Thursday, May 10, 2012

Future of Lowell @ Lincoln

Lifting this from the comments so more people see it, Lori writes:
The latest proposal is that L@L would stay at Lincoln thru 2017 and move into the new Wilson-Pacific building when it's built. Of course, this depends on the BEXIV levy passing. And, on enrollment sort of stabilizing because if current growth rates were to continue, by 2017, I supposed it's possible that we wouldn't fit into that building and would need to be split again. The latest number for next year is 530 kids (versus 430 this year).

The school has been piloting project-based learning in several classes. Not sure if that's what the writer meant by "experiential learning" or not. My child's teacher piloted a science unit that went over really well this year. My child came home several days bursting with excitement, sharing with me what was going on, and saying things like, "I can't wait to go back to school Monday and work on my project." Seriously, that is so *not* her typical banter at home about school! So I have been really excited about it.

The goal is to integrate more PBL into the curriculum moving forward. Notably, when this was presented by the teachers at the last PTA general membership meeting, one long-time parent spoke up about how wonderful this is because it seems that elementary APP is getting back to its roots. After the split, the eviction, growth, etc, it feels like we are finally getting some of the stability we need. We have a group of really enthusiastic teachers who work well together and want to try new (or should I say "old"!) teaching methods that work for our population.

There's a lot of doom and gloom on this blog sometimes. But I don't see it or feel it. I'm really enthused about the program, and I see it only getting better in the years ahead if we stay on this path.
Update: Charlie Mas writes:
North-end elementary APP will remain at Lincoln until it is moved to its permanent location at the new Wilson Elementary School ... That program placement is inevitable .... There is nowhere else it can go.

As soon as it is official, then SNAPP can become independent of Lowell and the program can be upgraded to a school and be called Wilson at Lincoln.


Anonymous said...

My son will be starting at L@L this Fall and we're excited - and looking forward to the ice cream social tonight. Does anyone know if they are going to change to school's name (maybe to SNAPP?)? Or is it going to keep being called Lowell@Lincoln? And if it keeps the L@L name, will it still technically be part of Lowell? Lowell at Lincoln is kind of a mouthful - I'd love to see the school get a new name. Jane

Anonymous said...

SNAPP is the "unofficial" name that the PTA came up with. SPS insists on calling it by a specific school building name, and as we're currently technically still part of Lowell but residing at Lincoln we're called Lowell@Lincoln. I'd guess that if we get officially assigned to Wilson Pacific we'll be called Wilson@Lincoln or something like that.


Anonymous said...

Please be aware that the District has not yet made a decision about the long-term placement of APP North. Placing APP elementary north at Wilson is on BEX 4 proposals because APP north has to be housed somewhere, and this is a place holder for now. The district is still gathering information from the ALPTF and a permanent long-term housing decision is unlikely to be made until after the new Superintendent arrives. Housing all of APP elementary North at Wilson Pacific is an option being considered, not a plan.
-- no decision made yet

ArchStanton said...

I'm curious; is the "team" name still the Dragons,or have they changed to something else? Someone suggested the "Nomads" a while back.
I thought that was highly appropriate.

NESeattleMom said...

Why do we have to be associated with a building if we are not associated with that building's budget or principal? This is a question for Seattle Public Schools. To me, it seems that SPS acts like our school is a program at some times and acts like our school is a school at other times. I don't think a school's identity depends on a particular building. After all the difficulties in the past two years with association/dissociation with Lowell on Capitol Hill, I think it would be great to get a new identity.

Incoming SNAPP Mom said...

I know a very popular math teacher at Seattle Country Day School who uses project-based learning with all his classes. His students LOVE it, and because it's the same projects year after year, every year he improves on them. Personally I think it's great because it's really applied learning (not just abstract knowledge) with a tangible result (not just a test score). The projects are things you can go home and talk about with your parents, and they grasp what you're doing. Also, it more closely mirrors real things kids will need to do as grownups (as opposed to performing on tests).

Anonymous said...

We are a new family starting our child in 1st grade at L@L this year. We are taking care to call his new school "APP at Lincoln" but it is REALLY confusing having several different names associated with the program, especially "Lowell" since we are not at all linked to that program, as I understand it.

I would love it if the district and the principal could come up with a real name for the program, one that loses the Lowell association completely. Having a real name will help our community come together. If the north APP is going to be at Lincoln for the next 5 years, that will be my child's entire elementary experience, so can we please get a correct name for the school and program?

Anonymous said...

Another incoming 1st grade family here. I have a question regarding the Open House - Is tonight the only opportunity to meet other families before school starts or will there be other activities later? We are out of town and very sad to miss out on tonight. Knowing that there will be another shot would be a HUGE relief.

Kate Martin said...

I am working on a proposal to make the Wilson Pacific site into a campus for Licton Springs Community Schools. I have a facebook group if you are interested call Licton Springs Community Schools, so please request to be a member. Right now there is a 650 student elementary and a 1000 student middle school in the BEX draft plan. I have mentioned to a few APP folks that we should have a building for APP on the campus as well. APP will always be a tent city if they don't get capacity in addition to whatever the geographic draw needs. This has been the root of the problem or at least part of it IMO. Additionally, we need to urbanize (and economize) the configurations and this is the place to do it on a gigantic site where we can house several different schools on a campus that resembles a college campus and which is in fact nearly contiguous with North Seattle Community College. Please contact me at if you can help me with this or even if you can discuss it with me. I think that APP deserves some status and recognition and to have its own building on this very accessible centrally located site for the north end makes sense. Community Schools are open day and eve all year round and have complete integration with adult needs as well as children's needs. It is also massively accessible by metro which must be considered for the future. I think we can get many youth oriented organizations to locate on adjacent or nearby parcels. It can be a year round central hub for families, kids and the greater community. I would love it if you would let me bend your ear on this. (206) 579-3703 is my call phone. Thank your for considering it.

Anonymous said...

Kate - I thought the plan was for the 650 seat elementary school at Wilson to house APP. Are you advocating for the elementary school to be a community elementary school instead of APP?


Catherine said...

There will be other events over the summer. They won't be at the school or with teachers, but their will be grade level get togethers.

Catherine said...

Their= there. Sigh.

The events will be at places such as parks.

Anonymous said...

Agree with Confused and would add a WHOA - really?!? North-end APP is an existing, thriving, yet (in the foreseeable term) HOMELESS program. Wilson APP was the first glimmer of hope this community has had for a permanent home and is already currently in the BEX plan. It sounds like you are advocating that the not-yet-existing community school would supplant APPs opportunity to be housed at the Wilson site. Obviously, you realize that the APP community will not support this and have appeared here to "throw us a bone" in your efforts to transform APP's opportunity into your school's opportunity. Transparent and unbelievable, really.

A better approach would have been to establish that (a) APP is already slated for Wilson in BEX planning; then (b) if there is extra space, maybe we can add a community school to the site. NOT vice versa. I don't see you winning allies from the APP community otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Particularly in light of your 2007 comments published in the Seattle Times, Kate, you have a long way to go to establish credibility with the APP community. In other words, don't expect many phone calls.

"The problem [of racial disparity] continues after APP into AP (Advanced Placement) high-school classes, another club for white, affluent families.

At least 55 percent of Roosevelt students need a level playing field that children in AP with stay-at-home/"hovercraft"-parents/Laurelhurst-privilege don't think a freaking minute about.

And that's one of the Seattle Public Schools' poster-child schools, Roosevelt. I'm at a boiling point.

I am not anti-APP or anti-AP. I am for opportunities for all and if we have only enough dough to fund one program, I want it to be for the kids falling through the cracks, as I believe the others will do fine in general with their notably larger variety of options.

Ideally, I want individual learning plans and high levels of achievement for each in their own way but, like I said, given that apparently everyone cannot be served, I'll help the most vulnerable first and leave the affluent kids "behind." We all know they'll do just fine."

- Aghast

suep. said...

Hey folks,
I think this is a genuine idea from Kate which is supportive of the APP community. Let's see if she can clarify her concept for us instead of jumping all over her and assuming the worst.

Anonymous said...

Confused - The "plan" for APP elementary'y north end location has not yet been determined and locating all of SNAPP at Wilson is not a "done deal". That is one of the tasks that the ALPTF and FACMAC have been charged with. The BEX 4 listing of APP at Wilson is a place-holder that recognizes APP needs to go somewhere but is not meant to be a definate "plan" according to the district. Kate Martin has a proposal for the building as does APP. The district is considering various proposals, including the possibility of co-housing APP with another program, or splitting the growing program into 2 schools by the time Wilson opens. You may debate the merits of Kate's proposal, but she is no more encroaching on your territory than you are on hers.
- no decision made yet

Kate Martin said...

If my apology about when I misspoke about APP has not reached everyone, I'll repeat it here. I apologize. I was wrong.

About the idea of the Licton Springs campus, I would like APP to be a third school of this shared campus concept. I don't believe that it's a stable position for APP to be "the" elementary school in any geographic area. I think it would be better to be a school that does not suffer the brunt of the fluctuating needs of the reference area. WP is a huge site and it looks like the district is interested in the idea of developing the site for both an elementary school and a middle school. I would go one further and develop it with those 2 schools which the reference area needs and make APP the 3rd school on the site. In this way, local pressure for seats would not impact APP in the future. While I do think it makes sense to use excess capacity in schools for a program that will fill the seats when there's a lull in enrollment in various geographic areas, I don't think that makes sense for APP. The need to have APP seats are consistent and stable. We basically know how many kids statistically qualify for APP because that bar is defined. If we have a school on this Licton Springs campus that serves that, I feel it will be stable and won't have to move to another site as the demand for seats put pressure on it over time.

Lori said...

Kate, can you tell us more about what a community school is? Is it an option school or an attendance area school? How many students would it hold at the elementary level?

And is this community school idea something that would be "nice to have" or does it fulfill an unmet need? That is, are there children living near W-P who don't currently have a local school? Or would this school draw in children from other nearby schools? How does it ultimately affect capacity in the north end?

Finally, has the district expressed interest or an ability to build 3 buildings on the W-P site instead of the 2 that they have discussed at various BEX meetings around town?


apparent said...

Under the current *DRAFT* BEX IV levy proposal, these are the proposed north seattle APP locations and timeline:

new Wilson Elementary APP interim@Lincoln

new Wilson Elementary APP interim@Lincoln (w/North Beach ES)

new Wilson Elementary APP interim@Lincoln (w/North Beach ES)
new Wilson Pacific MS (includes APP?) interim@John Marshall

new Wilson Elementary APP interim@Lincoln (w/North Beach/Bagley ES)
new Wilson Pacific MS (includes APP?) interim@John Marshall (w/new Jane Adams MS)

new Wilson Elementary APP interim@Lincoln (w/Bagley ES)
new Wilson Pacific MS (includes APP?) interim@ John Marshall (w/new Jane Adams MS)

new 650-seat Wilson Elementary APP opens (includes APP)
new 1000-seat Wilson Pacific Middle School opens (includes APP?)
newly renovated 760-seat John Marshall has no occupants currently scheduled

apparent said...

This latest BEX IV draft scenario does not foreclose several APP issues under discussion. The Advanced Learning Programs Task Force (ALPTF) has yet to make its recommendations, followed by the Facilities and Capacity Management Committee (FACMAC) and others before the proposal becomes final this fall, and is put to the levy vote next spring. The sole APP reference to a new Wilson Elementary in the current draft document is being described as a placeholder.

Specifically, the draft scenario does *not* indicate whether north Seattle elementary APP would be the sole occupant of the new 650-seat Wilson Elementary building, or whether it would share. In the latter event, which other school building would be found for elementary APP to coshare?

Similarly, the current draft scenario invites speculation whether APP is being considered for some portion of the proposed new 1,000-seat Pacific Middle School building on the same site? Numerous further variations are also available by the introduction of focused APP elementary or middle school options (e.g. like Ingraham HS for older kids), or perhaps even including an optional APP 1-8 which would permit a further variety of component MS possibilities (e.g. like APP language immersion, or APP IB preparation). Presumably such questions are being considered by the ALPTF committee.

apparent said...

Ideally, student academics alone would drive this discussion, but even under the current BEX IV draft capacity concerns remain. These are relieved by a 50-seat increase to the proposed new Wilson Elementary building to its present 650-seat target, between the initial and revised draft proposals. But to the recently projected 530 incoming elementary students in north Seattle APP might be added roughly 200 APP-eligible students attending school elsewhere, for a north end cohort already nearing 750 eligible students – about 100 more than the new Wilson Elementary capacity if all were to attend, even absent any intervening APP growth by 2017.

Remember that any lower than anticipated APP enrollment does not necessarily indicate fewer students qualified, it means they are choosing to attend their neighborhood schools that school year.

The latest BEX IV draft scenario leaves entirely open the projected use of the newly renovated 760-seat John Marshall middle school building from the fall of 2017, when its interim resident the new Wilson Pacific Middle School (including APP?) is scheduled to relocate to its proposed new 1,000-seat middle school building, and when the new Wilson Elementary (including some or all of north Seattle APP?) is scheduled to relocate from its interim Lincoln site to the proposed new 650-seat elementary school building.

kellie said...

apparent -

Your timeline is pretty close but there are a few nuances.

The "new Wilson Pacific MS (includes APP?) interim@John Marshall" is scheduled to open Sept 2013 - not 2014.

The "new Jane Addams" is scheduled to be interim at the Jane Addams building. This is scheduled to start Sept 2014, not 2015 and last until the Jane Addams K8 relocates to Cedar Park. I have no idea how they plan to have the new middle school and the K8 share space.

No matter how you slice it. Space is tight and is going to get a lot tighter before some of these buildings come on line.

It is important to note that the current 4th grade cohort is where the "current capacity management" started. In other words, with the 4th grade cohort, growth had already used al the easy to convert spaces. In Sept 2013, that group will start middle school and all the "easy to use" spaces at Hamilton, Whitman and Eckstein will be used up.

apparent said...

Kellie, thanks for your update, that’s helpful. Maybe after others also have a chance to comment I’ll post another revised version of the timeline further down in this thread.

All contained in my above timeline accurately reflects the SPS 4/24 BEX IV Scenario that has been made public and not revised. Across the top, the spreadsheet shows years 2012 through 2020. Down the side, it shows Elementary, Middle, High, and Interim school buildings. Reading across the Interim Schools row: “Wilson Elementary - APP” is shown occupying Lincoln from 2012 through 2016; “New MS @ Wil Pac” is shown occupying John Marshall from 2014 through 2016, sharing with “New MS @ Jane Addams” during 2015 through 2016. This scenario shows “J Adms K-8 @ Cedar Park” opening in 2016 and “Jane Addams” middle school conversion opening in 2017, but does not include the Jane Addams building among its Interim Schools.

Your helpful nuances must have materialized since this published 4/24 BEX draft scenario. Has the district made its proposed adjustments public since then? Are changes in middle school APP assignments being planned?

apparent said...

sorry for the multiple posts, two disappeared then reappeared ...

Greg Linden said...

It was Blogger's annoyingly overly aggressive spam filter (which I have no control over). I cleaned up the multiple posts.

kellie said...


Yes, there was a new handout this week at the BEX work session with the board. A very helpful person posted it on scribd

The enrollment numbers for next year have not yet been released. I imagine as the enrollment number are being matched to the BEX scenarios that the severity of the crowding is becoming more clear.

One (of the many) issues is that under old SAP, the cohort sizes would shrink each year. In other words, the 7th grade cohort was ALWAYS smaller than 6th grade cohort. Under the NSAP, cohort sizes are either stable or growing each year.

Six years ago, they just didn't believe that the entire K cohort could roll up to middle school. However, it looks like the 6th grade cohort will be at least the same size as the K classes 6 years earlier. As this reality hits staff, middle school capacity is shifting from a potential issue to a must be solved now issue.

Sound familiar to anyone?

apparent said...

Kellie, thanks for the link. It is not yet posted on the SPS webpage, where there is a magnify option so I will be able to read it more easily. However, while looking I did find that SPS has just posted some new BEX IV FAQs, including this under Program Placement:

"17. Where would programs such as North End APP (currently at Lowell and Hamilton) move to?
We understand that North End APP students and families have experienced substantial changes in the
past several years. Creating program consistency and finding a permanent home is our goal for APP. In
November 2011, the District launched the Advanced Learning Program Task Force. This community
volunteer group is charged with several tasks, including making a recommendation on where to house 5
APP elementary in the north end of Seattle. We want this process to be methodical, carefully weighing all
components and factors of the program, including location. After determining the model, the District’s
Capital team will work with FACMAC regarding potential locations."

kellie said...


Yes, I can't find it on the website either. On the right hand side, there is a download PDF button. Once downloaded, it is much easier to read.

Anonymous said...

Kate wrote: "...the" elementary school in any geographic area. I think it would be better to be a school that does not suffer the brunt of the fluctuating needs of the reference area."

So Kate, what you're saying is that there is no place for a APP program that isn't cohoused or co-located, is that correct?

Anonymous said...

If John Marshall is being potentially proposed as a MS APP site (interim or long term) we should revisit the *known* health concerns of housing a schools so close to the highway.

-heathy kids first

Kate Martin said...

This is a link to some information about the community schools model.

Kate Martin said...

This is the link to the facebook group for Licton Springs Community Schools. Please request to join the group if you're interested in knowing more about this or joining the conversation.

Anonymous said...

Our child will be starting 2nd grade at L@L this Fall. I am genuinely confused as to what to call his new school. What do current students at L@L call their school?

L@L needs a new name

Anonymous said...

We all call it Lowell@Lincoln. This will be the case until we get a new name.

L@L parent

Anonymous said...

More importantly, the school will not be given a new name until there is a building to go to. McDonald is called "McDonald at Lincoln." It will be the same for SNAPP, but we don't have a future building yet.

-another L@L parent

Anonymous said...

Greg, will you please open another discussion on APP issues at Hamilton?


Anonymous said...

Did any 6th grade parents attend the parent coffee at Hamilton? As far as APP classes go, it's been a disappointing year, and that's putting it mildly. Not knowing what's in store for next year makes us worried as well.


Kate Martin said...

May I suggest a new name? SNAPP @ Licton Springs Community Schools Campus or SNAPP @ Licton Springs for short. I really am hopeful that Licton Springs can be all things to all people and that a permanent home for APP can coexist on a next gen community schools campus at Licton Springs (WP).

Anonymous said...

For all who are concerned about "what do we/should we call ourselves?"--really? This is the least of our problems! Who cares?? Call it whatever you want, a 'name' is not the issue!!

Anonymous said...

Kate - I find it bizarre that you are trying to co-opt the option to finally give APP a permanent home at the Wilson-Pacific site by saying that it will be a community school and APP can be a third school. APP has no permanent home and it clearly is much too large to go back to Lowell. Why are you pushing this community school? There's a finite amount of levy funding (if the levy passes) - I think there are higher priorities for the district than a new community school. Jane

Anonymous said...

The Hamilton Coffee chat was not well attended last Friday (probably about 20 people max), mainly because it was the first and many people didn't know about it. There were a few 6th grader APP parents in the beginning and then they left. It was not the place and time to discuss the APP problems since most of the parents didn't know each other and many parents were from the regular ed and the spectrum program. There were no teachers and admin members present. The word is that the coffee chat for parents will continue this year and the next and it is planned once a month. But my feeling is that the APP program has to find another channel to talk to the admin about their concerns. This year we couldn't achieve one meeting for the program with the principal. Maybe next he will be more open to the growing population?
Worried 3

Anonymous said...

Im a bit confused by Worried3's post about not being able to acheive a meeting w/the Hamilton principal about APP "issues". If there are program-wide issues, can someone state them in a nutshell? I had a couple issues with my 6th grader's teacher and did have a meeting w/Mr Carter about it. I cant say it was totally resolved but he did agree to see me. What are the issues that are specific to the APP HIMS community, and are you saying that Mr Carter refused to meet with you as a parent; or has the APP-AC been trying to set up a meeting and was denied? There is a Hamilton parent rep for the APP AC and that would be one option for representing APP-specific concerns at a meeting w/Mr Carter.
- Hamilton parent

Anonymous said...

Hamilton issues from earlier:
You could read a whole lot more on this earlier site:

" suep. said...
Ah yes, not approving of your 11-year-old child being given sexually explicit college-level material to read and discuss in social studies class is definitely something only APP parents would have a problem with.

Or a teacher who singles out and harasses a 6th-grade student and falsely accuses her of theft -- only APP parents aren't okay with that kind of behavior from teachers.

Or a teacher who basically doesn't teach much, and whose students don't bother to go to her for help because she isn't helpful -- but who is very eager for her students to take the MAP test for some reason. Surely it's just an APP parent thing to be dissatisfied with that situation.

Or a teacher who gives an erotic poetry writing assignment to her 6th grade (12-year-olds) language arts students -- yep, everyone else in the district is surely okay with that except those pesky APP parents.

Or a middle school where kids are shown the "Kony 2012" video without context or discussion or tie-in to any curriculum, and there are plans to take an entire grade of 11- and 12-year-olds to see a PG-13 movie about kids killing kids as a fun "bonding" experience -- just an APP thing, I guess, to not be okay with that.

Yep, we APP parents sure are picky about wanting our kids to be taught appropriate material in a safe, non-threatening environment where adults demonstrate sound judgment.

Guilty as charged.

March 23, 2012 12:12 AM"

Anonymous said...


Will you please direct me to where on the district's website it says this school exists - Licton Springs Community Schools Campus? Why would SNAPP name themselves after a fantasy school?

Your pet school may be a great idea (I don't know anything about it), but I do know my kids are in a temporary building and my focus is to get them a home.

Another L@L

Anonymous said...

Hear, hear, Jane. Kate has identified one of the two easiest targets to displace on BEX: a new building for SNAPP. Kate, why don't you try to co-opt the South Lake Union school for your latest project instead of a school that already has a population waiting desperately for a home.

I would be very leery of co-housing the APP program with a program spearheaded by a person who publicly and offensively lamented support for APP-like programs, regardless of Kate's apology. Biases and opinions change, sure, but usually not wildly so.

- Constanze

Anonymous said...

The biggest fear at the school right now in the APP community, which teacher will loop next year. Because there are some 6-7th grade teachers who are teaching APP students with no background in gifted ed and no practice who look great on the papers because of the students MAP score but are not really appropriate to teach in the classrooms.The students and parents in these classrooms are hoping for a different teacher for next year.
- Hopeful

Anonymous said...

There are so many issues...a general lack of learning in some of the classes (YouTube videos used as instruction, including Bill Nye and some that are plain factually incorrect), age inappopriate material (thematically or sometimes of a sexual nature), a lack of a clearly defined curriculum that allows such freedom in teacher chosen materials, the lack of teacher experience and training with gifted ed, the list goes on.

Then there are the teacher specific complaints that have parents on edge with the possibility of looping (unless, of course, your child is in a class where learning is happening, then looping is good). On top of that are capacity issues and the possibility of APP being forced out of Hamilton like L@L.

The biggest fear at the school right now in the APP community, which teacher will loop next year. Has it been confirmed that looping will happen next year? I thought it was off the table, so this is where a meeting with Mr. Carter would be in order (a meeting that was scheduled, but has somehow vanished into nowhere).

Anonymous said...

Kate - What reason if any do you have to suspect that the WP school is slated for general education and is up for grabs by simply lobbying and a potentially good idea?

The mysterious program placement process will begin to put "programs" in buildings after the new buildings have been determined. It is my understanding that all the new buildings are being driven solely by construction constraints on where a new building can be placed.

For example, the district preferred to build a middle school on the OH campus along side the elementary school there. Once construction determined that the campus could not support two separate buildings, they then decided the only way to add additional middle school capacity in the NE was to re-purpose Jane Addams K8 and find a new home for JA K8.

A new elementary school at WP was undoubtedly driven by the decision that WP was the only place where a new elementary school COULD be built and that there are already existing students / programs to relocate there.

What reason at all do you have to suspect, let alone propose that suddenly, the district decided to just spend $50M to build a new building for fun and amusement and then go looking for a marvelous idea to use to go fill that building.

With all the desperate capacity and facilities needs, it is reckless and irresponsible to build a school on "spec." Hence the outcry regarding the South Lake Union building.

However, there hasn't been any outcry over new building at WP. Perhaps it is because there are already existing programs desperately in need of a building.

In sum, I think it is reckless and irresponsible for you to pressure the APP community to attempt to lobby for the district to use very limited and (not yet voter approved) funding to support "an idea."

north seattle mom

Anonymous said...

How about a separate discussion on this topic? I think we need one, too.

Worried 4

Greg Linden said...

Sorry, which topic do you want a new thread on? On whether or how elementary APP in the north will co-housed? Or on whether Hamilton APP is likely to have to move due to overcrowding? Or something else?

Could someone summarize the specific question or issue you want to discuss? Happy to start a new thread, but, at this point, not sure which of several possible topics it would be on.

Anonymous said...

A general discussion on APP concerns at Hamilton would be terrific!

Worried 4

Anonymous said...

Hi Greg:
Worried asked for another thread on the APP issues at Hamilton earlier. Since there were a few comments on this between the Lowell APP comments here and there, I would like to join and ask for a thread on the Hamilton issues. Maybe we could have a clear picture what is (not) going on there.
Thanks so much.
- Worried 3

Greg Linden said...

Okay, new thread:

Charlie Mas said...

I think folks should get used to the idea that north-end elementary APP will remain at Lincoln until it is moved to its permanent location at the new Wilson Elementary School. The ALPTF has yet to make their recommendation and FACMAC has yet to make their recommendation and the superintendent has yet to make the decision, but there really are no other solutions available. There are no other suitable locations available - either for the entire cohort in one building or two locations each with about half of the cohort. That program placement is inevitable.

As soon as it is official, then SNAPP can become independent of Lowell and the program can be upgraded to a school and be called Wilson at Lincoln. That will align the "official" truth with the actual truth and it will grant SNAPP the autonomy it should have.

There are other program placement decisions which are not yet settled. Among them are:

* The APP pathway for students in the McClure Service Area. Will they be part of the north-end program or the south-end program?

* Will SNAPP be co-housed or co-located with any other programs at Wilson?

* The eventual placement of the south-end elementary program. Will the program remain at Thurgood Marshall? Will it continue to co-house with an attendance area program? Will the PEACE Academy remain there?

* The eventual placement of the middle school programs. Will the north-end program remain at Hamilton or it will move to Pacific? The south-end program will probably remain at Washington, especially with the relief that school will get from the restoration of a middle school at Meany, but should it move?

* Even the high school program may see some program placement action. There are a number of possibilities here, ranging from the relocation of all or part of the program to Lincoln to recognition of additional APP options (like Ingraham) at the two other IB schools, STEM, and NOVA.

So there are a lot of questions that remain unclear, but SNAPP is going to Wilson - if only because there is nowhere else it can go.

apparent said...

John Marshall? 760 seats vacant from 2017 ...

Charlie Mas said...

Is apparent suggesting that John Marshall is a preferable location to Wilson? The absence of playspace makes it an inappropriate choice for a permanent elementary school location. It will do in a pinch as an interim location, but not as a permanent one.

apparent said...


just a little mystified by your insistence that for north end APP it must be Wilson "if only because there is nowhere else it can go."

I'm not necessarily suggesting that John Marshall is a preferable location to the Wilson proposal, but it is larger by 110 seats, so I'm not sure why you would rule it out *either* for the entire cohort *or* as one of two cosharing locations if this were the favored approach.

Your sole explanation is "[t]he absence of playspace," but that's only because there are literally dozens of striped parking spaces all over the large tarmac, all of which can simply be removed. You don't even have to walk the site to realize there's oodles of unused playspace, you can see it from Google satellite images in sharp detail.

So yes, I do remain mystified why you never include John Marshall in your otherwise very thoughtful list of available future APP locations ...

Lori said...

It's an interesting question, what might happen with John Marshall in 2017 and beyond.

As I understand it, it will be an interim middle school site for the next few years, housing kids slated to go to the new Wilson Pacific middle school.

Now, if there is any possibility that JM will become the permanent home of L@L kids, wouldn't it make sense to let us move in now? And put the interim middle school at Lincoln instead?

I for one would be a little frustrated to see the L@L kids stay in an interim building designed for much older/bigger kids and endure multiple co-locations between now and 2017 only to then be moved to the soon-to-be-available Marshall building permanently.