Thursday, April 12, 2012

Another open thread

What's on your mind, APP parents?


Annie said...

the Lowell meeting.

Anonymous said...

What's the "Lowell meeting?" Is there something going on on Capitol Hill? Or, do you mean the meeting this morning at L@L?


NESeattleMom said...

Dear Lowell @ Lincoln Families,

Please join Nancy Coogan and myself for our April Coffee Chat, Thursday, April 12th at 9:30 am in the third floor staff lounge, room 307. We hope you can join us after drop off. As this meeting is occurring during the school day, parents should remember to check in at the Lincoln office.

Thank you ,

Rina Geoghagan
Lowell @ Lincoln

NESeattleMom said...

Very well attended meeting in the 3rd floor teachers lunch/work room today. Many of the attendees were very well versed in the historical Lowell or were participants in various advanced learning committees.
Ms. Geoghagan talked about how she has been working this year to help teachers collaborate together in grade level units. She said that L@L is hiring new teachers to accommodate next year's students.

suep. said...

And then there was the final third of the meeting where a number of parents brought up the investigation and their concerns, and Rina G. dismissed the investigation as "very one-sided."

Parent activist and blogger Melissa Westbrook was barred from the room at the beginning by Rina and/or others who claimed she could not attend because she is "not a parent" at L@L.

Anonymous said...

Sue, I think you are misrepresenting what happened. Your use of quotes suggests that Rina herself said those words. She did not.

I also understood that it was one or more parents, not Rina, who wasn't comfortable with Melissa being there and asked her to leave.

And, in the final third of the meeting, just as many or more parents who are happy with school leadership spoke up and gave real examples of the good things going on this year at L@L.

I think the picture being painted so far is not accurate. I saw a lot of happy, supportive families. Unfortunately, those views don't always make it to the blogs.

-- I was there too

Anonymous said...

Lowell - Coffee chat
The meeting was exactly what the the name suggests: it was a coffee chat with Ms G and Ms C for the parents at Lowell@Lincoln.
It was NOT serious, it was NOT a community meeting, it did NOT address the different issues raised by the Lowell investigation and certainly did NOT answer the questions about the APP program's future at all.
But, it was a meeting when you heard the plans for next year and since it already looks better than this year (no planned move, no principal change, music classes for 4th and 5th graders, library access every day, etc.) I think it had a positive ending.
- Better next year

Anonymous said...

I was there too-

Rina did say those words.

-i was there too, too

Anonymous said...

I think it's important to say that the last third of the meeting was not about the investigations. There were a few questions about it, but not many. There was also talk about lots of other things.

It should also be clarified that the "number of parents" who mentioned the investigation was four. Three spoke about the investigations, and one spoke about another issue from last year.

For the most part, the meeting was an update on all the changes taking place over the next year due to the huge amount of growth. There was a bit of talk about where the program may go next, but no decisions have been made.

-another who was there

Anonymous said...

Wondering about the changes for next year, and am curious to know if L@L will be re-configured to take up space on the first floor(s), possibly for grades 1-2?

Incoming L@L

jujubee said...

I attended the Coffee Chat today at Lincoln, but arrived after it had officially started, so I didn't witness the barring of Melissa Westbrook. I don't know who made the decision to do so, but I am sorely disappointed with that decision. Do they really think that L@L parents are the only people concerned about the investigation? That they are the only ones who have questions? A parent of an incoming L@L student is "not a parent" at L@L either, but I presume he or she would have been welcome at the chat.

I was *so* hopeful that this Coffee Chat would be a chance to address and answer parents' questions -- to clear the air, if you will. Instead, this silliness of barring a concerned community member and parent from the meeting happens. For shame.

That said, I am *so* grateful to the people who spoke up at the meeting: those who asked pointed questions about the investigation and expressed legitimate concerns, AND those who praised Rina's work this year (citing examples). It was very helpful to hear all of those things. Thank you.

Personally, what I would really like to hear (from the district and from Rina and Gregory) is simple, along the lines of: "I/we made a mistake. But I/we learned (X, Y, and Z) from this experience, and I/we won't make this mistake again." Wishful thinking, I know, but hearing that would go a long way toward putting my mind at ease.


suep. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

SueP, how many people who heard about the 9:30am meeting today and weren't happy that it wasn't an after-hours meeting complained? Where was the uproar and the call for a general meeting? Is it possible that while there are some people who wanted to have an all-school discussion about this, there might be a large majority who don't see the need? Most of what you post is anecdotal from your own experience and contact with individual parents (which, I should say, *is* valid), but to keep saying that there *may* be a large number of people actively concerned about this issue when there is little evidence to the contrary...well, I'm not sure what to make of that.

When does a response to this issue represent a significant enough "sampling" to indicate that most parents are not as concerned about this issue as you are?

I am glad you're focused on this issue, but I am not convinced that it is as big an issue to most people as it is to you.

- Just Saying

Melissa Westbrook said...

"Sue, I think you are misrepresenting what happened. Your use of quotes suggests that Rina herself said those words. She did not."

Just to clarify, I did ask Principal Geoghagan if I, as a member of the Advanced Learning Committee, could come in and listen. Our charge is to make the best possible recommendation for the new location for the APP at Lincoln community. It occurred to me this might be a topic at the chat and so I went.

I had no laptop or notebook with me and was not going to blog about any of it. I talked to your PTA president, Jean (also on the AL committee) and assured her I was not going to be writing about this issue as I had my AL hat on.

I asked Principal Geoghagan if I could come in and she said no, I could not come in because I was not a parent and said it would be "inappropriate." She also had brought over a staff member (a custodian perhaps) to smile and make sure I left the building. That was uncalled for.

NESeattleMom said...

It is my understanding that the guy with the blue shirt on was a security person for SPS. I had never seen him before at L@L. I spoke with him in the office before the meeting about nothing in particular. A very nice guy. Definitely smiling.

Anonymous said...

The previous "coffee chat" had an unusually small number of parents -- about 5. So we actually had a pretty large turnout today. Clearly people were expecting to hear discussion of the investigation. I found it refreshing that much of the discussion was about student numbers, teacher collaboration and training, and hiring.

When discussion turned to the investigation, several concerned parents did get their say and asked some pointed questions. I'll agree that there wasn't much in depth response from Rina or Nancy and I could see that some people would leave unsatisfied.

As a second-year APP parent, I may be ignorant of some history that others watched or lived through. But I give Rina the benefit of the doubt going forward. She was officially reprimanded by the district and has faced public scrutiny. She seems to be doing a great job this year and growing into her position.

On Melissa's comment:
..."as a member of the Advanced Learning Committee, could come in and listen. Our charge is to make the best possible recommendation for the new location for the APP at Lincoln community. It occurred to me this might be a topic at the chat and so I went. ....I had no laptop or notebook with me and was not going to blog about any of it."

I'll take you at your word that you weren't going to blog about it. As an APP parent -- and just as a district parent -- I appreciate all your work and advocacy, including your advocacy for advanced learning programs. But given your online forum and your previous online statement about being determined to go to the chat (ostensibly in relation to the investigation), I can understand apprehension around not just what you might report, but how your presence might affect the freedom of discussion. (Take that as a compliment, please.)

-One more who was there

suep. said...

Whoa! Rina called security on Melissa Westbrook? Yet another page from the G. King playbook. He called security on a teacher last year.

NESeattleMom said...

I think they had security there just to be safe. Then they asked him to escort her out. Not that they called security on her.

Anonymous said...

Sue p,

Please stop trying to make trouble. Find a better use for your time

Anonymous said...

Rina cost one person her job and one person her health and never investigated serious concerns about staff misconduct. She has never admitted to mistakes and has never apologized to the staff people she "investigated" for "not reporting" what they actually did report. Nor did she apologize for almost $40,000 in outside costs to the district. People are looking forward to a better year next year? Good luck.
-not an optimist

Anonymous said...

To Incoming L@L
Ms G said that we will have 5 new classrooms at Lincoln and after McDonalds leaves Lowell will occupy the 2nd floor also with the administrative offices and maybe with smaller classrooms. It was not clear what will happen with the already existing classrooms since she said teachers are not happy to move one more time even if it is only in the building (it certainly takes up lot of time and energy!). And she also mentioned that she would like to keep the grades together. So from this:
- Go and figure!

Anonymous said...

Just for your information Anon at 8 25pm.
Sue P is not the one who is trying to make trouble. She is only one member of the parent community who voices her concerns. And she is not alone. Ms C could tell you how many similar letters she received (and never responded) asking for a "real" community meeting with everybody involved, teachers, parents, community members who care about what is going on with Lowell.

suep. said...

(Re-post from yesterday with correction.)

@-another who was there, Why are you trying to diminish this issue and belittle the valid concerns of other parents?

I counted over 30 people at the "coffee chat." It was billed as that -- not as a community forum to discuss the investigation, even though some parents have asked for such a forum. Held on a Thursday morning at 9:30 AM in the staff lounge, clearly the organizers were not aiming to bring in a large representation of the L@L community to talk about the investigation, and didn't.

So this was just a small sampling of the L@L parent community and may not be representative of the whole school.

I'm sure if the district or the PTA had organized a forum in the evening to specifically discuss the investigation findings and leadership, there would have been a larger crowd and more questions and discussions about those issues.

But getting back to the tally by -another who was there,
there were definitely more than four of us who spoke up about the investigation. And I know of others who were there who share our concerns but didn't happen to speak up.

At least three of us spoke about the fact that incoming L@L parents have asked some of us about the investigation, and what it means that our principal has been formally reprimanded by the district for misconduct. One parent said she sent these new parents links to the article and documents about the investigation and they decided it was "much ado about nothing."

About three of us spoke about the investigation directly and our concerns about child safety and asked how teachers at L@L can expect to be treated by the principal if they report inappropriate interactions between staff and children.

I also asked why Rina and Nancy seemed to regard the investigation as inaccurate or incomplete. Rina did say it was "absolutely" one-sided -- I have it in my notes and others heard it too -- and I was shocked to hear it. It comes across as though she does not agree with the findings of the investigation and feels she did nothing wrong.

Therefore as a parent, I don't have any reason to believe she would do anything differently if confronted with such a situation again.

Some of us asked her why she investigated the staffer who had come to her with concerns. Rina said she took it downtown and was told to investigate. Why she investigated someone who had come to her with concerns was not clarified. I didn't find her or Nancy's answers on this point clear or satisfying.

Nancy did come over to some of us after the 'chat' was over and tried to help clarify more issues, which I appreciated.

So I count at least 6 people who spoke up about the investigation and then others joined in on related issues. Some spoke up in support of Rina. They have liked what they have seen this year. And that is their prerogative.

Just as it is the prerogative of others like myself to remain concerned by the behavior displayed by Rina and Gregory and very troubled by the fact that neither has ever admitted any wrongdoing, or failing of any kind. As a parent, I am not reassured by this. Nor the fact that both principals appear to have dismissed the 10-month independent investigation and its findings as biased and apparently not relevant to them.

Anonymous said...

To Anon at 8:25
Sue P is not the one making trouble. Rina Geoghagan and others did a fine job of that last spring. Sue P is one of many who are working hard to clean up the mess others have made. And I find that a very good use of a person's time. Thanks for your advocacy Sue P.

Anonymous said...

"Rina said she took it downtown and was told to investigate."

I thought Rina went through a leadership program at the UW. This sounds like behavior of a follower - not a leader.

Fiona Cohen said...

Thank you, Sue P.

Thanks to you and several others at the meeting, we now have some progress towards the answers to the question "how can we be sure something like this won't happen again?"
I think you did Rina and Nancy a favor, because they obviously weren't ready to volunteer any information without prompting.

Fiona Cohen

NESeattleMom said...

Yes, I agree. Only through prompting by parents' questions did the obvious point of the "coffee chat" happen. If it was just a regular coffee chat, we would not have had Nancy Coogan there. I think Ms. Geoghagan probably feels a bit of relief that the meeting is over. The room wasn't really ideal with the science kits filling the room making it hard to see and get around, but we could hear really well.

ArchStanton said...

Asked security to escort her out.
Called security on her.

You say tomayto.
I say tomahto.

/Lets call the whole thing off.

Anonymous said...

From the link below, it appears that HIMS use of Wallingford Playfield is permitted for PE (presuming they respect the "field closed" signs when up).

From Ms. Hoff, Seattle Parks, "Parks has a Joint Use Agreement with Seattle Public Schools (that has been in place since 1995), allowing Hamilton International Middle School to use Wallingford Playfield."

Anonymous said...

The Joint Use Agreement:

Anonymous said...

Appendices here:

Anonymous said...

Uh, has it occurred to anyone that having a principal who needs to have security on hand for a coffee chat might be a sign that this is a person to compromised to lead a school?

I appreciate that folks would like to move on. So would I.

Fresh leadership would be the quickest and simplest way to move forward with a fresh slate.

That Rina G and King can be reprimanded and at the same time deny the legitimacy of that reprimand, but retain their positions is ridiculous.

-- embarrassed for everyone

Anonymous said...

-- embarrassed for everyone
Has it occurred to you that finding a new principal takes time and energy and work from the District?
That maybe not too many people would want to a be principal for a non-counted program with no place to go? Before a big move and / or a split? With not having too many supporting staff member (since many gifted ed teacher left last year)?
That the District is behind Mr K and Ms G a 100%? Ms C strongly stated her trust in Ms G with no question.
And the last one: do you have a number of the concerned parents, community members? Do you think it is the majority of the people involved?
- Questions, questions

Anonymous said...

It is interesting how some seems to sideline what appears to be a "minority concern" for the greater good of the community and to "move on". How you deal with concerns of "the vocal few" especially over a serious matter is very telling of what and who you consider your "community" to be. Is this to be a community of " the my way or the highway"? OR one who can deal with the flaws of its leaders, find some healthy reconciliation of truths or one who prefers to sweep it all away as it never happened.

Why? Because it's embarassing, it's a distraction, or better to do whatever it takes to make sure your kids' get the best? My eldest (big ears and reads too much) is watching this with interest and we have had some insightful discussion about adut's behaviors. It's tough at times to watch kids learn about the reality of do what we say, NOT what we do. The kids do ask awkward questions, but I'm glad they are asking.

-moving on, but baggage in tow

Anonymous said...

--Questions, questions,

Interesting questions.

"Has it occurred to you that finding a new principal takes time and energy and work from the District?"

So is the implicit assumption here that it would be better to have a new principal, but that there is just none to be had? Would you rather be backing a new principal with no baggage, but you are hopeless that one can be found?

How depressing.

"That the District is behind Mr K and Ms G a 100%? Ms C strongly stated her trust in Ms G with no question."

I don't think it matters that Ms C has 100% confidence in them. What matters is that there are parents, staff and community members that don't. That's what makes them compromised leadership.

"And the last one: do you have a number of the concerned parents, community members? Do you think it is the majority of the people involved?"

Is this really the way that you think this situation should be managed? By the will of the majority?

I think the school should have administrators who are not controversial, ones that all parents can confidently entrust their children to.

I also think it would be better to go into the upcoming year, with all the problems the program is facing, with leaders who don't feel like they need security guards at a coffee chat.

--embarrassed for everyone

Anonymous said...

-embarrassed for everyone
Yes, you are right, I am on "your" side because I would like to have a really strong principal who is not dividing the community in these hard enough months / years also when we have to face the uncertain future of the whole APP program. But, with my previous questions I wanted to show the reality, which is quite depressing. And I am not sure what to do.
-Questions, questions

Charlie Mas said...

The District doesn't seem to have any trouble re-assigning principals. They do it all the time. Most schools have been assigned a new principal sometime in the past four years.

Please don't pretend that's some kind of challenge for the District.

The District doesn't even have trouble hiring principals from all over the country for some schools. I think there would be a lot of highly qualified principals who would LOVE to be the administrator at SNAPP - principals with gifted ed experience.

Anonymous said...

(Greg, wondering if this should have separate thread since anyone who doesn't want to follow the rancor above may not see this.)

Does everyone already know about Julie Breidenbach suddenly going on medical leave until June? Her note in the past week's TM newsletter says:

"I had a recent medical diagnosis that will require that I take time off to get things squared away. I expect to return the first part of June. During my absence, retired principal Hal Kimball will be the acting principal. I will not be checking email or phone messages during my leave so please be sure to call the office and ask for Mr. Kimball or [head teacher] Ms. Bader if you need immediate assistance."

Naturally, we're concerned about Julie. I'm also wondering if anyone knows anything about Mr. Kimball, and wondering what the effect will be if Julie decides not to return (though I hope that doesn't happen).

Anonymous said...

Mr. Kimball was the principal at Lowell prior to Ms. Breidenbach's tenure there. He stepped out of retirement and returned to Lowell for part of a year 5 or 6 years ago when Julie B. was sent to Whittier to be interim principal there due to the sudden departure of their principal. He is an experienced APP principal and a nice person.

Ms. Briedenbach is dealing with a medical issue and fully plans to return in June. She would like to have some privacy during this difficult time - hence the brevity of her message.
-APP parent

NESeattleMom said...

Mr. Kimball is fantastic. Several years ago when Julie Breidenbach went to Whittier for several months to take over after the principal there had to resign for lewd acts, Mr. Kimball jumped back into the job at Lowell perfectly.

Anonymous said...

That's great to hear -- thanks for the info. Certainly don't want to invade Julie's privacy; it's just hard to get such a concise message and not want more information, especially about who will be handling things in the meantime.

Anonymous said...

Reading through the documents about the use of Public Parks by Seattle Public Schools, it's not clear that the APP kids at Lincoln wouldn't/shouldn't be able to use Wallingford Playfield for recess or other activities. 39 schools adjacent to parks have agreements to use them for recess, and as it has been mentioned, so does Hamilton. There has always been mention of "covenants" with the neighborhood, and I've asked the Parks Department for evidence of this, but haven't seen anything yet. Has anyone else?

While there are significant logistical issues related to the recess use of Wallingford Playfield by Lowell APP kids, I'd love to know the specific things preventing it.

- Kids on the Field

Anonymous said...

As I was writing my previous post, I received an email from the Parks Department about restrictions on the use of Wallingford Playfield. She (Laurie Dunlap, Superintendent's Office, Seattle Park & Rec) says:

I don’t know of a covenant preventing use of Wallingford Playfield by the nearby public schools, and it’s hard to see how that could co-exist with the very longstanding Joint Use Agreement we have with Seattle Public Schools to share recreational space. Over a third of Seattle’s public schools adjoin Seattle Parks land or facilities. Seattle Parks and Recreation and Seattle Public Schools have cooperated in planning and jointly using these separately owned lands and facilities for the benefit of students and other community members.

So, there are apparently no formal restrictions(?). Again, there are definite logistical concerns about getting 100s of kids to a park kitty-corner from the school and keeping track of them. But if it's a question of funds for recess monitors, I'm betting there's interest in supporting this.

- Kids on the Field

Anonymous said...

Can anyone fill us in on how assignment to IBX at Ingraham ended up? As I recall, there was some concern that the number assigned would be capped and not everyone who wanted a spot would get one. I'm wondering how many ended up assigned. Was it exactly two (or three...) class fulls) and was anyone turned away? Thank you!

IBX Watcher

Anonymous said...

Good question, IBX Watcher. I am wondering about the same thing.


NESeattleMom said...

I don't know if anyone was turned away. We turned in our choice form on the final day (before the extension for the power outage). My HIMS APP daughter got assigned to Ingraham APP as requested. When I was looking up on line she said to me she wouldn't mind if she got her second choice (Garfield).

heidi b said...

just $45 per peron on Fri,April 27

Includes Cocktails and Dinner, Silent and Live Auctions, Raffles and Prizes, and Music and Entertainment. You’ll be able to socialize with staff and other parents while sipping a glass of wine and perusing the silent auction tables. Dine with your friends and raise a paddle to fund a need. After dinner your table will pool bids and compete in the not-to-be-missed Dessert Dash. Finish the evening with the exciting Live Auction and leave having had a great time supporting Ingraham High School.

RosieReader said...

My understanding is that about 55 IBX incoming ninth graders are enrolled at Ingraham. Does anyone know how many are currentlly on the list to go to Garfield? Of course, numbers can move around between now and September.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for that number RosieReader. So it looks like two, not quite full, classes. "Of course, numbers can move around between now and September." It seems to me that they can only decrease at Ingraham? Is there a way to still get assigned there at this point?

IBX Watcher

hschinske said...

Anyone know the deal on transportation to Ingraham? My understanding is that there was a Ballard bus last year -- is that something that came together at the last minute? Currently my son's info says Orca card.

Helen Schinske

Anonymous said...

I'm a little surprised that there aren't more kids assigned to Ingraham...thought all but a few of the Hamilton kids were planning to go?

How many eighth graders are at Hamilton this year? The IBX # (55) must also include any private school/other middle school kids that tested into IBX based on their MAP scores - yes? Is the total more or about the same as last year?

Looks like Garfield is still going to be overcrowded...


Anonymous said...

There will be an APP bus that goes through Ballard from Queen Anne for next year.

A guy that should know

RosieReader said...

This is a few more IBX than were at Ingraham last year. And my understanding is that this overall 8th grade APP cohort is smaller than last year's, which means that the overall percentage of them at Ingraham would be higher. Anyone know for sure if this year's 8th grade APP cohort is smaller than last year's?

I'm not aware of anyone asking for Ingraham as a first choice who didn't get in. Is anyone else?

Anonymous said...

Wondering what people are thinking of the latest BEX proposal. The district is proposing that SNAPP stay at Lincoln for the next 5 years while a new school is being built on the Wilson-Pacific site. I am not thrilled with the prospect of my child's entire elementary school experience taking place at a high school with inadequate playground facilities, but am glad that she might not have to move or be co-housed.

Anonymous said...

Link to BEX proposal as of 4/23


Anonymous said...

I can live with having the North end APP kids stay at Lincoln until a new school at Wilson is ready. I'd rather have stability - and I don't see any other viable option for housing the elementary school co-hort.

I'm still very concerned about capacity for middle school APP. They don't include APP kids in the Hamilton numbers with the result that Hamilton actually shows as having extra capacity - even though it's overcrowded. I'm very worried that the scenario that just played out at Lowell one year ago is going to repeat itself at Hamilton soon.

Mom of a 1st grader and 6th grader in APP.

Anonymous said...

LOVE the potential for staying at Lincoln. Prefer this to Marshall for sure.

Anonymous said...

For a future generation of northend APP kids, I love the Wilson Elementary idea (would it be guaranteed?). But what would the experience be like for the next five years for current and incoming students at Lincoln?

Looks like North Beach might be housed there temporarily starting 2014. Would there be another wing available by that time? I can't see how the current area of the building being used could house both North Beach and APP. And then once Bagley is added to the mix...that's three entire elementary schools in Lincoln in 2015. Is that right? Is that possible? It's much better than co-locating with middle or high school programs. But I wonder what the plan for space usage at Lincoln would be. There are three gyms, I believe. Is there more than one library? Is there another cafeteria available elsewhere in another wing of the school?

Anonymous said...

So Lowell@Lincoln will be Wilson Elementary - APP next school year? That is how I am reading the undated BEX IV Scenario Draft document.

L@L parent

Anonymous said...

So am I correct to assume the new Wilson Pacific MS in 2017 (and housed at John Marshall beginning in 2014) will be both APP and non-APP? The document specifically calls out "APP" only with regard to the elementary school portion of Wilson Pacific. Plus, the capacity number is much too large for an APP-only MS. Thus, it seems it would not be an APP K-8, but a hybrid containing an APP elementary and regular middle.

Also, would the Wilson Pacific plan be a complete teardown and rebuild? The tag used is "New" versus "New Replacement," so it is not entirely clear...though the prices attached seem to indicate new construction.

L@L Parent

BL said...

L@L Parent,
My understanding is that the proposal is that the Wilson-Pacific property will have two schools, one K-5, one 6-8--adjacent to one another, but not attached.
There is no indication, one way or the other, that middle school APP will wind up at Wilson-Pacific.

Anonymous said...

to "incoming"

I believe that there would be an opportunity to improve the playground options if we are staying for that long. It's a good question for Kevin B. who led the playground planning effort last summer...but I believe that if this plan is ratified, then we can petition to consider longer term equipment. The choices made last summer were based on APP being in the building for 1, maybe 2 years.

Also, I like the stability of keeping the kids in Lincoln during the build at W-P, and have the same questions about APP middle school in NE. If someone from the AL task force knows more...please post.

Mom of 1st grader, APP

ben said...

Was there anything in the latest BEX IV proposal that explicitly called out Wilson-Pacific being for APP. I was just looking over the link and couldn't find it.

Anonymous said...

Re APP 8th grade class from HIMS. I think this year's graduating class is smaller than last year's. Not 100% sure, but it seems half the size of the 7th grade APP class. The 6th grade APP class is the largest of the three.

Anonymous said...

PS - If I had to guess, I'd say 6th grade 125, 7th grade 100, and 8th grade 60 tops. Most chose Ingraham because Garfield was so dang unwelcoming.

Anonymous said...

HIMS 8th grade is only 60 kids? I'm pretty sure WMS is closer to 75-85 (3 block there really that big of a difference? I thought Hamilton was bigger than WMS...?

Anonymous said...

With those ever increasing HIMS cohorts, I bet Ingraham is going to be bursting at the seams in about 3 years.
Future Ingraham parent

Anonymous said...


Take a look at the last row of the spreadsheet. It shows Wilson Pacific Elementary APP at Lincoln until 2017.

L@L Parent

Anonymous said...

Can we have a thread about testing? How are parents feeling about the onslaught? Are APP scores really being used to prop up schools?

Anonymous said...

Any thoughts from APP parents about the last two superintendent candidates standing?

Greg Linden said...

Hi, Anonymous @ 9:31, the moderator here, I'm happy to do a new thread on testing, but could you elaborate on what you want? What is the onslaught (and at what grade level) and what do you mean by scores being used to prop up schools? If you expand on that a bit, I can see if I can do a top-level thread on it soon.

Anonymous said...

Testing testing 123

7th grade APP @ HIMS taking the following tests:

MSP: Math, Reading, Writing
EOC: Algebra I
MAPS: Math, Reading

Assume that 8th grade also taking same tests (except their EOC is Geometry)

Why both 7th grade math and the EOC Algebra exam?

Anonymous said...

"Why both 7th grade math and the EOC Algebra exam?"

Because that is 3 day less to teach, I guess (sarcasm).

Seriously, I don't get that either, why do they have to do 2 grade level math tests (which is not really appropriate to the APP level anyway).

Why can not they just take the EOC Algebra exam? At least they need that for the placement next year...

- Ask the AL Office

Anonymous said...

If your child already took the Winter MAP (and they continue to maintain the magical 95%), why not opt out for Spring? You can't calculate growth without two data points.

Anonymous said...

Does it matter if they maintain 95%? Do they get counseled out of APP if they don't? Or is the 'magic' just for home consumption? :)