Saturday, January 27, 2018

2 new Amendments

There are two new amendment/resolutions for the upcoming Board Meeting related to pathways:

Amendment 4:  (West Seattle Area)

Allow current 7th grade highly capable students from West Seattle attending Washington Middle School to enroll in Garfield as rising 9th graders in 2019-20. Approval of this item would allow current 7th grade highly capable students from West Seattle attending Washington Middle School to enroll in Garfield as rising 9th graders in 2019-20.

Substitute Resolution for 18-10

Substitute Resolution No. 2017/18-10 to affirm the vision for equitable access to advanced coursework in all high schools and develop the detailed plan for implementation by 2021-22. 

Approval of this item would replace Resolution No. 2017/18-10 as introduced on January 17 with a substitute version that affirms the vision for equitable access to advanced coursework, calls for more equitable identification practices for advanced learning and highly capable services, and requests a report that will detail the comprehensive plan for increasing advanced learning in all high schools following a collaborative planning process.

18-10 was the horribly flawed resolution that would just dissolve the pathways. The replacement one here offered by Mack, Patu and Pinkham is vastly superior.

Some quick predictions: given 3 board members have sponsored this one and you only need 4 to pass this version will likely pass as will the general interim plan to have the Pathways be Lincoln/Garfield/W. Seattle for the next few years.

Scenario F4.3: The official boundaries going forward. With the ammendments

  • The Language Immersion Pathway will also be at Lincoln.
  • You will be able to attend your area pathway high school if you are qualified regardless of what middle school you attended.
  • Grandfathering was given to the W. Seattle students at Washington Middle School to attend Garfield.
  • Language seems to be intact that if you're in a HC pathway High School in 2018-19 you will also be grandfathered.


Anonymous said...

This new resolution to move toward testing everyone is great, but the other part that keeps the HCC High School Pathway is terrible. It will continue the segregation at south end high schools and in West Seattle. The wealthier students will continue at Garfield/West Seattle while poorer students will stay at their local high schools. It will not have much effect in the north end as the trend is for HCC students to choose their local high schools anyhow.

This is such a cowardly proposal by board members and so unfair to minority students. It means that students who start to excel in middle school or early high school will continue to be blocked by HCC students from taking more advanced courses in high school. It is just perpetuating the inequity that is prevalent in Seattle schools and teaches students of color that being financially well off really does create advantages in school--even public school.


Anonymous said...

It's a fallacy that you have to be on the pathway or HCC qualified to take accelerated courses in high school.

EVERY SINGLE comprehensive high school in our district offers advanced learning, either AP or IB. Some even offer College in the Classroom, too.

The accelerated AP or IB courses are open to everyone barring any prerequisites and not all have prerequisites.

Furthermore, IB is predominately taken by students of color due to the program placement in two South end schools.

Students can choose to self-select acceleration at their assignment school or test in to acceleration on a pathway. The pathway offers a greater depth of courses and the sequencing necessary for those who already took advanced courses in middle school, but the assignment schools all have AP in the core areas of English, History & Social Sciences and STEM.

South end Franklin actually has more robust AP offerings than North end Hale.


Anonymous said...

Clarification, IB is predominately in the South end for two out of three IB programs in our district.

I thank these three Board members for having the courage to consider the overall impact to al students when making this decision.


Anonymous said...

I have no idea what Karen is smoking but can she share some details, it must be sublime.

Grouchy Parent said...

First of all, you can test into HC through 8th grade, so students who start to excel in middle school can still test in if they want. Second of all, advanced classes in high school are open to any student so you don't even need to test in to participate in those.

Wealth and intelligence and race are all separate issues. Intelligent people aren't all one race. Wealthy people aren't all intelligent. People of the same race aren't all the same SES.

This wasn't cowardly at all. To the contrary, it's one of the first things we've seen in a while that's really listened to what the Seattle Public Schools’ African American Male Advisory Committee AND School Board Policy No. 0030, Ensuring Educational and Racial Equity, AND School Board Policy No. 2190, Highly Capable Services and Advanced Learning Programs, all have to say and attempted to do something for ALL students including promote identity safety for ALL students. Plus it will improve equitable identification practices for HC. A step in the right direction.

Excellent work by the three board members who put in the work to come up with something real instead dancing along like Dorothy and Toto.

Anonymous said...

This must be where Karen got her assertion of HC students locking or blocking out minorities:

There is a sentence using that same terminology about four paragraphs in.

Different perspective

Grouchy Parent said...

Ah, thanks for the link to the article. That explains a lot.

Using 2016-17 OSPI numbers, in Seattle (public and private) there are:
36,410 white students
10,254 Asian students
10,160 black students
7,465 Hispanic students
416 Native American students
and 8,222 Other students

And yet it seems like the Seattle Times Education Lab focuses disproportionately on HC students. There's really not very many of them, so that's a little weird.

I'd like to hear about low teacher expectations of students of color at Franklin and Cleveland and Sealth and Rainier Beach and other schools. This is a problem anywhere it happens, not just at Garfield. Actually all the discussion of hicap stuff in his article kind of distracted from his point...

Doctor Hu said...

"The HC eligible heat map shows where eligible (not HCC enrolled) students live. There are not 329 Ballard students at Garfield. 126 of them attend [Ballard] and many [104?] attend Ingraham [so only about 97? Ballard HC are enrolled in the Garfield HC pathway + 2 attend other schools]."

Fairmount Parent makes a vital point about correctly reading the recently released "Student Density: Eligible for HCC Grades 9-12" heat maps which include AA HC numbers. Because so many HC eligible students are already enrolled in the Ingraham IB/IBX HC option or in their own attendance area and other schools, taking one example probably less than 100 HC enrolled Ballard AA high school students can actually be redirected from the Garfield HC pathway to Lincoln or to any other new north end HC pathway; while slightly larger, about the same figure also holds true for Roosevelt.

Garfield Pathway 652 HC enrolled
109? Roosevelt AA (+ 118? Ingraham IB/IBX + 155 Roosevelt + 5 others = 387 HC enrolled/eligible, 30 ft RS)
97? Ballard AA (+ 104? Ingraham IB/IBX + 126 Ballard + 2 others = 329 HC enrolled/eligible, 51 ft RS)
36? Nathan Hale AA (+ 63? Ingraham IB/IBX + 21 Hale + 5 others = 125 HC enrolled/eligible, 44 ft RS)
20? Ingraham AA (+ 76? Ingraham IB/IBX + 2 others = 98 HC enrolled/eligible, 48 ft RS)
170? Garfield AA (+ 9? Ingraham IB/IBX + 3 others = 182 HC enrolled/eligible, 83 ft RS)
85? Franklin AA (+ 4? Ingraham IB/IBX + 9 Franklin + 9 others = 107 HC enrolled/eligible, 0 ft RS)
73? West Seattle AA (+ 2? Ingraham IB/IBX + 20 West Seattle + 1 other = 96 HC enrolled/eligible, 59 ft RS)
32? Rainier Beach AA (+ 2? Ingraham IB/IBX + 0 Rainier Beach + 4 others = 38 HC enrolled/eligible, 26 ft RS)
30? Chief Sealth AA (+ 1? Ingraham IB/IBX + 13 Chief Sealth + 0 others = 44 HC enrolled/eligible, 50 ft RS)

652 HC enrolled Garfield Pathway
379 HC enrolled Ingraham IB/IBX Option
344 HC eligible local AA schools
32 HC eligible other schools (12 Center, 14 ft RS + 10 Nova, 0 ft RS + 9 Cleveland, 22 ft RS + 1 Middle College, 0 ft RS)
1407 HC enrolled/eligible (427 ft RS)

In fact, the total figure of ALL north end students currently enrolled in the Garfield HC pathway who can be reassigned is only about 262. Another 220 HC enrolled south end students can also be reassigned leaving 170 Garfield AA HC enrolled (262 north end HC enrolled + 390 south end HC enrolled = total 652 HC enrolled in Garfield HC pathway, 2017-18 numbers).

And at every Seattle high school, HC enrolled/eligible numbers must also be reduced by all HC eligible students who are enrolled in full-time Running Start and therefore do not occupy high school seats.

Here is a school by school breakdown of HC attendance patterns:

What Size Would 10 + 1 HC High School Pathways Really Be?

High School HC Enrolled/Eligible Heat Map by Attendance Area

High School Open Choice Assignments by Home Attendance Area (includes Ingraham IB/IBX HC Option), 2016-17 Data, Table 6C

Students in High Schools by Attendance Area, 2016-17 Data, Tables 4D & 4E

High School Full-Time Running Start Numbers, January 1, 2018 Data, (Total Student Count - P223 Total Count, note ft RS numbers include ALL students, not just HC eligible)

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Nancy is clearly not clear on the issues. "Blocked by HCC students"? Not true.

I'm also willing to bet that this other nugget from the ST guest essay is, on average, completely false: "...those in AP with me were no smarter than the students not in AP." I am confident that whether you looked at IQ scores, grades, state test scores, graduation rates, PSAT/SAT/ACT scores, or any other readily available measure of academic "smartness," the AP students would in fact outperform non-AP students. The idea that everybody is all equally smart is as absurd as the idea that everybody is all equally tall or equally strong. This is not to suggest that those non-AP students don't have other strengths--all students have areas of strength and weakness.

I really wish the ST didn't just publish guest perspectives without fact checking the inflammatory claims.

Facts matter

Anonymous said...

Facts Matter, that was Karen that said "blocked by HCC students", not me.


Anonymous said...

My bad, Nancy! Sorry! Your name was stuck in my head, too, because your post looked spot on!

Facts Matter ( so do typos!)

J. Lardizabal said...

The Board just approved Substitute Resolution 10 and voted down the values-based statement that Dewolf and Geary tried to add.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the update, JL. A measured and sensible approach by the Board, if this is correct.

DavidF said...

Thank you, J. Was anxiously watching for that news!

Benjamin Leis said...

And the whole boundary package with all the amendments apparently passed. So we have clarity for next year. Map F4.3 is the final one.

Benjamin Leis said...

I added the map onto the top.

GLP said...

Hi Benjamin,

That is not the correct map. There were no changes to NE Seattle (the map you posted has changed to Ingraham and Nathan Hale in the Maple Leaf Area). The correct map is F4.3. Thanks!

Benjamin Leis said...

My apologies I thought I had captured the right one from the board materials. I've put a new one up that is definitely F4.3

GLP said...

Thanks Benjamin!