tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post4535483643730742758..comments2024-03-28T02:21:17.452-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Bill in Support of Highly Capable ServicesMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-79592390025109891842018-01-28T14:02:40.427-08:002018-01-28T14:02:40.427-08:00Also, while I'm at it, you are the one who nee...Also, while I'm at it, you are the one who needs to rethink your paradigm. First, you say this: <i>The new kids who qualify will receive services appropriate to THEM, which may be different from the services your kids needed or got. Accelerating two years ahead may not be needed, desirable or advisable for many HC and/or gifted students.</i> And hallelujah for that, it's absolutely true, and desirable, though good luck seeing it happen in practice.<br /><br />But your other comment <i>plus supporting Spectrum as a Bush League program for historically underserved students</i> flies in the face of the above. Somehow you have it stuck in your head that anything less than "full fledged HCC" is somehow bush league. Total BS. Different kids need different programs or services, and what matters is that they're at an appropriate level. I know you understand this, but you still make completely stupid, inconsistent comments like this one. Your rage shows through in a lack of logic, and yet I know you will come up with some ridiculous reasoning to justify a rude comment.<br /><br />znoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-62541879190899840942018-01-28T13:54:58.404-08:002018-01-28T13:54:58.404-08:00My question has nothing to do with state law, or N...My question has nothing to do with state law, or NAGC practices, or anything else. It was simply asking your opinion. But you know your answer will not serve your goal of warping all the data into your own world view, so you avoid it. Sad, but not unexpected.<br /><br />Here's an even more simple question for you that requires no linkage to anything else: <br /><br />Do you think truly Gifted Kids (not the bright kids that make up probably 2/3 of today's current HC cohort) appear at random, i.e. equally represented among all socioeconomic levels?znoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-22367994788186465622018-01-28T00:55:03.244-08:002018-01-28T00:55:03.244-08:00correction from above:
Are you truly unaware that...correction from above:<br /><br />Are you truly unaware that Rainier Scholars had to be formed largely as a response to the fact that so many historically underserved STUDENTS...<br /><br />Lip ServiceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-38868471512230612132018-01-28T00:51:03.000-08:002018-01-28T00:51:03.000-08:00Your question will be moot, which is how I answere...Your question will be moot, which is how I answered it.<br /><br />HCC, the renamed version of APP, is not going to be the only model anymore. Get it?<br /><br />HC, by state law, is a service, not a model or program. The SPS version of HC has been excluding students who deserve services, and uses outdated identification and service delivery (because it's currently operating as strictly a program).<br /><br />The new kids who qualify will receive services appropriate to THEM, which may be different from the services your kids needed or got. Accelerating two years ahead may not be needed, desirable or advisable for many HC and/or gifted students.<br /><br />You really need to shift your paradigm. It's an outdated one and, as the bill outlines, has gone against best practices by excluding many children.<br /><br />I did already say that "a bunch" will qualify because they will. They are also a priority per the state:<br /><br />"District practices for identifying the most highly capable students must prioritize equitable identification of low-income students."<br /><br />Reading the bill really will help with your understanding. I'm through answering your questions that are easily spelled out for you in the bill.<br /><br />It's not rocket science. It has been in NAGC as best practices for a long time now, as well as in the research of De Bonte and other experts.<br /><br />Lip Service<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-28561307575255185002018-01-27T23:52:49.539-08:002018-01-27T23:52:49.539-08:00Yeah, as expected, you wouldn't answer that si...Yeah, as expected, you wouldn't answer that simple question. To be clear, that's a (1) AND (2), not either/or, which would be a silly question. Try again, I'm waiting. We're all waiting.<br /><br />It's sick that by your own description you apparently believe it's a good idea to throw (any) kids who are unprepared for (any) class into said class. What kind of sadist does that? And by the way, I've seen that firsthand in HCC classes already. Especially when some of the less effective qualification measures were in place in some years. <br /><br />The real world isn't like your pie in the sky version, it's VERY unpleasant for all concerned, but mostly for the kid(s) who are struggling mightily in a class that's working significantly above their level. You end up with a situation where NO ONE is happy. The teacher's workload goes up. And the struggling student not only has to work twice as hard as everyone else (with no guarantee of success), but they have to deal with the stares and glares from the other kids. They are kids after all. It's not like they all don't know who's far behind, it's quite obvious to everyone, including the struggling kids. For precious few, that can serve as motivation, but from what I've seen myself it's usually just frustration and serves to defeat the kids' self esteem. It's especially troubling when the struggling kid doesn't look like the other kids in the class, because it feeds negative stereotypes that I want to see disappear. The kids need support, not to be thrown into a fire.<br /><br />Worst of all, these are bright kids who would be far ahead of the other students in a typical classroom and likely successful and learning in a moderately accelerated honors class or what used to be Spectrum. Some of these kids would pick up steam and be ready for HCC work with some of that kind of support, but not all. Having a support system in place for them wherever they (and everyone) land is the best we could hope for, but nope, somehow you think HCC is "the goal" that everyone should be striving for.<br /><br />HCC is NOT a goal, the intent is that it's an intervention for kids who truly cannot be served in a typical classroom. Unfortunately it's grown into a monster, but stop feeding the ridiculous frenzied notions that it's something every kid should want and strive for, because it will never and should never be that.<br /><br />Still waiting for your answer to my simple question.znoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-69178805993100832132018-01-27T20:41:14.449-08:002018-01-27T20:41:14.449-08:00@z
Are you truly unaware that Rainier Scholars ha...@z<br /><br />Are you truly unaware that Rainier Scholars had to be formed largely as a response to the fact that so many historically underserved services have been excluded from APP/HCC (and formerly Spectrum)?<br /><br />This quote comes to mind with the cluelessness of your comment: "HBCUs are real pioneers when it comes to school choice,” DeVos said.<br /><br />And, do you realize that HCC qualifications for underserved students will change so that they no longer have to "be prepared for an HCC class"? <br /><br />"This misunderstanding turns multiple measures into multiple hurdles that disproportionately limit identification of low-income and other historically underrepresented students, who may have variable scores despite high cognitive potential."<br /><br />Local norms will be used, too. Read the bill before reacting. Yes, a "bunch" of kids will now qualify.<br /><br />http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6508.htm<br /><br />Lip ServiceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-9615187841470956992018-01-27T16:52:26.272-08:002018-01-27T16:52:26.272-08:00plus supporting Spectrum as a Bush League program ...<i>plus supporting Spectrum as a Bush League program for historically underserved students</i><br /><br />Seriously? This is offensive. You've slipped and let your true colors show. The program label doesn't matter, the fact that you do not support helping cognitively capable students who haven't had the same privileges at home bridge the gap speaks volumes.<br /><br />I guess you consider Rainier Scholars to be "Bush League" too, because it's not HCC? Wow, just wow. You are a piece of work.<br /><br />I have one simple question, if you dare. Do you believe there are a bunch of historically underserved but HC-capable kids in Seattle that:<br />1) have not already been identified as HC qualified<br />2) are already prepared for an HCC class (elem) or classes (MS/HS)<br /><br />I don't mean maybe-possibly one or two in a district of 50k, I mean enough to justify a comment like what you made above.znoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-159099476118882192018-01-27T16:34:01.684-08:002018-01-27T16:34:01.684-08:00Lip Service, enough with the attacks. You think K...Lip Service, enough with the attacks. You think Kellie and I are wrong. We get that. Move on with solutions.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-37403440735670407272018-01-27T15:31:08.323-08:002018-01-27T15:31:08.323-08:00or eliminate hcc hs pathways and think the same pi...or eliminate hcc hs pathways and think the same pipe dream.<br /><br />no capsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-15233839056535779092018-01-27T13:50:45.600-08:002018-01-27T13:50:45.600-08:00@ Lip Service, think about it. You (or someone app...@ Lip Service, think about it. You (or someone appears to be you or at least thinks just like you) have in the past advocated for changes to the highly capable program so that it accepts fewer *high achievers who aren't really all that gifted* and more underrepresented students who aren't high achieving but who are cognitively gifted. Great-and yes, we absolutely should find and serve those kids. However, as you have also acknowledged, our current HCC services are NOT geared toward cognitively gifted kids regardless of achievement. HCC is geared toward cognitively gifted kids who are ALSO academic high achievers, so the curriculum relies not on strategies that are more tailored to the needs of cognitive outliers, but rather on pure, simple (and cheap) acceleration. Unfortunately, that makes it much more challenging to find those gifted-but-low-achieving and simply throw them into HCC, as they are likely years behind in the curriculum. That's where a tailored, target-group-specific, intensive talent development program could really come in handy. It would not be a "bush league" or "runner up" program any more than Rainier Scholars is such a program. Or any more than special ed is, or ELL services are, or any other program designed to target a group with different needs. Providing programs specific to the needs of certain groups, to help make up for the additional challenges they face, is the very definition of equity. Equity means providing something to help mitigate the existing inequities. It's hard to see how dedicating resources and providing intensive academic support services to help promising students from underrepresented groups qualify for and/or be ready to thrive in HCC could be anything but a move toward greater equity. You seem to have a bizarre idea of how equity is achieved--you don't just change eligibility criteria suddenly, like magic, find that everything is peachy. <br /><br />DisAPPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-82901827942333203072018-01-27T07:02:08.468-08:002018-01-27T07:02:08.468-08:00@ Lip Service,
Seriously? Worst.Apology.Ever.
C...@ Lip Service,<br /><br />Seriously? Worst.Apology.Ever.<br /><br />Can you issue me a merit badge that reads "Both Implicit and Complicit Support for the Status Quo" I think I might enjoy wearing my merit badge the next time, I sit through another tedious meeting that is the foundation of the governance process. It would also help everyone else to stop mistaking me for a harmless soccer mom. Win-Win!<br /><br />I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that you have dealt with racism to the point where you are genuinely reading subtext in my words (that isn't there) or that other people have used these same words that I am using but for nefarious purposes. <br /><br />FWIW, I am a staunch believer in multiple types of programs, because one size does not fit all. And also because kids needs change drastically between PreK and high school and you never know what challenges are going to arise or what you might need later. <br /><br />I tend to think of various programs as simple flavors of ice cream. People may have preferences and opinions about their favorite flavor but that doesn't not make one flavor better than another. I have truly no clue why you would believe that ADDITIONAL programs, over and above the minimum mandated by the state, is so problematic but ... that is the foundation of democracy. Everyone gets a vote. Everyone gets an opinion. <br /><br /> <br />kelliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01322661098626555834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-57723555007003651412018-01-26T21:02:21.240-08:002018-01-26T21:02:21.240-08:00your support for hcc is less whites. period. less ...your support for hcc is less whites. period. less whites would end up with less hcc. the state wants less missing of frl/ell hcc. EVERYONE DOES. do you? to advocate to get rid of private testing as it adds more whites (folks like you have advocated for such) is wrong headed. the state does not support that (and i do believe that change will be challenged). but you do.<br /> <br /><br />you and the state will never be on the same page. your attempts are race based and theirs are need base. non-white doesn't mean more need. frl/ell most likely does. and how do (you/or) teachers teach those white kids in their class? they need more, need less? need the same? they need the same regardless of the pigment of their skin, right. <br /><br />if you were to say doing more with nothing more you will probably, and unfortunately, get the same result. the state is offering more for more universal testing. great. and pd is great. but that really is all they are offering to sps. surprise! sps will not have much else to change as they work to be the standard of the state and nation. and they use the sbac for achievement (wrong). you need to have something to decide who are the most in need. <br /><br />no caps <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-54074988339516266162018-01-26T20:12:47.819-08:002018-01-26T20:12:47.819-08:00Your support for Spectrum as a minor league progra...Your support for Spectrum as a minor league program for students to get up to the HCC achievement cut-off is not new. In fact, you just did an "amen" to nocaps in this very thread regarding Spectrum.<br /><br />You have no record at all of supporting changes in HCC entrance requirements on this blog. <br /><br />If your history of not advocating for changing identification protocols, plus supporting Spectrum as a Bush League program for historically underserved students, is not correct, please accept my apologies.<br /><br />Otherwise, your support for the status quo has been both implicit and complicit in terms of HCC.<br /><br />Lip Service<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-5504599889278418662018-01-26T19:18:58.242-08:002018-01-26T19:18:58.242-08:00@ Lip Service,
Whoa, please find a quote from me...@ Lip Service, <br /><br />Whoa, please find a quote from me where I say I support HC entrance criteria, particularly SPS's version of entrance criteria. I have never said that. It is always possible that something I did say was unclear, but .... that would be a stretch. <br /><br />It would be a huge stretch, because I have also stated (under my consistent moniker) that the procedure that SPS uses is not equitable. In addition to missing historically underserved students, it is not age normed and misses younger students with summer birthdays and captures red-shirts, it misses most 2e students. <br /><br />Frankly some of the "cut off" procedures over the years have been downright barbaric, like using MAP scores as exclusionary tools, rather than identification tools. Kids who raced through a silly test to get to recess, nope, you are now not qualified, regardless of your Cogat. <br /><br />I have said many, many times, that this district is large enough to have multiple types of programs. I have also clarified many times, that multiple programs is not some hidden code for not doing equitable identification. <br /><br />If you have been around for as long as you claim, then you likely remember the outreach that was done one year (during the MGJ era) for students of color who scored a 4 on the MSP to test for HC services. I remember the board meeting when it was reported that there was a profound lack of interested in the current program but that the results showed there would be interest in programs closer to home and a program that had a broader range of abilities. <br /><br />To be extra clear, I am thrilled that this has made its way to the legislature and I think that legislative action and clarity will be critical for creating any meaningful change in HC services. <br /><br />To be blunt, doing more than the minimum, has always been a option for SPS. SPS has the ability to create and implement programs. They have the ability to do more than simply provide the bare minimum required by law in the least expensive format. IMHO, continuing to remind people that the legal requirement is a FLOOR, not a ceiling is an important part of this discussion. <br /><br /><br /> <br />kelliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01322661098626555834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-90234670776676650172018-01-26T17:14:01.478-08:002018-01-26T17:14:01.478-08:00Wow, thanks, Lip Service. NO one would have known ...Wow, thanks, Lip Service. NO one would have known Spectrum was dead if not for you.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-40704107691121950612018-01-26T16:44:35.536-08:002018-01-26T16:44:35.536-08:00"Adding a program for historical underserved ..."Adding a program for historical underserved communities that don't meet the HC cutoffs is something that SPS could do."<br /><br />@kellie--you are on record on this blog for supporting the HCC entrance criteria, but having a Spectrum-type of program to get the SE students up-to-par. In fact, you are still talking about "cut-off" scores.<br /><br />That is precisely the intent of the new bill, which makes it clear that such an approach to HC has been discriminatory:<br /><br />"This misunderstanding turns multiple measures into multiple hurdles that disproportionately limit identification of low-income and other historically underrepresented students, who may have variable scores despite high cognitive potential."<br /><br />http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6508.htm<br /><br />"District practices for identifying the most highly capable students must prioritize equitable identification of low-income students."<br /><br />http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=28A.185.020<br /><br />Btw, the Spectrum ship has sailed.<br /><br />Lip Service<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-49349279066057229372018-01-26T14:29:29.785-08:002018-01-26T14:29:29.785-08:00That program (call it Spectrum or Advanced Learnin...That program (call it Spectrum or Advanced Learning Opportunities or Horizon or whatever) could also serve as a springboard for underserved students. Martin Luther King Jr. skipped ninth grade, so he went directly from eighth grade to tenth grade. Then he completed tenth grade. Then, that whole thing worked out so well for him that he skipped 11th grade. So he went directly from tenth grade to 12th grade. Then he graduated and went to Morehouse College at age 15.<br /><br />This is the kind of program we need in Seattle. A program (like Spectrum) that would allow students to accelerate by one year. And then from among those students, there would be some for whom accelerating a second year would be a good choice. There would be many for whom accelerating a second year was not a good choice. SPS is selling kids short by insisting that nobody skip anything. <br /><br />According to the link below, at Morehouse Martin "was a popular student, especially with his female classmates, but an unmotivated student who floated though his first two years." We need SPS to start looking at students like Martin who have a tremendous amount of potential even if they seem unmotivated and not that into school, and help them live up to their fullest potential regardless of the color of their skin. This bill would help. And a program like Spectrum would help.<br /><br />It's a social justice issue.<br /><br />https://www.biography.com/people/martin-luther-king-jr-9365086MLK Giftednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-2568093014946525152018-01-26T11:19:54.160-08:002018-01-26T11:19:54.160-08:00@ Lip Service,
As you well know, I am supporter ...@ Lip Service, <br /><br />As you well know, I am supporter of multiple programs for AL. One size does not fit all.<br /><br />Adding a program for historical underserved communities that don't meet the HC cutoffs is something that SPS could do. IN ADDITION to efforts to improved identification for students who do meet the criteria. <br /><br />kelliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01322661098626555834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-52514376314608335022018-01-26T11:02:00.643-08:002018-01-26T11:02:00.643-08:00@ Lip Service, I see that the INTENT of the propos...@ Lip Service, I see that the INTENT of the proposed legislation is to qualify more underserved students, but the actual language of the proposed legislation does nothing to ensure that will happen. The requirement to use local norms (but not if more restrictive than national norms) doesn't necessarily do it. A few hours of teacher/admin PD doesn't necessarily do it. The requirement for universal screening at 2 different grades doesn't necessarily do it. And the requirement to use "multiple sources" of info and not rule someone out based on one piece of info doesn't do it either, because it all depends on the nature of the assessments used. <br /><br />To make a real difference, it seems the legislation would need to (1) be much more specific about how local norms should be used; and (2) be much clearer about the variety of assessments that must be used--both for the universal screening and in allowing for multiple sources. <br /><br />Also, I'm curious -- what does it look like if you can't rule someone out based on a single result? Does that mean we need to move to an eligibility process that includes at least 3 assessments? If you score high enough on 2/2 or 2/3 you are in, and you're only deemed not eligible if you have 2 assessments that come up short? If the universal screener says someone isn't likely HC, or if a teacher says no and won't write a referral, does that matter under the proposed new process?<br /><br />Ironically, while you seem to often rail against the fact that HCC has many high achievers who you don't think are truly gifted, under the proposed law the program likely becomes even MORE of high achievers program than a gifted program. Why? Because many of those currently "ruled out" based on a single test are students from "overrepresented" groups--students who do very well academically, but who don't score in the top 2% on the CogAT or IQ tests. Being at the 90th percentile in terms of IQ would no longer disqualify someone from HCC if they had strong achievement scores and got a teacher recommendation or met some other TBD criterion, right? <br /><br />unclearAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-57583870785779220812018-01-26T10:21:02.259-08:002018-01-26T10:21:02.259-08:00You need something as was said to get FRL/ELL kids...You need something as was said to get FRL/ELL kids to approach the rigor as it should be in the HCC. But I assume that really isn't your point is it. It is to get kids out of HCC not in.<br /><br />Disturbing to hear of the low enrollment numbers at once bursting schools. And that was do to staff manipulations of the wait-list? <br /><br />Buck stop -6Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-27211323432004714522018-01-26T08:10:35.865-08:002018-01-26T08:10:35.865-08:00@kellie
If you reread the information about the p...@kellie<br /><br />If you reread the information about the proposed bill, it's about finally qualifying underserved students for state-mandated H.C. services, not some SPS-construed runner-up prize for "that community."<br /><br />Lip ServiceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-86011070148420555392018-01-26T08:04:25.368-08:002018-01-26T08:04:25.368-08:00@ no caps,
What is more ironic is that there is ...@ no caps, <br /><br />What is more ironic is that there is enough space in the SE to build a very robust old style spectrum program, with customize qualifications. There is no room north of the ship canal. <br /><br />The enrollment drop in the Capitol Hill area is rather shocking and is a direct consequence of splitting siblings. Enrollment is down at Montlake, McGilvra, Lowell and Stevens, plus the change at Madronna added extra space. It should be possible to move HC out of TM and back to Capitol Hill and then create several spectrum style program in the SE that truly reflected the needs and desires of that community. <br /><br />kelliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01322661098626555834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-55658239626275319522018-01-25T22:12:09.982-08:002018-01-25T22:12:09.982-08:00the problem is that the first round identified man...<br />the problem is that the first round identified many spectrum qualified frl/ell students. then they killed spectrum. so nothing to come of that. without scaffolding or a subset program for those groups hcc will remain as white as seattle. <br /><br />but as kellie says hcc and capacity go hand in hand. so as we go forward with 2,100 hs seats north of the ship canal shouldn't we be looking at truly expanding hcc? that is not what killing the cohort and increasing nerd bullying at aa hs will do. it will make it less likely to get hcc services when we have the best time to reintroduce choice at the hs level including hcc choice. <br /><br />i think the state under fiances hcs in sps. but what does it matter if board members are using their position as a stepping stone and will legislate false promises and completely falsify info from the dias? no amount of direction or money from the state doesn't matter when we have boneheaded staff proposals (they wanted no pathways in 2019 folks) followed by opportunist board members. give geary and dewolf all the direction you may like and money and they will try their damndest to see how they can parly it to the next level. look what they are doing with 2100 new seats.<br /><br />no capsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-67289430130902542132018-01-25T20:35:51.012-08:002018-01-25T20:35:51.012-08:00If memory serves (and I am the first to admit it f...If memory serves (and I am the first to admit it fails me sometimes) when they tested all 2nd graders in the SE, they did find a larger group of CogAT qualified scores, but they didn't have corresponding MAP scores so nothing came of it (particularly as this was in the elimination of Spectrum). I find it very frustrating that the definition of highly capable includes both high capability and achievement, and certainly believe that you can be single subject HCC qualified. <br /><br />I understand when people are tired of the constant HCC talk. I have a current 8th grader and I can't keep up with it myself. All the splits, and proposals, and accusations of unfairness. I am sad to say I look forward to my child graduating out of the system, but I'm afraid it's not better than when she entered it.<br /><br />Trixie Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-60780960769346714572018-01-25T17:30:39.518-08:002018-01-25T17:30:39.518-08:00I sent my comments to my legislators supporting th...I sent my comments to my legislators supporting this bill. I hope others do the same.maze runnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04637319432431596411noreply@blogger.com