First of Seattle School Board Candidate ViewPoint - Christie Robertson

The 37th Dems are having their endorsement meeting on Monday the 22nd (a bit early given that the filing deadline is through Friday). They have released candidates' answers to their questionnaire. Here's Christie Robertson's; she's running for Hampson's seat.

I have heard past candidates say that these questionnaires come early and fast/furious and they struggle to get them all done. I do not think if a candidate is not represented in one group's questionnaire that it isn't that they don't care; they just may have gotten a late start.

I found some of Robertson's answers to be interesting or troubling.

Have you previously participated, or will you be participating, in a candidate training program like Institute for a Democratic Future or Emerge? Answer: Yes.

I do not know this type of program, anyone?

What motivated you to run for this position and how would you evaluate your success?

 
I am motivated to run for this position by my personal experiences as a parent navigating the special education system for my child with a disability. Through that journey, I witnessed the challenges faced by families and the need for advocacy and change within our educational system. I want to be a voice for community, ensuring that every child has access to quality education and opportunities to thrive.

This sounds like the path the district is moving towards but then she goes on:

If I succeed in my goals, students with disabilities will spend more time in the general education classroom, be moved away from their communities less often, and the disproportionality of discipline and restraint will decrease. School climates should improve, teacher turnover should decrease, and students should report improved mental health.

I'm trying to understand if she means Special Education students or all students with that answer. By what metrics does she know that all these outcomes will be so and that not serving Special Education students properly has seen lower school climates, teacher turnover, etc.?

What are the top three issues of urgency that you will address if elected?

She says: 1) "well-resourced inclusive schools" and includes "Rather than designing schools for the average student and adding resources as an afterthought, we must consider the entire spectrum of student needs from the start." and she includes "the needs of students with disabilities, advanced learners, and all combinations thereof..."

2) communication and transparency and

3) Special Education focus. In that section she says, "We must closely monitor segregated classrooms, assess the placement of students in specialized schools, and work towards ending practice that cause trauma to our students."

I'm not sure what she means by specialized schools because really only Cleveland STEM, Boren STEM K-8, Hazel Wolf K-8 E-STEM, and Cascadia Elementary are specialized. Or does she mean all Option schools? Hmmm.

Much of her answers about community engagement seem quite canned. She does say maybe the Board should have a newsletter. That's not a bad idea but who writes it? Who determines content? She also says committee meetings should be recorded (and I believe most of the remaining ones are for their audio).

On the questions of promoting inclusivity, diversity and equity she says:

One of my major efforts over the last two years on the Special Education PTSA board was to improve our outreach to a broader audience of special education families. Our family guide to special education, which was finally printed last October, was professionally translated into the top 10 languages spoken by families of students with disabilities in Seattle Public Schools (information I got from a public records request).

That she had to go through public disclosure for that info is troubling. As well, I believe the Seattle Special Education PTSA had asked that their family guide be linked at the district's website. I'm not sure it did.

If elected, how will you address inequalities experienced among BIPOC, LGBTQIA+, or other marginalized communities and advance an agenda of equality?

Robertson says, "This is the most important and hardest question." 

That's an interesting answer. She goes on:

The current School Board is fortunate to have exceptional voices with profound wisdom, and I know that I will learn from them. 

Uh oh.

Comments

Jargon Galore said…

"Emerge " is a group that supports Democratic women candidate. They give candidates the tools they need to succeed.

Candidate states;
"A school system as big as SPS cannot function properly without sunlight and oversight. The current board has worked hard to shift from a focus on adult actions to student outcomes, which has been a useful mindset shift. Without losing this focus, the board can also help the district review and refine its initiatives, providing a framework of exposure and feedback that helps a large institution."

Clearly, this candidate has bought into the "student focus" governance structure which killed committee meetings! The narrative MUST change.

Sadly, the candidate also refers to "Well Resourced School" mantra...even thought he superintendent and board have FAILED to define this term. What exactly is the candidate's definition of "Well Resourced"?

The candidate goes on to say the following:

Rekindle reports to the school board on work happening in the district and make them more accessible publicly. Reports should focus on student impact rather than adult action."

Number one: The candidate still does not address committee meetings. Number 2: The candidate clearly has no idea that the district does a horrible job providing staff with reports.

Melissa, thanks for your work.
Jargon Galore said…
"The current School Board is fortunate to have exceptional voices with profound wisdom, and I know that I will learn from them."

Has the candidate noticed that some of Hersey's schools have greater than 90 percent of students that can't pass a state exam??? So, I must truly question the "profound wisdom" comment.
Anonymous said…
Evan Briggs is already starting to look pretty good, even without any further info.

That's only because Briggs is neither Hampson nor Robertson. If it were just between Robertson and Hampson, non-Hampson has advantage for apparently having a clean slate.

New Day
Goose said…
I would take "assess the placement of students in specialized schools" to be referring to students placed at NPAs in this context.
Anonymous said…
Paying lip service to the wisdom of the current board, and uncritically adopting the double-speak jargon of the SOFG nonsense are both huge turn-offs.

Since it is core to the candidate's reason for running, I think it would be helpful for her to explain what an inclusive classroom looks like. For instance, how do "universally designed lessons" get taught and where they have been used successfully? I'm especially curious because my Gen Ed high schooler was assigned to a Language Arts classroom this year that is 1/3 students with IEPs, 1/3 ELL students and 1/3 Gen Ed students. Is this what the candidate is promoting? Based on my family's experience, SPS does not know how to make this kind of classroom work so that all students are challenged and engaged.

Voter
Anonymous said…
Yes. Melissa. You should know by now that “special schools” means the $100k+ per year NPA schools which are simply warehouses for the unwanted students in the district. It does not mean boutique offerings like Nova or steam offerings like Cleveland, those are imperceptibly different than any other thing already available. You can’t fix any equity problem at all while you leave special education as a gaping hole where students are treated as trash. If you discount a POC by classifying them as disabled, then you’ve allowed yourself space to be utterly unaccountable to any sort of equity effort. She probably gives a nod to the current board not wishing to wake the beast.

Reader
Unknown said…
Her statement shows me that Special Ed is continuing to overtake race as SPS's main identity focus, which is starting to prove more appealing to white parents. I'm hearing less about targeted universalism and Black boys and more about inclusion and hiring more IAs. I'm looking forward to seeing more statements from candidates.

So it goes.

SP
Anonymous said…
New Day, Evan Briggs is Chandra Hampson's handpicked successor, so be careful who you vote for.
—SPS Mom
Ok SPS Mom, how do you know Robertson is Hampson's choice?
SPS Mom, just to say, I think Hampson will not run so yes, I think she's playing puppetmaster for at least one candidate.
Anonymous said…
I'm curious what readers here most want to see in a candidate for this seat. I'm in that zone and thinking of running. Maybe.

Last Minute Mom
Anonymous said…
I attend a lot of SPS meetings, not just the main board meetings, but many of the smaller committee/planning meetings that the public is welcome at, and Christie Robertson is frequently one of the only other people who doesn't have to be there who is there.

She shows up so reliably that I assumed she was there on behalf of the Special Education PTSA.

As someone pointed out in the Future of Seattle Public Schools Facebook group recently, during the budget meeting last week, fewer than 1/2 the elected board directors stayed to the end (at a time when the district is careening toward insolvency). Which means that literally *showing up to the meetings* will outperform the incumbents.

As the district closes and consolidates schools and SPS enrollment continues to shrink as the wave of kids that makes up the end of Generation Z ages out of the schools leaving a much smaller population of Generation Alpha in its wake, I wholeheartedly support Cristie Robertson because I know she will show up to the meetings. And I know because I have seen her there, time and again.

Thank you for showing up at all those meetings, Christie Robertson. And for all your work with the Special Education PTSA.

-Middle School Parent
Anonymous said…
Melissa, I said that Evan Briggs is Hampson's choice (not Robertson). It's secondhand info but I trust the source. We'll see who Hampson endorses.

—SPS Mom
Anonymous said…
@SPS Mom,

Now Hampson knows what to do to get Briggs elected; Hampson should just endorse Robertson to help Briggs! If that works, there will be new low for SPS board.

New Day
Last Minute Mom, here's what I want:
- someone who will push back on walking lockstep with the Superintendent
- someone who will push back if staff does not provide needed info. It's nuts that any director should have to ask over and over for data/info.
- someone who WILL watch over and know the schools in their region. Yes, directors are elected city-wide but you should know the schools in your region.
- someone who believes in ALL kids getting a good education
SPS Mom, sorry, that was an error on my part.
Anonymous said…
Hey Voter, apparently you have a beef with students with disabilities and with Robertson in particular. Let’s address your issues before you toss out this candidate. An “inclusive” classroom doesn’t have 1/3 disabled students and 1/3 ELL. That’s a disproportionate classroom. An inclusive classroom has natural proportions… inclusively. You also predictably mentioned that your student isn’t “challenged”. This is code for “advantaged”. Apparently you’re upset you aren’t getting any special perks or classrooms cherry picked to your demographic. Welcome to public ed. When the district cancelled its Access programs and its SEL programs, those students will all go somewhere. Did you have an opinion then? And that has already happened. And yes they’ll be in there with your student. The district absolutely must move to universal design and teach students nonjudgmentally wherever they are in their development. This what Christy is talking about. NPAs are a huge cost and liability to the district. See the Seattle Times.

Reader
Anonymous said…
@Last Minute Mom & Melissa:
I know it's too late but here are some answers I would like to see instead of the usual canned answers... I picked and chose because I honestly think some of these questions are just junk.

What motivated you to run? / How would you evaluate your success?

I am motivated to run but what I see as a district that is drifting in the wrong direction. Over the past several years, I believe the district has decided that striving for academic excellence is no longer its core mission. As families have observed this abrogation of what should be the district's focus, they have decided to leave the district resulting in the fall in enrollment. No family willingly chooses to pay $15,000 per year and up when there is a free option available. I would evaluate my success then by increasing the "capture rate" of Seattle's population as measured by the capture rate. This would indicate that families are attracted to the product that SPS is producing and buying in. If all students see that academic excellence is something to be celebrated and encouraged

Top three issues:
1) Shoring up the budget - this will be helped by improving enrollment
2) Renewed focus on academic excellence - I believe this will improve enrollment and feed into improving the budget through increased revenue per student.
3) Improving enrollment – At the next superintendent contract negotiation, incentive pay for increasing the capture rate, as measured by Birth-to-K ratio should be included. From 2009 to 2021, enrollment at SPS has fallen -6.4%. As the B-t-K ratio uses births five years prior to enrollment, examining the period from 2004 to 2016 shows that the population of Seattle grew ~24.4% and births during that period grew 21.6% using the B-t-K ratio to back calculate the births during that same time. Claiming that there are no students available in Seattle is a poor argument. They are there, it’s just that a very significant fraction of them are not enrolling in SPS. We need to figure out why

IB/AP for low income students:
Yes. But if the district continues to eliminate HCC and honors tracks from middle school, will we have students that are prepared to take and score well on these very rigorous exams?

What policies/changes to ensure all students... enabled to reach their fullest potential?
I would reinstate the HCC program rather than the ongoing outward and stealth elimination of it. Additionally, I would want to ensure that every student is tested for inclusion in the program and given the opportunity to attend one of the HCC schools if they choose to do so.

Discipline & equity: Provide a minimum standard for schools to meet, such as changing locks and managing points of entry and allow for steps up in security measures - up to and including officers in the school - as each school community decides which will provide the best level of safety for its school.

... Apart from the questionnaire: The fact that it seems the elephant in the room of falling enrollment in the context of population & birth growth will continue to just be ignored is depressing and indicative of the district's ongoing failings.

-OMEP
@Last Minute Mom said…
I would like to see increased transparency. The current board majority has pushed Student Focused Outcome Governance which has consumed huge amounts of administrative time and dollars.

The board has effectively eliminated committee meetings and it appears they plan on killing committee meetings and Ad Hoc committees to push anything and everything they want.

Student Focused Outcome Governance gives TOO much power to the board president and essentially eliminates the voices of minority board members. It used to be that minority board members could hold-back things in committee which is no longer possible.

New board members would benefit from the work done in committee meetings, as well.

Years ago, a district employee was involved in a scheme that resulted in a loss of more than $1M being diverted to friends. The board, at the time, INCREASED oversight via committee meetings. This board has complained- more than any other- of time involved in being a director, but overseeing $1.3B involves time. It shouldn't be forgotten that this board increased board approved expenditures from $250K to $1M for operations and board approved expenditures has gone from $1M to $5M for capital projects.

Safety MUST be a priority. As we have seen in the Seattle Times, the Ingraham community has not been given the support and reassurance that their children are safe. It is going to take an unacceptable two years to make sure classroom doors can lock from the inside- this is unacceptable.

For all of student focus, HUGE swaths of kids don't have the ability to pass a state exam. Hersey's district, for example, has at least a couple of schools with only 8-10 percent of the kids passing state exams.

This board has driven the district off the financial cliff.

@Last Minute Mom said…
The district is currently spending at least $1M per week (!) on transportation. There is a board director that wants to change the model to shore-up dollars. The board member is in the minority and needs support which she is unlikely to get from current board majority.
Anonymous said…
@Last Minute Mom, what I would like to see:
Balance.
Between solid oversight of central administration and support for people doing their best with what they have to work with.
Transparency and adherence to the board's own policies, not hiding/ignoring existing policies or changing policies without input/transparency
Seeking wide input rather than just input from those who have time to attend meetings or who are loud in groups with strong and narrow views
Stop equity by elimination and encouraging programming to the lowest common denominator
Balance between providing an excellent education for all students and a focus on groups not historically served well.
Do provide oversight and drive the district's mission and culture and direction - but stop viewing staff and especially schools, teachers, and your own city families as the enemy.
Balance - there has to be a way to be all in on equity - providing what each child needs to be successful; prioritizing those who need more resources to get what they need; and not expecting those who have been defined as "advantaged" to want nothing from the school or to give up on a great education for their kid. That's an impossible idea. Who wants to put their child in a system that openly views their hopes for their children with disdain?
Attention to multi-lingual learners in groups needing extra focus for equity. If you look at district data, achievement of MLL learners should be of tremendous concern.

In the district:
Transportation work: transportation needs to serve those who will need it. Don't spend money on routes with empty seats. Design it around those who indicate they will use it. Parents should decide in advance. And transparency - people should know the cost to everyone of holding transportation seats they only need occasionally. There's got to be a way that technology or partnering with outside experts could support more efficient use of transportation.

Rigor for everyone - and this is not "universal design." Universal design always sounds to me like an impossible job for teachers.

Inclusion that truly supports the needs of all learners, considerate of the voices of parents who are often not heard (because those with the highest need kids don't have time for advocacy), the teachers who are doing the work, and not just self-identified allies.

Inclusion that recognizes we do not have two groups of students - kids with IEPs and advantaged gen ed kids - but kids with many different kinds of challenges. Multi-lingual learners, students with ADHD and anxiety, students who need significant instruction to learn are all part of that gen ed group. Significant behaviors such as constant movement or yelling or hitting others make it very difficult for everyone in a classroom to learn. And being with 28 other kids is not necessarily the least stressful, most joyful learning environment for a child with major social-emotional or communication challenges.

Curriculum - get back to the actual adoption process, not curriculum jammed through by groups with loud voices. Then let teachers do their work, making what actually happens in classrooms interesting and engaging and exciting, with the curriculum as a backbone and guide but not the whole thing.

Schools and educators must be viewed as partners, not adversaries, even when they don't agree with a particular interest group's view.

-Seattle lifer
Anonymous said…
I posted anonymously about possibly running and used the name "Last Minute Mom." I see that
someone in the thread is using that name and I'm sorry if I took your existing handle. It was accidental. For the record, I posted only this comment and @lastminutemom did not.

"I'm curious what readers here most want to see in a candidate for this seat. I'm in that zone and thinking of running. Maybe.

Last Minute Mom"

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors