You may remember that last year Seattle Schools proposed closing several campuses to save money. The resulting outcry was so large that the plan was abandoned, but the deficit that prompted it remains, and so the superintendent is again looking for ways to save money.
This time the plan will be created by a committee of fourteen with the bureaucratic name of the Superintendent’s Community Advisory Committee on Investing in Educational Excellence (SCACIEE). [I am not making this up.]
Anyway, SCACIEE wants public input on its new plan. This is an opportunity to influence the process before the plan goes public. Meetings will be held January 17 from 6 to 8 pm, and January 21 from 10:30 am to noon. Please see the links for details. The more people who get engaged to save the Seattle Public schools from itself, the better.
1: They need more tax money
2: They need more tax money
3: They need more tax money
Anyone think of any other's.........
Where is the 1.8 bil surplus that Gregoire is sitting on?
The good news with the new committee is that newspaper reporters will be able to fill up a column inch of print just spelling out.
That's a good story idea...A contest for the governmental agency with the longest and most mundane title.
Posted by: Reporterward on January 6, 2006 04:13 PMHere is a list of Washington State's agencies.
It may not be the longest title, but I don't like the sounds of this one. How much money are we spending to "improving employment conditions and career opportunities for women, especially in the areas of education, training, and career development"? Is that really a problem we need to be spending money on? I wonder if the work of the ICSEW could be done under the umbrella of the OMWBA?
Posted by: huckleberry on January 6, 2006 04:45 PMThat is one of the funniest punchlines I've seen on here for about a month...
Tip of the noggin your way.
As for the Seattle School District. I hope folks go to those meetings other than the typical paid lobbyist, rabble rouser and government paycheck employee types that normally inhabit public meetings.
No offense against the aforesaid, but I've found that you rarely get an accurate assessment of the real public at these kinds of events.
Glad I don't live in Seattle.
Raise taxes!
Posted by: huckleberry on January 6, 2006 10:22 PMThe problem with the Seattle School district is NOT a lack of money. The problem with the Seattle School district is a lack of nerve. They know what they need to do (close some schools) to more efficiently educate their students. But if they choose not to do that due to political pressure from the residents of their district, I say let them raise the levy and let their residents pay for it.
But don't make me or anyone else who lives in a district than can figure out how to educate a student for a reasonable amount of money bail them out. It won't solve the problem and it will only take money away from some of the projects we need taken care of in this state (Can you say roads?).
Posted by: BMack on January 7, 2006 12:14 AMI was very surprised to read their preliminary recommendations and some of them involved new programs. NO!! We have to tighten our belts, follow through on the programs we already have and get down to the work of educating these kids. I don't know why they would suggest anything new.
But the District has had a parade of "leadership" and a lot of problems can be directly traced to "education as a business" thinking. Our last superintendent was a complete idiot who spent us into this mess (and meanwhile had been touted as a financial whiz to overlook the fact he had no education background). Raj Manhas is a nice guy, able to be very calm and a good manager. He is not a leader.
What would help? It would help if the Legislature would quit asking the world of students (because folks, in case you didn't know, it's not just passing the WASL, it's a huge senior project, community service and a certain GPA to graduate) and pony up. They currently fund ONLY a 5 period high school day when the day runs for 6 periods. Most high schools have to take the money out of their pockets to fund the 6th period. The majority of these kids want and should be in 6 periods of school a day. It would help if the City could give the schools some of its surplus to pay for the water pipes that haven't been maintained or replaced in 30 years (you can't ignore infrastructure). It would help to close some schools but actually use a real plan and not put schools on the list that are popular AND succeeding educationally. I would point to Montlake, North Beach and Bagley elementaries, all doing great and yet were on the list.
I don't hold out much hope for whatever this latest committee offers but I'm going to their last meeting. Should be interesting.
Posted by: westello on January 7, 2006 10:08 AMThe obvious answer is: YES!
The above article says it all. Throwing money at the problem does not solve it. We've got pontificating techers unions, statist diversity curriculum writers, and an overly apolegetic attitude toward Johnny when he can't read. Sprinkle in a little Ritalin and you've got a recipe for the decline of the American student.
Posted by: Jeff B. on January 8, 2006 12:42 AMPublic schools are obsolete so long as they are dominated by unions and controlled by interests outside of the local communities. Quit relying on clichés and face the facts. Education is a business and the products are literacy and all of our futures. Typical modern liberal resistance to positive change and progress is killing schools.
The line should have read: Raj Manhas opened a series of community meetings to elect fourteen individuals from within the local community to prepare a report making recommendations about local school issues including assessment of the district's current and long-term fiscal condition.
How many of Manhas’ appointees do you suppose have children in the subject schools?
Supposedly they have ”expertise in finance, budget management and leadership experience in large organizations; skill in marketing and communication; and experience in K-12 academic issues,” but . . . do they care about the students . . . or the teachers' jobs?
Westello is dead wrong when he pretends that a lot of problems with Seattle’s’ schools can be directly traced to "education as a business" thinking. The elements central to a successful business model must of necessity deal with practical realities, and they are the precise essentials ignored in Seattle schools. Private schools are businesses that function far better than public schools—mostly because they are not burdened with teachers unions. They produce social stability by preparing future citizens for life, and we profit only if the students get what they need. Responsible parents are tiring of the same old worn out arguments, and Public schools are rapidly becoming obsolete.
What? Westello says, ”What would help? It would help if the Legislature would quit asking the world of students (because folks, in case you didn't know, it's not just passing the WASL, it's a huge senior project, community service and a certain GPA to graduate) and pony up. ” ”Quit asking the world of students and pony up?” Sounds like . . . forget standards . . . give em more money.
When Westello is done babbling nonsense, he might consider cutting the resistance to positive change. Drop the pretense that the solution is more money, and concentrate on the idea that the solutions are community based. Absent the assumption of local community control, and taking schools back from the Teachers Unions, progress is stifled and nothing will improve.
I think they decided not to use it because they didn't want the public to confuse them with that other hazard to school-aged children.
Posted by: ERNurse on January 8, 2006 09:15 PMSee, that makes more sense, and, umm... yeah.
Posted by: ERNurse on January 8, 2006 09:18 PM