Why Doesn't the Seattle School Board Respect Highly Capable Students and Their Parents?
I just wanted to make sure that my readers are aware this incident happened at last Wednesday's Board meeting in a discussion around the Highly Capable program.
I want to note that the two items previous to this one - the principals' contract and the criteria for the next BEX levy - DID have staff available to answer questions. But not HC.
From my post:
Director Gina Topp wanted to know if Highly Capable was a service or program. She asked for consistency in the language and Rankin talked around it but said they have a month as this is an Intro item. Except next month, it will be rolled into the Consent agenda without any further discussion as they have been doing for months.
Then, Director Evan Briggs asked questions about what is replacing the cohort model and when will they see that timeline. These are not bad questions. "What is the future of Highly Capable in SPS? It feels like it's past time to know what's going on with that."
Rankin really wasn't having it. She made it sound like the document is pro forma as it is an annual thing for OSPI and that's what they are doing.
Joining Rankin in that dance was Superintendent Jones. He spoke in circles and didn't get to Briggs' question.
Briggs comes back, "How will we know if services are being delivered (Jones' and Rankin's point) if we don't know what services are?"
Rankin actually said they could look at the OSPI document and see the models and then "drill down on that, then we can figure out how to ask staff" what they are. Oh.
Topp asked for a future Work Session just on Highly Capable. Bravo! And when Topp pointed out how many students are in the program (between Advanced Learning and HCC), what was Rankin's snappy reply?
"It's like Lake Wobegon." Topp tried to continue as Rankin said, "And all the kids are above average" while the rest of the Board struggled to not laugh especially Sarju who did laugh out loud.
This is about 2:25:00 into the video if you want to watch it yourself.
I'm
sure Rankin thought that very funny. However, it is apparently what
President Rankin thinks of the program and, apparently, the students it
serves.
That would include many students who are twice-exceptional (2E, meaning both Special Education AND HC/AL).
You might want to consider writing the Board and asking them for more maturity and thoughtfulness because if this had been done to ANY other group of students, people would be furious.
Their address:
spsdirectors@seattleschools.org
Comments
Mean Girls
What is funny is that the CSIPs - each school's plan/notification of who they are, what they do and how they serve kids - are notorious for being just on paper. You can read the CSIPs and THINK stuff is happening when it's not. And, since the Superintendent is allowing schools to make their own decisions, HC service will only be as good as the principal wants to make it.
Face Palm
Do I think individual schools will help HC kids? Individual teachers? Nope. I think some might want to but they will likely not be supported. Watching that little meeting clip makes it crystal clear that they abandoned HCC with no plan whatsoever.
It seems like Briggs and Topp might care.. but they're obviously in the minority. I can see Rankin dismissing any such emails.
I'm racking my brain to think of what we can actually do about this situation that might help.
Why not offer HCC services at neighborhood schools, but make them available to anyone who wants them. Then it no longer becomes an us versus them battle. And if everyone's kid is above average and requests the more advanced academics , then we end up with a school full of incredibly smart kids. More power to us all.
NW Mom
One, the district DID have this option and they called it "advanced learning opportunity" and any kid at any non-HCC school could do it. Absolutely. But I've heard from parents it was an extra worksheet or lengthen of a report. That's not highly capable work.
Two, the district IS leaving it up to schools and they certainly can offer it to anyone but will they? And will it have genuine rigor? From my experience, no.
And you are going to continue the "above average" joke? Not here. Please don't do that again.
From what I've read, Mr Olson is very much into local control. For Hi Cap, that has not worked. But whatever the current policy is .... isn't working either. And I think Reykdal is fine with current laws on Hi Cap. The people on his staff follow the law. All they need is a report from a district, filed annually, saying they are doing something with the money the state is sending specifically for Hi Cap. It doesn't really matter where the money goes. One year, a district I know used some of the funds to buy AP history books.
We chose to keep our kids in the neighborhood schools for SEL reasons, but I fully understand that the right school looks different for different families. I never advocated for any schools or programs to be closed .
However, these replies are the type of communication I have come to expect.
And yes, there is gatekeepering. I asked if my oldest could be in the advanced walk to math program in his elementary school, but was told he didn't have the right scores. He did not get identified as HC until middle school. Based on his current academic track, I still believe he would have no problem with 4th grade advanced math.
I am just asking if there is a different way to approach this that might work for more families and improve communication across all stakeholders.
NW Mom
I graduated from a SPS HS as valedictorian, straight A's, 5's on APs (granted, we only had like 4 or 5 back then), 99%+ on standardized tests, bunch of scholarships, and went on to one of those schools with single-digit acceptance rates. Got a couple graduate degrees from universities back east you've all heard of.
Here's the thing about SPS: they were always more than happy for me to be quiet and sit in a corner, but admin wouldn't lift a finger themselves to provide any resources or help. I self-studied for several APs and SAT II subject tests (do they even do that any more?). Had to teach myself some areas our science classes didn't cover. Teachers were always supportive to the extent they could be, and were always happy to let me move up a grade, get out of PE to take more academic tests, and even just work myself ahead. I spent a good chunk of one elementary school year in the library reading on my own because they basically didn't know what to do with me half the time. I was a grade ahead of the advanced track in high school math and science just because I asked why I couldn't move ahead, kind of just did it, and no one seemed to care enough to stop me. I realized later that I actually had horrible study skills, but no one seemed to notice because I got A's anyway. I was well behaved and got along with some older kids that kind of took me under their wing. I was the only kid from my grade in some of my classes. That said, every time I asked for or needed support from the administration, counselors, principal, etc. - nothing. I tried to get a biology AP class supported. We had a willing teacher, but the principal told me that it should be the focus of the school to raise the bar for everyone, not have more advanced courses (sound familiar?). We had discussion days about privilege and race relations where other students would gripe about the students in the more advanced classes excluding other students, even though there were no admissions requirement or barriers to entry other than just signing up (again familiar?).
I tried for a couple years to switch HS to one with better math and science programs (you probably know which ones), but was denied due to the districts busing policies then in force, so was stuck. I even tried changing my address to a relative's house to change schools (no luck). The closest HS to me was pretty terrible and the best one I could get into was still a pretty long bus ride, but better that than the closer HS.
When it came to college I was advised by the school counselors to apply to UW and WWU like everyone else (no offense intended - they're great schools). My dad was a college dropout, and I didn't really know all that much about "college prep." Fortunately, I learned about other/more prestigious schools from friends whose parents had more education than mine.
I have my own kids now, and I live in a smaller suburb where my kids go to well funded, local schools that have excellent academics. If I were still in Seattle, my kids would go private, or more likely I'd live in a suburb for the schools.
Okay, so why did I just write that? Here's my 2 cents as someone that struggled with, and was considerably frustrated by, SPS for many years. Don't expect help. It's not coming. Whatever your kids are entitled to, and frankly deserve, isn't likely to happen. At best, SPS admin is not all that interested in supporting high-achieving kids. At worst, they'll actively try to squash success for "equity." My interactions with administration were almost always negative or discouraging, and not productive. What you CAN do is work with teachers and other like-minded parents to make the best of what you have for your kids. In my experience, teachers hate the admin's BS just as much as parents. Get your kids outside tutoring/learning opportunities. Have them start a study group. Look for opportunities with clubs or activities at UW. My best resources were the teachers that really cared, and other nerdy kids. Anyone from principle on up to board? Frankly, I wouldn't even bother trying to talk to them.
As a close, when I heard about what was happening with the gifted and talented programs (or whatever SPS calls them now) I was incredibly sad, but incredibly unsurprised. From this big nerd to all your little nerds: best of luck out there. Don't let the bastards grind you down.
The presence of advanced learners in a classroom can significantly enhance the learning environment, fostering a culture of academic excellence and motivation. However, when the distribution is skewed, students in areas with fewer advanced learners may not benefit from the same level of peer driven academic situations. This could widen the gap in educational outcomes and opportunities for students in different parts of town.
I actually think that the board hurt advanced learners in the south end of Seattle.
My only goal in posting was to provide some historical context as someone who spent an entire pre-college educational life in SPS as an advanced learner, and DID advocate for opportunities. I'm not sure putting the burden of advocacy on children makes a lot of sense--that's what parents are for (and mine weren't going to do it). Understand that I had the experiences I had, and made the choices I made based on my own judgment about the future.
So here is my view: the direction and outcomes within SPS is exactly what I predicted decades ago, based on the social and policy views expressed back then. The current state of SPS is both a natural and desired result of policy decisions that flow from the values of the policy-makers. Where I saw failure and decline, many saw progress and success. You don't need a lot of life experience to understand, even as a child, that you're dealing with forces fundamentally misaligned with your own values. That is what I was staring at, and what you're dealing with now. Personally, I decided that my priorities were opposed to those of SPS, and voted with my feet. You may well disagree with my decision. At this point, I'm just a bystander with no skin the game, so feel free to dismiss me as such.
However, on the value of excellence and providing the best possible opportunities for our kids, we appear to agree. As such, I wish you the best of luck,
-Unknown
-Unknown