The Times on Nyland; Still an Engima
The Times has a somewhat curious article on the Superintendent.
For one thing, they make it sound like he's been here just a year but, at the end of August, 2016, he will have been in SPS for two years. (They say it's the end of his first full school year which is true but most people will not read that distinction.)
They make this claim:
- some who think he's stabilized the district
- some who think he is moving too slowly
- those who just don't feel they know him (despite his nearly two year tenure)
I'm pretty sure the majority of people who have interacted with him would say he is a nice guy and a gentleman. I certainly would.
I think JSCEE staff probably do like working with him because of his personality. But Stephanie Jones of CPPS nails it:
But I sure do want a leader.
One thing I had hoped for - given his background in Marysville in working with Native American students - is to see some of that happen in SPS. Not so much.
One thing Nyland did do right? He rehired Steve Nielsen as deputy superintendent.
Nyland had this interesting statement:
The Times also pointed this out:
Who did they talk to?
What Nyland says at the end is telling about how he sees the work in SPS:
For one thing, they make it sound like he's been here just a year but, at the end of August, 2016, he will have been in SPS for two years. (They say it's the end of his first full school year which is true but most people will not read that distinction.)
They make this claim:
At the end of Nyland’s first full school year as permanent superintendent of the state’s largest school district, opinions on his performance split into three groups.They are:
- some who think he's stabilized the district
- some who think he is moving too slowly
- those who just don't feel they know him (despite his nearly two year tenure)
I'm pretty sure the majority of people who have interacted with him would say he is a nice guy and a gentleman. I certainly would.
I think JSCEE staff probably do like working with him because of his personality. But Stephanie Jones of CPPS nails it:
“I know that he is passionate about the work of the district, but I don’t know that I have a great sense of what his priorities are for the next phase,” said Stephanie Jones, executive director of Community and Parents for Public Schools of Seattle, a group that works to improve parent and community-member engagement.Exactly. Even as he continues with the Strategic Plan, most parents probably couldn't tell you much about it. It's large and unwieldy and has had some shape-shifting happening to it.
At his office in the school district’s headquarters in Sodo, Nyland is the first to admit he’s not a visionary. Ultimately, he sees his role as bringing together different groups that otherwise might not have interacted, like central-office staff with a parent group. It’s not appropriate for him, he said, to come in with one big idea for how to fix all the district’s problems. He sees his job as a weaver.I'm not sure we do need a visionary but we do need a vision. It's interesting that he had the idea that central office staff didn't interact with parent groups before he came (or that they wouldn't.) As well, I wouldn't want someone like Maria Goodloe-Johnson who did come in with a big vision of her own.
But I sure do want a leader.
One thing I had hoped for - given his background in Marysville in working with Native American students - is to see some of that happen in SPS. Not so much.
One thing Nyland did do right? He rehired Steve Nielsen as deputy superintendent.
Nyland had this interesting statement:
In Marysville, where Nyland served for nine years, he said he would meet with people who had concerns and explain what the district was or wasn’t doing. They would either agree or come to understand that the district couldn’t do everything for everybody. In Seattle, there’s another group:Could that have been the Alliance for Education? Because I can't imagine any parent group coming in and saying that.
“(They say) ‘I flat-out disagree and I want what I want,’ ” Nyland said. “That part is different.”
The Times also pointed this out:
In a 5-1 vote, that board recently decided to dilute one of the longtime powers of the superintendent — deciding where to offer and close programs, sites and services.
That had long been the sole responsibility of the superintendent, and now, depending on the situation, the board will vote on them, or at least be informed of the superintendent’s decisions beforehand.Unfortunately, the Times did not explain WHY the Board took this step which makes it look like the Board is trying to micromanage. (They also did not get a quote from a single current Board member.)
Who did they talk to?
Among the two dozen educators, parents, advocates, former School Board members and politicians interviewed, the responses about the state of the district range from “running exceptionally well” to “bad, which is business as usual.”I have to wonder about the thinking of any reporter or editor who is doing a story on a current superintendent and doesn't talk to a single current Board member. Almost like they wanted to shape the story in a specific manner.
What Nyland says at the end is telling about how he sees the work in SPS:
From his office, Nyland gazed out the windows at the Seattle skyline. His contract runs through 2018. After that? He’s not sure.Given the Mayor's machinations around gaining control over the district, I find that statement quite in line with the Mayor's efforts. Hmmm.
“Grand, big ideas, particularly for a city or district the size of Seattle, are going to take a lot of time, and a lot of ownership,” he said. “My goal is to leave the system better than I found it.
Comments
As well, Nyland told A4E that they were not in charge of the school district and severed ties.
Clearly, Murray would love for the city to help select a superintendent. I'm sure the individual would be supportive of the corporate model of education reform.
The superintendent is always under the watchful eye of the press and politicos with an agenda.
The district could look very different without Nyland.
Also, Dorn has no authority of Nyland.
Courage demands sacrifice. Nyland sacrificed nothing (except the future of about 100 kids who were enrolled at Summit Sierra).
--- aka
As to Nyland himself, he seems to be well-liked on a personal level, but as Charlie's previous post makes clear, he has not put an end to the culture of lawlessness at the JSCEE. Doing so is a prerequisite to his ability to achieve his laudable equity goals.
His term is up in 2018. I don't know if there's any significance to that from his perspective. But 2018 is the year that the City of Seattle's Families and Education Levy and the Pre-K Levy both expire. It is entirely possible that Ed Murray and Tim Burgess will use that as an opportunity to aggressively push for some kind of city takeover of SPS.
--- aka
Can you explain your thinking on this statement:
"Nyland sacrificed nothing (except the future of about 100 kids who were enrolled at Summit Sierra)."
Charter Schools operate outside of SPS, so how would Nyland's position/opinion have any impact on Summit students?
Wasn't their "future' in the hands of the state legislators?
For anyone that thinks that it doesn't take courage to stand-up to Gates and his minions- think again. These individuals love to use the media to discredit individuals in positions of authority.
Some prefer to paint Nyland as flat, but it takes an enormous amount of courage to stand-up to political forces in this town and state. Highline and Spokane had no problem diverting public funds to schools formed under an unconstitutional law. If you think Nyland would circumvent public dollars to appease Gates et. al...think again. Why did the Seattle Times feel it necessary to write this piece- anyway??
Nyland let A4e know that- under no uncertain terms- he was running the district. Now, we have Murray and Jones wringing their hands.
--- aka
"saw how [charter schools] systematically undermind and suck funding from public schoos" -- broad, perhaps, but generally accurate from what I have read;
"as Seattle voters have repeatedly made clear" -- flatly spot on; Seattle voters DID vote against charters, every time they had a chance to.
"SPS would be made far worse by the proliferation of charter schools. Just ask anyone in Chicago or Philadelphia." -- this is really opinion, not "information" so maybe it falls outside the discussion -- but from what I know of public school supporters in those two cities, this is true as well.
And -- for what it is worth, I totally think that Robert is right to worry about a push by the mayor to take over the schools (though that also is not "information" or "fact" -- it is a worrisome prediction, based on observations to date and predictions about how faux democratic mayors in other cities have acted.
Where is the misinformation?
--- aka
I maintain: It takes courage to stand-up to the city's most powerful.
-- Ivan Weiss
As for media coverage of Dorn's actions, are these not sufficient?
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/for-states-charter-schools-its-a-matter-of-survival/
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/lawmakers-to-propose-way-to-keep-charter-schools-in-state/
--- aka
--- aka
No. There was never a media discussion or call to ascertain whether Dorn worked within his Rule Making authority. Also, there was never a public/media discussion to call attention to the fact that the MWSD listed themselves as the parent to all charter school students. There was never media attention to the fact that the MWSD provided their address-as place of resident-for all charter school students.
There was never media coverage to the fact that Washington Charters and Gates played an enormous role in helping former Charter Commissioner- Kevin Jacka- and Dorn divert funding for charter schools through the MWSD.
Signing off.
They didn't report the MWSD as parent and providing their address as residence because neither of those things happened.
As for the latter issue regarding the use of ALEs to provide funding for the programs, that was reported in the articles referenced above.
What else?
--- aka
Moody's issued a report making it clear that charter schools take money from public schools: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/10/15/charter-schools-are-hurting-urban-public-schools-moodys-says/
An overview of how charters undermine public school funding in districts across America: http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2016/05/charter_schools_enrollment_nat.html
Here is an NAACP lawsuit about $42 million that has left St. Louis public schools for charter schools: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/st-louis-public-schools-says-it-s-owed-million-from/article_051bef08-264d-590c-acb5-bede59dc6e72.html
Charter schools draining money from Oakland public schools: http://capitalandmain.com/latest-news/issues/education/oaklands-charter-school-tipping-point-0531/
The great Rick Perlstein looks at how Chicago charter schools drain money from Chicago public schools - 50 of which closed, devastating neighborhoods and causing a mass revolt that has pretty much destroyed Rahm Emanuel's career: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/04/chicago-public-schools-charters-closings-emanuel/
Massachusetts charter schools drain money from public schools: http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2016/04/08/in-mass-charters-clash-with-traditional-schools-over-siphoning-of-funds (which is why parents in Mass are working to stop charter school expansion)
A small town in Ohio: http://www.timesreporter.com/article/20151217/NEWS/151219406
And here's a charter school advocate saying not only do charters take money from public schools, that public school districts should just get used to it and downsize: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-roza-charter-fiscal-impact-public-20160519-snap-story.html
Shall I go on? Nyland has his strengths and weaknesses, but standing up for 50,000+ public school kids and their schools is one of the best things he's ever done.
"They didn't report the MWSD as parent and providing their address as residence because neither of those things happened." Wrong.
As for standing up to the Mayor or the BMGF, it's more a case of not fawning over them or abdicating authority to them than opposing them. And, again, I see the Board having a role in that posture. The District staff, on the other hand, is all for sucking up to the City (they couldn't do enough for the pre-school initiative) and the BMGF.
You bring -up important points and I'm enormously grateful for our board.
However, I can't imagine Banda standing-up to the over-reaching A4E. As I recall, it was Banda that ordered a mass math waiver..after the board adopted math curriculum. According to the article, Nyland acknowledged the board had legitimate concerns regarding program placement.
Clearly, as the city engages with principals and works from the inside..there is more work to be done.
I also think that if a corporate backed superintendent was in office...the Seattle Times article would have looked very different.
I'd love to see SPS under the leadership of someone dynamic and forthright - who tells the Mayor the places where his assistance is welcome and where Mr. Mayor can just back off. Who tells senior staff to remember that is classroom first, and perhaps gets rid of a few of those newly ensconced senior mgmt positions...
SPS is such a messed up place on so many levels that I'm not sure there exists a person who can turn it around to a more functional entity, but wouldn't it be lovely to try? A girl can dream, right?
reader47
Another perspective
At the risk of starting an unintended thread, how does HCC cherry pick, from a cost or other perspective?
-SPS Tired
Another perspective
-sleeper
As for charter apologists, public records show Dorn cast a blind eye to irregularities in establishing these ALEs under the MWSD. They all should go down in flames.
HC is required by state law. Seattle is not following state law. If it were, HCC would reflect the demographics of the district and use a continuum of services model (instead of segregating most of the elementary students). They also would not be identifying close to 10% of students but would be in line with local districts which average 5%. The students in HCC are a very specific demographic that is out of sync with the district in every measure.
"Cherry picking" is used against charters for good reason. They do the same thing that is going on in the HCC cohort (and formerly Spectrum).
The height of hypocrisy is the uproar against charters by the same people who support and defend HCC most vocally. HCC and charters both result in low FRL, ELL and SPED classrooms with the most connected/savvy parents in the districts. In SPS, it includes the most educated.
The "cost" is to the students left behind in the highly impacted classrooms. The "cost" is also to the integrity and fairness of the system. And, don't kid yourselves, there's a huge "cost" to the credibility of charter opponents who maintain an indefensible double standard on this blog and elsewhere.
FWIW
Another perspective
I *do* think frl kids are underrepresented in hcc, and that there are several things we should do to address that (though that will also bring per pupil spending up.). No, i'm not a school staffer, but I know my way around a budget and am very familiar with the wss.
-sleeper
Actually, sleeper, the students in HCC are plotted by location and those locations are certainly not in lower income areas in terms of clusters. There is very legitimate data for A.P.'s point, and I would put my money on the accuracy of this assertion.
What you believe about the data doesn't match the clusters on the HCC maps. The number of apartments, etc. are can be easily plotted and usually correlate with income. The NE "hot zones" simply don't follow lower income housing patterns. I'm sure the district has very clear data to prove A.P.'s point.
FWIW
No, the district definitely does not track student cohort by median household income or even have any idea what any student's household income is, aside from frl statistics. If the district was that competent things would be very different in many ways.
-sleeper
I guess my solution would be an equalization in funding. Much more to classrooms which are highly impacted by poverty, disability, and language issues - less to others. Removal of gifting except to the entire pot.
Another perspective
The district does have the information about student wealth based on residency. Housing patterns and addresses can certainly indicate SES without knowing family income. I think most of us already know the truth about this, especially the people who are in the program.
sleeper is pushing back very hard against the obvious. It indicates to me that he/she is uncomfortable about the injustice in the SPS version of HC.
FWIW
FWIW
-ap
-number stuff
The high poverty north end schools send so few students to Cascadia that returning them to their neighborhoods would make no difference at all in the budget or classrooms (6 from Olympic Hills, 7 from Viewlands, 12 from Northgate.)
http://sps.ss8.sharpschool.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Enrollment%20Planning/Reports/Annual%20Enrollment/2015-16/Section%204.pdf
HCC is its own demon because it is categorized as the "fittest" in terms of academic capability. It is beyond shameful that a so-called progressive city needs something like Rainier Scholars because it is so neglectful of its own talent.
Instead of addressing the overriding issue here--HCC injustice--there is always an attempt to rebut an otherwise insignificant detail that a poster who is speaking from the heart and has made a very important point. The overall argument is rarely rebutted since there is no rebuttal that is ethical.
This is known as either the Availability Bias or Tiny Percentage Fallacy.
FWIW
ap, that's a pretty depressing reason to have advanced learning. That reason to keep wealthier families from leaving isn't going to make much different to the ones who can afford to leave without hardship. Wealthy families don't even have to be in HCC to have advantages. That's the great thing in having money. It buys you resources, right neighborhoods, peers, networking opportunity and information. That reason just help support those who say HCC is more like a gated school within a public school system. Not to mention the flak if HCC gets the new school. The group which would benefit the most by advanced learning are those kids with the least. They are the ones who aren't in advanced learning, but have great potential. They don't have the advantages outside school to help them realize their potential. What happens in the school matters and helps counterbalance what's happening outside school, even if what happens at home affects these students more. Any advantage a person gets is an advantage.
I trade HC/spectrum for smaller class size, real curriculum planning and evaluation, more resources in the classroom and enrichments paid by SPS not PTA fundraising. But that's my fantasy. Not going to happen with an America that is fine with monopolies, income inequality, stagnated wages and loss of upward social mobility and living in city where its leaders talk progressive, but perpetuate policies which drives the poor and increasingly its middle class away while enriching the wealthy even more. It's progress for the right kind of people.
The most highly capable are not well served by SPS advanced learning anyway. They need more than 2 year acceleration. It means allowing more academic individualization like IEP, so students can access college level classes much earlier than HS. The same for those with exceptional talent. Where's a performance art school around here?
voter
Rainier Scholars tests it's applicants with the CogAT - just like the district does for HCC. They also provide after school and summer support and require massive amounts of out of school effort by their students - things the district cannot do and they then funnel that talent into well-funded exclusive private high schools. Rainier Scholars has nothing to do with public schools and HCC.
What you call HCC injustice I call the unfortunate evidence that very few children in poor families receive the support and enrichment outside of school that is necessary to develop their academic potential. HCC is not a reward or the ticket to a superior education. It's an academic intervention for children whose needs our general education classrooms are not designed to meet.
What? You'd better have some stats to back that up. I had no idea that enrolling in HCC came with a requirement of stating your sexual preference. As well, while HCC is not as diverse as it should be, once again, Asians are not white.
"HCC is its own demon because it is categorized as the "fittest" in terms of academic capability."
First sentence: "demon?" Who are you, Ben Carson?
Lynn, and speaking of South Shore, they get more extra money than any school in the district. Interesting how they have the lowest FRL/ELL service rates.
I trade HC/spectrum for smaller class size, real curriculum planning and evaluation, more resources in the classroom and enrichments paid by SPS not PTA fundraising.
Well, you couldn't "trade" HCC because it's a state mandate so there's that. And yes, it would be good for SPS to pay for enrichments but I'll remind you that many parents - both in and out of HCC - do invest in our schools. If Garfield drives out many families, I'd be interested to see how their fundraising goes.
It's also a fantasy of mine to see school less reliant on PTA fundraising arm. PTA is great for community building. I dislike the yearly burden, the power dynamic and the politics which ensues when fundraising a huge sum, speaking from my lens as a volunteer and check writer. I prefer a well balanced BLT with voting parent representatives. That's where governance should be. It's been a full circle for me watching site-based decision making (which has seen decisions made by one person or a few vs. consensus) to central apparatchik calling the shots, now back to site based again.
voter
Rainier Scholars has everything to do with how Seattle mis-identifies HCC students by not using Lohman's own best practices. We've already gone down this road, Lynn, but we can go down it again. Seattle has over-identified massive numbers of students who are advantaged because they don't use local norms. David Lohman and Diane Ravitz, among others, would be appalled at SPS HCC that blantantly favors those in the privileged demographics. That does make it a "reward ticket" based on family privilege rather than proper identification.
Your mantra about "poor families" and the enrichment outside school as an argument for excluding students from HCC is fully rebutted by the author of CogAT. The test is
designed to identify talent, not prior advantage. State law also rebuts your argument since it now requires the demographics in HC to reflect the district.
Rainier Scholars' website refers to the low identification of HCC of underrepresented groups as a reason for its existence. I'm not against CogAT. I'm against Seattle having hot zones of students who are identified by using a scoring formula (and in more than a few cases, test prep) that results in a segregated self-contained program that excludes many talented students in this district. Melissa brings up HC as state guaranteed. True, but there are laws and regulations governing this guarantee, and what you are defending is not following them.
"Funneling talent" that you said doesn't exist (because they are "poor students") is interesting double speak. If HCC worked in accordance with state law, those students would have been identifed early and would have received on-going support and enrichment (making the need for clean-up costs a non-issue or much less expensive one). Why stay in Seattle when your talent has been fully ignored?
If evil is injustice manifested, then the shoe fits. "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will--Frederick Douglass
P.S. We can always count on the I'm-going-to-take-my-ball-and-run response when people
who are used to getting their way don't get their way. Go ahead. Do what's best for your family.
FWIW
Self-contained can be part of OSPI's continuum of services but, like in SPED, should be reserved for the extreme outliers.
FWIW
Another perspective
-just wondering
From OSPI:
"The district identification process must apply equitably to all enrolled students and families from every racial, ethnic and socio-economic population present in the public school population they serve. Districts must review identification
procedures to make sure student selection reflects the demographics of the area they serve. These specific requirements for compliance — and related activities — appear here in the WACs we list below."
Self contained opt in for elementary isn't cutting it either:
"Lawmakers emphasize the need for a continuum of services with regular review that takes a critical look at — how effective are the services and programs you provide?
WAC 392-170-078 Program services — defines the “continuum” as kindergarten through grade 12.
Districts shall make a variety of appropriate program services available to students who participate in the district's program for highly capable students. Once services are started, a continuum of services shall be provided to the student from K-12. Districts shall periodically review services for each student to ensure that the services are appropriate."
How effective SPS will be when they follow the law is yet to be seen. That speculation doesn't preclude the need for them to follow state HC state law.
FWIW
Need Rigor
"Districts must review identification procedures to make sure student SELECTION reflects the demographics of the area they serve."
Lynn, your stand for years and up until today has been that SPS is doing everything by the book in terms of OSPI compliance. Interesting that you now find the need to prove some SPS work toward compliance with the state law.
OSPI has been giving districts a grace period to reach full compliance since HC is a relatively recent law. Next step is SELECTION. The referenced comment makes it clear that both SPS and OSPI know that demographic reflection in HC student selection is a significant part of the law.
If the law isn't followed within a reasonable time frame, there are enough community members who are fed up with this reprehensible HCC program to take the necessary measures. SPED families can attest to the need to sometimes have to "follow up". The law is clear and is about basic education.
FWIW