Tuesday Open Thread

Hope you saw my heads up on a possible bus strike due to drivers rejecting management's offer. 

From Twitter:
David Simon Retweeted The Associated Press

BREAKING: The Dow Jones industrial average closed above 25,000 points for the first time.
David Simon added,
BREAKING: The parents at my kid's Baltimore public school raised their own money to keep the school librarian.


Anonymous said…
What's on my mind? In no particular order:

Lincoln opening with yet to be determined programming and boundaries...altered HS science sequence...new HS schedule...next year's HS capacity crunch

monkeypuzzled said…
I have a question. I have been trying to follow all the revisions to the maps but I am beyond confused about where my 8th grader (HIMS HCC) will go to high school. I know the HCC pathway isn't established yet, but what's our reference area school?We are in a weird little corner of Phinney Ridge and I have heard at different times
all with possible later geosplit to Lincoln. If you put our address in the lookup tool right now, our reference area is Roosevelt, but I don't know what that actually means. The maps currently labeled scenarios 6 and 4.2 have us at either Lincoln or Ingraham, but again, I don't know what that means if she starts at Roosevelt in fall 2018.

Is there someone I can go to to help me figure out our options?
Anonymous said…
Looking at the enrollment projections from the Jan 5 meeting (data table), many schools are at, near or over capacity under all scenarios by 2021, if not sooner. No matter how they slice it, it does not seem the added capacity is enough. Rainier Beach is the exception, but geographically it's not where capacity is most needed.

haters hate because that is all they have said…
Not yet as options are not yet finalized. That said they are hoping to get things nailed down before open enrollment so that toolshould work for you AA school.

GHS would be your pathway with a alternate IBx both of which should be good for all four years.

monkeypuzzled said…
Haters, thanks. But if there's HCC at Lincoln would we be geosplit? Or is that not decided yet either?

I just need to figure out which schools to visit etc. Kiddo is 2e/ASD and not every place is a good fit.
Anonymous said…
I would not count on IBX. They seem focused on getting all students on a traditional IB pathway and it's very unclear how students will be served their senior year if they choose the accelerated IB option (really can't call it IBX, because they've eliminated any pretense of offering a 4 yr program of classes for HC students). The recent boundary update message sent to SPS families states:

For both options, HC pathways in 2019 would be at Garfield, Lincoln and West Seattle with Ingraham’s International Baccalaureate Program as another option.

Not IBX, or IBX program, but "Ingraham's International Baccalaureate Program."

no guarantees
haters hate because that is all they have said…
All indications have been this years 8th at GHS and IBx would complete at that school. LHS would only bring in freshman HCC in 2019
monkeypuzzled said…
Ah, OK. So if IB isn't a good fit (it's not), Garfield; if Garfield commute is too long, Roosevelt. Thx all.
haters hate because that is all they have said…
RHS might bring about a geo split down the road for your child. That said, they are required to offer classes in sequence for HC kids. You are not the only parent weighing this decision. I would wait until they vote then ask these same questions.
monkeypuzzled said…
This is the first time in our SPS lifetime that I've wished we could go private.
Eric B said…
Monkeypuzzled/Haters Hate, everything I've seen is that the HC group grades 9-10 will geosplit just like everyone else with the new assignment boundaries. The main reason is that they desperately need to relieve enrollment pressure at Garfield. There's also an equity perception issue--if HC doesn't have to deal with the pain of a geosplit, people will complain that they get special treatment. I guess that's a question for the Board at the work session tomorrow.

I would look at map F4.2 to see where that puts you. If you start at Roosevelt and are geosplit to Ingraham, it's theoretically possible you could get a choice assignment at Roosevelt in the first year of the geosplit, depending on how many kids they have enrolled. If you are at Garfield HC, I would expect to be geosplit to Lincoln.
Anonymous said…
My Junior Daughter does not have any PE credits yet. I won't go into all the reasons why attempted waiver for dance and schedule conflicts did not work out. I asked her to be sure to get in to the counselor to make sure she resolves her spring semester schedule since she technically needs to take PE every semester or figure out a work around to get or waive the credits. She said that there is an announcement coming soon and that school may move to 7 periods next year in which case it will be no issue. Has anyone heard that they are close to a decision on how to handle 24 credit requirement for current freshman and younger? By soon, she heard they will know in the next couple weeks.

NE Mom of 3
haters hate because that is all they have said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
kellie said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
kellie said…
I concur with EricB. I strongly suspect that any geo-split will be applied equally across all schools and programs.

Enrollment strongly suggested that Garfield students would be grandfathered but that was based on the notion that there would be zero HCC services at Lincoln. An idea that was never realistic when you look at the severe capacity constraints that are looming for 2018 and 2019.

At the last board meeting, the annual request for portable purchase was presented to the board. There were a lot of board questions and not a lot of very clear answers.

The request was for up to 26 portables with the strong implication that almost all of the portables would be needed for high school. If you read between the lines in the answers there were a few notable comments, including that several of the impacted high schools, no longer had easy portable space in the parking lots.

The next logical implication is that portables will either be placed on the field or that high schools will need to add a seventh period for capacity reasons.

All of these issues were discussed at FACMAC years ago and should not be surprising in any way. I wish that there was more transparency on this topic. The massive uncertainty around all things high school is rather exhausting.
haters hate because that is all they have said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
monkeypuzzled said…
"All of these issues were discussed at FACMAC years ago and should not be surprising in any way. I wish that there was more transparency on this topic. The massive uncertainty around all things high school is rather exhausting."

THIS. There is no institutional memory around any of it either. They should just hire you, Kellie.
Eric B said…
The statement to Garfield PTSA was super-carefully worded. They said that they planned to grandfather at Garfield, but that they couldn't guarantee that students living outside the Garfield assignment area would be grandfathered. So their "grandfathering guarantee" was basically just that kids living inside the Garfield zone could stay at Garfield. Which they could anyway. It sounded like a lot more, but wasn't.

Flip told me that they can't add portables at Roosevelt. There's no space but the parking lot, and if they block off more parking spaces, nobody can use the field because there's a guaranteed minimum number of parking spots. I believe Garfield is in a similar spot. Don't know about Ballard.
Reminder to readers; please, no more than a two-word name/moniker.

Wait, what? They just put in a request for more portables and included Roosevelt. Personally, I don't think they can fit anymore without losing the entire parking lot. And it's definitely going to be more crowded around RHS for the near and far future.

Near because they are currently building right in front of it (or will start the next project on 15th and 66th) and far because once those buildings are in, there will be more cars.
Eric B said…
They may have talked about Roosevelt, but the BAR is for 11-19 new portables at up to 4 sites to be named later. I assume there may be a future contract as well, because the BAR says they think they will need 26-34 new classrooms in portables total.
kellie said…
Yes, at last week's whopper of a board meeting, one of the items was the portables. It was pretty easy to miss this item with all the rest of the evening's drama but the Q&A (with a notable lack of A) was very critical about the plan for 2018 high school.

Placing more than 4 portables at a time requires special permits, so the "implication" of the testimony is that there are 4 portables planned for Garfield, Roosevelt, Ballard and Ingraham. I say implication because while the board asked multiple questions, Flip's response were rather vague.

IMHO, the vagueness was much more alarming that a direct response. Last year at this same time when the RFP for portables was placed there was also a long discussion about how there was minimal space at all of the high schools for more portables. IIRC, each of the major high school is scheduled for another 200 student increase.

At this point in the process, there really are only two viable options for 2018. You either move to a 7 or 8 period day to better utilize the already existing space or you start putting portables on the fields. Neither are great options and IMHO these decisions should be made by the BLTs at each building and should have been given more notification.

Frankly, so much of this pain was avoidable with better planning. One FACMAC recommendation was to deflect enrollment to Ingraham in advance of the 2019 addition. If this had been planned then there would be a little bit more wiggle room for 2018. But as I have stated on this blog many times, the failure to include the Running Start information in the enrollment reports made it look like high school enrollment was much more stable than it actually is. Other option would have been to keep Cedar Park as an interim building and made Marshall available for high school overflow.

The boundary process for Lincoln has been dominated by the "theory of high school." At this point, the reality is beginning to trickle into the conversation and the reality is that we have multiple years of increasing cohort sizes.

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Lincoln "suddenly" needs to open as a 9-11 for capacity reasons.

kellie said…
Thanks Monkeypuzzled. The primary reason that I still blog on these topics is to preserve some institutional memory, so that the next generation of advocates are well informed. I appreciate your comment.

Again, I concur with EricB. The statement to the Garfield PTSA was very carefully worded and ultimately does not really mean anything. Even if the statement had been less carefully worded, I would not put any weight on the statement after the Whitman incident.

The promise to the Whitman families was unequivocal, capacity neutral and fiscally neutral and yet ... it was completely disregarded at the last moment, even with substantial board oversight to press the issue.

In the case of Garfield HCC, it will not be either capacity or fiscally neutral to grandfather HCC students. The next few weeks has multiple critical decisions related to high school that will impact this district for the next decade or more and there is precious little daylight on how they all interconnect.

Anonymous said…
We live in the Whitman zone and know many current 8th graders who were in that group who were promised to be grandfathered in Whitman when Eaglestaff opened. Those students were then assigned to Eaglestaff during the enrollment period but most of the families got their kids on the wait list for Whitman. Over the summer, all of the kids who we know were moved off of the wait list and were assigned to Whitman for 8th grade. I heard it was like 50 8th graders were moved back to Whitman before the start of school. It seems like it was done very quietly because I keep reading references to how those Whitman 8th graders were promised to be grandfathered but ended up at Eaglestaff. That's not what ended up happening. Maybe it was kept quiet because HCC kids weren't grandfathered when HIMS was split to JAMS and then again to Eaglestaff. I was happy for our neighbors who's kids are getting to finish 8th grade at Whitman but it leaves a pretty bitter taste in my mouth for our HCC friends who didn't get that same courtesy.

North of 85th
kellie said…
@ North of 85th,

I'm happy to learn that many of the 8th graders were eventually returned to Whitman, but the point still stands. That was a lot of drama that ultimately did more damage than anything else.

The "stated reason" for not enrolling Whitman was the "staffing capacity" of 600, despite a physical capacity of nearly 1,000. Staff staunchly defended this staffing capacity. Whitman's Oct 1 enrollment count was 566, significantly below the "staffing capacity."

These numbers strongly suggest that many families simply left the district, rather than play these games. Staff just got this one wrong, plain and simple and it will haunt the Lincoln process.

Anonymous said…
@North of 85th Yes, we were in that HC split camp. Whitman also had room and HIMS had no room so that's probably why those Whitman families got to remain. Also, Whitman and Burke and board members were worried about Whitman's enrollment being high enough. But thank you for the support. It is a shame kids get the bad end of the stick with capacity issues.

I also agree with Eric & Kellie. Any geo-split will be applied equally across all capacity constrained schools and programs. So that includes Garfield. The SPS statement about Grandfathering current 8th at their pathway school (Garfield) was based upon an old plan.
split enough
Anonymous said…
What is the status of John Marshall? Interim site only?

Anonymous said…
Parent, next year QAE is at John Marshall, and the following year Greenlake will be. Both schools have major renovations and expansions planned.
GLP said…
It’s Bagley not Green Lake that will be at John Marshall during their remodel.

Anonymous said…
@no guarantees I don't think it's reasonable to expect Ingraham to offer a 4th year for HCC students following IBX. If a student is ready for IB in 10th and 11th grade (nowhere else in the world does a school run the IB Diploma Program in 10th grade - it is universally an 11th and 12th grade program), then they should make a plan to graduate early and go to college, to take a gap year, to study abroad, or to do some other non-traditional program.

Future Ingraham Parent
NE Parent said…
There was a meeting tonight at Olympic View mostly regarding HS boundaries, but several parents asked about capacity issues at Eagle Staff. The issuing being that Licton Springs (which is included in the building) is growing, and middle school attendance is also growing.

Director Burke indicated that Eagle Staff may soon be over capacity, and that staff is considering the following 3 options: (1) Moving HCC out of Eagle Staff; (2) adding portables to Eagle Staff; or (3) changing the boundaries for Eagle Staff.

Only last year, the concern was raised that the projections for Eagle Staff showed that it was on a path to being overcrowded.

Anonymous said…
@FIP, really? It's the district's program. They set it up. They set it up as a 4 year pathway. Are you suggesting it's unreasonable for students to expect 4 sequential years of math, science and LA/SS? Once again, the district created the program, and it certainly wasn't planned as a "3 years then you need to go" program. If that's what it is now, officially, then they need to be totally upfront with families about it. That's the real issue.

no guarantees
Anonymous said…
@ FIP, "nowhere else in the world does a school run the IB Diploma Program in 10th grade - it is universally an 11th and 12th grade program." Really? Wasn't our program supposed to modeled on Interlake's?

Looks to me like they do IB in 10/11.

But that's not the issue. It's the district's program, so they should do what they said. Or, if they eliminate it, they should find a way for HCC students to get a 4-year sequence of math within the regular IB sequence that doesn't result in having to repeat material.

all types
Anonymous said…
This is way off topic, but would anyone with any institutional memory please list the schools that were closed almost 10 years ago?

And we're schools closed the. The building ms reused for different programs (so it looks like they weren't closed?)


Mag mom
Anonymous said…
Ugh! Autocorrect you're killing me!! (I should post while on my phone.)

Should say something like... Were some of the closed schools buildings reused for different programs so it looks like schools weren't closed?

Mag mom
Anonymous said…
Tt minor is open again as ELL HS.

MLK was sold to some community group.

Haters hate-66
Mag Mom, I was actually on the committee that was charged with that work and I'd have to go back and check my records.

But to your last question, most were closed for a period of time but now, I don't think there is a single empty school building (the district has other property that is leased). The district did find itself with some issues over those closures such as Viewlands having their copper plumbing ripped out and taken by thieves. That cost a lot to redo.
Anonymous said…
There has been some community comment regarding the Ingraham Rams mascot and whether a change should be made to a gender-neutral mascot. Attached information explains the history of the mascot; school is named for the first SPS school superintendent who was an avid mountaineer; the “rams” mascot was selected by the students.

From the Friday Memo. You have got to be kidding me.

no words
Anonymous said…
Go Sheep!

o my

kellie said…
@ Mag Mom,

I am not positive this is the entire list but the bones are pretty close.

04-05 closure round
MLK closed and later sold. The MLK names was moved to another building.
For capacity reasons, rather than close, multiple schools were turned into K-8s for capacity reasons.
Broadview Thompson, Madronna, Pathfinder, Orca, and possibly a few more.

06-07 closure round
Viewlands (reopened)
Rainier View (reopened)
Fairmount Park (reopened)
there was a big push to close Sacajawea in this round but Sac was taken off the list at the last minute.
there was a big push to close a central area school but I don't think one was closed.

TT Minor (now the world school)
Nova (program moved to Meany, building closed and building reopened and Nova returned to Nova)
Queen Anne Elementary (World School moved from QAE, building closed one year, reopened as elementary school)
Meany Middle School (closed to become the home of Nova and World School, Meany reopened and Nova returned to Nova and World School to TT Minor)
Genesse Hill (building closed - Pathfinder moved to Cooper - building reopened as new Schmitz park)

Anonymous said…
Thank you!!!

Mag mom
Owler said…
Director Burke indicated that Eagle Staff may soon be over capacity, and that staff is considering the following 3 options: (1) Moving HCC out of Eagle Staff; (2) adding portables to Eagle Staff; or (3) changing the boundaries for Eagle Staff.

Wait...what? Six months in and already threatening to change the boundaries or move out HCC?? Seems like if (1) or (3) are going to happen for this coming fall, there are going to be some angry parents.
Zella917 said…
Yep, especially since the capacity problems at Eagle Staff were completely predictable from the start. It would have made more sense to address this last year before opening the school.
Anonymous said…
“Director Burke indicated that Eagle Staff may soon be over capacity, and that staff is considering the following 3 options: (1) Moving HCC out of Eagle Staff; (2) adding portables to Eagle Staff; or (3) changing the boundaries for Eagle Staff.”

If moved out of Eaglestaff, where will the HCC middle school kids go? And when? Makes me wonder about Whitman being about 400 seats under its full 1000 capacity. Aren’t there about 400 HCC kids between REMS and HIMS?

Anonymous said…
Didn't a lot of us say something along the lines of "hey, if you are going to also split HCC to Eaglestaff, you should shrink the boundary you drew before you knew HCC was going to be placed there"???

KP said…
I was at the meeting where Director Burke said this. It was in response to questions from the Maple Leaf Community. Maple Leaf -- part of Olympic View's attendance area -- had advocated last year not to be assigned across I-5 to Eagle Staff. The group was asking if this could be reconsidered, moving assignment back to middle schools east of I-5, and brought up how crowded Eagle Staff is on year 1 and how it's likely to get more crowded. Director Burke acknowledged this and said that if something needs to be done down the road, here are three possible ways dealing with it. It was all very theoretical, and given everything going on with the high school boundaries and open enrollment about to start I think it's highly unlikely any changes would happen for next school year.


P.S. IMHO, they completely messed up last year on this. The Board seemed so anxious to open Eagle Staff successfully, and there were all these budget issues at play, that they didn't listen to the community and allowed staff to go ahead with a plan that overfilled it.
Anonymous said…
If SPS is considering moving HCC kids out of Eaglestaff, please give families a heads up WELL BEFORE SPS open enrollment and private school application due dates. That way, those of who want to make other plans to avoid displacing our kids mid- middle school and likely again in high school when Lincoln opens have enough time to plan. SPS crisis "planning" every year is not Excellence in Education.

Excellence in Uncertainty
Anonymous said…
On Robert Eagle Staff: When they voted down amendment 2 a year ago (which would have kept Greenwood elementary and Broadview Thomson-area kids slated for Whitman MS instead of Robert Eagle Staff MS), the language of the amendment was framed as moving kids BACK to Whitman (because it was relative to the underlying plan to move them TO Eagle Staff when it opened.

I could be wrong, but it struck me that some directors—particularly those not in the north-end—may have not actually understood the nature of the amendment, whether it was making kids move or saving them from a move, and the fact that it would have created more sustainable pathways and balanced enrollment.

I remember school board director comments before the vote along the lines of… “We don’t want to move kids unnecessarily. We can revisit next year if the school’s too crowded and move them after that.” I was like, what?! No no no. By voting against the amendment, you are changing long-standing pathways, moving actual kids, and filling Robert Eagle Staff from the start. Revisiting would mean moving kids back OUT of Eagle Staff.

It was super clear that Robert Eagle Staff would be filled very quickly and that increasing density in the immediate neighborhood would lead to overcrowding in short order. And that doesn't even address the uncertainty and stress caused to Whitman adjusting to such a big drop in enrollment.

Confused said…
I am going to be a new parent to SPS, and I'm confused about enrolling my kid for next year. On one page it says I can enroll now, "We will begin accepting 2018-19 registrations (new registrations) on Jan. 8, 2018."
On the same page when I try to actually go through the process, it says "We are not accepting 2018-19 applications at this time."

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Weirdness in Seattle Public Schools Abounds and Astounds

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals