School Board Meeting Date October 21,2015 Pt1

Seconds, please.

Okay.

All right, my computer is still booting up, but we can go ahead and start.

And I'll start by welcoming everyone here on this October afternoon.

It definitely feels like fall these days.

Why don't we go ahead and start by taking the roll call, please, Ms. Voti.

Director Blanford.

Present.

Director Martin-Morris.

Here.

Director McLaren.

Here.

Director Patu.

Here.

Director Peasley.

Here.

Director Peters.

Here.

Director Carr.

Here.

Thank you.

All right so with that let's go ahead and stand and do the Pledge of Allegiance please.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right.

All right.

So the next item on the agenda is a recognition item and we are very pleased this afternoon to recognize Susan Susie Fitzhugh.

And with that I'm going to turn it over to the superintendent for some comments and then we'll follow up.

All right.

Well if you haven't had an opportunity to look at the lobby out there Susie Fitzhugh has a lot of her work many of them in bigger than life size format out there.

18 years of volunteering with Seattle Public Schools to capture those magical learning moments with smiles of delight on students and teachers faces.

Her work is shown throughout this building and in many of our schools and we probably are guilty of taking her work for granted but her work's been featured in Life Magazine, People, Washington Post Magazine and lots of different very prestigious publications around the US.

And she represents just a great example of the impact that one can have when you donate hundreds and maybe thousands of hours to Seattle Public Schools.

So we have a very small token of appreciation and then I think the board wants to come down and recognize and appreciate you and your work.

All right so I understand that we have a video that we're going to show so why don't we do that next if we could please.

Yeah well actually before you queue it up let's let the directors get down there so we can actually see it in the live screen.

John Stanford International School is an interesting school.

Taking a lot of photos.

Oh, yeah.

Well, it's been a long time.

What, 45 years?

That's a long time.

The pictures I was getting were so wonderful.

And I realized what an incredible opportunity it was for me as a photographer to be able to work in the Seattle Public Schools because it had such a diverse population.

I feel like it's a gift that I found that a place that I could do work that I love doing.

To see the intense concentration of people and their work is the most interesting thing for me to photograph.

Every time I do a different school, I would come back and dream about it.

You know, there was just so much that I was getting out of it, just to see what was happening.

It's like reading a novel to go to one of these schools.

And the delight, the delight on the children's faces.

It's a terrific opportunity to get wonderful photographs.

Oh, this one.

What do you love about that one?

I like the light.

I'm a big light lover.

You know, I think it's really hard for me to explain what, to me, makes a good photograph.

It's not something that I can put into words.

I just see it and I connect with it.

But the teachers really understand what it is I'm trying to do.

And lots of teachers have told me how much they appreciate the work.

I didn't set out to make an archive for the Seattle Public Schools.

But once I started thinking about retiring, I realized, wait a minute, this is really valuable.

When I saw the SBS archives, it's huge and it's beautifully organized.

It's really interesting.

And I thought, okay, this is where they need to go.

And that means a lot to me.

A lot.

That's like the best.

So with that, why don't we go ahead and have directors come up and we'll take a photograph with Ms. Fitzhugh and present the certificate.

Oh, look at that guy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, again, thank you so very much.

The next item on the agenda is student presentations and we do not have one this evening so we will go ahead and go on next to the superintendent's comments.

Thank you.

The first item that I have is to introduce Rick Stiggins and he's going to give us a presentation on using assessment for improved learning.

My first recollection from Rick Stiggin's work was probably 20 years ago when he had discovered that not very many administrators take courses in assessment and set out to remedy that.

And one of the remarks that he made at that point in time was that it had taken 60 years for us to take, pull apart curriculum assessment and instruction and it might take that long to put them back together.

And I thought at the time that can't be.

But here we are 20 years later and we're still sometimes struggling to figure out how do we put curriculum, the content together with great teaching, together with good assessment to improve student learning.

Rick's work is recognized nationally and internationally.

He was here today working with our teaching staff and he's going to share some thoughts with us on how we use assessment for learning and not just to monitor learning after the fact.

So Rick, thanks for being here.

Yeah, we can see it on the screen up here.

You'll definitely want to use the microphone though so that way your voice is captured by everyone in the room.

Okay.

Watch the cords.

I'm just going to stand over this way and just kind of stay out of the way so you can see the screen and I can speak to the audience too.

So my assignment today, this morning, was to share, to continue a conversation with the staff of the district on the development of a local school district assessment system that are likely to really be productive.

And I wanted to just.

quickly run through why we're doing this.

Our perspective when we think about assessment is that as our society has literally exploded in its evolution and change over the last 20 years, obviously schools have changed too.

The mission has changed.

And as a result of that, the assessment processes that we use to gauge and to promote student learning have had to evolve also.

And in fact they are.

And so what's happened is quite literally across the country there is the development of new visions of excellence and assessment at virtually all levels.

And they are in direct response to the societal directives of narrowing achievement score gaps.

Reducing dropout rates, promoting high school graduation, universal high school graduation and all the things that we learn about, we hear about in the media on a day-to-day basis.

All students ready for college and workplace training.

The point is that this was not the mission of most of the schools that we grew up in.

It was not.

There was a different mission.

I graduated from high school in 1962 and I think since then up until pretty recently the mission of those schools was to weed out the unwilling and unable, we call them our dropouts, and rank the rest based on achievement from the highest achiever to the lowest achiever.

And here's the tricky part of this.

If the objective is to produce a dependable rank order by the end of high school, you maximize that dependability by maximizing the differences among students.

That's where achievement gaps come from.

The desire to maximize differences among students.

The problem we realized, have realized as a society over the last 20 years is that those who drop out and those who finish low in the rank orders fail to develop the essential lifelong learning proficiencies they're going to need to survive in the future of our rapidly evolving and changing society.

As a result of that, We, as a society, have changed the mission of our schools to one now of making sure all students, not just those high in the rank order, become proficient readers, writers, and math problem solvers.

That is, ready for college and workplace training.

In order to do that, we have to think differently about the assessment process and the ideas and the things that I'm proposing that I talked with the staff about this morning and I'm suggesting now as ways to do that include three big ideas.

One is the creation of balanced assessment systems.

And what we mean by that is that we use our assessment processes to meet the information needs of all assessment users.

And that means all of them.

So what we mean by that is that if assessment is the process of gathering information to inform instructional decisions, then in any particular context, these questions become essential.

What decisions are to be made, who's making them, and what information do they need?

Now it turns out that the answers to these questions vary profoundly depending on where you ask them.

Because it turns out the answers are fundamentally different whether you ask them day to day in the classroom on an interim basis in benchmark assessments or in the context of annual testing.

That is, the answers to those three driving questions will vary profoundly depending on which of these contexts you ask them in.

Furthermore, in addition, we can use assessment for a variety of different purposes.

We can use it as formative assessment to inform teachers about how to diagnose student needs and act on the results.

We can use them as assessment for learning where we involve students in the self-assessment process as an instructional intervention that is to help them learn more.

And we can use them summatively as we have traditionally to document student achievement at a particular point in time for reporting to the community regarding the status of our schools.

All of these are viable.

The chart you have in front of you, I don't know if you have them in the audience.

Does everybody have them or just the board?

The chart you have in front of you is a portrait of a balanced assessment system that crosses the different levels of assessment with the different ways of using them.

Creating a nine cell table.

Now I'll just tell you that each cell describes who the decision makers are, what decisions they have to make and what information they need.

When you get a few minutes, I know we don't have time to do it tonight, read through this chart because my point is that each of the nine cells in this table make a unique contribution to student well-being and school effectiveness that the others cannot make.

each makes a unique contribution.

The problem we've faced is that over the decades, the last 70 years, our almost total investment in the creation and effective use of assessment have been given to the summative line used for accountability purposes.

with almost nothing being invested to ensure the quality or effective use of the classroom level of assessment or interim benchmark assessments and the district now is involved in the process of adding those two components to a balanced assessment system.

In order to do that, And when one does that, the point I want to make here is that of the three levels of assessment that are listed there, classroom, interim, benchmark, and annual, only one level arises from a foundation of research in which it has revealed in systematic and dependable terms that it can be used to enhance student learning.

Only one of the three arises from a foundation of research that says it is efficacious in improving the quality of schools.

and that one is the classroom level of assessment.

When used effectively in formative and assessment for learning contexts, research conducted literally around the world tells us that we can expect profound achievement score gains attributable to the manner in which we use the assessment process.

There is no such foundation of research for annual summative assessment.

As a matter of fact, so blind has been our faith in those tests that we've never even really asked the question what contribution do they make to the improvement of schools in any systematic or rigorous scientific manner.

That doesn't mean we don't use them.

Of course we do.

They have a role to play.

My point is merely that if we balance them with the other two and all those applications, the promise is immense.

That's balanced assessment.

And my point is that if assessment isn't working productively day to day in the classroom, that is during the learning, That is, if bad decisions are being made based on inaccurate evidence due to inept classroom assessment, the other two levels of assessment can't overcome the dire consequences for the learner.

The foundation of a balanced assessment system is good quality day-to-day classroom assessment.

That leads me to the second big idea, and that is the matter of quality assessments.

Because in order for them to play out productively, all of the assessments in this system must meet standards of quality.

and the standards of quality are basically these.

We have to have accurate information effectively used.

In order to have accurate information, we've got to start with a clear purpose.

Why are we assessing?

Start with a clear learning target, then design assessments to fit into that context and communicate the results effectively.

And so this is the vision of excellence in assessment and quality assessment that I was sharing today and have shared repeatedly with the district.

Purpose, target, clear assessment design and effective communication.

It turns out that creating a quality assessment requires that the developer know what they're doing from an assessment creation point of view.

and the criteria for doing that are very clear to us.

They need to be able to pick proper assessment methods, design sampling frames, build high quality items, tasks, and scoring schemes, and anticipate sources of bias so as to eliminate them.

Those four are critical.

They're not negotiable.

The reality that I want you to face is that the vast majority of currently practicing teachers and school leaders in America, and I say this without prejudice because I don't know what the data look like in Seattle but I'll bet I do, have not been given the opportunity to master the basic principles of sound assessment required to create quality assessments.

And the vast majority know that.

And so, as we move forward and think about how to create balanced assessment systems relying on high quality assessment, if we don't get them the opportunity to learn these things, we won't achieve the excellence in assessment that we all aspire to.

The fact is, the need for professional development in this realm is profound throughout the country.

teachers are not trained and they can't turn to their supervisors for help in this regard because relevant helpful assessment training remains non-existent in pre-service leadership preparation programs in graduate schools across the country.

Non-existent.

How that's even possible in these assessment times is beyond me.

But it's true.

Opportunity to learn will be critical and that process of learning is underway within the district.

Which leads me to the fourth and final point.

And it has to do with the student's role in the assessment process.

We have operated systematically over the decades on the belief that assessment is something that adults do to students.

And they do and need to do it well.

But it turns out there are other critical database instructional decision makers too and those others are students themselves.

They are interpreting the results of the assessments we give them and they're making critical decisions.

based on their interpretation.

And I want to amplify that just for a minute and then I'll stop and we can talk about these things.

What we're talking about here is the emotional dynamics of the assessment experience from the student's point of view.

It turns out that our job must be to engage students productively in the monitoring of their own achievement in ways that keep them believing in themselves.

The student's emotional reaction to assessment results is what will determine what each student does about those results.

What we must do, and we know how to do this, and the professional development is underway in the district to help people operationalize this, is bring students to a place where upon seeing assessment results of any sort, weak, medium, strong, they can say to themselves, I understand these results.

I know what to do about them.

I can handle this.

Therefore, the fourth bullet is critical.

I choose to keep trying.

Surely you can see that as critical.

If we have some kids who have not yet met critical standards and we can get them to this place, the probability is great of success.

The problem is the student who has brought to a counterproductive place which leaves them saying, I don't get it.

I have no idea what to do about it.

I can't handle this anyway.

I quit.

These dynamics are critical.

Well, it turns out we know how to get students into the productive place using principles of assessment for learning.

And the professional development process is underway now to get these tools into people's hands.

My revolutionary point is what students think about and do with assessment results is at least as important as what we adults think about and do with those results.

Because it turns out students are making data based instructional decisions too and they get to go first.

So they're looking at the evidence we give them of their own achievement.

and they're asking things like this, can I learn this or am I just too stupid?

See, my point is, if they come down on the wrong side of that, it doesn't matter what we decide with our highfalutin data management systems, the learning already stopped.

Or they're asking of the data, is learning this worth the energy that I'm going to have to expend to get it?

If they come down on the wrong side of that, the learning stops before their teachers ever became involved.

Or think about the struggling learner who's asking, is learning, is trying to learn this worth the risk that I might fail again in public because that public failure just hurts too much?

If a kid gets into this place and they've not met a critical standard, they're doomed.

The question is can we help them to make productive decisions based on their interpretation of the results and it turns out they can through the use of principles of assessment for learning which simply use the classroom assessment process during the learning to help students know where they're going, where they are now in relation to those expectations and how they can close the gap between the two.

And these are principles of assessment for learning.

And once again I say to you, we can expect profound achievement score gains of half to three quarters of a standard deviation student performance and subsequent high stakes test through the careful management of these principles.

My point is, that we know how to use assessment productively to serve a wide variety of purposes, but only if they're of high quality and only if they're used in ways that keep students believing in themselves.

And so these are the things we spent the morning talking about this morning and the things that we're engaged in ongoing professional development to promote.

These are new times.

They require new assessment visions.

We know what those visions are and we know how to put them in place.

And that process is underway.

Not just here but quite literally across the country and around the world.

These are new assessment times.

And it's an honor to have been invited to share them and speak with you.

Can I respond to any questions about any of that?

Anything at all?

Are there any questions from directors?

Go ahead, Director Blanford.

I was fascinated by your presentation.

I thought that somewhere in there I would hear something about Claude Steele's research around stereotype threat and how that informs or how that affects particularly students of color but also female students and any student that deals with the stereotype of underperformance.

Right.

There's that work, there's Seligman's work on learned hopelessness.

A wide variety of researchers have delved into the topic.

Regardless of the student's ethnicity, regardless of the student's family circumstance, Hopelessness has the same effect.

The keys to removing that hopelessness are the same.

We either get that student on a winning streak so that they can begin to feel in control of their own academic success or they're doomed.

And we know how to do that.

And that's true of all students regardless of their family of origin.

It just happens that we accumulate struggling learners in some subpopulations more than others.

But my suggestion for resolving that problem is exactly the same.

We either get that student some success.

It turns on success, not intimidation.

Either get that student some success or they will not go on the winning streaks they need to ascend the learning ladder.

There's a wide variety of foundations of psychological research that underpin all of these ways of thinking and that's one of them.

Director Paisley.

So this is all music to my ears.

I'm thrilled to hear everything you've just said.

And it seems to me that the national agenda of high-stakes standardized testing is a kind of misguided effort to accomplish what classroom-based formative assessment is much more likely to accomplish.

So I'm wondering what your thoughts are on changing the national agenda.

My thoughts are that I want to change that agenda clearly in the direction of a balanced allocation of resources to support the classroom level of assessment used formatively and summatively.

It absolutely must change.

We've had 70 years of obsessive belief that somehow the once a year test is the key to the improvement of schools.

That began in the 1950s and 60s for some of us with district wide testing.

In the 1970s statewide testing.

In the 1980s allow a cash register to ring up in your heads as we go.

1980s national assessment.

1990s international assessment.

The point that we missed throughout that period of time is the understanding that Assessments that happen once a year are not likely to be of much value to those who are making instructional decisions every three to four minutes.

we must honor those and those who make decisions annually.

And if we do that in a balanced kind of way, now we're talking about an assessment system that can work.

You know, the most recent enterprise, the Smarter Balanced Test is yet another manifestation of 1950s thinking and how you improve schools.

I'm not opposed to the test and I'm not opposed to annual accountability testing, I'm simply saying our allocation of resources, I mean that test cost probably nationally three quarters of a billion dollars and took six years to develop.

If I could have had half of that to improve the levels of classroom assessment across the country, I just would have liked a chance to conduct that experiment and see which one has a more positive impact.

I think you know what the answer would be.

I think we need to shift the agenda to a more balanced agenda.

I'm welcoming annual testing in the context of a balanced system.

All right let's take a couple more questions.

I know Director Peters had one and then Director McLaren and then I think we probably need to move on after that.

Yes ma'am.

I'll try to be as quick as I can.

So you just mentioned the smarter balanced test.

That's definitely something that came to mind to me when you were talking about the importance of students to feel a sense of potential when they're taking a test and also the importance of formative assessment.

So based on that, a summative assessment like Smarter Balanced, which has such a prescribed high failure rate, sounds like it doesn't meet the values that you talked about at all.

I have been uneasy about the use of a test that produces such a high failure rate because of the confidence that it can shake in large numbers of learners.

That having been said, That doesn't call into question the quality of the assessment itself, it calls into question the context within which it's being used and the policymaking that leads to that context.

So I think we have some deep, deep reexamination that we need to carry out certainly in the US Department of Education and the State Departments of Education as we move forward on that agenda.

We absolutely do.

My other question has to do with, you mentioned that teachers need professional development and how to establish formative assessments in class, but haven't teachers always been doing some kind of in-class assessment, the pop quiz, the chapter review, so what is it that you're saying they're not doing?

The quality of those assessments often is at least shaky because they've not been given the opportunity to learn to do it well.

Now I say all that without prejudice because I have no way of knowing about the faculty in Seattle and their levels of assessment literacy.

I just will tell you that once a decade, every decade for the past four decades there has been published in the professional literature research review decrying the quality of classroom assessments because teachers rarely have the opportunity.

to learn to do that well.

Assessment training remains very very infrequent in pre-service teacher preparation programs and often we spend so much of our resources on the annual standardized test there's nothing left for professional development in classroom assessment.

We're out of balance.

We need to be in balance.

Both in terms of preparation to do the job and then doing the job productively.

It's merely a matter of making sure that the evidence being gathered day to day in the classroom is high quality evidence and there's reason to be uneasy about that until we verify that each teacher and their principal has been given the opportunity to do it well.

Thank you.

You bet.

Director McLaren.

Following up on that it sounds as though we need a plan for our grad schools of education for training and also for professional development within the districts and I'm just wondering how you envision that rolling out.

Yeah, actually my wife, I'm a graduate of, I did my doctoral work at Michigan State University and my wife Nancy and I recently created an endowment at Michigan State, the mission of which is to understand the barriers to good quality pre-service assessment training for teachers and school leaders and then to remove those barriers.

So we're trying to understand how, what the barriers are that have kept that from happening and it turns out they're profound.

and very difficult.

We're going to get them out of the way.

So that's the pre-service level.

And at the in-service level it's going to be the responsibility of policy makers and resource allocators throughout the system at the local level to make sure that if there's a need for professional development in this realm that somehow teachers and school leaders get the opportunity to fill this, to evaluate their current status in this domain and then grow in this domain if they need to.

It's going to come down to the allocation of local resources to do this.

It's not going to come from the federal government, that's obvious.

And the resources may not be available at the state level.

So it's going to come down to local priorities.

It's going to come down to local priorities.

And getting people just the opportunity to learn.

Look, a typical teacher spends between a quarter and a third of his or her available professional time engaged in assessment related activities.

It's foundational to good teaching and yet we don't prepare people to do it dependably.

How is that possible?

That can't continue any longer because now we're not just trying to produce a dependable rank order at the end of high school.

We're trying to produce lifelong learners that requires quality assessment day to day, not just once a year.

I'm going on.

I shouldn't do that.

So anyway, it's been an honor to be invited to spend the day here.

I love you guys and thanks for everything you do for the kids too.

Thank you.

Oh, I brought copies of a new publication that we just finished called Revolutionize Assessment.

It describes these things in specific detail.

And if you have reactions to it, please do read it.

It will take a couple of hours.

Let me know what you think.

Okay?

Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

All right thank you Dr. Stiggins.

Some updates on the district.

We continue to work on enrollment and staffing.

I know that's caused anxiety in many of the schools.

We made those determinations on October 5th and we've been working over the last couple of weeks with principals and trying to figure out.

how to not undo that but how to make some accommodations.

We did start the year short, 675 students over what we had projected.

Our enrollment overall is still up from what it was a year ago but below what we had projected.

We're still looking at why that might be the case.

We had more students, about that same number of students leave the district, students that were in the district a year ago who have withdrawn.

And we're trying to find out what that means, whether that's a new trend, people moving to the suburbs for cheaper housing or whether it was something to do with our delayed start.

That represents about a $4.3 million loss in terms of enrollment.

We get funded on the basis of each student.

We are making reductions of a net of about 22 positions.

Having worked with those schools, the actual number of teachers impacted at this point in time is far less than that.

It's about seven teachers.

Schools in the middle have made adjustments.

They in some cases have had resources to buy a teacher.

In some cases they had an opening in their building that they used the extra teacher to fill and so therefore we saved by not buying that added teacher.

And in some cases teachers collectively over a building have agreed to reduce their FTE-ness, giving up a portion of their contract.

We, I know that we have many parents that would dearly love to be involved in that decision making process.

As I say we have been engaging in conversations with principals.

I think we have 2100 elementary and K-8.

teachers and we make staffing decisions through the spring, through the fall, through the summer and into the fall.

And the formulas end up being the formulas and we work hard to get the numbers right but again we get staff based, we buy staff based on the resources that we get per student enrolled so when those numbers go down We make adjustments accordingly.

We are also making restrictions in district hiring to help fill in that gap.

The reduction in staff covers about half of the total amount of revenue that was lost due to the lower enrollment.

Coming up on November 5th is the State of the District presentations.

There will be two, one at City Hall at 1 p.m.

and one here in this auditorium at 7 p.m.

Deep learning, Michael Fullen was here in town with his worldwide network earlier in the week.

Probably 10 years ago we had some research on what effective school districts do.

We know that teachers make the biggest difference.

We know that principals are second.

But we also now know that districts make a difference.

Early research was odds are if you do these things it might improve student learning.

The second wave came from probably a dozen districts recognized nationally as making major gains.

Montgomery County, Broad Foundation winners, others.

And so we've had case studies that we could go and look and say if you do things like these districts, something in what they did worked.

Michael Fullen's work for the first time says we think these things work and we're applying them in these districts and this is the result that we're getting.

So it's actually beginning to apply research in schools and districts that seems to be making a difference.

So we're all ears wanting to know what that looks like.

Likewise Seattle sponsored a regional gathering of ELL teachers earlier in the week.

They're looking at what makes a difference for ELL students and some of it sounds so apparent in retrospect.

It's instead of having students memorize, it's how do we give them more opportunity to engage in conversations so that they remember the words that they learn.

Common problem that we have with ELL students is that some ELL students learn to read perfectly.

They can sound out the words, they can say them perfectly, and they can read what's on a page, but they don't comprehend what the words mean.

So we learned a lot of techniques about what that might look like.

Budgeting for 2016-17 is underway, and we start out knowing that we're about $30 million short, which is a 4% gap.

And so we'll be working on that through the course of the year.

The Senate was in town earlier in the week and they took testimony in Renton.

I think it was one of seven locations where they met around the state to hear the public in regard to further changes and legislation that would be helpful.

We have a levy coming up, two levies coming up in February and there's fact sheets being put out on those.

The maintenance and operation levy pays for about 25% of everything that we do in the day-to-day operation of schools.

And the BTA levy pays for building remodels, increased capacity, technology, and athletics, academics.

We recognized our legislators I believe at our last meeting for the work that they had done to help address some of the capital needs and this now is our opportunity to raise the matching funds that need to go with that to open up more seats in Seattle.

Legislative agenda has been drafted.

It's being postponed until the next board meeting.

But big headline pieces are full funding of McCleary including regional salaries and a look at levies.

Two of the items from McCleary that the legislature took up late in the last session but didn't have the opportunity to begin working on.

Secondly, this issue of capital construction and finding enough seats for all of our children.

And then the third one, the closing of the opportunity gap.

Seattle Council PTSA did adopt the resolution regarding full funding for McCleary.

Another item that's underway is bell times and that comes up as a first reading later tonight.

That's been, and we'll actually have a report later tonight, but a series of community meetings with hundreds and thousands of people over the last several months and closing in on how we can start school later for high school students for sleep time.

And then trying to mitigate the impact on other parts of the district.

Several opportunities over the last week to meet with different groups in our community about closing the opportunity gap.

That's not always the only thing that we might meet with them on but that was kind of the focus this week.

Africatown we've worked with over the last year and they're providing after school programming for students of color and providing I think what Dr. Stiggins touched on just a little bit was to how students can bring their culture and their ethnicity to school and apply that to academics.

Earlier today Union Gospel Mission held a conference for churches in the area.

175 churches were in the area to hear from other churches and schools about how they're partnering.

We have 18 church school partnerships in Seattle.

Urban impact goes back 25 years supporting for Rainier Beach.

They do summer school.

They do after school tutoring and they provide like Africatown that one on one relationship and mentoring for students.

And then SEA, part of our agreement with SEA was several partnership activities that we were going to pick up and move on.

One of those having to do with peer assessment review.

And so we have about a dozen teachers, half from SEA and half administrators from the district working together over the next few days to begin looking at what that might result in.

And looking at Montgomery County and other places around the country that have done that well to use that to close the opportunity gap.

And then coming up later this week and over the weekend, the African American Scholars Think Tank will be meeting and the Equity and Race Advisory Committee will be meeting.

I had the opportunity yesterday to visit three of our schools, McClure, Catherine Blaine, and Lawton.

McClure was very much focused on rigor, depth of knowledge, and differentiated instruction.

Catherine Blaine continues to grow up to 750 and growing at about 60 students per year.

Lots of families moving into the grand old homes in their neighborhood and contributing to the enrollment growth.

They expressed their concern over being in tier 3 of the bell times recommendation.

And Lawton elementary told me about their MTSS intervention team and how they're meeting students' needs with some great help from their parent group.

Some good news, Karen Andrews is the recipient of Crosscut Magazine's 2015 Courage Award for Public Service.

Mr. Karn and the interagency staff have been doing diligent work in addressing some of the gang violence and trying to provide social, emotional opportunities, health opportunities with our community partners for our young people.

Tragically, there's been 11 deaths or suicides in that group in the last year.

Leschi Elementary was featured in the Seattle Times with their good work over the last year that was approved by the board in the spring.

They previously had a Montessori program that was mostly white and a neighborhood program that was mostly of color.

And they did a lot of work and some pilot work to figure out how to blend those two programs so that all of the students benefited from both of those programs.

And then, I can only imagine, Russell Wilson visited Dunlap Elementary, and I'm sure that caused a positive stir for the kids.

The video is up on our website.

DonorsChoose is one of those national social networking websites, and one of the ones that was featured recently was Broadview Thompson K-8.

Q13 featured a story on ORCA K-8 where the principal, Toni Talbert, has been sharing with staff and with students that she has breast cancer and using that as an opportunity to engage students to talk about that.

That concludes my remarks.

With regard to the agenda as I mentioned earlier the legislative agenda will be delayed by one meeting and will come back for first reading at the next board meeting.

Thank you very much for that report.

Okay, so the next item on the agenda is student comments.

And so as not to cause any panic to the group in the back, this student comments is the one that usually we have a person up here at the dais.

We don't have one here tonight.

The group in the back will go when we get to public testimony.

So hold tight on your comments in the back there.

And so no student from up here tonight.

And so now we are after five, excuse me, I'm getting ahead of myself.

Motion to amend the agenda.

So as was just discussed we have a request to amend the agenda and so I would like now to ask if there are questions from directors on the request to change the agenda.

All right.

I am not seeing any.

And so with that may I have a motion please.

I so move.

I second.

All right.

So it has been moved and seconded.

So let's look to Ms. Did we do something wrong?

We have to read the whole motion, right?

One of you.

One of us.

OK.

OK.

So I think that was my mistake.

So I'll read it.

It says, oh, no, I don't.

Do you have it?

We need the whole statement read.

I thought I had it here but I don't think I do.

I can wing it.

I move to amend the agenda to delay action item number 2, the 2015-16 state legislative agenda to the November 4 meeting of the board.

I second the motion.

All right now we have the motion read and have a second.

So with that do I go straight to the vote Teresa?

All right so there hadn't been any questions so let's go ahead and have a roll call on that please.

Director Patu.

Director Peasley.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Martin-Morris.

Aye.

Director McLaren.

Aye.

Director Carr.

Aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

All right.

So we have now have an amended agenda so we will move now to the consent agenda.

Keep me honest Teresa.

Okay so let's go ahead and well first I'll ask the question do directors have any items they'd like to remove from the consent agenda?

Oh sorry.

I move approval of the consent agenda.

I second the motion.

All right thank you.

Now does anyone have anything they would like removed from the consent agenda?

All right, I am seeing none.

So all of those in favor of the consent agenda, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, say nay.

All right, the consent agenda has passed.

All right, so that brings us to the public testimony portion of our meeting.

And since it is after 5 o'clock, we will move right into public testimony.

And so for the board meeting this evening, we had a large number of requests for public testimony.

So therefore, according to our procedure 1430 BP, the testimony list was increased from 20 to 25 speakers.

The rules for public testimony are on the screen.

And I would ask that speakers be respectful of these rules.

I would note that the board does not make public comments on issues, does not take public comments on issues related to personnel or individually named staff members.

I'd also like to note that each speaker does have a two minute speaking time limit.

When the two minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

And so I have the list here.

And we will go ahead.

I will call three at a time.

And if people could be sort of queued and ready to come to the podium as the person in front of them concludes, that would help us move along.

All right.

So we will start with our students from Chief Sealth.

I'll ask you to correct your names.

I may not get these quite right.

Aldebaran, Hernandez, Leseth, Salas, and Jennifer Torres.

That's the first speaking slot.

followed by Chris Jackins and Heidi Bennett.

All right, so let's go ahead and what will happen.

You guys collectively will have two minutes.

And when you start speaking, the meter will start running.

There's a light.

When it goes to yellow, you have 30 seconds left.

So you'll want to keep that microphone fairly close to you.

I think it's probably fine from where I'm seeing you have it.

But it is sometimes hard to pick up.

And you're welcome to take it out if you feel like you need to do that.

Hola, buenas tardes.

Mi nombre es Alevarán Hernández y estos son Jennifer Torres y Lisette Salas.

El propósito del programa es que adquirimos conocimientos del idioma y cultura.

Con este programa, los chicos consiguen niveles bilingües que les ayudará en el futuro para su trabajo, aplicaciones universitarias y otras habilidades necesarias.

La importancia del español es inmensa, ya que facilita el acceso a diferentes comunidades y programas públicos como protección del medio ambiente.

Hello, good afternoon.

My name is Jennifer Torres.

This is Lisette Salas and Aldebaran Hernandez.

The purpose of the program is to maintain and increase our level of Spanish as well as to learn about our culture.

This will later help out with work, university applications, and life skills.

This also eases a connection to a bigger audience for public programs such as environmental justice groups.

Con el programa de Chief Sealth estamos en desarrollo.

Nos han prometido que tomaremos clases de Español IB, Historia de America en Español IB, y unas clases AP que nos ayudará a obtener créditos para la universidad.

With the program that Chief Sealth has developed for us, they have promised us that we will be able to take Spanish IB, History of America in Spanish IB, and some AP classes that will help us obtain useful credits for college.

El programa de inmersión nos ha ayudado a mejorar los conocimientos de español y también los de inglés.

The immersion program has helped us to improve not only our Spanish skills but also the English skills.

Siendo bilingüe o incluso multilingüe es esencial en nuestro mundo.

Los países están conectados y las relaciones existen más allá de la frontera.

to be bilingual or even multilingual is essential in our current world where countries are connected and relations exist beyond the border.

Can I ask you to pause.

So the time has run out but there is interpretation going on here and we typically give you four minutes instead of two if there is multi-languages happening.

So I would ask that we set the meter for two more minutes for this group in order for you to be able to finish.

We are right about to be done.

Go right ahead.

You have two more minutes.

We want to thank you for giving us this opportunity to become fully bilingual and we hope that someday this is not something special in a few schools around Seattle but something spread throughout the country.

Thank you.

All right we have Chris Jackins, Heidi Bennett, Andrea Baumgarten.

My name is Chris Jackins, Box 84063, Seattle 98124. On the Loyal Heights value engineering report, four points.

Number one, this project would violate zoning codes including drastically shrinking the playground.

Number two, the district spent money on its report before it had permission to violate city zoning codes.

Number three, a city committee just recommended not allowing these departures from code.

Number four, the project needs a new plan.

Please vote no on this item.

On the student assignment plan, three points.

Number one, a court found that the plan would create and aggravate racial imbalance in the district.

Number two, the loss of school choice through lack of equitable transportation options should be changed.

Number three, when families choose a school that lacks capacity, the district should add capacity immediately to try to meet the demand.

Please vote no on this item.

On the growth boundaries plan, two points.

Number one, an area around Crown Hill is being added to the Loyal Heights attendance area.

The district instead should buy back Crown Hill school.

Number two, the district is expanding the Roxhill attendance area toward making a case for closing Roxhill and moving students to EC Hughes.

Closing schools is a mistake.

I oppose the closure of Roxhill.

Please vote no on this item.

On the alliance for education, three points.

Number one, several years ago the alliance pushed the district to close schools which harmed public schools.

Number two, the district needs to stop letting private money improperly influence public school policies.

Number three, please drop the partnership with the alliance for education.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Heidi Bennett, Andrew Baumgarten, Jeremy Whiting.

Hello Directors and Superintendent Nyland.

My name is Heidi Bennett.

I'm a schools first board member, Seattle Council area director and a long-time advocate here in Seattle and Olympia for kids.

I've got a long list, I've dropped off a copy and there's lots of other detailed testimony ahead of time so I'll be really fast.

On the two levies scheduled for public vote on 29 please approve the authorization of both.

The three years operations levy.

But this doesn't give the district a blank check and better transparency must be addressed.

Why can't the district shoulder a 1% change in enrollment?

Why are parents and citizens buying teachers?

28 kids in a K-3 classroom is not appropriate.

On the six-year levy also approve it but where is the plan for dealing with capacity?

Where is the one central planning document the public can review and comment on and stop all the rumors?

Why is Cascadia that isn't built yet even over capacity?

On the legislative agenda, I appreciate that you are taking another look at the legislative agenda, so it includes fully funding all positions, not just amply funding regional salaries.

And capital funding needs to be a priority.

It's not just about increased enrollment, but addressing smaller classroom size.

On the McCleary resolution, yes please sign on to this resolution and give it to our legislators.

Seattle Public Schools is one of the original co-signers of the McCleary lawsuit and please continue the pressure.

On transportation, lots of testimony coming in on this but my issue is the two-mile walk zone for middle school and high school students.

Most kids are usually taking the bus for this, I know my kids did.

However, short term I am requesting orca cards for those families that have free, qualify and free and reduced lunch.

Families should not have to make a decision between feeding their kids, buying groceries and getting an orca card.

Short term we should be helping these kids make it to school.

Longer term we should be reducing the walk zone so it is more appropriate with neighboring districts.

As far as the alliance goes I've personally been involved with them and I think severing the relationship is not in the best interest of kids.

You should work on rebuilding it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Is Andrea Baumgarten here?

I don't see her at this point.

No Andrea.

So what we will do I'll circle back to these folks before we go to the waitlist.

Next is Jeremy Whiting.

Hello I'm here as a concerned kindergarten teacher at Olympic Hills Elementary.

Currently we are at an interim site known as Cedar Park while our building is rebuilt into a bigger brand-new site.

While that's happening we are at this interim site and I'm really concerned about the proposed growth boundaries for 2017-18.

As it stands, when we move back to Cedar Park, we will not be taking our most needy families with us.

In fact, we will be losing a lot of the rich linguistic, economic, and racial diversity at that school.

To give you an idea, at Cedar Park right now we have 300 students and we needed 8 portables in order to house all of us.

The new boundaries would create a 400 capacity student at Cedar Park.

It's a landmark site.

There's no way we could bring in more portables.

There's one set of bathrooms at Cedar Park.

There's three stalls for the entire set of boys that are in that school.

So you can just see that it's not really appropriate for 400 students.

We would also have a very high percentage of free and reduced lunch kids at the new Cedar Park building.

I know those applications come in every year, but I've been teaching in the Olympic Hills boundaries for the last eight years, and I've done home visits for the last three years.

So I know all of the families that are in the portion that's going to be moved over to Cedar Park.

Meanwhile, the new Olympic Hills building that I was on the design team that we created for our population would be under capacity.

Now we've addressed this with a few different people and there's been some pushback about a domino effect for example that one school changing boundaries will impact others.

We have maps that show that those boundaries are actually only impacting a couple schools.

We're right up by shoreline and if we just bring back 100 kids to Olympic Hills that are now going to be at Cedar Park.

We can have two schools that are under capacity and we can avoid the true domino effect of kids toppling into the school to prison pipeline that I know all of us want to avoid and that is sometimes the result of segregated schools.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

The next three speakers, Greg Wong, Jane Broome, Kevin Hillman.

Good evening directors, Dr. Nyland, I'm Greg Wong, I'm the president of Schools First.

I'm also a part of Seattle Public Schools K-12 quite proudly and have three kids at John Muir Elementary and Washington Middle School right now.

As you may know Schools First is the nonprofit coalition that runs the campaign to make sure that our Seattle school levies pass.

And this is a very broad based coalition.

We ask anybody who really cares deeply about public education in our community to come together and to make sure that we support our levies.

This means that we get the business community, the parents, teachers, principals, anybody at all really, ordinary citizens who don't even have kids in the schools, anybody who cares about public education to get on board with supporting the levies.

And we know that those people may have differences of opinion on, for example, the student assignment plan, what to do with math curriculum, but we ask them to put aside those differences and make sure that we pass these levies.

And this is crucial.

Tonight before you, you have an introduction of the two levies and you've heard a little bit about them.

And I know you have familiarity, the operations levy is 25% of the district's operating funds and it pays for teachers, it pays for textbooks.

These are the basic things that we all know the state should be paying through McCleary but unfortunately until the state actually does so we can't penalize our kids.

for the failures of adult legislators by not doing so.

So please do strongly support the Ops levy.

The BTA IV levy, the capital levy is for maintenance and capacity building in our schools.

These are HVAC systems.

I mean the things that we just need to keep our schools open and safe for our kids.

And I just ask four things as you consider these levies over the next couple of weeks.

One, please make sure it maintains an objective process for assessing capital projects.

Two, have a well thought out capacity plan.

Three, make it transparent.

And four, make it accountable.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

All right next is Jane Broome followed by Kevin Hillman and Cindy Jatul.

Sorry.

Hi, my name is Jane Broome, and I'm the very proud incoming chair of the Alliance for Education.

Let me start by thanking all of you for the work that you do, President Carr, Directors Peasley, Martin Morris, Peters, McLaren, Patew, and Blanford, and of course, Superintendent Nyland.

Governing and leading our state's largest school district is not easy, harder than most in this room could ever understand.

In many ways, it is a thankless job where the stakes are very, very high.

We respect the fact that you have to make difficult decisions and trade-offs every day that have real impact on kids and families.

But in our opinion, separating our work together shouldn't be one of those decisions.

We are disappointed to learn this board is considering sharply curtailing its partnership with the Alliance.

Each and every one of us in this room are here for one reason, a deep commitment to improving opportunities and outcomes for all of our kids.

That is our common ground and ought always to be.

We are partners that share this commitment but we are independent organizations and we have been since our founding under Superintendent John Stanford who wanted an independent partner.

We believe that independence is a cornerstone of the trust the community has placed in us in making the Alliance the steward of its financial contributions.

In our 20-year partnership, it is this common ground that has enabled us to work through disagreements about how to best do the work.

It hasn't always been easy, but I believe the results have benefited our kids.

Our message tonight to you is this, we remain steadfastly committed to improving opportunities and outcomes for all children in our public schools.

We will continue to manage our many independent programs and channel the support of the business and philanthropic partners.

We remain open and willing to work with anybody, anytime, including all of you.

Thank you again for the work you do.

Really, thank you.

It's hard, I know, and we appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Kevin Hillman followed by Cindy Jatul and Taya Lauer.

Good evening my name is Kevin Hillman I'm a parent at Olympic Hills Elementary in Lake City area of Northeast Seattle.

I'm here tonight because I believe the updated growth boundaries plan is not adequate until boundaries in the north northeast are revisited.

Specifically the proposed boundary for the Cedar Park building.

So I'm following up on the comments from Jeremy Whiting earlier.

In front of you you should all have a handout with maps for the area around the Cedar Park building.

The primary map there is actually the ELL heat map from the district showing where the K-5 students in the northeast are concentrated.

These are all the students who receive all the ELL services.

On this map you will notice the largest concentration of students receiving ELL services in the north end is located in the far northeast.

On top of this map, we have drawn the proposed boundary for the Cedar Park building.

You will notice that this boundary surrounds nearly all the area with the highest concentration of ELL students.

These students are currently split between Olympic Hills and John Rogers, but the proposed boundary would put them all into the same Cedar Park building, creating a new neighborhood school that from day one will have an extremely high concentration of high needs families.

At the same time, just across Lake City Way, a brand new Olympic Hills building will house a health center for families living in poverty, a small group spaces for ELL support, a kitchen space dedicated for families and community members and a large counseling area and many other features specifically designed for this school community.

However due to the proposed Cedar Park boundary the vast majority of these families that these services were designed for will no longer be part of Olympic Hills.

They will be at Cedar Park along with the high needs families from the John Rogers community.

As a school community we are in a very hard position of trying to be enthusiastic about our brand new building and all its great services yet having to answer questions from our most vulnerable families about why they will not get to be part of the new building at Olympic Hills in 2017. This is a major equity concern for our community.

For more details you will find board briefings from the Olympic Hills and the John Rogers community for your review.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Cindy Jatul, Taya Lauer and Savannah Standard.

Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I am here as a teacher from Roosevelt high school and a parent of two students, one at middle school and one at high school.

I am co-chair of Start School Later Seattle and I want to thank this board for making the decision to go into a lengthy process of doing an in-depth analysis of the start time issue and community engagement.

I want to thank Peggy McEvoy and Sam Marcotte for doing an excellent job at doing this kind of engagement and analysis that's been done over the past year.

I'm here to say that I strongly support the proposal.

work has been done that puts all high school students and middle school students in sleep cycle aligned start times.

This is an enormous achievement and I really want to recognize that.

We have 97 schools in Seattle and only 13 of them will be in tier 3. Again that is a remarkable achievement given that we currently have 33 schools in tier 3. I want to recognize the work that has been done to mitigate problems.

One example is giving tier 1 schools more access to tier.

Tier 1 schools getting, Title I schools getting Tier 1 priority.

Just as a reminder there is broad support, we have over 4400 people who have signed a petition for this initiative, we have endorsements from El Centro de la Raza, NAACP, we have The Seattle Council PTSA, the SCA, the School Nurses Association and just this week five city council members came forth with a letter of endorsement that includes Mike O'Brien, Sawant, Licata and Okamoto and so the support is there.

I encourage you to go forward.

Thank you.

Hi there.

I'm Taya Lauer.

I'm the mother of an elementary school student and a middle school student, and I'm also here to talk about the proposed bell time change.

My mornings consist of dragging an exhausted middle school student out of bed, while my elementary school student, who's excited and ready to go, waits another two hours to go to school.

It occurred to me, perhaps, this was backwards.

So I started talking to other families, and they were experiencing the same thing.

When I had the opportunity to join the bell times task force to learn more about the issue, I did.

In doing our research we found out there was a lot of science and study to back up my assertion we should probably just switch the bell times, send the younger kids earlier, let the older kids go later.

During our time at the task force we did consider sports and athletics.

As a three season high school and college athlete I personally understand and value athletics and I believe that there is a way to continue our strong athletic program and change bell times.

We also took special care to talk to the ELL minority and other groups that face challenging circumstances in our district.

These families shared with us that they have a need to have their older children care for their younger children and I believe that bell times change will support that as the younger children would go to school first allowing the older children to take care of the younger ones in the morning.

They also mentioned to us it was important that their older students be able to work after school.

And the current proposal is for high school students to get out early enough to participate in the workforce.

We considered another issue for middle schoolers in particular.

Currently most of them get out of school about 2.20 and they have fewer after school activities and athletics so they are left to their own devices without parents at home.

We know these unsupervised hours are when the high risk behaviors occur the most.

So keeping those students in school one hour later would help mitigate that situation.

And finally, now we have 33 schools in third tier and this proposal reduces that number to 13. Reducing the number of schools in the third tier was not a goal of the bell times change but to be able to do this is very positive.

I believe this proposal is a good healthy option and I urge you to accept the proposal and change the bell times.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alright the next speaker is Savannah Stannard followed by Jennifer Ogle and Catherine Darley.

Hi my name is Savannah Stannard I am a parent of a second grader at Olympic Hills Elementary School and I'm also here to talk about the growth boundary issues around that school.

More specifically I'd like to speak to how the current approved boundaries will have very real and damaging effects on family like mine who are already dealing with the effects of poverty, immigration and language barriers have on our children and the ability to achieve their full potential.

Upon joining Olympic Hills community in the middle of my daughter's kindergarten year my family and I were very excited to learn the plans were underway to build a new state-of-the-art school.

Built specifically to meet the needs of the historically underserved children and families that Olympic Hills has excelled at serving.

Needless to say the excitement around this new building and the role in helping to close the achievement gap facing our children is tangible for everybody in our community.

However, the new boundaries, almost half of Olympic Hills student body will be reassigned to Cedar Park, a school that at best meets the minimum requirements needed to qualify as an interim site.

As you can see from the maps that you have, this is not just half of our student body, this is the most vulnerable and at risk part of our student body for whom the new building will be most beneficial.

Nevertheless, the loss of a purposely designed building is only part of why these new boundaries will be so damaging to our children and dividing up our school in such a drastic way you will also be dividing up our community.

A community our children have come to count on for the consistency, predictability and support systems that have often eluded them outside of school.

This more than staying in a substandard building will have the most long-term and damaging effects on our children.

reinforcing their internal dialogue that they are underserving of stable and supportive relationships.

Therefore I request again that the board take immediate action to reinstate the sliver of students who have been taken out of our boundaries.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Jennifer Ogle, Catherine Darley, Rochelle Dickerson.

Hi I'd like to start out by congratulating you.

It may seem like you're not making any progress but I've just come from my 30 year class reunion for Garfield class of 1985. It was great to see everyone hail and hearty some with kids of their own back in Seattle Public Schools.

We were impressed with the tour of the new building, the renovated building and the performance hall is beautiful.

And of course we're all so proud of classmate Ted Howard doing such a good job of minding the store.

I'm sure you've heard from some of my classmates last year who have kids back at Garfield.

I bet there were parents here right where I'm standing talking about why they didn't want to lose a teacher in the middle of the semester.

Their PTSA believes as we all do that the school district has an obligation to make every effort possible to keep staffing displacements or layoffs as far from the classroom and direct to student services as possible.

We have asked for transparency to understand how and why the cuts occurred and the criteria used to decide them but we still don't have that information.

It's my understanding that the board also has asked for transparency.

In policy number 6010 the board directs the superintendent to implement a transparent school funding model that schools, families, and community members can understand.

This year at my school we have higher enrollment than last year but lower than estimated.

So we are scheduled to lose a teacher that has been on staff for many years.

That is not something easy to understand.

We do understand the need to balance the budget but we don't understand why enrollment can't be underestimated instead of overestimated.

Perhaps the lure of ransoming PTAs is too great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Catherine Darley is next followed by Rochelle Dickerson, Mary McHale.

Hi, my name is Catherine Darley, Sleep Specialist.

First, thanks to the school board, superintendent, and district staff for your diligent efforts to align school start times with the times students are best able to learn and also to engage the community in this process.

I think you did a great job.

As you know, the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2014 recommended that secondary schools start at 8.30 a.m.

or later.

The Centers for Disease Control just in the last couple months joined them in supporting that recommendation.

You have information in your packet.

So the proposal before you supports the recommendations of these health organizations.

So I encourage you to endorse that proposal when it comes time to vote.

The Seattle Sleep Community first began supporting the district to make this improvement in May of 2012. We'd like to continue to support the district as you implement this improvement whether it be providing educational events for SPS families, providing materials.

There are 17 sleep specialists in the community who have volunteered their services and we can speak between us English, Spanish and Amharic so the list is there in your materials also.

I'd like to speak personally as an SPS student, excuse me parent right now.

My child began sixth grade last year at Whitman.

Her first semester she did well earning A's and B's with the exception of one D.

That D was in math held first period.

At 11 years old she naturally sleeps until 830 or 845 in the morning and math is taught before that so no wonder she couldn't learn.

The worst thing to hear her say was a couple weeks after grades came out she said I can't do math, I can't do science or technology, I can't do a STEM program and she didn't want to take math anymore.

So we clearly don't want our sixth graders reaching that conclusion and you know not every family has the ability to compensate for that bad experience.

Thank you.

Rochelle Dickerson, Mary McHale, Jim Wurzer.

I originally intended to speak on the transportation bell times agenda item.

However, I will instead address the authorization to drop the superintendent's evaluation salary and contract extension discussion.

I realize this is a legal responsibility of the school board.

But I would urge the board that any talk of contract extension or raise be tabled at this time.

District parents would hope that with all the cuts endured by our schools, teachers, and students, the district leadership would want to set an example for the rest of us and show a commitment to the financial health of our district by not even entertaining the possibility of a raise in salary at this time.

We also ask that the community be allowed to weigh in on our view of the performance of the leadership of our school district.

We have been shocked at the absence of leadership shown both verbally and physically to our community during the recent strike and teacher cuts at schools in one-third of our district, beyond a few emails.

I have been contacted by many school families with stories of callous, dismissive, and downright rude behavior in response to the requests to be heard.

And the lack of transparency and honesty from our district administration is completely unacceptable.

Clearly a tone has been set at central administration that this kind of behavior is acceptable and no accountability will be required.

Seattle is one of the most educated and community minded cities in our country.

I beg our school board directors to insist that our leadership understand the importance of truly engaging the families and educators in decision making.

Our school community is uniting and collaborating like never before.

We will continue to demand accountability from our school leadership as long as it takes.

Thank you.

Mary McHale, Jim Wurzer, Robin Timmermans, Graham.

Hi my name is Mary McHale.

I'm a four-year resident of the Maple Leaf neighborhood and I have a daughter in first grade at Hazel Wolf K-8.

I'm here today to express concern over the proposed transportation plan for 2016-17.

Currently my daughter rides the bus to school nearly every day and it has become a crucial part of our morning.

To put it quite bluntly, having transportation service in the morning is not a luxury, but it is a necessity that allows me to get to work on time.

As the sole provider for my daughter in my household, being able to get to work on time every day is of critical importance.

Under the proposed transportation plan, my family, along with many others in our neighborhood, would lose bus service to and from the new Hazel Wolf K-8 building when it opens in Pinehurst next year, despite being two miles from the school.

At our bus stop alone there are seven kids which is a small number compared to other bus stops nearby with up to 15 kids or more.

I realize that the district is in a tough situation regarding funding but impact on both families and the environment is significant if our busing goes away.

I'm asking you to work with parents on a creative solution to this problem and I have the following three suggestions.

Option one, obviously those of us who stand to lose busing under the new plan would prefer that you make the decision to reference more than one middle school to an option school transportation zone.

This could be accomplished by utilizing more strategically placed bus stops to streamline the routes within the expanded zone.

Option two, hub bus stops.

A creative alternative would be to assign zone to drop off bus stops for areas outside the actual transportation zones.

This plan would be a satisfactory alternative for families with little impact on the district's finances.

It would also relieve the inevitable congestion that will occur when a large number of families are forced to resort to dropping kids at school in a neighborhood that already has very limited parking.

This option is easy to implement as well.

Option three, lastly, due to the low ridership prevalent in the North End, another alternative would be to assign one or two rapid bus routes along main arterials with hub type bus stops along the way.

For example, a rapid route straight up 15th to Hazel Wolf picking up kids at four or five stops with the goal that it goes towards the school, stays on arterials and is fast.

Please consider these alternatives and at the very least please delay finalizing this plan until there is a clear assessment of the impact on our families and on the Pinehurst neighborhood along with the viability of alternatives.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Jim Wurzer followed by Robin Timmermans Graham and Carol Ann Landis.

My name is Jim Wurzer I live in the Loyal Heights neighborhood and I want to speak to the project that is the value engineering study and the project that is for the park, I mean for the school in the future.

In 2003 our neighborhood had very little green space.

The community approached the school because the school had about 32,000 square feet of bare asphalt on the south side of the school.

So we asked if we could go to the city and to the county because there was money in the neighborhoods.

funds to build a park.

The school agreed and we procured the money for the park, we built a beautiful park.

It's been used for the kids in the school and for the community.

So when you have heavy use in a school, I mean in the playground, we had grass and so the grass got worn out.

So the community came to the school and the school board and said well you should, we should water it.

And the school board said well we can't afford the water.

So the community said well we'll pay for the water.

The school district said no.

So as a result that beautifully that grass has now disappeared and the proposal in the new project is that from the architect is that you just pave over that park.

So I don't know how you can explain this to the community.

Another thing you have a MAC on this school that was originally budgeted at 26 now it's 36. So I say redesign the school, get rid of the courtyard, and eliminate the childcare facility.

Thank you.

All right, it looks like our next speaker is at the podium.

So after her is Carol Ann Landis and Jennifer Sylvester.

and you can begin whenever you're ready.

Okay, thanks.

Thanks for having me and thank you for your time and thank you for putting up with a very two, two-year-old.

My kids are at Louisa Boren STEM K-8 and someday all four kids will be SPS students.

My kids are going to be okay.

Next year, I'm going to do a lot of crockpot meals.

We're going to run late to soccer practice.

We're going to make it work.

I'm lucky that I have a family where we can make it work.

Today, I'd like to talk about the students and families that are going to have a really hard time making 940 to 410 work.

The original proposal for bell times was that K-8s go to a 9-40 start, which was unilaterally rejected.

Most of us can understand why.

9-40 to 4-10 is late.

4-10 is late for a kid riding the bus home at rush hour.

4-10 means the last kids on the bus aren't home till 5, 5-30.

940 to 410 means before and after school for working families and that's very and truly cost prohibitive.

410 is late for a child who has occupational or speech or other therapies after school.

410 is unsafe for the kids that are walking home after school.

940 is when a first grader is ready for a snack after being up for two hours.

410 is late for a student who goes to the Delridge Library for free tutoring after school.

410 is very late for having play time after doing homework and practicing his extremely loud trumpet.

I appreciate the need to balance science, money, and that older kids need a later start time.

I agree with that 100%.

But 940 to 410 is not a meaningful option for any elementary age school kids and needs to be taken off the table.

Let's actually do this right.

Please make something good happen for families, for teenagers, for all students.

Adopt a two-tier transportation routing system which was part of the recommendation of the Bell Times Analysis Task Force.

This and this alone supports all families.

It supports athletics, it supports working class families, it supports the people at my school.

Please do this right for the first time and not have to revisit it in two years.

Thanks for your time.

Thank you.

Carol Landis, Jennifer Sylvester, Sarah Abelman.

My name is Carol Landis.

I'm a professor in the School of Nursing at the University of Washington.

First I would thank the board and the superintendent as well as the staff for the wonderful work that they've done to seriously take on this issue and to study it over the past year.

Also to try to arrive at workable solutions that allow teenagers to start school later.

Data from studies continue to support that after later school start times are started kids get more sleep, tardiness and absences go down and some students show improvement in academic achievement.

Kids from families with fewer resources compared to those with lots of resources actually show the greatest improvement.

Last spring I attended two of the neighborhood to neighbor meetings in South Seattle and I was very impressed with the video that the school board made as well as the information that is currently on the school board website which summarizes the data from the American Pediatric Association's article from last year.

While attendance was small at the neighbor to neighborhood meetings the parents who were there expressed their support for later start times for teenagers.

They also expressed some concerns that after all they didn't benefit from later school start times as teenagers and their kids didn't either and now their kids are young adults and they're doing quite fine.

So really what's the need for this change?

I think that it just speaks to the need for us to continue educating the entire community about the need for adequate sleep.

I think that the school board making this change for the Seattle school district will send a very strong system level change that demonstrates the improvement, which demonstrates our priority for making adequate sleep and its importance to health.

I'll stop there.

Thank you.

Jennifer Sylvester, Sarah Abelman, Marvin Wetzel.

Hello my name is Jenna Sylvester and I have two children in Seattle Public School and serve as the PTA president at Catherine Blaine K-8.

One of the three K-8 schools moved to tier 3 after the public comment period for the bell times proposal was completed.

I'm here tonight to ask you to return Catherine Blaine and affected K-8s to tier 2 or abandon the three tier system entirely.

The statistics listed in the report presented here do not reflect feedback for the current proposal.

They represent feedback for a proposal with later start times for high school and middle school students and earlier start times for elementary school students.

Every tier 3 school in the current proposal is an elementary or K-8 school.

Nowhere in the public comment period was this cited as an option.

There is no reason, logic or benefit to sending young children to school at such a late hour but there are significant concerns.

In 1998, the University of Minnesota conducted a study on elementary school students who were pushed to a 9.40 start time.

Teaching and learning were significantly compromised when academics were pushed back into the afternoon and students were less alert and fatigued.

Sending five and six year olds home in the dark poses significant threats to the safety of children in a community where large numbers walk to and from school.

A two hour time gap between our school dismissal time and all others in the neighborhood will splinter our community and create havoc for shared childcare and activity schedules.

The proposal includes numerous citation of strong preference for K-8s to be included in Tier 2 and the majority of public comment lists are strong preference for K-8s to be in Tier 2. Please return Catherine Blaine K-8 and all interested K-8s to Tier 2. The fact that we don't fit into any other category is not a good enough reason to jeopardize our kids' safety, academics and community.

Please honor the original recommendations of your task force and return K-8s to Tier 2.

Thank you.

Sarah Abelman, Marvin Wetzel, Paul Defonso.

My name is Sarah Ottelman.

I'm a parent and neighbor of Loyal Heights Elementary.

The Loyal Heights value engineering team reported that the Loyal Heights project is estimated to be $12.6 million over budget and this is prior to probable additional costs.

There are two clear ways for the district to drastically reduce the cost of the project while also listening to the community opposition to the current plan.

First and most importantly, the district needs to change the proposal from the four track program serving 660 kids to the three track program.

The other schools set to use the 660 model are in lots that are two to three times the size of the Loyal Heights lot.

This cookie cutter program does not fit on a 2.7 acre lot.

By using a three track program, there would be significant cost savings which would help get the project back under budget.

Second, the district needs to remove the childcare from the plan.

The site is not large enough to accommodate the needs of K-5 students, so there is no reason more space should be taken up by a childcare that does not serve the primary needs of the district.

Furthermore, there is no need for an onsite childcare.

There are 31 preschools in Ballard, 17 of which have availability right now.

and three of which are within one block of this school.

The VET even reported that removing the childcare would save $900,000.

One of the two functions listed by the VET as having the highest order was engaging the community.

The district has failed to do this.

The community is strongly opposed to the size of the current plan, as evidenced by public comments presented at two city code departure meetings held this month.

The Departures Committee voted to reject all four of the requested departures.

Even the Seattle Landmarks Board scolded the district for not having enough input and communication from the community.

It is time for the district to listen to the community and give us a better plan.

Thank you.

Marvin Wetzel, Paul Defonso, Leslie Harris.

Thank you Sarah.

I'm Marvin Wetzel.

I have two children going to Loyal Heights Elementary and the district brought to us a plan in March and there were two meetings and overwhelmingly everybody spoke against the 660 child size school and yet we were told that that's just the way it was going to be.

So we had meetings down here at this building and we were told that's just the way it was going to be.

Six more months go by, the departures committee is formed because departures are necessary to build a school of that scale and we are still faced with the fact that we have the school that's being designed.

A lot of money and effort as this we're looking at.

at this approval for today is being thrown at this design.

And yet overwhelmingly, everybody does not want this school at this scale.

The departures committee, people were actually crying because they were voting against these departures.

They want a new school.

But the only power that we seem to have, or they felt like they have, was a vote against the departures.

The force, the school district, back to the table, back to the design table, and look at a smaller scale.

The lot is really small.

We all feel our children's safety is at jeopardy by building a school this big, by bringing that many more cars into a very small residential area, three times more buses, three more buses into that small area.

We reduced the play area by 50% and yet we throw 300 more students into half the play area.

Four hours this week alone, hanging out with my kids after school with about 150 kids playing in that play area.

It's really unfortunate that the beautiful grassy space that the community had built, put in, couldn't have been watered.

But kids still play there anyways.

They love that space.

Let's just go back to the drawing board as a group, let's include the community, give us some choice other than 660 students.

Please conclude your remarks.

Certainly.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Paul Defonso, Leslie Harris, Holly Brisco.

Greetings Board Members, Superintendent Nyland, my name is Paul Defonso, I'm the Legislative Chair at Lafayette Elementary in West Seattle.

We're a K-5 school and I'm here on behalf of Lafayette.

I want to start off by saying that we at Lafayette, we applaud the work of the Belltimes Task Force on reforming Belltimes, it's long overdue.

and we would hope that the board does adopt it.

However, we do not applaud the decision of the task force to put Lafayette into the third tier.

As I'm sure you're aware, we have been on a 9.30 start time for seven to eight years at Lafayette.

This has had a very onerous financial impact on Lafayette's working parents who can't get themselves to work and get their children to school on time for 9.30.

increase of the bell time to 940 would only exacerbate this financial burden.

I'm sure you're also well aware that scientific research has demonstrated that the earlier bell time for K-5 students is most efficacious for academic excellence.

Pushing it to 940 only hampers the ability of our students to achieve that academic excellence.

Lafayette, in fact, has among the highest percentages of free and reduced lunch students for a non-Title I school in West Seattle, more than Alki, more than Schmitz Park, more than Fairmount, and those students would be adversely affected by an even later bell time than we have now.

from 930 to 940. Finally, we have been burdened with a late bell time for seven to eight years.

It's been onerous on the parents economically.

It's been onerous on the academic ability of the students to excel.

We don't know what decision was made by the board.

There was no transparency into putting Lafayette into the third tier.

We would at least ask that there be a rotation of the other schools to be in third tier if there has to be a third tier.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alright Leslie Harris looks like she's ready to go followed by Holly Briscoe and Chandra Hampson.

Thank you my name is Leslie Harris I've been down here for a long time sitting in the cheap seats and I hope on November 3rd I'm sitting on the dais.

Let's stay away from the campaigning from the dais please.

Fair enough.

The one word that we have heard over and over and over again today and elsewhere in the testimony and from the community is transparency.

We still don't have feedback from the superintendent or this board regarding the unilateral arbitrary closure of Middle College High School at High Point.

It's been months.

Folks deserve those answers.

Folks deserve to see the budget that talks about $8 million for the third tier plan.

I sat in the cheap seats at your retreat and I listened to fabulous conversation and lots of plans for the future but what we did not hear was a recognition that this board will be changing substantially.

There are a great many resolutions and plans being put forward now to be run through prior to said election and I hope you slow down.

Thank you ever so much.

Thank you.

Holly Briscoe, Chandra Hampson and then I want to circle back to the person that we skipped which is Andrea Baumgarten.

Holly Briscoe.

All right, the next name is Chandra Hampson.

So we'll go and then again to Andrea Baumgarten.

So at least one person on the wait list if folks don't show up.

Hi.

A fortnight ago, I was here representing Sandpoint Elementary PTA.

This week, I, Chandra Hampson, am here to remind you that you and I are responsible for representing those without a voice.

Your administration has spent this time obfuscating and speaking half truths.

There is not a thread of data to support that cutting staff is in fact a fiscally responsible decision.

On Monday approximately 50 classroom special ed and ELL staff will be placed into sub pools with only five known positions to fill in the district.

You state your responsibility doesn't extend beyond said explanation that you do not need to hold the staff accountable for providing analysis on what impacts 13,000 of your children.

What you and your staff are also saying is that the deepening inequity in this district is not your responsibility.

But the district has no business making cuts without cost saving and compliance analysis.

The cuts impact 5,000 children in poverty, 2,000 English language learners, and at least 1,500 special education students.

So 67% of the children impacted are high need.

As for the rest, the 33% will, as they have done for years, respond with what amounts to fundraising by teacher cuts by funding their schools with between $4 and $5 million in annual grants for teachers, counselors, and nurses.

Grants that go directly to the schools representing a weighted average free and reduced lunch population of only 11%.

What's worse, your staff acknowledges and condones this inequity.

Michael Stone stated in the October 6th Budget and Finance Committee meeting that the $3.3 million in proposed PTSA grants this year would go up based on the staffing cuts announcement.

And you confirmed that in your remarks tonight, Dr. Nyland.

And in October 14th press conference, Communications Officer Jackie Ko, stated that the state legislature is responsible for the inequity created by school cuts and she endorses the use of PTA funds to buy teachers.

Yet your board policy states equitable access and racial equity analysis are your primary purpose and that the board is accountable to the community and will adopt a system for district oversight and accountability.

Your refusal to act is therefore either a failure of ethics or a failure of courage.

I am here to lend you my courage and encourage you to act on behalf of those that have entrusted their future to you.

As I tell my daughters every morning, be brave for your ancestors.

Thank you very much.

Okay, one last call for the two people that we've skipped and then I'm going to officially move on to the waitlist.

So, Andrea Baumgarten.

She said her daughter's 18th birthday.

Alright, well, that sounds like a good place to be.

Holly Briscoe.

Alright, so we will move to the waitlist and the two names, while they're speaking I'll have the staff check my math, but the first name is Robin Schwartz, the second one is Marty Brekke.

Hi I'm Robin Schwartz thanks for having us tonight.

I'm a parent at Concord international elementary school in South Park.

I want to talk about how the recent cuts have affected us.

We at Concord are not moving on from this subject because it is hurting us and we want it to be rectified.

We are a Title I school, over 80% free and reduced lunch.

We are 46% English language learners.

We are 89% children of color.

Many of our kindergartners begin school without having had the benefit of preschool and or not speaking English.

We also have an amazing staff and an incredible dual language program.

As a result of the recent cuts, we lost a teacher this week.

Seven kindergarten and first grade classes were reduced to six, including two K-1 splits.

These splits mean different rooms, different kids, different schedules, and a new teaching plan with almost no preparation.

Additionally, all the dual language classrooms affected are overcrowded.

Our brand new K-1s have 26 kids each, four over the legal limit.

Our non-merged grade ones are at 28 and 29, four or five over the legal limit.

Because of the special nature of our dual language program, the cuts have forced us to overload our youngest classes.

This means that our kindergartners and first graders who already face so many social challenges are now facing significant academic ones as well.

Here's my question.

Will these kids get the education this year that they would have gotten without the loss of a teacher?

No.

It's obvious that by shifting them into overcrowded classes with unplanned curriculums, they will finish behind, and the equity gap will be sustained.

We are failing these kids.

They will not learn as much or as well this year.

My community is refusing to roll over on this.

We won't sit back and let our students suffer as a result of poor planning and a failure to locate the money.

We want our teacher back so that our students can learn.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And then the last speaker, and I'm assuming this is Marty, is Marty Brekke.

Hi there, thank you for dipping into the waitlist.

My name is Marty Brekke.

I'm a mom of two Seattle Public Schools students, one in general ed and one in special ed at Thornton Creek Elementary.

And I'm here to talk about the understaffing of my son's distinct classroom that should have started the school year with two full-time aides.

per the collective bargaining agreement.

One position was cut prior to the start of the year with no explanation and the lack of the IA caused every child in that room IEP to fall out of compliance.

Kids were not receiving an appropriate education nor was that happening in the least restrictive environment.

It took 22 days to get that position reposted, 22 days filled with stress, injuries, anxiety and frustration.

And the Northeast Special, Northeast District Special Ed Executive first gave us an explanation that the position was cut due to under enrollment but the math is simple.

Article 9 section F of the collective bargaining agreement we had met the minimum requirements to have both IAs at the start of the school year.

So it took five busy moms, 22 days, 84 emails, 14 phone calls just to get a meeting with the district.

And at that meeting, it was clear that the district was wrong and the second position was open by the end of the day.

So it's still unclear to me if this month of disruption for these families was caused by the incompetence of the special ed directors not knowing the staffing ratios in the collective bargaining agreement or malice on the part of the district towards the most vulnerable population.

And it makes me question the other schools that are facing cuts in special education if those cuts are legal and in line with the CBA.

Second I'd like to address a broader issue with special education and that's the cutting of the IAs in the resource rooms at continuum schools.

Not staffing IAs or no longer staffing IAs in resource rooms is setting back special ed about 15 years.

It's going to a model of pulling kids out of the classroom to get academic support instead of pushing in the IAs to the classroom to provide that support and the research is clear that that's not a model that works.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right so that brings us to the end of public testimony for tonight and now we will shift to board comments and I'll start looking both directions to see if there's someone that would like to lead off.

I think I saw a nod from Director Martin Morris so we'll go there first.

Just a couple of items.

First, the last few weeks have been fairly busy from the national scene.

The district participated in the Council of Urban Boards of Education annual fall conference and then a week later Dr. Nyland and Director Peasley were presenters at the Council of great city schools in Long Beach California and I'm sure they will be talking a little bit about that later.

The folks that I talked to at the conference were intrigued and learned an awful lot from that session from people that I ran to that were in the session.

I was facilitating a different session so I couldn't participate.

There is a lot of buzz I guess you could say around the country around the referendum that we passed a few weeks ago around the moratorium on elementary school out of school suspension.

A lot of districts are interested in how we did it, what we did.

what it means and quite frankly we don't know what it's going to mean yet because we just started but we will be monitoring that over the next year to see that the intended outcomes which is one to break that school to prison pipeline and we look at out of school suspension starting in elementary school as a as part of that process to end that practice as it will.

So we look forward to seeing the results of that at the end of this year to see if we've actually made some results there.

This week on Saturday I will have my community meeting.

It will be at the Montlake Public Library at 11 o'clock until 1 o'clock and feel free to come by and say hello.

Thank you.

Any volunteers to go next?

All right let's go to Director McLaren.

Thanks, many thanks to all of you who came and testified tonight.

And it's always an incredible education to hear the personal stories and to hear the passion that people bring to us as you talk about your own situations and those of your neighbors and your children's peers.

And I just want to say a little bit about, you know, there's so much repeated request for parent engagement.

And it's a difficult thing to move to a model of true partnership with parents.

But that is the goal of this district.

It is my belief.

It's my personal goal.

I've talked before about the Family Engagement Institute I attended last summer that taught us a lot of strategies.

So this venue where you talk, we listen, and then we talk, you listen, it's clearly not a dialogue and we recognize that.

I just want to acknowledge that there's tremendous room for us to move together and change from this adversarial situation to true partnership.

I'm not going to comment, I do want to thank the Chief Sealth students who were here.

This is one of the schools in my district and I was very impressed with their bilingual facility as they told us about their program.

And the last thing I'll say is thank you to Superintendent Nyland for bringing Mr. Stiggins, Dr. Stiggins here to talk about assessment.

We all very very much need to be educated about the purposes of assessment and the ways that it can be a support to learning.

So this was a good start in a very very important conversation.

Thank you.

Other directors?

Director Paisley.

Well, I'll just briefly say that the Council of Great City Schools Conference was just an amazing opportunity to hear about districts across the country, some really impressive innovation.

I came away with a notebook full of ideas and then I come back here and we're confronted These ongoing issues, most of which are at least exacerbated by lack of funding.

And that is the problem over and over and over again.

So I'd just like to talk very briefly about the staffing reallocation.

This is a process we have to go through every single year.

Every single district in the state of Washington goes through it.

It is a reality that stems from the fact that we don't have our final enrollment numbers until the beginning of October.

We only get a certain amount of money per student and where we have too many teachers per student and it is a ratio, we need to move teachers to schools where we don't have enough teachers per student.

Nobody likes this.

If we had a reserve of money we could do it differently.

We don't have that.

As far as the transportation bell times the three-tier system.

I think we would all love to go to a two-tier system.

We would love that.

We don't have the money.

It would cost at least $8 million more.

So we have, what we have, what we're stuck with is a three-tier system and no matter what we do there will be schools in the third tier.

The good news is if we change from what we have now to what staff is recommending we will move from 33 schools in tier 3 to 13 schools in tier 3. Maybe there will be an enormous influx of money from the state as they make good on the McCleary court ruling and we will have enough to shift to a two-tier system but I would not hold my breath on that.

So it may take a few years to figure out what to do about this but what staff is recommending is better.

We can't afford perfection.

That's a sad reality.

As far as the Cedar Heights Olympic Hills boundaries, I'm sorry Cedar Park and Olympic Hills boundaries.

I support that change.

I've been involved with meetings at Olympic Hills.

There will be another meeting in November to discuss that with the people down here who are in a position to make that change.

I'm very much in support of it.

And I also am in support of considering a hub stop in Maple Leaf for families who are enrolled at Hazel Wolf.

I just ask transportation to take a look at that.

And that's it.

Thank you.

Director Patu.

I want to thank everyone for coming tonight and letting us know what is in your mind.

We might not always be able to answer you right away but there is an opportunity for you to go and be able to talk to any of the board directors in their monthly community meetings.

Also I want to, I would like to make a statement very clear from a work session that we had last week that I realized that my comments was construed.

So what I would like to say is that what I had said, I would like for us to keep a focus on African American males but with emphasis on the three ethnic groups which are Native Americans, Hispanic and South Pacific Islanders.

I believe that it's a group that definitely we need to pay attention to considering all the various areas and at risk that they have been at.

But at the same time, we almost must remember that we have three other groups that are almost as neediest.

So I just want to make that very clear that I do support the fact that we do have a very much high need in terms of serving our African American males and that is something that I would like to actually to say that that is a Definitely a focus that the board actually had talked about so hopefully that we can be able to continue to look at that and see what we can do to be able to serve to the needs of our most neediest communities.

Thank you.

Thank you Director Patu.

Director Blanford.

I'll start off by many of the comments that we've heard before, ones that I would echo.

I didn't hear anything about Susie Fitzhugh and she's been a friend of mine for a long time so I appreciate the opportunity to appreciate her.

I met her in 1998 when I was the executive director of the Rotary Boys and Girls Club and she took pictures of number of my photogenic kids at that time and we have managed to maintain a friendship since and I've admired the gift that she has given to Seattle Public Schools and to Seattle at large with her art and her ability to graphically represent our students and so I wanted to just share my appreciation for her as well.

I last night had the opportunity to attend a meeting of international school parents and many of them, it was interesting that the conclusion of that meeting was very similar to the comments that the Chief Sealth students came up with today.

That they wish that that program was expanded so that it wasn't something that you got lucky and got into but something that every child in Seattle had access to.

I frequently boast the fact that my daughter has done well in that program and lots of her friends have done well in that program and I believe that as they aspire to be global citizens that they need to have access to multiple languages and so that will be something that I'll be pushing for and advocating hopefully with my colleagues support.

And then finally, I'll just say also that I appreciate the attendance of so many folks to share their opinions with us via email, coming to our community meetings, and then especially coming to these board meetings.

My next community meeting is scheduled for October, November, I'm sorry, October.

I had one last week, so it would be November the 21st from 10 to 1130 at Douglas Truth Library.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Director Peters.

Thank you everybody who came and brought to us the different issues.

facing our district.

I want to thank the students from Chief Sealth who reminded us of the great value of being multilingual and I too wish for a time, a day when being able to speak different languages will be a norm in this country.

And those of you who came out from the Cedar Park Olympic Hills region, thank you very much.

You brought some very compelling testimony to us tonight and I am looking forward to finding out from staff the status of the problems that you bring forth and I really respect the fact that that you came here for all the right reasons, that you deeply care about the fairness and equity and the kids and the families that you work with.

So thank you for coming out.

I would also like to thank some of our state legislators, our Washington delegation who recently wrote a letter to us about our start of school situation and our staffing adjustments.

They too I think wrote to us from the right place.

They really did care about what's going on and they gave us an offer to help.

And I appreciate that.

To some extent it does mean funding.

It's really hard to get the projections spot on.

So these adjustments, apparently these adjustments are not just made in Seattle they are made in other districts.

They are so painful.

I would like to pursue the possibility of creating some kind of student stability fund, a line item in our budget where we do put aside some funds to mitigate against these sorts of projection, under projections, I'm sorry over projections and so that we don't have to suffer as much every year.

You know it turns out that some of the students that we lost did end up going to charter schools and so that was another variable that was unique to this year.

I don't know whether we will see them come back into the system.

I suppose it is possible.

Thank you.

Regarding the bell times I think wonderful progress has been made on this and we will be talking about it later tonight but I understand the 940 start time is a hardship.

My own family has been in the third tier for about two years so I understand where you're all coming from and we've gotten a great deal of feedback on this and I have asked staff to look into the feasibility of adjusting that back.

It will have a domino effect though I think with some of the other start times so we have to see what that's going to look like but we will be discussing that later tonight.

And I know Peggy McEvoy especially has been working very hard on this.

Let's see.

I recently had the pleasure of attending a conference down in Tacoma, it's the WTAG conference and that's the Washington Association of Educators of Talented and Gifted.

And you know it's a group that we don't talk a whole lot about but it's some of our very advanced learners, we now refer to them as highly capable.

I discovered a new term for them, it's high cap, which is kind of cute, so our high cap kids.

And so it's interesting to focus on what their needs are because I think sometimes we assume that those kids are flying by and don't really need much attention or much help but they have their own vulnerabilities and their own intensities and it's really important to understand these kids.

and to understand what it means to teach these kids, what the expectations should be and so we need to help our teachers understand them.

And I actually believe that this kind of work dovetails with the work we are trying to do with disproportionality because we have a disproportionate number of students of color who are over identified If we are in special ed or for discipline and then we are under identifying these kids for advanced learning.

All this work I think needs to be looked at as a whole.

We need to better understand our students, better understand what the characteristics are so we know when a student is boarding class what that really means.

If they are acting up is that really a deep problem or is it that they are not being challenged?

And so I would like us to continue with this conversation so that we do have a richer representation of our students in all these programs.

Tom Ahern was one of the guests at the conference and he is as you may know the lead attorney in the McCleary case and he did a wonderful somewhat sardonic presentation about the McCleary decision and the various forms of discipline one could say that could be meted upon our state legislators for not fully funding schools.

He also made a point, he was given an award that night and he was, because he was making the point that our highly capable students are also by definition legally covered by our definition of basic education.

And so it's important to remember that highly capable is included in basic education legally and that they too are not being fully funded.

So let me see.

And I think that's it.

So my next meeting is going to be this Saturday at Queen Anne library from 11 until 1. I understand I may have some families from the third tier coming to chat with me and so I welcome all of you to come to talk about that issue or any other issue that's on your mind right now.

Thank you.

Thank you I think everyone's gone I'll go ahead and take my turn and I've crossed some things off the list so I don't repeat what others have said.

I did want to acknowledge the testimony from Olympic Hills.

I was given a copy of a proposal that has been put together.

And, as Director Peasley said, I think there's some good things that we need to take a look at there.

I wanted to talk just briefly, not to repeat other comments, on the reallocation of staffing.

I think I liked the suggestion in public testimony about basically sort of allocating short, if you will, at the beginning of the year.

because the impact there means that you add and not take away.

I would just simply point out that there's disruption related to that as well so it's really tricky to get this all landed just right at the grade by grade level.

The other thing of it is that didn't get mentioned in any of the earlier comments I don't think so I will bring it up and that's the impact that our wait list process has on the staffing reallocation.

Typical district practice is the wait lists are sunset at the end of June.

Other surrounding districts and other districts in the state, that's the practice.

We've always kept them open through the end of September for a host of reasons.

One, our long standing practice under the old student assignment plan was to do that in order to optimize choice.

In recent years since we moved to the new student assignment which is more attendance area or neighborhood based, we used it as a way to bridge the transition from the old plan to the new plan and try to get as many families together as we could.

I think that need has passed.

And at this point now, when we move a wait list on September 30th, there's impacts then from staffing.

So that's an opportunity for us is to take a really good hard look at that practice and that proposal, a change in that practice has been proposed.

Bell times are coming up.

I won't talk about them now except I do want to acknowledge Peggy McEvoy You have been a role model for our staff in terms of being out there in the community listening Making adjustments in response to what you're hearing and I really appreciate that.

It's It's you've done terrific work.

And so thank you.

I you know, I recognize that That doesn't necessarily mean everybody will get exactly what they want but Pegi has certainly worked hard to be responsive to what she's heard from families as well as from board directors so I wanted that acknowledged while everyone was here.

Superintendent contract that's coming up.

I just wanted to say thank you to the team that came from the alliance for education.

Thank you for your testimony for your attendance and for the work that you've done on behalf of the students in Seattle Public Schools.

Similarly, I wanted to say thank you to Greg Wong from Schools First and the work that you're doing, have done, and are continuing to do on behalf of our students.

I skipped something here.

I'll just briefly comment piggybacking on Director Blanford's comments about the recognition of Suzy Fitzhugh.

There's a picture upstairs that is a picture of a girl that was in my daughter's kindergarten class and I think about the fact that she's 23 years old now and she's like institutionalized on the wall up there as this very happy kindergartner and it's a thing of beauty to me.

So thank you to Suzy Fitzhugh for her work.

And then lastly, I have a community meeting on November the 14th.

I only had four people at the last one, which was just two weeks ago.

So I would invite people to come and I say with a smile on my face, it's my last one.

So I will be very happy and I look forward to seeing people there.

And with that, we are going to take a break.

We are two hours and 15 minutes in.

And so let's take a quick, my clock on my computer says 6.32.

Let's target 6.40.

I know that's short, but let's go with that.

Thank you.

you