Seattle Schools This Week
Monday, October 23rd
Student Assignment Plan and High School Boundaries Meeting
6:30 to 8 p.m., Eckstein Middle School
Tuesday, October 24th
Native American/Alaska Native family meeting
Meany Middle School, Lunchroom, 6-7:30 p.m.
Wednesday, October 25th
Board Work Sessions: Budget; Student Assignment Plan; Executive Session: to evaluate the performance of a public employee 4:30 PM to 8:30 PM, JSCEE, No agenda yet available
Thursday, October 26th
Native American/Alaska Native family meeting
Chief Sealth High school, 6-7:30 pm
Student Assignment Plan and High School Boundaries Meeting
6:30 to 8 p.m., Ballard High School,
Saturday, October 28th
Director Community Meetings
Director Patu
Raconteur, 5041 Wilson Ave S, 9-11 am
Director Blanford
Location TBA, 10 am-noon (note: this is Director Blanford's last community meeting as a director)
I note the announcement of the annual State of the District speech by the Superintendent which will be Tuesday, November 14th at West Seattle High School from 5-7 pm. This might be an interesting event to attend what with school board elections the week before and the announcement that the current Board has decided to seek a new superintendent.
Student Assignment Plan and High School Boundaries Meeting
6:30 to 8 p.m., Eckstein Middle School
Tuesday, October 24th
Native American/Alaska Native family meeting
Meany Middle School, Lunchroom, 6-7:30 p.m.
Wednesday, October 25th
Board Work Sessions: Budget; Student Assignment Plan; Executive Session: to evaluate the performance of a public employee 4:30 PM to 8:30 PM, JSCEE, No agenda yet available
Thursday, October 26th
Native American/Alaska Native family meeting
Chief Sealth High school, 6-7:30 pm
Student Assignment Plan and High School Boundaries Meeting
6:30 to 8 p.m., Ballard High School,
Saturday, October 28th
Director Community Meetings
Director Patu
Raconteur, 5041 Wilson Ave S, 9-11 am
Director Blanford
Location TBA, 10 am-noon (note: this is Director Blanford's last community meeting as a director)
I note the announcement of the annual State of the District speech by the Superintendent which will be Tuesday, November 14th at West Seattle High School from 5-7 pm. This might be an interesting event to attend what with school board elections the week before and the announcement that the current Board has decided to seek a new superintendent.
Comments
-attendee
HCC will not be moving to the neighborhood high schools anytime soon. They said that the cohorts at each individual school would not be large enough to support adequate advance classes. It was implied that additional HCC pathway schools would open in different parts of the city - Ingraham would become the North end HCC pathway.
WW
And WW is right; a lot of "implied" explanations that, later on, can either be denied or "that just didn't work out."
more questions
They need to be all working together on a comprehensive strategy. These silos--and the lack of leadership able to put all the pieces together in a way that will actually work--are killing us.
DisAPP
1. HC will no longer default to Garfield for all of Seattle after 2019; (only for South side?)
2. Sounds like HC pathway may be preserved, with option for HC at more schools. (I took this to mean Ingraham in the North end given the added capacity- not sure if there would be a third)
3. HC students will not be automatically assigned to reference school in 2019.
4. Lincoln will not be the North HC pathway (it would be over-enrolled too quickly)
5. More accelerated classes will be offered at high schools currently at the low end for better equity (number of AP classes at area high schools range from < 10 to 70);
6. IB/ AP conundrum at Ingraham- will they add more AP classes as some kids don't want IB? Currently being considered.
7. Lincoln as STEM school, would have 4 yrs of Math/ Science, but it would not be an option school. (I looked at Cleveland's website for an idea of curriculum). If it opens as a 9/10, they would hope to accommodate HCC who are already 2 yrs accelerated with continuation of math/ science
8. High schools may continue have a focus or special areas of study beyond core offerings without being an option school
9. No additional boundary maps will be drawn, so make your case for one of the three that are the finalists (these 3 were on display at the meeting)
10. 24 credits was enacted to better prepare students to meet entrance requirements for colleges. 21 credits left some kids short. (I didn't know this was the reason).
11. Recommendation for HC pathway in 2019 should be made in the Nov or Dec meeting
12. Community engagement matters, so either go to the meetings, or email your opinions. Things like opening Lincoln as a 9/10, grandfathering 11th graders to stay at their existing school- let enrollment planning know. Which map you like and why- email boundaries. Recommendation to be made Dec 7.
13. It would be good to know when draft of 2019 SAP will be ready for community review. Someone mentioned that it should be done before boundaries are finalized. That was not on the decision timelines sheet that was passed out at the meeting tonight. If someone could ask at the next meeting, it would be helpful.
14. By January vote, students will hopefully know their high schools for the 2019 including final vote on boundaries, pathways, and grandfathering.
Waiting Imp-atiently
- Frustrated
For anyone who attends the meetings, please write your comments on a card, placed at the appropriate table. Feedback will be attached to topic of the table where the card gets submitted. Do not leave without submitting a comment card. These concerns need to be heard and documented.
UnFingbelievable
"Community engagement matters" - not to staff it doesn't. But yes, tell the Board your thoughts.
Frustrated and those things ARE in the original SAP that staff is calling "an historical document" with "principles" in it. They are wrong. It is the a living document that is the baseline for enrollment.
If the three map options up for consideration are the only options to be available, they need to provide additional details as to how they came up with the projections for each school under each scenario. The current maps assume pathway changes--they need to spell these out. For example, how do they get to a Garfield projection of 1352 in Scenario E--down about 500 from their current population--when the Garfield boundary only shrinks by about 211? That leaves about 300 mysteriously to-be-disappeared students... Who are they, where else are they counted, and why?
In addition, for each of these three map options they need to provide projections that include pathways. They don't have to re-do the maps themselves; they could simply add what the numbers would look like if, as they suggested, Garfield was a south-end pathway and Ingraham was the north-end pathway. This is important to do because the three options have varying amounts of space left over to absorb these pathways.
DisAPP
They need to create versions of the current maps with scenarios where HC students stay in neighbor schools and where they follow pathway to Ingraham. There is a real capacity change that should be illustrated and acknowledged. Are they assuming only Hale HCC students and a small number from the other northend schools with go to Ingraham, or the majority across the Northend will follow the pathway? It is unclear what they project, but it is good news they found a lot of gold to add advanced curriculum and teachers to all those schools. Who won the lottery? Awesome!
Chaos Theory
Curve Ball
We need a plan that is well thought out, based on clear data, and internally consistent.
bring it
Realistically they cannot afford to fund AP classes unless they are full. Those classes need to be packed to run. All kids should have access to AP classes at each high school. But to be realistic not all high schools have loads of kids needing loads of sections. IB is also available at Sealth and Rainier Beach.
-P
-skeptical-
Get Serious
FNH
-GLP
Imagine if SPS superimposed border scenarios with transportation/walkability zones...why is this an afterthought???
UFB
messy
NW parent
"All kids should have access to AP classes at each high school."
They do. Every single comprehensive high school has AP and every single kid can sign up. The only barrier is if taking a language AP (which, of course, means you need to have had a lot of that language) or other APs that might need more advanced math. But advanced math classes are also available to any student.
I pointed this out to Jesse and he said, yes, we need to get this message out.
But the reader is also correct that the number does vary from school to school (and that's based on demand especially for HCC students)AND that you cannot add AP without a nearly full class. Again, this is why you have HCC pathways - to have enough AP for those students AND save the district money from having to provide more at every single school.
That's been our experience at well and that Ingraham's admin is committed to making Ingraham work for all students including those in HCC. The problem a couple years back is that the district was not clearly communicating to families and many thought HCC at Ingraham was a guaranteed option which it wasn't.
A north end HCC pathway at Ingraham with some additional sections of advanced courses seems like the best case scenario for all students given Garfield's overcrowding.
Maple Leaf Family
HF
I found it curious that the handouts Mr. Jesse had with "the results" of the ThoughtExchange did not include the top two voted on comments, which were:
"Advanced students need to enter 9th with a critical mass of students entering the math/science pathway at their level."
"A true pathway at north end and south end."
WW
-P
Good catch WW. And of course that is why they went with the amorphous ThoughtExchange experiment. It allowed them to censor questions and then cook the books as to what was said. Does anyone have a copy of the results?
Live Life
At the last time this was done, over 70% of high school students had TWO addresses and address fluidity was higher at high school that other grades. This completely changes the dynamics of drawing high school boundaries and it is was abundantly clear from the data that families (in all demographic categories) will move to get an assignment that is a better student fit.
All of the maps presented are based on resident address. The last time we did this, the reason why it was made clear that there was no alignment between middle and high school was because choice at high school is critical to students.
One of the answers I heard last night was that "multiple HCC pathways" sites were under consideration in order to alleviate crowding at Garfield.
There has been a group in West Seattle that has been actively promoting a Madison -> WSHS HC cohort. I think this is pretty solid idea. If HCC were placed at WSHS, then West Seattle could have easy access to both IB and HCC. Additionally, by placing these programs at separate schools, you have the ability to increase movement between the schools.
Fairmount Parent
HF
@ HF, I have no idea about current numbers because they don't seem to be in the data sets. That said, in the 2008, 2009 data sets, those number were most likely representative of true 2 parent/guardian families, because there was no "guaranteed assignment" at that time based on address and it was similar to nationwide divorce statistics.
If I had to make a guess, I would guess that the percentage is actually higher now.
Their parents do (I'm pretty sure but I can ask.) I don't think the district requires "primary parent" status but even so, there are parents who share custody.
I also suspect that in the case of a school like Roosevelt, you'll see some of the apartments nearby being rented (and then subleased) in order to have an address in the neighborhood.
There will be gaming aplenty.
https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/School%20Board/17-18%20agendas/20171025/20171025_Agenda_Packet.pdf
-GLP
The last time we went through the high school boundary process, it became very clear that it was just not possible to "right-size" schools and then "force" families into that school. There needed to be some flexibility in the system. But all that institutional memory is just gone.
The conclusion the last time was that it would be far easier and simplier to honor a limited choice model, where people could be honest and direct about their choices and the district would do their best to accommodate these choices. Otherwise, there would be plenty of gaming the system and managing that would be less predictable. 70% of families already have two addresses. It would be really interesting to run the maps from the meeting with both addresses and then divide that number in half. The picture would look drastically different.
Downtown seems to think that all choice can be eliminated and then somehow, magically, there will be a better outcome. It just doesn't work that way. When you back people into a corner, they are more likely to just leave.
Live Life
I move that the Board approve the Student Assignment Plan, as attached to the Board Action Report, and retire the 2009 New Student Assignment Plan to minimize confusion.
It should read ... to remove all choice options and protections for students, rather than to minimize confusion.
- grouchy parent
Half Full
N by Nw
Others are renting and are intending to move within the boundary of their desired HS once the boundaries are established. With all of the new construction around RHS that won't be difficult.
I know of other families that have tried the choice system in the past years. The school they applied for had plenty of building space, and enough staff to accommodate wait list moves. However, just like Stevens, Enrollment Planning had projected a reduction in staff, so the wait list didn't move. Enrollment at the school decreased (although not a lot, and 20-30 kids above projections) yet even so, staff was reduced and the wait list not moved. The majority of these families left SPS within three years.
I agree with Kellie that Enrollment Planning will not succeed with their plan to provide themselves with total predictability in enrollment by eliminating choice. I also suspect they (EP) don't care if enrollment in SPS declines. If no one cares it is a zero sum game for families. With no reason to stay , why would they?
And eventually, this no choice strategy will backfire as the loss of so many students will reduce monies from the State and there is only so long this decline can continue and the many jobs at JSCEE be maintained.
-StepJ
I am not saying this is the ideal to return to, but space available should return to actual physical (reasonable) space based on the classrooms available at the school. Not an arbitrary staffing allotment determined by EP who could just be directed to not staff a school that their boss says needs to close down. All without Board oversight.
The 2009 NSAP is pages and pages long - it includes each of the boundary maps of all of the schools. This proposed SAP is very similar to what EP tried to float last year. Not a lot of detail, a lot removed from Board oversight. (Including boundaries!)
These past years have very distinctly shown that if EP or staff at JSCEE say "trust me" it is not to be believed (Whitman, Stevens, etc.) If there is to be a new SAP then it should be many pages of very detailed rules, that are clear and unambiguous to families and the Board. No more (to quote Eric B.) left is right and black is white.
-StepJ
HF