FOLLOWUP: High-school students protesting sudden schedule change plan rally at district HQs; School Board president promises ‘listening session’; district posts FAQ

7:31 PM: New developments since we first reported Tuesday on a sudden announcement from Seattle Public Schools that they’ll change multiple high schools’ schedules tomorrow – a week and a half into the new school year – so that all “comprehensive high schools” have two lunch periods (currently most have one). First, the district-wide student walkout that one West Seattle High School student mentioned has become a rally at district headquarters at noon Monday, after students walk out at 11 am. Second, School Board president Gina Topp – who is the West Seattle/South Park rep on the board – answered our original inquiry to her this weekend by saying she doesn’t “have more information than what the district has already shared” but expects a briefing at this Wednesday’s board meeting. Before then, Topp says, “I’ll be holding a listening session for students with some other board directors on Monday, and staff is coordinating one with ASB officers from all the schools.” The district did not answer our question about why the change is happening with the school year under way, nor did they explain the change beyond what was also in the original message to parents:

Seattle Public Schools (SPS) is implementing a two-lunch schedule across all comprehensive high school campuses for the 2025–26 school year. This reflects thoughtful planning to ensure compliance with applicable laws and policies while meeting the needs of students and staff.

This change ensures all students have adequate time for seated lunch while meeting Washington state’s required instructional minutes. Additionally, this schedule will support increased and equitable access to school meals, and ensure compliance with staffing, instructional time, and labor contract requirements.

A follow-up message to families, reported here, also cites safety.

8:21 PM: Just checked the district website and there’s now an FAQ posted about the change, dated today. Among other things, it says schools have until October 6 to implement this, while saying some will do so “as soon as (tomorrow).” It also cites specific policies behind the change.

Seattlite September 14, 2025 (7:45 pm)

In my opinion, it is a 100% cop out on the part of SPS not to give a detailed statement on the reasons for changing the lunch schedule. By not doing that, it seems as if parents, students have no say. I hope that the students prepare themselves well to debate Gina Topp about their reasons for not wanting a change. This will be a good exercise for students to learn how to debate and present their facts of the matter.

Gavan September 14, 2025 (8:17 pm)

I don’t think a listening session is needed here, the students have already made it pretty clear what they want…

SunriseHeights September 14, 2025 (8:46 pm)

Reply

I disagree. Even though I’m somewhat cynical about the term “listening session,” resolving differences involves more than stating what you want. Sharing your interests can be even more important since groups that want different things can still be motivated by similar interests, which can be a starting point for resolving the conflict. Even if you don’t find common interests, understanding why you have a conflict can help those involved come up with a wider array of solutions and/compromises. I’d like our kids to learn that conflict resolution means more than shouting what you want louder than the other side. It’s great they are organizing to be heard, and I hope this can be a positive experience even if they don’t get everything they want.

Kyle September 14, 2025 (8:50 pm)

That FAQ is a disgrace to FAQ’s. The only reason given is “most large high schools in the region have 2+ lunches”. Their answer on why they made the change after the school year started is even more vague and incompetent. I am not a student nor have a vested interested, but it pains me to see a school district so badly make an argument. How can they expect students to respect them with side step answers like that? They know those are bad answers too. Show some actual data and actually justify the change or let the students enjoy their one lunch.

K September 14, 2025 (9:08 pm)

So the school was not offering enough instructional time in violation of state law, and the remedy is two shorter lunches instead of a longer one to come back into compliance. Seems pretty cut and dry, although it should have definitely been figured out before the year started. Clubs are important, but school is primarily for academics, and instructional time takes priority.

SunriseHeights September 15, 2025 (6:58 am)

Reply

My daughter was told by a teacher at Sealth that they were not actually out of compliance (the change only affects Wednesday lunch at Sealth). I wonder if Sealth’s model, 2 lunches MTTHF and 1 long lunch on Wednesday, could serve as a compromise solution if that’s the case for other schools. The long lunch on Wednesday has been when clubs meet, teachers do retakes, etc. FWIW, as an educator (college), I would add that seat time is probably over-emphasized. Time in class matters, but how that time is structured makes more difference than sheer quantity. I can do more with two blocks of two hours separated by days for homework and reflection than I can with five one-hour M-F class periods. This can differ from subject-to-subject, so I’m not saying I have all the answers. But students being in class 20-30 minutes longer per day is unlikely to impact their learning, especially if it’s spread out over 6 periods. Breaks are good for lots of reasons. More time relaxing, resetting, moving around, etc. during lunch can improve focus when students are in class. In theory. I know that there are problems with lateness, attendance, etc. that mitigate the positives. Like most things, it’s complicated.
Curious George September 15, 2025 (7:43 am)

Reply

I agree with all of K’s thoughts especially the one on planing this change should have been in place before the start of the current school year. This just shows the incompetence of the Seattle School Districts Board.
Citizen Joe September 15, 2025 (10:49 am)

Reply

Clubs and extracurricular activities are just as important as academics.
Frog September 15, 2025 (7:00 pm)

Reply

Wait, what? WSHS gave up its longer lunch last year already. Lunch was a full hour two years ago, but since September 2024 it has been 30 minutes. The two-lunch schedule still has 30 minute lunches, so the number of instructional minutes will not be affected by this change at WSHS. State law is not driving this change, at least not at WSHS.

AG September 14, 2025 (11:09 pm)

The 2nd lunch isn’t until 1:10pm.

Kathy September 14, 2025 (11:22 pm)

What is “an FAQ”? The person who wrote this on the SPS website needs remedial spelling, or at least remedial proofreading. Schools must have changed a lot in the internet age. Or maybe it was written by AI?

Brian September 15, 2025 (10:30 am)

Reply

This is such a weird flex… it’s literally written as if you say the letters out loud so “an” makes perfect sense.

Person September 15, 2025 (4:59 am)

I think it all stems from the food workers union, but they won’t say it. Just fix the schedule next year. Leave it be this year.

J September 15, 2025 (5:53 am)

Each explanation is a lie. Nothing changed, these schedules were approved by the district. Equality is not equity, and by requiring schools where there is no problem with lunch service to change, they are impacting the skills center students they are claiming to support. Yes, clubs are outside core academic content. But they’re part of college applications and high school social life. This impacts student athletes and individuals with jobs. And why now? Schools were mandated by Monday. October 6th is a lie. Vote the board out. They care more about contract violations with their culinary staff than they do about student success.

SLJ September 15, 2025 (8:09 am)

Just to clarify, WSHS doesn’t currently have an hour long lunch (they did in the past), so they are not out of compliance with state law. I understand that all kids need time to get through the lunch line and eat, and that should be the priority. But this should have been done before the school year started. I like how Sealth does it (posted above) to have a longer lunch on Wednesdays so clubs can still meet (assuming one longer lunch is still meet state requirements).

Another One September 15, 2025 (12:51 pm)

Does the school board itself have anything to do with this decision? It seems like it’s coming from the district. One thing I’ve learned over the years is that the way the Seattle public schools and their board is set up, the board actually has very little authority or ability to get things changed. They often aren’t aprised of school district policy/procedure changes until the public is. As usual, the school district seems to be hiding the real reasons for this change, and why it’s changing now, when school has already started. It’s very frustrating being an SPS parent.

HTB September 15, 2025 (2:25 pm)

I wish they could just say clearly what the issue is. The word salads being served up are what causes most of the irritation around this. “We are out of compliance with state law X, which requires us to Y.” “We are not properly following clause Z in the food service union contract.” Just say it! Whatever it is! People are understanding but not when the only explanation is vague generalities.