happening?  Because they are going to discuss Policy A01.00, Instructional Philosophy, which is a huge policy for teaching and learning for the district.

The opening paragraph is the aspirational part of what SPS and the Board want for students.

Achievement of this goal will be reached through the following:
  • Maintenance of high academic standards for all students, and high expectations by all staff;
  • A rigorous curriculum aligned to college and career readiness standards at all schools and in all programs;
  • Effective teaching, measurable outcomes, ongoing assessment, professional development and continuous improvement at the student, school, and district levels;
  • Programs designed to promote the full development of each student’s capabilities, including social/emotional capabilities, to ensure that all students can meet or exceed college ready standards in addition to state and district performance standards, regardless of the student’s skills upon entering school;
  • Programs designed to provide a broad based education in areas not measured by standardized tests, such as music and visual and performing arts;
  • An expectation that all students will demonstrate critical thinking skills, will communicate effectively with words, numbers, visuals, sounds and symbols, will use technology effectively, and will achieve at levels that meet or exceed college readiness and state performance standards, thus eliminating any achievement gap.
Student success will come through a concerted effort towards these goals by district professionals, school board members, students, families, community partners, and elected leadership. 

In addition to community collaboration and family commitment, quality leadership, effective academic support structures, and efficient operations are key enablers of student success.
So what's the issue? I'm not sure but I don't think this is just some regular "clean-up" of policy that has been on-going over the last several years.

What is more specific is the next policy in this block of policies, Performance Management.  So if you change one, the other might change as well.  (This is all under the heading of Philosophy and Goals and it includes Ensuring Educational and Racial Equity.)

This could be interesting.

Comments

disconnect said…
That last bullet point is strangely written. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that we agree with this part:

An expectation that all students will demonstrate critical thinking skills, will communicate effectively with words, numbers, visuals, sounds and symbols, will use technology effectively, and will achieve at levels that meet or exceed college readiness and state performance standards,

I'm trying to figure out how that in any way points to the conclusion:

thus eliminating any achievement gap.

Really?? Are we defining "elimination of the achievement gap" as "all students will meet or exceed (minimal) college readiness"? I guess that's one definition. Good luck even starting to make that happen without addressing the Opportunity Gap, which unfortunately is mostly beyond the scope of what school districts can address by themselves.

3/14/16, 3:52 PM
Anonymous said…
Not sure if everyone meets college readiness and state performance standards if their achievement therefore is void of "gaps" from student to student. Not unless they want a cap on those who "exceed" those standards. But that is not what they are saying. They are working with a misunderstanding or incorrect definition of what the "gap" is. They are new. Someone will help them fix that, right?

-Hopeful
3/14/16, 4:12 PM
Ms206 said…
These curriculum and instruction philosophy statements are clearly designed to apply to neurotypical children and children with mild disabilities. What about students with more severe disabilities, like intellectual disability, multiple disabilities, deafness, or blindness. I am aware that altogether, these are a very small percentage of students. But what about them? College is often an inappropriate goal for these students and they need more individualized programs as well as vocational rehabilitation or support services.
3/15/16, 4:56 AM
Charlie Mas said…
That language looks familiar.

It reminds me of the definition of basic education in RCW 28A.150.200
3/15/16, 8:21 AM
Melissa Westbrook said…
That was a weird C&I meeting and I left early as they decided they had to reread (silently for minute on end) the policy on Instructional Philosophy.

Charlie, I perceive your perseverance on the issue of policy may be getting some traction. But there also seems a lot of word wrangling and strangling that worries me.
3/15/16, 2:16 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more