Closing Seattle Schools; The Big Picture (Part 1)

Here are some higher level thoughts from Seattle Schools on what they are trying to do. I pulled out what I thought were key comments in their documentation on Well-Resourced Schools. 

This plan begins with our schools that serve our preschool through 5th grade students.

Right there, you have a issue that the district should publicly acknowledge. Their funded role is for K-12 and yet they are going to put Pre-K near the top of the list of things in a well-resourced K-5 elementary.

If that is true, they need to renegotiate with the City on Pre-K. It's ridiculous that the City pays no rent for the space AND withholds payment to the district until they see metrics of their liking. And, Pre-K pushes out other uses for K-5 buildings.

For example:

Our plans for a well-resourced school system includes space for two Pre-K classrooms at every single elementary school. SPS knows that early childhood education is a critical part of a well-resourced schools system so Pre-K is an important consideration as we plan for well-resourced schools and school closures.

 We don’t currently have Pre-K available at every elementary school but we’re planning now so that every school will have space for Pre-K and we can continue expanding access alongside with our partners in the Seattle City Department of Education and Early Learning (DEEL). 

Special education services can also connect with PreK in every school so many students with disabilities can transition directly from PreK to kindergarten without switching schools.  

The latter sentence is a good point but they are not going to put Special Education Pre-K in every K-5. I can ask but I doubt it.

Bigger schools will require more before/ after care for students. Is there a plan to expand afterschool programs to serve additional students? Will there be space for after care programs to operate?

For many families after school care is critical. We will be working closely with our licensed childcare partners and other after school partners to identify ways their services can be maintained and expanded to meet increased demand in schools with more students. There will not be as many dedicated spaces for after school care, and this will require creativity, space sharing, and deeper partnership in order to meet the need. 

That paragraph above is quite the word salad.  So before/after school childcare or Pre-K? It appears SPS has made that decision.

Our primary responsibility is to create schools that are equitable and excellent, ensuring that we operate within our resources to maintain the stability and health of our district for the future. 

A district that seems to have an endless stream of dollars to pay senior leadership large salaries as well as many paid consultants really can't be said to "operate within our resources."

We believe that high-quality instruction includes creating schools that are culturally responsive and provide inclusion of all students in meaningful ways.

My question here would be - in hard, cold dollars - what is the cost for culturally responsive schools?  Not that it is not something the district shouldn't be doing, especially in terms of the Strategic Plan. But yes, what are the costs?

If you look at the district website, they are working for culturally responsive meals, culturally responsive workforce, culturally responsive teaching and so on. 

If the district is saying this value is important, they need to clearly define it.

From "Criteria, Data and Equity"

The current system, which provides most resources based on enrollment, gives students uneven access to core services including art and music, counselors/social workers and support staff.

These services were key themes that community members identified as essential and beloved parts of their child’s education in fall 2023 Well-Resourced Schools engagement.

Students of color, especially Black students, are disproportionately served in schools that are too small (< 350 students) for sustainable allocation of the resources and services they need and deserve. With declining enrollment and a structural budget deficit these gaps in core student services will only get worse without action. 

The district gives the impression that some schools have more students of color because of district planning or district choosing. Those schools have more students of color because of historical redlining that created population centers. Add to that higher housing costs and you are not going to see big change.

I also ask - where is the data for the declining enrollment so that parents can see the areas of most concern. Are there specific areas or the decline is mostly uniform throughout the city?

Vision (partial)

Support special education and inclusionary practices, special education intensive services available in EVERY elementary school.

Multilingual learners supported in their neighborhood school.

Expand access to advanced learning by providing service in all elementary schools.

A racially equitable outcome will do a better job of fulfilling Policy 2200, equitable access to programs and services:

Engage stakeholders in a timely and publicly visible manner by informing, involving, and/or consulting with them as appropriate, and consider their input in the decision-making process when feasible; 

I do want to speak to each of these programs in a separate post because, while it may sound good to have all this programs in every school, the reality may be a watered-down future for them.

Lastly, the public engagement has been opaque and secretive, not "publicly visible." The Board should have published who they talked to, why they chose those groups, and the documentation for these choices.

Option schools

Option schools historically provided capacity relief for overcrowded schools; today, they draw enrollment and resources from neighborhood schools.

Both option and neighborhood schools develop unique instructional models to serve their student and communities.

Option schools disproportionately serve students who have traditionally had additional access to additional educational resources.

Most option schools serve a smaller proportion of students who are eligible for free and reduced school meals compared to the demographics of their geographical zone.

See all of that above? That's the fine hand of former director Chandra Hampson's one-woman rage campaign against Option Schools. 

The first sentence? Option Schools are popular and that's not good for the district? But maybe the district should be considering what schools are popular AND have a consistent waitlist, no matter if attendance OR Option.

Second sentence? Yes, one unique instructional model that is VERY popular with a consistent waitlist is the Boren STEM program. And yet it's on the chopping block.

Third sentence? The Option Schools are open to all within their geozones. Every single region has Option Schools. It's unclear to me why they have to go after all the Option Schools, rather than just the underenrolled ones. It's especially hard to understand how SPS was deliberately trying to fail Licton Springs K-8  for years and yet moved the program into a renovated building. Wonder what the plan is for that Webster building now? 

Fourth sentence? I'd like to see these numbers especially since this point is being used to close nearly ALL Option Schools.

It truly looks like a hit against Option and K-8 schools.

I also see this overall as a move to cookie-cutter schools which had long been something that no one wanted for Seattle Schools.