Seattle Schools Community Forum

There's an article in the Times this morning about IB funding, particularly at Rainier Beach High School.  It reflects a pattern in Seattle Schools that truly has to be addressed.  That pattern is for the district - with a flourish and applause - likes to roll out new and "innovative" programs that are usually wildly popular.  And fund them with seed money and then expect them to continue on (finding the funding themselves.) I truly dislike that the district - and many school boards - like to start programs that they have no idea how to continually fund.  

A bit of a slow week at SPS, probably because of the MLK, Jr. day off.  It's a good day to reflect on issues around race relations and our district, our city, our state and our country.  Maybe a good day to go see Selma.  (I read that one student - at a sponsored viewing of the movie - had said thank you to the producers for making it because he finally learned what "MLK" stood for - meaning, the actual letters, not the man. Amazing.) Looking over the Board agenda for the school board meeting on Wednesday, I found a compare and contrast moment.  The Times had a good story about the Creative Advance Initiative - arts in the schools program - and it's highly successful launch.  The Creative Advantage Initiative, a program paid for by the city of Seattle, Seattle Public Schools and the private Seattle Foundation, this school year helped 1,659 students in about 12 schools — mostly in the central part of the city — who wouldn’t otherwise have ...

It was a full house but frankly, not as full as I thought it would be (and certainly not the crowd that Charlie had - Tracy Libros said there were at least 250 people at Monday's event).   There were three legislators there - Rep. Jamie Pedersen, Rep. Gerry Pollet and Senator David Frockt.  I saw just two Board members - Director DeBell and Director Peaslee (odd that Martin-Morris wasn't there - this is his region).  There were also several members of the FACMAC committee. I sat at a table with parents worried about several issues but they seems resigned.  I also sat with two reporters from the Roosevelt News.  They worry over losing diversity at their school and overcrowding.  I set them up to talk with Shauna Heath.  Big Picture A couple of themes I came away with that I hope ALL parents understand. This is a serious situation (and probably more serious than the district is letting on although Flip Herdon did let two things slip that s...

I swear, this post is not about Program Placement, but a lot of folks will think that it is. The District staff is making a new distinction, between things that are programs and services and schools that have a distinctive "curricular focus". All of the things that they will recognize as programs and services exist to address student academic needs. They are pretty much limited to special education, bilingual education, and advanced learning. Nothing else - including a lot of stuff that you might think are programs - is a program. Language immersion? Not a program. Montessori? Not a program. Same for alternative schools, STEM schools, and international schools. None of these are programs. They are each, instead, a curricular focus. So what? So this: since they are not programs, they will not be governed by the proposed policy 2020, Equitable Access to Programs and Services. In other words, the District won't be under any obligation to provide equitable access to any...

Mark your calendars, folks. You will not want to miss the April 26 meeting of the Curriculum and Instruction committee. And bring a snack because the agenda is going to be packed! According to the timetable for the policy review process, the C & I committee will consider Phase II revisions for five - count 'em, FIVE - different policies. And not quick, simple, non-contentious policies, but five potentially controversial ones. I'm not sure what else the committee hopes to do in that meeting, but the discussion of these five policies could take a long time.

As we all know, the District has intentionally made language immersion programs at attendance area schools. This works directly against the District's stated goal of equitable access to programs. It's just bad in every way. It's getting worse. When building the feeder pattern for language immersion programs, the District wants to have two elementary schools feeding into each middle school and, then, into one high school. If the second elementary school program were placed in a school in another middle school service area, but adjacent to the middle school service area of the language program middle school, then access to the program could be extended to students in another service area. For example, if the second school with language immersion in the north-end were at Green Lake, then students in the Eckstein service area (theoretically) would have access to a language immersion program as well as students in the Hamilton service area. The District, however, has rejec...

I wasn't able to attend the Integrated Planning Workshop of December 9, but here is the Powerpoint for your review. I just have a few notes on the slides. Integrated Timeline. * I see the annual enrollment report has been pushed out. * I wonder why the Tentative Funding for Schools Set and Tentative Central Office Reductions, which are scheduled for February 11, 2011, appear on the timeline ahead of some January things. * I see that the report to the community on the Budget Survey is scheduled for tomorrow, a Saturday. That's odd. * I see that the introduction for the Board motion on the Transition Plan is scheduled for January 5. That's before they even see the enrollment report or the capacity management report. They vote on the 19th, before they have had much time to consider them. Academic Assurances * Nothing on the whole first slide has anything to do with Academic Assurances. On the second slide only two items address the topic: curriculum alignment...

Part 1 ( this part is not as fascinating as Part 2 but may have info you might be interested in. I'll bold key words so you can skip to what you care about.) Charlie was right (I lost count how many times I have written that this year but his streak continues). The Executive Committee meeting on Wednesday morning was very, very good. I was the only member of the public there which I think might have somewhat influenced what was said (or how forcefully it was said). I'm not sure it was me personally but that there was a John Q. Public in the room. Michael DeBell is the head of the Committee and Kay Smith-Blum and Steve Sundquist are the other members. The cast of staff coming in and out was quite amazing. Dr. Goodloe-Johnson was there for most of it as was Holly Ferguson, head of policy and government (I always forget her exact title) and Noel Treat, the new head of Legal. The first thing I learned is that this is where you get an advance look at upcoming Board meeting age...