tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post117221539028760864..comments2024-03-28T02:21:17.452-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Guest Post: Rep Gerry Pollet Meets with Charter School Parents and StudentsMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-84855387708123440812015-12-07T08:38:08.711-08:002015-12-07T08:38:08.711-08:00Scanning through the comments on this blog, I wond...Scanning through the comments on this blog, I wonder how many people here have actually visited Summit Sierra? You are all welcome - the school is very interested in people exploring, speaking with teachers and speaking with students. I'm a south Seattle Orca K-8 parent, a product of Summit K-12 (and AS#1), a past board member of Powerful Schools, a WMS parent and PTSA board member, a fundraiser for the Schools First levy campaign -- and the proud parent of a Summit Sierra kid, who opted to attend Summit because she did not feel attending a large school where tracking governs interaction was the public experience she wanted, but also wanted challenging academics. She's deeply engaged in project-based learning (in classrooms, with her peers and teachers). She is also able and supported to do much of her work at her own pace (in my own "alternative" experience, the support part was always challenging for our teachers, largely due to the way SPS only incidentally supported the mission). She has deep friendships with the most diverse set of friends she's ever had. Her classes are not small (25-26 or more) and extra-curriculars are limited. Teacher professional development is a huge priority (with a creative solution on how to enable that without exploiting teachers). The teachers have chosen the school - and seem well aware of their choices and trade-offs (they're adults, after all); many moved to Seattle to be a part of the project. Technology is an integral tool that enables a coherent experience for kids, teachers and parents, but as a former tech employee engaged in skills work (globally), it is the most appropriate implementation I've seen.<br /><br />I voted no twice on charters, but saw in the last initiative the opportunity for innovation and real examples that might be extended by districts and that our state was going to proceed in a careful and controlled way, including oversight by a board of people (appointed by an elected official) who believe strongly in quality public schools, with the ability to revoke a charter should things go haywire. I'm pleased that Summit has figured out new ways of doing things that can be sustained (once fully enrolled/over three more years) on the current state allotment per kid. I'd love to see districts learn from these schools, IF IT WILL SERVE THE KIDS WELL, and suggest we all take some time to go and see and talk to those who've opted for these programs to learn first hand what they're experiencing.MelissaPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-38155753254264926812015-11-24T22:23:25.909-08:002015-11-24T22:23:25.909-08:00I also have to add just because it's one of th...I also have to add just because it's one of those head scratching moment, the Crosscut's opinion piece used the US Chamber of Commerce's ranking (based on a survey of corporate lawyers) to showcase WA Supreme Court as being in the top 3 for judicial impartiality. Yet several paragraphs later, the author decried the Chamber for pouring $4 million of big money interests into the 2006 election of WA Supreme Court justices in order to influence the make up of the court. I understand the author is trying to contrast the $ amount to the pittance from labor unions.<br /><br /> I have high regards for our justices, but this opinion piece doesn't do them justice! <br /><br />readerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-52809349184782368392015-11-24T21:13:18.143-08:002015-11-24T21:13:18.143-08:00I found the Crosscut's opinion piece on WA sta...I found the Crosscut's opinion piece on WA state Supreme Court insightful. It's even more insightful when you go and read the sources for the piece. There are aspects and measures of the WA Court ranking which got left out of the article, which by doing so, made it an opinion. Regardless, I have to give it to U Chicago law for being self aware in understanding its attempt to rank state courts competitively is akin to the usefulness and meaningfulness of US World & News ranking of colleges. There is also a good analysis of why and how US Chamber of Commerce decided to rank state courts. It's fascinating and reveals there are far more murkiness than this just being a list. <br /><br />Courts are not immutable and static. I'm not sure why people need to paint institutions with such polarity. <br /><br />http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/405.pdf<br /><br />readerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-16794936994387824012015-11-24T17:11:32.153-08:002015-11-24T17:11:32.153-08:00Perry, you can't PLAY a lawyer on TV; you ARE ...Perry, you can't PLAY a lawyer on TV; you ARE a lawyer on TV. Raymond Burr...Now HE could play a lawyer on TV, boy-howdy... ; )seattle citizenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16724175257161649500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-35480153502324699582015-11-24T15:37:23.099-08:002015-11-24T15:37:23.099-08:00I was only responding to @leilamas' comment th...I was only responding to @leilamas' comment that there were not any legal arguments against the court's decision. I'm not agreeing with those arguments nor could I make them myself. I'm not a lawyer (although I might play one on TV). I just know there were legal arguments with the court's decision. That's all.<br /><br />Perry MasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-59619065419678804532015-11-24T15:27:07.066-08:002015-11-24T15:27:07.066-08:00Yes, you're right Melissa. Bad copy editing on...Yes, you're right Melissa. Bad copy editing on my part. <br /><br />I think I meant to write something like this: Didn't the legislator's brief to the court say that the legislature had allocated general funds to go to charter schools?<br /><br />LisaGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-4846835402899356782015-11-24T15:05:39.447-08:002015-11-24T15:05:39.447-08:00Ah, Lisa, you used the word "legislature"...Ah, Lisa, you used the word "legislature" which would have meant the entire group, but it's group of legislators. Kind of different. <br /><br />Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-2762489036854378072015-11-24T14:19:24.492-08:002015-11-24T14:19:24.492-08:00Lynn asked me what my preferred outcome for this d...Lynn asked me what my preferred outcome for this discussion was.<br /><br />I was happy to learn there was at least one project-based school in the Seattle school district, and used that opportunity to ask if there were any more. I had looked around, but hadn't been able to find out that information. It appears that there are 4 public schools in the Seattle area that offer this type of curriculum.<br /><br />Other than that, Rep. Pollet made some comments which seemed surprising, so I was trying to find out what they were based on. I guess they were more ethos/pathos than logos.<br /><br />LisaGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-86563709354959519912015-11-24T14:10:17.913-08:002015-11-24T14:10:17.913-08:00Melissa wrote "I was not aware the "legi...Melissa wrote "I was not aware the "legislature" sent a brief to the court. I think that would have made news."<br /><br />I don't know why it didn't make news, but here it is:<br />https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2487584/memorandum-of-amici-legislators-charter-school.pdf<br /><br />page 3 of the memorandum (but page 7 of the .pdf) says "The operating 2015-17 budget expressly stated: State general fund appropriations distributed through part V of this act for the operation and administration of charter schools as provided in chapter 28A.710 RCW shall not include state common school levy revenues collected under RCW 84.52.065.<br /><br />LisaGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-88119908084758485302015-11-24T13:18:34.103-08:002015-11-24T13:18:34.103-08:00LisaG,
What is your preferred outcome from this d...LisaG,<br /><br />What is your preferred outcome from this discussion? Are you hoping to influence those readers who are undecided on the charter question? Would you like to talk about what could/should happen to these students next month?<br /><br />As I've pointed out in the past, parents in Washington are required to ensure their children are attending public schools, attending approved private schools or receiving home-based instruction. Have they already notified their resident districts that they are providing home-based instruction? (And does attending a charter school qualify?) If the schools are to be privately funded for the remainder of the year, they will need to apply with OSPI for approved private school status. Lynnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-5462986963992141092015-11-24T13:15:56.329-08:002015-11-24T13:15:56.329-08:00Lisa, that point has been made before. That is the...Lisa, that point has been made before. That is the key point - charters aren't common schools, can't get those school funds and now it's up to the Legislature to find the money (and tell some other program/department that cuts are coming.) <br /><br />I was not aware the "legislature" sent a brief to the court. I think that would have made news.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-36178570848416683372015-11-24T13:03:09.698-08:002015-11-24T13:03:09.698-08:00Watching said " From Crosscut:
"Recent ...Watching said " From Crosscut:<br /><br />"Recent attacks levied at the integrity of Washington’s State Supreme Court justices are simply unfounded, factually and legally...."<br /><br />And thanks to suep's comment on another post, I learned from this Lines of Influence chart (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzZWF0dGxlZHVjYXRpb24yMDEyfGd4Ojc5NjZmYTc4ZGQ4NWYyZDc) that Crosscut received $400,000 from Gates.<br /><br />Does that mean anything from Crosscut is suspect? Or does that mean that not everything that receives money from Gates is tarnished?<br /><br />LisaGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-86132810320560096802015-11-24T12:41:07.860-08:002015-11-24T12:41:07.860-08:00@leilamas
I guess my point about the charter scho...@leilamas<br /><br />I guess my point about the charter schools and unions was more that it was one of several times in the guest post that Rep. Pollet was not exactly precise with what he said.<br /><br />It was my first exposure to him, so now I know that his statements might not have been fact checked.<br /><br />LisaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-54984364889581827522015-11-24T12:36:55.915-08:002015-11-24T12:36:55.915-08:00Charlie said "Can you articulate a legal argu...Charlie said "Can you articulate a legal argument against the decision?"<br /><br />Didn't the legislature in their brief to the court say that they had allocated general funds to go to charter schools? <br /><br />If general funds are being used, then it doesn't matter whether charter schools are common schools, just like it wouldn't matter that road repair isn't a common school.<br /><br />LisaG Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-67662938912741122602015-11-24T12:19:01.786-08:002015-11-24T12:19:01.786-08:00Perry, and... There are friend of the court briefs...Perry, and... There are friend of the court briefs submitted all the time that support one or the other side. That there were ones in this case is not surprising. But it doesn't mean the Court was necessarily wrong in the first place.<br /><br />And Watching is right; others in the country look to our Supreme Court as one the best. <br /><br />I will point out that Randy Dorn has said - over and over, both before the election and after - that he is willing to help oversee charters. In fact, that is the second constitutional issue that may have to go back to court to be addressed.<br /><br />Article 3 of the constitution is where executive department is created including SSPI.<br /><br />This is his duty:<br /><br />The superintendent of public instruction shall have supervision over all matters pertaining to public schools, and shall perform such specific duties as may be prescribed by law.<br /><br />Now, charters are not "public schools" under the "common schools" definition in this case. So, they don't have to be under that office's supervision. But if they DID, that would make them common schools being under an elected official's supervision, make them eligible for school funds and this would all be moot.<br /><br />But that's charter schools - they want their freedom. Well, in this case, they got it.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-43125122149388292722015-11-24T11:23:24.877-08:002015-11-24T11:23:24.877-08:00@Perry Mason,
I have read those. At least some of ...@Perry Mason,<br />I have read those. At least some of them. They all seem to complain that the law used as the basis for the decision is old. As if that somehow negated it. A couple others have said that the charter schools are common schools because the charter school law says that they are common schools. That's nutso. The charters don't meet any of the criteria for common schools. They aren't under the authority of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. They aren't part of a uniform system of schools. They aren't governed by elected boards. They are not common schools.<br /><br />There may well be some better legal argument against the decision, but we're not seeing that argument made by anyone. Liv Finne isn't making it. The charter school operators aren't making it. The charter school supporters aren't making it. Maybe their lawyers made it, but not with any success.<br /><br />Can you articulate a legal argument against the decision?Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-64100702904837719852015-11-24T10:06:30.940-08:002015-11-24T10:06:30.940-08:00@leilamas - There were several briefs submitted to...@leilamas - There were several briefs submitted to the court --- from our current AG, former AGs, the charter schools association, et al --- making legal arguments that the court got it wrong. You can look up these briefs on the court's website to read the legal arguments.<br /><br />Perry MasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-3609009489618540822015-11-24T10:05:06.789-08:002015-11-24T10:05:06.789-08:00We were told be those that pushed I 1240 that I 12...We were told be those that pushed I 1240 that I 1240 WAS constitutional and that we had the best charter school law in the country.I agree with leilalmas. From Crosscut:<br /><br />"Recent attacks levied at the integrity of Washington’s State Supreme Court justices are simply unfounded, factually and legally. All of these attacks have come from special-interest groups with limited, specific agendas and preferred outcomes.<br /><br />The simple truth is this: Washington’s Supreme Court is ranked among the most respected state supreme courts in the nation. It has earned this distinction based on independent studies by legal scholars who have scrutinized our nation’s top courts for the quality of their opinions, independence and productivity."<br /><br />http://crosscut.com/2015/10/opinion-attacks-on-washington-state-supreme-court-are-unfounded/<br /><br /><br />Watchingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-8589510293368727112015-11-24T08:15:28.270-08:002015-11-24T08:15:28.270-08:00I'm glad that Liv Finne comments here. It'...I'm glad that Liv Finne comments here. It's good to hear from people with a different perspective.<br /><br />I also think it's very telling that there have been only three arguments made against the Supreme Court decision.<br />1. Emotional - the Court is closing these schools on 1,200 students, how mean.<br />2. Political - the Court is negating the Will of the People.<br />3. Conspiratorial - seven of the nine Justices should have recused themselves from the case because the WEA was a plaintiff and contributed to their campaigns.<br /><br />What's missing, of course, is a legal argument. That's pretty strong evidence that the Court, which is supposed to base their decision on the law rather than emotions or politics, made the right decision.leilamashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09697527221309261613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-4828987998791851012015-11-24T08:10:00.885-08:002015-11-24T08:10:00.885-08:00Tell ya what. Let's have a charter school teac...Tell ya what. Let's have a charter school teachers' union first. And then let's have that union want to affiliate with the WEA, and then we can find out if the law allows it and if the WEA allows it. Until then, it's too hypothetical to bother with.leilamashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09697527221309261613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-43540932495372592932015-11-24T07:34:23.238-08:002015-11-24T07:34:23.238-08:00Not sure, LisaG - there could be some aspect of th...Not sure, LisaG - there could be some aspect of the law, or some reading of it, that precludes a charter union from joining WEA. For instance, charter employees "must be separate from other bargaining units in school districts" might mean that their little union must be separate from, cannot join, the bargaining unit (union) of the SEA, which, since it's a subsidiary of WEA, might mean they can't join the WEA. I don't know. Melissa states that it's in the law; perhaps it is. As I said, I might play a lawyer on TV, but I ha'en't a clue, as they say in bonnie Scotland....<br />Regardless, I hold to my claim that they would have little power.seattle citizenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16724175257161649500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-15615918167147853272015-11-24T07:20:32.227-08:002015-11-24T07:20:32.227-08:00seattle citizen at 8:31
I agree that they would n...seattle citizen at 8:31<br /><br />I agree that they would not have a lot of bargaining power, but I would think that WEA would want them as members since at least some of them have taught at other WA schools before (and probably after).<br /><br />But there does seem to be a big difference between it wouldn't do them much good to be unionized, and "It’s the union which her new school’s teachers are barred from joining by the charter school law." as Rep. Pollet said in his guest blog post.<br /><br />LisaGAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-35405657786899216482015-11-24T01:38:48.048-08:002015-11-24T01:38:48.048-08:00Summit isn't in Spokane, I wasn't referrin...Summit isn't in Spokane, I wasn't referring to Spokane :)<br />But yes, it's messy and unfortunate for allheidi bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08184134576347467444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-12805812956564995742015-11-23T20:32:05.557-08:002015-11-23T20:32:05.557-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.seattle citizenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16724175257161649500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-58019771260698648742015-11-23T20:31:40.247-08:002015-11-23T20:31:40.247-08:00Each district has its own bargaining unit. Oh, I s...Each district has its own bargaining unit. Oh, I see what you're getting at: the law says that a charter school's union can't affiliate with another bargaining unit in that district, not that it can't affiliate with the overarching state WEA (or NEA.) Interesting point.<br />I suppose...maybe...a charter school's union could maybe perhaps (a cording to the law...maybe) affiliate with WEA. I just see little bargaining power in such a teeny union.<br />Again, someone with more legal knowledge than I would have to respond. Thanks for hammering at the point - I get what you're saying now and maybe...maybe my interpretation of the law is wrong.<br />This is why we have supreme court judges: laws are complicated. ; )seattle citizenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16724175257161649500noreply@blogger.com