Loading...

Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three - Hallo friend SMART KIDS, In the article you read this time with the title Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three, we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article baby, Article care, Article education, Article recipes, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three
link : Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three

Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three

When we last left the Board meeting, it was about hour five and Enrollment's Ashley Davies had made a last plea for guidance from the Board to narrow the Highly Capable high school pathways down in order to facilitate the work of creating new high school boundaries.

Right after her remarks, came an interesting exchange between new directors Mack and DeWolf.

I again note that some of the remarks will appear truncated because directors don't always speak in complete sentences and I was shortening for note-taking. 


Mack

It is complicated, pathways and boundaries and capacity and students and scenarios. I feel uncomfortable saying yes to pathways without a matching map and how much disruption is that crossing acrossing the whole system. 60% of students in north are getting disrupted. You guys, we all want to know about scenarios to have meaningful conversations.

The HC Advisory Committee recommended; there was one recommendation on table but no scenarios developed around it. Another alt is status quo with increased and guaranteed assignment for those in IB programs -we have three and only one is an option for HC students. 

DeWolf (interrupting)
HCC Advisory Committee, district-created or organized?

Mack
It's a superintendent committee.

DeWolf
I see a headshake from staff.

Mack
No, it's got a charter from the superintendent.

DeWolf says something unintelligible and then the Superintendent breaks in.

Nyland
I can research it but it's not on my list of advisory or taskforce.

Mack
I understood it started with former head of Finance, Bob Boesche, four superintendents ago.

Harris
Those folks were appointed and minutes kept.

A staffer comes to the mic and I missed her first name but her last name was Hanson.  

Hanson


So my understanding of the HC Advisory Ctm is that it came under Kendrick and is a group of community members who meet. As connection to district superintendent, not sure of that charter. In talking about this today, staff does bring them information, community talks, brings back information.

I would have to research it.

Harris
Did that answer it?

DeWolf
I just imagine that it goes thru approved membership process, training 

I'll just note that as long as I have been involved in SPS, this committee has been part of the landscape. Numerous superintendents, including Kendrick from the late '80s, have used their feedback.  The "Highly Capable Services Advisory Committee from 2014-2105 lists.

As well, "training" to be on a committee? I've been on a lot of them and we certainly were given instructions and an overview but not training.  It's assumed if we were appointed, we know what the job is.

The document I have attached is updated from 2014.

In 1989 Superintendent William Kendrick convened the APP Task Force and charged the group with reviewing programs and making recommendations on policies that relate to the program. In 2006, the APP Task Force was renamed the Accelerated Progress Program Advisory Committee (APP AC). The purpose of the Accelerated Progress Program Advisory Committee (APP AC) is to advise the Superintendent on issues, policies and their implementation relating to Highly Capable Students, specifically those in the Accelerated Progress Program. In addition, the committee will serve as a two-way conduit of information between the District and APP community members.

I'm a bit baffled why DeWolf pressed the issue.

Nyland (going on)
He says there are six options (but only names five) and then says, "Is that the intent you want - for 7 seven options?" 

Burke

I look at Option 4 as destination, do no harm, minimize disruption, but creating pathways where there are none so we can remove them.

North has well-develop IBX because of pathways. IB ones organically and I think makes sense to leverage off that structure instead of saying 5 is the magic number.

All high schools should be trying to build out with AP structure.

On that last point, that is the minimum that should happen if the decision is - as it seems to be moving - towards HC services in all high schools.  Because those services can't wait; otherwise, students would be short-changed and the district leaves itself open to lawsuits from parents and sanctions from OSPI.

Geary

Director Burke and I have talked about IB pathways but in the south you run up against again the fact that those principals have not been asked about this new influx of students that may disrupt how their IB is currently functioning.  Because of cultural shift and if imposed as a pathway designation.  A better job of making sure that great options are there and we have to find the ability to commit to supporting them so they can be offered.  But I don’t think in next month for community engagement as much as I did enjoy the idea of doing that.

Mack

Good points and I think Amendment 1 is good idea.  Provide ability to ask question and brought up in High School Taskforce by a principal. 

Harris

Talking about Options 1, 2,3, 4 is this on internet so folks can see it?

Nyland

If they Google it, they will find it.

Vote on Amendment 1 (Harris/Burke)

Pinkham =- no

Burke – yes

DeWolf – no

Geary – no

Mack – yes

Patu –no

Harris – yes

3-4, the motion does not pass.

Vote on Amendment 2 (DeWolf/Geary/Patu)

Director Geary started to read it but President Harris asked her to read the entire thing into the record - which is necessary for legal reasons - and Geary seemed somewhat irritated.

I was mystified by Geary the entire evening because of her tone which went from earnest to deadly serious to irritated.

There was no discussion of this amendment.

Pinkham - aye
Burke - aye
DeWolf - yes
Geary - yes
Mack - no
Patu - yes
Harris -yes

Passed 6-1.

Vote on Amendment 3 (DeWolf/Geary/Patu)
Would take Franklin off pathway list.

Burke
There are ramifications to doing this at the last minute and, as well, this issue could apply to Ballard and Roosevelt.

Geary
I'm also mindful having lived through a school that ended up with a program put into it -- a program that is called a service -- that the, the school wasn't adequately prepared for it, and it caused such a cultural division that I am hoping that as we -- we're going to have to do the work around Franklin to get it ready for '20-21 anyway -- and that as we do that work the culture can be, um, fostered so that the blending of populations becomes much more thoughtfully done by the staff in the school. That is my purpose and I have -- I believe that when a leader comes out, a building leader comes out, and makes a strong request but says that they are willing to do the work over time, that that is something that, that I can honor.

Pinkham
Wiley concerns for tracks for students.  Saw her email.  Will offer HC services but don’t call me a pathway.

That is really quite the statement and I'd like to see the actual e-mail - provide services but don't say we are a pathway.  Well, guess what? ALL the comprehensive high schools are now "pathways" and that will be in writing so I'm not sure how Principal Wiley will feel about that.

Patu (repeating over and over in different places)

Franklin has HC students and “all students are treated equally for academics.”  What school doesn’t?  Will disrupt learning climate?

Pinkham

Are we leaving a hole there for no Hc pathway.  How do we still advertise advanced learning opps?  "I don’t need HC pathway to be HC student."

Great question.  I'll be interested in the wordsmithing on this one.

  

Geary

RBHS IB and there’s STEM at Cleveland and Aviation High, if they can get into it.  As AL opportunitites.  Franklin is a hot property for SPS.  The place where kids don’t want into the Garfield dilemma, they want to go to a place that feels integrated.  

How does Garfield have a popular, strong, long-term African-American principal and yet the school is segregated?  That Garfield has evolved so much in that direction under his watch is an odd thing.

Harris

Why didn't West Seattle HS community get a heads-up?

Geary

I tried to get in touch with the principal but couldn't and there is already a designated thru process.  I let that be.

Vote

Burke - yes

DeWolf - yes

Geary - yes

Mack -yes

Patu - yes

Pinkham - yes

Harris - yes

7-0

Burke then immediately made a motion to remove Lincoln from the attendance list linked to Garfield.

I don’t like arm chair quarterbacking.  We just added two schools to Garfield.  I believe that keeping Lincoln in the list linked overloads /doesn’t relieve Garfield.  I don’t like to do this from dais.

Harris

Question for General Counsel.   If we just passed Amendment 3 and table on back has Lincoln has attendance area going to Garfield, should we have voted then?

Cerqui

He can make motion and be clear on where Lincoln would go as pathway if not Garfield.

Nyland

Check my math Lincoln opens in 2019.  Have 9^th and 10^th . So we’re talking about HC part of state law of what they would be offering for those students.  Roll up 11^th next year and then have designation but after that, the earlier amendment 2021-2022, everyone has a pathway. 

Mack

Lincoln is attendance area, not just 9^th/10^th.  Where is their pathway?

Burke

By 2020, they have one and its neighborhood school. 

Look to staff to advise Chair.

Jessee

Having new comprehensive and putting down as high quality AP honors and classes, I’m very, very nervous about that.  (He referenced saying this at Work Session.)

We can get there by 2020.

Ingraham might be a better match but not BHS and not RHS because of capacity issues.

Nervousness around that.  Garfield that was why we made that match.  More research and come back for next year with an idea.  

 

Mack

That doesn’t seem fair that it’s okay to delay on these kids.  It’s still an issue.  We can make a decision next year.

Geary

How many kids are we anticipating in Lincoln?   That would be shifting as HC.

Davies

Dependent on other factors mainly scenario.  Haven't done with them and the ones we shared were generated by Taskforce. 

I don’t have that answer offhand.

Burke requests lawyer help restate his amendment.

Move that Board amend transition plan to remove Lincoln from attendance area high school linked to Garfield as HC pathway school.

Mack seconded.

Mack

What is the pathway?

Burke

School is its own pathway.  Moves that school closer to option 4.

Pinkham

Will come on but now in interim too heavy with HCC pathways in north but not south during transition time.

Burke

No pathways but that makes it its own pathway. 

Mack

Pressure on Garfield, that would help alleviate that.

Geary

Do this out of fairness or put it off in order to think it through more and then Seattle Center popped into my head and we have to think about that. 

Our weddedness to certainty as to the future is an illusion.

The best we can do is grandfather to create stability for one child. Throw that out as a comment. 

 

I'm voting Geary's "weddedness" comment as the comment of the night (and there were a lot to pick from).  

Berge

Lincoln amendment has me worried about cost.  May be good idea to think about it for a little bit.

Harris

I’ll bite.  How expensive?

Berge

9^th and 10^th grade, some above and there are no 11^th/12 grade teachers so 6-8 more teachers likely. 

Harris

Given deference to Wiley at Franklin, what about Metzker at Lincoln?  Looking at Burke. Same question I had as WSHS.

Burke

No, not yet but conversation now.  She wants a robust comp high school for neighborhood. 

I would love the time to do that.

Amendment 4 Vote

Burke - yes

DeWolf - no

Geary - no

Mack - yes

Patu - no

Pinkham - no

Harris - no

1-6, motion fails.

Main Motion (as amended) for 2018-2019 Student Assignment Transition Plan

Geary

Thanks team for listening to changes for made.  Got thru it.  Listening about Sped pathways and families assignment or cohort we placed them in to serve them.  Important to me.

I want to note here that indeed Geary did advocate for Sped pathways since services move from buildings and students who are changing from elementary to middle and middle to high should be able to stay with their "cohort" or leave. 

So a cohort does matter sometimes.  

Mack

Space changed and concerned how this landed and not certain of pathways in her vote.

Pinkham

Thanks to staff.  Are we in the right place yet now?  What if this doesn’t pass?

Herndon 

If it does not pass, we will be following the rules of last transition plan.

Burke

Counterpoint to that is wish we had this conversation two or three or four months ago when we did have opp to do so.  Five pathways came after 1^st work session, no opp to discuss and now part of 2^nd work session which was 1 hour and no discussion.  

Interjecting here - how can it be that a Work Session could include no time for discussion?  Especially around something as like this?

I think, as structured, this student assignment transition plan is potentially still ‘damaged goods’”.  The fact that we made a last-minute change pulling one school out how that affects student shifts.  But didn’t consider other possibilities and I can’t support document as amended but affirm long-term vision.

Patu

Thank you staff, we’re here dismantling it and putting new ideas into it.  I feel like burke, not enough time to study all this and concrete decision whether this is good for our students.

All discussion, I still have not have that concrete feeling of wanting this to be implemented.

Should have had these discussions a few months back.   Will vote no on it.

All on the dais are starting to look very unhappy.

Harris

We have to build trust.  This process is not our best work; I will be voting no.

Vote on Transition Plan

Mack - no

Patu - no

Burke - no

DeWolf (very long pause, then a sigh) - no.  (He then looked over to either Geary or staff with a hand motion - I didn't understand what it meant.)

Geary - yes

Pinkham - yes

Harris - no

Motion fails, 2-5

The last item on the agenda - the resolution about the City not allowing Green Dot its zoning departures.

Patu

Thank you Director Harris for resolution because two charters schools in my district close to schools in system.  We need to stop this from moving forward.  Middle to Aki and high school from RBHS. 

Harris

Thanks to Nate Van Duzer, Director Geary and Noel Treat, combined lift. 

This is a flag in the sand issue and we need to be loud and proud.  We need to protect our very, very limited funds and this one we’re standing up and being very serious about.  We have  a month before an action item.  That was a personal plea from executive suite.

We will probably have another packed room on Jan. 3^rd, so game on.

thus Article Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three

that is all articles Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article Seattle School Board Meeting, December 6, 2017 - Part Three with the link address https://onechildsmart.blogspot.com/2017/12/seattle-school-board-meeting-december-6_28.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: