Curriculum and Instruction Committee Meeting
The Curriculum and Instruction meeting is tomorrow from 4:30-6:30 pm in the Board conference room. Agenda here.
First up on the agenda after the basics is the approval the grant from the League of Education Voters to South Shore Pre-K-8 for two years at $1M per year. Oddly, it's for intro and action at the next Board meeting and yet this is no emergency. The Board continues to allow this to happen for almost BAR; and so it goes.
As I have said in the past, I think this is all fine except for a couple of things.
I have never seen a report about the outcomes for this investment which has been going on at about the same rate since 2003. (It started at TT Minor Elementary in 1998 but then the philanthropist who started it realized he just wanted to fund for a whole new school. A couple of years after that change, TT Minor was closed.)
Here's how the district explains this:
Well, the original donor was Stuart Sloan who used to run QFC but I don't know if the funding still comes from him. As for the date for partnership starting in 2003, I'm unclear. The program at TT Minor started in 1998. Here's an excellent overview from Forbes:
I'd have to go ask if I missed something but I have never seen a report from the district about outcomes, especially for a partnership that has lasted this long.
So you throw out a part of a program - that the district itself designed and maintained - because of racial inequities instead of correcting that issue? Sounds a lot like a good reason to get rid of a program you don't really want at your school.
First up on the agenda after the basics is the approval the grant from the League of Education Voters to South Shore Pre-K-8 for two years at $1M per year. Oddly, it's for intro and action at the next Board meeting and yet this is no emergency. The Board continues to allow this to happen for almost BAR; and so it goes.
As I have said in the past, I think this is all fine except for a couple of things.
I have never seen a report about the outcomes for this investment which has been going on at about the same rate since 2003. (It started at TT Minor Elementary in 1998 but then the philanthropist who started it realized he just wanted to fund for a whole new school. A couple of years after that change, TT Minor was closed.)
Here's how the district explains this:
This partnership between the School District and The New School Foundation (merged with LEV in 2011) was formed in 2003. It began with a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that evolved into a Partnership Agreement in 2006. The school’s first year, 2002-2003, began with PreK and K. In each subsequent year, the school grew by one grade until it reached its current size, a PreK-8. The funding source of the grant was a private individual who chose to be anonymous.
Sloan’s extra money paid for a 12-month school year and a school day that runs from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. It provided three meals to students each day, put teacher’s aides in classrooms and paid for psychological counseling for students. And that first million was only for the 80 kids in kindergarten and nursery school. Sloan says he is prepared to spend millions more to roll his ideas through the fifth gradeThis is not what the money pays for today, at least not according to the BAR.
Initially, the grant was governed by a Partnership Agreement that provided for an annual grant renewal subject to review of the program success and an integrated budget. The funding made up a significant portion of the school’s budget (86% in 2002-2003). Funding peaked in 2006 at $1,556,000 (40% of the school’s budget). Over time as the school has grown and other funding sources have been secured, LEV funding has decreased to an annual pledge of $1,000,000, which is about 20% of the school’s budget, excluding Special Education programs which were added in 2010.
South Shore Program Priorities
-
Maintain the original goals of LEV funding which include lowered class size and academic
supports to Pre K-2 classrooms. This will ensure adequate academic growth and maintain social
emotional regulation.
- Continued improvement in academic outcomes, as evidenced by standardized tests
- PreK-3rd literacy program alignment
- Hands-on learning, such as garden, music, environment, arts
- Support for school newcomers, especially students in the 4th and 6th grades and new
teachers
- Continued improvement of the Wellness Program through program review, the RULER
framework, and integration of physical health resources
- Support for families through before/after school programs
-
Add to the Multi-tiered System of Support in tiers two and three for social emotional learning to
optimize the learning environment for all. South Shore will take an “early adopter” role in
implementing trauma informed practices to ensure that South Shore remains a safe, kind,
respectful learning environment that prepares students for high school and post-secondary
education.
-
South Shore will proactively develop alternatives for students of color that negate the early onset
of special education services, particularly the overrepresentation of African American males that
are served in programs that label students as Emotionally and Behaviorally.
-
Continue to use funds generated for South Shore in ways to push the work forward to a great
degree in SE and Central Seattle so that other students in need may also benefit from what we are
learning.
I've never heard the district say that, based on outcomes from South Shore piloting new initiatives, that the district was trying them elsewhere.
It all seems a bit mysterious and you'd think, after more than a decade, there might be some real news to report.
I'll also note that South Shore is the only school in the district where an outside entity get to interview principal candidates and do it alone. The Superintendent does make the final decision but I highly doubt that he/she would ever go against what LEV recommends. Have to wonder if schools that raised more than $1M a year, between PTA and booster groups, could ask if they might have the same ability to choose a principal.
Other agenda items:
- High school - 24 Credits, see page 22.
- Cascade Parent Partnership Program, see page 23, about Running Start students in the program
- update on Middle School textbook for Math adoption, see page 26
- Assessment updates, starting on page 30. Page 31 starts the assessment calendar.
This year’s calendar will include Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessments. The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment was selected for its wide use across schools in our district as well as its ability to complement the new K-5 ELA adoption, which lack a robust assessment to carry out the goals of Multi Tiered Systems of Supports (MTSS). Additionally, these assessments will support elementary and K-8 schools in using assessments and data to drive instructional decision-making and monitor the progress of students in English Language Arts (ELA).- Advanced Learning update. Key findings from "Phase 1 Report: Descriptive Analysis" that was delivered this past June. (I still need to write a thread on this report.)
-
Enrollment
-
There has been an increase in the districtwide percentage of students eligible for Advanced
Learning over a three-year period, from 9.4% in 2015-16 to a projected 11.3% for 2017-18.
-
White students remain significantly overrepresented and historically underserved students of
color remain significantly underrepresented. Disproportionality has not significantly decreased
in the last 3 years
-
The Northwest region currently has the highest concentration of the district’s Advanced
Learning/Highly Capable students (30%), while the Southeast region has the lowest
concentration (6%).
-
There has been a steady decline in the percentage of AL eligible students enrolled in Spectrum
Program, driven mainly by declining number of students attending Spectrum designated
schools. The decline is most noticeable among elementary grades, where the proportion of
students enrolled in Spectrum Program dropped from 40% in 2014 to 28% in 2016.
That last bullet? I call BS on the reasoning. Of course, Spectrum enrolled has dropped; they've allowed the program to twist in the wind/be at the mercy of individual principals. Why would students/parents transfer to a new school for a weakened/watered down program?
In open-ended responses, these principals cited two main concerns:
o Maintaining a Spectrum designation perpetuates inequities in the district, benefiting families privileged in terms of both race and socioeconomic status.
o All schools should be able to accommodate Advanced Learners as part of the district’s Multi-Tiered Systems of Supports (MTSS).
Only 4% of principals said the District should continue designating certain schools as “Spectrum schools.” Over two-thirds of respondents believes the District (68%, 46 principals in total) should discontinue this practice. The rest (28%) were “unsure”.
o Maintaining a Spectrum designation perpetuates inequities in the district, benefiting families privileged in terms of both race and socioeconomic status.
o All schools should be able to accommodate Advanced Learners as part of the district’s Multi-Tiered Systems of Supports (MTSS).
As well, sure, you go! MTSS. But please allow that parents might not believe in this ability to support all learners when there is no proof that MTSS will work either.
The end of the agenda is the work place for this committee for the coming school year.
Comments
Anything on waitlists?
Blind Faith
Spectrum was illegal because it did not provide General Ed LRE for students with IEPs and it also illegally clustered ELL students. When HC was enacted in state law, the writing for Spectrum was on the wall.
The real disgrace here is that the district hasn't had the backbone to make these facts clear by eliminating Spectrum, but has instead let the program die a slow death.
The other disgrace, of course, is that the district creates these HCC demographics by design because they don't follow state law: Students should be evaluated for HC in comparison to those with similar backgrounds and experiences.
A lawsuit is not if, but when, especially as people continue to wake up to white supremacy and get sickened by it.
Poor Me
Thats progress?
Oh Mr. Sloan.
I didn't grow up around here; my school had a walk to math in 2nd, nothing in 3rd, then always provided walk to math from 4th grade on. It wasn't called spectrum, and there was no feeling of "you're in, you're out" and I believe it was based on standardized test scores and teacher recommendations at the beginning of each school year. I honestly don't know or remember if we worked ahead or deeper/more or what, but I did know I was in advanced math and I enjoyed the challenge. There was also olympics of the mind where I was pulled into the library with a small group to work on fun creative problem solving projects. Otherwise, I was in school with everyone from my town/city. My husband had the same arrangement at his school, both of us were from small to medium sized schools, with 4-5 classes per grade of 23-28 kids each class. We both have masters degrees and feel we received good educations. AP classes where available, but not on the grand scale we have here. I was one of the first students to participate in running start, which I have regretted since but I guess at the time it was the right choice for me socially and academically.
I do believe spectrum has been shuddered and it seems silly not to acknowledge this happened. There might be two or three schools left with walk to math, other than the impossible to get in STEM schools. Has anyone surveyed parents to find out which schools offer walk to math? I'm curious becyyou cant tell by reading websites.
Regarding Spectrum: I venture to guess they don't have a name for how they will serve advanced learners (or a plan), or maybe they won't and it's up to parents to provide stretch learning opportunities for their elementary kids (Kahn or Kuman).
If they don't offer walk to math, how else will they give kids at various ability levels the instruction they need? I mean that seriously because it seems that for some subjects, pulling kids into focused groups not only helps the instructor dial in the materials, but it also helps the students feel comfortable with their questions and peer group so they don't appear dumb or too smart. I think they could do it without all the labeling and exclusionary tracking and stuff that pisses people off, but ability grouping should not go away IMHO.
Instruxion
I am in complete agreement with your excellent posting.
Spectrum and the former APP allowed SPS to avoid offering what you described in General Ed because they simply assumed that they had an "out" in terms of providing for the needs of advanced students.
Now, they have simply continued APP as HCC instead of complying with HC state law, which mandates a representation of the district's demographics for students with unique educational needs.
Poor Me
tiring
That is cryptic. Please be specific so that your point has a basis rather than being a meaningless accusation.
Poor Me
https://seattleschools.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=627&pageId=24450150
Poor Me/FWIW, you do say the same things over and over. Also, "accusation?" Tiring just pointed out the obvious.
So poor me what about Bellevue where Asian kids are the kids overrepresented (as compared to Whites & other races/ethnicities) in the advanced learning programs? Is this "Asian Supremacy"? Or Mercer island where many more kids qualify for advanced learning programs. I think economics, parental values & education level of parents play a much larger role.
-Think deeper
Additionally, if you parse the demographics for distinct groups, "Asian" student demographics and outcomes vary extensively.
Augusta De Bonte addressed the high numbers of East Asian students in some HC programs, which was interesting:
http://www.nwgca.org/uploads/1/2/0/1/12018395/peeling_the_onion_-_equity_in_hicap_final.pdf
Educational attainment of parents is the critical piece, which is why I continue to say that HCC is a program for students born on third base, and why experts strongly emphasize that the identification protocols in most gifted programs are woefully inadequate.
The recommended protocol is for less reliance on cut-off scores, an approach which compares students to those with similar backgrounds and experiences, and, most importantly, looks at the needs and talents of the child as an individual.
I caution you to be very careful placing "parental values" as an issue since it implies that those without knowledge of the system, those who have been abused by the system, and those not like you have inferior values...even if you didn't mean it that way.
Your implication of false equivalencies also needs to be disputed, especially when we are talking about historically oppressed students, ELL, disabled/2E and FRL students who are excluded from gifted programs in vast degrees...and in SPS in such blatant terms as to be a serious civil rights issue.
Poor Me
I think the debate is between two camps of people: those who think that those who were born on third base should remain there, or even go back to second base to help those rounding second to make it to third. That is the philosophy behind things like honors for all. It is primarily a teacher and social justice warrior philosophy.
The other camp says that kids who are on third should have a program that gets them home - but not at the expense of other kids (which it isn't where HCC is served today). That same philosophy is theoretically embedded in the school district's mission statement of helping each kid reach their potential. Most parents I know are in this camp - they want to see to see all kids do well, and they generally empathize with other parents wanting the best for their kids.
If someone could prove to me that HCC is being provided to kids at the expense of other kids (i.e.the cost of providing HCC or Spectrum is far and above the average cost per student) and impacting the district's ability to provide for other kids, I would like to see that analysis. But it doesn't exist. And the issue isn't really that we have an "underfunded" school system - we don't. The funding per student according to the NCES is much higher than all of the peer districts other than Anchorage (that peer group includes PDX, SF and Denver) and higher per head than most other developed nations. We have have a mis-funded district, but it isn't a resource issue. We all know it is a hard/complex problem and we have a low-performing system.
The only way I can understand it is that it is a fundamental objection to the fact that some kids are born on third. And if certain educators and SJWs decide that if you are born on third, then the system isn't going to reasonably serve you, I think you can understand it as a rational decision to not participate in and/or not support that system. The point being: your objection may feel good and self righteous, but it is ultimately more than somewhat counter productive. It clearly isn't doing anything to move the needle for the kids you want to help, and it is weakening support for a public good.
SPS needs to shut down the flawed HCC program, create a small program for outliers and provide real rigor for all students at their local school.
If parents want an exclusive environment free of under grade level and SpEd kids, they need to pony up for private school.
Public school should not provide private school experiences for a select few.
Nor should SPS be paying for kids to go to Morningside, another example of savvy parents manipulating the system.
leaf girl
Having self-contained classrooms does not CREATE issues of inferiority and superiority in children. Kids are unique. They vary in perceived attractiveness, athletic ability, popularity, being nice dressers, being "not boring," meanness, coolness, toughness, aggressiveness, use of slang, musical taste, math ability, reading level, GPA... Issues of inferiority and superiority exist in society independent from how or where gifted kids are educated. If aliens came down and zapped away all the gifted kids, issues of inferiority and superiority would still remain.
The HCC schools are just option schools, like so many other option schools in Seattle. Only with entrance requirements. Allowing option schools to exist within the public education system does keep thousands of students out of their local neighborhood schools, but no one seems to care that Seattle has a ton of option schools. 30% of the city's kids go to private school. No one seems to care about that either. All those kids in private schools and option schools, those are all kids not in their neighborhood schools.
HCC would have a lot more SpEd students in it if Seattle public schools were any good at identifying giftedness or learning disabilities. SPS looks for students to fall behind before considering whether they might have a disability. And SPS looks for students to be way ahead before considering whether they might qualify for HCC. So you end up having many gifted learning disabled students floundering along at about grade level, exhausting themselves trying to outwit dyslexia or out-think dyscalculia. And because they're gifted, they succeed for a long time. Dyslexia affects what a student needs to thrive. Giftedness affects what a student needs to thrive. It doesn't make them special, but it does have educational implications. Maybe you've heard high blood pressure referred to as a "silent killer"? Well, giftedness masks a lot of other conditions (like dyslexia) and prevents schools from noticing that the student has either. It's a great masker.
One sure-fire way of creating issues with perceptions of inferiority and superiority in children is to force a student who's a year behind in math to sit next to a student who's four years ahead. And then force the student who's behind to ask the gifted kid for help. You know what the kid who's behind doesn't deserve? To have to learn math from a freaking genius who has no pedagogical training whatsoever, who's bored, who's not being paid, and who never learned that math the normal way anyway because she sees glowing numbers in the air like Russell Crowe in that movie A Beautiful Mind, and who does not want to be a teacher. Both kids deserve more.
HC is, by law, required to address the HC needs of ALL students who are highly CAPABLE, not just highly those who are highly performing and well-prepared for school.
BTW, coming on this blog time after time does not FEEL good or righteous because it's not about ME. I've been teaching for 25 years and don't have child in the program. In fact, that is the problem with the commentary about HCC on this blog, IMHO: It mostly comes from parents with children who are in/have been in HCC and there is a clear self-interest in preserving the APP mentality because it works for you and yours.
I'm providing a link to OSPI. That should help you understand what the legal mandate requires for HC. And, no, it's not reserved for those born on third base. In fact, the law and gifted experts are fully aware that giftedness is spread across all demographics and that those not born on third base are being vastly underserved. That is why the law stipulates clearly that the demographics in HC must reflect the area that the district serves.
The law takes the "camps" out of it. SPS will learn that at some point when a civil rights lawsuit makes them comply.
http://www.k12.wa.us/highlycapable/
Poor Me
See: http://www.alternet.org/real-estate-school-segregation and Melissa's real estate link from the other day.
I had to Google SJW! I could easily have found it on Breitbart had I just looked since that is also their mentality about silly progressives like me.
Poor Me
I fully agree the way SPS handles identification for HC is deeply flawed and needs to be fixed to identify ALL kids. I'd absolutely love there to be more diversity and have the community be reflected. However, this perception that these kids are getting a "private school experience" is just wrong. I've never had a kid in private school but I sure as hell hope people aren't paying thousands of dollars for the experience my HC kids have had...it really isn't "all that". I'd much rather they were served and challenged in their own schools but that wasn't an option. So for our lower class family with limited resources this was our only way to get any challenge, so we took what was offered to us by the system. And are consistently looked down upon for doing it. Doing what we thought was best for our kids, given our options.
Therein lies the rub. Everyone wants their kid to be challenged. Lack of challenge is the hallmark of public schooling. But HCC parents think only their kid deserves challenge. Everyone else can stick with whatever. The kids who need challenge the most, are the kids with disabilities. For them finger painting and circle time is great in all grades. If anyone needs more challenge, it's special ed. Let's move them to HCC. They need more challenge.
Challenger
What HCC parents have you talked to? You won't find any HCC parents that think that.
Hazel Wolf is a public school in Seattle. Northgate is a public school in Seattle. Families can opt to go to Hazel Wolf, although this year there was an 88-child wait list for kindergarten. But the demographics of families who opt into option schools is not the same as Seattle's demographics in general. HCC is just an option school.
It's not like families at assignment schools are crying because all their sciency kids have left to go to STEM option schools. Where's the outcry over that?
(and the third base analogy...uh...just had a different meaning where I grew up...)
just laughable
Then I should be able to opt out of ALL taxes. These children are not select they are handicapped by a system not prepared to teach them.
Are you NEW here?
Some people
In fact, haven't you been watching the news? Those who label themselves "White Supremists" hate Jews, Middle Eastern, Mediterranean people etc. Also, the HCC program has more kids with autism, ADHD etc than our local elementary school.
-JK
1. When you say "HCC clusters students without disabilities", this is incorrect. Whether formally identified or not, there are many students with disabilities in HCC.
2. You criticize the district on civil rights, yet you have committed civil rights violations via your Thurgood Marshall "Racial Equity in HCC recommendations".
You purposely omit the disability category in your list of equity concerns and set quotas for certain racial sub-groups. This is non-compliant with civil rights in this state.
3. You perseverate on local norms despite that fact that David Lohman specifically stated that the identification process needs to match and be supported by the program.
If we followed your advice, a child who scored in the 75th percentile in a 35th percentile school would be moved to a two years accelerated program. This is illogical.
Lohman recommended that children who score higher than the norm in their school, but still below or at grade level, be given extra opportunities such as after school enrichment or mentors by the school.
Lohman does NOT recommend acceleration for children who perform below and at grade level. He is promoting an expansions of means to identify talent and modes to support them. What I hear from you is an endless focus on program entry without any substantive change in program delivery.
4. You're not a teacher, and yes, you're a HCC family. You're entitled to privacy, but not to misrepresent yourself.
APP
-Think deeper
-JK
Sounds like you HCCers are having some serious infighting issues! I don't know who you're trying to out (and you should be deleted for that) but you have sadly mistaken me for someone you are apparently harboring an intense animus toward.
The Lohman norms have nothing to do with this discussion since I am referring to state law, which clearly states that students should be evaluated for HC in comparison to those with similar backgounds and experiences. This is also a best practice according to NAGC. Furthermore, APP is the advanced learning model that is all about working two grade levels ahead. SPS just hasn't gotten around to updating APP to translate in the state law requirements for HCC (except they did change the name). HC law is about providing a variety of services for qualfied students. See link above for clarification.
If you look at the SPED funding in HCC, it is minuscule compared to district school averages. Nobody (certainly not me) said there were none with IEPs. That is why there is always a mantra on this blog that touts how HCC has the lowest student funding costs in the district. The students with IEPs are typically much milder than in other schools., too, hence the low costs.
Y'all need to keep your dirty laundry on the playground at Thurgood Marshall. It sounds pretty ugly.
Poor Me
Interesting though that you claim to know that APP is at Thurgood Marshall. It's a big oopsie to admit that FWIW. You gave credence to APP.
Popcorn
Definition—Students who are highly capable.
As used in this chapter, highly capable students are students who perform or show potential for performing at significantly advanced academic levels when compared with others of their age, experiences, or environments. Outstanding abilities are seen within students' general intellectual aptitudes, specific academic abilities, and/or creative productivities within a specific domain. These students are present not only in the general populace, but are present within all protected classes according to chapters 28A.640 and 28A.642 RCW.
Assessment process for selection as highly capable student.
(1) Students nominated for selection as a highly capable student, unless eliminated through screening as provided in WAC 392-170-045, shall be assessed by qualified district personnel;
(2) Districts shall use multiple objective criteria for identification of students who are among the most highly capable. There is no single prescribed method for identification of students among the most highly capable; and
(3) Districts shall have a clearly defined and written assessment process.
enough already
no one is happy with the program and yet it is growing much faster than gen ed which is also growing.
as for app = apartheid = segregationist = hate. anyone i have spoke to would love more diversity in the program. why can't that happen with such noble representatives like tolley and blandford. yet all i have heard is cut it all. baby meet bathwater.
no caps
http://www.k12.wa.us/equity/Rules.aspx
"While most of the requirements of this section remain unchanged, the revised
rules clarify that each school district and public charter school must, at least
annually, review course and program enrollment data disaggregated by sex,
race, limited-English proficiency (i.e., English language learners), and disability.
If a substantially disproportionate number of students who are members of a
protected class are enrolled (or not enrolled) in a particular course or program,
the school district or public charter school must take action to ensure that it is
not the result of discrimination, including in the identification and selection of
students, course and program enrollment criteria, tests and appraisal instruments, guidance materials, or educational scheduling or placement."
From Carolyn M. Callahan, gifted expert who has testified at in OCR lawsuits regarding gifted education discrimination:
http://giftededucationcommunicator.com/gec-winter-2015/the-courts-the-office-of-civil-rights-and-gifted-programming/
This is actually very serious. Blow it off at your own peril, School Board.
Poor Me
Poor Me, you may be an expert on gifted education. You certainly present yourself as one but since you don't sign your name, well, I'm just not sure. So I think most of us take your many pronouncements with a grain of salt.
No one outed you so I'm not deleting that comment. I would warn readers that we do not allow outing of anyone.
Also, Poor Me, words have meaning. Do not use "white supremacy" unless you mean it. If so, well, then we all know what you are trying to do which is to incite. I won't be having that here.
Also, to all readers - when you make comments about "the/this blog," I am always confused if you mean me or comments by readers. While this is a community forum, I represent the blog. Please be clear what you mean.
I can only continue to point out that the district - to my knowledge - has never been sued on HCC services. I think they believe they are firm ground on what they are doing, no matter how sad or how little it is or the diversity of the program.
-SpSParent
"And the issue isn't really that we have an "underfunded" school system - we don't. The funding per student according to the NCES is much higher than all of the peer districts other than Anchorage (that peer group includes PDX, SF and Denver) and higher per head than most other developed nations. We have have a mis-funded district, but it isn't a resource issue."
Any chance we can have more information? Perhaps a blog post? We really need to start looking at expenditures.
I think it always important HOW money is spent. The district doesn't seem to realize/care how much their lack of transparency hurts their cause.
I also note the recent comments by some Sped parents who don't think more money is needed and challenge work being done by IAs. This is in direct contradiction to what the district is saying about state funding for Sped.
I think you just answered your own question about who "this blog" means.
Poor Me
If Poor Me/FWIW really cared about children of color getting the education they need and deserve, rather than worrying white children are getting more than they deserve, she would spend more time examining:
a) where are the gifted children of color attending school and why?
b) what educational experience do parents want for their HC-qualified children of color, and if HCC doesn't fit that desired experience, does that mean HC-qualified white children willing to drive across town for HCC should be denied this education?
c) Should we be scrambling to lure children of color back from private schools and into HCC so we can meet our benchmarks? Or should we be happy for those kids who are getting great advanced educational experiences via private school?
I think everyone wants to increase diversity in HCC, but if a parent would rather keep their child at their neighborhood school or private school for whatever personal reason, does this mean everyone else needs to change course because of how people interpret the limited data being shared?
Private Eyes
I think I've been one of the parents who don't think more SPED money is needed...YET.
First I say lets have a clear picture of where each dollar is spent and the results. We all know the games SPS plays with SPED funding and the total lack of accountability for meaningful results and progress. I blame the school board for this never ending practice. I cringe at the thought of that group returning to the dais.
I'm not going to trash IAs but it's almost laughable if it wasn't so tragic the inappropriateness of how IAs are used in SPS.
SPED Parent
Now, the argument is adjusted to say that the talented children of color are being "lured" away (in kindergarten!) while (let's follow your argument to its conclusion) just a small proportion of talented white students get lured away (leaving 30% of talented NE students to populate SPS).
Not only is that a ridiculous argument on its face, OSPI has statistics on private school enrollment by demographics. The demographics in Seattle are majority white and the proportion in SPS are significantly lower (for whites).
BTW, since 30% go private, and they are disproportionately white, shouldn't HCC be disproportionately much less white?
Unless you are saying that the talented pool of students of color is just so small anyway.
(BTW, I have taught for 25 years and "really care" about all of my students and their families.)
Poor Me
Move on.
"The Northwest region currently has the highest concentration of the "district’s Advanced Learning/Highly Capable students (30%), while the Southwest region has the lowest concentration (6%)."
Poor Me
The rest of the schools just chug chug chug along singing why can't we be special too?
Ya Burped
My2Cents
Me Included
And the 30% who go private isn't an excuse. It's a fact. If you care about where the missing kids are who should be in the neighborhood assignment schools, you can't JUST blame HCC for filtering them away. You also have to blame the option schools (which account for WAY more kids filtered away from neighborhood assignment schools than HCC does, WAY more). And you also have to blame private schools. That 30% (again) is also WAY more than HCC filters off. Plus there's homeschoolers. If you care about where the kids who AREN'T in neighborhood assignment schools are, there you go. The leading causes:
1. private school (30%!!!)
2. option schools (a large number, way bigger than HCC)
3. HCC (a little over 3,000 kids at all grade levels city-wide)
4. homeschool/unschool
That's where all the kids who are missing from neighborhood schools have ended up.
I loved Alec Cooper's idea of showing the opt-out rate for each school on the school climate survey. For some specific schools it is QUITE high. Why????
The Missing
Makkah Islamic School 100
Amazing Grace Christian School 76
St. Edwards 74
Hope Academy 67
Holy Names Academy 64
St. Therese 63
O’Dea 60
St. Matthew 58
Lakeside 51
Seattle Academy of Arts/Sciences 50
St. Paul 44
St. George 43
University Preparatory 42
Northwest School 41
Seattle Preparatory School 35
Bishop Blanchet 32
The Bush School 27
First Place 26
St. John 24
Seattle Amistad School 23
St. Joseph School 21
Hamlin Robinson 17
Seattle Nativity School 15
Alfajer School 14
Christ the King School 14
Fairview Christian 14
Hope Lutheran 14
Seattle Urban Academy 14
Lake Washington Girls Middle School 13
Bertschi 12
Concordia Lutheran 12
Epiphany School 12
The Valley School 12
Billings 11
Meridian 11
Giddens School 10
Seattle Classical Christian School 10
Our Lady of Guadalupe 9
Seattle Girls School 9
Villa Academy 9
Holy Family Bilingual Catholic 8
St. Alphonsus 8
Holy Rosary Elementary 6
Seattle Lutheran High School 6
St. Anne 6
Morningside Academy 5
North Seattle French School 5
Our Lady of Fatima 5
St. Benedict 5
Northwest Montessori 4
Our Lady of the Lake 4
Spruce Street 4
St. Catherine 4
Westside School 4
Kapka Cooperative 3
Pacific Crest Schools 3
Seattle Area German American School 3
Seattle Jewish Community School 3
University Cooperative School 3
West Seattle Montessori 3
Matheia School 2
Seattle Hebrew Academy 2
Seattle Waldorf School 2
Tilden School 2
University Child Development School 2
Academy for Precision Learning 1
Brightmont Academy 1
Dartmoor 1
Emerald City School 1
Laurel Academy 1
Perkins 1
Puget Sound Community School 1
I'm not sure what this tells us, but it's interesting to look at the list. The innuendo keeps coming up that this is where many of our city's gifted black students are in addition to the 60 in HCC and more than that in AL.
nitpicker
Curious Recruncher
Private Eyes
Except, let's consider the high schools. I've been getting queries about high school boundaries and Lincoln. Should the district peel off kids in all directions to make a diverse Lincoln? Should kids from Garfield be put into a Lincoln boundary?
Broken Record
Tired
" 8/24/17, 7:52 PM
Anonymous Curious Cruncher said...
I just don't understand how it can be harmful for all the students at the neighborhood assignment schools to be lacking the 3,000 or so HCC students, but no one cares about the 17,000 private school kids and thousands more option school kids that they're lacking??? Really? That's just weird. "
try to understand how my daughter felt when 1/3 of her classmates left for the HCC. we know we could have private tested her into the program, like many of her peers were, but she wanted to stay in the neighborhood and we wanted to support the local school and community, and the schools she has attended were able to differentiate to our satisfaction. not perfect, but as fairly as the special ed kids and the struggling students were treated.
we all felt that the cohort was a way to escape the challenges of a diverse, in many ways - not just racial, but socioeconomic and ability, student body. The loss of 1/3 of the students from her elementary school DID hurt her emotionally, in a loss of self-esteem and intellectually as it took all the high performers and the brighter kids out except for the ones whose parents value diversity.
the HCC hurts a lot of kids, even those in the programs. parents we know have pushed their kids into the cohort and the kids are unhappy to be away from friends in the area for school, they miss the diversity, they don't feel connected to their school because it is far away but the parents are so blinded by the obsession with college, starting about third grade, if even that late, that they don't see their children's pain at moving schools and abandoning friends.
no, the HCC is hurting many,many kids.
Sgt. Bilko
-sleeper
Sgt. Bilko,
Maybe instead of allowing your child to stay at the neighborhood school you should have tried HCC. My daughter was in the same position - her friends all publicly tested into the program. She waited a year and also publicly tested into the program (I don't think you, personally, know how many publicly and how many privately test). We found the HCC classes to be far more diverse than the neighborhood school. I think you made the wrong decision if you feel your child suffered as a result but, that said, you should stand by it and not tear down the program or make mean-spirited pronouncements about other parents' motivations.
MissingData
The Northwest region currently has the highest concentration of the "district’s Advanced Learning/Highly Capable students (30%).
math
-sleeper
math
The school district has also published numbers of AL vs hcc students in various reports, many of which are at dead links since the website redesign. There are many many more AL students. I agree the label is somewhat pointless. I don't know if it's people who were trying for HCC, or if they go to a school that requires it for walk to math or what. I think some middle schools still do something with it.
-sleeper
"...children's pain at moving schools and abandoning friends."
With SPS boundary redraws and program splits, imposed moves have been par for the course for many students. Yeah, moving schools and splitting from friends is difficult. Hopefully you have explained to your child that the choices of other families are just that, choices. Even without HCC, friends may switch schools, move out of state or across town...it's part of life.
"...we felt that the cohort was a way to escape the challenges of a diverse, in many ways - not just racial, but socioeconomic and ability..."
Lots of assumptions there. If the neighborhood school was able to provide appropriate academic challenge, don't you think families would prefer to stay in their neighborhood school? Many HCC qualified students are leaving schools (Bryant, View Ridge, Eckstein, Roosevelt, Ballard...) that are less diverse socioeconomically than the designated HCC pathway school.
"...parents we know have pushed their kids into the cohort...they don't see their children's pain.."
Wow, you know better than other parents what is best for their children? You know how those students feel, more than their own parents? Wow.
"...we know we could have private tested her into the program, like many of her peers were..."
And there it is. The tired canard about private testing.
getting old
There has been an increase in the districtwide percentage of students eligible for Advanced Learning over a three-year period, from 9.4% in 2015-16 to a projected 11.3% for 2017-18.
this is for hcc eligibility only but with district average now over 11% and spectrum enrollment declining, your numbers are likely outdated.
math
http://www.k12.wa.us/DataAdmin/enrollment.aspx
The reported categories are American Indian, Asian, Black (not just AA), Hispanic, White, and Other.
googled it
-sleeper
Many (not all) Bryant, Wedgwood and Viewridge teachers encourage students to move to HCC if they qualify. With commitment from parents, friendships endure regardless of where the kids go.
Is this about a sad little girl, or closing the opportunity gap? Rather than trashing HCC, let's focus on creating better scaffolding for students of color to progress and reach their potential. Many families of color would not want to send their students across town for HCC for various reasons, some cultural and some logistical, and it would be ideal to create other options. HW is a good example of another option, but it is difficult to get in there. Why didn't SPS make Cedar Park and advanced learning school like the Board directed? Anyone care about those NNE AL and gifted students? Anyone? Hello Pinkham, Geary...board...this one is on you: failure to care for those NNE advanced learners. Why would they want to go to Cascadia and make friends with hundreds of kids who won't attend their middle school? They might get into HW, Decatur is closed to them (big fail) and their neighborhood school teachers openly admit they can't differentiate four grade spans.
We need to be getting creative to cultivate opportunities for our eager students, not stifle their learning and/or jerk them around.
One person's perspective that parents force their child into HCC to avoid diversity is such a blanket generalization of parents across the city, it is not fair or true. Every school is different, and every child has different needs at different times. Many parents have one child in HCC and one or two in a neighborhood or option school. I know one family with two at a neighborhood school, one at private and one in HCC. The choices parents make are very personal.
Private Eyes
Evergreen is in Shoreline school district, so it wasn't included in my Seattle info search. Evergreen had 18 black students (plus 2 in preschool) last year.
Some families move from school to school to school because of housing instability. Others move in search of a school willing to teach kids something they DON'T already know at a pace not intended for sloths. Whatever the cause, the churn is bad for kids. Our district needs to improve.
Each school report card should list the opt-out rate for the school. How many families would be assigned there but have chosen a different school instead. That would really tell families something. And cut down on needless, wasteful, unnecessary churn.
For those who like to point out that private schools extract students from schools too. That is correct, they do and they are just as damaging. Sgt. Bilko correctly states the perception that people chose the exclusionary program such as HCC as a way of avoiding the panoply of urban public school experiences, with their complex riches and challenges. In addition HCC serves no academic purpose as we know from the district's own reporting to the board, that students who qualify for HCC but remain at their non HCC school perform better than than who enrolled at HCC. Why are we continuing to facilitate this harmful folly?
For progress
For progress, most districts have some kind of pull-out or separate gifted model. You can go check.
At least you are honest but with a flawed honesty. Why should kids have to stay at a school that doesn't serve their tested need? To help the school's test scores? To bring stability to classrooms? That's not their job.
And again, as we see from this district, the idea that all HCC kids leave their neighborhood schools is just - not - true. As well, there are still kids who test for Spectrum and yet they stay.
As for social issues, well, again, that's not any kid's job. It's part of life that we lose friends we make as children for all kinds of reasons and this is just one of them.
And while you may call it "racial exclusivity" (and it's not because there are many Asians in HCC), I'd call it the district's lack of will to find and place gifted kids of color.
I find it so telling that more people want ALL HCC kids to stay put rather than fix the program so we find all kids who need to be served.
Clearly, there's more to it than lack of diversity in HCC - it's keeping kids in place for many other reasons.
HCC abstracts the low risk group into a separate pool, leaving the higher risk behind, thus weakening the benefit for society at large.
Concentrating on individual wishes over society as a whole, as far as public education, is concerned is short sighted. It's not entirely up to the individual. Everyone pays for public education and the choices made affect all. Your child is not an island.
The system has to work for everyone and not just those with the means or ambition to divert their child out of the mainstream and into the elite. These separate and unequal programs emerged as a response to court mandated integration. They need to be disbanded.
For progress
We chose HCC so our student will have access to more diversity and rigor.
Playing Field
And Playing Field makes good points - the district has created - largely by parent demand - many different kind of programs that take kids out of their neighborhood. Do we get rid of all of those as well?
I agree that public education is a common good but no, I don't agree that we measure that common good by every kid receiving the exact same education in the exact same way.
Option schools, however, differ in major respect from HCC as they have no gate-keeping test. They are truly available to all in a way that HCC is not, and they have in general been much wore welcoming to under-served populations, such as our Native American, LGBT and special needs students than HCC. Overall most Option schools do provide an earned alternative place in our public system.
For progress
For progress
It's like a game of telephone tag. Your claim is morphing and misrepresenting the limited data presented to the Board.
I'm frankly too lazy to dig up that info, but remember the data showed a difference between math and language scores (numbers were based on **grade level** state standardized tests), with HCC enrolled students performing better in math, but not necessarily in language, compared with those HCC qualified students choosing to remain in their neighborhood schools. The data was also aggregated in a way that did not separate grade bands (elementary may have been lumped with middle school). Given the @%&* curriculum used for HCC LA/SS (a good LA/SS class was the exception in our experience), it's difficult to know how to interpret the data. Perhaps the HCC curriculum is in need of improvement! Ya think? Oh, that's right, there really is no curriculum.
Ultimately, the data left me wondering what schools are/were retaining the most HCC students, and did results differ between elementary and middle school. We have yet to see more detailed info.
remembering
Fallacy: "students who qualify for HCC but remain at their non HCC school perform better than than who enrolled at HCC"
Fact: HCC qualified students who remain at their neighborhood school are CURRENTLY taught and tested on the SAME level material. HCC qualified children who are enrolled in HCC are being taught accelerated material, but tested on material learned years ago thus a grade level disconnect. There's a disconnect in timing of learning vs. timing of testing for state tests. Obviously, memory plays a significant role in test performance for recalling facts and processes. Educators spiral curriculum to increase likelihood of learning becoming embedded in long-term memory storage. Teachers intensify test prep leading up to standardized tests to help performance. Logically, the gap in timing impacts test performance.
Fallacy: "Social capital is being used exclusively for the benefit of HCC cohort"
Fact: Have your heard Washington's Paramount Duty? Numerous HCC parents giving extensively of their time and professional expertise to benefit all WA students. Can you say you've done the same?
Fallacy: "Racial exclusivity" at HCC.
Fact: A composite demographic of SPS Advanced Learning was 68% white in 2015/16 and 65% in 2017/18 pre-lim estimate. If opposition to racial exclusivity were your true motive, your #1 target would be Loyal Heights Elementary at 80% white. There would be around 18 schools for you to excoriate first including Bryant Elementary, Salmon Bay K-8, Hamilton Middle School, Catherine Blaine K-8, Thornton Creek and Ballard High School.
School PercentWhite
Loyal Heights Elementary School 80.09
Whittier Elementary School 78.89
Bryant Elementary School 76.99
Salmon Bay K-8 School 76.19
Genesee Hill Elementary 75.63
West Woodland Elementary School 75.56
Hamilton International Middle School 74.88
Catharine Blaine K-8 School 74.66
Green Lake Elementary School 73.51
Thornton Creek Elementary School 73.32
Frantz Coe Elementary School 72.66
Ballard High School 72.62
North Beach Elementary School 72.43
Lawton Elementary School 72.07
Queen Anne Elementary 71.76
Eckstein Middle School 70.97
The Center School 70.74
Adams Elementary School 70.64
Source: OSPI School Demographics, 2015-16
Fallacy: Sgt. Bilko's claim of 1/3 of school leaving for HCC.
Fact: If you want credibility, don't align yourself with someone whose post is soaked in obvious propaganda. Anyone who's analyzed the district reports knows that no school contributes that high of a percentage. Not even close.
APP
I would actually explain how to do it if parents were interested. I think transparency and honesty about the HCC program is the best. How to get in, what it's all about, the history of the program as For progress laid out. I find it very disturbing when parents try to hide the fact they are in the program. I don't shame parents, I just hink the district has avery flawed approach to gifted education.
HCC is offered and parents have every right to use it, to private test, or, if they choose, to reject the program, as many parents with HC identified students have done.
I don't know if the program is bad for any one kid and I respect parents' decisions, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize the pain some children experience when moving away from friends. And yes it's sort of like moving across town except it isn't; it's moving into an exclusive(in the literal sense of the word) school that most of one's classmates are not allowed to attend.
Sgt. Bilko
I don't mind if people have arguments against HCC but c'mon, I'm with APP - it's propaganda, not fact.
Although, For Progress, you're incorrect that option schools are open to everyone. They're gate kept by geo zones and often have wait lists. Also, your post further up using IEP data to imply that HCC has few SPED students is ignorant of the process. It's harder to qualify for an IEP using a discrepancy model which many HCC students are subject to by the district despite the legality of this issue.
APP
http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/School%20Board/Friday%20Memos/2015-16/May%206/20160506_FridayMemo_2015-SBA-Results.pdf
remembering
"People, call it bias if you like but I am pretty even-handed in terms of believing in gifted programs that are finding and serving ALL gifted students...
I challenge my readers and for those who either believe in their points and/or enjoy a spirited debate, they don't find me that scary." Melissa 8/9/2017
Ganging up on dissenting voices is a sign of desperation:
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Mahatma Gandhi
Poor Me
Mahatma Wannabe
It was soon obvious that we could not simply identify extraordinarily gifted young people and then abandon them.
http://www.davidsongifted.org/Search-Database/entry/A10022
fact checker
i think the program sucks, is bad for ALL kids, in or out of he cohort, but that doesn't mean i'm angry or jealous of parents or students in the program.
i think For Progress is showing a much more adult attitude than the program defenders. For Progress and myself are being called names, outed, dismissed, called propagandists and liars.
pretty dismal imo
Sgt. Bilko
AL has definitely hurt my kid. At McClure we had a huge swath of kids who were "gifted". Since giftedness doesn't come in packages of 32, they got classes as low as 17 - just for them. They could "walk to math" but only with students of the same grade, wink-wink, same giftedness, oh and same ethnicity. For them in their giftedness - they couldn't be with even different ages - in middle school. So classes of 17 for them. The AL classes received both preferential class size, and class time. (had to make sure the gifted kids got all the good electives too). My kid's classes were often above 35 and close to 40, in order support those reduced sizes. There were 6 kids from the autism program. There was an IA for them - but only when there wasn't a tantrum somewhere happening in the building. There were often several students from the EBD program - let out for inclusion. And of course, ALL the resource room students - there were about 18 of them. All the school's disenfranchised minorities and ELL students were also clustered in my kid's class. So yeah. AL hurt my kid. And seriously. Does this concentration of minorities, disability, and ELL really help those kids? It exacerbates the "achievement gap". And just think about it. This is the same neighborhood where people rallied to kill off the alternative learning program for SPS students with substance and other problems. On QA, their $**t don't stink! Luckily, so far, not successful. Maybe it's changed, but from this blog the entitlement seems to have grown, not shrunk.
If AL didn't have such a negative impact on clustering people wouldn't oppose it. If the program was smaller - and not composed exclusive of third-basers, it would get support. We can all rally around supporting outliers - but not out-for-me exclusivity. The statues are coming down. Segregation hurts if you're on the bottom. Make no mistake.
XMcClure
Really? we don't out people here so please desist.
XMcClure, who are you talking to? It can't be me. I didn't say all the pushback was all one person but one person is trying to valiantly hide behind several names. Yes, I would agree the tone from staff has shifted from where it was several years back. What has happened, I don't know.
"They could "walk to math" but only with students of the same grade, wink-wink, same giftedness, oh and same ethnicity."
I call complete BS on that last part. If you have clear proof that your school only allowed kids of certain ethnic backgrounds to participate in Walk to Math, please provide it. Give me dates and times, teachers involved and I will indeed investigate and ask the Board to do so as well.
Sorry you don't like inclusion for Sped and ELL kids and think that minority kids aren't bright enough to be in your child's class. Or that's how it reads to me.
You need to watch that tone because if you are going to imply this is about racism, you'll need to do it to my face. You're not going to hide behind your anonymous computer and throw those kinds of accusations.
I'll be ending this thread by the end of tonight as it is - once again - becoming circular. All the other things I reported on in this thread and just one thing gets discussed. That's telling.
Fix AL
I don't need to insult anyone's intelligence if you think before you type or hit send.
We're done.