Loading...
Title : Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One)
link : Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One)
Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One)
I was only able to attend the first hour and a half of the Board meeting on Wednesday, May 29th. I watched the rest of it this week via SPS videotape. I'm just going to cover selected speakers during public testimony and the science adoption.Summary
What is it they say about watching sausage made? Don't watch.
Don't get me wrong; I love a good discussion. Problem is that the Board STILL had many questions and frankly, if they were not answered by this meeting, they should have voted no. But what happened over those hours of discussion was not pretty.
The Board has only had a couple of meetings go past 9 pm this year, which is great, but if you have been at an overly long meeting of any kind, you know that people start to tire. This meeting went on until past 11 o'clock (which triggered the lights to go off as a cost-saving measure at JSCEE). A meeting of seven hours is an exercise in focus. You could see the Board trying to keep that focus but people did seem to be getting bleary.
I think this photo below says it all:
See what's on the right side of the photo of President Harris? A big bottle of Tums. She came prepared.
It was quite a tag-team performance (and there's nothing else to call it) on the part of staff especially head of Science, Mary Margaret Welch, legal counsel, Ronald Boy, and CAO, Diane DeBacker. Looking less happy to be there were head of Budget, JoLynn Berge, and Deputy Superintendent, Steve Nielsen.
The discussion seemed to find Directors Mack and Burke seemed pitted against Directors Geary and DeWolf in all three science adoption discussions. Basically, it was cost/efficacy versus teachers' opinions and the need to do something different. There's nothing wrong with passion and concern but that is not enough in discussions about curricula AND its costs. Cost IS very much the Board's responsibility.
Speakers
For such a big topic on the agenda - the possible adoption of K-12 Science curricula - the room was not that full until about 5:15 pm. There was actually so many reporters that they had to make room (which, of course, is not the case 90% of the time). Also to note, many speakers - including me - handed off their time to others and it's not always possible to catch the name of the speaker.
The student speaker, Mario Falit, was from Nathan Hale HS. He talked about project-based learning and that their student leadership had created and planned a "Unity in the Community" event for the school. As usual for these first speakers, outstanding.
Another good student speaker was Gabi Masmela, the ASB president from Franklin HS. She said she was speaking for the adoption especially for younger kids.
One speaker, who received ceded time and whose name I could not understand, is a teacher at Chief Sealth International HS. She was pretty tough on the Board and said they should "learn from their mistakes" and that the teachers would not forgive or forget.
Ben Ostrom from Boren STEM K-8 seemed to think he was giving a lecture. He talked about politics and personal attacks and nearly ran out of time to say he supported the adoption.
Another teacher, this time from Denny MS, Anastasia Sanchez, praised the number of students of color who came to speak, saying it meant something important to see these numbers. She almost seemed to imply that if white kids came to speak, it wouldn't mean as much. She claimed that Amplify has closed the gap but I have not seen that evidence (and, from the Board discussion, neither has the Board).
Sarah Sense Wilson, representing the Urban Native Education Alliance, came with a number of members and supporters of that group. She spoke passionately about how Native American students learner which is better when work in hands-on and in groups. A student in the group also spoke. It was quite the contrast to have one group of color speaking so differently than another group of color.
One last speaker - who I missed because I stepped out the room - apparently had a lot to say about this blog. Or I guess she was speaking of this particular blog but because she said neither my name nor Seattle Schools Community Form but rather, called it "the blog," I'd have to guess she meant this one.
I do want to answer some of her charges. I didn't go into an Amplify classroom because, early on, I had made a request for information - as I am required to do thru the district Communications office - and was told that I could not have it as they were going thru the adoption process that included Amplify. I took that to mean they would be answering no questions. That other reporters did go into classrooms is something I can't explain.
She also claimed that I said that Mary Margaret Welch was compensated in a "significant" way from Amplify. I never said that. I don't believe that. I think she probably got a professional boost from Amplify via being quoted in their advertising but I never said she received any money. Now, a reader might have but I am not my readers.
Sigh. She spoke about what "real journalists" do but I have never claimed to be one. It's interesting, though, how many journalists are glad to get my tips. That would not be true if they didn't trust my integrity or the veracity of my words.
Board Comments (partial)
Director DeWolf apologized for missing the last two Board meetings, citing his gravely ill grandmother. He mentioned going to a sweat lodge to receive his Cree name.
What he forgot to mention in all that is somehow, at the Board meeting previous to this one, he managed to get back in time to attend a campaign event for City Council candidates at the Labor Council. Instead of going to the Board meeting that is the official legislative meeting for the Board. Where the official business takes place.
Then, in some kind of irony, he talked about having "broken trust" in reference to the math adoption. He also mentioned that there are issues at Washington Middle School. He said of the science teachers, "You are telling us what you need and we should listen."
Director Pinkham said he was glad for everyone who came and those who spoke especially the students. But he said he was responsible to listen to all voices, whether they were in the room or not. He said the increasing use of tech in the classroom does "concern me."
Director Geary firmly stated that the science adoption process had followed Board policy but then noted that some policies "may need to change for next time."
Director Mack spoke of the Board's budget and fiduciary responsibilities to taxpayers. She reminded the Board that the State does not pay for curriculum.
High School Adoption Discussion (partial)
Director Geary said that this would benefit HCC middle school students. Welch said that HCC students work two years accelerated so that was true.
Director Burke asked about assessments for the materials being adopted and MMW said some are online. He worked about student data being accessed by Amplify. MMW said no student data could be obtained that way. "We have Clever Portal that keeps kids safe." Burke then asked if that is why there is no data-sharing agreement and she said he was correct.
Director Patu went off on a tangent about how hard science is, especially the terminology and what about ELL students. MMW said that wouldn't be an issue.
Director Mack went wonky, repeatedly asking about specific costs. She was concerned about PD costs. Berge said that staff struggles with curriculum adoptions and fully funding them. But she said that all the costs - PD, licensing, materials - was in the budget given for the adoption.
Director DeWolf then said that they were getting "too in the weeds" and should not be. He then said that he had "heard" today that "science is about change." He said "getting nerdly" that "we could convert all the good energy tonight into good change and progress and you should listen to families and teachers."
Director Pinkham jokingly corrected him, saying it was "potential energy." He pointed out the first of many errors in the BARs for these three adoptions, saying the PDF said "Amplify high school" but the BAR didn't.
Director Harris said this was a 9-year adoption and "When do we check in with Research & Evaluation on how it closing the gap?" MMW said there would be a yearly baseline with "the teachers who are willing to give data." Harris said that sounded like a self-selected cohort.
Mack then asked about PD and MMW talked about how high schools have a specific science budget but all the high schools have "the same resources." I got confused here because she then said that Franklin HS had to lend RBHS microscopes because they had none.
The high school adoption passed, 7-0.
thus Article Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One)
that is all articles Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One) This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One) with the link address https://onechildsmart.blogspot.com/2019/06/slogging-thru-last-seattle-school-board.html
0 Response to "Slogging Thru the Last Seattle School Board Meeting (Part One)"
Post a Comment