Tuesday Open Thread

Let's do some Seattle Schools This Week:

Wednesday, the 20th 
School Board meeting. Agenda

Highlights:
- Intro item to spend over $600K over three years for college/career technology for 8-12th graders, starting this school year. Funding would include one more FTE at JSCEE and "school leads" at each school (presumably a counselor or teacher who takes the training to use the technology)

- Into - Adopting new School Board Policy No.4218, Speakers of Diverse Languages.  Twenty-five percent of students in SPS speak a language other than English at home.

- Intro - One-year extension of Strategic Plan.  This is something of a gap filler between the end of the cycle for the current Strategic Plan and the possible exit of Superintendent Nyland plus the election of new Board members.  Seems like a good idea given all those changes.

- Intro - Approval of property sales of 315 square feet for the South Lander Street Grade Separation Right of Way to the City for $50,000

- Intro/Action - resolution supporting undocumented students

Thursday, the 21st 
Boundary changes meeting for Adams, Loyal Heights and Whittier 
6:30-7:30 pm at the Ballard High Library

Friday, the 22nd
Last day for parent referrals for Advanced Learning programs

Saturday, the 23rd
Three Director community meetings (one of the last for Director Blanford who is not running for reelection.  I'll just point out that if you have concerns over the new Student Assignment Plan, now IS the time to talk to directors.)

Harris - Delridge Library from noon - 2:30 PM

Blanford - Douglass-Truth Library from 10 am-noon

Pinkham - University Library from 4-5:30 pm

There are new STOP paddle cameras on school buses to improve student safety.
Exterior cameras have been added to 120 of the 379 First Student buses that transport our students each day. The cameras capture video of vehicles that appear to be illegally passing the bus when its stop paddle is fully extended. The King County Sheriff’s Office reviews the footage provided by the American Traffic Solutions cameras to confirm the traffic violation occurred. 

The cameras began operation today, Sept. 18. Drivers captured on video now through Oct. 1, 2017, will receive a warning letter to educate them about the new program. 

Starting Monday, Oct. 2, 2017, the King County Sheriff’s Office will begin issuing $419 citations to vehicle owners that have violated the state’s stop paddle safety law. Visit the Washington State Legislature website to read the text of state law RW 46.61.370.
The district, along with OSPI, is really playing up the importance of daily student attendance.  I've seen some parents at the Soup for Teacher Facebook page saying they think the district doesn't consider many issues around attendance like transportation issues (including school buses), chronic illness and family vacations.

On that last issue - family vacations - I remind parents that the district's policy is to allow principals to be the deciders at each school on whether a child who is out of school for vacation will be allowed to make up work upon return.  Check with your school's principal.

What's on your mind?

Comments

PAA Member said…
Seattle Education uncovers e-mails between Summit Sierra Charter school and Seattle Public School employees.

Will Summit Sierra charter school sell their online learning platform(BaseCamp) to Seattle Public Schools? Check out Eric Anderson's involvement.

The stealth campaign for charter schools found in emails of Seattle Public School employees and the candidacy of Omar Vasquez

https://seattleducation.com/2017/09/17/the-stealth-campaign-for-charter-schools-found-in-emails-of-seattle-public-school-employees-and-the-candidacy-of-omar-vasquez/

Summit Learning Platform expected to be used in >330 schools this yr & utilized by over 800 schools by 2022 according to Moody’s; stuff on expected re charter school expansion here as well.

https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-Assigns-Baa3-to-Summit-Public-Schools-Obligated-Group-CA–PR_904170619
Anonymous said…
Over $600,000 to buy software (Naviance) to enable counselors to develop student schedules to enhance students' college readiness. Yet the district will not provide the FTEs for the teachers and classes that students need. This kind of A$$ backwards approach by the district drives me crazy. Furthermore, the lack of transparency in these 'packages' is disturbing. For example, will the software direct students to courses or curricula that (perhaps) provide a kick-back to Naviance?? Naviance and Common Application also have a history of clunky poorly operating technology - something the SPS does not need more of.

ImAginIt
Anonymous said…
ImAginIt, I too found it funny they would spend all this money on college readiness yet not offer enough classes for juniors and seniors to be college ready.

In regards to Naviance, almost all the private schools use it. My oldest kid used it at Seattle Waldorf High School and it made getting all the college applications items together so easy. I really liked the software. I am not sure what my Hale kid used because it was handled all by the counselor. I never had access to the system.

HP
Anonymous said…
Interesting - thanks for your input. Common App and Naviance are owned by the same company although it is Common App that has the reputation for problems. Regardless though......

ImAginIt
Anonymous said…
Interesting article on radical acceleration in math...

http://www.pasadenanow.com/pasadenaschools/parent-volunteers-spearhead-radical-acceleration-math-class-for-pusd-students/#.WcAPTNOGPBI

Half Full
Anonymous said…
Re: the Naviance contract, it seems like there should also be some note of the approximate total cost of implementation. The software is $600k+ over 3 yrs as indicated, but there's nothing about how much it'll cost us each and every year for the JSCEE person (or people) overseeing it, as well as the "team leads" at each high school (and possibly middle schools, too, since it's for grades 8-12).

hidden costs
Anonymous said…
Cary Moon posted her official stance on education issues, including the mayor taking over schools: https://medium.com/@CaryMoon4Mayor/cary-moons-four-part-plan-to-bring-equity-to-education-7276bad7d2f5

-Pragmatic Xennial
Jet City mom said…
They had Naviance when my kid was in high school, albeit she graduated almost ten years ago.
When did they stop using it?

Anonymous said…
@pragmatic Xennial-- Interesting. Talking about creating a divide, didn't Cary Moon also send her kids to selective private schools? The affluent folks (like Cary) who don't have public school kids, yet care so deeply about "the achievement gap" seem insincere.
- not convinced
Not Convinced, I'm of the mind that people do the best thing for their children. Moon did send her kids to SPS schools for some time and then determined they needed something else. She does pay taxes and so, like all other private school parents, is supporting public schools that way as well.
Anonymous said…
On the side of these budget allocations, is that the adjustments made because of low projections? Did anybody hear anything at schools? What grade bands were affected?

https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Budget/2018%20Budget%20Development/17-18%20Allocations/allocations18.pdf

-sleeper
Anonymous said…
Lack of personal commitment to our public schools is a serious issue for Cary Moon. Paying taxes is all well and good but more is expected of those seeking office. It will be hard to take seriously the pronouncements on public schools from candidates who chose to send their own children private. Credibility is vital and in the significant area of public education, Cary Moon is lacking.

Too bad
Anonymous said…
When will commenters here realize that SPS is the Walmart of education. Some parents like Nordstrom even if both Walmart and Nordstrom sell the exact same product and Walmart is cheaper some people prefer the better customer service and knowledgeable employees at Nordstrom.

MJ
Did you read what I said? She did send her kids to SPS at one point. As well, Durkan would not interview with me and has said virtually nothing on the topic past what she said at the 36th - I have no idea where her sons went to school. Does anyone?

Moon has a whole section about education and youth. Durkan touts free college and that's it.

Go with your gut if that's how you vote; I also take into account what the candidates are saying (or not).
Anonymous said…
At one point. That's not enough. This is a vastly inexperienced candidate, both professionally and politically, hence her personal experience matters most. It's all she has to sell and it doesn't measure up.

Too bad
Anonymous said…
Re Running Start:

The budget allocations show "Running Start Administration" as a line item for each school. Is there a means of estimating # of RS students based on the allocation and the difference between the Headcount and AAFTE? A quick look shows Ballard, Chief Stealth, Garfield and Ingraham have significant RS allocations, with a significant difference between Headcount and AAFTE for 11th and 12th.

number searching
Eric B said…
Sleeper, that document is from last March, early in the budget process. There would have been a bunch of changes after the Board forced waitlist moves starting in July and probably will be a bunch more based on who actually showed up for school September 6. I would love to see data on those last two if you have any.
Anonymous said…
I remember it from last March. What I hoped to draw attention to is the far right column/margin, which has been added. Some schools have a change in fte noted, and I think it is or is related to the adjustments principals are about to get. Or really I was just hoping for more information.

-sleeper
Eric B said…
I'm pretty sure that column was there earlier this year. It's labeled as change since 3/1/17, and the document was purportedly last updated 3/28, so I think it's the changes that happened in March. Also, JoLynn Berge told me a while back that they issue this document in February/March and never re-issue it because it's too much work.

I will check tonight--I have a prior copy of this downloaded in April-May or so.
Anonymous said…
@ Not Convinced, what exactly is this supposed to mean? The affluent folks (like Cary) who don't have public school kids, yet care so deeply about "the achievement gap" seem insincere.

That affluent people need to put their kids in public schools in order to minimize their progress, thus helping to reduce the overall achievement gap? Why should someone have to sacrifice their own child in order to prove they care about others?

Then again putting them in public wouldn't help the achievement gap anyway, so your comment doesn't even make sense in the first place.

unclear

Anonymous said…
Keeping her children in public school would demonstrate concrete solidarity with her constituents and would erase any doubt about her commitment to public education and the benefit of it to our city. As she chose private over public, she now has to face the consequences of that choice and the face that she is clearly less knowledgeable about a system which demands mayoral oversight and which she as a parent chose to ignore.

Too bad
Anonymous said…
Thanks, Eric. I don't remember that column from before, but I don't know when I last checked it. I know adjustments will be coming soon and am curious about projections vs reality.

-sleeper
I think it fine if readers have reasons to not vote for Moon but what is your reason - for public education - that you would vote for Durkan?

Do you know if her kids went to SPS schools?

And if Moon is less knowledgeable, then I'd have to ask for the evidence that Durkan is more knowledgeable (or is she just going to follow in Mayor Murray's footsteps as her statements seem to indicate).

Anonymous said…
So only those whose children are in public schools can run for mayor?

HP
Anonymous said…
@ Too bad,

You're WRONG that "Keeping her children in public school would demonstrate concrete solidarity with her constituents."

I suppose keeping her kids in public school demonstrates some sort of solidarity with constituents who have children in public
(and public only!) schools, but there are many in Seattle who (a) don't have kids; (b) have kids who are already done with school and aren't that familiar with or concerned about SPS; (c) have kids in both SPS and private schools; (d) have/had kids in only private schools; (e) have/had kids in public schools outside Seattle, even though they live in Seattle; and so on.

A candidate can't be LIKE their constituents in all ways, and nor should they be. Is a candidate ineligible because their income level isn't at the mean for the community--or should it be the median? Is it ok for them to be male or female, or do they need to identify as both? Do they need to be mixed race--and if so, what's the "right" mix? Are they required to ride Metro instead of Uber? Work out at the local community center instead of a private gym? Clearly, these questions are ridiculous. But it's similarly ridiculous to expect that they make one specific choice when it comes to education, when a great number of choices are available to their constituents.

unclear
Anonymous said…
My child rides a sped bus to Thurgood Marshall. Her bus comes between ten minutes and one hour late every morning while she sits alone on the corner and I try to drive to work, daily deciding whether to turn around when I get the automated call announcing the bus' late arrival. I've called Transportation and e-mailed and am still waiting for an explanation or a solution. The little bus carries four special needs kids and has a route that goes from West Seattle to North Capitol Hill then back down to Thurgood Marshall on the I-90 lid. It doesn't make sense. Today I learned that SPS Transportation doesn't actually schedule the buses and that all bus service is contracted out. Is there no end to the madness? To the opacity?

Incredulous.
NESeattleMom said…
Incredulous, I think it would help if you made a fuss at your school if making a fuss for Transportation is not working. There was an ombudsperson at SPS downtown two years ago. Maybe there is still an ombudsperson who could advocate for you. Maybe a taxi would be better. In my opinion is not safe for an elementary student to be out there for an indeterminate time for a consistently late bus. Would a taxi work better? I don't have experience with sped busses, but I can relate to the stress of leaving a kid on a corner. Parents/guardians do need to work. Schools need to provide services.
NESeattleMom said…
When I said taxi, I mean a SPS-provided taxi to substitute for sped bus for 4 kids from two separate neighborhoods.
Anonymous said…
Re - high profile political candidates sending their own kids to public school

Yes, I agree that all things being equal, it is a show of good faith, that there with us, taking the same metro buses, and enduring the same stupidity that has come to be public schools in the city of Seattle.

I hold zero animus to any person, be they an ordinary Joe or a high profile political public figure, for some sort of 'disloyalty' or hypocrisy should they send some or all of their kids to independent (aka private) schools, or if they move to Bellevue or Mercer Island in order to procure a steady and excellent school system for their family.

But yeah, it does come off as "what's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander" when a wealthy public official pulls their own kids out of the SPS rodeo and send them to a private nonparochial school but then climbs on the soapbox and bemoans equity and the achievement gap. Not saying they don't have a right to opine, just saying as it comes off a little chickenhawk for me.

Maybe I'm just jealous: love to be able to afford a private K – 12 education for our kids with the 15 kid max class size, spanish-language starting in kindergarten, and writing/grammar instruction.

However, when I look at mayor candidate, I think much more broadly; experience managing vast complex public agencies, drafting & running budgets, and understanding legislative functions due to direct experience legislating are far more important to get a skillful and effective mayor then somebody pushing out sound bites of the feel good top 10 hits.

But, that's just me.

Thank you Melissa for running this blog and allowing us to have a place for discourse, and yes, perhaps a little venting.

Tired parent
And again, Tired Parent, where do Durkan's children go to school?

When did Durkan work in legislating (truly asking because I don't recall this in her resume)? When did she manage a vast public agency?
Anonymous said…
How important are SPS issues in deciding how to vote for Seattle mayor?

The number of people in Seattle without children in SPS outnumbers the people with children in SPS. I don't think it's even close How do I know ? If there are 53,000 students then there could be 106,000 parents + the 53,000 students = 159,000 Seattle has a population numbered at 730,000. I will give the SPS total a extra 30% to account for pre kindergarten children and other unknown factors, so that's = 206,700. That leaves 523,300 without children in SPS. That's still more than 2X more people without children in SPS then with children in SPS. I would guess the SPS parent population is significantly lower due to SPS siblings and single parents.

106,000 plus or minus is still a large % of voters. There are most likely voters who are SPS grads and parents of SPS grads. What that number is would be a guess, but I doubt it's 200,000 so it probably true that there are more people in Seattle without any SPS connection than with a SPS connection.

I don't think I have ever cared what a mayoral candidate thought about public schools because the Seattle Mayor should be focused of other priorities.

Seattle voter

Anonymous said…
@ Tired Parent, but why does it "come off as 'what's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander' when a wealthy public official pulls their own kids out of the SPS rodeo and send them to a private nonparochial school but then climbs on the soapbox and bemoans equity and the achievement gap"?

What's the connection between private schools--excuse me, private non-parochial schools--and the achievement gap? Are you suggesting that private schools somehow cause the achievement gap? If all those kids wealthy kids in private schools went back to their neighborhood schools instead, you think Seattle's achievement gap would improve?

I think it's more likely things would move in the other direction. For one, those kids--and their parents' PTA dollars and volunteer hours--would likely end up in our already-more-well-off schools. And two, those tax dollars that now toward public education the family isn't using will instead get used. This all helps the achievement gap how exactly???

unclear
Anonymous said…
Affluent, well prepared kids are generally cheaper to educate. Look at per pupil budget allocations in the wealthier schools you are thinking of, compare that to a poverty impacted school. We spend far less than we get from the state on students at well to do schools. The money we don't need to educate those less impacted kids goes to schools that do need it. The tax dollars they send to Olympia get sent to other districts with fewer kids in private school. We'd get more dollars if we had those pupils, dollars we can spend on at risk kids. More people in the system is better. More cheaper kids in the system is much better. For everyone.

I don't really care where the mayor sends her kids to school. But I am less interested in hearing about what to do to fix SPS from someone without kids in it.

GroovyGal

Anonymous said…
GroovyGal, you have a clear misunderstanding of how school funding works. The reality is that we spend far MORE on students at well to do schools than on students at poorer schools. Reason: Well to do schools tend to have more highly educated and experienced (and thus more expensive) teachers than poorer schools. The state reimburses districts and schools for the cost of those teachers. While poorer schools may get more categorical funding and federal/Title I funding than well to do schools, that funding is marginal compared to teacher salaries.

Bean counter
Seattle Voter, good points except Durkan seems to think it IS the mayor's duty to somehow oversee the district. That makes me very nervious and yes, I agree that any mayor of this city should have enough to do without fixating on taking over the Board/district.

FYI, to all, "achievement gap" is now considered in error (and, in some circles, a racist term) and it's now "opportunity gap." I'll just point out that researchers or educators made that term up, not parents and regular citizens.

Bean Counter, you have it half right. Yes, some more experienced teachers (ie more costly) tend to be at well-to-do schools. But the less well-to-do schools also get Title One funds which is a good chunk of change. Is it being spent the same? No. Does that negate having fewer experienced teachers? No. But if you look at budgets, with all the dollars, you are going to see fewer dollars at well-to-do schools, just in funding. Of course, that does not include fundraising. Show me where Title One funding is "marginal" to teachers salaries.
Eric B said…
The thing I liked most about Moon's statement was that she was largely planning on staying out of SPS business and sticking to re-working programs the city already has. Based on the Medium article linked in the endorsement blog post, Moon wants to:

1. Refocus FEL money and social service money controlled by the city into programs that serve disadvantaged kids.
2. Revamp the preschool for all program to increase diversity of teachers and students while also reducing administrative costs.
3. Reduce the opportunity gap by increasing diversity of teachers and administrators while rolling out civics and ethnic studies curricula.
4. Advocate for Seattle education in Olympia and work with SPS leadership.

Paraphrasing is mine. If you don't think it's fair, please let me know.

The only item I really have issues with is #3, and that's just because curriculum and teacher hiring are core SPS issues, and I don't think the mayor should be dictating them to SPS. I do believe that this is an area where city leadership can work with SPS collaboratively.

For all of the issues, I don't see why you would need a child in SPS to make positive change. It could help, but I don't see it as necessary.
Anonymous said…
Melissa, personnel costs make up roughly 85% of a district/school budget. All other parts of the budget in comparison are marginal. Title I dollars are substantial in some cases as compared to other categorial funding received but the funding necessary to pay the staff far exceeds any other funding; hence, it is marginal.

Bean Counter
Anonymous said…
No, Bean Counter, I have a very strong understanding of how school budgets work. You are right that there are retention issues at lower income schools. But I am right that we spend more at those schools. There are many more adults in those schools in staffed positions. Look at the budgets- the more impacted schools have 2 and 3 times the budget with the same number of students. With good reason. More students who are cheaper to educate would allow us to funnel more money toward more impacted schools and students, and also if, say, more middle class families came back in the central district we would have fewer impacted schools. In that area in particular the demographics of surrounding neighborhoods are often very, very far off from the demographics of the schools, and the opt out rate is high. Our city child poverty rate is under 10%, but our FRL rate is 35%. Imagine if our overall Seattle Public Schools FRL rate was 10%. That would be better for every child in the district.

I also don't blame individual parents for the choice they make given the circumstances they have, but it would absolutely be better if more middle and upper middle class families chose public schools.

GroovyGal
Anonymous said…
Here is the budget for this year. I don't see per pupil spending; you have to do the math to get to it.

https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Budget/2018%20Budget%20Development/17-18%20Allocations/allocations18.pdf

Also looking at the OSPI pages, average years of teacher experience is something of a mixed bag, although I recognize it is a problem overall. Bryant and Bailey Gazert both have 12 years average. Cascadia is 5 years. Wing Luke 7.

-sleeper
Anonymous said…
The use of the term "achievement gap" is not in error. Opportunity gap is the preferred term in certain policy circles and certain communities but it is in no way universally used. Across the nation and across the vast majority of the state, the term "achievement gap" is preferred.

Seattle nomenclature is far from the norm. This is an example of language of social justice activists, mostly concentrated in Seattle.

And to be clear, the term "opportunity gap" was made up by politicians and bureaucrats and activists. Most educators and researchers continue to use the achievement gap and will continue to do so into the future.

Bean Counter
Bean Counter, I know that staffing costs the most. But you said some well-to-do schools get more budget than other schools and I'm not sure that's valid.

Yes, I see both achievement and opportunity used for the gap but I also see the sideways look if you use achievement. Sometimes, it's hard to keep up.
Anonymous said…
At tonight's board meeting, Nyland reported that there was no enrollment growth over last year. Enrollment had projected almost 1300 in growth. Nyland reports that this lower than expected enrollment will impact 50 teachers.

- Sigh.
Sigh, I heard that. That this district can be so off, so often in their projections is disturbing.
Anonymous said…
I wonder where all that enrollment went. I'd be particularly interested to know the number of kids enrolled in charter schools in Seattle. That may well be where some of this enrollment went - and thus we'd be losing teachers in public schools thanks to the existence of charter schools. (Same story we've seen across the country.)

JR
kellie said…
Hey Mel,

Can you start a thread on enrollment and/or tonight's board meeting. There was no hard data at the meeting tonight but there was some very interesting comments in the Superintendent remarks.

* They had projected growth of 1271 for this year. This would have been the largest single year growth ever, and there was no real year over year growth. No actual number reported but I referenced the projections to get the baseline.

* Enrollment is down district wide. They don't see a pattern.

* We know high school enrollment is up so that means the shortfall has to be at K-8

* This could impact up to 50 teachers. Fortunately there is $4M in mitigation funds in the budget, so this will not mean the loss of 50 teachers.

* Boundaries for Lincoln will be complete before open enrollment.

* They met with the city about Memorial Stadium and they are in discussions about potential land downtown as Memorial Stadium is too important to the city and too heavily utilized to be taken out of service and replaced with a high school.

There were a bunch of other items as well but that is some of the capacity and boundary related items.
Anonymous said…
I know a number of people who moved to Shoreline, Highline and a few to private. Most were in 5-6 grades, just planning ahead to protect their student from rediculous disruption or inability to access needed or desired classes. We are the tax paying customers and we can move our business when dissatisfied.

New leadership
Yeah, I listened to much of the first half. I do want to report on many of these items.
kellie said…
Thanks Mel.

There was a lot of interesting parts that impact student assignment, etc. There were a number of items that surprised me, so I suspect there will be a large number of parents blindsided by some of these changes to assignment and boundaries, etc.

The enrollment shortfall is really quite impressive. I can't even imagine how big of mess this would have been if the plan to geo-split 850 elementary students had actually come to pass. The shortfall would have been even larger.

Feeling Concerned said…
We have learned that the district is working with Summit Sierra charter school. Will Seattle Public Schools sign onto Summit Sierra's online learning program called BaseCamp.

Here is a concerning article about parents that rebelled against Summit's online learning. There are concerning issues regarding sharing of student data.

https://www.studentprivacymatters.org/parents-rebel-against-summitfacebookchan-zuckerberg-online-learning-platform/
Anonymous said…
Last night at the Meany PTSA meeting the principal reported the school had higher than anticipated enrollment - ~535 students compared to 485 projected. October 1 will be the official count date.

FNH
The district better not be thinking of signing on to Summit's Basecamp. We don't have the money and the time for a charter group's moneymaker.

Good for Meany.
Anonymous said…
Count our family as one of the shortfalls. Couldn't take the uncertainty of high school scheduling or location or personnel. SPS high schools really are very good in their depth and breadth of offerings, but being completely in the dark as to the next four years with boundaries, budgets and curriculum we regretfully

"Opted Out"

And P.S. we are far from the only family who we know who did so. Personally know at least 15 who left at high school at the last minute with only maybe three being upper middle class and able to afford. The rest are scrambling and leaning on scholarships.
Anonymous said…
Do we have a list of what schools will lose teachers? I have heard of several schools but it doesn't seem like there is much complete information yet.
Anonymous said…
The enrollment shortfall is more proof that SPS' bungling attempts at social engineering are driving families out of the district. If parents don't see SPS providing the education they want for their kids, they will leave the district one way or another.

Fed up
Anonymous said…
Tired parent said "But yeah, it does come off as "what's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander" when a wealthy public official pulls their own kids out of the SPS rodeo and send them to a private nonparochial school but then climbs on the soapbox and bemoans equity and the achievement gap. Not saying they don't have a right to opine, just saying as it comes off a little chickenhawk for me.
Maybe I'm just jealous: love to be able to afford a private K – 12 education for our kids with the 15 kid max class size, spanish-language starting in kindergarten, and writing/grammar instruction."

Yes I agree. A very affluent person with kids at a selective private non parochial school told me recently that she does not believe in gifted education in public school! She was "against advanced learning, as kids learn from each other". But hers are at a school the majority cannot afford, handpick excellent students, had to take an admission test & interview etc to enter etc. Far more segregated! My own advanced learning kid was in a general ed K-5 school. In middle, takes 3 classes (Spanish, math & orchestra) with general ed students. Three classes advanced learning cohort. In the public high school anyone can enroll in AP courses.
-JP
Anonymous said…
@JP, a lot of people are against advanced learning anywhere. What does that have to do with Cary Moon and her decision to use BOTH public and private ed systems for her family? You own anecdote uppirts the idea that one size is not right for all.

Unclear
PAA Member said…
I look forward to learning more about Seattle Public School's involvement with Summit Sierra charter school. I also look forward to learning more about whether or not the district wanted to sign onto Summit charter school's online learning program. Summit charter schools personalized and online learning takes full advantage of student data...which includes test grades etc.

It is possible that the district was unaware of Zuckerburg's involvement with Summit's online learning program.

Thanks to the board director that called attention to this issue.
Anonymous said…
Tired Parent here,
Why I find it annoyingly *hypocritical* when one sends one's own non-special ed students (in other words, they aren't leaving because their student's unique SpEd learning needs are being shafted) to a non-parochial private school (in other words, not leaving public to have their children will be bathed in the specific cultural and religious values that are critical to that family which are not available in public school) and then *bemoans* the achievement gap is because data shows that minimizing higher poverty schools, making schools all 'middle class' schools, has a positive affect on student achievement on poor students, and thus, the achievement gap would be narrowed by that person keeping their general ed kids in public schools (achievement gap is narrowed NOT by bringing down the top, or by simply 'cooking up' a high average by adding in high testing students, or by diluting the poor scores and spreading them across many buildings, but by actually raising scores of low achievers). Putting a majority of well-scoring general ed students with low scoring kids does not make the low scores 'smarter' because they are 'sitting beside' a 'smart' kid, there is no knowledge osmosis. Nor are those kids there to 'tutor' the low scorers. They are there to learn, as is their civil right to learn. However, have a majority of well prepared students in a classroom does positively affect the low scorers. Perhaps the overall tone of a classroom with students excited to learn means that fellow students adopt the attitudes modeled by the majority of their peers, and so they too become engrossed in lessons. I don't know why, just know that is what the data says.

I use achievement gap NOT opportunity gap, because the 'problem' we are trying to fix is students poor test scores: achievement. Who knows what kind of opportunities the low achieving students have had. I know kids from wealthy loving families who did terrible in school or who had drug problems and dropped out. They had no gap in opportunity but they bombed at school. I know kids who had nothing and came from 'broken homes', they had no 'opportunities', but, they did ferociously well in school and went on to successful careers. Opportunity is a vague word. We are not trying to solve opportunities in a class room per se. We are trying to support learning, excellence for all, and, if it takes solve barriers to learning, then that is something that is critical for schools. That is where learning specialists, wrap around services, early learning, free lunch and breakfast come in to play. Not that those will level the playing field, but school is school and cannot replace an intact social and health policy net and resources.

People with means pull their kids out of our public schools. I do not judge their choices. But when they get on that soapbox to complain about equity, however, I am repulsed by the hypocrisy. Because, if they cared so much about it, they could stay in public schools, convince their friends and neighbors to do the same, and thus actively make public schools better for all without making their kids suffer poorer scores.

To be clear, I am not talking about advanced learning: data shows that not only do their test scores fail to grow without appropriate instruction, but that their social/emotional learning suffers terribly, with high drop out rates as a result.

If we want excellence for all, that includes academically gifted learners as well as struggling learners as well as special needs students. All is all. I support all, and not at the expense of others -- education is not a zero sum game.

Please, no tangent about the program that shall not be named. A question was asked, so here are my thoughts.

Tired Parent
Anonymous said…
Tired Parent,

As long as SPS views high performing kids primarily as tools to bring up lower performing kids and not kids equally deserving a challenging education, parents will find other ways to get their kids what they need.

With education becoming increasingly important to adult success, how many parents are willing risk their kids' futures to support SPS' social engineering bungling?

Is it too much to ask for SPS to consider their primary goal as providing every kid a challenging education?

Fed Up
Anonymous said…
@Unclear-- Tired Parent sums up my feeling exactly with this statement

"People with means pull their kids out of our public schools. I do not judge their choices. But when they get on that soapbox to complain about equity, however, I am repulsed by the hypocrisy."

That's the point I was trying to make about the private school parent with kids in an exclusive school criticizing advanced learning. Yet, my kid's personal experience (as I outlined in my post) has been far less segregated.
-JP
Anonymous said…
@ JP and Tired Parent, I think it's more complicated than that. Some parents, public or private, don't support advanced learning, and some of those supposedly don't support it for equity reasons. However, many of those same parents often have no problem with inequities created by the SAP, so it's hard to take their "equity" concerns to heart. Instead, it often comes across more as a concern that some kids might feel bad...often their own kids, included. Parents with bright kids who don't qualify for advanced learning programs often escape to private schools, where that distinction doesn't generally exist. So in some ways, they are leaving to find "equity." They may believe kids shouldn't be "tracked," so that may make them opposed to public school advanced learning programs and more supportive of private.

To note, there are also a lot of other "equity" type issues that may come into play. Many children who started in public schools and ended up in private have faced some sort of discrimination or unfair or inappropriate treatment in the public school setting, or perhaps they faced a one-size-fits-all educational approach that simply did not work for them. Is it equity if works for most but not for all? Could you be seeking a more "equitable" approach in private? They are not equal, but may be equitable.

That said, yes, some are seeking a more "elite" experience in private. As are some who try so hard to get their kids into HCC in public. But many in both are seeking an appropriate fit for their child, something that allows them a similar chance to thrive.

At least that's our experience.

gone girl
Anonymous said…
@Gone girl-- "That said, yes, some are seeking a more "elite" experience in private",

The affluent person to whom I was referring went private and exclusive all the way. Yet, believes public schools should not offer advanced learning as "kids do learn from each other". Give me a break. I guess the "common people" should have a one size fits all education, while her own have an elite, hand picked economically & racially segregated, small class experience.
- JP
Anonymous said…
@JP, that's one person. She sounds obnoxious. There are people just like her in public schools, too. People who think they know what's best for other people's kids, people who make assumptions about other people's motivations while not admitting their own, people who use their experiences with a few to justify their prejudices against many, etc.

Gone girl
Anonymous said…
If the "one person" becomes a "leader", then their influence multiplies.

ThinkOUTSIDEof TheBOX

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Education News Roundup