tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post5339102548654886306..comments2024-03-29T02:41:52.718-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Seattle School Board Meeting on WednesdayMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-13309859644420871812014-06-30T23:49:54.001-07:002014-06-30T23:49:54.001-07:00The STR has been in the works since before 2010, e...The STR has been in the works since before 2010, even before our little dalliance with TFA. SPS and their bosses at A4E looked at the Urban Teacher Residency United model and said "we want one of those shiny things!" It was hardly a stretch to swap TFA for STR in a pinch. Thanks Enfield. <br /><br />Now we're at the point where it's costing real money.<br /><br />This is all the more reason to not let any of these half-baked ideas get footing. The usual cadre of movers and shakers will ram it down our throats and the board will just let it happen. Data or no data.mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-4211646904401984822014-06-30T22:43:52.530-07:002014-06-30T22:43:52.530-07:00Dan, exactly. I don't get it.Dan, exactly. I don't get it.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12588239576000641336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-53359855828993722572014-06-30T22:02:51.249-07:002014-06-30T22:02:51.249-07:00Seattle Teacher Residency program:
So we are to b...Seattle Teacher Residency program:<br /><br />So we are to believe that the UW gurus who apparently haven't done teacher prep correctly will now with STR do it right.<br /><br />To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data.<br /><br />So what changes will UW Education Gurus be making and on what data are these instructional preparation changes based?<br /><br />Looks like there is very little basis for the STR program. STR changes seem based on more UW Education Theories of "What we would like to have work". ... and spending lots more $$$.<br /><br />I have difficulty following the logic here:<br />UW has done an inadequate job in a particular area so we must believe that they will do much better in the future. So lets have UW Education gurus direct a spendy new program based on hope for a better result. --- Its the Seattle Education way (again).<br /><br />{{ It doesn't need to make any sense because its the politics of education.}}dan dempseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15536720661510933983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-50365404249534699922014-06-29T13:03:32.072-07:002014-06-29T13:03:32.072-07:00Melissa,
They will find the dollars...by scabbing...Melissa,<br /><br />They will find the dollars...by scabbing off other-actual education-things, and robbing other critical projects.<br /><br />So we would have to maintain a school for 30 years, whether one is warranted or not - or else lose our $40M plus. For all we know, all learning may be online by that time. Or Mayor Burgess VII may decide the building is better used as a charter - with free rent.<br /><br />This is a very costly and risky distraction. The smart thing to do is rent (for cheap, thx Vulcan) until you see what does and does not work. How a downtown school suddenly leapfrogs to the head of the line is beyond me. Everyone thought JSCEE was a no-brainer, right?mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-26323383660686079742014-06-29T12:01:20.912-07:002014-06-29T12:01:20.912-07:00I did not include any comments in my thread on thi...I did not include any comments in my thread on this policy as I didn't feel qualified to speak out on it but I know its importance and knew readers would chime in. Thanks.<br /><br />FP, I don't ask that the Board EVER rubber-stamp anything. I've given my reasons why I think this makes sense (and we have to see what the partnership with the City brings). <br /><br />Also, it is only a resolution. The district, if it cannot sufficiently find the dollars (did the homeless group did not), will not get the building.<br /><br />I will have a separate thread on the City and Pre-K as it is becoming increasing problematic (to me and others). <br /><br />But this business of the district doing things that involving reordering of priorities and $$$ and THEN announcing them after the fact does not work. <br /><br />Maybe that's how Burgess does things at City Hall but it should not fly in SPS.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-82186674855235874692014-06-29T01:21:45.512-07:002014-06-29T01:21:45.512-07:00If so then it is Definitely the wrong thing to do....If so then it is Definitely the wrong thing to do...mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-33495348123765073972014-06-29T01:11:12.921-07:002014-06-29T01:11:12.921-07:00Isn't Blanford the liason to the city? If so,...Isn't Blanford the liason to the city? If so, was Blanford involved in discussions that surrounded the purchase of the downtown building?#Getoffyourhandsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-43834586531199728752014-06-29T00:57:19.304-07:002014-06-29T00:57:19.304-07:00From Strategic Plan funding:
"The District w...From Strategic Plan funding:<br /><br />"The District will identify current funding sources and potential gaps for implementation costs. As we develop and implement this plan, we will need to do two things to address any funding gaps:<br />1. Reallocate existing funds against these priorities; and<br />2. Seek outside assistance through philanthropic and other grants where possible<br />This may include the difficult decision to postpone, stop or slow the growth of popular yet expensive programs if they are not aligned to the Strategic Plan."<br /><br />This is unacceptable. The district needs to be specific.Unacceptablenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-3948050245327277392014-06-29T00:43:50.448-07:002014-06-29T00:43:50.448-07:00"However, after conversation with staff betwe..."However, after conversation with staff between the City of Seattle and Seattle Public Schools, it was determined that Seattle Public Schools should be the applicant"<br /><br />First, the city has a conversation with SPS staff regarding pre-K and neglects to brief the board.<br /><br />Now we learn that staff and the city have been in conversation regarding a major purchase, but neglects briefing the school board.<br /><br />It is time for the city to get a grip.Unacceptablenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-86663601239039875662014-06-28T22:17:54.256-07:002014-06-28T22:17:54.256-07:00But hey we can always spend $40M and then give it ...But hey we can always spend $40M and then give it away to some group with political connections or some wealthy private school!mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-26205826831105961712014-06-28T22:16:01.057-07:002014-06-28T22:16:01.057-07:00See how quickly "free" turns into $Milli...See how quickly "free" turns into $Million$, General Fund dollars, 30 year obligations and, yep, no commitment from the City or the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, Vulcan, or BMGF and Bezos to give more than moral support?<br /><br />Looking more and more like the glass palace to me.mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-53640334849461497402014-06-28T21:58:36.854-07:002014-06-28T21:58:36.854-07:00Where's the analysis for the NEED for facility...Where's the analysis for the NEED for facility space there, downtown, VS. the district facilities' triaged PRIORITIES???<br /><br />Show me that FIRST BEFORE you ask/demand the board rubber stamp this with zero due diligence. File the 'papers' and that leads the mentality of the glass palace folks to think of it as a done deal, a matter of course. Nobody ever questions how did they get here from there, let alone WHY they are doing what they are doing. Truly idiotic. Not "management by objects", more like "management by random momentum". <br /><br />How can the board possibly be asked to vote on this so piecemeal? So capriciously? Zero runway to consider it? All while the district is now essentially a headless horseman? This truly is a new low. And you know staff will dance around and make the facts fit the conclusion all while saying "we don't know we will get back to you" while speaking out of the other side of their mouths how they've done extensive analysis and this was in the BEX IV plan (yeah, a $5M placeholder that was completely amorphosis-- $5M doesn't get you or buy you a building or land and doesn't even renovate a building -- at most - it's a rent payment to Vulcan for a couple of floors in a high rise for several years). <br /><br />Can you say, fail BTA, fail? Doing "facilities planning" this hapharazdly may tip people over the " I've had have enough line". <br /><br />It's $40 million. This is not triaged. <br /><br /><br />Facilities priorities <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-7698959108570558162014-06-28T20:07:26.084-07:002014-06-28T20:07:26.084-07:00Re Policy 3201 Discipline Appeals Committee (DAC)....Re Policy 3201 Discipline Appeals Committee (DAC). <br /><br />This committee does not serve students with disabilities fairly. We need 3201 to be revised so that whenever an appeal involves a student with a disability, a member of the SPED Department is automatically involved as a resource person for the DAC AND with all inputs documented. This is necessary for 2 reasons: <br /><br />First, the typical constellation of the DAC has nobody to interpret IEPs, Behavioral Plans, and good practices associated with these. These are technical matters that require the ability to parse what constitutes proper implementation and management. The typical DAC member is not versed in these technicalities. The consequence is that DAC processes do not allow the student with the disability or the family access to an appeals process that operates with full information and objectivity. This is a deep deep injustice. Without access to even a resource person who can interpret SPED information in IEPs and BIPs for non-SPED professionals, the DAC process IMO has zero integrity. <br /><br />Second, esp given the federal investigation of discipline disproportionality of students with color and the even higher rates of discipline disproportionality for students with special needs, why shouldn't we expect the District to put even a minimum safeguard into the DAC appeals process??? 3201 needs to be amended so that when the appeal involves a student with a disability, the DAC isn't inadvertently adding patterns of<br />disproportionality that are endemic in our system at this time. As we have said many times, the disproportionality in discipline rates for students with disabilities means that IEPs and<br />Behavioral Plans are not being managed and implemented properly in the first place - it is a very big red flag. <br /><br />Ultimately in my experience the building admins and staff are so condescending to special educator knowledge and expertise when it comes to "behavior" that even when SPED Dept staff participate in a DAC hearing their presence is treated with impatience and outright rudeness. There isn't even a requirement to document their inputs and state why the DAC agreed/disagreed - a simple check and balance that would provide a modicum of transparency and integrity to a process that<br />could not be more broken otherwise. Instead, the District cites "workplace privilege," so closing the door on any basic transparency. <br /><br />We need 3201 to be amended to ensure that students with disabilities have access to an appeals process where standards of practice for IEP and BIP implementation are more than just about the opinions of the building administrator. <br /><br />AnneS. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com