tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post8451028764394853619..comments2024-03-29T02:41:52.718-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Thoughts for STEM and APP in West SeattleMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-2119505545401909292013-08-03T02:23:16.490-07:002013-08-03T02:23:16.490-07:00There is very little differentiated instruction ha...There is very little differentiated instruction happening in Seattle Public Schools. That's a fact and there is a mountain of data to support it.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-7464471416915814422013-08-01T22:42:37.579-07:002013-08-01T22:42:37.579-07:00enough already,
I assume you are just annoyed (ye...enough already,<br /><br />I assume you are just annoyed (yet again) by the thought of someone making a plan for APP. On the slim chance you really don't understand, here's what I think Charlie is saying.<br /><br />The district believes there are too many APP students south of the ship canal for one just one elementary program and one middle school program. They've determined how many students are needed for an effective program - and they do not anticipate we will have enough for two at either level. When this happened at Garfield, they started a smaller option APP program to entice students away from Garfield.<br /><br />The district has identified overcrowding at TM and Washington as a problem. Where in West Seattle do you suggest we could provide the accelerated instruction APP students need? Charlie made a suggestion and you don't like it. What is yours?<br /><br />Boren has room for about 750 students. If STEM stays there, they can have three classes per grade as a K-8. You could fit some APP students in there and have quite a few non-APP seats available.<br /><br />I would not choose this program for my kids - but if it solves a problem for the district and for some West Seattle families - why is that a bad thing?<br /><br />The district has indicated they intend to make pathways for immersion schools with two elementary schools, a middle and a high school. West Seattle has only one immersion elementary. Maybe we should leave STEM at Boren as a K-8 and open a K-5 immersion school at Fairmount Park - both as option schools and both with APP programs. That would pull families out of Schmitz Park, Lafayette and Thurgood Marshall. <br /><br />Lynn<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-57622384803903032862013-08-01T22:34:27.990-07:002013-08-01T22:34:27.990-07:00String Cheese, I would assume that the staff does ...String Cheese, I would assume that the staff does some kind of "if this, then that" chart. <br /><br />If you want to ask for something via public disclosure, that's possible as well.<br /><br />It sounds like you sent it to the most important decisionmakers but I would get this info to our blog, the West Seattle blog, and then get to the next School Board meeting with as many people as possible. Get out in front of the boundary meetings.<br /><br />Good for all of you to meet and try to find solutions.<br />Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12588239576000641336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-19263371511972131782013-08-01T19:28:40.436-07:002013-08-01T19:28:40.436-07:00Interesting. My child gets differentiated instruc...Interesting. My child gets differentiated instruction, yet its not PBL nor APP. Hmmmm. Sorry, this sounds like a bunch of subjective opining, not based on data.mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-37612665901747801862013-08-01T19:14:53.088-07:002013-08-01T19:14:53.088-07:00From the APP blog, June 25th:
Charlie says:
&quo...From the APP blog, June 25th:<br /><br />Charlie says:<br /><br />"I'm not sure what schools would be the APP alternative pathway in West Seattle, but an authentic and intentional stepped up K-8 STEM program at Boren would fit the bill very nicely given the Project-Based Learning there. Yes, a lot of chess pieces would have to move for this to happen, but not as many as you might fear."<br /><br />It would be nice if your chess game included ensuring the program becomes successful for all students before figuring out how it might benefit APP kids. If the program becomes successful enough, it may need the whole space. <br /><br />I knew I hadn't misunderstood you, so am still unsure why you corrected me in your second post. All schools are supposed to be doing differentiated instruction. You called it "APP instruction" in your original post. Herein, lies my concern.<br /><br />--enough already<br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-90050311982849237442013-08-01T18:37:26.776-07:002013-08-01T18:37:26.776-07:00enough already asked:
"Your suggestion that ...enough already asked:<br /><br />"<i>Your suggestion that APP should be combined with STEM would certainly restrict the eligibility of ALL students who could attend the STEM school. Is this incorrect?</i>"<br /><br />Yes. That is incorrect. There would be plenty of space for students - both APP and non-APP at STEM if it were located in a building of adequate size, such as Boren.<br /><br />"<i>Your reference to the type of instruction APP students would be responsive to (PBL), and the fact that this style would fit into the STEM approach, is the rationale that you used to promote the two schools being put into the same building. If this is not what you meant, then what did you mean?</i>"<br /><br />I meant what I wrote. That STEM is using PBL, not that "this style would fit into the STEM approach". I wrote that PBL more readily lends itself to differentiated instruction than the traditional instructional strategy. Easier differentiated instruction suits students of all skill levels, including APP students, but certainly not exclusively APP students.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-79886182034790975222013-08-01T13:34:48.982-07:002013-08-01T13:34:48.982-07:00Melissa, representatives from most PTAs (as many a...Melissa, representatives from most PTAs (as many as we could wrestle together on short notice) met, discussed and submitted a letter, signed by all the WS PTAs, requesting the district to draw up a chart of scenarios to be shared with the community. This letter was sent to all School Board members, Banda, and staff known to be working on this issue in APRIL. Here we are in August with recommendations already submitted and not a shred of data in sight. With all of the shuffling around at JSCEE, who is the right person to contact to demand accountability and transparency on this? Is there a public records request that can be submitted?<br /><br />Shouldn't the district have created the type of chart you are suggesting before making their recommendations? (I am only half-joking on that.) StringCheesenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-21939936089188706632013-08-01T10:08:02.903-07:002013-08-01T10:08:02.903-07:00Melissa, K-5 STEM PTA posted their response to the...Melissa, K-5 STEM PTA posted their response to the SPS recommendations on their website: <a href="http://k5stempta.org/2013/08/01/we-need-your-help-now/" rel="nofollow">k5stempta.org</a>, with a PTA meeting to discuss options and next steps on Monday 8/5.Mom 2.0noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-48387894046849867832013-08-01T09:31:51.809-07:002013-08-01T09:31:51.809-07:00I 'm seeing what I said about the current K5ST...I 'm seeing what I said about the current K5STEM enrollment was not worded correctly. Nonsibling kids outside the geozone got it as well this year. It was just that all siblings and geozone kids got in first (for K at least). <br /><br />Also, I want to reiterate I am not in favor of splitting current SP families. I commend the SP community for remaining welcoming under great stress and seeking a solution for all their members. I thank them for putting up with hardship to wait for a plan that would not exclude current kids from their school. They have found a solution. I was just responding to Lynn's hypothetical question of how to avoid staring a new K-5 from a K only roll up. I think the clear solution in this real case is to locate a program at FP like language immersion, STEM,Spectrum or APP that would allow the school to start as a K-5 campus with involved parents. If all the seats are needed for the growth in the triangle area down the road then the program could change. If we didn't have these options, splitting a successful overcrowded school that didn't have a new campus on the way would be a better solution than a K-only roll-up.<br />-Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-56532822708811388172013-08-01T09:11:23.847-07:002013-08-01T09:11:23.847-07:00This is a great discussion and I hope someone can ...This is a great discussion and I hope someone can make up a paper/chart with the options and pros/cons. It would be helpful to Marty and the rest of the Board (and maybe the staff).<br /><br />"It's a good idea to ask families of preschoolers in the area if they'd prefer a general education program - or STEM. Does the district ever do that?"<br /><br />Well, that's a fun(ny) idea. The district barely asks existing parents anything but mirage parents? No.<br /><br />I think I would opine - as someone who does not know the region well - that the district doesn't generally expand Option schools. So this idea of K-5 STEM "growing" at one school doesn't seem to be a valid idea. <br /><br />They could create another one somewhere else OR have a co-housing a la Montessori. <br /><br />But the beauty of Option Schools - for the district - is that they DO exist as option AND that they can control their size.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12588239576000641336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-24819367940762709622013-08-01T08:44:22.652-07:002013-08-01T08:44:22.652-07:00The late breaking news that the family doesn't...The late breaking news that the family doesn't want the school closed should not have come as a surprise. Did the family want all those portables moved onto the campus? The needs of the district and the demand for SP drove those decisions instead. Why isn't the demand for K5STEM allowed to influence its placement? SP is slated to move to GH midyear are we going to ask another school to move midyear so the building will always be used? I hope not. I think closing it for a year or two, removing the portables, and seeing what is needed in that neighborhood would be a better answer. I know families who live close to old SP who bought their homes 5+ years ago so they could send their kids to this small neighborhood school. Now they are going elsewhere because the small neighborhood school they wanted is gone. If SP was returned to its original vision it would meet the needs of kids who would thrive in a smaller community who don't do as well in the larger noisy environment of a 500+ seat school. Some aren't able to get into Pathfinder and would love a smaller old SP. That could be a win-win for SP area families having a choice between a larger GH with more offerings and a smaller more intimate school at SP. I know the smaller schools are going away because of economies of scale but for an APP program or Pathfinder-like option program this could be a needed addition. K5STEM decided to accept 4 K's in year one and then plan for a 3 homeroom per grade future because that fit their educational strategies while allowing the most access from all over WS and beyond. What goals does moving them to a 2-up campus far away serve? <br /><br />Moving, starting, or splitting up any school is disruptive. However, if it has to be done I favor sharing the challenges. Not giving SP and other schools all the established resources and asking FP to start with nothing. K5STEM started with nothing (unfortunately the district broke their promises to provide things for them like a playground on day one) yet parents chose to take some of those sacrifices on for other benefits. FP as a neighborhood school would not be a choice. Families would be forced into an unequal position unless the district provides an attractive draw or other extra help to build the school. I don't favor splitting SP. I favor putting another draw into FP like APP or STEM. I think STEM should be at Boren or FP (with an option to go K-8 at Boren in the future) I don't favor giving one school all the space they need and no portables in their area and asking another school to move far away to take their leftovers when nearby renovated seats are readily available at Boren or FP. <br /><br />I believe the district currently has a stand-only APP school at Lincoln. If it needs to be associated with another nearby school like Lincoln is with Lowell there are several candidates. Maybe Lafayette could be associated and they could share some professional development, staff or other partnerships with the Spectrum program. -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-88210025026938453822013-08-01T08:40:44.334-07:002013-08-01T08:40:44.334-07:00Lynn & All,
Thanks for the dialog. I hope you...Lynn & All,<br /><br />Thanks for the dialog. I hope you will come to the meetings and voice your concerns and ideas. We all have a lot to learn and consider about this complex situation. Here are my thoughts and some more info:<br /><br />For option schools sibling is a higher tiebreaker than geozone. If STEM becomes too crowded families will not be split, instead neighborhood kids will not get in. This year siblings and geozone kids got it, others did not. That is with a super large geozone that was drawn to alleviate WS Elem. crowding not to be a walk-zone as the concept was intended. I think crowding out a reasonable geozone is unlikely to happen before Arbor Heights has their new building and a second WS STEM school is up and running there to draw off some of the demand for K5STEM. Also geozones can and do get adjusted year to year without making a painful neighborhood school boundary redraw. There is not a perceived guarantee to access an option school the same way as there is for neighborhood schools....option schools are always lottery based on space so no guarantees. SPS could open another STEM school at Hughes or offer the program elsewhere if it is so in demand that a 500 seat school can't accommodate enough. I am hopeful that SPS will have a better math curriculum and more PBL at other elementary schools (with SP and K5STEM helping bring this change about) and students won't have to go leave the schools to get access to these. Alki, Gatewood, Lafayette and other schools have already changed their math. <br /><br />I'm not sure that K5STEM at FP is the best solution, a K-8 at Boren sounds compelling too. I do think that FP would be far better than K5STEM at old SP and that is what the K5STEM community thinks and the FP neighbors I know who would be assigned to FP think. The enrollment numbers do not show a demand for K5STEM in the SP neighborhood (where PBL and Singapore Math are already available). <br /><br />The neighborhood of SP and the school district has benefited from the generosity of the Schmitz family all these years. Suddenly asking a school in Delridge with a High Point geozone with a enrollment that is too large for this campus to move to this far away location seems like asking more disadvantaged families to be in the portables farm that everyone agreed was not a good learning environment. STEM's current kids would have to spend much more time on buses and their families would have a harder time participating at school events and volunteering at the school. People who enrolled this year from the High Point area geozone were told staying at Boren, FP, or Hughes were the possible permanent locations, all campuses close to their homes. This seems like a real bait and switch to fulfill a debt of gratitude for a gift these communities did not directly benefit from. <br /><br />con't below -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-89725304386081280722013-08-01T00:26:57.216-07:002013-08-01T00:26:57.216-07:00There is no solution that doesn't split up SP....There is no solution that doesn't split up SP. under any scenario, families will get drawn out of the SP attendance area. This is an opportunity for the district to make a smart decision and make the "pain" result in the most successful outcome. Keeping the SP campus open for its immediate neighborhood while simultaneously opening Genesee for its appropriate neighborhood boundaries has the greatest potential for the creation of two highly desirable and successful "Schmitz" schools.StringCheesenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-55991881428987091302013-08-01T00:04:08.894-07:002013-08-01T00:04:08.894-07:00Was There,
If K-5 STEM is placed at Fauntleroy, t...Was There,<br /><br />If K-5 STEM is placed at Fauntleroy, the Geo Zone tiebreaker will eventually make it impossible for students outside the neighborhood to get in. Students from Sanislo, Highland Park, Alki and Roxhill will lose their access to STEM. <br /><br />It's a good idea to ask families of preschoolers in the area if they'd prefer a general education program - or STEM. Does the district ever do that?<br /><br />How is it splitting up a school community (SP) kind, fair and not disruptive? <br /><br />The district isn't going to create APP-only schools - so that's not going to happen at Schmitz Park.<br /><br />LynnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-64102228454323204102013-07-31T23:05:08.842-07:002013-07-31T23:05:08.842-07:00Where is this claim that we must use SP every year...Where is this claim that we must use SP every year or lose it coming from? I've never heard that before. I know the family wrote a letter saying it wants it used. I also heard it was given for use as a neighborhood school and might not be able to be anything else. Is that the case? Couldn't it be closed for a short period, remodeled, and then reopened as a neighborhood school when it's needed....which should be soon given the recent SP growth! -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-80763223955667685822013-07-31T22:49:46.786-07:002013-07-31T22:49:46.786-07:00Lynn, to respond to your second point. If you can ...Lynn, to respond to your second point. If you can accomplish a goal in two ways surely you should pick the kindest, fairest, least disruptive one. I'd always support a “pull” over a “push” if it will do enough to solve the capacity problem. In a perfect world every school could just get a brand-new right-sized building like SP is doing. I know why they lobbied so hard to get it because redrawing boundaries hurts schools, communities, and families. Jane Adams got a chance to show they could make a “pull' work by attracting Eckstein and Hamilton MS area kids. Why not give K5STEM a chance to do the same with a carefully designed geozone? The current demand seems to show it could be a win-win capacity solution for the existing crowded FP area schools. We will have Hughes, Old SP, and Old Denny, new AH to work with in the future, but I think we should always use large centrally located schools for the sought after successful programs. Forcing people into a program they don't want and leaving lots of seat empty for 5 years should not be the way forward. There are other possible draws to help FP succeed but STEM was the originally proposed plan that WS supported in 2011. I haven't seen the evidence that it isn't a good solution. If STEM stays at Boren, FP needs something else to help it succeed. The FP area preschool families need to be surveyed if that's what it takes to get the data right. In the preSTEM meetings lots of people said they would move to K5STEM once when it was in a permanent location and had proven itself. Current K5STEM families signed on knowing that there would be a move in 2014. Because it's an option school families can get younger siblings in if they choose and it doesn't split families the way a new neighborhood school does. They seem to vocally welcome the move to FP or a stay at Boren. In contrast families who were counting on another school who would be forced into FP (maybe split from siblings) are not being heard from because they don't know it will happen to them yet. With a few more years and less uncertainty K5STEM could be split/replicated at old SP (remodeled) or expanded to K-8 at Boren leaving FP as a geozone or neighborhood STEM school. If STEM moves far away from it's current families now and into a too small building that could easily prevent it from being a thriving school. Families could go back to their neighborhood schools and mess up the new boundaries again. If SP needs to stay open then some of SP should stay there (less disruption for kids and families) or it could be the new WS APP site. -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-65212130167970419432013-07-31T22:40:08.550-07:002013-07-31T22:40:08.550-07:00But out of curiosity, aside from personal preferen...But out of curiosity, aside from personal preference, could the K5STEM option program be converted over the next 5 years to instead be a STEM neighborhood school at Fairmount Park instead of a option school at Fairmount Park? <br /><br />Would Schmitz Park work as a stand alone elementary West Seattle APP site? What about a K-8 APP program at Schmitz Park?<br />-Neighbor <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-46974414602868397302013-07-31T22:22:18.575-07:002013-07-31T22:22:18.575-07:00Very well stated, Just There. No matter what, SP i...Very well stated, Just There. No matter what, SP isn't going to be able to stay together -- whether it be to move enough kids to alleviate overcrowding at the current SP building or siphoning off families to Fairmount -- the result is the same. The district should really be focusing on how to best creat two exceptional schools using the teaching and family resources that SP has. The line that SP supports the FP neighborhood plan because they don't want to be split is disingenuous. Families will be drawn out of SP no matter what. Best to make the best of those resources and keep the Schmitz Park building open as a small neighborhood school as the Schmitz Family has always intended for their amazing gift of that land.StringCheesenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-26169327423983210832013-07-31T22:08:09.191-07:002013-07-31T22:08:09.191-07:00Yes, the school that is k-5 STEM should remain an ...Yes, the school that is k-5 STEM should remain an option school. Should all non-option schools have strong stem curriculum? Of course! What is not always understood is that the school that is k-5 STEM is a project based learning environment with a focus on STEM subjects. It's alternative method that engages my son, but it's not right for every child. Some do better with less structured Montessori programs, some do better with more structure in a typical school. That's the beauty of an option, we can reach students that aren't engaged by the norm and find places where all kids can reach their full potential.Heidi Anoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-35254583234752271422013-07-31T20:56:34.190-07:002013-07-31T20:56:34.190-07:00Good point Lynn, and I do have a response. I thin...Good point Lynn, and I do have a response. I think it's easier to start a new MS or HS from scratch because families already have SPS experience like running a PTA. Also, for MS or HS it's only 3-4 years to roll up not 6. Rolling up a school from K may not always be avoidable but when it reasonably can be prevented I think it should be. If it has to be done, there needs to be a plan to make it fair and successful. When the 6th grade Academy was proposed for North Seattle recently there were all sorts of promises floated of how to make it fair and successful for families. Things like giving extra funding for extracurricular staff, moving the well-liked experienced teachers from the existing middle schools there, having the other PTA's in the region sponsor the new school's PTA so that it could share the funds raised and get off the ground smoothly. If FP rolls up from K or K-1 it needs this sort of help too. It was an unpopular school with no PTA when it closed. <br /><br />We have a unique situation here because we have a K5 School in the area in need of a new home with a geozone very close to FP and the ability to fill the building K-5 in year 1 or 2. This school is drawing lots of kids from the area surrounding FP, and needs a central location for the other enrolled students to minimize transportation costs and times. Have you seen the waiting list for K5STEM? <br /><br />We also have a near-by Spectrum program that is crowding out it's co-housed neighborhood school and splitting up families. Last I heard qualified kids couldn't get into Spectrum at Lafayette unless they already lived in the neighborhood zone and were offered not really there yet program at far away Arbor Heights. I don't know what the current status is on the Spectrum seats but putting APP or Spectrum at FP is an option that should be on the table to help the school start with more than K. <br /><br />We also already have the promise of another language immersion school in West Seattle and the call for a WS APP site for the equity throughout the city. Either of these could solve the many problems of a K-only school at FP. The feeder pattern for language programs to overcrowded Denny is a given so APP or STEM makes more sense.<br /><br />If you have to start a K-5 school from scratch and it can't be a special program, I think it should be done by splitting an existing successful school that is too crowded into two locations. Why wasn't this the solution for SP? It could still be split into Gen Hill and old SP or Gen Hill and FP and you would quickly have two successful K-5 schools. I think FP is getting a deal no other community would accept simply because unlike AH, K5STEM, SP, APP etc. it doesn't have any parents or staff or representation to lobby for its interests. How is that fair?<br /><br />The Montessori idea was more popular than STEM for a new K-5 school in 2011, but we were told SPS has a terrible time finding qualified staff for its current Montessori programs so WS is just never going to have any access to that option, tough luck. -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-52760809983366177942013-07-31T20:47:54.146-07:002013-07-31T20:47:54.146-07:00Lynn, I believe that SPS has created a culture in ...Lynn, I believe that SPS has created a culture in which it is extremely hard to successfully open a new school. Unless the district grows some cajones and pulls the plug on grandfathering, no one will switch from what they know is a successful program to an unknown. Also, it is not like FP is a "new" school. It is an old, motel-style-outdoor-walkway school with dated facilities. <br /><br />When I was growing up in a suburb of a large city in a different state, I went to 3 different schools between K and 5th as new schools were built. We didn't have any choice to stay. It was what it was and as "devastated" as I'm sure I was to be forced to switch schools before 5th grade, we all survived. That said, all schools had advanced learning, music, art, FT school nurses, and science labs. (None of it funded by PTAs) Switching schools, unlike SPS, didn't mean losing any services. <br /><br />The FP situation is made more difficult by the fact that the community they are trying to tie together do not have any real community ties. You have no real core seed of individuals/teachers/families with which to approach all of the challenges that come with starting a new school. In contrast, keeping Schmitz open and splitting off Genesee Hill would seed both the new Genesee building and SP with families/faculty/students with the knowledge to recreate the success of the current SP.<br /><br />Don't forget that a school starting slowly with few students also suffers from the weighted staffing standards problem. Fewer students means fewer staff (outside the standard admin core). You lose positions and hours for music/art, nurse, etc. Imagine trying to get specialists to agree to come in for a 0.1 FTE position.<br /><br />All told, I still don't see it as the best solution. Still waiting on ANY data supporting their recommendations...<br />StringCheesenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-34275991405390733862013-07-31T20:36:39.142-07:002013-07-31T20:36:39.142-07:00Does K5STEM have to remain an option school? Coul...Does K5STEM have to remain an option school? Could it move to Fairmount and then become a neighborhood school with a STEM curriculum focus like Arbor Heights is doing? Seems that way the currently enrolled cohort continues on together and slowly each subsequent year the incoming Kindergarten grade could then be filled with kids from within whatever the FP boundaries are once they established those. <br /><br />Just throwing out ideas. A STEM K-8 at Boren does sound appealing too.<br />-Neighbor Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-17314154802321156002013-07-31T20:08:03.709-07:002013-07-31T20:08:03.709-07:00Can we never build new neighborhood schools then? ...Can we never build new neighborhood schools then? Either new attendance area schools have to start with kindergarten only - or the district has to reassign older children to a new school - or every new school we build has to be a option school. <br /><br />STEM is freeing up seats at West Seattle Elementary and Gatewood - but a neighborhood school at Fairmount Park would do that too.<br /><br />If a K-8 STEM can fill up Boren, that might make the most sense. If we have to use Schmitz Park in order to keep it, how about removing the portables, cleaning up the building and putting a Montessori option school there? I wonder how much it would cost to do that.<br /><br />Lynn<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30525590303052405132013-07-31T19:54:18.120-07:002013-07-31T19:54:18.120-07:00String Cheese mentions SP and Lafayette. While it&...String Cheese mentions SP and Lafayette. While it's true that many families living around Fairmount Park have older kids at SP and Lafayette the homes surrounding the school were assigned to West Seattle Elementary (before NSAP) and then Gatewood, never SP or Lafayette. Younger students in the FP neighborhood are not getting in to North WS schools even with sibling preference. I know several families in the FP neighborhood with an older kid at Lafayette or SP and a younger one who couldn't get in who seem to want FP to open with the Cooper area reassigned to FP or some of SP so their younger kids can get into SP or Lafayette. Not that there's anything wrong with wanting to keep siblings together, but these voices should not be mistaken for FP neighbors who want to send their kids to a new neighborhood school. <br /><br />Also when you look at the impact of moving APP to Boren or Fairmount Park you need to include the numbers of kids who are APP qualified but go to Spectrum or their neighborhood schools instead to stay in West Seattle. I have anecdotal evidence that this happens a lot especially in the lower grades. If an APP elementary option was in West Seattle it would not just be kids currently at TM filling it.<br /><br />Rolling up a K-8STEM at Boren that could mushroom to provide more middle school seats when needed and have an optional Pathway to Cleveland STEM could totally solve the projected need for MS an HS seats in West Seattle if the numbers are right. I think lots of families who were not interested in sending an elementary student (especially K) to a STEM program would be really interested in MS STEM. By then you have more evidence that your child is really STEM-focused by their interests and career aspirations. -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-71294137651158093752013-07-31T19:50:07.045-07:002013-07-31T19:50:07.045-07:00One of the proposals at the end of 2011 alongside ...One of the proposals at the end of 2011 alongside starting K5STEM was creating a K-only campus at Boren to relieve the crowding at Gatewood, Roxhill, West Seattle Elementary, Schmitz Park, Lafayette, etc. There was a loud outcry against this from the entire WS community at meetings I attended. No one wanted to be forced to send their kids to a K only school that lacked the comprehensive program of a full K-5. Just like many parents were against the 6th grade academy idea in North Seattle recently. K5STEM was the alternative but many feared it wouldn't help the capacity problems at all. Instead K5STEM was able to help Gatewood and West Seattle Elementary reduce their crowding (the top two neighborhoods STEM students came from). Projected additional portables at Gatewood (and WSE I think?) were canceled after the K5STEM enrollment impact. By moving the PreK and transitional K program from Roxhill to K5STEM, it freed up classrooms at that school as well. <br /><br />Now Fairmount Park families who don't have money for private school or sibling preference at other schools face starting in a K-only school. Imagine your kids having teachers new to the school every year for six years. These are the same families who have the least PTA leadership and fund raising experience. These are also many of the same families (the one's who don't have the funds to move or go private) who don't have the free time to volunteer or extra income to donate. I suspect FP would be like the other catch-22 schools: too wealthy to get FRL funds but too poor to raise tens of thousands from parents. I also fear that the perceived neighborhood school need is for planned construction in the triangle area that is years away and may or may not add elementary aged public school kids. Show us the data! We can adjust boundaries if and when that happens but we shouldn't put kids back in the very portables at SP that the will of the voters said “NO MORE!” to if we have empty seats at newly renovated FP and Boren. -Was ThereAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com