Seattle School Board Elections 2019 Updates
Update: the Times has a story with a brief synopsis of each candidate. It does make for interesting reading. I do know (and know of) some of the candidates so I'll be writing about that information soon. I do wish the Times had asked Christophersen and Kline (who are partners) why they both decided to run in the same race. Also, they say they have both advocated for Special Education and yet don't mention it in their statements. Lisa Rivera Smith and Rebeca Muniz are the only candidates who did not vote in the last levy election.
Here's tally of key words/phrases used by candidates in this Times' article:
Equity - 8
Sped - 1
Accountability - 1
Close Opportunity Gaps - 1
Running Start - 1
Social Justice - 1
Equity comes in first but only because several candidates mentioned it multiple times but some candidates not at all. It's as if they didn't even bother to read the Strategic Plan where equity is the number one goal.
end of update
As I previously mentioned elsewhere, Director Jill Geary, in her board comments comments at last week's meeting, stated that she and Chandra Hampson, SCPTSA president, are writing a policy around racism in the district.
The candidate who is running for Geary's seat on the Board is the woman she is co-writing the policy on racism with? And she announces this after Hampson filed for that seat?
Silly me, I thought only the Board actually wrote the policies and that they just accepted input from others.
Wonder if Geary wants to work with the other two people running for that seat on writing Board policies?
Candidates, some free advice.
1) Not everyone is on Facebook so just having a Facebook page may not be as helpful as having a website.
2) I said this at an earlier thread:
3) I say this to ALL candidates. Do be yourself but, whether you like it or not, people want their school board directors to look like solid (read:dull) citizens. The Stranger was merciless one time on a candidate who wore a dress with boots. I always tell candidates, you can wear whatever you want...after you are elected.
District 1
Liza Rankin
37 Dems questionnaire
Website - this is her personal website for her art; it says at the top, that info on her campaign is coming
Facebook
info@elizasrankin.com
Eric Blumhagen
37th Dems questionnaire
Facebook
Website
Notable endorsements - King County Young Democrats, Directors Leslie Harris and Eden Mack as well as former directors Sue Peters and Sharon Peaslee
info@ericblumhagen.com
Sanaz Saadat
I can only find a LinkedIn page about Ms. Saadat.
ElectSanazSaadat@gmail.com
Michael Christophersen
No info available except for his last foray into running for the Board. Amazingly, the Times endorsed him but it's a big hard no from me. He is just unqualified and lacks the temperament for the position.
Darcie Kline
No info available except that she appears to be either Mr. Christophersen's wife/partner.
DarcieKline4education@gmail.com
District 2
Lisa Rivera Smith
Facebook
Notable endorsements - King County Young Democrats
District 3
Rebeca Muniz
website
Facebook
Notable endorsements - Director Eden Mack, Senator Bob Hasegawa, King County Young Dems
info@electmuniz.com
Chandra Hampson
Facebook
website (no actual website so far, just a link to a donation page which I have elected to not put
a link to)
Notable endorsements - I would think Director Geary but there is no info directly from the candidate to show that.
info@electchandra.org
Ben Leis
Facebook
Website
Notable endorsements - Director Rick Burke, former director Sue Peters and Public Education Advocate Kellie LaRue.
benfortheboard@gmail.com
Director District 6
Molly E. Mitchell
mitchell4education@gmail.com
Facebook
Leslie Harris
Harrislsh@comcast.net
Website (this may be her old campaign website)
Crystal Liston
crystal@crystalliston.com
Website
I know that legislative district endorsements are coming out. Please update any that you know about.
Chandra Hampson and Rebeca Muniz both got the 46th Dems endorsement.
Eric Blumhagen and Lisa Rivera Smith both got the 46th Dems endorsement. Blumhagen and Rivera Smith also received the endorsement from the 36th Dems. Blumhagen is also endorsed by the 32nd.
Please note: I have not read thru every candidate's Facebook page, website or questionnaires nor have I viewed taped interviews yet.
Here's tally of key words/phrases used by candidates in this Times' article:
Equity - 8
Sped - 1
Accountability - 1
Close Opportunity Gaps - 1
Running Start - 1
Social Justice - 1
Equity comes in first but only because several candidates mentioned it multiple times but some candidates not at all. It's as if they didn't even bother to read the Strategic Plan where equity is the number one goal.
end of update
As I previously mentioned elsewhere, Director Jill Geary, in her board comments comments at last week's meeting, stated that she and Chandra Hampson, SCPTSA president, are writing a policy around racism in the district.
The candidate who is running for Geary's seat on the Board is the woman she is co-writing the policy on racism with? And she announces this after Hampson filed for that seat?
Silly me, I thought only the Board actually wrote the policies and that they just accepted input from others.
Wonder if Geary wants to work with the other two people running for that seat on writing Board policies?
Candidates, some free advice.
1) Not everyone is on Facebook so just having a Facebook page may not be as helpful as having a website.
2) I said this at an earlier thread:
It does make me smile at the number of people who think running for school board is just filing, getting a couple of helpers and off you go. In 2019, that's some unsophisticated thinking.I did not mean that as an insult. I meant that many otherwise bright people have no idea the amount of work and organization and money it takes to run a campaign even for school board. As someone who has run a political campaign and helped many, many candidates on their campaigns, I know this. You can have good ideas and have great speaking skills but you still may not win if your campaign is lackluster.
3) I say this to ALL candidates. Do be yourself but, whether you like it or not, people want their school board directors to look like solid (read:dull) citizens. The Stranger was merciless one time on a candidate who wore a dress with boots. I always tell candidates, you can wear whatever you want...after you are elected.
District 1
Liza Rankin
37 Dems questionnaire
Website - this is her personal website for her art; it says at the top, that info on her campaign is coming
info@elizasrankin.com
Eric Blumhagen
37th Dems questionnaire
Website
Notable endorsements - King County Young Democrats, Directors Leslie Harris and Eden Mack as well as former directors Sue Peters and Sharon Peaslee
info@ericblumhagen.com
Sanaz Saadat
I can only find a LinkedIn page about Ms. Saadat.
ElectSanazSaadat@gmail.com
Michael Christophersen
No info available except for his last foray into running for the Board. Amazingly, the Times endorsed him but it's a big hard no from me. He is just unqualified and lacks the temperament for the position.
Darcie Kline
No info available except that she appears to be either Mr. Christophersen's wife/partner.
DarcieKline4education@gmail.com
District 2
Lisa Rivera Smith
Notable endorsements - King County Young Democrats
District 3
Rebeca Muniz
website
Notable endorsements - Director Eden Mack, Senator Bob Hasegawa, King County Young Dems
info@electmuniz.com
Chandra Hampson
website (no actual website so far, just a link to a donation page which I have elected to not put
a link to)
Notable endorsements - I would think Director Geary but there is no info directly from the candidate to show that.
info@electchandra.org
Ben Leis
Website
Notable endorsements - Director Rick Burke, former director Sue Peters and Public Education Advocate Kellie LaRue.
benfortheboard@gmail.com
Director District 6
Molly E. Mitchell
mitchell4education@gmail.com
Leslie Harris
Harrislsh@comcast.net
Website (this may be her old campaign website)
Crystal Liston
crystal@crystalliston.com
Website
I know that legislative district endorsements are coming out. Please update any that you know about.
Chandra Hampson and Rebeca Muniz both got the 46th Dems endorsement.
Eric Blumhagen and Lisa Rivera Smith both got the 46th Dems endorsement. Blumhagen and Rivera Smith also received the endorsement from the 36th Dems. Blumhagen is also endorsed by the 32nd.
Please note: I have not read thru every candidate's Facebook page, website or questionnaires nor have I viewed taped interviews yet.
Comments
By doing it for her.
Sheesh
Looks to me from what you posted back in 2015 like the two of you have a history.
Lots of good stuff on special education posted on his blog. Care to be specific about your position? What do you know about his temperament. Sounds like your typical character assassination. Do you actually have facts that you could share to back-up your assumptions? I really doubt the Seattle Times would endorse someone unreasonable.
You do tend to back stab people using your blog as a weapon and have turned on people you once supported.
Just facts
The Times is noted for its misguided endorsements, particularly around school board.
I have no “history” with Christophersen; I merely reported on him in context of the elections. I’ll repost his performance at an election event at Hale. That should be enough for anyone.
i remember last time mc ran too. he had so many supporters who all seemed to struggle with their post and whom seemed fixated on mw. didn't he make his blog look like hers for a while too(?)
i wonder if geary's understanding of racism is like her race advocacy partner looking for the next gig within a couple of years of securing the seat; dewolf. he thinks asian are not minorities. he thinks and makes decisions on that for the board. sure if you had a program that was 90% white in a city that is only 65% white that would be odd. but it is only that way if you count asian as white. what lens is that again? trying to skip to my next seat lens i guess. dewolf (and i know he is na) and geary are the same race though... the race to win higher elections.
no caps
Do they want a policy that says school board directors aren't allowed to lie about racial demographics in attempting to disparage certain programs or schools? (I doubt it, bus sounds like a good idea!) Do they want a policy that says we need to start doing more complex analyses that also consider FRL, not just always assuming racism as the reason behind whatever the issue is? (I'd be for that, too!) I doubt it.
This should be interesting to see.
unclear
own it
Good Riddance
Prove It
http://esb.k12albemarle.org/Reference_Library/ESB_Policies_and_Regulations/Policies//ACC.pdf
Basically, the goal of Albemarle's policy is to get rid of racial disparities in:
enrollment
suspension/discipline
student achievement
graduation rates
gifted identification
special education identification
course participation
They want to collect data on gender and socioeconomic status, but don't mention doing anything with that. They want restorative justice and an anonymous tip line for reporting racism (We have the ombudsperson and the OCR. Should we set up a STASI system, too?)
I can't wait to hear how Geary/Hampson plan to get rid of racial disparities in enrollment. In fact, I bet a lot of Seattle voters would like to hear about that before the election.
Probado
She was supposed to be a special education advocate. How did that work-out?
Yea, are you talking about the Hampson, Rankin and Mitchell slate?
According to page 18 of the file linked at the bottom of this comment, "Honors for All" is a research project at Garfield High School directed by Eric M. Anderson. Now in its 3rd year, Dr. Anderson says data is being collected now and the "deliverables" will include a final report delivered by fall 2019.
Dr. Anderson explains: "this study will use a case study approach" and the final report may include student data for select schools. May include data?!! The board must require data. What if it's harming students? What if it's working great for the 4 students they select in their case studies and lowering the self esteem and achievement and increasing the drop out rate of FRL students? If we only look at a few cherry-picked case studies, we'll never know.
https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/School%20Board/Annual%20Reports/2018-19/FOR%20INTRO%20I02_20181114_Policy%202090.pdf
Proof
Things are so bad that Burke's wife need to comment on this blog in his defense.
Rick if there's something you want to say please do it yourself.
Rubber-stamp board
watching
If you want to fight racism, think things through a little, make sure you're not doing more harm. We fight racism with thoughtful consideration of consequences and unintended consequences. Troll-y armchair-quarterbacking helps no one and just makes things worse.
RT
This happened several election cycles back when all four seats flipped. It was really getting rid of the "professional" board who allowed the district to be mismanaged by Olchefske but the four women who won were very different from each other. They got called a slate.
Watching, how do you know what is in any given FOIA? Also, not running is not the same as resigning. Geary and Burke are stepping down, Patu is resigning.
Lastly, I am slogging thru the last Board meeting video (which is not fun at all) and, in the course of the middle school science adoption, Harris did bring up STILL waiting for a report on Honors for All.
It seems quite odd how long the Advanced Learning Taskforce AND the Honors for All reporting are both taking. Hmm.
Isn't that generally what SPS staff have been doing for the last few years? With materials adoptions, curriculum re-alignments, caps on middle school math advancement, limits on AP options at Lincoln, the decimation of WMS, new restrictions on online coursework...the list goes on. The Board is just following the district's lead.
As far as HfA, what objective data would the district collect? 10th grade PSAT performance? Subsequent enrollment in an AP course (wasn't that one of the goals?) and scores on AP exams?
MfA
I don't see any evidence of racism, wanting HCC students to be taught to their capabilities is not racism.
Seattle is bending over backwards for people of color so either start providing proof supporting your claims or move on.
I see no FOIA request from the NAACP or the ACLU in the last 3 years. Yes there is somethings going on at WMS, but there are 2 sides of that story and both don't equate to systemic racism in SPS or Seattle.
watching
watching
Also, if a gifted kid should "be expected to excel independently." why bother making them go to school? Can't they just show up for the after-school piece--maybe some sports and clubs--and do the rest of their learning at home? Oh right, then they'd get even further ahead and we can't have that!
@Viriginia Model, those topics seem to fit squarely within Policy 0030. Why doesn't Geary work (with fellow board members) on revising that one if necessary? Actually, weren't they recently working on that one???
unclear
Those make sense. In addition, data collection should include a student survey (which is notably absent from the data collection methods mentioned), as well as a comparison of curricula and expectations pre- and post-HFA (which I suspect is not a component of their literature review). Since the first cohort of 9th grade students subjected to HFA is currently in 11th grade, they should also be able to include full ACT and SAT scores before too long, in which case looking at writing scores could be useful. It will also be interesting to see down the road how this affects graduation rates and matriculation rates at a 4-year colleges, since it was supposed to help with those, too. Oh, and they should look at the impact of this change on GPAs and rankings.
Whatever data they do include, they'll need to break them out by demographics INCLUDING whether students were HC-qualified, AL-qualified, etc. They need to look at trends within student groups, not just lump all students together. We want to know the impact of this approach on students who had been working at all different levels prior to the change.
Then again, it unfortunately does not look like they plan to look at actual academic outcomes in the first place, so maybe they don't need to do much analysis at all. The summary of findings is really only going to be a descriptive piece on what teachers are doing to implement this policy/approach that they already believe is so innovative and important.
data seeker
Geary, as chair of C&I has damaged the district. She allowed an unfunded K-5 science adoption out of committee. There is NO policy regarding the use of screen time with children and in our classrooms. Then, there was the ridiculous revamping of the science scope and sequence. This will, IMO, be felt for years to come.
That effort was led by Harris. Don't let her fool you, Harris is no friend of HCC.
2e
Supporting Harris
Do tell!
Nosy
Staff previously shared data that a surprisingly high percentage of students were already off track to graduate on time after just their 9th grade year. With no extra room in their schedules to make up missing credits, I expect that most of those will still be off track after they finish their 10th grade year in a couple weeks--and a new group of "off-track" students will likely be added to the mix, meaning an even larger percentage not on track to graduate on time. These kids will be in 11th grade when the new board gets rolling, and unless something happens quickly, it'll be another year of inaction on this issue...and the percentage not on track to graduate on time could increase further.
Any guesses as to who these failures to plan for the 24-credit requirement will most impact, ESPECIALLY since the current board just made it harder for students to access online learning? Hint: It's probably not well-off students, those who know how to work the system, those who have the means to participate in RS, those whose parents are aware of the issue, etc.
For a district and that purports to be so concerned with equity, their unwillingness and/or inability to the plan for this is appalling. To me.
Core24
I don't even know where to start with your wrong information. The majority of private schools can't serve HCC kids well. They don't offer a more rigorous curriculum. In addition, our HCC kid is middle class, not affluent, and of a mixed race background. But we also know kids in HCC who are FRL.
In addition, do your homework, overwhelmingly most of the affluent whites in SPS have kids who are not in HCC. There is indeed a correlation nationwide between socio-economics and gifted program identification and SPS needs to do a better job identifying lower income kids.
However, your grand broad assumptions really need an education in this area. Your argument they are "segregationists" puts the blame on parents who are actually bussing their kids out of less diverse neighborhood schools in favor of a program in a majority minority school. How does your argument make any sense in that context? Your beef is with SPS is identify more FRL, as well as more racially underrepresented kids for the program.
Most states recognize these kids as needing something different and many recognize them under a special education umbrella. Many are also 2E.
HCC parent
2Cents
Just to clarify my beef. It is my beef after all, I don’t need it gifted-splained to me. The problem isn’t that the district is somehow failing to invite enough “worthy” and educable minority students to join the country club. It’s with the country club itself. Nobody ever asked for loads of “data” supporting Honors For the Few did they? Btw, nobody cares about your long bus ride to the country club from the all white neighborhood. Must be awesome if you’re willing to ride. Again, strategic plan.
Proof
God Bless
Salut
Bonjour
You're assuming that this a choice between two equally valid options, which it often isn't. If your neighborhood school isn't going to teach you things you don't already know, it's not really a "choice" of whether or not to leave.
How, exactly, is it "fair" for a student capable of working two--or often more--years above grade level to sit in a classroom bored year after year, with limited (or no) opportunities to connect with intellectual peers?
all types
Get real. It's not a dog whistle to ask for the promised (and very late) data on a pilot program that was implemented without board approval and not consistent with the district's established HC services. Some might even say that kind of oversight is part of the board's freakin' job.
As to where of not it's relevant to the science adoption, it absolutely is. It's a question of the broader impacts of reducing curricular rigor, which is what will likely happen with Amplify, too.
@Proof, your "country club" comment was hilarious. I guess my family missed the membership card...and the perks!
Worst.CC.Ever!
Hun
Asian here. HCC. Not rich. Not alone. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Rawr
So like it or not many white and Asian kids are receiving their education separate from other children of color in neighborhood schools because Seattle is largely economically and racially segregated. That exists without the HCC program. Is that better?
At least the HCC programs are placed in majority minority schools where students from various backgrounds can share at least some classes.
"Establishment white students"...nope our HCC kid is not. In fact the majority of Seattle's affluent, as well as white families don't have any kids at all in the HCC program. Whether you like it or not, academically gifted programs are needed and are recognized as such nationwide. Special education and ELL programs are also recognized programs for some kids who need differentiation. Are you against those programs as well?
Lastly the HCC program provides peers and BTW no different socioeconomically or racially than our neighborhood school, and no special curriculum than what Non-HCC kids will also take in school. That's right no special curriculum. Dissolving a program for academically gifted and 2E kids (or ELL or Special Ed program) has no effect on battling racism or poverty or equity. Pick a different cause to advance the above.
HCC parent
Salut, "dog whistle"? C'mon, it was a good comparison about asking for, but not being given data and all the while being told "it's working."
HfStudy, yes, unbelievably DeWolf used his grandmother's illness to cover his campaigning tracks. I am so sorry she is gravely ill; it's tough to lose someone you love. But if he could make it back in time to be at the Labor Council event for City Council offices, he could have made it back to serve the people who elected him to School Board. This is not going to serve him well.
One would think that everyone on the board would be fully supportive of Honors for All instead of treating it as a point of agitation for certain political blocks. Hence dog whistle.
Salut
"Establishment white kids" going to Garfield are at least as likely to come from Garfield's own feeder schools (like McGilvra and Montlake and TOPS (with their PTA $$$$$)) and feeder neighborhoods (Madison Park, Montlake, the Arboretum, Eastlake, Capitol Hill, Madrona (aka privilege city!)) as they are to come from HCC.
Uh, unless it doesn't help African American males or anyone else. Hopefully no one would support it then. To know if it's helping or harming, we would actually need data. Harris was pointing out to MMW that staff promises the board data all the time (like about Honors for All or whether Amplify reduces learning for FRL students) but doesn't seem able to actually produce the promised data for some reason.
I think you may have the dog whistle analysis exactly backward. Since an honors class is open to everyone automatically, why were these honors classes called Honors for All? Are there ever honors classes not open to all? No, there are not. The classes were named as a dog whistle for those concerned about HCC, even though HCC classes don't exist in high school, as others have pointed out.
Also bear in mind (as a previous poster pointed out) that Honors for All is part of a case study research project being done by Eric Anderson (https://seattleschools.org/departments/rea), who is the Director of Research and Evaluation for the district. His choice of title an be viewed as a dog whistle. Data has apparently been collected for three years now, and although interim reports were apparently assured, there have been no interim reports. Harris is right to ask about this. The final report itself is due this fall (https://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/School%20Board/Annual%20Reports/2018-19/FOR%20INTRO%20I02_20181114_Policy%202090.pdf).
The calls for reporting on Honors for All are not random but reasonably arise from the context of Honors for All as a research project and past assurances.
RT
There was a school board meeting on May 15th. Zachary DeWolf was not in attendance. MLK labor council held a candidate forum on May 15. MLK Labor Council had a debate during the same time frame.
May 15 @ 6:00 pm - 8:00 pm
Seattle Labor Temple, 2800 First Avenue
Seattle, WA United States
According to The Stranger Zachary DeWolf was at the MLK Labor Council debate:
https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2019/05/16/40224072/zachary-dewolf-goes-on-the-attack-at-labor-council-candidate-forum
The entire process for Seattle HC qualification is skewed and against best practices.
Calling those who qualify for HC in Seattle "gifted" is a misappropriation of that term.
It gets very tiresome when Seattle's HC program is defended. It's a complete joke and needs to be overhauled.
Requalifying every three years is an excellent idea.
Harris is among those who have benefitted from HC parent support. No doubt about it.
I wouldn't call her HfA comment a "dog whistle" but she definitely knows where her bread gets buttered.
Gravy Train
Self selecting segregation doesn’t somehow make it any better. These HCC parents are missing boats right and left. It’s not about self selection and it’s not about digging up a few “deserving” minorities worthy of privilege with some yet to be discovered strategy. As HCCparent said, it’s not about learning or curriculum. It’s about “peers”. Eg exclusion. Public school isn’t a country club full of good peers for your kid.
—Hun.
(An HCC parent assigned that sexist and derogatory moniker, but I’ll keep it. It’s ok for them to do that, evidently. Thanks)
Rose
There are lots of students in SPS who haven't been qualified for HC and who manifest their giftedness in different ways than yours: acting out, underachievement, and a later higher probability to land in jail.
The exclusion in HC is about the fact that the SPS qualifications are based on out-dated criteria that would not fly for any serious giftedness researcher.
The exclusion is in the form of so many of similar demographics in the same program: mostly children of highly educated parents. The others are left out.
The "all backgrounds" meme is fictional, to say the least. The Amazon prep books make sure that doesn't happen.
Gravy Train
It’s Obvious
I wouldn't call her HfA comment a "dog whistle" but she definitely knows where her bread gets buttered."
Really? Because if you believe Harris wants the data because she supports HCC, then what motive would you assign to other directors who want the data to support HfA?
I have known Harris for several years now and I have virtually never heard her talk about HCC.
There are plenty of highly intelligent people who have been disadvantaged and are not highly educated.
And no, not all gifted students grow up to become highly educated adults. Research shows that a disproportionate number of them from underprivileged families wind up in jail.
The "Duh" in your comment betrays that you obviously didn't know this.
Gravy Train
Just the facts, ma'am.
Gravy Train
Get Real
ELL and special education, LBGTQ and minority students also need same peers. Don't all kids need to have peers who understand them? These kids are no different. As has been mentioned many do come from middle class schools so the peers are no different racially or economically, yet many of these kids have a terrible time in the neighborhood school. You have alot to learn apparently. I suggest you read the research and learn about programs offered nationwide. My child comes from generations of disadvantaged relatives on both sides of the family. One relative had a very high IQ, and would have qualified as gifted, yet grew up in the projects of the south bronx attending a public school with one of the worst graduation rates in NYC. No access to a gifted program, but his grandchild has had that opportunity. These programs are needed and these kids exist. The issue is with identification. In SPS the program also has kids taking some classes with non-Hc kids, and in high school any kid can select classes as are open to all.
HCC parent