Disqus

Thursday, December 28, 2017

Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three

When we last left the Board meeting, it was about hour five and Enrollment's Ashley Davies had made a last plea for guidance from the Board to narrow the Highly Capable high school pathways down in order to facilitate the work of creating new high school boundaries.

Right after her remarks, came an interesting exchange between new directors Mack and DeWolf.

(I again note that some of the remarks will appear truncated because directors don't always speak in complete sentences and I was shortening for note-taking.)

Mack
It is complicated, pathways and boundaries and capacity and students and scenarios. I feel uncomfortable saying yes to pathways without a matching map and how much disruption is that crossing acrossing the whole system. 60% of students in north are getting disrupted. You guys, we all want to know about scenarios to have meaningful conversations.

The HC Advisory Committee recommended; there was one recommendation on table but no scenarios developed around it. Another alt is status quo with increased and guaranteed assignment for those in IB programs -we have three and only one is an option for HC students.

DeWolf (interrupting)
HCC Advisory Committee, district-created or organized?

Mack
It's a superintendent committee.

DeWolf
I see a headshake from staff.

Mack
No, it's got a charter from the superintendent.

DeWolf says something unintelligible and then the Superintendent breaks in.

Nyland
I can research it but it's not on my list of advisory or taskforce.

Mack
I understood it started with former head of Finance, Bob Boesche, four superintendents ago.

Harris
Those folks were appointed and minutes kept

A staffer comes to the mic and I missed her first name but her last name was Hanson.

Hanson
So my understanding of the HC Advisory Ctm is that it came under Kendrick and is a group of community members who meet. As connection to district superintendent, not sure of that charter. In talking about this today, staff does bring them information, community talks, brings back information.

I would have to research it.

Harris
Did that answer it?

DeWolf
I just imagine that it goes thru approved membership process, training

I'll just note that as long as I have been involved in SPS, this committee has been part of the landscape. Numerous superintendents, including Kendrick from the late '80s, have used their feedback. The "Highly Capable Services Advisory Committee from 2014-2105 lists.

As well, "training" to be on a committee? I've been on a lot of them and we certainly were given instructions and an overview but not training. It's assumed if we were appointed, we know what the job is.

The document I have attached is updated from 2014:

In 1989 Superintendent William Kendrick convened the APP Task Force and charged the group with reviewing programs and making recommendations on policies that relate to the program. In 2006, the APP Task Force was renamed the Accelerated Progress Program Advisory Committee (APP AC). The purpose of the Accelerated Progress Program Advisory Committee (APP AC) is to advise the Superintendent on issues, policies and their implementation relating to Highly Capable Students, specifically those in the Accelerated Progress Program. In addition, the committee will serve as a two-way conduit of information between the District and APP community members.

I'm a bit baffled why DeWolf pressed the issue.

Nyland (going on)
He says there are six options (but only names five) and then says, "Is that the intent you want - for 7 seven options?"

Burke
I look at Option 4 as destination, do no harm, minimize disruption, but creating pathways where there are none so we can remove them.

North has well-develop IBX because of pathways. IB ones organically and I think makes sense to leverage off that structure instead of saying 5 is the magic number. All high schools should be trying to build out with AP structure.

On that last point, that is the minimum that should happen if the decision is - as it seems to be moving - towards HC services in all high schools. Because those services can't wait; otherwise, students would be short-changed and the district leaves itself open to lawsuits from parents and sanctions from OSPI.

Geary
Director Burke and I have talked about IB pathways but in the south you run up against again the fact that those principals have not been asked about this new influx of students that may disrupt how their IB is currently functioning. Because of cultural shift and if imposed as a pathway designation. A better job of making sure that great options are there and we have to find the ability to commit to supporting them so they can be offered. But I don’t think in next month for community engagement as much as I did enjoy the idea of doing that.

Mack
Good points and I think Amendment 1 is good idea. Provide ability to ask question and brought up in High School Taskforce by a principal. 

Harris
Talking about Options 1, 2,3, 4 is this on internet so folks can see it?

Nyland
If they Google it, they will find it. 

Van Duzer
It can be found under last week's Work Session, not this BAR.  There are copies at the back of the room.

Vote on Amendment 1 (Harris/Burke) 

Pinkham - no
Burke - yes
DeWolf - no
Geary - no
Mack - yes
Patu -no
Harris - yes

3-4, the motion does not pass.

Vote on Amendment 2 (DeWolf/Geary/Patu)

Director Geary started to read it but President Harris asked her to read the entire thing into the record - which is necessary for legal reasons - and Geary seemed somewhat irritated.

I was mystified by Geary the entire evening because of her tone which went from earnest to deadly serious to irritated.

There was no discussion of this amendment.

Pinkham - aye
Burke - aye
DeWolf - yes
Geary - yes
Mack - no
Patu - yes
Harris -yes

Passed 6-1.

Vote on Amendment 3 (DeWolf/Geary/Patu)
Would take Franklin off pathway list.

Burke
There are ramifications to doing this at the last minute and, as well, this issue could apply to Ballard and Roosevelt.

Geary
I'm also mindful having lived through a school that ended up with a program put into it -- a program that is called a service -- that the, the school wasn't adequately prepared for it, and it caused such a cultural division that I am hoping that as we -- we're going to have to do the work around Franklin to get it ready for '20-21 anyway -- and that as we do that work the culture can be, um, fostered so that the blending of populations becomes much more thoughtfully done by the staff in the school. That is my purpose and I have -- I believe that when a leader comes out, a building leader comes out, and makes a strong request but says that they are willing to do the work over time, that that is something that, that I can honor.

Pinkham
Wiley concerned for tracks for students. Saw her email. "Will offer HC services but don’t call me a pathway."

That is really quite the statement and I'd like to see the actual e-mail - provide services but don't say we are a pathway. Guess what? ALL the comprehensive high schools will be "pathways" and that will be in writing so I'm not sure how Principal Wiley will feel about that.

Patu (making this point several times)
Franklin has HC students and “all students are treated equally for academics.” What school doesn’t? Will disrupt learning climate?

Pinkham
Are we leaving a hole there for no HCpathway.? How do we still advertise advanced learning opps? "I don’t need HC pathway to be HC student." 

Geary
RBHS IB and there’s STEM at Cleveland and Aviation High, if they can get into it. As AL opportunitites. Franklin is a hot property for SPS. The place where kids don’t want into the Garfield dilemma, they want to go to a place that feels integrated.

How does Garfield have a popular, strong, long-term African-American principal and yet the school is segregated? That Garfield has evolved so much in that direction under his watch is an odd thing.

Harris
Why didn't West Seattle HS community get a heads-up?

Geary
I tried to get in touch with the principal but couldn't and there is already a designated thru process. I let that be.

Vote
Burke - yes
DeWolf - yes
Geary - yes
Mack -yes
Patu - yes
Pinkham - yes
Harris - yes

7-0, motion passes

Burke then immediately made a motion to remove Lincoln from the attendance list linked to Garfield.

Burke
I don’t like armchair quarterbacking. We just added two schools to Garfield. I believe that keeping Lincoln in the list linked overloads /doesn’t relieve Garfield. I don’t like to do this from dais.

Harris
Question for General Counsel. If we just passed Amendment 3 and table on back has Lincoln has attendance area going to Garfield, should we have voted then?

Cerqui
He can make motion and be clear on where Lincoln would go as pathway if not Garfield.

Nyland
Check my math: Lincoln opens in 2019. Have 9th and 10th . So we’re talking about HC part of state law of what they would be offering for those students. Roll up 11th next year and then have designation but after that, the earlier amendment 2021-2022, everyone has a pathway.

Mack
Lincoln is attendance area, not just 9th/10th. Where is their pathway?

Burke
By 2020, they have one and its neighborhood school.  Look to staff to advise Chair.

Jessee
Having new comprehensive and putting down as high quality AP honors and classes, I’m very, very nervous about that. (He referenced saying this at Work Session.)

We can get there by 2020.

Ingraham might be a better match but not BHS and not RHS because of capacity issues.

Nervousness around that. Garfield that was why we made that match. More research and come back for next year with an idea.

Mack
That doesn’t seem fair that it’s okay to delay on these kids. It’s still an issue. We can make a decision next year.

Geary
How many kids are we anticipating in Lincoln? That would be shifting as HC.

Davies
Dependent on other factors mainly scenario. Haven't done with them and the ones we shared were generated by Taskforce.

I don’t have that answer offhand.

Burke requests lawyer help restate his amendment.

Burke
Move that Board amend transition plan to remove Lincoln from attendance area high school linked to Garfield as HC pathway school.

Mack seconded.

Mack
What is the pathway?

Burke
School is its own pathway. Moves that school closer to option 4.

Pinkham
Will come on but now in interim too heavy with HCC pathways in north but not south during transition time.

Burke
No pathways but that makes it its own pathway.

Mack
Pressure on Garfield, that would help alleviate that.

Geary
Do this out of fairness or put it off in order to think it through more and then Seattle Center popped into my head and we have to think about that.

Our weddedness to certainty as to the future is an illusion.

The best we can do is grandfather to create stability for one child. Throw that out as a comment.

I'm voting Geary's "weddedness" comment as the comment of the night (and there were a lot to pick from).

Berge
Lincoln amendment has me worried about cost. May be good idea to think about it for a little bit.

Harris
I’ll bite. How expensive?

Berge
9th and 10th grade, some above and there are no 11th/12 grade teachers so 6-8 more teachers likely.

Harris
Given deference to Wiley at Franklin, what about Metzker at Lincoln? Looking at Burke. Same question I had as WSHS.

Burke
No, not yet but conversation now. She wants a robust comp high school for neighborhood.

I would love the time to do that.

Amendment 4 Vote

Burke - yes
DeWolf - no
Geary - no
Mack - yes
Patu - no
Pinkham - no
Harris - no

1-6, motion fails.

Main Motion (as amended) for 2018-2019 Student Assignment Transition Plan

Geary
Thanks team for listening to changes for made. Got thru it. Listening about Sped pathways and families assignment or cohort we placed them in to serve them. Important to me.


I want to note here that indeed Geary did advocate for Sped pathways since those services move from buildings and students who are changing from elementary to middle and middle to high should be able to stay with their "cohort" or leave.

So a cohort does matter sometimes.

Mack
Space changed and concerned how this landed and not certain of pathways in her vote.

Pinkham
Thanks to staff. Are we in the right place yet now? What if this doesn’t pass?

Herndon
If it does not pass, we will be following the rules of last transition plan.

Burke
Counterpoint to that is wish we had this conversation two or three or four months ago when we did have opp to do so. Five pathways came after 1st work session, no opp to discuss and now part of 2nd work session which was 1 hour and no discussion.

Interjecting here - how can it be that a Work Session could include no time for discussion? Especially around something as like this?

I think, as structured, this student assignment transition plan is potentially still ‘damaged goods’”. The fact that we made a last-minute change pulling one school out how that affects student shifts. But didn’t consider other possibilities and I can’t support document as amended but affirm long-term vision.

Patu
Thank you staff, we’re here dismantling it and putting new ideas into it. I feel like Burke, not enough time to study all this and concrete decision whether this is good for our students.

All discussion, I still have not have that concrete feeling of wanting this to be implemented.

Should have had these discussions a few months back. Will vote no on it.

All on the dais are starting to look very unhappy.

Harris
We have to build trust. This process is not our best work; I will be voting no.

Vote on Transition Plan

Mack - no
Patu - no
Burke - no
DeWolf (very long pause, then a sigh) - no. (He then looked over to either Geary or staff with a hand motion - I didn't understand what it meant.)
Geary - yes
Pinkham - yes
Harris - no

Motion fails, 2-5

The last item on the agenda - the resolution about the City not allowing Green Dot its zoning departures.

Patu
Thank you Director Harris for resolution because two charters schools in my district close to schools in system. We need to stop this from moving forward. Middle to Aki and high school from RBHS.

Harris
Thanks to Nate Van Duzer, Director Geary and Noel Treat, combined lift. This is a flag in the sand issue and we need to be loud and proud. We need to protect our very, very limited funds and this one we’re standing up and being very serious about. We have a month before an action item. That was a personal plea from executive suite. 

We will probably have another packed room on Jan. 3rd, so game on.

30 comments:

Doctor Hu said...

For me, the most astonishing moment of the December 6 SPS School Board meeting was the following response to Director Pinkham's query as to whether Franklin and Rainier Beach HC qualified students will have sufficient advanced learning opportunities?

After mentioning the Rainier Beach IB Program and Cleveland STEM, Director Geary continued: "If they can get into it, the South also has the combo of Aviation High. So they can, they can access that program as a highly, you know, as an advanced learning opportunity. And I think the really great news is that Franklin is, is becoming a sort of a hot property for Seattle Public Schools. I think it's being seen as the place where kids who don't want to go into the Garfield, um, dilemma let's call it, um, to go into that, they don't want to go there, they want to go someplace that feels integrated." SPS Dec 6 SPS Board Meeting, Part II, @ 2hrs, 36 mins, 50 seconds.

So the educational needs of all South Seattle high schoolers designated as highly capable outside the Garfield HC pathway would be met in part because they have the option of attempting to get into Aviation High -- a challenging high school in the neighboring Highline School District?

Given that identifying and providing certain services to numerous students is mandated by various state and federal laws, no school district can fail or simply refuse to provide such services to some on the ground that those opportunities might still be available for a few in another adjoining school district.

What a cop-out! What a flagrant dereliction of the Seattle School District's duty to provide highly capable learning opportunities for all of its students, regardless of their address, skin color, income level, etc! Where would be the equity in that?

Highline North said...

Director Geary suggested that students in south and southeast Seattle could go to high school in the Highline School District if they want advanced learning? That's disappointing.

Anonymous said...

yeah i would have to say outside of mary bass she is the most disappointing sbd i have every supported.

Kari Hanson, Interim Director School Based Special Education Services. not sure if that is still her role.

"Wiley concerned for tracks for students. Saw her email. "Will offer HC services but don’t call me a pathway."

That is really quite the statement and I'd like to see the actual e-mail - provide services but don't say we are a pathway. Guess what? ALL the comprehensive high schools will be "pathways" and that will be in writing so I'm not sure how Principal Wiley will feel about that."

Well not sure if every hs can be a pathway even by burke's lose definition. that said the principal thing is out of hand. they are in direct violation to the at every school hc services... and that is why they don't want to follow sped and ell down that rabbit hole. you can't offer those services as effectively everywhere.

hale and roosevelt students have to repeat classes if you want to stay local. probably the same at fhs. and then there is that kid from ws who traveled to ibx at ihs with an ib program right there. odd.

finally, integrated - dilemma - institutionalized racism. someone needs to set geary down and tell her she is the cop to insure those things aren't happening. best way to shut them down is to show proof of it, right? i'm not saying there are equivalent numbers of all races in all programs. but there isn't a concerted effort to make it so. in fact, it is just the opposite and the number of fully staffed folks dt who have pd and /or who's sole function is to insure that things are equitable probably could staff an elementary school. it isn't happening. if so prove it!

she just seems so simple minded to me. sad.

imho

Anonymous said...

"As well, "training" to be on a committee? I've been on a lot of them and we certainly were given instructions and an overview but not training. It's assumed if we were appointed, we know what the job is."

On a related note, I was having a discussion with someone recently and think that our elected board members really ought to have a level of qualifications similar to what one would need to get hired for a educational administration job. Eden Mack is very qualified due to her background in policy, as well as her ability to understand a variety of complex issues and relate to a diverse population of constituents. However, a couple of the other board members really do not seems to have the appropriate backgrounds and they have the power to throw a monkey wrench into very important decisions. You really need people operating without a single agenda etc and who can understand policy deeply, as well as understand how SPS administration functions etc.
PL

One Size said...

Geary and DeWolf are working with the district to create a One Size Fits All model of education. She should not be pushing south-end students into another school district. It is the job of Seattle School Board to create programs and opportunities in existing buildings.



Majority Minority said...

"Franklin is a hot property for SPS. The place where kids don’t want into the Garfield dilemma, they want to go to a place that feels integrated."

Both Franklin and Garfield are majority minority schools. Based on the October 2016 numbers from OSPI, the two schools have near identical percentages of most races/ethnicities with the only big difference being the number of White and Asian students. Franklin is 49% Asian (Garfield only 17%) and Garfield is 41% white (Franklin only 8%).

So, both schools are demonstrably "integrated" in terms of race/ethnicity.

So, to the extent that there is a dilemma at Garfield, we should all stop using terms like "integrated" or "segregated" to talk about it. Because those terms don't actually describe the source of the dilemma. And if you can't describe the dilemma, you can't fix it.

Anonymous said...


Here's more info on on what was then called the APP Advisory Committee. It was convened in 1989, and formed as a standing committee. This info was updated in 2014 and on the district's website. Wasn't Nyland here then? Shame on him for making it sound like it's not legitimate when DeWolf questioned it.
http://halehs.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/advancedlearning/hcsac/APP%20AC%20Charge_2%202014.pdf

Also from the district, they clearly claim it as their own: "The Seattle Public School's Highly Capable Services Advisory Committee (HCSAC) is a group of volunteer parents and teachers charged to advise the District on behalf of identified Highly Capable Students; As well as serve as a two-way conduit of information between the District and HCS community members.
https://www.seattleschools.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=627&pageId=28757720

The district seemed to partner fully with the APP AC re: the Highly Capable Task Forces a couple years back, too. The advisory committed was an equal partner in accepting and reviewing applications.
http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/advancedlearning/hcsac/Service%20Delivery%20Model%20Task%20Force%20Charter_FINAL_1%2023%2014.pdf

I'm not always thrilled with the work of this group (which often hasn't pushed back hard enough, imho), but it is a legitimate group. A legitimate district-sponsored group. Read up, Nyland and DeWolf and all those other SPS staff who just were't sure...

read up

Melissa Westbrook said...

"Well not sure if every hs can be a pathway even by burke's lose definition."

They all voted for this to be so by 2020. I do not think they will change on that point. I would say I don't see ramping up to 5 (whoops, 4, if Franklin can say no) and then, by 2020, it's all high schools.

Berge pushed back on Lincoln because of costs. I'm not sure I understand how the district can fulfill the state requirement (which is NOT just to have a plan but to actually provide service) without cost. There have to be more AP classes at more high schools even if not full (but since the district says 90% of AP classes are NOT HC, then that shouldn't be a problem for them to fill, right?)

Read Up, I'm not sure they weren't sure. I think there was a point to delegitimize the APP AC. Question is: why?

Anonymous said...

not really a pathway if ALL high schools provide the same services. It's just hs.

imho

Stuartj said...

Raisbeck Aviation High School is located next to the Museum of Flight. My son goes there. A few comments:

1. RAHS has 20 spots for kids from Seattle school boundaries, 55 for kids from Highline boundaries, and 30 for kids from anywhere else. 20 places is a drop in the bucket, barely worth mentioning.

2. RAHS is challenging, but it is not designed to serve highly capable students. It is definitely not a pathway school for Highline for Hi Cap, and there are zero Hi Cap services at the school.

3. Most kids from Seattle who attend and take Metro bus would need to transfer at least once. The school is next to the Museum of Flight. There are only a couple of routes that go along East Marginal Way.

Stuart

Highline North said...

Also, it's in a different school district.

Insert Lurning said...

"not really a pathway if ALL high schools provide the same services. It's just hs."

This is the crux of it. If all students have gifts, then there would be no need to consider the needs of gifted students. All students would just need "school." If all students enter kindergarten as blank slates, then teachers just pour learning into their empty heads, and all empty heads can be filled just as well anywhere just as effectively. The schools would be filling stations and the students could just put the nozzle into their brains and insert lurning.

But that's not how human beings work. Students need a variety of things. We're talking more than 50,000 students here. The district needs to grow up and cope.

Anonymous said...

Can someone give an overview of what the amendments were? It's not at all clear from the original post.
Amendment 1: fail
Amendment 2: pass
Amendment 3: ??? was there an amendment?
Amendment 4: fail
Main Transition plan: fail

What's the bird's eye description of the amendment and transition plan. I realize all the regulars must know this like the back of their hands - but not me.

Curious

Stuartj said...

As noted by Highline North, yes Aviation is in the Highline School District. It is pretty unusual for a school district to tell its students to go to another district.

Aviation is now a lottery school. There were at least 2 and probably 3 entrants from Seattle for every Seattle slot at the school this year.

Highline North said...

@Curious

Amendment 1 - Approval of this item would amend the Student Assignment Transition Plan for 2018-19 to delete assignment pathway changes scheduled for implementation in 2019-20 and combine them with high school boundary approval to be implemented in 2019-20. (Directors Burke and Harris) FAIL
Amendment 2 - Approval of this item would include language in the Student Assignment Transition Plan for 2018-19 stating that, starting in the 2021-22 school year, students entering high school from a highly capable program or with a highly capable designation would have a default assignment to their neighborhood school. (Directors Geary, DeWolf and Patu) (This item added on 12/6) PASS
Amendment 3 - Approval of this item would remove Franklin High School from the list of designated highly capable pathways. (Directors Geary, DeWolf and Patu) (This item added on 12/6) PASS
Amendment 4 - Added during the meeting.

Since the whole Student Assignment Transition Plan failed, none of the amendments were enacted even if they passed.

There are links to one through three here
https://www.seattleschools.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=627&pageId=29381480

Anonymous said...

I, too, am having trouble keeping everything straight. Could someone let me know whether or not there is a decision on how many classes will be offered this fall? Block schedule or not? If there's no decision yet, when could we expect one? Would it for sure be implemented next fall?

Also, BHS is our school. Will they really just cram more kids into it before Lincoln opens the following year, or is there likely to be some other scenario? What is the impact of the overcrowding? What might my freshman experience there next fall? Are the classes overcrowded, or might she just not get the ones she wants? How does it actually play out?

Thanks

asdf

joanna said...

HCC Lincoln students should have been removed Garfield and feed into whatever the plan is for the Northend HCC. Lincoln students should not contribute to over crowding at Garfield and the shrinking of Garfield boundaries. Also with concerns about racial equities, Lincoln students are likely to be white students further contributing to the a less diverse Garfield. Garfield should be considered with the south and central area schools. Lincoln is in the north end and should not impact Garfield by feeding into it or by cutting into its neighborhood boundaries. I am having difficulty understanding the vote of some of the members on this.

Anonymous said...

Gosh yes. We can’t have white kids coming into our south end schools. That comment sucks.

A school without white students isn’t diverse, it’s segregated.

WTF

Anonymous said...

Gosh, so right WTF! Of course keeping white students out of Garfield is so wrong. What could possibly be the problem? The white students are just minding their own business in their all white classes, which they so deserve. Diversity is awesome, so long as we don’t have to sit next to it.

WTF2

Anonymous said...

@WTF- You are right but there will always be people who disagree with you. I also wonder with some of these people do they have the same type of hate comments on the Eastside where gifted programs are overwhelmingly majority Asian? We all know this is an issue (in both scenarios!) , but don't take it out on the kids. @WTF2 The AP classes at Garfield are open to everyone at the school.
WTF3

Majority Minority said...

Garfield is a majority minority school and has long been thought of as one of the best high schools in the state. It's 41% White in a city that in 2010 was 69% White, 14% Asian and 8% Black or African American. So, it's demonstrably "integrated" in terms of race/ethnicity.

High school students sign up for classes and then take the classes. AP classes (and many of the other classes) are open to all. Unless there's some kind of seating chart, students should be able to sit next to whoever they want.

Anonymous said...

@Joanna, Lincoln area students make Garfield more diverse--not only in terms of race, but probably also in terms of family income, range of academic classes needed/ offered, student interest groups/clubs, etc. you have a strange idea of diversity.

WTF4

Melissa Westbrook said...

I again want readers to consider they are talking about students, real children. So mind your tone, please.

Curious, my apologies on the amendments. I assumed readers would refer to them in the agenda but given the extended discussion, I should have included descriptions.

What the conversation will be on Wednesday should be interesting. It seems the same Transition Plan will be in place for this year's enrollment but beyond that, I'm not sure how the discussion will proceed.

joanna said...

Anonymous, with 'gentrification" concerns and the like, Lincoln is a Northend school and would add whatever diversity they have to offer to Northend high schools, and Garfield does not need the numbers and risks having its boundaries shrink for neighborhood school if Lincoln HCC is assigned there. Montlake, Capitol Hill, and the ID, along with whatever the HCC from the areas of Central and South Seattle offer a very good diversity and very adequate numbers. Look to the north for solutions for Lincoln.

Anonymous said...

@joanna, HCC north end students are already at Garfield in large numbers. Some will probably be assigned elsewhere, but some may end up continuing to be routed to Garfirld as their pathway. It sounds like you're saying they aren't welcome because they're too "northend" or too white? That the ship canal is a hard boundary for us vs them type arguments, in which capacity shouldn't be a factor? That's hardly any way to run an integrated school district.

WTF4

Anonymous said...

It’s pretty clear what Joanna is saying. No need for the patronization. Providing Garfield as a special choice for Lincoln area students renders Garfield unavailable as a neighborhood school for it’s actual neighborhood. There’s plenty of “diversity”, white, HCC, and otherwise that will attend Garfield without giving a special entitlement to Lincoln area residents. Going to a new school is a “risk” for everyone. No reason for selected demographics should be exempted from that cost at the expense of south end residents. Equity lense, remember?

WTF2

joanna said...

Yes, that has been true for sometime. Now is a transition time as neighborhood assignments have grown at Garfield, as has the HCC student population. There has been ongoing desire to have students assigned to programs by area and to protect the students' rights to the high school in their areas. Lincoln is new high school in the north end as are the 500 seats that are being added to Ingraham and should be a part of the plan for that area. I am mainly concerned about not risking shrinking Garfield's assignment area boundaries and maintaining it for the neighborhood needs and needs of central and south end. I also think that making Cleveland an assignment area school is a mistake given that Franklin and Rainier Beach both adequately serve as assignment area schools, and Cleveland should be a choice for those who are a good match for the program. I believe that the numbers show that with Garfield will be quite full with neighborhood and southend HCC students for now. It would also serve HC students in Central Area, Montlake, Capitol Hill, Madison Park, Madrona, and Leschi etc. I suppose as resident of the Garfield area, I feel protective of Garfield and the neighborhood.

Anonymous said...

joanna Are you protective of all students in your area? They are going to lose much of their access to advanced courses. It will no longer be one of the best schools in the state. We’ll soon see students from Montlake, Capitol Hill and Madison Park choosing to avoid Garfield.

Programs like Honors for All don’t lead to academic excellence. At best, they may increase the number of students who achieve academic mediocrity.

WTF

Melissa Westbrook said...

WTF, staff says all schools will have more access to rigor including AP. Will that happen? Hard to say. It's equally hard to say if Garfield, with a high number of AP classes, might see that change.

Joanna, I think from living in the Central Area, you know -for better or worse- it's gentrifying. I wonder what Garfield will look like in 10 years.

Anonymous said...

@ WTF2, Garfield ALREADY IS the special choice for may Lincoln area students. The various plans proposed will pull many HCC north-end students out of Garfield. The issue is whether or not the final plan pulls ALL north-end HCC students out...which would likely mean a pretty thin cohort of HCC students left at Garfield, likely resulting in the loss of some advanced classes for neighborhood students. But it sounds like you'd rather see those north-end students leave at all costs, because, I don't know why, I guess because they are "outsiders" and not "entitled" to be there. (Note: No student is entitled to be at any particular school. Just because it's closer does not give anyone more right to it. SPS could decide that Garfield area students all go to Hale, Ballard neighborhood goes to Garfield, and so on.)

Your comment that "going to a new school is a 'risk' for everyone. No reason for selected demographics should be exempted from that cost at the expense of south end residents" demonstrates that you don't fully understand the issue. The district has already acknowledged that Lincoln will not be able to open with the ability to serve all the HCC students in its area, so sending them to this new school isn't really on the table at this point. You're arguing to send them to a school that the district says can't serve them? I think you need to polish your equity lens.

WTF4