Seattle Schools This Week

No meetings being held; July is generally when tumbleweeds roll thru JSCEE.

Director Blanford has cancelled his community meeting for next Saturday, July 16th.  
However, Directors Patu and Harris still have their community meetings on that date.
Patu - 10-11:30 am Caffe Vita, 5028 Wilson Ave S.
Harris - 3:00-4:30 pm Southwest Branch, 9010 35th Ave. SW

Message from Superintendent Nyland on the events of the last couple of weeks and resources for you to help your child. 

The following resources can help you discuss troubling events with children:

Comments

Anonymous said…
Please,please attend the directors' meetings and let them know loud and clear that this new blending of Garfield students is very misguided.

We can change this but we need people to show up and explain to the directors the harm this will cause to ALL students.

Please find time to attend at least one meeting.

Hamilton Parent
7/10/16, 12:11 PM
Anonymous said…
Thanks Hamilton Parent!

Anyone know why Blanford has canceled his meeting?

Ambushed
7/10/16, 2:45 PM
GarfieldMom said…
Hamilton Parent, what is misguided about it? Can you give examples of students who would be harmed and specifically how? So far, I am not seeing any persuasive arguments against the change and will be letting directors know that I am in favor of it.

7/11/16, 11:11 PM
mirmac1 said…
I support it as well
7/12/16, 8:37 AM
Charlie Mas said…
GarfieldMom, what gives you such confidence that the Honors for All classes will be as rigorous as previous years' Honors classes?
And, if the instruction is not as rigorous, wouldn't that be a negative for the students who would have chosen Honors if it were a choice?
7/12/16, 10:37 AM
Anonymous said…
Now if they would only be so committed to including and differentiating for students with disabilities, whose outcomes are also shown to improve with inclusion.

reader
7/12/16, 11:36 AM
Lynn said…
I am guessing that many of the students taking the reading support class are students with disabilities. Wouldn't that make sense?
7/12/16, 11:56 AM
GarfieldMom said…
I'm confident because I know the teachers who are working on this. My kids have had many of these teachers, for gen ed and honors/AP classes. My kids were in private schools until high school (except for some non-US public schools). Based on what I know about them and the scores they achieved on various standardized tests over the years, I know that had they been in SPS for K-8, they would have certainly tested into HCC. Also, I have a graduate degree in education, FWIW.

I have been happy overall with the level of academic rigor expected of my kids at GHS (health class notwithstanding -- what a wasted semester that was for both my kids). I'm also extremely pleased with the non-academic skills and knowledge they are gaining that will serve them as adults in a society where curiosity, problem solving, communication, resourcefulness, empathy, and creativity are going to be more important than whether they can score highly on an AP or SAT test. Students who fail to learn those skills are going to be less successful adults, no matter how rigorous their classes were or how high their GPAs were.
7/12/16, 2:22 PM
Melissa Westbrook said…
Reader, that is a good point. Hmmm.
7/12/16, 3:58 PM
Anonymous said…
LOL!! Her kids would have totally tested in to that horrible program that separates rich white kids from poor black kids if she wasn't too morally superior to test them for it. Also, they were in private school at the time.

Chuckles
7/12/16, 4:18 PM
Melissa Westbrook said…
Chuckles, please don't be cryptic; who are you talking about?
7/12/16, 7:00 PM
GarfieldMom said…
Chuckles is talking about me, Melissa -- he/she is referring to what I wrote in response to Charlie's question. I'm not sure why Chuckles thinks I didn't have my kids tested out of some kind of moral superiority. There is no testing into HCC coming into 9th grade. I really don't know whether I would have wanted my kids to test for HCC or not if we'd been in SPS at the time. It's a moot point though, since we weren't.
7/12/16, 10:19 PM
mirmac1 said…
I support it as well
7/12/16, 11:47 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