of our schools are going to have low enrollment numbers as a result of the fact that we are opening schools and we are moving some students around.
And so I just want an acknowledgment that we will need to consider these schools for mitigation resources.
And let me get to the bar for this proposed amendment.
What I just said?
Did anybody write down what I just said?
Well in a perfect world we would but will we remember to do that?
How do we codify something like that?
This would highlight the fact that we acknowledge that we know that these three schools in particular are going to see an enrollment drop and they may lose under our weighted staffing standard formula they may lose some resources.
And so we are acknowledging that and we are saying that we will give consideration to them for mitigation.
Would you be satisfied with rather than kind of defining the consideration just saying give consideration for mitigation to Whitman, Washington and Meany?
So you at least bookmark that you need to consider mitigation for those schools without then assessing their priority versus other schools is that?
Yes I am comfortable with that.
The point is just to highlight the fact that we can predict that they are going to have some enrollment challenges at least during the transition year and we are, we share the concern.
I think your other wording is better in that we just talked about Cedar Park as an option school that is going to have no students so saying that we are going to mitigate these three schools and leaving Cedar Park out.
Kind of does the opposite of what you're suggesting so your other wording whatever it was which was low enrollment consideration would be given to students have low enrollment as a result of the boundary changes.
Okay.
I think as we come, correct me if I'm wrong but if as we go through the enrollment process and we start identifying our schools projected enrollment it seems like any school that we saw that was going to be low enrolled would be ones that would be highlighted for mitigation anyway and it seems to me to make this To do this now is to foreclose a more global view of all of our under enrolled schools and take it through the equity tool as we have indicated that we want to do.
So I'm just, it seems to me having lived a year that low enrolled schools naturally come up and that we don't need to be reminded because that is something that just rises to the top.
Well what is different here is at least two of these schools are going to be, their enrollment is going to drop as a result of our growth boundary changes.
So this is going to be, they are going to suffer you know that.
And then in the case of Meany it is a new school and it is just going to have low numbers because it is a new school.
Oh we've got everybody.
Do we have some communal wisdom?
I will just say that I think that is a decision that you take the whole district into account because the whole district is not paying attention to this decision and having to weigh in in terms of the potential.
pros or cons as we make mitigation decisions later.
Well the last thing I will say before going to our wise group over there is this whole context is the growth boundaries discussion and schools that have been impacted by the growth boundary changes and so that is why my focus here is on the schools that as a result of these changes are going to have low enrollment numbers.
So that is why it is specifically focused within that parameters rather than the entire district.
We will of course when it comes time to have our broader discussions about mitigation look at every school and we will look through the equity lens.
as well.
But for now we are talking about just as all the amendments you have all put forth earlier are ways to mitigate against the changes of the growth boundaries this is still in the context of that.
So much of what we talked about tonight had to do with the north end.
That doesn't mean we are forgetting about the rest of the district but this is the part of the district and these are the schools that are mostly impacted by these growth boundary changes.
So I think the staff just wanted to highlight the race and equity tool has been how we have developed tier 1 for mitigation and if there were to be some other factor put on I think the way that we would read it would be after that tier 1 race and equity tool consideration happened.
The other thing when we talk about mitigations and the decisions that are made overarching tonight, there's going to be impacts, there's potentially going to be impacts across the entire district from decisions that we make that have dollar impacts.
I just wanted to put that back out there as we walk through all of these decisions.
that there will be impacts to potentially all of the schools as well.
So I think having a broader statement about consideration in a more broad term would be a good idea.
Director Peters.
Would tabling this to the next board meeting give us time to work this through and get some of these numbers that y'all are talking about and at the same time preserving your concerns.
Is that a potential win-win?
I don't know if it requires that much more process around it.
I think we are close to having a solution or we are close to tabling it permanently.
If my colleagues don't share a desire to identify the north pathways and if they don't share a desire to acknowledge that some of these schools are going to be under enrolled then I guess we don't need to move forward with this.
The only thing I was going to mention is that so a couple of the decisions in the amendments are impacting, we called out a couple of those.
So Meany is one that is impacted by these changes, Cedar Park is one, Washington could be one, Whitman could be one, Olympic Hills could be one.
Because originally they were slated to have more students when they opened and now they won't.
I'm not sure if we want to make the exhaustive list of schools that might be impacted.
Realizing of course that we are trying to implement the race and equity tool on a consistent basis so that we are supporting our schools with the resources appropriate and necessary.
At the same time we do realize that there are some changes that might not be happening on a regular basis and may need to be mitigated more on a temporary basis until schools continue to grow.
So but just wanted to make sure we've got several schools that are impacted tonight.
All right well with that then how about if I strike the second point and we just stay with the first point which is just being more explicit about some pathways and that the whole mitigation discussion will have later on and we will apply it to all of our schools.
So then procedurally just probably the right way to handle that is just to withdraw the second point of your motion and then if there is no objections by other directors then you can consider that part withdrawn.
Okay well then I would like to withdraw the second part of the motion and just put forth the first part of the motion.
Do I need a second?
No you just need, the chair just didn't ask are there any objections to that withdrawal.
Is there any objection?
And if there aren't then we can consider that withdrawn.
Does anybody have any objection to that?
I don't have an objection but I have a question when the time is appropriate.
So without an objection that just now leaves you with the motion with the first part.
Okay and at what point do we take questions?
So you had a second on your motion originally right?
Right.
So I think now you are up to discussion and debate.
Okay.
Director Blanford.
I'm just, we spent a lot of time talking about the first or the second part of this and so I'm curious if there can be some discussion about the first part and the implications of the pathways.
So there actually aren't any implications for this because this is moving forward as part of the student assignment plan.
This is already again been routed will be introduced tomorrow and so essentially Eagle Staff when it opens would be the middle school pathway for everyone who lives within the Eagle Staff boundaries and the Whitman boundaries.
And then Hamilton would be the site for anyone in HCC who lives within the Hamilton boundary and the McClure boundary.
So nothing will change for current Hamilton and McClure families.
Those who live within the Whitman boundaries are currently attending Hamilton would be assigned to Eagle Staff in that program when it opens.
So did I understand you to say that this is basically status quo?
No because Eagle Staff when it opens will offer HCC.
There will be a cohort there and so when Eagle Staff opens right now everyone at who live within the Whitman, the McClure and the Hamilton boundary attend Hamilton.
When Eagle Staff opens anyone who lives within the new Eagle Staff boundary and the Whitman will attend Eagle Staff so that will be probably a lot closer for most families.
And then anyone who lives within McClure will continue to have their pathway be Hamilton.
Any more questions or comments?
Director Burke.
I am still not completely sure if I understand the discussion that Director Blanford raised.
The guidance in this motion under item number one, is it exactly the same as what is in the student assignment plan currently being routed through operations committee?
Or are there any differences?
There are no differences.
Okay so this is just moving it forward and codifying it as part of this process which will then be reaffirmed in the student assignment plan process.
Yes because that ultimately will have to be updated with the pathways.
Thank you.
And just by way of context the middle school pathways is something that I think I was working on a couple of weeks ago before the student assignment plan was brought forth and we won't be voting on the student assignment plan until January.
So the idea was to have this part of the growth boundaries discussion because families were not clear on what the pathways were for these particular schools.
Any questions, comments?
I have a question that I'm a little curious about.
I see here the middle school HCC pathway.
Is there an HCC pathway for the other districts such as southeast, west Seattle?
Because I see it only in the north end area.
Yes so I think, I imagine the amendment was only to address the changes that came about from the opening of Eagle Staff.
Nothing is changing with the other pathways in the other locations.
Any more questions or comments before we vote on this item?
I don't see any.
Ms. Ritchie.
Did you have anything?
Dr. Blanford.
Did you want to say something?
No.
Ms.
Ritchie roll call.
Director Geary.
Aye.
Director Harris.
Aye.
Director Peters.
Aye.
Director Pinkham.
Aye.
Director Blanford.
No.
Director Patu.
What?
Director Patu.
I'm sorry yes.
This motion passed 6 to 1 as amended.
Now there is actually a motion here to postpone.
So we don't need to do it?
All right moving on to the rest of our.
Yeah just to clarify you now need to vote on the main motion as amended by.
Yeah, no that amendment 12 with the part that was withdrawn has been approved.
So now what is left to vote on, I understand you are not going to make the motion to postpone so now you need to go back to your very first main motion and vote on that as amended by all the various amendments.
All right I found the language I think.
This is just closing the complete loop on.
All right so then I move that the school board amend the 2013-20 growth boundaries plan for student assignment as shown in attachment A to the board action report Wait a minute, where do I put as amended?
As amended and direct the superintendent to take any appropriate actions to implement this decision.
Second the motion.
Any more questions?
Director Blanford.
I am wondering if you can come forward Noel.
And I understand completely that we are now voting on the main motion with the amendments attached.
What I am struggling with is having voted against many of the amendments, voting for the main motion, is there any kind of a conflict between voting for the main motion with the amendments attached and having voted against the amendments?
You see my question?
No I do understand your question and really the question then for you is as a decision maker based on those amendments do you now think you need to vote no to the entirety or overall can you still approve the overall plan even though it's been amended as it's been amended through the course of amendments tonight.
Okay thank you.
Your hands aren't tied either direction.
Director Geary.
Just going back to the forgotten amendments I want to thank the district for the amendment that kept a group of students at Sandpoint Elementary and I want to thank the district on behalf of my constituents for increasing the Thornton Creek GeoZone to include all of the families that are and we anticipate moving into the Magnuson Park area.
Roll call Ms. Ritchie.
Director Pinkham.
Aye.
Director Blanford.
No.
Director Burke.
Aye.
Director Geary.
Aye.
Director Harris.
Aye.
Director Peters.
Aye.
Director Patu.
Aye.
This motion passed 6 to 1 as amended.
Okay we are going to continue on to our action item BEX IV resolution 2016 17-5 intent to construct the Loyal Heights elementary school modernization and addition project.
Can we hear from, oh I'm sorry.
I move that the school board approve resolution 2016-17-5 which certifies the intent of Seattle Public Schools to construct the Loyal Heights elementary school modernization and addition project as attached to the board action report.
Second the motion.
The ops committee heard this item on October 20 and moved it forward for approval.
Thank you.
Any questions?
Director Harris.
Is this the place where we finally get to deal with the daycare situation at Loyal Heights and the square footage and the playground?
And if not, when?
We will be bringing that to operations committee in December.
It will come to school board for introduction in January and approval in January.
So this is not, this is just that we intend to construct the project for which state funds have been allocated.
Any questions, comments?
Seeing none, Ms. Ritchie roll call.
Director Pinkham.
Director Blanford.
Aye.
Director Burke.
Aye.
Director Geary.
Aye.
Director Harris.
Aye.
Director Peters.
Aye.
Director Patu.
Aye.
This motion passed unanimously.
Next one PTA 4 constructability review report for the Laurel Heights Elementary School modernization and addition
I move that the school board approve and accept the constructability review report dated October 10, 2016 by Meng analysis for the Loyal Heights elementary school modernization and addition project.
Second the motion.
This item was heard by the operations committee on October 20 and was also moved forward for approval.
Thank you.
Any questions or comments?
Good moving on.
Ms. Ritchie vote.
Director Blanford.
Aye.
Director Burke.
Aye.
Director Geary.
Aye.
Director Harris.
Aye.
Director Peters.
Aye.
Director Pinkham.
Aye.
Director Patu.
Aye.
This motion passed unanimously.
Next PTA 4, Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project, value engineering report, state funding assistance.
I move that the school board accept the value engineering report dated June 7, 2016 and the architect's response and recommendation matrix for the Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project.
This item also, oops I'm sorry.
Second the motion.
This item was heard by the office committee and moved forward for approval.
Thank you.
Any questions?
Comments?
Moving right along.
Ms. Ritchie roll call.
Director Burke.
Aye.
Director Geary.
Aye.
Director Harris.
Aye.
Director Peters.
Aye.
Director Pinkham.
Aye.
Director Blanford.
Aye.
Director Patu.
Aye.
This motion passed unanimously.
PTA.
I think we should thank Mr. Best for staying here for the meeting in spite of the fact that he didn't get a chance to speak.
PTA for Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project.
Oh I did.
I'm sorry.
Introduction items.
Acceptance of teacher principal evaluation program TPEP I grant 664.
C&I.
This came before the curriculum and instruction committee on October 10 and was moved forward for consideration.
Go ahead.
Okay.
Clover Codd assistant superintendent of human resources.
So here to introduce the acceptance of the teacher and principal evaluation project I grant.
This is a state funded grant it is not a competitive grant so we don't have to apply and compete against anybody.
It is an allocation based on the number of teachers that we have.
The funds are dedicated to support teachers especially new teachers in learning the evaluation framework and the TPEP process.
We did include a one page that Director Harris had asked us to include on all of last year's activities.
I believe that's why it came forward for consideration.
That is now included and then you will see in the board action report the activities that we have planned for this year in terms of teacher professional development.
So I will open it up for questions.
Director Harris.
Given that we have a wind shift last Tuesday in terms of federal and state leadership in education is this one of those programs that is likely to be messed with
I honestly can't answer that because I have no idea what the education agenda is of what may be the Department of Education or may not be.
But teacher and principal evaluation has been a pretty I would say bipartisan initiative across the country so I don't imagine that teacher standards or principal standards are going to go away in terms of an evaluation project.
but Assistant Superintendent JoLynn Berge may have more information than I do.
It's not federal it's a state grant so the chances of this changing, I think that the state is invested in maintaining this grant until everyone has changed and then the conversation was there's going to be a natural amount of turnover so there would be, need to be maintained a level of funding for TPEP so a state initiative not in the same, not impacted in the same way with the federal election.
But the funds to fund it for the state don't come from the federal government?
No not right now they come out of the state budget.
Director Peters.
I'm just looking at the background information and it says in 2010 the district started using the Charlotte Danielson framework.
To what extent is the district still using that?
We still use the Charlotte Danielson framework.
It's just been aligned to the eight evaluative criteria of the state.
It's the same framework.
Okay.
Do we have any sense of how well that framework has worked for the district since we are now going into our 6th or 7th year using it?
Well I don't think we have done any research to isolate has the teacher evaluation system contributed to teacher professional growth or lack of teacher professional growth.
I think that that would be something we could look into.
we do tend to believe that having teacher standards and holding teachers accountable to the standards with appropriate support and training is the right direction for education.
Right no I am not questioning the philosophy I am asking about the tool.
So the tool is in our collective bargaining agreement outlined so if we were going to change the tools we would need to bargain that with our SEA partners.
Okay so if it has been bargained in am I to understand then that there is support for this tool from our labor partners?
Yes absolutely.
Okay thank you.
Any more questions?
Comments?
Thank you.
Okay the next one accepting the Seattle Foundation Vulcan Foundation grant to fund creative advantage CTE media arts skill center programs and creative advantage regional arts showcase.
Can we hear from Audit and Finance?
Okay this motion was discussed at the Audit and Finance Committee on November 10, 2016. The committee reviewed the motion and moved it forward to the full board with a recommendation for approval.
Thank you.
Good evening Directors and Superintendent Nyland.
I am here to bring forward an excellent opportunity for our skills center and for our creative advantage arts program.
Just over $400,000 coming from the Vulcan Foundation through the Seattle Foundation.
But I am going to let the team come up and talk a little bit more about exactly what those funds are going to do.
Hi Gail Selhorst visual and performing arts program manager.
So a little about the creative advantage to know how this work is situated in terms of our art schools for the district.
The creative advantage is our citywide initiative to establish equitable access to an arts education for every student in every school in every neighborhood.
It is a public-private partnership with Seattle Public Schools, with the Mayor's Office of Arts and Culture, with the Seattle Foundation and with community-based arts organizations.
And our efforts are to ensure that all elementary students have music and visual art instruction, that we have integrated arts instruction with other content areas.
That we are providing opportunities for students to partner with different arts organizations and teaching artists and that we are providing opportunities for students to make connections between arts and creative industry careers and to be Seattle ready when they graduate.
I am going to talk about the regional art showcases and then Audrey Querns and Dan Golisman will speak to the skill centers.
The regional art showcases this comes out of research that we did in 2012. What surfaced for students and community members and teachers is that students really wanted to have an opportunity to show their arts learning with the broader community.
And to highlight that learning in the same way that you might see that happen in athletics.
And so out of those focus groups and with this opportunity with Vulcan We want to test this out using our regional approach strategy so what it would look like is in the central arts pathway and in the south southwest arts pathway where we are currently investing the creative advantage we will have art showcases that will stem out of focus groups that an arts coordinator would help us put together and that would leave us with something sustainable so that other pathways or regions could do something similar to show the learning K through 12 that's happening within their pathways.
Thank you I am Audrey Corns and I am the SPS project manager for the creative advantage arts plan.
And as Gail said I am here to talk about the media arts skill center course.
So the funding from Vulcan covers two different sections from our arts plan.
Also going back to when we were in the planning phase of developing this multi-arts multi-year arts plan we did focus groups with families, teachers, students around the city and especially in focus groups with students and with families there was a lot of talk about students not feeling like they had the ability to connect arts to career or the arts education that they were getting at SPS to careers in arts.
We had at the time and still have so many some great school-based media arts programs or courses like the film program at Ballard High School, broadcasting, radio broadcasting at Nathan Hale, theater tech at Roosevelt, but those are only available to the students lucky enough to live in those assignment areas.
And so and at the same time the Office of Film and Music the city's office of film and music had conducted research finding that Seattle was a place where jobs were growing, high paying jobs were growing in creative industries like music production, film production, computer, graphic animation.
And so when the idea of starting media arts skill center courses became part of, at the same time that we were developing this the CTE, the state was developing skill centers and Seattle was developing its own skill center so this seemed like a real opportunity to bring more equitable access to media arts and that opportunity to connect to careers to all of our students to all Seattle Public Schools juniors and seniors not just the ones at those specific schools that have those programs or courses.
And so when Vulcan approached us asking well we would like to fund something in the creative advantage, we would like to just, we would just like to fund you for a couple of years though, this was a perfect opportunity because of the connection to creative industries but also because of the sustainable nature of the way the CTE funding works.
And so I will hand that off to Dan Golisman.
Good evening directors.
The opportunity to speak briefly about this.
Dan Goldsman principal for the skills center and I just want to say the skills center as we've talked about in other meetings it's a wonderful point of leverage for us to eliminate opportunity gaps and also provide career in college, more focus for career in college for our students and in short this grant I feel really supports us in that work and just expands more opportunities for our students and more equitable access to the arts.
Do we have any questions?
Comments?
Director Pinkham.
I just want to thank you for including and bringing this up and giving the opportunity to have a media arts skills center here for the Seattle School District and for our students.
In particular because my daughter graduated last year I think if she would have had this opportunity it would have helped her tremendously.
She is currently at the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe where she is actually a straight A student.
but just appreciate this coming forward and that you know we can provide this opportunity for future students.
And just I guess kind of clarification, EMP isn't that now called something else?
Mopop.
Mopop so yeah.
Thank you again.
Director Burke.
I just want to say for all of you thanks for waiting while we work through the rest of our agenda and I always appreciate when great programs come before us and I am an enthusiastic fan of the skills center and I think that there is a lot of opportunity there that you are in the process of capitalizing on.
So you are firing on a lot of cylinders so I appreciate that.
Director Geary.
This is my third time hearing this presentation.
It's lovely and I love the idea of this.
I want to make sure speaking to the whole district that we capture the excitement of what we are doing on our web page.
I went on to our arts web page.
It is it's hard.
And if I was a family trying to see what is Seattle Public Schools offering for my student my artistically gifted student It doesn't show this explosive excitement that I hear coming from you.
So I want us to capture that you know part of back to Director Harris's marketing and oh I had one more point but I'm so tired it's such a long day.
It will come back to me.
I had one more point.
I haven't heard it said so I will being the dollars and cents person thank you for the $465,000 grant application or whatever process was involved in actually securing these dollars.
That is greatly appreciated.
I too would like to say thank you so much for this.
Our students certainly need it and it is something that every school would like to take a part of so this is a good start.
Thank you for making this opportunity available.
I remember what my comment was.
Go ahead.
Going back to some of my earlier comments about what defines highly capable as we know it is academic, intellectual, and creative and that we have an obligation to address the gifted aspects of our creative students as well.
And so I want us to look at this even though this is in the higher grades I want to look at us as being very mindful in creating that pathway of identifying the kids who this will ultimately be where they end up and it keeps them in school and it makes them so excited and that they never even understand that they had a chance to almost not participate in the system because again we have gone back and we have made it so clear that there is a pathway for these kids from the moment we identify them that this is their gift.
I also want to just weigh in my appreciation and my enthusiasm for this whole project.
As you heard me say before in committee in the era of No Child Left Behind with the focus on accountability a lot of things fell by the wayside and the arts were one of them and I think people are starting to realize you know with steam and with projects like this one that we cannot let go of the creative opportunities for our students that makes for well-rounded individuals.
It also as Director Geary says this could be the thing that keeps a student in school and that's what will help them find their passion and that's what will give them a path forward.
So I'm really excited about this work.
Thank you.
Director Harris.
I loved the presentation the first time, I loved it more the second time, I love it the third time.
If we could put something on the web with these folks that represent partnerships and passion I would be thrilled.
Hint, hint.
And I would also like to see you take this program and run it down to Southlake Union and pick Jeff Bezos' pocket at the same time.
Let's have a little leverage going on here.
Thank you very very much.
Any more questions or comments?
Thank you.
BEX IV learning phase 2 authorized purchase orders through BIT number B06691 and RFP 0362 to Thornburg, Apple, P&H, Photo, Video, CDW, Government, and Troxo for purchase of classroom technology.
Ops.
This item was heard by the operations committee on October 20 and moved forward for approval.
Thank you.
I'm not sure whether I say good evening or good night or good morning.
So thank you.
So BEX IV planning.
You will recall that BEX IV was passed by voters in 2013. BEX IV included the refreshing of old computers five years or greater in age.
The purpose of the refresh is to provide more alignment of our software systems and to have a more streamlined and efficient system.
So this is phase 2 of that and it will literally replace school to bring them up to a standard that is more efficient and more.
As noted by questions at the ops meeting and also by other board members and members of the community.
This is not for BTA scheduled dollars that is a separate discussion at another time.
Hopefully that answers your question.
Any questions or comments?
Director Burke.
One of my favorite topics and I appreciate the clarity around replacement versus new technology or new innovation.
That said we are looking at a $3 million opportunity to not necessarily replace like with like.
And so when we look at our technology infrastructure and we look at how it's serving our students the question that I have for you collectively not just in DOTS but in teaching and learning as well is as part of replacement can we leverage this opportunity into something that's better than just we're going to take this desktop and replace it with the newer, we're going to take this laptop and replace it with the newer.
Are there things that we can do under this vehicle that actually improve the educational tools and learning outcomes?
John Kroll, chief information officer.
I reviewed this and that's exactly what we did.
Ms. Halverson and the team.
talked to all the principals, they created a calculator and the principals actually made the choices of what was appropriate for their school.
So if they were changing from a desktop to a laptop they could make that choice as an example.
Within this vehicle though do we have like a change in the fundamental paradigm of going from you know computing technology to you know a like a rapid prototyping equipment.
Instead of replacing your printer you are now replacing it with a 3D printer.
You know you're looking at technology for science.
This is working more into the BTA realm but I'm just wondering if there's points that we could still capitalize or that we did already.
On this purchase we were sticking with computing devices but that's definitely something we could look at in the next round.
Any more comments?
Director Harris.
Welcome.
It's good to see you.
I'm very hopeful that the marvelous tension about educational philosophy and the technology overlay and that we look forward to hearing your thoughts about that and blowing up some of the silos.
Thanks for bringing that up.
I already had a A quick meeting with the new assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction.
We are already planning on how we are going to be working together because we want curriculum and instruction to be really driving what we are doing with technology.
Any more questions, comments?
Director Pinkham.
I was just looking over these draft purchase orders and noticed that for the Apple computers we are buying like extended care packages but given I guess it's probably more due to the quantity that we are ordering but then for the PC base we are just buying the computers since there is such a large amount but not buying any extended warranty.
Colleen Haverson Dodds yeah we are buying warranties with all the equipment.
So it is three years for the laptops and four years for the desktops.
Okay I guess I have to scroll through here some more and maybe I will find it.
Okay thank you.
It is 1114 meeting adjourned.