The Urban League report on Seattle school assignment

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

Related stories Reaping benefits of talking

The work group was comprised of the following individuals:

* Represents those who did not attend all meetings

The workgroup was staffed and facilitated by Shani Taha and Kwami Taha of SNT Consulting.

The workgroup met for a three-day period, which involved many hours of reading, research, discussion and debate. The workgroup was asked to outline goals, develop and discuss high school assignment options that would meet their goals and then select a preferred option. The following report summarizes the results of this effort and the rationale behind the preferred options.

The workgroup uniformly agreed that the uneven quality and value of education in each of our high schools plagued assignment issues and practices. Parent discontent with the district's assignment processes was based on perceptions about the quality and value of programs and staff at each high school. Five of the high schools are perceived as being better than the others. These schools are Roosevelt, Ballard, Franklin, Garfield and

Nathan Hale. Higher test scores and student performance are factors which contributed to this perception. Five high schools are perceived as being not so good. These schools include Rainier Beach and Cleveland in the south, Ingraham in the north and West Seattle and Sealth in west. (Please note, this report does not deal with the city's alternative high schools.)

Every assignment option that the workgroup examined was plagued by the perception of inconsistent quality in each high school. Under the district's current controlled choice assignment plan, the top five high schools were in demand and some parents were angered if their children were assigned elsewhere. Under a neighborhood based system with no flexible assignment options, five regions would not have the same level of academic achievement as their sister schools. That several of the poorer performing high schools are located in the south end of the city in predominantly minority neighborhoods is even more problematic.

1. All schools must be organized and outfitted for learning. They must have the resources they need.
2. Teacher excellence in all subjects that they teach.
3. Teacher excellence in working with students and parents, in particular mastery of interpersonal dynamics and protocols as well as sensitivity to multiethnic people.
4. A rigorous academic curriculum that pushes each student's learning capabilities.
5. Advanced academic, avocational and vocational curricula.
6. A dynamic, multiethnic student and faculty environment.
7. Clear uncompromising standards for personal and learning behaviors from students and staff.
8. An integrated academic environment which includes arts education.
9. Extensive extra-curricular activities and sports but not at the expense of academic offerings.

We are now trying to accommodate the high school population in five of ten schools. Many parents are dissatisfied and so are many students. Again, the district can no longer tolerate this inequity. With quality high schools throughout the city, assignment issues will disappear.

Prior to discussing high school assignment options, the workgroup developed the following goals. These goals represent the workgroups long-term objectives. While their preferred and recommended options only achieve these goals to some degree, the goals provide direction and a standard for measuring the options which have been identified.

1. Quality schools and programs with excellent instructors. We have defined quality in the preceding section.
2. Integration of students within all high schools.
3. Equal access to choice for all students including students who move into the district and students who submit applications after March 31^st.
4. Predictability and stability of school assignments.
5. Retention and attraction of students to Seattle's public schools.
6. Better district communications so that there is honesty, truthfulness and earlier notification to parents of student assignments so that parents and the district can make changes. Improved communication should include providing parents with high school assignment sensitivity studies regarding probable outcomes prior to the high school selection process.
7. Student acceptance into specific magnet programs should guarantee admittance into the school that offers that program.
8. Increased parent involvement with assignment processes and high school activities and programs.
9. Maximize the number of students/parents satisfied with their high school assignment.

There are three components to the consensus option that are explained in detail here. These components should not be separated.

Our preferred option calls for establishing eleven regional areas, based on neighborhoods. Each region would have a high school to which students living in that region would get a preference for assignment. Students would be able to apply to any high school in the city or to any magnet program in the city. Where over-subscription occurred, students living in the designated region would be assigned ahead of those who did not.

This option would provide parents with some measure of predictability and it meets many of our goals. While some Seattle neighborhoods are not well integrated, citywide application processes would help to assure an ethnically diverse student body in each school.

The challenge will be to decide which region or neighborhood has which high school. In configuring each region, we ask that distance be measured by road distance and not crow's distance. Standards should be derived that will recognize physical transportation barriers and minimize burdensome transportation issues. We also ask that each region be

configured to assure that applicants from the region do not fill the high school to capacity. The workgroup wants to assure that expanded programs will function effectively and not overburden school capacity. We also want to assure that student diversity can be achieved in all regions.

Our goal is to achieve parity in each high school region. Baseline course offerings must be comparable throughout the district. Also academic, avocational and vocational

magnet programs must be expanded, developed or redefined in each high school so that all schools are high quality and competitive.

The neighborhood assignment process will not eliminate current tiebreakers. Barnhart/Waldman will be retained to reinforce residential assignment patterns. Siblings and residents will be given preference in each region. Our Recommendation is that the tiebreakers should be used in the following order:

1. Reference area
2. Sibling
3. Diversity
4. Distance
5. Lottery

We also recommend that the timelines for making high school assignments should be moved to January in order to provide early notification of assignments to parents and students. High schools should send representatives to each middle school to meet with 8^th and 9^th graders and discuss their programs and their requirements. In addition, middle school staff should be used to secure high school applications so that they can make sure that students have applied their high schools of choice in a timely fashion.

Our second option is that significant progress should be made to develop and promote, within the 2001-2003 school year, merit-based academic, avocational and vocational magnet programs. Programs will have rigorous academics and will be designed to meet academic and vocational requirements. Each high school will have one or more magnet programs; for example, biotech and mechanics could be magnet programs located at one high school. School choice based on magnet programs will bring a special emphasis to each school. Magnet programs will help each school address racial diversity issues by encouraging students to travel outside of their communities to participate in a specific magnet program.

Existing programs, which are good, such as those at Ballard and Franklin, should be strengthened, increased in terms of their capacity and aggressively marketed to parents and students. Under performing programs, such as those at Rainier Beach and Sealth, should be strengthened or need to be replaced by effective new programs. New magnet programs should also be developed to address the need for vocational skills such as auto/marine mechanics, aviation and computer technology and avocational curricula such as music, art and the performing arts. Each high school should have at least one or two magnet programs. Again, each magnet program shall be reinforced, acknowledged and promoted. If demand outstrips a program's capacity, programs should be replicated in other locations.

Magnet programs should be competitive. Admittance should be based on merit and aptitude. Students should learn about and understand merit goals. This will provide them with an incentive to master subjects. Merit and aptitude should be defined to include interest, effort and academic achievement. The same process should be used for all schools and magnet programs, though each school will make unique decisions about the types of students they need. Merit processes should include teacher and counselor recommendations. No student or parent should receive preferential treatment. Magnet programs should be diverse in their configuration and not of one ethnicity or the other.

Students should be guaranteed admittance if accepted to a magnet program. If a student is not accepted to a magnet program, they can apply to the regular program at that school. Students can also reapply to the magnet program in the 10^th grade. Students who reapply must meet the same criteria and perquisites as first-time applicants. They should not get preferential treatment because they are in the same school as the magnet program. Magnet programs will allow staff greater participation in the selection processes of student applicants; staff will be involved in reviewing and approving applications.

Adding a high school to the current mix would reduce the capacity burden on each high school, would assure regional high school assignments that would accommodate each neighborhood and would still allow magnet students and other students to be assigned throughout the district. Currently, the Queen Anne /Magnolia area is the only area of the city without a high school. This issue is of particular concern to Queen Anne/Magnolia parents.

This option involves creating a small alternative high school, using district funds in this current year. The first year, the high school would accommodate 9^th and 10^th grades. This alternative high school would have a rigorous academic curriculum. This high school could partner sports with other larger schools. There would be no reference or preference areas; students would be drawn citywide but the school would be accessible to Queen Anne /Magnolia. The high school would open in the fall of 2001

The workgroup developed and discussed several other options in addition to the preferred option. Additionally, several workgroup members held unique concerns. These options and concerns follow.

Barnhart/Waldman fosters high school assignments that reinforce neighborhoods when the high school assignment area is citywide. Because there are no regions at the high school level, 3^rd and 4^th choice students who live closer to a particular high school bump 1^st choice students who live further away. If Barnhart/Waldman is eliminated, better access will be provided throughout the high school district. Further, Barnhart/Waldman disadvantages neighborhoods without a high school. It adds confusion and inequity to the assignment process.

This strategy would assure accountability to parents/customers by providing that their top three choices be recognized and accepted. The district would make no unilateral assignments. There would be a preference area in each neighborhood. This may create an imbalance in capacity of a given high school which could be handled in several ways:

• Using an 8 period day
• Creating a satellite school
• Creating year round schools

The power of the decision will rest with the people affected. Some schools will be closed down but these can be reconfigured or redesigned to meet changing demand.

A 5-year pilot program could be provided at several high schools which would:

• Use transportation to take students to sports and clubs and/or
• Create smaller class size for participating students

The weighted student formula would have to be changed but the funding from Initiative 728 could be used to support this recommendation.

A lottery is equitable and fair but it is not predictable. A lottery would eliminate tiebreakers especially race which is both good and bad. Lottery numbers could be given out in advance so that parents could assess the odds of securing their high school of choice. A lottery could create flight as parents select private and parochial schools rather than risk the public high school assignment processes. Also, with a lottery it is difficult to build a community school base.

One workgroup member indicated they could not endorse the creation of a small high school unless they knew the effects on other schools, on long range planning and on efforts to integrate Seattle's schools.

The NAACP offered the following comments:

• Excellence and endorsement of teachers in all subject areas that they teach;
• Continued emphasizes the importance of achieving racial diversity throughout the school system;
• Recognizes that most African American students are in a general education track which limits their choices. Thus it would make it difficult for them to compete for magnet programs. These programs should correlate with the pathways that provides greater choice;
• Unbiased review and approval of magnet program applications from disadvantaged students;
• In depth analysis, before approving an additional high school, the affects on budget and high school integration should be made known and ;
• An awareness that rigorous academic standards for magnet and other programs could exclude students who have not yet achieved their academic potential.