tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post7724688187646428147..comments2024-03-28T02:21:17.452-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Co-Housing / Co-LocatingMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-82621585112248547502012-04-13T16:51:28.196-07:002012-04-13T16:51:28.196-07:00@Melissa (4-12, 12:20 PM)
They SHOULD rebuild Joh...@Melissa (4-12, 12:20 PM)<br /><br />They SHOULD rebuild John Rogers (and make it larger), but not to shove in 1/2 of north APP. There has been a lot of family-oriented housing development in the Lake City area, and development of 14 acres along Lake City Way is in the planning stages (potentially including new housing). See:<br /><br />http://www.familiesforlakecity.com/pierre-properties-whats-the-deal/<br /><br />Even with some pretty dramatic shrinking of the John Rogers attendance area, with chunks going to Olympic Hills, View Ridge and Wedgwood, Rogers is budgeted to add a kindergarten classroom next year (this year John Rogers was held to 2 kindergartens, but they quickly grew to 30 kids each). The building simply cannot handle 3classrooms per grade level. It was built for only two, and the facilities can not handle the addition of a portable "village."<br /><br />(oh, and please note that there is no "d" in Rogers- thanks!).<br /><br />-KimAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30894468914876575492012-04-13T15:54:59.921-07:002012-04-13T15:54:59.921-07:00curious, for the only reason that comments are eve...curious, for the only reason that comments are ever deleted: it was unsigned.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-58558936525728046492012-04-13T14:29:28.310-07:002012-04-13T14:29:28.310-07:00Administrator : why the deletion of the 8:45 comm...Administrator : why the deletion of the 8:45 comment on 4/13/12? <br />- curiousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-50590078496080658012012-04-13T11:10:22.050-07:002012-04-13T11:10:22.050-07:00Thanks, Charlie!
ALPTF parent feedback?Thanks, Charlie!<br /><br />ALPTF parent feedback?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-26226694783313630592012-04-13T10:20:48.080-07:002012-04-13T10:20:48.080-07:00@ALPTF parent feedback?,
There is a link on the h...@ALPTF parent feedback?,<br /><br />There is a link on the home page of the blog. It is on the right side, just below the list of contributors.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-78594855172624121022012-04-13T10:02:42.809-07:002012-04-13T10:02:42.809-07:00Melissa/Charlie,
Melissa, previously you posted y...Melissa/Charlie,<br /><br />Melissa, previously you posted your email address so that somebody could send you something, but I did not write it down.<br /><br />In your capacity as members of the Advanced Learning Programs Task Force, I would like to cc you and Charlie some parent feedback on the topic of this important co-housing thread, a letter recently sent to Thompson, McEvoy, Vaughan, Capacity Management, etc., that was not written for blog posting here. Strangely, the SPS link to the ALPTF includes no email address for any such AL parent feedback, so could either you or Charlie post an email address I could use to send you a copy?<br /><br />Thanks so much to both of you for all your excellent work for our kids,<br /><br />ALPTF parent feedback?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-43835667776899098832012-04-13T09:05:15.199-07:002012-04-13T09:05:15.199-07:00My point, which seems to need repeating, is not th...My point, which seems to need repeating, is not that co-housing or co-locating doesn't work or can't work, but that it requires a big building for it to work well. If each program is allowed to be big enough to achieve the critical mass necessary for a viable learning community, it should have at least two classes per grade. This requires 24 homerooms, which translates into capacity for no fewer than 600 students.<br /><br />There are programs that are smaller than that, but they suffer for it.<br /><br />The exceptions are special education programs, ELL programs, and advanced learning programs, such as Spectrum or A.L.O.s, which can participate in the general education program's learning community. These programs do not have to be full-sized to be viable (although they do have other critical mass requirements).<br /><br />It would be better if either:<br /><br />a) The district built elementary schools big enough to house two full-sized programs or<br /><br />b) The district did not try to co-house full-sized elementary programs.<br /><br />I'm not saying that co-housing doesn't work or can't work at the elementary level. I'm saying that it needs more space than the District provides for it to work well.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-29097814327557320572012-04-13T08:52:03.518-07:002012-04-13T08:52:03.518-07:00Thanks for the hint, dj.
Here is the data on Thur...Thanks for the hint, dj.<br /><br />Here is the data on Thurgood Marshall from the District's annual data summary. Go to page 152 of <a href="http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/1583136/File/Departmental%20Content/siso/disprof/2011/Prfl11all.pdf" rel="nofollow">this report</a> and you will see that there are only 49 attendance area students enrolled at Thurgood Marshall.<br /><br />That is, by far, the lowest enrollment of attendance area students anywhere in the district. The next lowest is Northgate with 83.<br /><br />Thurgood Marshall will only work as a co-housed school so long as the families in the Thurgood Marshall attendance area don't discover it.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-17700024272615273982012-04-13T08:45:17.456-07:002012-04-13T08:45:17.456-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-39290836707601163362012-04-13T08:20:56.078-07:002012-04-13T08:20:56.078-07:00I meant a theoretical number for a cut-off. Inter...I meant a theoretical number for a cut-off. Interesting, though, some districts have cut-offs for their programs like there is a cut-off for Spectrum. So the district could say no to expanding the APP program if they wanted to.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12588239576000641336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-85791644479450332372012-04-13T07:54:01.080-07:002012-04-13T07:54:01.080-07:00Charlie, I will go you one further. The reason th...Charlie, I will go you one further. The reason that Thurgood Marshall has not experienced what Lowell experienced so far is not just because the attendance area is small, but because even the students in the attendance area do not attend (if you look at enrollment in the general education program, most of it is from outside the attendance area for the school). In other words, right now, TM can control growth because the general education program is not popular with the neighborhood, so there is not a large or growing neighborhood group with both the entitlement and wish to attend. That could change. Even if if does not change, modest growth in the student population entitled to attend APP would push the building.<br /><br />I think this is a good argument for the district planning longer-range for both north and south-end APP at this point. It may be best to have both in their own buildings, which may or may not require (in the future) a different geographic split.djhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01720927162286657378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-68321127292862396732012-04-13T07:12:25.653-07:002012-04-13T07:12:25.653-07:00@South end APP parent,
Yes, Thurgood Marshall cur...@South end APP parent,<br /><br />Yes, Thurgood Marshall currently has three programs and they are currently co-housed - with surprising success. That is a testament to a talented administrator, Ms Breidenbach. She has shown a deft hand, a focus on culture, and an ability to retain staff.<br /><br />TM's enrollment on October 3 was 451. They will soon have problems that come with success. The school has a capacity of 383 without portables. That number comes from the district and can be found on <a href="http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/1583136/File/Departmental%20Content/school%20board/10-11%20agendas/062911agenda/20110629_Report_IntTermCapitalPlanning.pdf" rel="nofollow">this document</a>.<br /><br />For some extraordinary reason, the District expects the enrollment at Thurgood Marshall to shrink. I don't think their expectations are right. Especially since the school is growing. It will have two portables next year and perhaps more every year after that. In other words, Thurgood Marshall is already over-crowded. Neither APP students nor attendance area students can be denied assignment there. A capacity conflict isn't just coming - it's here.<br /><br />Thurgood Marshall appears to work now, but that's only because the attendance area program is so under-sized. I am told that Thurgood Marshall has only 7 homerooms for the attendance area program there. That means that five of the six grades have only one class for that grade. That does not allow the teacher a grade level peer for collaboration nor does it allow for any mixing of students. That's not a full-size program. It lacks the critical mass to be a viable learning community.<br /><br />Two elementary programs can be co-housed, but only if one of them is under-sized and never grows.<br /><br />As for growth, splitting APP will make it grow faster, not slower. Distance is a real factor is the decision to participate in APP. The closer the school is to home, the more likely families will choose to send their child there. With two locations, the designated APP site will be closer to families' homes and MORE will choose to participate, not less. APP growth will be faster with multiple locations, not slower.<br /><br />The proposal to have two programs of 225 share a building (whatever the two programs may be), dooms each program to be undersized and to never have the critical mass necessary to be successful. Even with small classes such a program can never have more than nine classrooms. That means half of the grades has only one class and half of the grades have only two classes. That's barely enough peers for half and no peers for the other half. It dooms the programs to never be as effective as they can and should be. That is NOT the ideal delivery model for any program.<br /><br />I tell you what, south-end APP parent, you tell the Thurgood Marshall APP community that their enrollment is capped at 225 and you tell the attendance area program that their enrollment is also capped at 225 and you tell us how cool they are with that. (Except, of course, that neither program's enrollment is capped at all).<br /><br />Your example of a program that works is like the the guy falling from the twentieth floor reaching the fifth floor on the way down and claiming that everything is okay so far.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-21281985856782859782012-04-13T06:48:28.392-07:002012-04-13T06:48:28.392-07:00Melissa you said there's a ceiling on how many...Melissa you said there's a ceiling on how many kids would qualify for APP. Do you mean there is a certain number of spaces for APP and no more, or a theoretical number given that it is for students in the 98/99th percentile range in cognitive ability and the 95th percentile range or above in both reading and math achievement?<br /><br />TamiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-77435855294570572082012-04-12T21:09:27.350-07:002012-04-12T21:09:27.350-07:00NE Seattle Mom-
You are talking about the BLT - B...NE Seattle Mom-<br /><br />You are talking about the BLT - Building Leadership Team.<br /><br />South APP - Any decision made about north elementary APP will affect TM. I have heard many times recently that TM is two to three years away from out-growing TM and something will need to change there, too. The district will look at what decisions were made in the north while making the decision about what to do with TM.<br /><br />I am at L@L and no one is asking for a new building. We are asking to stay together for at least a few years until all the new teachers have some experience in the program. As I am sure you understand, many L@L families are hesitant about sharing buildings because we were just kicked out of a shared building. North APP families also don't want to be responsible for kicking another school out or capping a program. That isn't any more fair to an option program than it is to APP.<br /><br />-L@L parentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-34134917615928066412012-04-12T18:31:38.292-07:002012-04-12T18:31:38.292-07:00South End, you make a lot of assumptions.
"S...South End, you make a lot of assumptions.<br /><br />"Since APP is growing so fast, splitting APP North in half will actually help control growth and capacity problems. If APP is split into 2 groups of 225 kids and paired with a slower growing program of comparable size, or paired with an option program that can be capped, the school's growth can be managed as well or better than one mega-APP site with rapid program growth. "<br /><br />APP isn't necessarily "growing." They are either finding more kids who are eligible or those that have tested in (but went to a Spectrum program or stayed local) is more likely. There is a ceiling on how many kids would qualify.<br /><br />And what option program would want to be capped? Why would it be a good idea to co-house with an option school that has its own program and then say, well, here's APP so you are capped at a certain number. Good luck with that co-housing.<br /><br />You say:<br /><br />It seems disingenuous for the APP North folks to say that they can't split and co-house because there are no buildings available for them to co-house in, yet simultaneously ask for a huge new APP-only building at Wilson Pacific because there really isn't a building for a big north end stand alone APP program either. <br /><br />I don't think anyone has said there are no buildings to co-house; there is an issue of making the best possible outcome for both programs. <br /><br />I have not heard from a single APP parent asking for a new stand-alone building. John Marshall was considered but it seems the district has other plans.<br /><br />I would ask you to be careful with your words unless you can verify that you heard them directly from a Lowell at Lincoln parent.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12588239576000641336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-76936290818098884412012-04-12T18:28:58.682-07:002012-04-12T18:28:58.682-07:00Lowell @ Lincoln now has its own budget and its ow...Lowell @ Lincoln now has its own budget and its own BLM(is that the acronym?) Last year L@L had only its own BLM, but not its own budget. The only things it will share with Lowell on Capitol Hill next year is the name Lowell, the librarian and the music teacher(s?), and a 5th grade field trip (possibly) To me, if it has its own budget, and completely separate principals, then they are separate. If Lowell on Capitol Hill is a school, and L@L is a program, it is confusing.NESeattleMomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14685367298254415469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-85777228054067310612012-04-12T18:14:16.288-07:002012-04-12T18:14:16.288-07:00"If APP is split into 2 groups of 225 kids an...<i>"If APP is split into 2 groups of 225 kids and paired with a slower growing program of comparable size, or <b>paired with an option program that can be capped,</b> the school's growth can be managed as well or better than one mega-APP site with rapid program growth."</i><br /><br />The problem is, what option program is going to welcome 225+ APP students into their school at their own expense? What option program wants to see its own enrollment capped? What happens when the choice is between letting in a younger sibling to the option program or allowing APP to grow? <br /><br />What option progams exist in North Seattle right now that both have the room for and would welcome 225+ APP kids in 2013? <br /><br />--worried for 2013Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-49273590408438691232012-04-12T18:13:01.850-07:002012-04-12T18:13:01.850-07:00I would be curious to see how the distract tracks ...I would be curious to see how the distract tracks the "success" of the Denny/Sealth co-location. <br />Because from a pure pragmatic POV that campus is a disaster.Walnutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-29352304540125861042012-04-12T17:19:38.986-07:002012-04-12T17:19:38.986-07:00Charlie -- you make a good point about the need to...Charlie -- you make a good point about the need to be thoughtful about what programs to co-house, and that we need to consider capacity. But -- your conclusion that we can't co-house elementary programs in a building with less than 600 kids is counterfactual. Thurgood Marshall has successfully co-housed 3 distinct elementary communities -- gen Ed., autism, and APP. Their numbers are just above 450, with 2 new classrooms planned for next year. Elementary cohousing presents challenges but it can work. A north end APP school cohoused with another program could require 4 fewer classrooms than thurgood marshall (the TM autism program has 4 homerooms plus a therapy room). TM's 3 co-housed programs have 22 classrooms, 24 planned for next year. Remember that APP and spectrum both have zero kindergarten classrooms and could both start at 1 1st grade for a critical mass. Yes, if you are starting from a blank slate, it is a real challenge to plan for 3 communities, but 2 elementary programs can be co-housed. Also - consider growth. Since APP is growing so fast, splitting APP North in half will actually help control growth and capacity problems. If APP is split into 2 groups of 225 kids and paired with a slower growing program of comparable size, or paired with an option program that can be capped, the school's growth can be managed as well or better than one mega-APP site with rapid program growth. If you can find a building to house the APP North population of 550 an growing, that same building can be used to co-house 2 smaller programs of 225. TM APP has been at around that number (9-10 APP classrooms with controlled growth), and it has worked for them. I agree that we should consider the ideal delivery models for our programs and schools first, then look at whether there are buildings to meet those needs, or whether buildings need to be re-modeled or built to meet the district's needs. It seems disingenuous for the APP North folks to say that they can't split and co-house because there are no buildings available for them to co-house in, yet simultaneously ask for a huge new APP-only building at Wilson Pacific because there really isn't a building for a big north end stand alone APP program either. Capacity is a huge problem whatever the housing model, so let's evaluate the best model first, and see if we can develop a solution to deliver that model.<br />- South end APP parentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-42891484452466704382012-04-12T16:31:36.594-07:002012-04-12T16:31:36.594-07:00@simplify
It is expensive and difficult to offer ...@simplify<br /><br />It is expensive and difficult to offer language immersion in K-5 schools, but that's also when it is most effective.<br /><br />It does continue a bit at middle school (with more planned), but not at high school.<br /><br />Your question "<i>Do we need to offer spectrum and ALO (in name or in action) in schools? Why can't we just make sure all schools provide the academic challenges that meet kid's individual needs?</i>" reflects a charming naivete.<br /><br />It is immeasurably difficult for our schools to provide advanced students with academic challenge outside of schools which have a very high concentration of high performing students. It often doesn't happen even in them. It is, essentially, a non-starter. So, yes, we do need Spectrum and we do need ALOs, in fact, not just in name.<br /><br />Another (charming) misunderstanding is the belief that the District regards it as their role to "make sure" that there is anything happening in our schools. The District refuses to accept a quality assurance role. I share your wish that the District would assume responsibility for educational accountability and management. I, too, wish they would stop with the grade promotion and inflation. I, too, wish they would stop with using ineffective texts and so many standardized testings.<br /><br />Unfortunately, that would require a revolution in the District's perception of their role.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-14397924366174048422012-04-12T16:22:54.683-07:002012-04-12T16:22:54.683-07:00Steve, A "school" is a building. A "...Steve, A "school" is a building. A "program" is a learning community (students, teachers, and administrators) in that building.<br /><br />That's how we can have Van Asselt at AAA, Aki Kurose at Sharples, Lowell at Lincoln, Pathfinder at Cooper, The Option Program at Seward (TOPS), and STEM at Cleveland. Most programs are in schools with the same name as the program. You never hear folks talk about Montlake at Montlake or Stevens at Stevens. However, if there is a program in those buildings, such as a specific special education program, an advanced learning program, a Montessori program or an ELL program, you may hear about it. Such as the Montessori program at Leschi.<br /><br />Does that help?Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-37141914525566883752012-04-12T14:37:47.279-07:002012-04-12T14:37:47.279-07:00Wouldn't streamlining and whittling some of th...Wouldn't streamlining and whittling some of these programs down help?<br /><br />How cost sustainable is it to offer language immersion in K-5 schools? Do you have language immersion continuing on in MS and HS? Or just language classes in MS and HS? Do we need to offer spectrum and ALO (in name or in action) in schools? Why can't we just make sure all schools provide the academic challenges that meet kid's individual needs? (Hello Ed Directors) Make sure kids will be on an assessment continuum and working in various small groups to keep them challenged, learning, and progressing. Why offer STEM in some ES or MS? District should improve and make sure there is a hearty curriculum behind these subjects and the LAs (yoohoo C & I) from K-12. Create teaching guidelines and standards so teachers are allowed to add depth to these courses and infuse their passion for writing, chemistry, geography, music, arts, etc. into these subject matters. Give teachers some reasonable flexibility.<br /><br />Another word create a real educational accountability and management system so we don't need so many programs to draw, entice, balance population and achievement differences. Stop with the grade promotion and inflation. Stop with using ineffective texts and so many standardized testings. <br /><br />That leaves programs like Special Ed, ELL, APP (with tighter entrance and a curriculum), IB/STEM/biotech in HS to manage. It also leaves option/alternative schools that are designed for long term sustainability (not just a designation to pretend to fix short term capacity/desirability issues).<br /><br />-simplify (or is this going to PO too many folks?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-69103200769823419602012-04-12T14:30:36.535-07:002012-04-12T14:30:36.535-07:00I also wonder about the definition of the word &qu...I also wonder about the definition of the word "program" in the eyes of the district. When a single location (North End Elementary APP, at Lincoln) has 450 kids and will have more than 500 next year, is it still just a "program" or is it... (gasp!) a "school"? With NSAP, the argument could be made that a "school" is the educational site for kids within a specific boundary, but the geography seems like a somewhat arbitrary criteria when you consider what a school is.<br /><br />Given how the district believes "programs" can be split and moved at will, it seems they have secondary status to "schools," even though most of them have the same components of a neighborhood school (and in the case of North End APP - which I think is the biggest "program" - as large a population). As has been discussed on this blog, kids in the APP program don't even exist at the school they attend in District planning calculations.<br /><br />What is a "school," and what will it take to get the district to consider "programs" as the schools they are?Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05105365816526108707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-20832560617179586952012-04-12T13:43:00.322-07:002012-04-12T13:43:00.322-07:00Ben, I certainly understand your point. The buildi...Ben, I certainly understand your point. The buildings cannot be so specific to the programs that they are not useful for any programs they might house in the future.<br /><br />When the District builds a K-8 on the same property as an existing K-5 school, doesn't that suggest that they will not both be attendance area schools? How smart is it to build two attendance area schools so close to one another? Never mind that Wing Luke and Van Asselt at AAA are just three blocks apart.<br /><br />Also, given what I have just written about the minimum capacity of any building that would co-house two full-sized programs, shouldn't the District be building elementary schools with capacities of 600+ instead of 500?<br /><br /><br />Where did that magical 500 number come from?Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-73393102055987272372012-04-12T13:27:54.688-07:002012-04-12T13:27:54.688-07:00I know you mentioned this idea in one of your last...I know you mentioned this idea in one of your last posts and I was thinking about it yesterday. It seems to me to be silly not to talk with program planning during the capacity planning process but I don't think its the value should be overstated. The building are going to for the most part outlast any special programs installed in them and have to be reusable over time. Ideally you're trying to anticipate both where to put APP today, if we need to deal with an upsurge in population will this work and will this building be useful 50 years from now as well all at the same time.<br /><br />BenBenjamin Leishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10974191081762367425noreply@blogger.com