Seattle Schools This Week

Tuesday, September 26th
Board Work Session: BEX V Planning, 4:30-6:30 pm, JSCEE, Agenda

I will be attending and taking notes.


Wednesday, September 27th
Board Work Sessions: Budget; Technology to Support Teaching and Learning.  Agenda
4:30-6:30 pm.  Living Computer Museum, 2245 1st Avenue South.

I note the interesting venue just down the street from JSCEE.   I have to wonder if "personalized learning" will be discussed (and pushed) to the Board.

Page 4 of this agenda has the "three pillars" of the district's "Formula for Success." I honestly must have missed these because I thought family engagement was one of them.

Page 5 says this:

Digital technology accelerates and amplifies teaching and learning 

I would urge the Board to ask for data that backs this up because currently, I know of little data that technology "accelerates and amplifies teaching and learning."

Staff then goes on to talk about "enhancing" teaching and learning via technology and that I can believe.

Page 6 is basically a photo of Dr. Nyland.  What?

All I can say after reading the whole PowerPoint is no.  There is no real information here but a great plan for spending money.  The Board should tell them to go back, streamline, provide real information on a real plan and THEN ask for money.  (And fyi, I suspect this would also mean several more jobs at JSCEE.)

The Budget section of the Powerpoint is a lollapalooza of items; levies, McCleary, programs - I'm not sure I understand what is trying to be said.

Saturday, September 30th
Director Community Meetings

Director Patu - 9 am-11am, Raconteur, 5041 Wilson Ave. S.

Director Geary - 1-2:30 pm, Phyllis Gutierrez Kenney Place, 6951 62nd Avenue NE

Comments

Robert Cruickshank said…
There's a lot in the tech work session presentation that is troubling. Some sort of digital learning as an add-on to the existing curriculum and classroom model is fine - but *not* as a replacement. But the presentation seems to want to cajole to board into approving some vague thing that would suddenly replace teachers with iPads, which is what I suspect this is all about (and which the board must resist).

Some specific things stood out:

"Example of deep or project-based learning:
Teachers and students writing collaboratively online"

Writing is a solitary activity, not a collaborative activity.

"To free up computer labs and libraries to have assessments well integrated with classroom instruction"

This is a *classic* argument used by ed tech people and corporate ed reformers. It's BS. We need fewer assessments, not more. Turning every class assignment into the equivalent of an "assessment" is a recipe for disaster and for psychological problems in kids, as we've seen with Summit Learning (see here: https://www.studentprivacymatters.org/parents-rebel-against-summitfacebookchan-zuckerberg-online-learning-platform/)

But I love how the staff is trying to say "well, you told us you don't like libraries and computer labs taken over for testing, so let's do this!" No, central staff, we're telling you to administer fewer tests to our kids. Don't twist our words and concerns like this.

Last but not least, on page 5 of the budget presentation, we discover that SPS will be worse off under HB 2242 (the legislature's education funding plan) than if the legislature had done nothing. We need every Seattle legislator to commit to us that in the 2018 session they will fix this, and finally and amply fund our public schools.
9/26/17, 9:20 AM
Anonymous said…
I am not against technology in the classroom *if there is enough money for it*. I think if we are being told that we have to cut teachers and nurses and support staff because we don't have enough money, then we don't have enough money for computers in the classroom either.

I would be curious to see information about how much money is spent on buying, maintaining, upgrading and replacing computers and supporting software in the schools every year - including how much PTAs with the means spend. I doubt that it is truly saving us money that would otherwise be spent on teachers....

-NW Mom
9/26/17, 9:52 AM
Anonymous said…
No surprise that the "Results" section of the presentation re: technology in the classroom is pretty much empty...

unclear
9/26/17, 11:49 AM
Jan said…
Thanks for the Leonie Haimson "studentprivacymatters" link, Robert. Great article.
9/26/17, 9:02 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, gr...
Read more

Education News Roundup

From the ever-amusing Washington Policy Center : Vouchers are Pell Grants for students under 18.  Vouchers are no different than Pell Grants or GI benefits, except the money goes to the families of students younger than age 18.  Except they are. Pell Grants were created to help needy students and that's not really the goal of the voucher program.  The Pell grant website does have a couple of great studies on why low-income students drop out before finishing their higher ed and what makes a difference.
Read more