2nd meeting for K-5 STEM at Boren: More info, less attendance

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

The second informational meeting for families interested in West Seattle’s new public school, K-5 STEM at Boren, was very different from the first one 2 weeks ago (WSB coverage here).

For one, tonight’s meeting was led by Seattle Public Schools assistant superintendent for teaching and learning Dr. Cathy Thompson (at left in top photo). The crowd at the first meeting was told that Dr. Thompson had been leading the school-creation project, but was unable to be there that night because a School Board meeting was scheduled concurrently. Tonight, no board meeting, so the West Seattle-residing district official was there, bubbling over with enthusiasm, as well as a message: Yes, it will obviously be a “leap of faith” for families to enroll their elementary schoolers in this new program, and they understand if someone decides against it.

Also different, but not surprising: While more than 300 people jammed the Schmitz Park Elementary cafetorium for the first meeting, our informal count noted maybe 100 in the more-spacious Denny International Middle School galleria tonight. Here’s our video of the meeting, unedited, in its entirety:

We’ll add the key toplines soon. One important point: If you are interested in being on the school’s Design Team, which Dr. Thompson says will include six district staffers, six parents, and three community representatives, tomorrow’s the deadline for applying. Those chosen, she said, will be notified March 9th, and the team’s first meeting – which will be open to the public – will be March 14th. Meantime, the March 13th meet-and-greet with principal Dr. Shannon McKinney (about whom we learned more tonight, too) is still on, 6:30 pm at Madison Middle School. And if you missed the link in a comment thread here this afternoon – the first FAQ about the new school is now on the district website.

ADDED 7:51 AM FRIDAY: More new info from the meeting:

District reps who participated in the presentation and/or Q/A also included enrollment manager Dr. Tracy Libros, project manager Kim Van Atta – explained as the person who will lead the design team until the principal starts work April 9th – and West Seattle executive director of schools Aurora Lora, who led the last meeting but said little at this one (explaining that she wasn’t feeling well).

Questions centered around a few key areas:

MAKING THE BOREN BUILDING WORK: Dr. Thompson said she was familiar with the building because she had taught preschool there in the 1990s. She acknowledged concerns that, since it was originally built as a middle school, it wasn’t suitable for the littlest elementary schoolers; adaptations are being planned, she said, though they don’t have full details worked out. They plan to use two of the school’s three wings, though if before/after-school care was needed in the mix, the third wing is the only area that would meet the requirements, they said.

Outside, they will have two play areas, but haven’t decided exactly where on the grounds they’ll go – one key consideration is whether any or all of the 11 portables will be moved; since Boren will be a temporary home for this school (two years minimum), the portables might still be needed in the future for secondary schoolers, and moving them out and then back could cost more than a million dollars.

The building renovations are not expected to be done until shortly before the year starts; there will be an open house at the Boren campus this spring, though, probably in May. Asked why this meeting couldn’t have happened there, district reps noted it’s still technically “closed,” with the windows boarded up, etc. (And they acknowledged the graffiti problem, reported here earlier this week, and said cleanup efforts are continuing.)

CLASSES – HOW MANY AND WHAT SIZE: It’s too early in the enrollment process to say or even guess how many students have applied so far, the district reps said, but they are expecting more kindergarten classes than 1st-5th “since that’s where we’ve had the most interest so far.” The district’s class sizes for next year will be 26 for K through 2nd, 28 for 3rd through 5th. Dr. Libros cautioned that those waiting to enroll till after “open enrollment” ends in a week might be taking a gamble, since, for example, if they have one full class at a certain grade plus just a couple additional applicants extra, they will not create an additional class just to accommodate those extra applicants.

CURRICULUM: It was reiterated that if, for example, the Design Team decided they want the school to use Singapore Math (or anything else digressing from the district curriculum), they’ll need to request a waiver (a process that’s changing, with new rules coming before the School Board next week). Dr. Thompson said she realized “a few weeks ago” that she “had better start learning about Singapore Math.” Some attendees were worried the curriculum might be too rigorous for their students; it was reiterated that this is a general-education program, not advanced-learning (and in fact, it was stated that this school, for starters, will not have either of the district’s advanced-learning self-contained programs, Spectrum or APP). It will offer PE, since that’s state-mandated for first through fifth graders, but that doesn’t mean they have to have a PE specialist – it could be taught by a “classroom teacher.”

THE PRINCIPAL: Dr. Thompson elaborated on her choice, saying that just weeks earlier, Dr. McKinney had been under consideration for a management position in the district’s special-education program; though her background turned out not to be a match for that, they were so impressed, they wanted to have her in the district somehow, some way, and then this came up. Asked about reports that writing scores at her “turnaround school” in Tucson had been less than stellar, Dr. Thompson said that was the result of the Arizona district’s priorities – “her district cares about reading and math.” Dr. McKinney has been interested in working in this state for years, she added, having procured a Washington State principal credential in 2008.

THE TEACHERS: Openings for this school will be posted a few weeks before other district openings for next year. Teachers will not be required to have special credentials or other special qualifications. But the Design Team could choose to have a science specialist, for example, the district reps said.

POTENTIAL BUSINESS PARTNERS: Boeing – described as “very excited about this” – and Disney were mentioned again as companies that had expressed interest in possibly partnering with the new school. One other name, Red Dot (described as an air-conditioning company), also was mentioned; Dr. Thompson alluded to having received “five business cards” but first said she couldn’t recall who the others were from, then said she’d find out and post it online, then said she had probably better ask the companies first. What shape a partnership might take, the district managers said, would depend on what the partner suggested and what if anything the Building Leadership Team (different from the Design Team) decided to accept. Partners don’t have to be large companies; community members could offer donations of time, money, materials (Dr. Thompson mentioned that her daughter teaches at a district school that has a standing $1 million donation each year from a private source).

THE FUTURE: There were many questions the district reps said they just couldn’t answer – such as what would happen if the STEM pathway was established as this school to Madison and West Seattle High School, but a student at this school happened to live in the Denny/Sealth attendance area. And about the program’s permanent home – it would be at Boren for “a minimum of two years,” the district says, and its permanent home would depend on “whichever (district-owned) building in West Seattle makes sense.”

If you’d like to be on a mailing list to receive updates as the new school is planned, you can sign up here.

45 Replies to "2nd meeting for K-5 STEM at Boren: More info, less attendance "

  • cs in hp March 2, 2012 (7:26 am)

    Thank you for posting this, Does anyone know, or was this question asked already- how many years does the school have funding? if I start my children there in K, will it still be there by the time they get to grade 5?

  • MercyMoi March 2, 2012 (7:35 am)

    I feel I got the better end of the stick by attending last night’s meeting versus the first one. Having so many district reps there was reassuring and Dr Thompson’s facilitating was professional and positive. It does appear the steering committee has done a lot in a short time.

  • evergreen March 2, 2012 (10:24 am)

    The district has funds set aside to start the program (ie. building, technology, teachers, training, etc…), and afterwards the school will receive the standard dollar per child as other Seattle Public Schools. Additionally, a strong PTSA and involved community organizations will likely contribute funding in the future. My child’s current PTSA (in another ELL option school) raises thousands of dollars for extra programs, and I imagine the same thing will happen with this school.

  • AIDM March 2, 2012 (11:13 am)

    The summary you provided is excellent. Thanks for your comprehensive coverage on this topic.

  • Lucian March 2, 2012 (12:10 pm)

    Thanks for the summary and the video! I had wanted to go to this one, but had a conflict–just knowing that you were going to be there was a great relief. My one question not covered above–was the racial diversity at this meeting any better than the first one?

    • WSB March 2, 2012 (12:39 pm)

      Anecdotally, I’d say yes, though I’m interested in others’ observations. I didn’t get a really good look at everyone because upon arrival, I went over to talk to the district folks and then promptly plopped myself and my tripod down in the front row – angling from the sides wouldn’t have worked the way it did at Schmitz Park last month – every time I could swivel, I was more focused on a crowd count. I apologize for not getting a good crowd shot; co-publisher was at another meeting and while I texted him to see if he could come get a crowd shot, he arrived after the presentation concluded and everybody had started to leave.

  • CONFUSED March 2, 2012 (1:49 pm)

    The BEV IX levy keeps getting brought up for 2014 — so a school can be fixed etc., am I the only one who sees an issue with Boren being the ‘transition’ school building for a possible fix/rebuild of another school (AH/Roxhill) and in 2014 Boren is full with STEM kids?

    The Boren kids need to move into another building…which one? One has a lapsed lease, the former Pathfinder building is a tear-down for sure.

    Don’t the voters have to approve this levy in 2014, if they don’t, then what? This just seems like the “perfect storm” of financial events to collide in the district.

  • Harry March 2, 2012 (2:23 pm)

    Confused, my thoughts exactly. I would think re-establishing the neighborhood schools that have been foolishly closed/allowed to deteriorate, would be higher priority than another option school that hasn’t been fully thought out/conceived yet.

  • evergreen March 2, 2012 (2:25 pm)

    They stated last night that it will be in the Boren building for at LEAST two years. So who knows.

  • frustrated March 2, 2012 (2:32 pm)

    My concern about the STEM school is it will become the “Golden Child” of the school district. I hear companies excited about supporting this school, which could potentially mean this school gets the best technology, etc, while our other schools suffer. Why can’t we get these same companies to give support to all our schools?? I noted at the meeting, the audience was not very diverse. Who is informing families who can’t afford to come to these meetings, who may not even know this as an option for their children, either due to language barrier or educational barriers. My fear is this will become the upper middle class school, leaving even less money available for other schools. As we know there is a huge discrepancy in how much a school in South West Seattle fund-raises compared to North West Seattle. What are we creating here?

  • SPS dad March 2, 2012 (3:24 pm)

    Frustrated,
    Why? Because people have their own particular interests. If we don’t have unique programs in the district to capture the interest (and $) of private citizens an businesses, we lose the opportunity to gain resources that we would otherwise just not have.

    This is not a win-lose situation. Please tell me that you’re not of the mindset that if YOU can’t have something that no one else should. It’s not robbing any other kids of something they would otherwise have, and in fact it’s more likely to raise awareness that businesses are welcome to donate to schools.

  • sam-c March 2, 2012 (3:34 pm)

    frustrated- kind of related though only geographically, i noticed that the Brandon Node visioning meeting was not diverse either, at least based on the flickr photos linked to in the WSB. and I THOUGHT that was a diverse neighborhood. I wonder if any-one communicates anything via means OTHER than the internet anymore.

  • Harry March 2, 2012 (5:12 pm)

    I believe that, the more our district spends energy and good will on one-of experiments and unproven strategies, the more that schools that could USE the attention and resources (like Highland Park, for instance) will just be allowed to waste away or, like Cooper, be simply erased.

    It’s not a matter of “if I can’t have it, nobody should!” Rather, it is taking a principled stand that, private interests that wish to contribute do not get to dictate when and where the money goes. It’s not like Daddy Warbucks can pull up to the back door of John Stanford Center and drop off a bag of cash, then say it can only spend it on nephew Warbucks. When I make my charitable contributions, it is for the greater good, as decided by a legislative body elected by and for the people.

  • fj March 2, 2012 (5:52 pm)

    in the article is says “Some attendees were worried the curriculum might be too rigorous for their students”. If the focus is science, math, etc., it seems to me it SHOULD be more rigorous, just given the focus. What is the point, otherwise? I’m confused. They want a science/math curriculum, but they’ll dumb it down instead of challenge students?

  • Beach pup March 2, 2012 (8:43 pm)

    fj makes a really good point….. Those folks wanting a rigorous, advanced curriculum should remember… the administration states up front that the STEM program is NOT an accelerated program. Spectrum will remain the avenue for identified highly capable students. The STEM school will be an OPTION school for ANY family desiring a curriculum that is planning to focus on the areas of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math…. But it won’t be advanced. The question really becomes one of HOW a program can focus on those areas AND provide a variety of Special Education services, English as a second language, not to mention remedial reading and mathematics tutoring to bring students that are needing to come up to grade level proficiency…
    Again, the district is being transparent about the fact that the STEM school is NOT replacing Spectrum, nor is it designed to meet the needs of advanced math and science students.

  • Harry March 2, 2012 (10:53 pm)

    Beach pup, I like that. Are we only funding “options” to appeal to Spectrum or whatever? There are many children whose parents willfully keep their children out of Spectrum at this formative stage for their own reasons. That doesn’t mean that child could not readily handle the work, rather at what expense? No real PE:

    “It will offer PE, since that’s state-mandated for first through fifth graders, but that doesn’t mean they have to have a PE specialist – it could be taught by a “classroom teacher.”

    Is it a good idea to start at this early age to stratify youth into “Can do” and Can’t do”? Are most of our readers remembering where they were at that age?

  • mom March 3, 2012 (2:59 am)

    PEOPLE, PEOPLE, COME ON THIS IS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR, IF YOU DIDN’T VOTE OR PARTICIPATE IN THE CAPACITY MEETINGS DO YOU REALLY THINK YOU HAVE A SAY NOW? WORRIED THIS IS GOING TO BE THE “GOLDEN SCHOOL”? GIVE ME A BREAK, THEN SEND YOUR KID THERE, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FOR FLAGSHIP, FIRST OF IT’S KIND SCHOOL IN SEATTLE, WHICH AGAIN WEST SEATTLE RESIDENTS DID VOTE FOR AS A CAPACITY REMEDY. DON’T HATE BE HAPPY AND EXCITED FOR THOSE WHO CHOOSE THIS. IF YOU ARE HAPPY AT YOUR SCHOOL THEN STAY, OTHERWISE DON’T COMPLAIN OR JUST JOIN THE NEW “GOLDEN SCHOOL” ANYONE IS WELCOME, IF EVERYONE WASN’T WELCOME I COULD SEE THE RATIONALE IN YOUR “GOLDEN SCHOOL” COMMENT. THERE ARE ALOT OF SCHOOLS THAT COULD USE THIS KIND OF TALK IN THEIR PTA’S SO GET INVOLVED AND ADVOCATE FOR WHAT YOU WANT RATHER THAN WORRY OR COMPLAIN ABOUT SOMETHING POSITIVE AND GOOD. DID I MAKE MY POINT? HOPEFULLY. LET’S RALLY BEHIND EACH OTHER AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR CHILDREN. YOU CAN MAKE ANYTHING HAPPEN IF YOU ADVOCATE ENOUGH.

  • mom March 3, 2012 (3:06 am)

    BY THE WAY FRUSTRATED, THIS IS A OPTION SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WHO ARE INCLINED TOWARDS ENGINEERING, MATH SCIENCE TECH AND SCIENCE, WHY DEPRIVE THESE STUDENTS, WHAT’S YOUR CHILD INTERESTED IN TECH ALSO? THEN GET THEM INTO THIS SCHOOL. WHAT DO YOU WANT, EVERYTHING”THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS?” I’M SURE YOUR KIDS GET COMPUTER TIME AT SCHOOL, MY QUESTION WOULD YOUR CHILD BE INTERESTED IN AN ENGINEERING SOFTWARE PROGRAM? CHECK YOURSELF

  • Harry March 3, 2012 (7:07 am)

    Stop shouting mom. You’re wearing out the CAPS LOCK key.

  • frustrated March 3, 2012 (9:14 am)

    MOM–Do I want the best for my child? Who doesn’t? I would like to see the resources spread more evenly. I am still concerned we will end up, as Harry eluded to, a school that will be allotted more financial resources than other nearby schools. Why is it that the STEM school would be allowed to have take-home computers when that option is not available to any other school in our area? Private donations or sponsorships via large companies like Boeing and Disney sounds more like a charter system than a public school. It is difficult if not impossible for a lot of our schools, especially those in the south end, to find private donations of that magnitude.

    Lack of diversity is another concern. This is an option school for children inclined towards engineering, math, technology, and science. I am all for that. But the word needs to be spread throughout our whole community. Right now, it appears the only people who really know about this program are those that are computer savvy. We still have a large population that is not.

    And whatever happened to drawing and singing and playing and learning how to get a long with each other in kindergarten? Are we really doing our children a service by trying to differentiate their learning in kindergarten? Maybe we it would help us to step back and try to remember what it is like to be a kindergartner. My favorite reminder comes from a song by John McCutcheon:

    Kindergarten Wall
    When I was a little kid not so long ago
    I had to learn a lot of stuff I didn’t even know
    How to dress myself, tie my shoes, how to jump a rope
    How to smile for a picture without looking like a dope
    But of all the things I learned my favorite of them all
    Was a little poem hanging on the kindergarten wall

    CHORUS:

    Of all you learn here remember this the best:
    Don’t hurt each other and clean up your mess
    Take a nap everyday, wash before you eat
    Hold hands, stick together, look before you cross the street
    And remember the seed in the little paper cup:
    First the root goes down and then the plant grows up!

  • mom March 3, 2012 (9:54 am)

    ARE YOU A PARENT OF A CHILD AT SCHOOL HERE? PLESE BE HONEST. WE ALL WERE INFORMED EVERY STEP OF THE WAY BY PHONE AND EMAIL-REMEMBER THIS IS AN OPTION SCHOOL AND ALOT OF PARENTS PROBABLY JUST OPTED OUT DID YOU GET EACH AND EVERY E-MAIL AND PHONE CALL CONCERNING MEETINGS,THE NEW PRINCIPAL, OPEN ENROLLMENT, ANNOUNCEMENTS ABOUT THE NEW SCHOOL, OR AGAIN ARE YOU NOT A PARENT OF A SPS SCHOOL KID, IF NOT WHY ARE YOU EVEN ON HERE AS AN UNINFORMED BYSTASNDER?

  • mom March 3, 2012 (10:05 am)

    BY THE WAY IT’S A TECH SCHOOL THAT’S WHY, AGAIN WOULD YOUR CHILD BE INTERESTED IN ASSEMBLING AND PROGRAMMING A ROBOT? I HAVE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT TAKE HOME COMPUTERS, WERE YOU AT THE MEETINGS, I WAS, OF COURSE KINDERGARTEN WILL BE APPROPRIATE–GEEZ ARE YOU AN EDUCATOR OR SOMETHING, IF SO APPLY FOR AND TEACH AT THIS SCHOOL AS A KINDER TEACHER OTHERWISE SERIOUSLY STOP MEDDLING. OR JUST DON’T SEND YOUR KID THERE AND LET OTHER PARENTS OPT TO. THESE ARE GOING TO BE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS, NOT COLLEGE PROFFESSORS, BY THE WAY HARRY I’M NOT YELLING. I’M GOING TO PASS ALONG ALL OF THESE COMMENTS TO OUR BOARD SO THEY CAN GET YOU GUYS TO A SPS PARENT MEETING FOR PARENTS WHO HAVE CONCERNS BUT DID NOT GO TO ANY OF THE CAPACITY MEETINGS, BOTHER TO VOTE AGAINST THE STEM SCHOOL, AND DIDN’T LISTEN TO THE MANY MANY PHONE MESSAGES ABOUT THIS NEW SCHOOL. I’LL LEAVE THE INFO HERE WHEN I HEAR BACK. FRUSTRATED WHAT GRADES ARE YOU KIDS IN?

  • mom March 3, 2012 (10:14 am)

    by the way, if this school didn’t have any appeal, our capacity issues wouldn’t be solved because there would be no one willing to pull their kids out of their current schools, remember again, this was the route voted on by the people. Do you guys realize that we need this school to alleviate capacity?

  • Harry March 3, 2012 (10:44 am)

    Oh, are there less portables planned? Even the district has conceded this will not solve capacity issues.

    And you don’t have to pass my comments along. I’m probably more in contact with board and staff than you are. I have every right to question the use of limited resources on an option school that was favored by a vocal minority of parents and staff. Particularly when there is a dire need for quality math and science curricula throughout the district.

  • frustrated March 3, 2012 (12:48 pm)

    Yes, I’m a parent in West Seattle. No. I did not get all the emails. Yes, I was at the last STEM meeting. And why are you so angry? I’m just stating my point of view. That appears to bother you. I have two children, both in a SPS. One is in elementary school. Pass on my emails. Maybe something will come of it. Our school district is in dire need for quality math and science curricula. The WHOLE school district. Resources should not go to just one program.

    Thank you Harry for your input. I’ll vote for you if you want to become a school board member. :)

  • Caprial March 3, 2012 (1:23 pm)

    The STEM school is clearly an experiment, with a probable shelf life. I don’t understand how this got voted in, as it would have made much more sense to expand the proven advanced learning programs, which have many children who are qualified but not served. Thus opening up alot more space in all of the buildings to alleviate capacity issues for sure, as opposed to hoping there will be enough families to sign up for this “experimental program’ to make any difference in capacity management.

  • mom March 3, 2012 (3:47 pm)

    Math and science are alive and well in our schools, there is a quality science program that comes from the district, scientific equipment, lesson plans, materials used by sps teachers,interesting and engaging for the students and it’s required!!! there is nothing wrong with the math at our schools either…what is all the complaining about, were you unhappy with your classroom science and math before you heard of this school? I think our teachers are doing a pretty good job teaching this stuff, I have seen it in action all over the district…Very confused, Harry what is your problem with the way our teachers are teaching math and science currently? and why are you involved, are you a parent? have you been in the classrooms and if a teacher is not teaching science properly why haven’t you brought it up to that individual principal, I am very involved in the schools, I see nothing wrong with what our teachers are doing
    they are doing a fantastic job! I really don’t understand all of this, your kids are getting a quality school experience, science math and tech included, all schools get computer time also…..please explain the problem to me……Harry what do you really have against this? The other schools are still getting quality instruction, this isn’t going to pull any thing away from the status quo?????? Please name a school you think is not getting math or science and I’ll go directly to that principal because they would be in violation of required curricula.

  • mom March 3, 2012 (4:04 pm)

    Frustrated, which schools are suffering from inadequate math and science, I would like to go take a look and observe the classroom teachers or ask the principal whats happening and why? We have quality dedicated teachers in this district.

  • mom March 3, 2012 (4:15 pm)

    p.s until you have been in the classroom with these teachers, watching science, watching math and maybe even offering an extra body to help with the lessons how do you have any idea what your complaining about, my son grew a beautiful bean plant, raised mealworms, had fish, watched salmon hatch, learned about minerals, earthworms, decomposition, humus, how to write in a science journal, designed a boat, and a lot, lot more.. all in his 1st couple years of sps general education with his classroom teachers as a part of the district’s science program…not just our school’s program, district wide. What is wrong with this? Please tell me what schools are not getting this stuff guys…I am really, honestly interested.

  • Caprial March 3, 2012 (4:19 pm)

    Exactly “mom”. Well said. This is not private school or a charter school we’re in here. If that’s something you seek for your child, then pay for it. SPS is to serve all children, not segregate them.

  • frustrated March 3, 2012 (4:33 pm)

    If the science and math programs in our schools are so good what is the purpose of the STEM school? Why not incorporate these ideas into every school? Take a tour of ALL of the West Seattle elementary schools. You’ll see disparity.

  • Harry March 3, 2012 (4:42 pm)

    mom, I think it’s the way you question others right to say anything, and accuse them of knowing or doing nothing. In fact I’m a mom and strongly support teachers (critiquing curricula is not slamming teachers, duh). I give and do much. I know that the science kits our kids use are old and falling apart, stymie creativity. Shoot, the board’s considering cuts to science education (I didn’t see you at the last board meeting). Math textbooks are lousy and nonsensical, costly and likely the main reasons math scores are flat-lined or falling. So, you are welcome to your opinion, do not disparage mine.

  • mom March 3, 2012 (5:05 pm)

    The purpose of the stem school is to help our capacity issues in West Seattle and it’s for children that are drawn(option school)to these subjects, this is not to one up anyone, are you unhappy with the science at your school? This should be the main question. Specifically tell me where the disparity is in our West Seattle Schools because everyone is teaching from the same District science kits and Math curricula, same computer MAP testing and games, I’ve seen i-pods at a school which a teacher received through a hard earned grant, not extra funding.. I’ve been to all West Seattle Schools, which teachers are lacking in their teaching skills? Some schools are literacy based and the parents like that, some schools are environmental science schools, the parents like that, pathfinder is a whole child school with tons of science, environmental, cultural, arts etc, the parents love that.(also an option school, do you have a beef with Pathfinder and all the parents work so hard at getting, you could go there… If you are not unhappy with your school and you haven’t heard complaints directly from other parents, what is your issue?
    This is an option school, most teachers have a hard time teaching everything they need to teach in one day, and a lot of students just aren’t interested in the engineering, tech, etc. Do what’s best for your child and let other parents do what’s best for their children and know that the district is not using any additional funding for this school, the funding comes from a separate start-up fund that is ONLY available to start a new school. Again, are you happy with your school? Main question……There’s nothing in our programs that is lacking except enough room for our kids, This is just a new concept to DRAW kids out to make more room for everyone. It should be exciting and well received for those kids who are brave enough to leave everything behind to start something new that they are interested and excited about. Please don’t ruin that for these students, just let it be. Seriously, send your kid there if that’s the focus you want for you child and that is what your child shows interest in.

  • mom March 3, 2012 (9:37 pm)

    I am a teacher, the books are fine, the math adequate and the science kits are not falling apart, have you heard complaints form other teachers?

  • mom March 3, 2012 (9:51 pm)

    I’m signing out guys, I’m really not getting through to people to be positive about this new opportunity for our children. The text books are not non-sensical Harry, have you taught from them? They make sense and your job as a teacher is to bring it alive for your students it’s just text. Science kits are working great and have valuable lessons about weight, balance, geology, biology etc. I’m in the schools Harry are you? that’s where my accurate opinions are coming from, just because there is a new school coming to help matters doesn’t mean that everything else now sucks…..really?, so take your kids to another district if that’s the way you feel and good luck. Back to work making learning as interesting as possible with what I have which is enough and just fine to work with, if you pick this school good luck and I hope there is no unfair harrassement towards the students or teachers. Stay positive.Thanks WSB for the coverage.

  • Alice P. March 3, 2012 (11:11 pm)

    Hi everyone:) So, it’s already a done deal, why is everyone arguing? How many of you have signed your kids up? We are so excited, we signed up and wanted to get a feel for how many others did as well…..Hope to hear from you.

  • Harry March 4, 2012 (1:26 pm)

    Ah, so you are a teacher AND and a mom with kids in the district? good. Interestingly, here’s a story by Schmitz Park teacher Craig Parsley from earlier this year (summarized in the SSS blog) one of your compatriots. He may, in fact, support the new STEM program. I’m curious whether he feels it will help all the other children in WS schools.

    “An absolutely fantastic story from teacher Craig Parsley at Crosscuts about teaching science with the help of a cranky boiler and a hard-working custodian. Basically:

    “…how Dave the custodian became an integral part of the science program at Schmitz Park Elementary School in West Seattle.”

    From the article:

    Though the standards seem to be a moving target these days, with new educational goals this year and possible federal standards coming soon, there are three basic themes teachers can hang their lab coats on: physical science, earth and space science, and life science. While there are multiple and overlapping domains within these themes, we can distill them down into just a few words: energy, rocks, and photosynthesis.

    He explains the problem in SPS:

    The are two key themes in Seattle’s science mission statement that limit the methods teachers may use to inspire budding young science minds: “construct” and “investigate.”

    Essentially, constructivism promulgates the belief that “knowledge is constructed <i<(or "discovered" like Everyday Math or Discovery Math", Harry), not transmitted.” Teachers in a constructivist classroom are passive guides and material handlers. They do not teach, they merely facilitate.

    The other constraint found in the statement is the overused term investigate. Back in the day, before constructivism became the latest education reform fad, kids did experiments to test a hypothesis (or prediction). Now they investigate prefabricated situations (with predetermined outcomes) that arrive in a box from a district science warehouse in Seattle.

    I don’t know about you but I remember my sons’ elementary teachers really hating the NSF kits. Never enough of what equipment you need (or it’s broken) and very boring experiments.

    He says what he thinks kids today want:

    Growing a plant, observing goldfish, or waiting for water vapor to condense on plastic sheets no longer fascinates children. What kids want (and need) is full contact, high energy, vibrant, and visual science experiences to compete with the myriad other events in their lives vying for diminishing attention spans. Students relish fire, noise, digital media, messes, and destruction. With few exceptions, children don’t have the patience to investigate and their teachers do not have the time to facilitate investigation.

    And herein lies the problem. How do teachers with limited resources, boring science materials, and digitally driven students get children interested in rocks, energy, and photosynthesis? Well, ask Dave the custodian. He spends his day doing much of the science a 4th- or 5th-grade student needs to be successful on the MSP test. Or, he has the materials a teacher could use to engage students in compelling science activities.

    Then Mr. Parsley goes through all the scientific knowledge you can learn walking through an elementary school. And with a little help, even more can be done:

    A former parent at our school, Grant Varney, liked the work we were doing in science and decided to use his contractor’s expertise to build us several inexpensive science teaching tools. He started with a well-built lever and fulcrum. Our students thoroughly enjoy lifting a heavy stump using this simple device. Applying the pressure of one hand, a student can lift 50 kilograms.

    Watching the kids’ faces you would think they had suddenly morphed into superheroes. But lifting is just the science part of the lesson. They enjoy crushing things under the stump even more — that’s the “make it fun” element of the lesson. So, what do they learn? Simple machines allow humans to do more work than they could do otherwise.

    I know, not every school has a custodian like this or savvy parents but Mr. Parsley has an answer for that as well:

    To interest students in earth and space science, elementary teachers need two qualities: tech-savviness and a willingness to get dirty. PBS, BBC, and YouTube all offer high-quality videos (eye-candy) that establish the basis for studying landforms and geology.

    He points out that ,b>there are no science textbooks in elementary schools so kids can’t go off and read on their own.

    He points out the issues with what SPS currently does:

    For teachers to conduct these simple, hands-on science activities requires some training. However, the inertia surrounding school district’s insistence on using National Science Foundation (NSF) kits discourages curriculum innovations. Teachers don’t have to think about science (or know it); they merely have to follow the scripted lessons.

    The NSF kits also represent a huge capital expenditure, and their maintenance requires an entire 14,500-square-foot warehouse. The District maintains and refurbishes over 2,500 elementary school science kits with a full-time staff of four employees. Each kit must be refurbished three times per year.

    What to do?

    The alternative to the SPS inquiry-based, materials-intensive elementary science program would involve shifting the emphasis away from a highly centralized program to a site-based model where schools purchase and manage their own materials. (okay, so why not all? Until Boren STEM where waivers affordable or predictably obtainable? Harry)

    Budget expenditures could then be redirected towards building and buying durable science materials with multiple functions.

    In an ideal world, carpenters, groundskeepers, plumbers, mechanics, welders, and custodians (like Dave) should all serve as the primary support services to teachers developing new classroom science innovations. Parent volunteers from multiple trades serve as an excellent resource to build science equipment.

    He ends with some pretty forward-thinking talk:

    Many of my colleagues will probably write off these ideas as pie-in-the-sky idealism. They will say, “SPS is known for its glacial pace when it comes to curriculum changes.” Yet doing nothing — slowly — ensures that more than half of 5th-graders will continue to fail the science MSP exams. Inertia is infectious.

    Transforming our science program would cost nothing upfront. It would merely require a shift in emphasis away from centralized control of curriculum to allow for site-based innovations.(For everyone? Harry) Seattle Public Schools must release its grip on both materials management and pedagogy.

    He probably didn’t get the memo on curriculum alignment.”

  • andrea March 4, 2012 (2:18 pm)

    I have to say all this negativity has been driving me nuts! My son is thriving at Madison and my daughter at Lafayette. I feel that the curriculum and teaching is fabulous and have no worries about the STEM school changing that. Let’s stop all this back and forth and focus on what matters here. Getting the parents who want to/will send their kids to the new STEM school the information they want/need. If you are not a parent in that case, leave it alone. The STEM school will not take anything away from the wonderful education that my two kids are getting, why are so many worried it will? Be happy fellow west Seattle families :)

    • WSB March 4, 2012 (3:07 pm)

      If negativity drives you nuts, thanks for contributing a positive comment. We manage our comment sections much more aggressively than most online news operations – no personal attacks, profanity, racism, sexism, sizism, trolling, a multitude of other rules – so they are safe places to speak; the only reason some threads seem dominated by opponents or naysayers is that, if there are supporters at all, they just are not bothering to speak up and make their opinion known. Same thing goes for public meetings, of course, having been to hundreds of them – we cover them, we accurately report that “almost everyone who spoke was opposed/concerned” IF that is the case – and then only afterward someone will pipe up with a comment “Oh, but I support it, I just couldn’t be there.” Overall, though, thanks again to everyone who cares enough to read, commenting or not commenting; we covered a variety of meetings leading up to the School Board vote to create this school, including board member Marty McLaren’s first community meetings, and the “we wish there could be better science/math in ALL local schools” was a common sentiment. But perhaps the loudest statement in this entire discourse was the gigantic turnout for the first informational meeting about the new school https://westseattleblog.com/2012/02/west-seattle-schools-crowded-1st-meeting-for-k-5-stem-at-boren .. as one teacher told us at that meeting, at the heart of it is the inescapable fact that every parent wants the best for their kid/s … TR

  • andrea March 4, 2012 (9:22 pm)

    Agreed, speaking up in any capacity (no pun intended) means we care. I just wish I was seeing a little more optimism that is all :) Thanks for the great coverage as always WSB!

  • Harry March 5, 2012 (1:30 pm)

    Hi andrea, I loved my child’s education at Lafayette and now at Madison also!

  • carmenflora March 5, 2012 (6:50 pm)

    Cheers Harry :)

  • Thomas March 5, 2012 (10:56 pm)

    To Harry, why does a school like Jane Adams exist in our district, can we petition the district to do away with the option programs, Can you help? I agree this just doesn’t sound fair. What follows is a description of Jane Adams.

    We would like to thank everyone for your warm welcome last Thursday and for your well thought out questions. It was a short amount of time together and our hope is that we provided you with a clear picture of what the Jane Addams K-8 program will look like, and what we mean by a highly traditional program. We want to see everyone make a decision that is right for themselves as individuals. In order to help you do that, we wanted to reiterate some important aspects of the program.

    As we mentioned, our focus is on environmental science and math. We not only envision a rigorous program in these areas, but one that is considered the strongest in the Northeast Cluster. In addition to this focus, we will be fully implementing a school wide Writers Workshop curriculum, along with providing a balanced literacy program in every classroom. This is the core of what Jane Addams will be all about, which means we will be involved in extensive professional development and work together.

  • Harry March 7, 2012 (12:25 pm)

    Sounds like a well-balanced, non-faddish program. Has all three of the 3 R’s. Sure beats just having one.

  • wsmama3 March 22, 2012 (1:15 pm)

    Here are the details on K5STEM yahoo group:

    Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/K5STEM
    Group email address: K5STEM@yahoogroups.com

    Come join us! Google group has been deleted. Thanks!

Sorry, comment time is over.