A new open thread, have at it!
Update: In the comments, lots of new parents asking about whether they should choose APP and existing parents offering frank details of their experience in and why they chose APP.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Low limit on APP students at Ingraham
Suep asked Bob Vaughan about "whether there is or will be a cap on APP seats at Ingraham". Excerpts from his response:
As other parents pointed out, this means that only about 60% of students in elementary APP in the north-end of Seattle will be able to go to an APP high school in the north-end, and it will get worse if APP in the north continues to grow as expected.
APP parents north of the canal, were you expecting to be able to go to APP in the north through high school? Anyone see any good options for adding capacity for APP in the north at the high school level?
Update: In the comments, Suep adds a new clarification from Bob Vaughan.
Full implementation for APP at Ingraham for 9th grade for next year is two full classrooms of APP students. This means there is room for 64 APP students ... When originally conceived, the APP/IB option for Ingraham envisioned as many as 60 students per grade level over four years.Bob Vaughan's full letter is available.
As to why there might ever be any limit on enrollment in this program, remember that capacity needs to be available for nearby resident students. Also ... Ingraham is the guaranteed pathway school for rising language immersion students coming from John Stanford and MacDonald International Schools through Hamilton International Middle School. Space needs to be planned for these students, as well.
As other parents pointed out, this means that only about 60% of students in elementary APP in the north-end of Seattle will be able to go to an APP high school in the north-end, and it will get worse if APP in the north continues to grow as expected.
APP parents north of the canal, were you expecting to be able to go to APP in the north through high school? Anyone see any good options for adding capacity for APP in the north at the high school level?
Update: In the comments, Suep adds a new clarification from Bob Vaughan.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Open thread
Discuss what you like!
Update: In the comments, lots of discussion of appealing APP admissions, with current parents helping new parents through the process, and of Principal Gregory King leaving Lowell.
Update: In the comments, lots of discussion of appealing APP admissions, with current parents helping new parents through the process, and of Principal Gregory King leaving Lowell.
How should Seattle's schools handle advanced learning?
Charlie Mas has a post up at the Seattle Schools Community Forum, "Towards a Shared Vision for Advanced Learning", where he asks:
Charlie Mas, by the way, is on the Seattle Public Schools Advanced Learning Task Force, which is supposed to "advise district staff as they develop facility recommendations that will support the delivery of services to advanced learners throughout the district."
Update: Charlie is asking for "any constructive feedback that you all can offer" in the comments to this post, saying that his current thinking is that APP should shift to "addressing the special educational needs of children with very high cognitive ability" but "no academic achievement requirement for eligibility" and "no specific effort or goal to accelerate." He also suggests a new second program for "those who are working significantly ahead of their classroom peers" with "eligibility ... [based] strictly [on] academic achievement without regard to cognitive ability." Quite a change, potentially, please discuss further in the comments.
If we were to re-design Advanced Learning in Seattle Public Schools from a blank slate, how would we do it?Thought-provoking discussion there already from Charlie. Go take a look. Melissa has also chimed in in the comments to Charlie's post.
Charlie Mas, by the way, is on the Seattle Public Schools Advanced Learning Task Force, which is supposed to "advise district staff as they develop facility recommendations that will support the delivery of services to advanced learners throughout the district."
Update: Charlie is asking for "any constructive feedback that you all can offer" in the comments to this post, saying that his current thinking is that APP should shift to "addressing the special educational needs of children with very high cognitive ability" but "no academic achievement requirement for eligibility" and "no specific effort or goal to accelerate." He also suggests a new second program for "those who are working significantly ahead of their classroom peers" with "eligibility ... [based] strictly [on] academic achievement without regard to cognitive ability." Quite a change, potentially, please discuss further in the comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)