Welcome to School Board Director (District IV) Michael DeBell's Blog

23 Comments |Add your own

1. 1. Jeff | May 12th, 2009 at 3:05 PM

   Why do the schools not align with the school board districts? www.seattleschools.org/area/board/districts.xml Ballard seems to be split between districts 1 and 4. Which is odd because a good portion of the students in the elementary schools in your district go to Whitman in another district. The boundaries of the district 1 just seem ridiculous to me from the sound all the way to the lake...

2. 2. P.Scott Cummins | May 12th, 2009 at 9:47 PM

   Thanks Michael, I've subscribed and now have this blog on my reader. Thanks so much for the outreach - hopefully it will help streamline communication and help get more folks involved.

3. 3. Michael DeBell | May 13th, 2009 at 8:53 AM

   Jeff, The Director districts are based on population. They each contain about the same number of people and get adjusted occaisionally to reflect demographic changes. The odd shape of some and the way they cross some neighborhoods goes back beyond the knowledge of our district archivist, whom I asked. King County Elections seems to have a key role.

4. 4. Charlie Mas | May 13th, 2009 at 10:36 AM

   I think the Board has three distinct jobs to do. 1) The Board is the policymaking body for the District. This not only means writing policy, but enforcing policy. Without enforcement, policies - and the policymaking body - are meaningless. 2) Oversight of the management of the District. No one wants the board to micro-manage the Superintendent, but we do want the Board to manage her. This means reviewing the Superintendent's decisions to confirm that they conform with District Policy, comply with State and federal law, and are consistent with the District's Guiding Principles. It also means that the Superintendent's recommendations submitted for Board approval should be reviewed to confirm that they are data-based, founded on sound rationale, and reflect best practices. 3) Finally, the Board is the elected representatives of the public and have a duty to represent the public's perspective and advocate for it. No one else in the District is accountable to the public, so if the Board doesn't advocate for the public then no one does.

5. 5. Charlie Mas | May 14th, 2009 at 9:09 AM

   But the Board does NOT have a role with the budget. The Board votes only on the total appropriation for the four budgets. The Board only votes on the total spending for each, not on any of the line items (except contracts over a specific size). The budget that the Superintendent shows the Board at the time of the vote is always subject to change at the Superintendent's sole discretion throughout the year - so long as it does not exceed the approved total spending. This just isn't a Board matter and the Board shouldn't be sweating over these details. That is over-reaching beyond policy-level concerns. Besides, the Board is so detatched from what is really happening in the District that their periodic comments on the budget are often absurd. The Board crowed about increases in the staffing of the Advanced Learning office this year when the staffing was actually cut. Yes, the program manager's position was increased from 0.6 FTE to 1.0 FTE, but the department lost a consulting teacher (1.0 FTE). And let's not forget that the person who was congratulated for increasing the program manager to 1.0 FTE was the same person who, in the previous year, cut it from 1.0 FTE to 0.6 FTE. The Board has no business with the budget, no authority over the budget, no control of the budget, can't keep up with the changes in the budget, and should just stay out of the budget.

6. 6. Laura | May 14th, 2009 at 2:04 PM

   Re: Elementary Math The elementary math program, as taught with EveryDay Math (EDM), does not meet the current WA State Math Standards. The WA Standards 3.1.C, 4.1.F and 5.1.C call for fluency and accuracy in “standard algorithms” for addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Between my two children, I have seen close to five years of EDM (K/1/2 and 2/3/4) and the standard algorithms are not being explicitly taught. Nor has there been any supplementation with Singapore. EDM seems to actually discourage the use of standard algorithms. We are fortunate that we can purchase Singapore books locally and supplement at home in order to ensure mathematical fluency for our kids. But why should parents need to do this? And what about the children not receiving this extra help at home (or through Sylvan or Kumon)? The District seems to have made the Singapore supplementation “optional”. Since when is meeting State Standards optional? The teachers and schools seem to have their hands tied – the District seems more concerned with teachers sticking to the EDM pacing guide than actually teaching to the WA State Standards. As a SPS parent, I am frustrated that my kids are not receiving the “basics”. As a citizen, I am angered that many children are being cheated out of receiving a solid foundation in mathematics that will cripple them for years to come. Please, take some action on this issue as a Board and show SPS parents and students what accountability truly means.

7. 7. Charlie Mas | May 15th, 2009 at 1:39 PM

   The success of the recent high school math materials adoption is heavily dependent on the implementation of all of the other elements in the Theory of Action presented to the Board. But how can we have any confidence in the implementation of these plans when the District staff refuse to implement the Board mandated supplementation of the EDM with the Singapore math materials in elementary schools. Why should anyone believe that the district staff will implement the necessary supports for the high school math materials adoption when they have shown that they won't implement the supports for the elementary school math materials adoption. And why hasn't the Board said or done anything about it?

8. 8. Charlie Mas | May 15th, 2009 at 7:48 PM

   The Board is the policymaking body for the District, and therefore has an obligation to enforce policy. Was the Alternative Education Policy, C54.00, been violated when the superintendent assigned a new principal to TOPS without community involvement in the decision? C54.00 says: "2. Program design includes a shared decision making model. Indicators: • School community participates in the selection of instructional, support and administrative staff." Will the Board consider this potential violation of policy? Does the Board even have a mechanism for considering this question? If not, then how can the Board function as a governance body?

9. 9. Carmen | May 15th, 2009 at 7:54 PM

   Mr DeBell- We learned today at Loyal Heights Elementary that our beloved, wonderful principal is being removed from our school and community. As a newcomer to Seattle Schools many things make me scratch my head but this just makes me very angry. Is there anyway to appeal this decision? I would appreciate any guidance in the matter. Thank you, Carmen Hudson

10. 10. Michael DeBell | May 16th, 2009 at 10:08 AM

    Charlie, You emphasize the Board's role as representing the public uniquely within SPS. I agree entirely, but that is a responsibility that applies within each of the Board's functional roles- policymaking, budget, facilities ect. District community engagement is meant to inform and to gather input which is used by both the Superintendent and Board to inform their governance. The Board also has testimony, hearings, community meetings and e-mail to gather public input. The annual budget development and adoption is in fact a critical Board role that is both required by law and essential to taxpayer accountability. This is not a line item exercize but the Board has a significant role in setting budget priorities, weighting spending, adding or eliminating programs and approving the primary drivers of the budget -labor contracts and capital levies. In addition, the Executive Committee which oversees the Superintendent's evaluation has placed particular emphasis on this area of her performance. This role is ultimately dependent on the depth of understanding of the budget by Directors and their willingness to assert their opinions- neither of which is assured.

11. 11. Ruth Berge | May 16th, 2009 at 2:15 PM

    I suspect that Carmen should be reporting her issue to Peter Maier by the way. Loyal Heights has been through that experience in that past- losing an excellent principal and it took many years to recover. What I see missing over and over again in the School Board is a sense of responsibility to the students and to better education. Who represents the students if not the school board? I have seen Mary Bass go to PTA meetings and school functions, which seems like a great way to involve students. The outreach should include formal outreach to students which serves both as a good way for the Board to learn and for students to learn. The school board comment meetings are too little and too late. Many of them are obviously just for show where decisions have already been made (example:all of the school closure meetings). Here are some ideas that come to mind as you rewrite policies: One school had a unique way to provide "home" cooked healthy vegetarian meals which was shut down by the school district. I have had lunch with my daughters at school, but the official lunches and breakfasts served are repellent. Get rid of the current lunch program, with precooked high fat meals and ask the community for input. The policies on attendance and tardiness should take into account that people sometimes don't go to school on time or skip because they don't want to be there. (I'm talking about students). Sometimes this is because of bullying or hazing that happens at school. A kid who is not having a good time at school is then doubly punished-first by getting targeted by all the "normal" or "popular" or whatever they are kids who are casually cruel. Second by getting in trouble with the school and their parents for being late or not wanting to go to school. There are teachers who are cruel as well and they establish classrooms that kids don't want to be in. Don't be overly punitive. Schools should encourage freedom of speech for students in newspapers. Student journalism should be encouraged. Students should be allowed to criticize teachers, principals or anyone else. The staff should not be that thin skinned. I went to school, in a school district that passed out bibles, and it was more open than 21st century Seattle schools. Schools should not throw away the fine arts just because our technological society thinks that they are silly. Many people have contributed to their societies without using math or science. Schools should find ways to encourage girls to be involved in sports. I haven't been able to do this as a parent. I think that kids face the hazing and snide remarks in gym class and in the after school programs. In policies, please remember that people(students) are different. We are not all morning people. We are not all able to sit still in classrooms all day. There is a long history of people learning in the real world- as apprentices- that may work better for some of us. The first principal of policies should be to do no harm and the needs of the minority should not be overlooked. By minority I mean just that, any type of group where some attribute is not common. The 4% of the population who are bored in school. Why isn't there summer school? The only summer school offered is deeply remedial. Why don't we have the option to send our kids to one or two extra classes over the summer to make up work or gain extra credits?

12. 12. Michael DeBell | May 16th, 2009 at 4:28 PM

    Carmen, The appointment or transfer of principals is the perogative of the Superintendent, the School Board has no direct role. In the past, most schools had a selection process with parent and faculty participation recommending choices to the Supt. This was part of our site based management approach. If you feel strongly about retaining your principal, you should write to the Superintendent and cc. the School Board. Ruth, You touch on many different issues, I will try to address some of them. I agree that the protection of minority groups and the avoidance of harm are both important in policymaking. Both of these goals also require the goodwill and intention of staff who implement the policy. As Charlie notes above the School Board has few tools available for policy compliance and implementation, though calling it out with a clear majority backing may sometimes get results. Food service options are highly constrained by federal program guidelines and by our contract with nutrition services (OE 609). Healthy option are preferred but they don't always sell when there are choices. I disagree with your assertion that hearings and testimony are not authentic with some issues. I have changed my mind on issues large and small because of public input and I believe this is true of other directors as well. What is also clear is that the Board attempts to change direction by degrees toward the locus of public sentiment - not always the clear break that peaople want but typical compromising that is a hallmark of democratic process.

13. 13. Kathy | May 18th, 2009 at 12:49 PM

    I am angered that the community and principal of Loyal Heights Elementary was given abrupt notice of her relocation. Cashel Toner will be replaced by Wayne Floyd. I am angry that we are getting a principal with 31 years of primary high school experience. In addition, Mr. Floyd is involved in the South East Intiiative. Moving Mr. Floyd does not make sense to me. This all seems silly!

14. 14. Dan Dempsey | May 18th, 2009 at 11:13 PM

    Charlie Mas said: “It also means that the Superintendent's recommendations submitted for Board approval should be reviewed to confirm that they are data-based, founded on sound rationale, and reflect best practices.” There has yet to be a Math instructional materials decision based on the intelligent application of the relevant data in the last 4 years. The board has voted for the approval of multi-millions of dollars without a shred of meaningful evidence that any of these will work. Often the board chose to ignore relevant data instead preferring to believe administrative fairy-tales The board voted 6-0 to adopt the EDM program amid irrational claims by CAO Santorno that EDM would end the achievement gap in 4 to 5 years. Absolutely no data for these claims. After one year of EDM use math achievement gaps, for Black students, Asian Students, Hispanic Students, American Indian Students, and English Language learners, all increased. That is 5 out of 5 gaps increased in size. Singapore Math the program written in English for a population of students, in which English is not the primary language at home, is the top rated k-6 math program in the world. Seattle chose the expensive wordy program without a positive track record. Seattle now proposes to spend $474,440 for one year of EDM supplements and $0.00 for Singapore. Michael I hope you have some questions about this action. Intro 5-20-2009. I just became aware that the famous lost episode of the Seattle School board … the 5-30-2007 non-videoed Elementary math adoption action meeting is actually available as an audio experience. Michael DeBell I would urge you to listen to the audio tape from 5-30-2007 and see if the board planned to annually spend $474,440 for EDM consumables a program which expands the achievement gap and spend $0.00 for Singapore Math. The way CAO Santorno handled this action decision of 5-30-2007 is very deceptive if not actually fraudulent. Accountability where are thou? perhaps only in Federal Court.

15. 15. Charlie Mas | May 18th, 2009 at 11:38 PM

    Speaking of the Board's community engagement; it is atrocious. If a principal did community engagement like that you would find it gravely deficient. Imagine a principal who tells you that his (or her) primary community engagement is a semi-monthly meeting in which twenty people - no more - are allowed to speak for three minutes each - no longer. After the people speak the principal does not respond to them - not at all. Not at the meeting, not after the meeting, not to follow up with their concern, nothing. If that were a principal's community engagement you wouldn't approve of it at all. You might not even count it as community engagement considering the fact that no one actually engages the speakers. And yet that is the Board's primary community engagement. Sad. At one time the Superintendent claimed that she was tracking public testimony and that her staff was following up with those who give it. That simply isn't true. Of course, there is no accountability.

16. 16. Corey | May 19th, 2009 at 10:29 AM

    In defense of Michael and his community engagement, I have seen him out and about at school functions more than any other school board member. I have encountered him at the high school level, middle school, and most recently, at an elementary school outside of his representation. This fact alone has inspired some confidence in his commitment. I have seen him ask questions and listen carefully to answers. I have taken issue with some of Michael's positions, but at least I see him pursuing some engagement. I also see Harium quite a bit, but our elementary schoolis under his representation.

17. 17. JRockne | May 19th, 2009 at 12:34 PM

    I find Michael to be very approachable and very professional. While I might not agree with every one of his conclusions, there can be no faulting his hard work on all the issues that come before him.

18. 18. dan dempsey | May 21st, 2009 at 2:18 PM

    Transparency, the idea that there is any balance in Seattle’s Inquiry Math CANNOT be found in what is transparent. . Seattle cares about ideology not previous results or current performance. Check the Seattle definition of math – stacked for Discovery. ------------------------ {Mathematics is the language and science of patterns and connections. Learning and doing mathematics are active processes in which students construct meaning through exploration and inquiry of challenging problems.} ------------------------------- Check the questionnaire and rubric for math adoption committee membership – stacked for Discovery. . Previous results are ignored to the Discovery advantage. . English language learners have been devastated by Discovery Learning. … Check the data. . The District still ignores the promotion / non-promotion policies’ call for mastery of required necessary skills and the effective interventions needed to assure such mastery. Wordy books with little practice are preferred. The myth that Differentiated Instruction is an effective strategy for teaching socially promoted unskilled students has no validity. It is another sham pushed upon us by those in charge. Check the data. . Everyday Math spiraling is based on repeated exposure with rarely a call for mastery. It does not work. It is NOT a best practice. . Ms. Santorno spoke of narrowing topics while adopting the EDM series with a huge number of topics per grade level. Students see each topic for many years and not as review but as being re-taught year after year. Students are beginning or beginning/developing or developing or developing/securing or securing …..Each topic shows up again and again and again but rarely taught to mastery. . The mastering of topics and acquisition of solid skills is NOT important. Teaching the standard algorithm for multi-digit multiplication is not important in grade 4. Teaching long division in grade 5, is NOT part of the Everyday Math pacing plan. Students use calculators to divide. . The State Math Standards are NOT the curriculum in grades k-5. The pacing plan is the curriculum. . The pacing plan curriculum is aligned with a failed ideology and little else. . NOW.. it is half a million dollars to continue the math plan to nowhere. Yes Nowhere. . In 2007 Ms. Santorno spoke of arithmetic fluency while ordering calculators for first and second graders. Discovery trumps logic or common sense. . A previously predicted charge for consumables is now $100,000 greater … Discovery publishers win … and our kids lose. Lose again and again and again. The math Trifecta of disaster is not over, not by a long shot, for we will have a half-million dollar bill every year to remind us of Ms. Santorno’s and Mr. Bernetek’s previous deception. When will this nonsense ever end? The ending must be found by Discovery because there is no logic to any of this nonsense.

19. 19. dan dempsey | May 21st, 2009 at 2:30 PM

    Michael, ..................... I greatly appreciated the thoughtful questions you asked on Don Kennedy at the finance work session on 5-20-2009. It was good to see you focused on the numbers. It did seem that an excessive number of teachers are being RIFed in the way the $$$$ were accounted for. ................ I hope Mr. Kennedy gets back to you with better answers than what he gave yesterday............ I remain extremely concerned with many of the Superintendent's ideas ... Her class size does not matter stand is particularly disturbing ..... But if we plan to teach without any mastery of skills ... Then Stack 'em Deep and Teach 'em Cheap is the way to go.............. The kids and their parents will eventually Discover how bad an SPS math education was.

20. 20. Charlie Mas | May 26th, 2009 at 4:38 PM

    State Law (RCW 28A.230.090) says that districts are required to grant high school credit for classes taken in middle school if those classes are similar or equivalent to classes offered in high schools. There are hundreds of middle school students taking world language classes and math classes that would qualify for credit, yet Seattle Public Schools refuses to grant that credit. The Board was going to take up this issue in October, but staff talked the Board into deferring it until it could be addressed as part of an integrated grading policy reform in January or February. The grading policy reform was delayed and delayed and now has been deferred for the indeterminant future. Students should get credit for their work. If the Board does not take up this issue soon - an issue which is NOT integrated with any other part of grading policy reform - yet another year will go by and students will be cheated out of the credit they earned and that, by state law, they should have. At what point does it become the role of the Board to initiate changes in policy instead of waiting for the staff to bring policy changes to the Board? If not in this case, then when?

21. 21. Hope | May 28th, 2009 at 12:18 AM

    Michael, when is the district going to tell the public what is happening at Jane Addams? Parents are confused and beginning to panic,and yet, no official communication from anyone at the district. Can you please help us figure out what's going on

22. 22. Matt | May 30th, 2009 at 2:18 AM

    Director DeBell: I am extremely troubled by the District's refusal to grandfather siblings under the new SAP. In the new draft published today, not only does the sibling policy stay the same, but the District has now UNDERLINED it as if to emphasize that they absolutely will not agree to grandfather siblings. This is practically a slap in the face, as there has been so much discussion about the issue. If the District wants parents to keep their children in Seattle Public Schools, to become and remain involved in their schools, and to develop lasting commitments to the District and its success, it needs to grandfather students into the older siblings' school as of implementation of the new plan. Grandfathering would last only a short while (e.g., at most five years in a K-5 in the extreme) and would likely cause little delay in implementation of the new SAP (as many students will likely not need to be grandfathered because they will be in the same attendance area boundary). The only potential negative I see is the possible delay in full implementation of the plan. But why the urgency? The District has already acknowledged there will be a transitional period, which is only vaguely described and seems merely a tool to allow the District to delay taking certain steps necessary for full implementation (like being able to provide certain services at each school). There's no reason why the transitional period also cannot grandfather siblings and, thus, support families. Please don't make us choose between keeping our kids together and yanking our older children from an environment in which they're thriving and have spent their whole school "career." That does not support families or any goal of the District. Thank you for your consideration and your continued service to the District.

23. 23. StepJ | May 31st, 2009 at 1:32 PM

    Dear Director DeBell, I have shared my concerns about siblings with you previously. I am not asking to abandon or delay the new SAP. I have reviewed it in depth and find it to be a very reasoned and thoughtful plan. I appreciate the predictability and the redirection of monies from transportation to the classroom. My concern is in the realm of the transition period for families who enrolled for 2009 or prior, and have younger siblings yet to come. For these families the rules have changed on them mid-stream. Option one to keep families together is to apply for open seats via the Choice process. As we live in an area where all of the schools are oversubscribed this option is not available to us. Another challenge of oversubscribed areas is that we have not been able to gain assignment to any schools within walking distance of our home. Those very schools that might reasonably become our new assignment area school. Option two to keep families together is to move the older siblings out of the school they have been attending when the younger sibling reaches Kindergarten age. For our family this will mean moving our three children to our new attendance area school when my daughters are in third grade vs. add one entry level grade sibling to the school my daughters attend. Our request (I say 'our' as this request is from many families not just mine) is to grant a specified period of grandfathering of Sibling Preference to families who find themselves caught in the transition period. This grandfathering would only apply to children already enrolled, and only to the school the older sibling(s) currently attend. In this scenario (as poster Matt already stated) if an older sibling started elementary school under the last year of the old plan (2009-2010), the grandfather of sibling preference would last no more than five years. This request does not displace students from our new assignment area school, nor does it displace students in the attendance area of the school the older sibling(s) attend. As the current draft of the rules read, children who live in an attendance area will only be guaranteed a seat at the school during the transition phase at the entry level grade. Dr. Libros has told me on more than one occasion that it is easiest to accommodate students at an entry grade level - which is why the current Sibling Preference only applies to siblings at the entry level grade. And that is precisely our request - to accommodate the younger sibling at an entry level grade. As my family is not alone in having more older siblings than younger we would actually move through the transition in a less disruptive manner to the new SAP by not moving our older children to our new assignment area school. I also really do believe that keeping families together will provide an accepted and supported (and likely more speedy) transition to the new plan. Families will certainly protest, disrupt, and resist the new plan when they are directly impacted by having siblings assigned to separate schools. A reasonable and thoughtful transition for families could certainly promote a stable and successful launch of the new SAP. I hope our request will be considered. We believe it benefits all in that it promotes a transition to the new SAP in a reasonable and predictable time frame. We also believe it will provide predictability to families and allow them to not only stay together, but to remain supportive and engaged with their school and the district. Thank you, Stephanie J