Enrollment and Waitlists
By request, a thread on this topic. Waitlist link.
I'm going to reprint Kellie LaRue's comments to start it (bold/color mine):
I'm going to reprint Kellie LaRue's comments to start it (bold/color mine):
The middle schools wait lists are at bit much. Meany and REMS are brand new schools with lots of space. There is no reason for a wait list at either of these schools. They should let anyone who is interested in starting a brand new school, go and start that school. Whitman has excess capacity and was promised that all students who applied would be let in but the wait list is extensive.
Cedar Park and Olympic Hills are also brand new schools with ample space, there is no reason for a waitlist.
Moreover, multiple schools that have begged and pleaded for additional enrollment .... have waitlists. The Center School, Madrona, BF Day, Broadview-Thomson, Lowell ....
And the high school lists are fascinating. Garfield, Roosevelt and Ballard are all going to be seriously capacity challenged next year. As such, it would make sense that any school that could take a few extra students, should take a few extra students, so that the eventually swirl will give those three schools some relief. But no ....
Cleveland with extra capacity once again has a long wait list. WSHS with extra capacity has a wait list. Nathan Hale and Ingraham, which are better able to handle extra students via portables have waitlist list. Ingraham is going to have a 500 student addition in two years. it makes a lot of sense for Ingraham to take a few extra students this year and next year so that they scale up, slowly and are able to take the time to find IB qualified staff.
In summary, it looks like families have one idea of what "choice" means and the enrollment office has a completely different idea.
Comments
NE Parent
Concerned Whitman Parent
This year, there will be two new middle schools opening - Meany and REMS. Opening TWO new middle school in the same year is a huge undertaking and a major systems change and is very disruptive to students, teachers, families, staff, everyone involved. Staff deserves a lot of credit for getting these school open. However, the way this capacity has been managed is creating at least as many problems as it is solving.
JAMS was opened in 2014 because all of the middle schools were full and a few were dangerously full. As such, when JAMS opened, all the other middle schools were still full but not dangerously full.
By opening TWO new schools in the same year, we are going from not-enough middle school capacity, to EXTRA middle school capacity, for the first time since Meany Middle School was closed in 2009. (Historical note: When Meany was closed in 2009, SPS went from 10 middle schools that were mostly full to 9 middle schools that were very full. )
Next year, SPS will have 12 middle schools. Unfortunately for everyone, the boundaries for those 12 schools were drawn in 2013 and don't accurately reflect where students live in 2017. As such the capacity that is being brought online is pretty uneven.
Washington, Meany, REMS, Eckstein and Whitman will have extra capacity. As such, it is possible for these schools to accept every single student that wants to attend. Simply put, there is NO CAPACITY reason for a waitlist at any of these schools.
Hamilton will still be severely over-capacity even with this changes. The building was originally designed for 800 students. As such, a long waitlist at Hamilton makes sense.
JAMS is also getting very full, so a wait list there could make sense as well.
Bottom line: The POINT of our "limited choice" assignment plan was so that families could choose any school that had space. Families still think that is the plan. The Student Assignment Plan spells out that this is the PLAN.
This wait list makes it clear that not everyone thinks this is the plan
Thanks! I reposted with the correct info.
Fix AL
Huh?
NE Parent
P.S. Thank you to Kellie for your always-insightful comments and contributions!
Share Info
Data seeker
FY2017-18 schools funding allocations show projected enrollment (adjusted 3/28/17):
http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Budget/2018%20Budget%20Development/17-18%20Allocations/allocations18.pdf
SSCF reader
-HD
Until then remember their 3Ds , Deny, Defend and Delay.
PO
-TG
* That is probably the last time you'll hear that from me in this thread.
JV team
My daughter was 10th on the Ingraham HCC waitlist then yesterday was 11.
The district person I spoke with was trying to be helpful and explained that it is first sibling as priority then complete lottery. Curious how she would get moved down to 11 and they said they are not processing inquiries/mistakes and that is how she got moved down and not up... I tried to ask how many open spots there were to begin with for the Ingraham HCC and she said she couldn't share that or how long the waitlist is. I know someone is #13 so it is at least that long. Luckily for me, my daughter is fine going to Garfield next year, although the cross town commute from Phinney Ridge will be a challenge. I'm more upset than her as I think the IB program would be a fantastic fit. I hear other friends that didn't get in are really upset.
-IHS Parent
JV team
NE Parent
regarding your student moving down the waitlist, I understand that there were many HCC students incorrectly put on Gen Ed waiting lists. My daughter and some friends are on Hamilton's Gen Ed waitlist though currently enrolled HCC students. The enrollment choice form did not include a place for specifying programs, though I should have known better after all of these years...
Anyway, the assumption on the HCC Facebook page is that as they make corrections (which appear to be random, so far), students are moving down on waitlists.
I am appalled that the district thinks they are not going to post enrollment data publicly. Of course that should be public.
-sleeper
wonderin'
-Frustrated
SPSparent
Rusty
Unclear
Dear SPS: educate all the kids! Whatever their educational needs are. Stop making them line up in little personalized lines. Stop making their parents go through obstacle courses to get the kids a basic education. Need a harder math class? Sorry, get out this line. We don't do that here. Well, yeah, we do have harder math classes, but, no, your kid can't have them because your kid is the wrong age for harder math classes. Sorry. Also, you didn't wait in the line for kids who need harder math. Sorry. We don't do that here. Hazel Wolf might. Too bad you're not in the geozone for it. And apparently there's a waiting list of 88 kids. Joke's on us, Seattle.
:-(
" ... enrollment isn't asking the schools what they want. I know that at least one previous year, enrollment refused to move waitlist in order to protect a neighboring school from staff layoffs."
In theory the Student Assignment Plan, authorizes all extra space at all schools to be available to any student that applies. In theory, under the plan, the only reason, to not admit a student during open enrollment is because the school is full. Full can mean either that grade band is full or the school is at or near capacity.
The SAP was intended to give families access to other schools. This had a side effect of giving "popular" schools, an extra layer of enrollment stability. This had a side effect of giving other schools a little less stability. This was part of the plan and well known.
The current enrollment philosophy seems to be that it is more important to "protect" the enrollment at the schools students are leaving via the choice system, than to accommodate the students making choices. The philosophy is understandable but it defeats the point of the choice plan and it is incredibly disrespectful to the families in this district.
In the case of Ingraham, if you examine the high school enrollment data reports, there are 382 students at Ingraham from outside the attendance area. The vast majority of these students are from Ballard (129), Roosevelt (151) and Hale (79). If Ingraham had moved the waitlist then it is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of these students would have come from these three schools.
Ballard with a whopping enrollment of 1798 was so over-crowded this last year, that folks started referring to NSCC as Ballard's second campus. Roosevelt at 1715 added portables over the summer. Both of those schools would most likely have been delighted to lose a few extra students to Ingraham.
Nathan Hale was right on their enrollment target, but with a substantial wait list. Had Ingraham's wait list moved, then Nathan Hale would easily have been able to backfill. This backfill would likely have provide even more relief to Ballard and Roosevelt.
So what was protected? In the end, the over-crowding at Ballard and Roosevelt was protected.
Fix AL
Where is Pinkham's hand in all this, I understand this isn't a Licton Springs issue or Native issue, but it's negatively impacting 100s of students in both his and Burke's districts.
Let's see some action or else I think the two of you should resign. Seriously, if we can't expect you guys to step up on an issue like this then what's the point.
MJ
Fix AL
I eagerly checked our 2017 enrollment (K) to find that it is unchanged and based on the enrollment report we are last in line. Ok, theres no chance to get into our first "choice" school, does anyone know if it is possible to move to another school while maintaining space on a waitlist? Has anyone gambled on moving to a different school with a shorter waitlist? We were zoned for our first choice school last year and then the rug was pulled from under us. Thanks and congrats to those who received new enrollments.
-JE
There is no 9th grade IB. There is no limit on the number of students who can do the IB program if they choose to do that as juniors, or take IB certificate classes at any grade level.
Students are admitted as part of the HCC program, the gen ed program, or one of several specific service models of special ed. Of those groups, I only know the limit on HCC.
-IHS Parent
There is no way to answer your question, without enrollment data. The only information we have is the number of students who did NOT get in. We have ZERO information on the number of students who did get in.
But that said, I highly doubt it.
Based on the quote above about how Whitman was "capped" at 500, my suspicion is that Enrollment Services "capped" the enrollment at schools based on the 3/28 Budget Allocations, which are based on "enrollment projections" also created by Enrollment Services.
The 3/28 Budget Allocation for Whitman was just under 500. Back when the Budget Allocations hit schools at the end of March, many schools (like Whitman) said that they were expecting significantly higher numbers based on the number of families that had expressed interest during Open Enrollment.
The Budget Office confirmed that these 3/28 allocations were based on PRE Open Enrollment projections and that there would be adjustments AFTER open enrollment.
So now we have this incredible circular situation where
* Enrollment sets Whitman's projected enrollment at 500.
* Whitman's capacity is approximately 1,000
* During open enrollment families do the math and say ... "hey, there are 500 empty seats at this school, we are certain to get a spot."
Open enrollment then happens and "somebody" decides to enroll, up to the projected number, rather then do open enrollment based on student demand, as intended by the SAP.
My suspicion is that this was done with the honorable intention to not "disrupt staff" with a change in projections. Except that Whitman is losing staff already and the waitlist represents TWO STAFF MEMBERS, who would not be displaced and get to remain at Whitman.
I strongly suspect that both Dir Burke and Dir Pinkham will actively review this situation. I attended the entire board meeting where this year's SAP was approved and board members asked very detailed questions about how Open Enrollment would impact each of the amendments under review.
This outcome does not match the expectations of the board as voiced in that meeting. There were multiple amendments that addressed grandfathering students either at certain schools or in certain grade bands. Staff provided answers that indicated these amendments were not needed because there would be ample space available during open enrollment and students who wished to remain at their current schools "should" be able to do that during open enrollment.
You can only be on one wait list at a time. If you move to a different wait list you will lose your current wait list spot.
-StepJ
Fix AL
School capacity numbers available here: http://www.seattleschools.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=627&pageId=9498085
What I want to know is:
1) How many students are currently enrolled in each school?
2) What is the process by which enrollment and admissions determine the number of seats available to choice students?
A parent commented on a recent FB post that an admissions staffer told her that the number of choice seats are "fixed" and new choice students can only come in if a choice student vacates their seat. I don't see how that's possible, since enrollments fluctuate from year-to-year. It's also contrary to the official policy which says if there is space available, waitlisted students will be admitted.
SPS craziness
Misillusioned
-North-end Mom
MJ
* The 2009 Board Approved Student Assignment Plan INTENDED that any student in the district could access any school in the district on a space-avaiable basis. This was considered to be a limited choice plan, that incorporated many of the elements of the 100% choice plan.
* The board and families had all presumed that space-availabe would be a capacity related issue. Simply put, if a school *could* take a student, that school *would* take that student. As this was how the choice plan operated.
Enrollment Services has since made two key procedural changes that are not in alignment this this understanding.
1) Certain schools have been given enrollment caps. These enrollment caps, align with enrollment projections but are not communicated to the public in any way.
2) Wait list moves are not being made on the basis of available space at the receiving school, but rather on whether or not the other school might lose staff.
Enrollment services has the right to make these changes. The can come up with any definition they want of what space-available means. That said, the lack of transparency in this process is a serious breach of public trust. This is precisely what Charlie calls the "culture of lawlessness."
IMHO, Enrollment Services is the keystone of a public school system. This department is where the public gains access to the services paid for by public taxes. Enrollment Services are the gatekeepers and as such, have a public duty to be clear and transparent in how they decide which members of the public gets to access public services.
Enrollment data is so critical that OSPI requires that enrollment data is reported monthly and these enrollment reports are then used to generate the funding upon which SPS operates. The policy of embargoing this data from the public can only be described as a breach of public trust and it is a policy that no other district follows.
Cleveland STEM
McDonald Intl.
Pathfinder
Salmon Bay
South Shore
John Stanford Intl.
Thornton Creek
TOPS
Hazel Wolf
After they let in whatever students make it in off the waitlist, they will dissolve the waitlists. Then after the school year begins, a few kids will decide to go to private school. Or move to Tacoma. Or go to their geozone school. Or any variety of other things.
And then there will be vacancies. But the students who were on the wait list will not get those seats. Because the waitlists have been dissolved.
Those seats that open up will be given to the children of recently hired high tech executives who just moved up here from Silicon Valley and need a school for their children to attend starting in January. And they'll ask, "what schools are good?" And a friend will say, "This option school is close to you and they encourage kids to be well-rounded full human beings AND promote academic progress and excellence even for students who are working ahead of grade level in one or more subjects." And they'll fill out the paperwork for the impacted option school with the behemoth waitlist. And their children will get in right away and start school the next day.
Talk about a lack of equity.
-Frustrated
This stinks
unclear
This stinks
The district should honor its commitment to families who were told there was room to stay in their current school.
-Frustrated
Thanks,
NE Parent
Also, does anyone know who is it on the waitlist for Eagle Staff? Non-reassigned kids from Whitman? JAMS? I doubt many from Hamilton. So, who?
Fireside
-Frustrated
MJ
Enough said
Listen: They can do this the easy, right way in collaboration with their customers - Seattle families or the difficult, hard way -- with ill will from families and bad press from the media. Either way it needs to happen.
I don't doubt they were trying to do the right thing in balancing capacity issues. I also don't doubt the unintended consequences have kicked them in the butt. Now is not the time to hunker down and hide downtown. Publish the information and get busy with the enrollment fixes.
DistrictWatcher
That promise to Whitman was not only made it writing, it was posted on the SPS website for TWO YEARS. I have screenshot of it and that screen shot was widely circulated during all of the boundary meetings last Fall. The board is very well aware of that promise.
I *wish* I could explain that better.
Your logic matches my logic on how the wait list really works.
My point #2 was simply a summary of multiple types of statements made by enrollment. This "policy" of not moving wait lists that could hurt other schools started with Cleveland High School. In that case, most of the students on the Cleveland wait list were enrolled at Rainier Beach. As such, someone made the executive decision to NOT move the Cleveland wait list so that Rainier Beach would have more students. That issue has been going on for a few years.
The bottom line is that parents think about capacity dramatically differently than enrollment services. Family think that open enrollment should be used to actively manage capacity and move students from over-crowded to less crowded school. In the case you mention, Ballard and Roosevelt are so fundamentally over-crowded that any and all attempts to move enrollment to Ingraham and Hale should be pursued.
However, enrollment services seems to be prioritizing ensuring that schools are given the same number of students in their projections to create the "illusion" of staffing stability. I say illusion because with the budget gap, there is no staffing stability this year.
I confident that folks are now describing this as a "budget issue" as it is clearly not a "capacity issue." It is simply not possible to say that there is not room at Whitman.
I am equally confident that this is in no meaningful way a "budget issue."
The top level of the budget is driven by enrollment. Every student brings a certain number of dollars from the State to the district. The district then has one big lump sum that they get to divide amongst the schools. We all know that the average per pupil varies pretty significantly from school to school but the amount from the state is consistent.
Therefore when the district is saying "budget issue" what the really mean is an "allocation issue" at a particular school.
Here is the link to the 2016 WSS that explains how staff are allocated at schools.
https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Budget/Budget%20Development%202017/wssmodel17.pdf
For middle school the "break point" for extra staff is 700. As such, there is no extra cost to the district until there are more than 700 middle school students. If the entire wait list moves, Whitman will not be over 700.
However, the Assistant Principal line is different. That is not based on the number of students but rather the number of teachers. If there are fewer than 23 FTE then there is no Assistant Principal. If there are 24 FTE, then you get a .5 Assistant Principal and with 27 FTE, you get a 1.0 Assistant Principal.
Per the March 28th, Budget allocation, Whitman was assigned .5 Assistant Principal. It is possible that the budget issue they are referencing is that moving the wait list might cause that .5 to be increased to 1.0.
We are in the boat you describe. Default assignment to AA at Ballard but would much rather be at Ingraham or Nathan Hale for capacity and other reasons. Currently we are #3 on the waitlist for Ingraham Grade 11. It would be great to see the actual enrollment figures since I would be willing to bet the Ingraham numbers have been artificially capped for reasons that probably make no sense to anyone on this blog. It would take a miracle but why is the District unwilling to consider swaps to facilitate better opportunities for students?
Marmauset
Kelly, can you post the screenshot and emails for all to see?
This stinks
It makes no sense to put a "cap" on a under enrolled school. It seems they would want to balance enrollment better to avoid disruptions, changes in staff allocations etc at schools. Perhaps that is a second step that is coming? Anyone email upper level administrators and get a reply? The board and district is well aware of enrollment inbalances, overcrowding, under enrollment. I am having a hard time believing they will not be working things out.
-JH
Students who will be assigned to Wilson Pacific (or whatever the name may be in the future) and start at Whitman can follow one of two paths. They can stay at Whitman for the duration of their middle school experience or they can attend Whitman for the year(s) before Wilson Pacific opens and then attend Wilson Pacific when the building is complete.
I don't think your question is naive. It is very reasonable.
IMHO, it is completely and totally irrelevant whether or not enrollment services intend to move the wait list over the next few months. I am certain that everyone working on this has good intentions.
For me, the issue is simply a matter of priorities. What is the priority for enrollment services? What is their mission? Who do they consider to be their customers? Who is their most important customer? When you have to choose between competing priorities, what priority wins?
Enrollment services has multiple customers -
* students and families who want services
* the schools where the students are assigned
* every single district department whose work includes student.
That's a lot of customers and a lot of competing priorities. Just managing a standard assignment process is challenging. So managing a standard assignment process PLUS a secondary choice assignment process gets complicated very quickly.
The way the entire assignment process was handled this year - between geo-splits, boundaries, promises made and now promises broken, make it crystal clear, that students and families are NOT the customer.
We have a limited choice program in Seattle for a good reason. With 28% private school enrollment, SPS is always dangerously on the edge of losing critical community buy-in. If you have ever lived in a city where the middle class has effectively abandoned public schools, you know how ugly that can get.
1) Broken promises - a plain and simple breach of public trust. These NEVER should have happened. Particularly in a year where SPS has relied heavily on parents to lobby over the levy cliff and the challenges of a $50M budget gap.
2) Vision or Planning Failure - the failure to optimize the choice process to move as many students as possible out of over-crowded schools and into schools that can better handle a few extra students.
3) Missed opportunities - every families that gets their choice assignment is a happy customer. There are so many "1" on this list. One student does not make or break any particular school.
4) The usual suspects - every year, there are long wait lists at certain schools. This is known and expected.
the latest allocations for REMS on 3/28 were as follows:
6th grade: 265
7th grade: 224
8th grade: 231
Total: 720
Seems like if waitlist moved to Whitman, would actually save $?
http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Budget/2018%20Budget%20Development/17-18%20Allocations/allocations18.pdf
"With 28% private school enrollment, SPS is always dangerously on the edge of losing critical community buy-in. If you have ever lived in a city where the middle class has effectively abandoned public schools, you know how ugly that can get.
That is the biggest equity issue Seattle Public School faces.
Misillusioned
Sully
Fix AL
Something is really messed up.
-North-end Mom
MeDo
I have been looking at the high school numbers and the wait list scenarios. Without transparent data, all we have is rumor and innuendo and guesses about which school can do what. It is always in the best interest of the district to share basic facts whenever possible. Because facts create buy in.
Here is the limited facts I can find. Here are the North End High School projections, per the 3/28 Budget allocation.
Ballard - 1904
Ingraham - 1361
Hale - 1173
Roosevelt - 1846
At the moment, we have no way of know if the high schools followed the same pattern as the middle schools where the wait list was started at about the same point as the budget allocation. It is a reasonable guess, but it is a guess.
If that guess is correct, then question becomes ... "Can Ingraham or Hale better handle more students over and above this initial allocation than Ballard or Roosevelt are ready to handle their allocation?"
I have no idea what the answer is, because we have no idea what the enrollment number is. That said, my best recommendation would be for the PTSA's of the various high schools to connect with each other and see if there are any grass roots solutions.
NE families did this years ago regarding split siblings. The schools connected and by collaborating they were able to effectively get the wait lists at elementary schools moved so that families stayed together.
-JH
Families care about education. This blog exists because so many people are passionate about education. It is extremely challenging to "force' families into a choice they don't want. Even harder, when they think it is a bad choice for them.
So the rationale for the Whitman waitlist could easily be that REMS "needs those students more." But that does not mean that those students will actually show up at REMS. The students on the REMS waitlist are much more likely to actually attend REMS than the families on the Whitman waitlist assigned to REMS.
If all 68 of those families just left for homeschool, private or Shoreline, then the district lose approximately $700,000 in expected funding and the budget gap grows even wider.
If you dispute a proposed change to your child’s placement, the “stay put” provision allows them to do just that—stay put. The student will continue to get the same amount of services while you and the school complete a dispute resolution process.
If the district fights then you can use the mobility argument which supports the negative impacts of up rooting students from their current school and peers.
Lots of info on the net on this issue.
SPED Parent
Wow. All this crying because of perceived lost school choice is absurd. When new schools come online, you have to change boundaries. New schools won't be good if they are underenrolled or unbalanced. And overcrowded old ones aren't good either. The district has to load balance. Choice system absolutely has to consider the impacts on all schools. What would people do if they had real problems?
Another Sped Parent
I'm not sure if your response is based off of your own personal experience or not, but the law is very clear on how IEP change decisions are to be made. The district has consistently violated the ADA laws for 20+ years and it does get away with many illegal activities, because the district feeds off of parent's ignorance of the laws and lack of resources.
That being said, the district can not unilaterally decided to move your student without your and your child's participation in an IEP meeting to discuss and review the merits and impacts of the decision. To clarify, "stay put" is synonymous with "status quo" and in effect means your child's educational environment will remain constant while your complaint works its way though the system. It could take 6-18 months for a due process hearing to commence, so in your filings you simply ask for a stay put motion. You might have to have a pre conference hearing to argue your motion. You're likely to be granted the motion, unless you have a particularity complex situation where the district can show that staying put with cause irreparable harm to either party.
If you file in late June your practically guaranteed not to have a preliminary hearing date before December which means your child will not be moved in the 2017-2018 school year. Now you have successfully achieved your goal of "stay put". At this point your action is moot and you withdraw your complaint just before the hearing day.
Our children are not pawns to be used to load balance the districts mismanagement. I believe SPS has spent over $25 million over the last decade on software and personnel to help with capacity management and analytics. I suggest they seek a refund.
SPED Parent
-JH
The district promised that all special ed services would be available at all comprehensive secondary schools. ( we know they lie about this all the time). Will both schools really have all sped programs? If so it might be ok. Or will it be partial programs with lots of subs? Or just a simple booting of sped?
Another sped parent
Ps. Yeah Melissa. Doesn't everybody know they lie all the time? Liars lie. But they actually have a decent reason now. Choice has always been a lie.
SPED Parent
MJ
Hey Directors, care to explain yourselves?
unclear
observer
-another observer
SPS north and SPA south have different needs; look at Bellevue, Lake Washington and Woodinville and Northshore for ideas.
Reform the District bureaucracy and stop pushing so much testing and merit based competition between teachers.
Queen 4aDay
Every time I see this suggestion, I assume you're thinking we need a district for poor kids and a district for kids who aren't poor.
Jamal
observer
The district needs to be split because its dysfunctional.
How often do families from Arbor Heights find themselves hanging out at Olympic Hills? And vice versa.
How often do families from Broadview-Thomson find themselves hanging out Rainier View? And vice versa.
-another observer
Fix AL
Obviously the district is dysfunctional. It's not because it's too large - this isn't a particularly large district compared to those in other areas. As of 2012, we were the 94th largest district in the country.
Stretching the same amount of money to hire another $250K per year superintendent isn't the solution. The next superintendent must have experience in running a well-functioning district and be willing to refocus administration on serving the schools. Central admin exists to hire teachers and principals and provide them with training as necessary, choose and supply curriculum, manage enrollment services and arrange for transportation and meal service and assure the safety of our children.
I like the new head of C&I. He's not been here long and has already drawn the board's attention to one of the district's most egregious failures - the district does not provide schools with curriculum and necessary materials. There are many subjects for which books and materials were adopted so long ago (decades!) that they cannot be replaced. The new middle schools will open next fall without math textbooks. They're planning to purchase 550 student laptops for a school with expected enrollment of 465 though. Maybe we're just going to transition to using the Khan Academy?
@ Lynn, what's this about a new head of C&I? Sounds promising!
HF
Let's hope SPS finally makes headway on this shortcoming, and doesn't default to using EngageNY or some other random, incoherent sampling of online sources of questionable value. Some teachers seem to like the freedom, but it leads to a lack of coherence and great inconsistencies in skill and content coverage, even within a school. I used to laugh at the skits where they peppered people on the street with random history questions, but I'm seeing little in the way of a solid curriculum that will keep my kids from being those uninformed people. My only concern would be poorly designed curriculum forced on schools, which leads to more waivers, which leads to more inconsistencies...which takes us back to where we started.
The existence of waivers is an opportunity to compare outcomes, however. Has the district done a comparison for various schools and groups? Do schools using waivers vs the adopted materials show any difference in outcomes? If so, are they doing anything else differently?
They're planning to purchase 550 student laptops for a school with expected enrollment of 465 though. Maybe we're just going to transition to using the Khan Academy?
Whoa, what? What school (Rainier Beach?)? Did we not learn from LA's laptop for all program? Is this a pilot and what is the funding source?
-parent
Why not
I didn't think the district had enough technology staff to keep the current computers running.
Could it be north Seattle doesn't want to lose access to Garfield? So, recreate Garfield at Lincoln and then split the District. Garfield doesn't want you anyway.
Queen 4aDay
Here are the FRL %s for each high school attendance area:
Ballard 12%
Ingraham 39%
Nathan Hale 35%
Roosevelt 12%
Chief Sealth 66%
Franklin 65%
Garfield 46%
Rainier Beach 76%
West Seattle 28%
Only one high school attendance area south of the ship canal has a lower poverty rate than any school in the north end.
The district has a "Research, Evaluation and Assessment" department, but they don't seem to do any evaluation of academic program effectiveness. They mostly seem to do scorecard-related data, which means looking at standardized tests and climate surveys. Their efforts seem to be primarily directed toward external reporting, with little or no emphasis on evaluation for QUALITY IMPROVEMENT. There are a lot of questions they could be asking and a lot of different ways they could be using the data they have--not to mention a lot of different questions they COULD be asking to dig a little deeper into any of the many issues that have been concerns for years and years--but they don't appear to be interested in looking beneath the surface. Maybe they're afraid of what we'll see?
data seeker
Wow.
Just stop
reality
nonsensical
I knew a legislative policy person who worked in upper administration at OSPI in Olympia who did alot of research on Seattle. He also concluded the district was too large to function well. At the time we were concerned with the fact that SPS was unable to garner federal grants like Tukwila. They did not qualify based upon the formulas although had pockets of poverty. One thing that stuck with me was his comment " Seattle Public Schools being so large results in mediocrity for all".
-JH
Queen 4aDay
-JH
Thanks, JH, for your information. We are a district that needs to change to succeed. Doing the same thing over and over . . . well, Lynn, I bet you can finish that one.
observer
observer
I absolutely think it is within the reach of this district to at least function well. That we elect Board members - election after election - who do not at least demand a district that functions well - you know, like enrollment, curriculum, a decent website - is curious. No wonder the district can't tackle big issues; they aren't even getting the trains to run on-time.
Is this the worst mid-size urban district? Of course not. But it's shameful that there are so many highly-paid employees at the district level and yet, they just muddle along.
I was at an event last week for WPD with many other activists and their issues. I was chatting up a teacher who said she had taught mostly in Bellevue but, for the last couple of years, in Seattle. I asked her what the difference was. She said "day and night. If I need curriculum in Bellevue, it's there. Curricular resources? There. Support from the principal? There."
You could surely break this district up but you will end up seeing a concentration of F/RL students in one or two districts and more manageable numbers in the north end. Then there will be cries about equity and we're back to square one.
Naturally, it's hard to tell how much having fully-funded schools would make a difference for SPS.
It wouldn't have to be a regional split of course. Anaheim has a pre-K to 6th district and a high school district. That would allow administrators to specialize.
It just makes sense to me. We are not other districts regardless of size. We are a district that should be doing much better. But we aren't. So change needs to happen and not the tired change and whining that seems to be repetitive here. I read the blog. I learn from it. But that doesn't make you the experts. Informative yes. Problem solvers, not.
Provide something concrete that will solve the problem besides more money. Honestly, I've just posted my opinion. If you have to be right, I probably won't concede it so we have nothing to continue talking about.
observer
Q4aD
Being needy enough to qualify for aid isn't the ideal. Federal aid doesn't offset the increased needs. High FRL schools are generally NOT a good thing.
data seeker
They are already rampant in Seattle because of the SAP.
This discussion about not splitting the district because
it leaves a tale of two cities is disingenuous.
It is already a district of haves and have nots as
long as SPS continues its neighborhood assignment plan.
And, yes, highly concentrated FRL schools are usually correlated with much
worse outcomes for students.
But fixing that fixable disgrace isn't on anyone's bucket list right now.
FWIW
simple math
be changed, Simple Math? You did not address that.
Federal grants, according to previous posters, are currently denied due
to the current construct of the district.
On the other hand, the proliferation of PTA funding to the "have" schools
exploded when the WSS formula was enacted because it seemed unfair.
The real issue is that SPS continues, by design and choice, to have highly
impacted FRL schools. That is my issue. I am not advocating about a district
split or not.
FWIW
impacted FRL schools."
agreed.
no caps
Yes. And we should figure out how to fix that. Splitting the district, however, would make that harder to fix because there wouldn't be many options. But you're right, FWIW, that there doesn't seem to be a lot of political will to fix it now, either, while it's conceivably possible. The NSAP has had mixed results--some schools are more diverse now and some are less, some are more poor and others are less--and moving away from a geographic assignment plan could potentially allow for the creation of more well-balanced schools (while adding transportation costs, assignment uncertainty, etc.). But it's tricky. Even many of those who decry the disparities don't like the idea of bussing kids around to even things out. They want "local schools for local kids."
data seeker
MM