Not to Start a Fight but Here's News on HCC

Way back in January, I made a public disclosure request to the district for emails and other documentation about the Advanced Learning office.  I recently read a number of emails that offer at least part of the picture of the thinking in that office.  (I have been told that there 10,000 items in response to my question - something of a record for me -and I'll be reading them in installments.)

The emails were largely among several people:

• Katie May, principal at Thurgood Marshall
• Stephen Martin, Director of Advanced Learning
• Mathew Okun, Consulting Teacher
• Thurgood Marshall parents on their equity team

Details of interest:

 - Mr. Martin received a very regular stream of emails from Ms. May and several parents at Thurgood Marshall.  He was very responsive to those emails.  Most of the emails were around Thurgood Marshall's equity program for HC.

-Martin had his hands full with trying to schedule over 660 students each Saturday during the testing period and lining up space at schools.  He mentions that it's better on Saturday because then students don't lose instructional time.  I find that surprising because it is likely you would test more students  during a school day and finding more students who would benefit from HC services would seem more important than a couple of hours of instructional time.

He tells the principals that "every available space in each school is needed" and that "we" will arrange and pay for costs to the buildings for this effort.

- Martin told the TM parents that his office had identified "over 350 new HC students who are currently in grades K-5 and about 100 are students of color."  He said it was a mixture of students from private and current public school students but he had no way of predicting if they would enroll in an HC program.

- Martin also told May in November 2015 that "it would be useful to investigate again the relative success in HCC of students who qualified via district testing versus those who became eligible via the appeal process (that comparison was last done in 2010 I believe).  At that time the difference in performance was found to be statistically insignificant.  But things change.  The number of appeals is large."

At this juncture I'll interject that it IS statistically significant that during the last several years, the district and schools have weakened and changed the Spectrum program.  That might be a good reason why the numbers in HC have changed.

- In October 2015, the Board was thinking about changes to the NSAP and Principal May asks Martin what he thinks.  He tells her, "Our office did not participate in the NSAP revisions.  The first I heard of it was yesterday when I got a boatload of emails and calls from anxious parents.  I'm sure there is no need to worry about the future of HCC.  I'll investigate further."

May asks Martin in November 2015, "I'm curious...is there any demographic data on the HCC program available?  I'm especially curious about how the racial make-up of the cohort has (or hasn't) changed over time? Or the number of students admitted?"

I'm curious why a principal would think there wasn't demographic data but May seemed to couch the language of her emails with wide-eyed curiosity so it's hard to say what she thinks.

Martin replies, "We have just assembled that very data, Katie.  Perhaps we should disseminate to all principals, I'll talk with staff tomorrow."

Odd that he would not just send out that data to all the HC principals.

- Martin to May in December 2015 (subject unknown) "BTW, we spoke with Cashel today. Working on a rationale that will be useful to you and your HC colleagues.  Stay tuned!"

- Staff gave "special training" to TM staff on equity.  Unclear why/what that was but I can ask what that was about.  Maybe it will be clearer in the next installment.

- Spectrum enrollment dropped from 2,309 in 2013-2014 to 279 one year (my notes don't reflect which year, I'll have to go back and check).  In that same timeframe, ALO participation dropped from 1625 to 512.  Surely such a shift in numbers might explain the huge rise in HC.  I recall Superintendent Nyland calling HCC "a growth industry" when the explanation was right there all along but then again, the district continued to act like Spectrum existed when it didn't.

- July 2016 - TM parent writes to Martin, "While there has been blog activity related to the social studies change, they only speak to smaller set of changes in the SP related to the waiver.  The blogging world doesn't seem to have the latest proposed changes.  That might be a good thing!"

This blog has been around a long time.  I've learned that we may not find out everything on every subject quickly but given the network we have built up, we tend to find out most news sooner or later.

- One TM parent was particularly persistent in outreach to Martin. In one email this parent asks about gender equity as well as racial imbalance.  This parents says that some classes at TM have "shocking" gender imbalances skewed to boys.

I had to smile.  When my younger son was in Spectrum, he was one of just 6 boys for grades 1-3 in a class of 26 and then one of six boys for grades 4-5 in a class of 32.  When some of us parents of boys asked if the waitlist could be adjusted to not continue to skew this way, most of the parents of the girls said they didn't care and didn't support any change to the waitlist.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

-  Martin and his entire office seem very taken with the equity group at Thurgood Marshall.  At one point, he reaches out to a parent and says that he had been talking with someone at OSPI who said this parent had called and he asks this parent, "Is there anything that we can help clarify for you and your team?"

This parent replies and then asks about using race as a factor in HC admissions ("We understand that it can't be the only factor, but can it be one of many factors considered?" and "Can the full Cogat be administered without parental permission as long as the full assessment and decision waits for parental permission?"

Well, like in enrollment, you probably could try to use race as a factor but this district has a bad track record on that.  As for the second question, no.  There are grave privacy issues and no do-gooder gets to decide for another parent what is best for their child.

- Mr. Okun, in reference to the TM equity team, "I continue to see the TM equity team as a partner in our work, and optimistically believe that they can help us achieve our goals...ESPECIALLY regarding appeals."

I'll have to ask about those goals - I have never seen them stated publicly.  If the district wants to get rid of most appeals, they can.  Other districts have.  

Mr. Okun again writes to this parent, "I can assure you that we agree completely with the vast majority of what you recommend."  About screening a large number of never previously referred students.  "Many schools in the northern portion of town currently refer huge percentages of their students while the opposite is true at most Title One schools."

- The main TM parent - who is going to remain nameless at this point - writes to Martin and says, "I definitely hear your point about the pros-cons of universal testing.  We think it is a partial risk, as maybe it will identify more white students."

I note that other readers here have made the same point.


- May claims at one point that parents at her school are on-board with what they are doing around HD and sends comments to Martin that she has received.  There is not a single negative one.  I've been in a lot of schools and I would not believe for one minute that 100% of parents agree with any one thing and that those who don't agree all remain silent.  

One comment came from someone who seems to also have a student at West Seattle High  and they are attempting to "detrack" it as well.

- One email is a TM parent who likes the social studies "interaction" among students but was not told it would also be happening for art, music and PE (which actually might have been a better place to start).  

Okun answers that the "grade level teams" have made their decisions about how and when to keep students in their "social studies groups."  He lets Ms. May know and she says she'll send a letter to parents.  So TM made changes to their entire school structure but didn't notify parents about all of it?

The last item in this email installment is why I'm not going to reveal the name of the parent who is the most active, the most vocal in all this.  

This would be the person who tells Martin that this person's student "got in on appeal and with a private test after we learned about that option for a friend."  This person then goes on, in a later email, to decry appeals and says they should stop.

Sure, after that person got their child in - on appeal using a private test that was paid for by that family - THEN, close the door for others after that. 

Note to that parent -  you are lucky, lucky, lucky that I am not outing you.  Speaking in a manner that some might just call hypocritical under the banner of equity.  I have to say, though, I can't wait for the next batch of emails.

Look, Martin is a good guy and so is most of his staff.  But, like most other AL directors, he has little power.  

I'd like to think that he is as responsive and accessible to ALL parents as he is to the group at Thurgood Marshall.  I'd like to think that he is as responsive and accessible to all principals.  

But if the AL department has goals and a vision of change, then let's hear it.  Do not form this vision behind close doors with just one group of parents.  

FYI, the deadline for the Advanced Learning Task Force is May 24th at noon.  Given these emails, I have to wonder if the group will be packed with the parents who seem to have the ear of this office.  It would look very suspicious if there are not parents from schools across the district.

Discussion at Curriculum & Instruction Committee meeting this week on AL

Wyeth Jessee, head of Student Support Services, gave the Highly Capable Annual Plan to the committee.  To note, this is the plan that was submitted in September 2017 to OSPI for this school year, the money has been flowing to the district for that purpose but it has to get signed off on by the Board by the end of the school year.

Mr. Jessee noted that we are one of 30 states that has to submit such a plan to the state.  He said the manner in which they are expected to answer the questions is more about compliance than being about demonstrating a robust program.

Kari Hanson, Director of Student Support Services, talked about the survey that had gone out to all schools and mentioned a list of the 25 schools with the highest number of HCC qualified students (I'll have to ask for that list). 

Director DeWolf asked about what the plan is for equity in this program.
Stephen Martin stated that they have a process to find out who is F/RL.   

He also said that as of today (that was Wednesday), the first day for AL referrals, that his office had received 52 from parents and 48 from teachers with the first one coming in at 12:20 am.

DeWolf asked about who was on the team that decides who is eligible.  The answer was a psychologist or psychiatrist, teachers of gifted, etc.  They meet in December and work thru until February.

DeWolf then asked about what other people have advisory roles.  (I thought he meant on applications but the answer seemed more general.)  Martin referenced the HC Services Advisory Committee and yet not the Thurgood Marshall equity group with whom he seems to interact with quite frequently).  He said that the HC Services Advisory group meets monthly and that they had "contributed to the information" in the report sent to OSPI and "vetted it" and saw the survey as well.

Well, color me confused because several months ago when De Wolf asked about the HC Advisory group at a Board meeting, staff tried to act like they were some group of parents that staff really knew nothing about and were not sanction ed by the district.  Well, if they are included in the official report to OSPI, I'd say they are pretty official.  I hope that clears up that mystery.

DeWolf persisted, asking when equity in access would be a priority?  Ms. Hanson said they were looking at current policies and creating the taskforce.   

Maybe she's new enough to not remember there have already been two taskforces over the last decade.  Nothing they recommended was ever really implemented, no less listened to.  And this new one is to take a year (!) for their work.  That's a lot of time wasted and I wish Board members would take the lead and ask for some change now.

Director Geary asked about the "creativity" assessment noted on the form.  Martin says there are questions embedded in the parent and teacher referral forms that speak to that but no separate test used.  Geary asked if it was required by the law but it is not.  Martin said that the district "is a performance-based district" and Geary said, "Are we satisfied with that?"  Jessee said that is part of the work of the taskforce.

Director Burke asked about the testing in grade two for all Title One schools.  Martin pointed out that Northshore district tests 1-8 universally but he thought that was too much.  

Hanson said they had 20 applicants for the taskforce so far and she claims it's a diverse group.  Burke thought that a low number but it was pointed out that the taskforce is to have 10 parents plus staff/community.  DeWolf asked if outreach was happening to community groups. 

Also, the Advanced Learning department is asking that schools ensure help for families not in AL by having a computer at school set up for those families to use in order to find more students who qualify.  This sounds good but I have to wonder about how easily schools will have someone who can stop and walk parents thru the process on the computer.