Friday Open Thread
Great story about Chief Sealth's water-bottle filling station from the West Seattle Blog.
At the Everett League of Women Voter's event last night, lead counsel on the McCleary case, Thomas Ahearne, outlined what the Court could consider ordering for the legislature:
A great, great op-ed piece from a departing principal in Ohio, George Wood, on schools, kindness and what kids remember:
What's on your mind?
The CSIHS Green Team has been “recognized as a 2015-16 Conservation Champion for their work to get water-bottle-filling stations. Not only did they get the green light to purchase filling stations at Chief Sealth, additionally they convinced the school board to pursue a $200,000 grant for filling stations in every single Seattle Public School.”Garfield is having a yard sale tomorrow, Saturday, June 4th from 10 am-2 pm- bring them anything you don't want in the garage anymore.
Garfield High School will be hosting a Goodwill Fundraiser. Goodwill will be sending trucks to Garfield and we will be attempting to fill them with your help. Money raised will go directly to Associated Student Body Government to fund student/school related activities.Don't forget the Art-In that The Center School is having today if you are around Seattle Center.
At the Everett League of Women Voter's event last night, lead counsel on the McCleary case, Thomas Ahearne, outlined what the Court could consider ordering for the legislature:
A great, great op-ed piece from a departing principal in Ohio, George Wood, on schools, kindness and what kids remember:
School should be a place for all sorts of kindnesses. After all, children are forced to attend, with little or no choice over the building, staff, or bus driver they draw. School is one of their first experiences with government, with strangers in close proximity, with authority outside of the family. School should be a place of challenge, but also a place where children are supported to try, and try again. Students should leave us knowing that for this time in their lives they were in the company of people who genuinely liked them and worked in their best interests.
Board Retreat, Saturday at JSCEE, from 10 am-3pm. Agenda. Looks like they will be discussing community engagement but there are no accompanying documents.When people ask me about what changes I have seen in the two decades I’ve worked here, I know they expect me to say something about how kids or families or teachers have changed. Wrong. Kids are still interesting, if a bit more docile, and interested in the world around them. Families still want the best they can marshal for their children. And teachers are here because they think they can make a difference.
What has changed is that it is harder for us to be nice to kids. With elevated standards and increased testing, we find ourselves with less leeway with which we can help a child navigate. With ‘zero tolerance’ laws and other Draconian rules, the mistakes some children make can no longer be forgiven.
What's on your mind?
Comments
So what positive improvements have the new board members created in your school?
With all the tough talk I really expected more in the first year!
Disenchanted
I see positive change happening, largely because of the new Board majority and the presence of Deputy Superintendent Steve Nielsen.
To note, it has not even been a year since the new Board members have come on; it's been six months.
I wish they had been able to fend off Nyland's extra year on his contract but that happened before they came on.
https://cloakinginequity.com/
It's funny how bureaucrats and their supporters defend the lack of meaningful change velocity, but kids are only in elementary school for a short period of time and failures there have a knock-on effect that can have serious consensuses in high school.
I've seen nothing from SPS to assure parents that the numerous issues plaguing SPS are being actively corrected or even targeted for later intervention.
I see mostly the same staffers plowing along and only 2 weeks left in the SCHOOL year.
I will ask you to identify each of the positive changes and the school, please if you will.
Disenchanted
Greater transparency, no embargo on Friday Memos for a week, mandate to staff to provide the annual reports required by policy
Greater scrutiny of initiatives and decisions (Disenchanted should attend a few committee meetings)
Resolving to work towards an alternative assessment framework, as allowed by the ESSA
Greater responsiveness to community concerns (e.g. EEU, Middle College)
Greater oversight over school, sites and program placement (except for special education, regrettably)
An enlightened approach to district practice re: use of restraints and isolation
Diligence with respect to policy formulation (no more cut and paste from WSSDA)
Ensuring that October staffing adjustments impact students less dramatically
Ensuring that any further expansion of City preschools protects the rights of children and district funds
Planning a retreat to more fully examine district's community and family engagement
Many more... But primarily placing students first in this district, as it should be.
My guess is, "community engagement" means giving activists and pressure groups a say in school policy while parents have none; and "family engagement" means more fluffy speeches by the principal. Am I missing something? I would love to hear what this actually means.
"Director Burke responded to my lengthy email and said they will be discussing the 3x5 schedule at the board work session this Wednesday, June 8, from 4:30 - 6:00 PM. Now is the time to write the board and voice your concerns. Also consider attending the work session."
Just sharing this so that everyone who opposes this plan knows to contact the board BEFORE next Wednesday to speak out against it. IMO, 3x5 would be disastrous for our high schools.
If you're just catching up on this proposal, check out Melissa's previous post, as well as the many dozens of excellent reader comments: https://saveseattleschools.blogspot.com/2016/05/is-district-moving-quickly-on-24-credit.html?showComment=1464835244365#c6308581524649794763
-Seattle parent
I'm sorry you are in fact, distressed.
Disappointed, would very much like to buy you a cup of coffee or have you correspond with me or my colleagues on what exactly you think we should be doing, doing differently, and how in the confines of our overmandated underfunded district we can do things differently? Pls. be specific, please add pricetags and source of funding and sustainability. Please Email me at leslie.harris@seattleschools.org
Mirmac / Melissa - thank you for your feedback.
Outsider - please come to the Retreat tomorrow - note that it is a FIRST Step - Board/Staff work to design the model and then we engage the community on community engagement - Part two. We have a new Chief Engagement Officer, Carri Campbell, who is most impressive and has a background in working with SPS and our CBOs Community Based Organizations) and non-profits. The purpose and reasoning to bring this forth is to address some of the issues you raise (though I do not necessarily agree with).
Best,
Leslie Harris
District No. 6
Ex. Comm., Audit & Finance
Leslie.Harris@seattleschools.org
206.475.1000
The fine means nothing, it's a farce in which all three branches are complicate.
We need an income tax, but even the judges are scared by the anti-taxers.
Karl
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/36254-how-teenagers-got-police-to-back-
down-and-remove-military-grade-weaponry-from-their-high-schools
A coalition of Los Angeles high school students and grassroots organizers
just accomplished the unthinkable. After nearly two years of sit-ins and
protests, they forced the police department for the second-largest public
school district in the United States to remove grenade launchers, M-16
rifles, a mine-resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicle and other military-
grade weaponry from its arsenal.
But the coalition did not stop there. Members took over a Los Angeles
Unified School District (LAUSD) board meeting in February to call for proof
that the arms had been returned to the Department of Defense -- a demand
they eventually won in the form of an itemized invoice for every weapon
sent back to the DoD. (more)
-McClureWatcher
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2016/06/01/18787162.php
A forum was held in Oakland on "common enrollment", charters, privatization
and racism in the education system. (more)
-McClureWatcher
It depends on the school. I have been in schools where teachers & staff immediately answer emails, attend evening meetings, and even organize food to try to tempt parents to come to conversations with them outside of school hours.
-HS Parent
We have an excellent and responsive board. I've also found this board to be very courageous. Director Peters and Director Burke put forth a resolution to inform the state of SBAC shortcomings; they stood up and let the state know they weren't happy with an expensive test that wasn't producing timely results. The resolution was supported by Harris, Pinkham and Patu. They also decided to begin questioning the SBAC/ 95% compliance issue. These are the first important steps to change and meaningful conversation. I've not seen any other district have the courage to stand-up to the feds and state.
I'm grateful.
I believe you're trying to make a difference in your district. I remember you were especially critical of the past SPS board and promised change. Where you able to convince the majority of the board the need for change? And will we see any positive changes in our classrooms anytime soon?
My original question was, what has improved in schools for the 15-16 school year.
I can tell you I know of numerous issues in special education resulting in law suits and OCR investigations, BTW the findings were against the district. There continues to be a parade of settlements, but only after the students and parents and teachers suffer. I see no evidence of the board working proactively with the Office of civil rights. So I will ask, is the board working proactively to eliminate special educational related law suit and if so how?
Do you or other directors provide any form of oversight to how the district handles IDEA or ADA complaints/violations? Is the board remotely interested in curtailing the steady stream of law suits?
If so, then perhaps the board should investigate the special education legal round table and in particular the SPS documents detailing instructions how SPS conducts settlements and how to avoid using private placement provisions in settlements and how SPS legal dictates IEPs.
Disappointed
-websiteshame
Two, Disappointed, Miramac gave you a list of things accomplished since the new Board majority has been elected. It seems that you are being specific about what you are looking for, namely, Sped. I would leave that to the directors to answer but I know they are aware of the issues.
Sure, the props have changed, the phones in particular are a force, but the way kids are, the way they interact, the way they feel and grow and struggle, it's all much the same as it was. Why would anyone expect it to be different? We're all human animals, and the species hasn't changed much in the last few decades. What stuck with me then was the teachers who treated students like people. I try to do the same thing, to understand their lives and treat them with respect, and warmth, and concern. It's amazing how much kids hunger for that sort of regard, that kindness. I suspect it doesn't stop when people stop being kids, either.
As for this district, I am cautiously optimistic. I think things are improving, but as Melissa says, this is a VERY LARGE vessel we're trying to turn here. It takes time and constant application of force (Newton's First Law, everybody!). Keep the faith, everybody.
1) We're all in this together.
2) Kids need to know that multiple adults in their lives are in their corner.
Westside
Thanks, NP
The complicated part is it's own fault. With a annual budget of ONE BILLION DOLLARS and only 52,000 students, there is no excuse for its mediocre performance.
SPED Parent
SPED Parent
Guiding principals for authentic community engagement
Draft community engagement model
Process to guide engagement level
What did it accomplish exactly?
- Just Curious
Director Patu made an impassioned speech for Alternative Education and Programs including cultural learning styles...hopefully, the Board heard it. Also, what does it take to resolve the Special Education issues?? Why haven't we done this?
Perhaps all of these concerns and requests (that have been made since 1978) were resolved (not just discussed) at the Retreat today.
Board directors, via discussion, saw that the draft Goal 3 (SPED) should encompass multitude different learning styles (HC, ELL, ALE, STEM CTE etc). While I would surely go to the mat re: SpEd, I can see how the newly-formulated Goal 9 can work towards reforming the exclusionary and rigid structure with which the District treats our kids with disabilities and those students with different learning styles/needs. I'm good with that.
Here's where I will offer up my personal perspective. The way draft Goal 2 is formulated, it is primarily around race and cultural competency. I see the new "9" as addressing different learners and what SPS can offer them. I believe the groups
consensus re: Goals was: 1 (regrettably), 2, and 9. Lovin' 2 and 9!
We have some amazing directors who take their roles VERY seriously and I am so happy to have witnessed this!
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/06/02/redesigned-denver-school-gets-rocky-start.html?intc=EW-DC16-TOC
-early riser
I think the later start is great for teens needing more sleep. I just wish our district could accommodate a reasonable start time for all the elementary schools, like around 8:30 am.
BT
and another option would be not to open schools until the Legislature does what the Legislature has been charged to do..........Yes, this would temporarily "hurt" the students....but not as severely as our students are currently being "hurt." SEA and the District and the Parents and the Students and the Community could make this happen.
--Legal Perspective
http://cjonline.com/opinion/2016-06-03/editorial-talk-defying-supreme-court-dangerous#
My question to Legal Perspective; would Gov Inslee comply and shut down the ferries and Child Protective Services and the blueberry commission if ordered by the Court?
The editorial above illustrates what the Court may be trying to avoid.
DR
Here's the thing - it's not like legislators on both sides having been talking behind closed doors within their own party already. They have their lines in the sand but hey, it's just sand.
If the legislature were pushed hard, they could get this done in days.
Push on,Supreme Court.
CT
--Legal Perspective
- Simple Logic
-NP
Who/how/why??
For staff? Teachers? Board Directors? Families/communities? Please tell us more.
Issues related to Levy Swaps and Levy Reform should be considered.
- Just Curious
From my perspective, what was gained was
a) a rallying of the community (parents, citizens, students) around teachers and the creation of at least one potentially effective parent/citizen support group;
b) recognition that educators have some insight as to best practices, with the issue of recess time;
c) a relatively fair raise, long-awaited...
d) increased cohesion and connection between educators; a reinvigoration of educator efficacy vis-à-vis the "reformers" and THEIR agenda.
We seem to be getting a spate of readers who seem upset if their questions aren't answered and/or their comment gets no response. Sometimes that will happen; no one here is obliged to answer anything. A non-response doesn't mean someone doesn't have an answer or doesn't care; there's a number of reasons they might not respond.
I absolutely think the teachers strike rallied the community, lead to the creation of Soup of Teachers (a great parent advocacy group), lead to discussion of recess time (something of great benefit to students) and yes, a raise.
"High school girls in Alaska are crying foul after a male sprinter took home all-state honors in girls’ track and field. According to local reports, it was the first time in Alaskan history that a male athlete competed in the girls’ state championships.
Haines senior Nattaphon Wangyot–who self-identifies as a girl–advanced to the state finals in the 100-meter and 200-meter events. He won fifth place in the 100-meter dash and third place in the 200-meter. In both events, he competed against girls as young as ninth grade."
Title IX issues?
--NEParent
Complete Title IX issues. Beyond that it's a clear issue on how in certain sports being a certain gender can be a 100% advantage. What's next? Identify-as-female golfers tearing up the LPGA? Rowing? Soccer? Etc. Especially since the article stated that Alaska doesn't require hormone therapy before they can sign up for a sport. Riiiight.
It's unfortunate that we get it through a tabloid because it immediately portrays it as a "shocking" thing, a "terrible" situation where boys are trying to rip off girls, when, in fact, it appears this girl does, yes, identify as a girl and wants to compete with girls....the Daily Caller trivializes the issue, and even insists on calling her "him" and "he" when the person evidently identifies as "she."
Relevant points of discussion:
1) if a person self-identifies as a girl, that is certainly their right, whether they have boy bits or girl bits;
2) it's true that, as a generality, those people born boys are typically more muscular and have denser bones, among other "advantages" in physicality;
3) that difference could impact competition;
4) for generations, "boys" and "girls" have been separated in many, if not most sports, sometimes for no apparent reason.
5) women have proven that they can do most things, physically, that men can do...
Maybe in many sports we need to do away with the boy/girl split. Golf, for instance - maybe a longer drive for guys? but really, isn't it about precision, not power? Soccer? Aren't boys and girls equally capable? Baseball? Basketball?
Some sports might require a split, for equity's sake, but many don't.
Once you have a split, yes: Title IX issues - is it unfair for someone born a boy to compete as a girl? maybe so. But if that person identifies as a girl, Title IX would, apparently, protect her rights as a girl, as well....Interesting quandary. I'm glad I'm not a judge in that case. But I'm so glad these discussions and decisions are coming up: more and more people are more and more free, and that's a GOOD thing!
Again, a brave new world and yes, I can see Title IX issues.
And to the person who was crude to SC - go away and stay away. You are not welcome here.
Funny, but I don't think that you are just curious. I think that you're trying to make a point, but you're doing it cryptically.
I want to know what the 17% increase in costs (versus 5% reduction in sped enrollment) brings our students. If not this first year of the CBA, then the next few years. Because I'm hearing the usual whinging about the costs for sped. Yet there's no indication of actual improvement plans.
1. Even though the district has opened Access programs, it is filling them up with students who have minimal or no disability. Previously, inclusion programs were for students with significant disability. Now, this most expensive program, Access, is for students who are the least disabled. The explosion of growth is in another expensive program, Focus or SM2, a maximum restrictive environment. So, by filling all the Access slots with students who are simply "odd", they actually fail to provide inclusion services to students who would be excluded, and they drive costs way up. Access is very expensive with 3 IA's. It needs to be reserved for students who need that level of support and who need this to "access" general education. Eg. They would otherwise be excluded in self contained.
2. Explosive administrative costs. This needs no explanation. With a truckload of new consulting teachers - they don't consult, they simply wait around to become really expensive supervisors, which takes about a year, they drive up costs.
3. Robbing special Ed funds. Using special Ed funds to to teach general Ed students. This happens everywhere. Special Ed teachers teach actual gen Ed classes, the robbery is blatant. IAs are used for every duty under the sun - bus duty, recess duty, hall monitor, lunchroom. That means they aren't providing special Ed service, and more special Ed funds are needed to do that. The provision of special Ed funding for seats in general Ed seemed like a good idea - but expensive. This is only a good use of funds, if it means special Ed students get their rightful inclusion. They don't.
There you have it. The obvious reasons that special Ed costs are increasing. All avoidable with oversight. Where is the director?
Speddie
Not cryptic just amused. Snide might be more appropriate
Don't read more into something that doesn't exist dude.
- Just Curious
Just say what you think, JC, no need to set up an elaborate verbal puzzle to tease us.
Why you think recess was the only gain when I listed at least three others is beyond me, but to each their own....
Dude.
Speddie, those are some big claims (including kids in Sped classification that have no disability - how would you know that?) And how could Access be the most "expensive" program - is that size?
If you can document all this, you should and take it to the Board.
Wow must be grads of SPS to think this is more than snark.
- Just Curious
Man I love this system of the Seattle Process.. you either are with us, repeat the talking points and if you don't you are a meanie genie. Yes I am the immature one totally like for sure.
Ah diversity means what in Seattle, just the color issue, opinions not so much.
Thanks for playing kids
- Just Curious
Students in self-contained (intensive services) used make up about 30% of special ed enrollment. (you can verify with 2007 audit) Now they comprise 40% of enrollment, a 33% increase. That is indeed a huge increase in costs - shifting resource students - to more expensive programs. That means the growth of expensive special education - has come from students formerly served in the resource room. About half of those students in expensive programs - used to be in "autism inclusion programs", or about 10-15% of the students with disabilities. Now about 20% of the total "expensive", or 8% of the total kids in special ed are now in Access. But that is almost the exact reduction in the resource room. Perhaps I overstate the case: "not disabled", but the evidence clearly shows "not developmentally disabled", or disabled with significant disabilities. Access was supposed to be for students who had no access to general education, not just extra services for students in resource rooms. We also see a whole new program that is huge: Focus. That is a self-contained program, and relatively expensive. We didn't have that before. SPS used have SM2, which was similar - but very few students were enrolled. Bottom line - if you want to know where the costs are - look no further.
Speddie
The state adjusted its model to pay for 1080 hours of instructional time in grades 9-12 (80 extra hours). The state also budgeted for more hs counselors and funded to support additional science lab requirements. (All this is in the state operations budget, if you're curious.)
BUT ... that funding is based on the state's salary allocation model. Locally, teachers negotiate tri pay as a raise. State funding does not cover tri pay, or any other salary/benefit modifcations negotiated locally. So that gap in funding remains.