Seattle Schools' Advanced Learning - What Next?

 I follow a Seattle parent page on Facebook and several parents were asking about what Advanced Learning will look like in the coming years. The short answer? 

  1. Students currently identified as Advanced Learners will be transitioned to Highly Capable (Building Based Services) with differentiated services provided in the neighborhood school.

    Sweeping change is necessary to uproot systems born from institutional racism and move the district forward toward genuine and authentic, culturally responsive services that prioritize the needs of every student.


    There are four Phases for this work, the first starting in school year 2020-2021and continuing through in school year 2027-2028. The cohort model will continue until 2027-2028. 

    This is ONLY for K-5 services. It is unclear what happens in middle school where there is a scaled-down cohort model only for a couple of classes. High schools have no "HC" program per se - high schools have Advanced Placement classes or International Baccalaureate classes but those are available to all students anyway. 

    What is in the Works (from the Board Action Report from April 21, 2021)

First to note, the BAR says this:

The current model of Highly Capable Cohort (HCC) programming was created for the purpose of white flight and segregation that has resulted in barriers to accessible services for our students furthest from educational justice.

Somehow that gets taken as truth and yet no one has ever provided evidence that this was the case - that the district created this program to keep white parents in the district. I've asked and asked and ...crickets.

- Renaming the program- no using "gifted" which SPS virtually never did or "advanced". The problem for the district is the state calls identified students "highly capable" so I don't think they can ever get rid of that. Indeed, the new name I see from SPS is Highly Capable Services or HCS.

- Redesigning identification, assessment and selection practices. I support this but it's a huge lift.

  • Synthesize the research on equitable identification practices that align with state law and expand our practice to include additional whole child data from personnel closest to knowing the story, strength, and need of each child;
  • Design and deliver an array of equitable services framed within a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) at every elementary, middle, and high school and alternative placements, as needed to meet the needs of students;
  • Currently there is testing in kindergarten with service that starts in Grade 1. With the new AL plan there will be no testing in K-1. So no matter what, your student WILL start at your neighborhood school or Option School. Students will be identified starting in Grade 2 via a universal screening.
  • Again, this level of detail will take time and money. The district has been working for years on MTSS so I would expect this area to work well. However, the BAR states:

The plan outlined in the BAR can be implemented using the current apportionment amount of $1,731,385 annually.

Sure. In this process, the district has only to:

  • change school boundaries, 
  • createprofessional development for every single teacher in the district including racial equity and bias training, 
  • work with EL and Sped for services for those students,
  •  "creation of a talent development stipend at each building that includes support of identification and tiered support for students in need of HC services" and 
  • a comprehensive communications plan.

I would assume the "changing school boundaries" will catch many a parent's eye. This changing of AL means that current Advanced Learners will be returning to their neighborhood elementary since every single elementary will have to provide services. This will occur in school year 2024-2025. 

- Changing the identification/delivery.  The district will move from:

  • Currently there are "Cohort" classes where Advanced Learners are grouped as a single class at schools that have AL services. Under the new plan, all schools will be providing AL services. 
From the Superintendent Procedure 2190SP that follows the BAR in the link. (To note, the Board passes policies about what they believe should be offered in the district and the superintendent creates procedures to enact those policies.)

  • Designing and delivering an array of highly capable (HC) services, within a tiered service model, aligned to student strengths, interests, and needs within neighborhood schools to replace the current segregated cohort programs
  • Identification and selection are a jointly held process that includes schools and the district’s central office. School-based Multi-Disciplinary Selection Committees (MSCs), will be responsible for screening, identifying and matching services to students’needs. School-based MSCs, a sub-committee of the MTSS tiered support team, take the lead on equitable identification of students who may have potential to benefit from HC services and also those students whose HC needs may be unique and thereby qualifying them for more intensive services
  • The AL Department will clearly define what the identification criteria would be for a student to receive HC services (or Tier 2 vs. Tier 3 services)*. They will also determine the criteria and process by which students become eligible for an alternative (Tier 3) placement, including objective criteria to be used to determine when a student’s needs are not, and cannot, realistically be met in their neighborhood school.
  • Local Norms as Used by School-Based MSCs: Where applicable, and effective immediately, school-based MSC teams should use local norms when appropriate for determining need for HC services. Specifically, standardized assessment scoreshould be looked at using local norms, including cognitive and/or achievement tests.
Two items from this bulleted list. 

One, that first sentence in bold means that there WILL be at least one 2-5 school where advanced learners (probably the top 1%) will be served. Since Cascadia Elementary is currently in this role as the only 1-5 school for Advanced Learners, that's likely to be where Tier 3 students will go. 

Two, see that phrase - "local norms" and this "School-based Multi-Disciplinary Selection Committees (MSCs), will be responsible for screening, identifying and matching services to students’needs."?

Here's where you can get nervous. Because that means that every single school will have its own little committee and they will make the decisions on what students get what services. And maybe you might want to be on your best parent behavior in case the committee decides your kid probably should stay in Tier 1. As well, if every school has its own "local norms" AND get to decide how they will differentiate the curriculum, well, my friend, you have not much coherency to this program and the district will NEVER truly know what works. 

How Will You Apply (partial)

Students in Kindergarten and Grade 1 will not be formally selected for HC services. Instead, they will be identified in a “talent pool” for possible selection for services beginning in Grade 2. All students have access to differentiated instruction and opportunities for engagement and enrichment for the purpose of talent development.
Universal Screening, at a minimum of one grade level, will be facilitated annually by the AL department. 
 
Within the MTSS structure in each school building, a multi-disciplinary selection team (MSC) composed of a building administrator, psychologist (or, other individual who can interpret cognitive and achievement test results), and a teacher will review data for all students in grades K-1 for identification into a “talent pool.” Students in Grades 2-8 will be reviewed for identification of service needs.

Multiple pathways for qualifications must be available and no single criterion may disqualify a student from identification;

The district will not use subjective measures, such as teacher recommendations or report card grades to screen out a student from assessment or to disqualify a student from identification. However, the district may use these data points alongside other criteria during selection to support identification;

To the extent practicable, the district must give screening and assessments in the native language of the student. If native language screening and assessments are not available, the district must use nonverbal screening and assessment.

Students referred by the school for Tier 3 services will be considered for placement in a program within their district region for services. These students will be identified as HC for this purpose.

Obtain parental permission to place identified students in Tier 2 & 3 services before any special services are provided to the student.

To the extent allowable by law, private testing is allowed only for students receiving Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL), students with a disability (including those whose disability is documented as part of the appeal), and for other students furthest from educational justice.

A process should also be created that allows for appeals or review; based on a documented need for services that is not being met. This could occur after students have been matched with services and the services provided are not meeting a student’s needs.

Referrals are accepted from schools for Tier 3 services. A process will be developed and communicated to schools and families along with necessary forms for referral.

A student portfolio will be collected. The portfolio includes assessments from the following list, as appropriate for the grade level of the student, to be used in the building collaborative problem-solving process for MTSS:

• State Academic assessments
• District level assessments
• Classroom work samples demonstrating the areas of giftedness • Classroom based assessments/Performance Tasks
• Cognitive Assessment (screeners and/or full assessments)
• Teacher, community member, and parent recommendations

Any evaluations or assessment for the identification of students for services shall be made available during the school day, in the schools that students attend at the time of assessment. Exceptions can be made for 2e students or students for whom testing off site is most appropriate.

Other than assessments from other schools/districts and assessments accepted as part of a Special Education Evaluation, no outside testing will be accepted.

*Tiers Explained

To be clear (from my reading), only students who place in Tier 3 are actually HC.

Tier 1: For all students

  • ●  Culturally responsive teaching

  • ●  Problem solving

  • ●  Critical thinking

  • ●  Strength-based focus for accessing and delivering services

  • ●  Assessment practices conducive to ALs to include: pre and post assessments, ongoing,

    responsive and timely multi-modal assessment

  • ●  Differentiation of core curriculum for all and targeting advanced learners

  • ●  Enrichment

  • ●  Enhanced pacing

  • ●  In-class flexible grouping regrouping

  • ●  Project Based Learning

  • ●  Mentorship

Tier 2 & Tier 3: Services available to some students with General Education

Tier 3: Services available to a few students: Unique, accelerated services

  • ●  Responsive learning experiences to asynchronous development

  • ●  Curriculum compacting

  • ●  Enrichment

  • ●  Flexible and cluster grouping

  • ●  Independent projects

  • ●  Content acceleration

  • ●  Supplemental instruction in area of

    interest

  • ●  Curricular compacting

  • ●  Individual Learning Plan (Tier 3 only)

  • ●  Alternative Setting available only to these students (i.e., Self-contained, Exclusive Pull- out)

  • ●  Individual learning plans required

    • ○  including addressing asynchronistic

    • ○  Responsive learning experiences to

           asynchronous development

  • ●  Unique or Non-traditional services including

    but not limited to:

                          ○ services provided through cooperative arrangement with ESD or other districts


Comments

Anonymous said…
Clear. As. Mud. It astounds me that SPS keeps finding new ways to make it harder to understand what they're going to offer. It's almost as if they've hired someone to specifically make sure that parents don't know what is going to happen with their kids, and why. We had two kids in the HCC program, and it was a constant struggle to understand what the program was. I'm glad they are out and in high school so they are no longer part of this charade. Embarrassing.

So Tired
Not Gifted said…
Do you think this will be successful? You can pick whatever criteria you want when answering this question. My answer is no.
Anonymous said…
"The current model of Highly Capable Cohort (HCC) programming was created for the purpose of white flight and segregation"

This is a lie. SPS knows this is not true, but repeats it anyway, which means the district is quite literally lying to the public. HCC programming was created to address the needs of highly capable students, and while some district leaders did sometimes later use that programming to try and lure white parents back, it is simply false to state that HCC exists to facilitate white flight.

This matters because SPS will use this same lie to attack option schools in the coming years.

And I'm not a defender of the HCC cohort model, though I am skeptical that the district will actually deliver on differentiated services in the classroom or in the schools (here again SPS is lying). I'm offended that the district can openly lie to people like this and seemingly get away with it.

CRT Supporter
Historian said…
It is laughable that Seattle Public Schools touts IBto serve HC students. The district has a LONG history of NOT wanting to pay for IB programs. Don't think, for a second, that the district will offer continous financial suppport for IB. Here is what happened to Rainier Beach, Chief Sealth and Ingraham in 2016:

"Across the country, thousands of schools offer the rigorous International Baccalaureate program. Seattle is the only large district in the Pacific Northwest that makes parents or individual schools pay for it."

https://www.seattletimes.com/education-lab/seattles-ib-schools-are-national-outliers-in-lack-of-support-from-district/

NE Mom said…
Two years ago self contained HCC history classes were eliminated at our pathway middle school. Last year self contained HCC English classes were eliminated. That was the end of all self contained HCC classes at our pathway middle school. This was in direct violation of school board policy. The superintendent and senior staff knew they were violating board policy at the time and made these changes anyway. People may think the board policy was wrong, but to have the superintendent and staff knowingly violate it sets a terrible precedent. HCC students were simply put back in the general education classes. As such, I'm very doubtful the district will keep any self contained elementary program such as Cascadia, because there is nothing for it to feed into. There are many aspirations in the new policy, and some teachers may differentiate as the teachers are generally excellent. But I would not recommend SPS to any parent seeking advanced learning, because district leadership have proven the will do whatever they want regardless of board policy or state law, and rightly or wrongly, at this time equality of outcome is the clear goal. From a cost standpoint, using advanced learners in general education classes effectively reduces general education class size, because the advanced learners can be left to work on their own while teachers are directed to focus on those below standard. This is already happening. This is the reality. For society overall, this may be the most realistic approach to achieveing equity. But individual families need to understand this is what is really happening.
Not Gifted, funny you should ask if I think it will work. I say that because on page 4 of the BAR, there's an explanation about how the district did a shift like this before and it was for EL and Sped services, school start times (totally different thing but sure). And how it worked out well but I think the jury is out on that assessment.

Here's the thing - these changes surely can and will happen. So yes, they have the power to change an entire program districtwide. I will point out that I don't believe any of their examples included boundary changes, not even for school start times. I will be quite interested to see what the reaction will be from parents when the discussion over boundary changes come up.

Do I think it will all work? Of course not because the district has some weird thing about "local control." I never liked Superintendent Olchefske but he had a "tight-loose" philosophy about watching over schools. Is your school doing well and has mostly happy parents? The district gives you a loose grip as far as oversight. Your school not doing well? A tighter grip.

But this administration is continuing to allow ALL schools to make their own decisions. For this program, that will not work well AND the district will never truly know how the program as a whole is doing.

I mean, if the principal chooses who will be on the committee to review applications and none of the members, including the principal, likes/cares about highly capable, I'd bet you will see low numbers for participation. If it's a school that has a committee that does believe in highly capable, then you'll see higher numbers.

And it's not just numbers/diversity but also what is presented for Tier One and Tier Two. After this change is implemented, I'd be willing to bet you could go to three schools in each region and it would look different at every single school.

No, I don't think this will go well. Also to note, the district has a cheery district news article about how they can see the diversity changing for HC and yet, gave no data. Just "it's doing better because we say it is." Weird.
Historian, correct on all counts.
MGJ said…
Arguing about the difference between Tier 1 and Tier 2 services is like arguing about the difference between ALO and Spectrum. ALO and Spectrum were supposed to be the advanced learning programs for those students requiring advanced services but not qualifying for the highly capable program. The reality is that ALO and Spectrum have for years been both mostly non-existent, except in perhaps some overlooked corners of the district.

How do we know, ALO and Spectrum were non-existent beyond the anecdotal evidence provided by parents? Because once the district ended the standalone Spectrum classes and replaced them with in-class “differentiation”, the number of students qualifying for the standalone HCC program unexpectedly went up as parents realized the district’s in-class differentiation MTS multi-tier system of support promises were mostly meaningless, and the test scores for schools that had previously offered “Standalone Spectrum Classes” went down as parents left.

Juneau and her staff broke the state law that says once started, the district must provide a continuum of services. The reality is, Juneau and her staff ended many HCC history and ELA middle school classes two years ago and simply placed the HCC students back in general education classes, without any differentiation or supports or teacher training or materials beyond what a given teacher might decide to do on their own. Her staff then lied and said the evidence showed the “all” HCC students did just as well in these new general education classes, without any evidence whatsoever, and while many HCC parents were pulling their students from the district because of the lack of services.

As a specific example, the district has placed HCC students in general education history classes with teachers that have never taught in Seattle Public Schools before. The idea such new teachers are differentiating for HCC and providing a continuum of services in general education classes with over thirty students, without a differentiated curriculum, is simply not credible.

So, what’s going to happen to the HCC students now that the district has eliminated the standalone HCC classes? Of my son’s closest friends 8 of 11 are leaving the district next year. Parents aren’t unhappy because the program is changing. Parents are unhappy because the program has been canceled, and the district has lied about it.

What will the numbers show? As the district has changed the definition of HCC so that there are no longer specific testing requirements for eligibility, and as the district doesn’t track why students leave, the numbers will show whatever the district wants them to show.
muh said…
Comments have been made, and then are mostly correct. The district is lying, reports false information as fact, and uses gifted students as scapegoats. They have done such a good job vilifying this population and spreading false information about what happens surrounding their education that most schools around the district abuse HC students and teachers alike.

Your write up has some issues that I would like to quibble with, but, mostly I think the real story is pretty simple - In five years there will be zero support for gifted students in Seattle. Done and done.

Its a shame that this city, with its educated populace and demand for a skilled workforce, will no longer be a leader in gifted ed, but an tale of wrath and destruction towards these kids.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Who Is A. J. Crabill (and why should you care)?

Why the Majority of the Board Needs to be Filled with New Faces