Marty McLaren – Seattle School Board

Community meetings at High Point

I will be having a community meeting on Wednesday, February 8, at the High Point Library from 11:15 AM to 1:15 PM. Parents and community members are invited to come with their Seattle Schools questions, concerns, and ideas, particularly regarding our West Seattle schools. Please feel free to email me your questions in preparation for the meeting: martha.mclaren@seattleschools.org

Hope to see you there.

In March, we'll also be meeting at the High Point Library on Saturday, March 17th, 11:15 to 1:15.

Demographics, buildings, and planning

Please take a look at the DRAFT Facilities Master Plan.
Update: This is the newest version, revised February 13, 2012.

Les Kendrick's presentation:
Enrollment Trends and Projections - An Update, Nov 2011

Kendrick's comments:
Seattle Public Schools Enrollment Trends and Projections: What is happening and what does the future look like?

STEM option school at Boren

Thank you to all the West Seattle (and other) people who have joined the dialogue about short term solutions for overcrowding in our elementary schools.

Decision to move forward with the STEM option proposal
Friday I made the decision not to go forward with my amendment to the current proposal: Thus, the Seattle School Board will vote next Wednesday, January 18th, on whether to open an elementary STEM option program at the Boren site, and in addition to add portables as needed in the Denny and Madison service areas for the 2012-13 school year.

Because many of you felt that there had not been adequate community discussion about the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) program recommendation, I had prepared an amendment which would have delayed placing a STEM program at Boren for a year, until 2013-14. I invited interested people to comment on the West Seattle Blog about their vision for West Seattle schools and the STEM option, and also invited people to attend one of three meetings (the final meeting of this series takes place this morning at 11 AM at the Delridge Library). However, after listening carefully, discussing the various angles, and looking at all the factors, when the Friday deadline came to post the amendment, I chose not to do it.

Deciding factors - concerns about going forward
As you know, this was a complex and difficult decision. Many West Seattle people have correctly pointed out that placing a STEM program at Boren does not begin to adequately address overcrowding in our elementary schools. It's clear that we need a comprehensive mid- and long-range master plan for providing more neighborhood schools, and many people believe strongly that it's premature to commit to a STEM option program before a feeder pattern for the program is determined and before the master plan is in place. However, there is simply not enough time to formulate such a plan before open enrollment begins on February 27th.

I share this concern about hasty action, and despite my enthusiasm for STEM, I had been fully prepared to carry my amendment forward and to ask other Directors to support me in delaying the Boren STEM program. However, on Thursday I learned details that I'd not previously understood about what monies would pay for the program, and what would happen to those monies if we delayed it for a year.

More factors - either/or opportunity
Basically, this is a one-time opportunity; it's urgent for the district to place a program at Boren in order to maintain the building's Occupancy status. Otherwise, re-opening the building when needed as an interim site will cost about five times more money. The Capital Budget funds which happen to be available for opening and refurbishing the building include startup costs for the first year of the program. These startup costs are available to whatever program is put in place, for the first year only, and would pay for equipment, books, etc. This creates a perfect opportunity to open a STEM program, which requires a sizable investment in technology. While other programs, such as Interagency, could be placed at Boren, the STEM program is the only one which would give some benefit to West Seattle and yet, as an option program, would not entail boundary commitments which would prematurely shape a master plan.

Holding to convictions vs. snatching the opportunity
To create positive change, good planning is essential; in my experience seizing opportunities is another vital ingredient for success. I've been urged to stick to my convictions and try to delay STEM at Boren until we have a master plan. However, it's important to remember that delaying STEM will not hasten this planning. It would certainly be ideal to wait for a comprehensive plan, but if we do, we won't have those startup funds, and investing in a STEM program at Boren in 2013 from our severely reduced operating monies would be extremely difficult. (The Operating Budget pays for day-to-day school costs; these funds are much more heavily encumbered than the Capital Budget funds available now.)

The opportunity: a model for strengthening math and science across the district
Our very talented and innovative West Seattle Executive Director, Aurora Lora, has experience in opening a STEM school, and she is confident that we can offer an excellent STEM program in West Seattle in the fall. Visionary educators have expressed great enthusiasm for developing this STEM elementary program; in addition to offering a unique option, it could serve as an incubator and model for strengthening math and science across our West Seattle District. All of our elementary students could benefit greatly.

What about capacity?
In fact, the new program will ease some overcrowding; probably relatively little the first year, but likely a good deal in the second year. In the meantime, basic comprehensive planning will have been completed and by the fall of 2013 we should be moving ahead with opening at least one, and hopefully two, neighborhood schools in an interim site.

Risks of moving forward with STEM?
Many people, including me, are concerned that Seattle School District history will repeat itself; the exciting new program will come, and nothing else -- that there may be no progress in addressing the clear needs and desires of the West Seattle community -- to address overcrowding and to offer strong math, science, and literacy programs (in addition to PE, arts, and enrichment) in ALL OF OUR SCHOOLS, across the district.

West Seattle Preferences
In the very rich and heartfelt sharing which has happened in the last couple of weeks, over the blog and in our meetings, people have shown widespread agreement about several things: Overcrowding must be addressed, and not only in elementary schools.
We want vibrant neighborhood schools throughout West Seattle.
We want strong math and science programs in all our schools.

Where are we now?
I feel that we've accomplished very important community work in this dialogue: We've come together from the north, south, east, and west of West Seattle to address problems that are facing our children in their schools -- overcrowding and, in many places, our desire for them to have greater success in math and science, for additional basic amenities, and for other enriching options.

As mentioned above, we share a belief that it is essential to have comprehensive planning to address capacity needs in a thoughtful way -- a way that also includes program planning, such as decisions on what kind of emphasis new schools will have, choices among other approaches such as Language Immersion, Montessori, etc., and needs of Special Education students, for example. There is a deadline: To prepare for the 2013 Capital Levy proposal (BEX IV -- Building Excellence IV -- the fourth in a series over the last two decades), the planning must commence soon -- in the next months.

Work to be done; Seattle Public Schools leadership and commitment
There are many questions which I will attempt to answer in another post. For now, I want to say that I have also discussed these issues in depth with staff. We are fortunate now to have many remarkably smart and talented cabinet-level district leaders, people of great integrity with a profound commitment to moving all of our schools forward. Along with dedicated staff in each school, I am confident that district leaders are focused on working collaboratively with us in this planning process.

Most of you know full well of the dedication, caring, talent, and energy of our children's teachers as well as of the extended staff who support them. We continue to owe them all a tremendous debt of gratitude for devoting their lives to our children and their education. Working together with them, as a large community and in smaller, school- and neighborhood-based groups, we must carry the momentum of our neighborhood conversations forward. We can commit ourselves to working together enthusiastically towards stable, supportive, challenging and enriching classrooms for all of our students, in schools filled with the joy of teaching and learning.

Questions for a later post:
Can we build capacity before BEX IV?
Financing greater capacity
Do people really want STEM?
Other questions?

Further meetings:
February and March community meetings will be posted shortly.

A discussion on the West Seattle Blog is here:
Board rep McLaren decides not to try to delay new ‘option’ school at Boren after all

Update:
In total, about 60 people spoke at the three recent West Seattle community meetings. On January 25th, the School Board voted to start up a STEM school at Boren. A further discussion among parents on the West Seattle Blog is here:
Board OKs starting new elementary at Boren

Community meetings

Discuss short-term plans to relieve overcrowding for 2012-13, planning a new elementary school in West Seattle for 2013-14, and any other concerns:

Saturday, January 7th - Southwest Library, 10-noon
Monday, January 9th - West Seattle Library, 10-noon
Saturday, January 14th - Delridge Library, 11-1

Interim school at Boren, and capacity planning

WS Blog: West Seattle schools - Your thoughts on ‘capacity management’?

WS Blog: Board members question ‘option school at Boren’ plan

Thanks again to all for the thought-provoking commentary — including concerns, information, analysis, and ideas. There are some very interesting ideas being floated on the West Seattle Blog (see the two discussions linked above). Also, I appreciate the awareness that many people who don’t blog have needs and concerns which must be understood and respected.

One clarification for tk: The occupancy permit for Boren could be maintained by other reasonable choices such as placing Interagency classes in the building; I don’t believe the need for occupancy status is the driving force behind the recommendation to place an option school at Boren.

Some of the hard questions needing to be decided quickly are based on unknowns: how accurate will the projections for next year prove to be? (Our projections must basically consist of guesses, no matter how well founded.) Will the extra capacity provided by a program in the Boren building be successful in drawing students out of the overcrowded schools? Will that extra capacity prove to be necessary next year?

Lots to consider here; again, thanks for all the dialogue.

What is your curriculum preference for a new elementary in West Seattle?

I've received some great feedback regarding the Short-term Capacity Management proposals. Thanks to all for your thoughtful comments.

If you want to email me on this topic (martha.mclaren@seattleschools.org), it would be helpful if you would prominently and concisely state your preference for the short-term - 2012-13 school year: STEM, language immersion, neighborhood school, STEAM, or other. The idea of a neighborhood school, which would have to be initiated at Boren for next year, seems very popular; it's unclear how viable is the possibility because of the boundary issues - I'm looking further into this.

Thanks again for taking the time to write.
Marty McLaren

Feedback on short-term capacity management proposals

Hi Families,

I'm very interested in hearing views from district families about the short term options that the community/school district committee ("FACMAC") has recommended to alleviate overcrowding at elementary schools in the Denny and Madison Middle School areas.

Background: The short-term solutions offered are intended for the year 2012-13 only. By identifying these options as soon as possible, we pave the way for open enrollment to commence on time in March, 2012. Open enrollment will allow families wanting their children to attend programs outside of their normal assignment area to request those assignments. These short-term solutions for the coming year are intended to allow time for the district (with community participation) to design mid- and long term plans for program placement and for opening more classroom space to meet our projected rise in number of students. So far, after extensive brainstorming and soliciting opinions from many members of the community, the district is recommending:

Madison Service Area: Opening the Boren School site and placing an option school there. If that does not draw off sufficient students in the 2012-13 year, the district is proposing to add temporary portables to Gatewood, Lafayette, and Schmitz Park. After consideration, moving 5th graders to Madison was not recommended.

1. Feedback requested: My impression is that, in this event -- Boren not drawing enough students to alleviate overcrowding) most parents in each of the elementary schools prefer to add portables, despite the great inconvenience entailed, because they value keeping the community intact. Please let me know if I've misunderstood.

Denny Service area: Similar to the above -- Opening the Boren School site and placing an option school there. If that does not draw off sufficient students in the 2012-13 year, the district is proposing to repurpose available classrooms at Arbor Heights and Roxhill, and to add portables to West Seattle Elementary. After consideration, moving kindergartners or 5th graders to Boren was not recommended.

2. Feedback requested: Similar question to 1, above: Is it true that the parent communities of Arbor Heights, Roxhill, and West Seattle favor the district recommendations of repurposing classrooms or adding portables, should opening Boren not relieve overcrowding at their schools?

About the Boren option school proposal: I've heard two possibilities mentioned: a) That Boren be a STEM elementary school -- that is, with a Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics focus, or b) that it become a language immersion program or international school. It could then feed into the Denny Middle School /Sealth High School pathway, as Concord already does. A third option which I've recently heard of is STEAM -- parents at Hawthorne in SE Seattle are working with staff to create a focus on Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics.

Here's what I know about these possibilities:

STEM: I've spoken with one highly respected, experienced, and accomplished West Seattle teacher who has expressed great interest in helping to plan such a program.

Language immersion: I have little experience, except that my brief visit at Concord Elementary in the fall impressed me tremendously. There's an abundance of spirit at Concord, and community engagement is clearly very positive there. At our recent Board work session, some staff members said that it could be difficult to put a language immersion school into place in the short time we will have; others have disputed this.

STEAM: I only know that many Hawthorne parents are very enthusiastic about this idea.

3. Feedback requested: Please let me know what you think of the above possibilities. (Caution: I know it's tempting to suggest other ideas for 2012-13; I think the time for that is past. However, other ideas are definitely welcome for the mid-term and long-term planning which will commence in earnest in January.)

Thanks,
Marty McLaren

Short-term Capacity Management presentation - Dec. 14, 2011

Thanks to Seattle’s parents and voters

I'm thrilled, honored, and humbled by my clear victory in the Seattle School Board election for Position 6. It's doubly exciting because Sharon Peaslee has pulled well ahead in the race for Position 1.

All of us have made this happen together, by choosing to pitch in and work on this campaign - it's incredibly inspiring. I'm very hopeful that Sharon and I can work effectively with the other board members to bring about positive change, making strategic, thoughtful course corrections and building on the existing strengths in our school district.

Thanks SO MUCH to all of you who have made this possible: You have offered encouragement and hard work in many, many ways - from vetting ideas to doorbelling to creating and handing out flyers and putting up signs; also solving myriad problems, big and small. Much appreciation goes to those who made the generous financial contributions which helped to extend our outreach so successfully.

I also gratefully acknowledge the many organizations which honored me with endorsements and made substantial donations, as well as putting "boots on the ground" and live voices to the telephones. Your support clearly made a huge contribution to my success.

Most of all, I appreciated the many heartfelt conversations with people who care passionately about our children's education. Together, we are a force to be reckoned with!

With appreciation,
Marty McLaren