Friday, May 27, 2011

APP middle schools overcrowded too?

By request, a new thread to discuss the overcrowding at Hamilton and Washington. From a parent:
Principal Chris Carter reported that there would be five sections of APP for 6th grade next year .... There were projected to have 3 classrooms for 6th grade (similar to this year) but were quite surprised to have 2 additional classrooms added ... I understand that Washington is also expecting to have 5 classrooms for 6th grade APP.

In order to make the master schedule work, they are removing all prep periods from the classrooms ... It is very likely that even more students will be added during summer enrollment.

Principal Carter did not report this but it sure seems that APP at Lincoln might become a necessity as there just isn't any room at the main Hamilton building. It was also mentioned last night that Washington was as or more crowded. So that means that BOTH APP middle schools are severely overcrowded.

APP is growing. The entire district is growing. Closing schools was a huge disaster for the district and really for APP.
Another middle school parent added and asked, "The 5 classes is a surprise, does anyone have feedback on avge class size? how will this affect language sign-up(of which there are limited availability)?"

Does anyone know more about the situation? What is the capacity and expected enrollment for Washington and Hamilton next year? If the 6th grade class is this large and future 6th grade classes will be equally large, what does that mean for projected enrollment? Is there any ability to handle the growing APP population in the two current locations, Washington and Hamilton, or will a new site or third site become necessary soon?

It appears almost all the schools APP are full and have no room for growth. Some will be so badly overcrowded that there are no spaces that all the students can assemble, bathrooms may be overloaded, and parents are concerned about fire danger and evacuation times. And the entire school system is projected to grow over the next few years by by 15%.

APP has had three splits in the last few years designed to deal with overcrowding, but most of the schools APP is now in appear to be at least full and, in some cases, bursting far over capacity. What is the solution?

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Open thread and Lowell open house

A new open thread. What's on your mind, APP parents?

Also, by request, an announcement about an upcoming open house event at Lowell on June 9 at 6pm:
FOR NEW FAMILIES WHO WILL BE ATTENDING LOWELL IN SEPTEMBER

Enrollment has informed us that student assignment letters will be mailed on May 31. As a result, we are not able to send you an invitation to our Open House for returning and new students on May 25 from 6:30-7:30 pm, however we hope that you will see this notice and plan to attend with your student. You will have the opportunity to visit classrooms and meet the teachers with your student.

In addition the PTA is sponsoring a New Family Ice Cream Social on June 9 from 6:00 - 7:30 pm. Classrooms will not be open and teachers will not be present, however this will be an opportunity for families to meet and explore the halls and playground.
Update: There is an interesting and very active discussion still going on at an older thread, "Severe overcrowding at Lowell next year". Don't miss it.

School Board elections

Several challengers have announced for the upcoming school board elections. I thought I'd start a new thread to discuss the elections, to talk about specific candidates, and to ponder the impact of these school board elections on APP.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Severe overcrowding at Lowell next year

Lifting from the comments over at the Save Seattle Schools Community blog, it appears that Lowell will be badly overcrowded next year.

Quoting one parent:
Lowell has announced that 5 new classrooms are to be added for next year. They currently have 575 enrolled, and by my estimate, 5 new classes would bring enrollment close to 700. The building capacity is 485 and no portables are permitted.

How is this possible? An all-school assembly wouldn't even fit in the lunchroom. What is it like at other schools?
Another parent writes:
Lowell is so full now that I can't even begin to comprehend where five new classrooms are going to go. To remind people who aren't at Lowell, the APP program was split two years ago partially because Lowell was "too crowded." The number of students there at that time? 531. Apparently not only is Lowell no longer overcrowded with 570, we have room for 130 more. Insane.
According to the Seattle Public Schools Facilities Department, in a Jan 2011 report, "Capacity and Planning Management" (PDF), Lowell has a "functional capacity" of 490, current enrollment of 545, and is already 111% of capacity. If Lowell went to 650-700 students, it would appear that it would be at 133% - 144% of capacity.

133% - 144% of capacity would appear to be far outside of the norm and puts it in the district's category of "severely over capacity" (over 125% of capacity). According to the document, the most overcrowded school in the district right now appears to be Gatewood at 116% of capacity.

Back over to the comments on the Save Seattle Schools blog, a third parent adds:
The thing that makes me mad is how predictable all of this was. The only time I ever talked one-on-one to Dr. GLJ was well over a year ago at one of those public meetings and I asked what their plans were for capacity at Lowell (eg, move APP to another building? change boundaries?) and all she would say is that each school will deal with capacity issues in their own unique ways and they would just make things work. There was no plan to prevent overcrowding; only a promise to react. How is that acceptable? And yes, she may be gone, but the entire enrollment department should have been working on solutions here and other crowded schools rather than standing idly by waiting to try to put out fires.

How is it that I, a busy working mom with no background in demography, could see that the capacity issues in the NE would eventually affect Lowell, sooner rather than later? Year after year of adding new K classes at the feeder schools means not only more kids who may qualify for APP but also more interest in transferring out of overcrowded schools. Add in promised spots to neighborhood kids, and your hands are literally tied. So while the news isn't entirely surprising, it is entirely frustrating.
Update: According to a post at the Save Seattle Schools blog, "Capacity Management Briefing", Lowell is not alone in this problem, and part of the problem may be how the district counts students in APP and other option programs. From the post:
The District will be seriously deficient in capacity for 2012-2013 all over the place:
Elementary schools in every part of the city except the Hamilton and McClure service areas will be at or over capacity.
Elementary schools in the Denny service area will be critically over capacity.
Four middle schools will be critically over capacity: Aki Kurose, Eckstein, Mercer and Whitman.

The numbers for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 just get worse.

Here's the worst news of all: the District does a perfectly terrible job of counting students and counting seats. The numbers shown to the Board are "adjusted" numbers. They are adjusted to discount students in option schools, students in APP, and students in K-8s. So, although the District reduced the student count for these populations, they didn't discount the school capacities for these populations.
Update: There is a meeting to discuss overcrowding at Lowell in the library at Lowell Tue, June 7 at 6:30 pm.

Friday, May 13, 2011

Loss of some AP classes at Garfield

In an e-mail newsletter, the APP AC wrote:
At Garfield, budget cuts are being translated to cuts in AP courses and other classes, including the cancellation of AP Calculus BC, reductions in sections of AP Chemistry, and AP Spanish.
APP students at Garfield are disproportionately heavy users of these classes -- I suppose you could go as far as to say that the APP curriculum at Garfield in large part is the available AP classes -- so this seems like a fairly big deal for students in APP at Garfield and APP parents considering Garfield High School for their children.

Thoughts? Ways to deal with this?

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Ingraham, APP, and the firing of Principal Martin Floe

By request, a new thread to discuss the firing of the Principal Martin Floe at Ingraham (more info at [1] [2]) and how it might impact APP.

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Open thread

Discuss what you like!

APP kids this summer

It's a beautiful spring day here in May, warm and sunny. I thought might be a good time to start a discussion on sharing what you are doing with your APP kids this summer. Classes or camps you like? Games you might recommend? Resources online or offline that other APP parents might want to know about? Other ideas? Please share!

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Teaching changes at Lowell and Garfield next year

Lifting from the comments, an anonymous parent asks if anyone knows details behind expected teaching staff changes at Lowell and Garfield:
In the minutes for the April 5 APP Advisory Council meeting, it says the following:

"There will be many teaching staff changes in the APP program at Lowell next year. Tamra Hauge, currently teaching 2nd grade, is leaving. Kristen Anderson and Allison Fenzl, both currently teaching 3rd grade, are also leaving. Emily Betz will move from teaching 1st grade to 3rd grade and Gary Bass will move from Kindergarten to 1st grade. And Margaret Saunders, who taught 5th grade, retired in December. So there will be open positions in both 2nd and 5th grades and a .5 position open for 3rd grade."

Lots of changes. Anyone have any background on whether these are retirements, moves to other schools, or something else?

Also from the minutes, Garfield is getting ready to RIF 5-6 teachers due to decrease in enrollment next year. I think they are getting ready underfund/staff the school and we will see a encore performance of what happened last September. Wondering what the committee's response was to this information?

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Open thread

Discuss what you like!

Middle and high school APP

By request, a new thread to discuss academic, teachers. or social issues specific to middle and high school APP, especially the new Ingraham IB program (which now is an option for APP students in high school instead of going to Garfield) and the relatively new middle school APP program at Hamilton.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Questions from parents considering APP

From the look of the last open thread, a lot of new parents are considering APP and have questions. Let's create a new thread for Q&A for those thinking about joining the APP Program. Please post your questions in the comments.

Current APP parents, please help by answering anything you can. I'm sure parents trying to decide whether to join APP would appreciate hearing what you have to say.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Open thread

Discuss what you like!

A new superintendent and APP

Let's start a new thread on the impact of having a new superintendent on APP. Expectations? Hopes? Wild speculation?

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Q&A on APP eligibility appeals

An anonymous parent requested a new thread for help for those going through the APP appeal process. There is some urgency to this since the appeal deadline is in just a couple weeks.

In particular, the parent had questions about whether anyone knows of appeals that have succeeded without scores that meet the required thresholds? From the parent:
Two different questioners have asked for examples of successful APP appeals based on scores below the stated thresholds, without any reply. Do no such instances actually exist, or have those parents simply not responded? If the former, what then is the purpose of the teacher recommendations? On testing, do MAP scores suffice for achievement, or are additional tests required? And what does it mean that that this year, without any explanation, Advanced Learning Services has deleted from its opening Frequently Asked Question "What are the scores needed to be found eligible for an Advanced Learning program?" its earlier standard boilerplate answer "Scores are not absolute qualifiers or disqualifiers"?

For all those parents submitting APP appeals based on independent assessments in the next two weeks, your answers to these important and confusing questions will be deeply appreciated.
If you know the answer, please chime in. And please also use this thread for other questions and answers about APP appeals.

Those interested in this topic might also want to look at the comments in the previous thread, where there are a lot of questions from parents looking at APP and answers from parents currently in APP.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Open thread

What's on your mind?

Update: A lot of parents interested in APP and new to APP asking questions in the comments. Please chime in if you might have answers for them!

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Last minute changes to APP in transition plan?

Lifting from the comments, Sue P writes:
The district's agenda for today's school board meeting has a number of last-minute changes, some of which affect APP.

It looks like they are proposing to eliminate the Lowell APP walk-zone option. I'm guessing they want to direct more kids to Thurgood and fewer to the already crowded Lowell.

Someone ... says the district is NOT proposing to allow incoming 9th graders to test into the APP/IB program at Ingraham. If that is true, this contradicts what many of us were told about a month ago when they first pitched the Ingraham idea to us all.

Details here: Many Changes in Tonight's Board Agenda

Tonight's school board meeting agenda (PDF).
The Transition Plan Revision 2 document (PDF) is what people are talking about here. That version is marked up with edits.

A quick note on the Lowell walk zone, it appears that two of three references to the Lowell walk zone were eliminated, but one remains. I'm not sure what that means exactly, but Robert interprets it as just eliminating redundancy.

Update: The APP AC sent out a summary of the finalized changes. In brief, seems reasonable, the default path from both Hamilton and Washington middle schools is Garfield with Ingraham IB as optional. Not sure about 9th graders not in APP trying to get into Ingraham APP/IB; The APP AC says, "Students newly eligible for APP must apply during the Open Enrollment period to guarantee placement in APP", but that may not specifically address the question. The walk zone at Lowell is unchanged. To deal with overcrowding at Garfield, the district is using a combination of a smaller assignment boundary, reducing open choice seats, and relying on movement to the new IB program at Ingraham. More details here.

Monday, January 17, 2011

How loss of state funds will impact Seattle APP

Specifics on how the loss of Highly Capable funding in Washington state will impact Seattle (from the APP AC):
The $400,000 annual categorical funding (the Highly Capable Grant) that our District receives from the State is used for:

a) identification and testing of all students who apply for advanced learning programs (ALO, Spectrum, APP)

b) salary for some staff in the Advanced Learning office who develop and oversee programs

c) a small amount of curriculum and professional development

These funds do not go directly to classrooms, students, or teacher/principal salaries in any of the advanced learning programs. Because our district sees implementation of these programs as basic education for gifted students, students/teachers/principals are funded through the District's general, "baseline" budget, not the state grant, with advanced learning students funded at same rate as most general education students.

[The cut] will be retroactive to September 2010 .... With advanced learning testing done in the fall/winter, and now nearly halfway through the academic year, most of the $400,000 is likely to be spent [and] the District will have a $400,000 hole in their budget which they will need to make up in some other way.

It appears that the APP transportation budget, which comes from a separate funding pot, is not impacted for the rest of this fiscal year.
The budget is not yet finalized. You can write your state legislators to let them know how important APP is to you and that you oppose eliminating state funding for highly capable education.

Update: Rumor has it that funding for highly capable students may have been restored in the state budget?

Update: Lori has more details.

Update: And the funds are cut again.

Update: And back again. Wheeee!

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Another open thread

It's a new year! Discuss what you like!

Update: There is a good discussion starting in the comments of the impact of losing Highly Capable state funding.

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Open thread

What's on your mind?

APP AC urges writing Board on Garfield

The APP AC sent e-mails to the APP AC Google Group urging parents to contact their school board members to advocate for not splitting APP at Garfield.

An excerpt:
School Board members ... support ... Ingraham as an *optional* path for APP ... [but they want] ... APP students [to] commit very soon to go to Ingraham -- otherwise they will want to impose a geographic north/south split for ease and predictability of student assignment. A GEOGRAPHIC SPLIT AT HIGH SCHOOL CANNOT HAPPEN!

We suggest you use whatever information we've sent that resonates with you and your family, together with your own personal experiences, to craft a *BRIEF* email to your School Board member. Be sure to cc all School Board Directors, the Superintendent, CAO, Advanced Learning Manager, and the APP AC.

It is most important to request ... [that] Ingraham is an OPTIONAL path for APP ... [and that] the Ingraham path remains ... [optional] even if APP numbers at Ingraham next year are lower than expected.

School Board Members:

michael.debell@seattleschools.org,
betty.patu@seattleschools.org,
peter.maier@seattleschools.org,
steve.sundquist@seattleschools.org,
sherry.carr@seattleschools.org,
kay.smith-blum@seattleschools.org,
harium.martin-morris@seattleschools.org
Here is a quick way to e-mail all the school board members at once and Cc the superintendent, CAO, Advanced Learning Manager, and APP AC co-chairs.

Update: One month later, the APP AC sent out an e-mail pointing to a draft of the transition plan (PDF). If the draft holds, APP high school will continue to be at Garfield for all APP students by default. APP students that would be entering Garfield will have the option of joining the new program at Ingraham (and, if they choose that option, but the program is too small to be viable, they will retain their place at Garfield, so there is low cost to choosing that option). The APP AC did warn that "Garfield will be very crowded the next few years ... [and] there will not be a lot of funding available to create a new program at Ingraham," but mostly good news here.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Ingraham new path for Hamilton APP if Garfield overcrowded

Charlie Mas points to slide 24 from the slides (PDF) shown at last night's school board work session:
Program Placement
Advanced Learning - APP

Current Pathways

Lowell > Hamilton > Garfield
T Marshall > Washington > Garfield

Add for 2011-12
APP at Ingraham
Optional alternative if sufficient interest and other measures can address Garfield overcrowding
New pathway for incoming 9th graders (Lowell > Hamilton > Ingraham) if other solutions cannot address Garfield overcrowding (to be included in Transition Plan for 2011-12)
DW writes, "This may have been implied previously, but this is the first I've seen where it's spelled out in black and white as THE result if the APP/IB plan doesn't pan out."

For more discussion on this topic, you might also be interested in the earlier thread, "APP at Garfield threatened?"

Update: In a new post about a recent board work session, Melissa Westbrook writes:
They started talking about program placement and the new possible Accelerated IB program in response to the overcrowding at Garfield. It would be modeled after the program at Interlake over in Bellevue. (I'll just say here that I think it's done. The community would have to rise up, en masse, to prevent it. I just think there's way too much work already done for this to be just a "possibility." The question is whether it will be optional or mandatory.)

Monday, November 29, 2010

Open thread

Seems to be a lot going on for APP lately. What would you like to talk about?

Gregoire cuts APP in 2011 budget

In a recent e-mail, the APP AC reports:
On ... November 23rd, Governor Gregoire ... [proposed cutting] all funding for highly capable [students in] ... Fiscal Year 2011, retroactive to September 1, 2010.

Her letter to Senate Majority Leader Brown can be viewed here
http://wcge.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/2010_11_23_gregoire_letter.pdf ,
and her proposed cuts can be viewed here
http://wcge.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/2010_11_23_gregoire_cuts.pdf

*If you have not yet contacted your legislator, please do so immediately http://www.leg.wa.gov/LIC/Pages/hotline.aspx *! The Governor requested legislators have any potential responses to her recommendations ready by Monday, November 29th ... Please e-mail your [sitting] representatives or phone them directly.
It's easy to e-mail or phone your legislators. Go to Find Your Legislator, enter your address, then e-mail or call them. You can also contact Governor Gregoire.

This, by the way, happened last year too and was avoided. So phone calls and e-mails might help.

Update: The Governor's proposed budget is available. The section on education (PDF) contains the proposed cut to our funding.

Update: A group called "Parents and Friends Highly-Capable Education" sent out an e-mail urging people to write their legislators and the Governor and also sign a petition that will be delivered to the Governor.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Ingraham Accelerated IB program

On request, a new thread to discuss the proposed Ingraham Accelerated IB program that was presented at a meeting last night.

PJ Manley attended and summarized the meeting:
It would be an Accelerated IB program at a high school that already has a well-established IB program. The principal & teachers seem to be good, supportive, and available. It was a very upbeat meeting, and I think Bob V deserves a fair amount of credit for this idea. It's not his own. He readily admits he's copying the Interlake model in Bellevue.

Based on what was presented, I'd choose an accelerated IB program over typical AP classes at a neighborhood school in a heartbeat. It would be the perfect fit for anyone on the fence between APP or IB. I have to believe it will appeal to a lot of people.
An anonymous parent also attended and added:
I am cautiously optimistic that it could become an excellent alternative for some kids.

The IB diploma is a rigorous and coordinated curriculum that has high value with college admissions officers. Gifted students would be in self-contained classrooms in 9th grade -- so the 9th grade academics are potentially more rigorous than at Garfield. It appears than some of the 10th-12 grade classes might also be only highly gifted students. So the gifted group would feel more cohesive. So overall, this curriculum held more appeal to me than a mishmash of AP courses at Garfield.

And the Ingraham teachers are already teaching the curriculum, so it might require less start up time than I had originally thought. The also are proposing to make it possible for gifted kids not currently in APP to test in -- which should both bring in new students and reduce the complaints that kids can't enter a "gifted program" in Seattle after 7th grade.

It was also clear that Bob Vaughan was passionate about its potential, based on the outcomes in Bellevue. And the Ingraham principal and staff who attended the meeting seemed excited about the program and having our kids ... I think its the core of a very good idea.
Update: Meg Diaz points out that the presentation is available (PDF).

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Open thread

A new open thread for everyone, discuss what you like!

Problems at Hamilton APP

There have been several requests for a new thread to discuss problems parents and students are seeing post-split with the new middle school APP at Hamilton.

It appears Hamilton APP was discussed at some length at a Nov 5 meeting with Kay Smith-Blum. Lendlees summarized:
Lots of discussion on how Hamilton and Washington were not equal, how Hamilton's teachers are not used to working with APP kids, how Hamilton's library isn't set up for APP, and how there isn't critical mass at either school to offer advanced math. In addition Hamilton is not offering very advanced math in 6th grade as they do not have an advanced enough course at 8th grade. And, finally, the music program at Hamilton is in jeopardy because they did not plan properly in the rebuild and there is no space for it.
Over on the Seattle Public Schools Community Blog, Gavroche added:
Algebra class for APP 6th grade has been eliminated as a result of the split.

APP 8th graders at Hamilton have been told there is no math class for them anymore, so they are being used as free TAs to correct papers in 6th grade math classes, or told they can go do an online course, at their own expense.

There is not enough physical room at Hamilton for the music program, so the school had to give up a gym space for the music program and divide the main gym in half to accommodate multiple PE classes.

At least 3 teachers in Hamilton 6th grade APP this year have no prior APP experience and this has resulted in inappropriate assignments and expectations.

One of the APP math teachers at HIMS is only teaching gen ed math this year.
And, in other comments, two other parents offer some additional details ([1] [2] [3]) on what happened with math instruction for APP students at Hamilton.

Others have additional information? Or thoughts on what to do about it?

Update: In the comments, APP AC Chair Stephanie Bower disputes the accounts above, saying that they contain "information that is incorrect and/or exaggerated". Could others who might have knowledge of the situation at Hamilton APP clarify what is going on there?

Friday, November 12, 2010

Q&A with APP AC

Stephanie Bower, the Chair of the APP Advisory Committee, said she would be interested in doing a Q&A with APP parents here on this blog.

Please post any questions you have for the APP Advisory Committee in the comments!

Update: It looks like the Q&A is winding down. I wanted to summarize this long thread, but was struggling trying to do that. Fortunately, someone else already provided an insightful comment that may summarize the reason for much of the turmoil in this Q&A:
I think the APP AC should be recognized for what it is, and not expected to be something it is not. That's why I asked the very first question in this thread, in a (I hope) neutral tone. Stephanie has taken a bit of a beating in this thread and I hope everyone appreciates her willingness to do this, even if you disagree with her.

Stephanie is visibly walking a line so fine it almost doesn't exist, trying to balance the desire to be responsive to parental concerns with the fact that the APP AC is deeply embedded with the existing district process.

As is usual with all similar positions (ombudsman for the press, citizen review panels for the police, the CBO, presidential debate moderators), it is staffed with well-intentioned and capable people who work hard to balance everything they hear while appearing neutral, but they have no real power...and they develop long-lived relationships with the powerful institutions on one side of the process (the district) while the other side (the parents) comes and goes. It's almost inevitable that the conciliatory tone they strike sounds a lot like capitulation, because they are looking for a midpoint between the powerful and the powerless.
I want to thank the APP AC for its work on behalf of APP parents and students. And, I especially want to thank APP AC Chair Stephanie Bower for coming here for the unenviable task of enduring questioning from parents, many of which were quite upset about the past and planned disruptions to APP. Thank you, Stephanie, for being willing to do this.

Update: In addition to the summary by the parent above, Stephanie pointed to her answer to the very first question in this thread as a good summary of the work and role of the APP AC. She asked for it to be added here:
We are not elected officials so we don't really "represent" parent concerns in that way, but we use multiple methods to communicate to and get communication from the APP community.

We hold monthly meetings, email minutes and many emails out to now 1323 people, and some email us with their concerns and thoughts. People email us with all kinds of questions. In the past, we have done surveys, held special meetings (sometimes very large ones), had workshops. We constantly invite people to email us with their concerns. Many on the APP AC are involved in our school buildings, so we talk to parents, staff, and principals.

We are also parents with kids in the schools, so our experience of the program is first-hand. Even several of our staff reps have been or are APP parents. I have 2 in APP since first grade who are now at Garfield, one who also has an IEP/Special Ed for health issues.

The collective information, together with our history and experiences, inform what we say and do. When you are a committee of 16, you get quite a broad representation of the program. We usually send out emails to the list telling people what we are doing, what we are saying, and inviting anyone and everyone to contact us.

We are open to suggestions for better ways to do this!
I want to thank Stephanie again for doing this sometimes contentious Q&A. I hope APP parents, Stephanie, and the other members of the APP AC thought that the Q&A was useful and helped to clarify what the APP AC does for APP parents and what the APP AC probably should not be expected to do.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

APP at Garfield threatened?

Over at the Seattle Public Schools Community Blog, Charlie Mas reviews the slides (PDF) from the new NSAP Transition Plan and writes:
Some things are pretty clear:

The District staff don't really want to do anything about changing the Garfield attendance area. In fact, they don't appear to really want to change any attendance areas. Instead, a lot of the options for Garfield had to do with re-arranging APP.
Ruthie adds:
Several of the vaguely-described potential "options" for fixing the overcrowding problem at Garfield seem to involve APP.

My bet is that the District isn't going to tell us what this latest round of hosing will look like until January. This would be a GREAT time to get someone from the APP-AC to answer some questions on this blog, guys, chief among them being "Who, exactly, is advocating for our kids in this process?"

Sorry to be cranky. I still have PTSD from the elementary split.
And, Lendlees writes:
They are planning once again to move/split/whatever APP without any thought as to where the students will go. (or as Parent said, how many APP students live in the Garfield zone)
Update: Good discussion in the comments.

Update: An anonymous parent claims letters are going out from Robert Vaughan saying that APP at Garfield "likely" will be broken up soon. The parent made the full text of the letter available.

Update: Active discussion on Robert Vaughan's letter in the comments of a post at the Seattle Public Schools Community Blog.

Update: Another post at the Seattle Public Schools Community Blog, "Questions About if APP is Split Off From Garfield".

Update: In another post at the Seattle Public Schools Community Blog, "Possible Outcome for Garfield", Charlie Mas writes:
The District is going to do something about Garfield and what they are going to do is limit APP access to the school. The full weight of reducing the overcrowding at Garfield will fall on APP.

This was their intent from the start and it is the reason that they drew the Garfield attendance area as they did. They want to break up APP because the District improves school test scores by re-arranging the distribution of high performing students.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Open thread

What's on your mind, APP parents?

Kay Smith-Blum at Lowell Nov 5

Lifting this from the comments, Lendlees writes:
Don't forget that Board member Kay Smith-Blum is coming to Lowell this Friday (11/5) for the "Coffee with Gregory" time (9:30 am). She's always a breath of sanity and is a big advocate of APP.
Kay Smith-Blum is the School Board Director for District 5 (Central Area, including Lowell). If you can't make this 9:30am Nov 5 meeting at Lowell Elementary but want to talk with Kay Smith-Blum, she has another meeting Nov 13 at 10am at the Douglas-Truth Library.

Also, Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson has her last coffee chats tonight 6-7pm at Mercer Middle School and tomorrow (Tue Nov 2) at North Beach Elementary from 8:10am-10am.

Update: Good summary of the Nov 5 Kay Smith-Blum meeting in the comments.

Friday, October 22, 2010

APP AC Oct 5 meeting minutes available

APP Advisory Committee had a meeting on Oct 5. A summary (PDF) of the meeting is available.

Worth reading. Most interesting tidbits for me were the enrollment numbers for elementary,
About 70% of the applications for advanced learning come for students in the Lowell/Hamilton assignment areas [and 63% of grade 1-5 APP is at Lowell] ... [perhaps because] schools in the NorthEast are very crowded which could provide an additional incentive for parents to look at other options (i.e. APP) for their students.
the response to a question on whether the new APP teachers are getting any training in gifted education,
Teachers new to APP do not get special training. But ... they are provided with curriculum and other in-service support ... Bob feels that the best way to influence the quality of instruction is to define expectations (students should be working at least 2 years above grade level) and to codify the curriculum
the new data that shows that the APP split had no impact on the diversity of the APP students, and the problems that are appearing due to overcrowding at Lowell, Hamilton, and Garfield.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Friday, September 17, 2010

Upcoming meetings with Superintendent and Board

In the comments to an earlier post, Lori asked:
Is anyone planning to attend one of the Superintendent's coffee chats?

I hope to go to the one at Jane Addams on October 12th. Given that it's at 9AM and many local families will be taking their elementary students to school at that very time, I suspect that meeting will have middle and highschool parents, along with APP parents residing in the NE whose kids take the bus to Lowell. Perhaps it will be a good opportunity to discuss APP-specific concerns.

I may ask if the split last year achieved its desired outcomes and how they are planning for capacity in the future ... I suspect there are going to be capacity issues at Lowell in the very near future.
Seems like a good idea. If APP parents might want to attend any of the Superintendent's coffee chats, here are the dates and places:
Superintendent Coffee Chat Dates
  • Central: Thursday, October 7 at SBOC from 6:00 p.m. -7:00 p.m.
  • Northeast: Tuesday, October 12 at Jane Adams (K-8) from 9:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.
  • West Seattle:Monday, October 25 at West Seattle Elementary from 6:00 p.m. –7:00 p.m.
  • South East: Wednesday, October 27 from 6:00 p.m. -7:00 p.m. at Mercer Middle
  • Northwest: Tuesday, November 2 at North Beach from 9:00 a.m. -10:00a.m.
Also, Director Kay Smith-Blum announced community meetings:
Kay Smith-Blum, School Board Director for District 5 (Central Area, including Lowell) is having community meetings on Saturday September 25th and November 13th from 10:00 am until 11:30 am at the Douglas-Truth Library (2300 East Yesler Way). These meetings are a good chance to meet with her and voice your concerns about our school district. She would like to connect with as many parents as possible.
APP parents, are there other events with other school board members that you plan on attending to ask questions?

Update: Melissa Westbrook mentions an upcoming meeting with Director Maier:
Director Maier is having a morning meeting on Wednesday the 22nd from 10-11:30 a.m. at the Lake City Public Library, 12501 28th NE.
She also notes that these meetings appear sparsely attended, only three parents at Harium's recent one. APP parents that attend future meetings almost certainly would have a chance to ask questions.

Update: Charlie Mas posted a list of many upcoming meetings, including these with Directors Patu and Sunquist:
Saturday, September 25 at 10:00-noon
Director Patu Community Meeting at Tully's Coffee @ Rainier / Genesee

Wednesday, September 29 at 11:30am-12:30pm
Director Sundquist Community Meeting at Delridge Library
Update: Steve notes in the comments that Director Kay Smith-Blum "encouraged everyone to come to the Community Meeting she is hosting at Douglas Truth Library on Sat. Sept 25 from 10:00 to 11:30 Capacity issues at both Lowell and Garfield will be topics for discussion."

Update: Melissa reports that superintendent is taking questions at the regional meetings. Here is a list of the next regional meetings
Central: September 22 at Bailey Gatzert Elementary School
Northwest: September 23 at Hamilton Middle School
Southeast: September 28 at Aki MS
West: September 30 at Chief Sealth High School
if you might want to attend.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

APP discussion on Seattle Public Schools Community blog

Charlie Mas posted an "APP Thread" over at the Seattle Public Schools Community blog.

Update: There is also a lot of discussion of the future of APP at the high school level at Garfield in the comments for another recent post on that blog, which I have summarized for convenience.

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

First day of school and topics for this blog

The first day of school is today! It is a good time to gather topics for this blog for the new school year. What would you like to talk about here on this blog in the next few months?

Perhaps another Q&A for new parents to ask questions of existing parents?

Anyone still interested in discussing the APP split (Lowell/Thurgood Marshall and Hamilton/Washington) and its aftermath?

More discussion of any additional splits that should or should not happen? Perhaps more discussion of the future of APP at the high school level as well?

Maybe compare Seattle APP to the expanding PRISM and GHSP programs in Bellevue? What is good and not so good?

Whether we need an advocacy group for APP? What parents are doing to supplement math (and whether we should be supplementing math)? Transportation issues? Other topics?

Please chime in on the comments to this post with what topics you might like. I will do my best to start threads on them over the coming months as well as covering any APP-related news that comes up over the year.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Another open thread

The new school year is coming up fast! New APP parents, do you have questions for old APP parents? And, old APP parents, what's on your mind?

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Open thread

Summertime! What are you and your APP kids doing this summer? And what is on your mind going into September?

Monday, June 21, 2010

End of another school year

It is the last day of school tomorrow. Another school year done, a summer ahead of us, and planning for the year to follow.

If you have thoughts on this year and the year to come, please discuss!

Friday, June 11, 2010

Board work session on Advanced Learning June 16

The Seattle Public Schools Community Blog reports that "on Wednesday, June 16, from 4:00pm to 5:30pm, will be a Board Work Session on Advanced Learning." The School Board calendar is here.

Opening a new thread to discuss that if anyone wants to organize people who want to attend, talk about what should be addressed in that meeting, or follow up afterward with a summary of what happened.

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Monday, May 31, 2010

APP broken promises

Lifting this from the comments, Charlie Mas writes:
This year was the first year of the split elementary and middle school programs.

The program splits came with risks. The District made specific promises about how they would address some of those risks.

They promised an aligned, written, taught and tested curriculum that would be fully implemented on the first day of school in fall 2009. They did not fulfill that promise.

They promised that the elementary programs would be comparable in size. The program at Lowell is nearly 50% bigger than the program at Thurgood Marshall. They did not fulfill that promise.

They promised that they would take steps to avoid a repeat of the problems experienced at Madrona when APP was co-housed with a general education program population that was academically and demographically different from APP's population. It's unclear if any of those steps were taken or if they were successful.

It is worth noting that co-housing part of elementary APP with general education students at Thurgood Marshall was specifically recommended AGAINST by the APP Review. The District did it anyway. At one time a response to the APP Review was a project of the Strategic Plan. It appears to have been dropped from the Strategic Plan and there has been no response to the APP Review. That's another promise that wasn't kept.

So where's the accountability?

If the district isn't going to apply any accountability, then what is the appropriate response from the community?
APP parents? What do you think?

Update: Charlie adds more in the comments, ending with, "We are a smart, effective, creative group of well-respected people with deep networks throughout the city ... When the APP AC stops acting like a doormat they will realize their power."

Update: Charlie writes again with specific ideas on what actions the APP AC and APP parents could take. Well worth reading.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

APP Advisory Committee asks for feedback

The APP Advisory Committee is asking for feedback on the year. Feel free to put comments on this post about your feedback, but they are asking for your feedback to be sent directly to them by e-mail.

A copy of their message is below (slightly edited for formatting and clarity):
As we get close to the end of this school year and start to think about writing our committee's final report to the district, we would like to hear your thoughts about how things are going.

Please drop us an email and consider the following:
  • Are things different now than they were at the beginning of the year?
  • What's working, what's good?
  • What's not working, what needs addressing?
  • What are your concerns for next year?
  • How can our committee do what we do better?
  • What was most helpful/important to you that the APP AC did this year?
    (e.g. hold monthly meetings, send monthly meeting minutes, send email updates, host middle school transition meeting, send out school announcements like tour dates/etc., forward emails from other groups/gifted ed/legislative info, support 2E meetings, respond to individual email questions, advocate behind the scenes on issues, work with district/building staff, generally keep the community informed?)
All communications will be kept confidential within the committee [and] will inform the issues we write about this year and address for next year. Thanks for your time and support.

Send your email to all or your school rep listed below [and] mention [which schools] your kids attend:

Chair, Stephanie Bower, stbower@comcast.net
Secretary, Ann Owens, ann@owensavage.com
Diversity Rep, Roberto Jourdan, Ahero@rocketmail.com
At-large Rep, Val Morris-Lent, valmorrislent@gmail.com
Communications Rep, Robert Njegovan, robertnappac@gmail.com
Lowell Parent Rep, Geeta Teredesai, geetaat@comcast.net
Lowell Staff Rep, Theresa Roth, trroth@seattleschools.org
Thurgood Marshall Parent Rep, Rachel Miller, rmiller_seattle@hotmail.com
Thurgood Marshall Staff Rep, Cathy Villanueva, cavillanueva@seattleschools.org
Washington Parent Rep, Shannon Wheeler, shannonw@msn.com
Washington Staff Rep, Amy Hallet Noji, aahallett@seattleschools.org
Hamilton Parent Rep, Kathy Tanaka, kathy.tanaka@att.net
Hamilton Staff Rep, Marcelyn Shadow, mhshadow@seattleschools.org
Garfield Parent Rep, Hildy Ko, hko@kcts9.org
Garfield Staff Rep, Ken Courtney, kcourtney@seattleschools.org

Monday, May 17, 2010

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

APP enrollment next year

The district has posted an update to the projected enrollment next year, "Initial Analysis of Open Enrollment Data - Draft".

On APP specifically, Charlie Mas notes:
I'm having trouble reading the numbers for Washington because they appear to report that some APP students are waitlisted. I don't get that.

There are 223 APP students assigned to Thurgood Marshall and 371 assigned to Lowell. That is NOT an equitable split.
Shannon asks if "the waitlisted APP kids at Washington [are] those assigned to Hamilton who hope to go to Washington instead." Later, Lori looks at the Lowell/TM numbers and writes:
They budgeted for 40 kids in 2nd grade APP at Lowell and assigned 75. That's almost twice as many! Grade 3 is somewhat similar (budgeted 58; assigned 83).

Did the district forget about the large cohort of kids born in 2002-2003 who required the creation of multiple new K classes in North Seattle 2 years ago? Since 2nd and 3rd grade are common entry points for APP, it seems that they should have been able to anticipate somewhat larger enrollment to APP for the upcoming year.
Another problem is the first grade APP enrollment. Estimated APP 1st graders at Lowell is 38; at Thurgood Marshall it is just 12.

The numbers may suggest that the newly split APP schools -- Hamilton and Thurgood Marshall -- are having trouble attracting and retaining APP families. Is that the case? Why? Do you know families who moved just to switch APP schools or who left APP rather than attend those schools? What were their reasons? And what could be done to improve the situation?

Open thread

Please discuss whatever you like!

Update: In the comments, Squeagle gives a useful summary of a Thurgood Marshall meeting today with Principal Julie Breidenbach. Worth reading.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Goodloe-Johnson at Thurgood Marshall PTSA meeting on April 29

Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson will be at the Thurgood Marshall April PTSA General Meeting tomorrow. From the announcement:
Superintendent of Seattle Schools to address next PTSA General Meeting
Thursday, April 29 6:30–8pm in the cafeteria

Join us for our April PTSA General Meeting and a chance to hear from the Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson, Superintendent, and Robert Vaughan, Director of Advanced Learning, as they speak and answer questions about the school district's plans for our APP and ALO programs. Here is our opportunity to ask the tough questions about their vision for the future success of our school.
If you attend, please comment on this post to let others know your thoughts on the meeting and if there is any new information about the school district's plans for APP.

Update: Ben writes:
Here's what I got out of the meeting:

* Budget crisis? What budget crisis? Besides money isn't everything. Besides, ALO kids will benefit from being in a "less-dense poverty" situation. (So...just by being near "rich" kids, they'll do better?)

* The curriculum? Science instruction is already the same in Lowell and TM. Math instruction is already the same. Teachers are meeting to work on Language Arts stuff.
Other thoughts on the meeting? Was any new information given about the "district's plans for our APP and ALO programs"?

Update: Two more comments ([1] [2]) with details on the meeting. Worth reading.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Kay Smith-Blum at Lowell and TM

Seattle School Board member Kay Smith-Blum met with parents at Lowell on April 5 and Thurgood Marshall on April 6. By request, here is a thread to discuss those meetings.

Lendlees offered a summary of the Lowell meeting in an early thread:
I was there this morning. KSB is a breath of fresh air. She was very forthright and blunt about the issues that are going on and the extent of her influence with the existing board.

She took copious notes about the issues we raised and is planning to bring them to her one on one with the Superintendent this week.

The issues we raised were:
  1. Lowell and TM should not be treated like other schools. We have unique programs that require special staffing not accounted for in the existing WSS formula. (example: you can't have .4 of a teacher)
  2. There is no curriculum for APP yet.
  3. We have very large class sizes (29 in 3rd/5th grade)
  4. We have a large number of split grades.
  5. Everyday Math is a terrible curriculum for APP and cannot be taught in a split class setting.
  6. Why are we getting penalized about lack of stimulus money this year when we didn't benefit from it last year.
  7. Just because Lowell looks 'successful' on the outside doesn't mean there aren't inherent issues that need extra support.
Kay is very much an advocate since her sons went through APP as well.
Can others who were there please comment on and summarize the meetings?

Open thread

Discuss what you like!