Wednesday, November 01, 2017

Transition Plan for Next Year on Ops Agenda

A reader pointed out to me that on the Operations Committee meeting agenda for tomorrow there is this:

Approval of the 2018-19 Student Assignment Transition Plan (Herndon, Davies) (Editor's note; the reader requested a copy and was sent one.)

The reader said she hadn't had time to read it but when I checked, no attachments.

This particularly important document isn't there?  How ready can it be to present to the Committee if it's not there 24 hours before the meeting?

I'd say be ready for anything.  I'm going to try to make this meeting.


Anonymous said...

On the APP blog saying 5 pathway schools including Roosevelt, Ballard, GHS, Franklin and WSHS. Strange. Also includes Lincoln to GHS.


Anonymous said...

It's crazy. Lincoln is in the most size- constrained area of the city (surrounded by other high schools), making it already awkward to draw a large enough boundary. Now they want to send Lincoln area HCC students and LI students--both of which are higher proportions in Lincoln than anywhere--somewhere else (LI to Ingraham, HCC to Garfield?) what percentage of students in the proposed Lincoln AA are neither HCC nor LI? Probably not too high, given that both JSIS and McDonald are elementary feeders.


kellie said...

When boundaries were redrawn for the 2009 SAP, the first thing that was presented at community meetings were maps of the number of students and their closest schools. These maps clearly highlighted which schools were geographically convenient and which schools were geographically NOT convenient. In other words, what schools had too many students who thought this was their closest schools and which schools did not.

The process was very simple.

1) Make a geographic map that draws boundaries exactly half way between all high schools. This will make transparent the line where "closest school" is for ALL students.

2) You then add to this map the number of currently enrolled SPS students who live in that boundary.

3) This will tell you at a glance, which schools have more students who live closer and which schools do not.

4) Then everyone knows which schools will be REQUIRED to have some students who live closer to this school, go elsewhere, AND which schools will need to have students who live closer to another school shift to this school.

You can then move students via boundaries (push them) or programs (pull them)

These maps were at every meeting the last time this happened and they used to be available on the district website. IIRC, Ballard had almost 2500 students, for whom Ballard was the closest high school. This made it very clear that there were going to be at least 1,000 families that would be directed to other schools. I would suspect that once again, Ballard has MORE students who live closer to Ballard, than Ballard can handle.

kellie said...

The recommendations for HCC placement are pure MADNESS from a capacity management point of view. These recommendations will ensure that Garfield, Ballard and Roosevelt are stuffed to the breaking point (AGAIN), while Lincoln and Nathan Hale remain empty. It will also ensure that boundaries in the North end will be INSANE.

How do I define Insane ... to make this plan work.

Magnolia, North Green Lake AND the University District will all need to go to Lincoln to give Lincoln a bare minimum number of students. Because BOTH the LI students and the HCC students will have a guaranteed pathway out of Lincoln. This means that the boundaries for Lincoln will practically go to the doors of Ballard and Roosevelt.

Both Ingraham and Nathan Hale will need to EXPAND their boundaries so that Roosevelt and Ballard can reserve space for HCC. I guess the boundary can drop from 85th to 75th to make that happen but .... Ouch.

kellie said...

The Franklin and WSHS recommendations are equally silly.

Franklin is an amazing school with long waitlist every year and very large boundaries. Franklin relies on students selecting Cleveland in order to manage their capacity. The changes to limit Open enrollment have widely different impacts in various schools. Limiting open enrollment has done significant harm to both Nova and Cleveland by not enabling choice seats in September. Nova changed to a service school to fix this but ... that was an awkward solution to a problem that never needed to exist.

Making Franklin the HCC pathway will necessitate boundary changes for South Seattle and changing Cleveland to an attendance area school. Maybe not immediately but in the not-too-distant-future, that will be the only way to manage capacity in that area.

And Garfield. Ouch. So all the South Seattle and West Seattle HCC, students will be pushed out of Garfield so Lincoln area students can go to Garfield. Ummm ... where is that racial and equity tool?????

Jet City mom said...

I have concern about struggling families, who often move in the summer.
I like the idea of low income families being protected from having to continually change schools.


Anonymous said...

Why was Lincoln not drawn with tighter geographic boundaries and designated for LI and HCC? Is this really all because of the principal there? Or because Ashley Davies is conflating pathways with privelege? Where is the reasoning for that decision? Is it too late for the board to intervene?


Anonymous said...

@Kellie: Please note that many Lincoln parents from the Wallingford/Green Lake will not want to send their kids to Garfield. The commute across the Montlake Bridge is horrendous in the afternoon. Roosevelt in contrast is about 10 minutes by bike or bus (no change) from our house. Ballard is not far either. To me the HCC boundaries make no sense. In addition Lincoln will have nothing going for it: no HCC, no language immersion, no sports field, possibly no AP classes at all. I know that we may have limited choices, but I see my kid neither at Lincoln or Garfield even though we unfortunately appear to be in those boundaries. We had been very hopeful after the first few Lincoln HS community meetings (not sure what they were for in retrospect). These new development regarding boundaries and HCC/language immersion placement come as a big blow.

South of Green Lake

Anonymous said...

My thoughts as well, @Help. Lincoln seems like an obvious location for a LI and HC pathway - boundaries could be drawn smaller and there would be less disruption to boundaries system wide. Again, where are the enrollment projections? Where are the numbers to support their latest proposal?

rework it

Anonymous said...

I agree with @help. The Lincoln decisions don't make sense. That's a lot of transportation time for many Wallingford kids.

Anonymous said...

From a comment by Concerned Parent in the other thread:

Also, it is my understanding that "equity" is a reason why the district isn't following the superintendent's task force recommendations to make Lincoln a DLI school.

AND, the district didn't want to "tell" Lincoln's principal what her school would be.

So is this decision being made because Ms. Davies and Principal Medsker don't want the appearance of a privileged high school in Wallingford? I believe Ms. Davies has said as much at meetings?

Also Concerned

Anonymous said...

This is also an excellent comment by United. I hope the board can view this thread.

"Neighborhood vs. neighborhood is bad, but I fear it's about to get worse--neighborhood vs. HCC community. The proposed high school boundary maps for the north-end lead HC students right back to their neighborhood schools. If the board forces SPS to rework these maps to create room for HC cohort(s), neighborhood attendance area(s) will shrink because, against all logic, SPS says Lincoln will not house HCC. SPS would rather maximize drama by pushing neighborhood kids out. The impacted neighborhood(s) will rally against HCC giving SPS strong allies in its anti-HCC cause.

SPS is trying to divide and conquer. Let's not fall into this trap.


Anonymous said...

Want meeting materials? The Ops agenda included this info:

(As School Board Committees are working committees, the documents presented to the Board can change up to the time of the meeting. The Board Executive Committee has approved a pilot program to post to the website committee agendas and approved minutes only. Full meeting materials for Regular Board Meetings will still be posted. If you would like access to any of the materials for this meeting, you may call 206-252-0040 or email boardoffice@seattleschools.org and the Board Office staff will send committee materials to you promptly.)

NESeattleMom said...

The recent plans, rumors of plans, and ideas put out by various SPS messages are giving me whiplash....It seems to be so rushed if they are thinking of 2018. Maybe this is all ahead of 2019. I do not understand who is in charge of planning. Everything seems in flux, and nothing really feels like a plan. I can't believe the principal of Lincoln has so much power whose effects will be felt by so many families. I know each high school parent hopes to somehow get through this with a solution that matches up for their kid, despite the challenges of Seattle traffic and geography. I think the later start time makes high school traffic challenges worse.

Anonymous said...

The school board needs to step in and forcefully, firmly tell the staff to stop jamming parents, stop making last-minute proposals, and instead engage in an honest, sincere, and deliberate process to get these boundaries right.

The board has to show the staff who is in charge here. For so long the board hasn't been willing to do it. Now is an urgent moment for the board to stand up and tell the staff "no."

Were it up to me there would also be consequences for people's jobs for having botched this process. I hope board members understand that if they continue to protect staff from accountability and refuse to fire people, that the voters will fire the board members themselves.

Fire Everyone

Anonymous said...

Just a reminder that the only employee the school board can fire is the Superintendent (and they have already effectively done that by initiating a search for a replacement.)

I know other boards elsewhere have broader powers. Its an interesting question whether the current board should push to expand in this direction.


Eric B said...

If the document linked above is truly the document to be debated today at the Ops Committee, then staff failed to fix some of the basic issues: spelling mistakes and confusion between physical and staffing capacity.

Flip, if you're reading this, you still have time to fix it before paper copies show up at the work session.

Anonymous said...

Uh, why is latest plan to grandfather HCC kids at Garfield when Gen Ed kids are going to be booted when Lincoln opens. Talk about an equity issue. All the kids move or none do.


kellie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

structure, that's not exactly true. The board has plenty of powers that they can choose to use or not use. They can also change policies as needed in order to make it possible to fire people. However, there are things they can do short of taking a vote to fire a staffer:

• Making the Superintendent's job and/or COLA conditional on firing people
• Eliminating the budget line for a senior staffer
• Publicly urging a senior staffer to resign - name them and shame them
• Slashing the Central Office budget until senior staffers resign or are fired

And so on.

The only people in SPS who are immune from any sort of accountability are the senior staff. As long as that situation continues, nothing will ever improve. The school board needs to find a way to fire the senior staffers who need to go. If they don't, then there are four board members up for re-election in 2019 and I am guessing the public will not be in a mood to hear any more excuses about why the senior staff continue to get away with things.

Fire Everyone

Anonymous said...

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. It is not OK to stop posting workshop documents. Does SPS not understand version control on docs? When the latest doc comes out, its numbering changes (v3.0 and the date) and goes to the board, that doc is also sent to the downtown webteam to post - and not 3 days later - this is a new millenium. "Write us and we'll send you a copy but meantime we'll move forward with discussions impacting 1000s of kids." Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Could SPS's noticeable attempts to improve public engagement (having lived through MGJ I assure you it's tremendously better - still quite flawed, but much much better) nothing will set SPS back farther than this "pilot" dreamed up by...who??? Push back hard people. Push back hard. Write your board members today.


Anonymous said...

The school board and staff need to hold multiple emergency planning meetings to get this mess sorted out. There are so many issues that affect so many students and the board will need time to process all the ramifications of their decision making. I know we are also dealing with a capacity crisis for 2018. But capacity should not be the sole driver in many of these decisions! I planned and managed programs for years and have some real concerns about going from 1 to 5 (6 including Ingraham!) HC pathway schools. I am very concerned about the timeline.

Kellie, Melissa & Eric B and all the wonderful parents who read and advocate on this blog, thank you and I hope you are communicating with the board! Now is the time.

Anonymous said...

Because I cannot help myself:

The newly released North End HCC pathway proposal is being discussed elsewhere but it impacts this and next year's SAP. In the worst possible way for HCC. Make no mistake, the problem is entirely because student enrollment and academic programming have not been tied at the hip in this process. It is *not* the fault of the community.

Here's where things seem to be landing:

With Ballard and Roosevelt designated as the North End HCC pathways (Except for Lincoln...whaaaaaa?), the most crowded North End schools will continue to be so. Further, the whitest most moneyed North End schools will become even more so. In a city trying to address racial and economic inequity - check out today's Seattle Times front page - the move will go over like a lead balloon and cause more antagonism toward the HCC program than is already here.

With Ballard and Roosevelt designated as the HCC pathways, boundaries will need to be drawn more tightly than the SAP being discussed for 2018 indicates.
Queen Anne, Magnolia, NW Greenlake, Phinney, Fremont, families north of 75th, families near I-5, chances are they're headed to schools other than Ballard, Roosevelt, if not in 2018 then in 2019. Are they fully aware? Are they going to be supportive of HCC at Ballard/Roosevelt? Been here. Done this. It will be ugly.

If by chance geographically nearby neighbors do attend Ballard/Roosevelt, then HCCers: Get ready for your program delivery to be largely Running Start. School capacity and scheduling issues will be growing, not diminishing. Is this the optimal way to deliver HCC services? It will work for some, but as the main solution I argue strongly....No!

Again, right sizing boundaries and program placement needed to be the primary lens, not one of the lenses, used in this process. This upcoming workshop is perhaps the last chance to bind the divergent paths, not splinter the north end into neighborhood v neighborhood. Further, every North End principal needs to be tied into this decision and needs to be a problem-solver not a roadblock. And they need to speak publicly about their perspective, not "hide" behind downtown. It isn't just downtown that owns this mess. It's the individual school principals too. Teamwork. We teach our kids to do it. Why can't the adult managers in this system manage to do the same?


Anonymous said...

Board Policy 1420 contains no directive about the posting of supplementary information for "special meetings":

Special Meetings

Special meeting agendas, including those for Board committee meetings, will be posted on the district’s website no later than twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the published start time, and final action may be taken only on that business contained in the notice of the special meeting and agenda.

I'd agree with DistrictWatcher that the supplementary info needs to get posted, and within the same time frame as the agenda. Write to the Board!

They've held public meetings that were cagey about the proposals, then won't post documents for public review, even on the day of the vote? Families have to request info individually, during school hours? What decade are we in?


Anonymous said...

Another way to look at this plan is that kids in Wallingford are getting a large array of high school choices; Lincoln, Ingraham or Garfield. I imagine most HCC students will end up at Lincoln (if it's a strong STEAM school) in the same way many are now choosing Roosevelt over Garfield.

Seems like this plan is terrible for Ballard and Roosevelt overcrowding.


kellie said...

The art of project management is the question "What is the problem you are trying to solve?"

I think the problem we are trying to solve is "How to open Lincoln as a comprehensive high school, so that Lincoln is set up to be successful BOTH at launch with geo-split students and in the long run with future attendance area students, while creating BOTH the least disruption to current students and long-term reasonable boundaries?"

That is the question, I would asking. How to best balance some competing priorities to make the most good for the most students? I have no clue what question this solution is solving?

To me, the answer lies in looking at BOTH the population that lives in the immediate area and committing to serve those students AND looking at the mitigation required for geo-split students. The could be the same or different things.

A long term plan would need to include HCC and LI at Lincoln. The majority of Language Immersion students live in the immediate Lincoln area. Additionally, under all of the various scenarios, Lincoln has a large number of HCC qualified students.

A short term plan looks only at mitigation needs and I am certain someone crunched some numbers and determined that HCC and LI would require mitigation dollars. Of course, they will require mitigation dollars. Any plan for Lincoln is going to require SUBSTANTIAL mitigation. IMHO, there is no way to mitigation the need for mitigation.

And most importantly, the problem of year one mitigation dollars should not determine the boundaries for the entire district.

Anonymous said...

Before we start pointing fingers and calling for heads, don't forget that Director Geary asked that all HCC high school students be sent back to their neighborhood schools at a recent meeting. If it seems like the District enrollment staff is running around like chickens with their heads cut off, maybe it's because they are getting conflicting messages from various "leaders" and they are having a hard time decifering the opinion of the day.

I'd like to see more data associated with each proposal, including equity analysis, transportation costs and times, and enrollment with and w/out HCC students.
Fix AL

kellie said...

CapacityWonk summed up the problem very nicely.

Anonymous said...

"I'd like to see more data associated with each proposal, including equity analysis, transportation costs and times, and enrollment with and w/out HCC students."

They also need to provide data on budget, cohort size & projected honors & AP classes for each school etc. How they would actually provide this program effectively with enough sections etc. Considering how all the varied electives impact high school scheduling, and ease of scheduling advanced core classes at all 5 high schools, plus those going to Ingraham? Going from 1-2 pathways to 5-6 pathways. Overexpansion without a plan. From a program planning perspective there is no plan.

Eric B said...

HS HCC at between three and five schools districtwide makes a lot of sense to me. Ballard and Roosevelt are not the schools to do that at, though. They don't have the space. I guess I'll have to swing by JSCEE on my way home tonight and pick up a copy of what they're actually proposing.

Anonymous said...

Who is on the ops committee? Who can we write to this afternoon?


Anonymous said...

@Eric B- There is more to consider than just space though when planning a program. The principal and culture of the school is also a factor. As well as location and current offerings etc. If they are to add a north end HC pathway (besides IB Ingraham which is not a fit for all) Roosevelt or Ballard (or Lincoln) would make sense as a critical mass come from neighborhoods that already attend those schools.

Another NW said...

Better get there early as now it might be first up (in red on agenda online)
There has been a request to revise the agenda to have the Student Assignment Transition Plan as the first item on tonight’s agenda. The committee will consider that request at the beginning of the meeting. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

I also question why they have eliminated Lincoln as an HC north end site. In addition, they have the space at Ingraham so why not add AP classes (in addition to IB) and make it an HC pathway (not optional) site.

Anonymous said...

The operations committee is Stephan Blanford (Chair), Scott Pinkham, and Jill Geary, according to the webpage.


observer said...

Thanks to In the Know on the HCC blog, here's the link to the newly revised SAP that is now being presented to the Operations Committee, which includes the 5 newly proposed HCC high school pathways from 2019 (Garfield, Franklin, West Seattle, Roosevelt, Ballard, plus continuing Ingraham IBX option). The SAP documents and supporting materials are the last in the file:


Melissa Westbrook said...

"Is it too late for the board to intervene?"

NO, it is NOT too late. Tell the Board to not approve this plan for next year (and all that it implies for the future). Do it NOW. Interesting that this plan is out AFTER the community meetings on the boundaries.

Anonymous, (and no anonymous comments, please), yes I know you can request materials but that is just silly. And not equitable.

Directors Blanford, Geary and Pinkham are on Ops.

Another NW, interesting. I suspect it will get moved up.

I think staff are trying to make HCC such a big deal that other parents will rise up against it.

Elsa said...

This board has been so willingly captured by the "stars" of the palace that they will continue to remain "powerless" because senior staff tells them so.

Elsa said...

This board can not act in any way but a manipulated manner.

Elsa said...


Eric B said...

Elsa, I disagree with that, mostly because of the July 5 board meeting. The board stared down staff and voted through waitlist moves plus a few other items even though staff said the world would end if the board did that. They also very nearly turned down the payroll warrants over CTE issues.

Anonymous said...

@Eric B "HS HCC at between three and five schools districtwide makes a lot of sense to me."
It does not to me especially without seeing an analysis on details and how will be provided. Three is different than five and five is way too many if you also include Ingraham which is also a pathway school so six.

Anonymous said...

So what, really, is an HC pathway school? I think SPS is just going to add some AP classes to schools that already have them and consider it good. In other words, the offerings won't be especially robust (in comparison to GHS historically) and will probably be comparable to what already exists at Ballard and RHS.

Blaming Ruth Medsker for the Lincoln approach is also a non-starter. SPS wouldn't have installed her as the principal unless they concurred with her vision for Lincoln. Just a thought.

- NP

Eric B said...

D, Two is too few; we've proven that by experiment. I agree that five is probably too many, at least for a while. That's why three to five makes sense to me. Where they go needs a lot of analysis and numbers.

Melissa Westbrook said...

I'm at the meeting and they did approve moving the SAP for 2018-2019 up on the agenda. There are multiple handouts and they continue to tie HCC to the SAP with multiple handouts. I don't get it and I will try to ask about it.

I note that district communications is not answering my questions very often so I don't know if I will get an answer.

Flip is handling this; Ashley is not here. The word Transitions will be placed in title and transfers back to assignment schools will be maintained.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the updates, Melissa. Why does it feel like watching a train wreck in slow motion?


GLP said...

So, several people have commented above that in order to make Ballard and Roosevelt "regional pathway" high schools for HCC, the boundaries will have to be drawn tighter (potentially moving students who live nearby out of the boundary). However, looking at map H2 and the data given along with it, I'm wondering if this has been the plan all along...???

right size capacity - 1607
2016 9th-12th grade SPS Residents - 1337

right size capacity - 1715
2016 9th-12th grade SPS Residents - 1427

Nathan Hale and Ingraham are much closer to the same # for each.



Anonymous said...

Good point, GLP--but that is impossible to know since they wouldn't show HCC overlay maps. The staff approach has seemed so sneaky. Still concerned for SE and West Seattle. Could Mag HC go to Ballard, Wallingford HC go to Roosevelt and QA HC go to Garfield so then SE and West could stay with a healthy cohort size at Garfield? How many kids would then be pulled out of Lincoln and what would be left?

So many questions the maps do not answer.

Shell Game

GLP said...

Also, it makes me crazy that they are using 2016 numbers. If they are going to do that, why not use 2016 6th - 9th grade SPS Residents to predict for 2019 high school students?


observer said...

To be clear, in plain print the newly revised draft Transition Student Assignment Plan for 2018-19 which is being discussed at the meeting Melissa is now attending includes:

Naming four (4) new regional HCC high school pathways beginning 2019 (Roosevelt, Ballard, Franklin, and West Seattle, in addition to Garfield and optional Ingraham IBX). Note that this new staff proposal is contrary to the HCC Advisory's proposal a couple of days ago for only one (1) new north end HCC high school school pathway (the HCC committee did not suggest at which school?). The new Lincoln High School is not being designated either as a HCC pathway or as a DLI language pathway.

Again, the extensive draft Transition SAP with supporting materials under discussion can be found at:

Meg said...

Yikes. Doesn't look good for ANY segment of HCC@GHS that the "right-size" attendance area boundaries are 1594, with 1563 SPS high school students living in the redrawn boundaries. And a "right-size" capacity of only 1594. Side question: what's a "right-size" capacity? There's not a footnote saying how that got calculated. Hopefully it's not as bad as the whole "staffing capacity" concept... but I'm not holding my breath

Of attendance area high schools, Garfield has the lowest outflow. Only about 10% of students living in GHS's boundaries elect to go to other schools in the district (compared with a district average of 25%, and RBHS's nearly 50%).

Since the district has a document showing where students live vs. where they go to school, this is information they have. So why would they choose to do that w/ GHS's boundaries if ANY portion of HCC is supposed to stay there? Last year, between GHS and Ingraham, there were 890 HCC-enrolled students.

Anonymous said...

What is the decision the Operations Committee is being asked to make? Does the Committee pass along a recommendation on the issue to the full Board?


kellie said...

So last week the document that was sent to the full board, simply indicated that HCC pathways would be decided later, with the strong implication that the pathway decision was going to be part of the January high school boundary vote.

So 7 days later, the revised document, now includes all the pathway information, that was NEVER vetted at any of the community meetings, that correspond with this process. So now all the comments at the community meetings about how HCC was not being returned to all schools but "some schools" is made clear.

And folks wonder why there is such a profound lack of trust on the topic of the SAP and boundaries. Transparency is critical to trust and there just isn't any transparency in this process.

kellie said...

I love the comment the notation that the AL department has over a year to plan for changing HCC from one site to five sites. As Charlie would say about now, "Where is the curriculum that was promised in 2008 after the first split?" That curriculum was promised to be delivered the following year. Still waiting.

IMHO, from a systems point of view, it is utter folly to go from one location to five. It makes a lot more sense to just make Lincoln the new site in the North end and then give it a few years for Madison to truly develop a cohort and if Garfield is still over-subscribed, then add an additional site in the south end.

Eric B said...

Right size capacity for high schools is approximately:

# Classrooms (no portables) * 25 students each * 5 periods/day

I believe that there is some adjustment for SpEd in there, but not 100% sure.

observer said...

Ruthie, according to the staff handout distributed during the ongoing open house meetings (two to go at Cleveland HS, Nov. 8, and West Seattle HS, Nov. 9!), "Proposed changes to Student Assignment Plan presented to the Operations Committee as a Whole. This committee will determine whether or not the Student Assignment Plan is ready to go to the full School Board," for the expected Nov. 15 School Board vote. For the second time, the Operations Committee is deciding whether the 2018-19 Transition SAP is "ready" for the full School Board.

For the full Decision Timelines for both the expected Nov. 15 SAP School Board vote and for the expected January 17 High School Boundary Changes School Board vote, see the following info from the staff open house handout "Student Assignment Plan, Advanced Learning, and High School Boundary Open House Meetings:"

Student Assignment Plan Changes for 2018-19 School Year
. . . .
* Oct. 25, 2017: Proposed changes to Student Assignment Plan presented to the Operations Committee as a Whole. This committee will determine whether or not the Student Assignment Plan is ready to go the full School Board.
* Oct. 23-30, 2017: Community feedback reviewed and considered so any revisions can be made before School Board introduction.
* Nov. 1, 2017: Expected date that recommended changes to Student Assignment Plan will be presented to the full School Board.
* Nov. 1-15, 2017: Additional community feedback reviewed and considered.
* Nov. 15, 2017: Expected date that the School Board will vote on the Student Assignment Plan for 2018-19.
. . . ."

"High School boundary Changes for 2019-20 School Year
. . . .
* April-October 2017: Task force works on recommendations. Preferred scenarios posted at www.seattleschools.org/high_school_boundary_changes
* October and November 2017: Community feedback collected through email, survey and community open houses on Oct. 23, 26 and 30, and Nov. 8 and 9.
* Week of Oct. 30 2017: Online survey available.
* November 2017: Task force members and Enrollment Planning team review and consider feedback to determine what adjustments should be made to scenarios.
* End of November: Enrollment Planning staff prepares recommended high school boundary change scenario to present to School Board.
* Dec. 7, 2017 High school boundary change options and recommendations presented to Seattle School Board Operations Committee. This committee decides if the options are ready to present to the full School Board.
* December 2017: Community meeting at John Stanford Center to share the recommendation presented to the Board Operations Committee on Dec. 7.
* Jan. 3, 2018: Expected date that recommendations will be presented to full School Board at Board Meeting.
* Jan. 17, 2018: Expected date Seattle School Board will vote on the high school boundaries at the School Board meeting.
. . . ."

Anonymous said...

Thanks, observer, for posting that information.


Melissa Westbrook said...

I will try to have a write-up later tonight but yes, committees make the recommendation to forward to entire Board. The Ops Ctm did so after some discussion especially after noting that other non-Ops Board members had concerns that needed to be addressed.

I urge you to write to the other non-Ops Board members; Burke, Harris, Peters and Patu.

Anonymous said...

@ Eric B "D, Two is too few; we've proven that by experiment. " No as Ingraham is actually a 3rd HC choice school due to the fact that so many HC chose to attend. That must be figured into the cohort split calculation. Adding one additional HC north end pathway makes more sense than having a total of 5 pathways plus Ingraham = 6.

Anonymous said...

thanks mw!

you can't have hcc in a new school. period. because as you all well know they are just looking for a private school experience. all cohorty and such. this is right up there when they made tm the north pathway school in south seattle. and hawthorne the south seattle cohort. so south of the ship canal and north of tm would have been bussed past tm and sent to hawthorne. as a reminder that was fought back by strong advocacy.

what is the one constant through all this mess. michael tolley. yep! spreading racial division for a quarter million dollars a year. nice gig if you can get it.

it has never been about race folks. it is about frl/ell and 2e being the underrepresented and protected groups. but it is so much easier to call it institutionalized racism. funny that this is the proposal for blandford and geary who have their own exposed hypocrisies on this and their option school enrollment for their kids. and was it pinkham who said effectively there are no poor whites at the last meeting? sounds like this one was tailored for them.

no caps

Anonymous said...

The only one running for re-election is Patu, but I believe her area needs some serious advocacy for both the HC students and the other students who will be shuffled around.

Shell Game

Anonymous said...

i am less concerned about the lhs issue than i am about two more pathways in the south. lhs can choose to stay in an area and will probably get their needs met. but franklin and wshs will struggle.

i agree this is designed to pit groups against each other.

no caps

Anonymous said...

@Kellie-- No as you stated nothing parents could review at the SAP meetings. But I did read one SAP parental account where Wyeth Jesse said the regional pathway proposal would be introduced very soon. So they talked about it only.

Anonymous said...

"I urge you to write to the other non-Ops Board members; Burke, Harris, Peters and Patu."

Yes, everybody that has issues with this plan...please write now!

Anonymous said...

So Um.....what happens when this plan is released and many of us with HC 8th graders decide to choose Ballard or Roosevelt for 2018? Chances are that many will start the process sooner. This might help Garfield next year, but Ballard & Roosevelt cannot handle HC coming back prematurely?

Anonymous said...

no caps
lhs can choose to stay in an area and will probably get their needs met.

Wait, what? HCC getting their needs met in a school full of regulars? Here we all thought that was impossible! But somehow it’s probabl gonna be ok. How could that be? Is it because they are all going to be white over there at lhs or what?


Anonymous said...

From Seattle Times: Can Seattle rezone away the racial divide in housing?

"Census data show that minorities in Seattle have lower incomes. For whites, median household income was more than $92,000 in 2016. But for African-American households it was $38,000; for Asians and Latinos it was more than $65,000."

FRL, ELL and race intersect, @no caps:
"it has never been about race folks. it is about frl/ell and 2e being the underrepresented and protected groups."

Facts matter.

About Time

Fishy said...

You know that scenario H v. 2 map? I just noticed something:
If we assume that SPED students, ELL students and Homeless students are costlier or more challenging to educate well than your purely run of the mill gen ed student, the map does not have these students being redistributed evenly.

That Hv2 map has these schools picking up ELL students:
Hale +2
Ingraham +4
Ballard +5
Lincoln +26

And these schools picking up homeless students:
Hale +2
Ingraham +3
Ballard +7
Lincoln +27

And these schools picking up SPED students:
Hale +7
Ingraham +20
Ballard +34
Lincoln +153

Is this just because Lincoln currently has zero students in these categories so it looks like a bigger change?

Lincoln would also pick up 320 HC students from Roosevelt and Ballard. But then it would be like a pass-through assignment, because they would be sent to Garfield. Weird.

On page 40 of this file (https://anonfile.com/f797Q9c5bd/20171102_Ops_Agenda_Packet.pdf) it says, "By providing [advanced learning] services close to home, the district’s intent is to make sure students do not need to leave their community to receive the educational opportunities they need. This recommendation is made in direct response to the requests we heard from our ELL families."

So, what's weird is that that H2 map only shows about 37 ELL students moving from one place to another. Even with the extra funding from the state for HC identification, you've got to wonder how many of those 37 ELL students will need advanced learning services. And then, assuming it's several, it's weird that Ingraham would gain 4 of them, Hale would gain 2 and Lincoln would gain 26. And all 32 of those ELL students would then have to be sent somewhere else if they needed HC services (Ingraham -> Ballard, Hale -> Roosevelt, and Lincoln -> Garfield). This seems fishy to me. The students would still very much need to leave their community to receive HC opportunities. Unless they happened to live inside the newly svelte new Ballard or Roosevelt zones. And, let's be honest, how many Seattle families can afford to live there? Especially if a parent(s) has language challenges to deal with while finding employment.

Anonymous said...

you bet at/fwiw. race and ses intersect. bingo we agree. but different from what one of the male board members said there are poor white people. and against what you seem to think being black doesn't mean your family doesn't have the resources to get into hcc.

skin color doesn't matter regarding placement into hcc. there is no institutionalized racism. show a hint of that otherwise and you will have everyone's attention.

the groups you need to look at (not hispanic or black) is ell, frl and 2e as those are protected classes. get up on that and holly cow that should increase black and hispanic kids enrollment in hcc. easier said than done but that should be the district, city, county and state's goal.

keep up the good fight for ell, frl and 2e and stop echoing the yellow journalism that is the seattle times race baiting articles.

no caps

Anonymous said...

reader oh reader,

ihs will be ok, and to be fair i didn't explain my point well, because of the high number of ihs hcc kids. they will be "ok" because they will still be in a mini cohort because of these numbers. could be as high as ibx's first year. i think they will go this way because of the hostile attitude at ghs towards hcc. kids shouldn't think they are racist because they are following the path that was set aside by the district. and listen to those self righteous ghs teachers and see the appartheid stickers. you know now why they will be okay. and you know why fhs and wshs will be challenged in a non welcoming environment.

it is not about race folks as much as michael tolley, seattle times, at, fwiw and i guess reader want you to think it is. nice company reader.

no caps

Anonymous said...

@no caps,

In addition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was specifically created to make race a "protected class," race is also a protected class in state law.

Yes, race is a "protected class" for lots of historical and contemporary reasons.

About Time

Anonymous said...

that protection and $3.22 will get you a latte. and rightly so. you can not define an individual by the color of their skin. someone said that before.

hcc doesn't either. but in the event you are 2e, ell or frl you get special dispositions for your application. they wiggle the numbers folks. it has been said time and again. is racist? no! is it right? yes. your non-frl, non-sped and english speaking child shouldn't be masking hc status were as the others might be.

but all this consternation seems to be either to kill hcc by making it look to hard to support. when they could have easily made lhs north pathway! simple. but due to race considerations we need to bus il to ihs. ihs hcc to ghs. i mean they need to bus as they need to get on a metro.

hum. is that the plan make it so miserable butts hit seats near homes because of metro schedules? diabolical. seattle preps stock just went up 10%.

no caps

observer said...

"So last week the document that was sent to the full board, simply indicated that HCC pathways would be decided later, with the strong implication that the pathway decision was going to be part of the January high school boundary vote.

So 7 days later, the revised document, now includes all the pathway information, that was NEVER vetted at any of the community meetings, that correspond with this process. So now all the comments at the community meetings about how HCC was not being returned to all schools but 'some schools' is made clear.

And folks wonder why there is such a profound lack of trust on the topic of the SAP and boundaries. Transparency is critical to trust and there just isn't any transparency in this process."

kellie, more from the staff handout "Student Assignment Plan, Advanced Learning, and High School Boundary Open House Meetings:

"Decision Timelines
Student Assignment Plan Changes for 2018-19 School Year
. . . .
* Oct. 20, 2017: Proposed changes to Student Assignment Plan posted to website and shared as part of community open houses on Oct. 23, 26 and 30, and Nov. 8 and 9.
. . . ."

You're quite right that district staff broke their own announced timeline because the proposed HCC pathways changes to Student Assignment Plan were NOT posted on the SPS website by Oct. 20 and in fact are only surfacing now. As recounted above by C: "No as you stated nothing parents could review at the [Eckstein, Ballard & McClure] SAP meetings. But I did read one SAP parental account where Wyeth Jesse said the regional pathway proposal would be introduced very soon. So they talked about it only." (That parental account of Jesse talking about regional pathways at the Eckstein open house was mine.)

So finally in the middle of those open houses there is now a bulky something on the proposed new HCC high school pathways (pages 38 to end of a bulky 116 page file) that parents can review at the two remaining SAP meetings next Wednesday, Nov. 8 at Cleveland HS, and next Thursday, Nov. 9, at West Seattle HS, just days before the expected Nov. 15 School Board vote on the ("Transitional"?) Student Assignment Plan for 2018-19 (and 2019-20?). The expected date that the School Board will vote on high school boundary changes from 2019-20 is two months later on Jan. 17.

The new plan for five (5) HCC high school regional pathways (Garfield, Franklin, West Seattle, Roosevelt, and Ballard, plus existing Ingraham IBX option) can be read at:

Weird process, befitting Halloween. As you say, "Transparency is critical to trust and there just isn't any transparency in this process."

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Why on earth would anybody think that the district needs to consult them for Pathway placement? Is that part of the birthright entitlement too? I thought HCC was special ed? No, they don’t ask where they’re going to put special ed programs. No, they aren’t honest. If keeping cohorts together is the main goal, then 5 high schools correspondending to 5 middle schools is reasonable. And keeping IBX is an expensive gift, but so worth it for the cream of the crop. And why on earth would anybody complain about a cohort model for general education, and then insist cohorts are only good for themselves? Everyone else. well no. That’s just for us. Oh and we get choice too, maximum choice, in case the pathway isn’t just perfect. We deserve to get something just perfect for our kids.

Keepit Up

Anonymous said...

and who is complaining about the cohort model for gen ed, fwiw?

conflate much?

Anonymous said...

Who is complaining about cohorts? Read through the posts. MW, on and on, cohorts wasn’t in the plan! And school is so horrible for HCC the cohort is all the oppressed HCCers have. But not everyone deserves it. Kellie HCC UberAlles, self appointed knower of all, but cohorts are only for them because they’re the only ones who really need anything. Everyone else should just suck up Pearson Ed, but not HCC, they deserve any interest they might have... served as a need. And the rest of the HCC crowd. It won’t be good for us, unless it is maximally bad for everyone else.

Btw. I’m not fwiw, but he/she has it mostly right.

Keepit Up

Anonymous said...

The HCC group just want to have classes their kids can attend without having to repeat classes. You can't offer higher level classes unless you have enough kids requiring them. And even then, if there is no room in the master schedule they are the first to go.

Hale had very few HCC kids but the AP classes were always overfull and oversubscribed. My kids AP Calc AB class was 45 kids full and kids were turned away. I totally get why HCC parents want their kids to be able to progress and not have to repeat or leave the high school for running start.


Anonymous said...

@KeepIt Up, say what?

1. Keeping cohorts together is NOT the main goal, so 5 high schools correspondending to 5 middle schools is NOT NECESSARILY reasonable. Providing the legally required appropriately advanced/accelaerated instruction is the main goal, so any decision about pathways should be based on careful analysis of how pathway changes impact service provision.

2. How is IBX an "expensive gift" to the "cream of the crop"? It's not any more expensive for kids to take their IB classes a year earlier, and if IBX students end up graduating early or taking Running Start classes during their senior year that probably SAVES the district money.

3. Your comment about the cohort model makes no sense. Nobody is complaining about a cohort model for general education--that's pretty much what we have. GE curricula and instruction are designed for GE students, who make up the majority of our district. GE students are THE primary cohort. Those whose needs fall far outside the needs of the majority GE cohort are the ones who need other options/interventions. It's not that complicated.


Melissa Westbrook said...

"No, they don’t ask where they’re going to put special ed programs."

Director Geary sure did yesterday. But HCC and Sped are just apples and oranges to compare but sure, go ahead if it makes you feel better.

And Jessee just said yesterday about HCC "no cohort."

kellie said...

@ Keepit Up, not fwiw, whoever.

Kellie HCC UberAlles, self appointed knower of all,

That is priceless. Thank you. Yes, I do know lots of things, particularly when it comes to system design and capacity management and institutional memory. The uberalles piece is comical as I am neither for nor against HCC in its current form.

My message is shockingly simple and I am sorry that you have missed the point. I daylight issues regarding capacity management because capacity decisions impacts every single student in the district. I daylight HOW program placement will impact general education students. Some of these HCC placement decisions will trigger changing Cleveland's option school status. All of the decision will impact boundaries and walkability. I think it matters that the connections are daylighted.

For the record, I am for transparency in decision making. I am for pragmatic solutions. I am for more efficient use of limited dollars. I am for using the opening of Lincoln to restore some form of choice for high schools students because choice is important for these young adults.

I am against platitudes. I am against political optics and equity solutions that have zero dollars attached, because equity requires the active allocation of resources towards poverty and underserved populations.

kellie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

How is IBX an "expensive gift" to the "cream of the crop"?

Surely you jest, DisAp. How many times have we heard about the full time extra and expensive administrators required to administer IB.? How many times did we hear about RBH not being able to fund IB? (because of its extra expense) Additionally, we all know that IB requires an extra period per day. 7 periods, so 1 is run after school. The district is funded for 5. Why does anybody need to dance through all the extra requirements just to get a “baccalaureate”? This ain’t France over here. And the baccalaureate adds nothing. Who pays for that extra staff? The extra materials? Etc. Oh yeah. All the other, less deserving kids cover that for you.


Anonymous said...

If you have an IB diploma, you can go to college in Europe. Many European countries offer college for free. IB doesn't cost anymore at IHS than it does at RBHS or CSHS. All IB campuses should be supported.


Anonymous said...

@ Keeps, I can't tell if you're truly confused or are trying to play it both ways. Which is it?

In your earlier post, you specifically said IBX, which is an option for HCC students. IB, on the other hand, is open to non-HCC students--we even have IB programs at non-HCC pathway high schools. When you complained that "IBX" is a "gift" to the "cream of the crop," that sure sounds like an HCC-specific complaint, doesn't it?

If you were really complaining about IB in general--including those expensive IB programs at RBHS and Chief Sealth--are you suggesting that any student who takes an IB class deserves to be insultingly referred to as "cream of the crop"? Should we do that with kids to take AP classes, too? What about kids who take honors classes, or who get good grades, or who score well on standardized tests? Where do we draw the line at which kids you think merit obnoxious descriptions? I wonder.

So...if you're talking about IB in general, talk about IB in general. If you're talking about IBX specifically, recognize that your statement was wrong.


Melissa Westbrook said...

"And the baccalaureate adds nothing."

I'd say go ask any college enrollment officer if it means "nothing." A lot of admissions is about taking the highest level of advanced classes your school offers.

Newbie Mom said...

OMG, Kellie, I think I love you! Because you said this:
I am against political optics and equity solutions that have zero dollars attached, because equity requires the active allocation of resources towards poverty and underserved populations.

So much pointless hate gets spewed here at my little HCC kid. But you said what we should all be talking about. If only you weren't the only one saying this.

Anyway, I love that you said it and I love that you take the time to explain all this detailed school knowledge to us. Thank you for bothering.

kellie said...

@ Newbie,

Thank you for the kind words. It is amazing how a few kinds words here and there, do so much to mitigate the harshness that anonymity enables.

Anonymous said...


One of the reasons I read this blog is because of the tremendous amount I learn from your posts.

Thank you for your thoughtful, intelligent analysis and solutions.


Anonymous said...

Melissa, get a grip. Colleges care about rigor. Theory of Mind, and other expensive IB BS they do not care about not.at.all. Fake rigor. Including extra administrators who do nothing except make sure everyone is all paid up. Did you ever go to a college and talk to anyone.? They do not care if you drank the cool-aide and knock yourself out spending all that extra money proving yourself superior. They do not care about expensive, and stress inducing IB exams nor what score you got. They admit students before they even take those exams.They do not give you credit for it either. The baccalaureate is worthless except to snake oil salesmen who sold it to the district. Sure, good quality prep classes are good. Nationwide though, the trend is away from these products. How many IBXers went on to study in Europe? Oh yeah. Nobody. The college is better here. Duh! Everybody knows that.


Anonymous said...

@ Keeps, keep trying. Here are a couple links for you to check out. I could go on, but these are plenty enough to poke holes in your argument that colleges don't care about IB exams or diplomas.

UW credit for IB exams

University of CA schools
"UC awards students who complete the IB diploma with a score of 30 or above with 30 quarter (20 semester) units toward their UC degree."


Anonymous said...

It's not just credit, but scholarship money:

Oregon State IB Diploma Scholarship
Students participating in an International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma program may qualify for the IB Diploma Scholarship.  To qualify, entering freshmen must have scored a total of 30 or higher on the IB exam and indicated pursuit of the IB Diploma.  Advanced awards will be offered in March with offers finalized once scores are verified by the IBO in July.  Awards are $3,000 annually / $12,000 over four years. 

fact checker

Anonymous said...


There are several thousand colleges and universities in this country and hundreds more in other countries. There are some that don't care about IB (or have never heard of it) and many that do. Any student who wants to go to any college or university should do some research on what their preferred colleges or universities are looking for.

In other countries it is standard procedure to ask students for predicted IB scores based on their course grades, admit students conditionally based on the predictions, and then confirm or deny admission when the final grades are received.

I have personally met IBx students who went on to study at prestigious universities in other countries, including some in Europe. So the number is clearly not "nobody". It may be true that the US has a larger number of excellent universities than most other countries, but the quality is not uniform in any country, and there do exist excellent universities in other countries.


Melissa Westbrook said...

Keeps, you need to watch your tone. There is no need to be unpleasant to make a point and you are being unpleasant.

I think other readers answered most of your questions. But yes, I have gone to colleges, both myself and my children and beyond and asked questions about this topic.

Anonymous said...

Keeps - with all due respect, you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Do a little research before your next diatribe. You are wrong.


syd said...

I agree there should be more transparency in the planning process, and agree that we should all be concerned about our students not getting access to rigorous classes. However...perhaps there could be some good that comes of

I have one kid who qualified for APP, and took the Lowell, Washington, Garfield path. Wonderful opportunity, great cohort (the cohort IMHO is one of the best things about this program - who knew you could have friends in HS?), many, many AP classes available. I have to echo one comment: HCC don't really get different material in elementary and middle school. In fact I think there is a developmentally inappropriate level of homework. They just get more homework sooner. The real difference is access to rigorous classes in HS. And the cohort.

My second child tested 99% math/97% language. We chose not to appeal. Mercer Middle is a great school. I was somewhat apprehensive about HS. I made spreadsheets of class offerings (because THAT is NOT information you can find on the SPS website), and I have to tell you that Franklin does not offer the same number of AP classes. No AP Biology, No AP Latin (no Latin at all!), No AP BC Calculus.

What Franklin does have is a much better outcome for FRL, African American, Hispanic cohorts on statewide testing (Garfield is just embarrassing BTW). Franklin students are achieving, and deserve more access to more rigorous classes.

I am not saying that this plan as written guarantees equitable access to more rigorous classes. I am saying that expanding HC service to all non-option HS campuses (and this plan does not do that), could be beneficial to all students...if we can get a commitment to offer the rigorous classes on all campuses. Assigning students to their closest HS for HC services increases the demand for rigorous classes (in the form of more students asking for these classes). You can't offer AP BC Calculus if only 5 people will take the class. It will not get funded. But 20 can be funded.

It is not easy to give up the HCC cohort and proven success of the Garfield program. We almost moved to give our kid access to that program. It was a leap of faith. I'll let you know how it goes.

Anonymous said...

Syd, I would prefer that we lived in a world where we could just offer AP BC calculus at all schools (most schools to not offer it, or AP Bio), but even if all the HC students who live in the Franklin area came back to Franklin came back(some of whom are not in the program, just have the designation and have stayed in their neighborhood school), I don't think there are enough kids to run the class. Maybe Franklin is funded a little differently, but at most schools <25 student classes do not run. It could be beneficial to all students to return HC students to their neighborhood high schools if there were enough HC students + gen ed students who would request these classes to run them, but in most cases there are not. Not because there aren't lots of really talented gen ed kids(especially in one subject or the other), but because they have't taken the prereqs to qualify. What I would really like to see is a commitment from the district to have, say, AP calculus BC, AP Bio, some AP humanities, at every school, run if there were more than 5 kids. And then if you are at a school with a smaller cohort and fewer other supports for advanced students, you get more support in the form of smaller class sizes for some of these advanced classes. That's really expensive, though, and in direct opposition of most staff who would prefer all students be in the same class all the time and take the AP test on their own if they want.

What I think is happening with this plan is northend students are being sent to schools that already have plentiful AP offerings (and with the addition of these students will get a couple more), and south end students are being sent to schools that will not be able to offer any advanced classes. I wish there was more support for advanced students in our district(whether they test into HCC or not). I am not sure how to get there from here.

Good luck at Franklin- I hear really amazing things, and with or without advanced classes it does send kids on to great colleges. I do think it will be tough if the HC cohort gets placed there. A big part of the secret sauce is supposed to be the 9th grade academy, which for HC kids means either repeating classes or being segregated out, which is contra the Franklin way. It's hard for any school to be all things to all people.


Anonymous said...

It would be challenging to even know how "in demand" a particular course would be if a student did not even know that the class is an option. If BC calculus is not on the master schedule as an option, students looking for the next course in series would look for other options, whether that be Statistics or RS. The true demand may be underestimated because the theoretical option is not put out there.
-math option