- R.B.
- AS#1 students include kids from nontraditional families
Federal grants are usually exciting news, right? They bring money and the promise to make things better. But when Seattle’s Alternative School #1 became eligible for a federal school improvement grant last week, reserved for persistently lowest-achieving schools, some parents welcomed the news with a wee bit of apprehension.
The grant, which could bring AS#1 between $50,000 to $2 million annually over a three-year period starting fall 2011, comes with a bit of a catch. The school district applying for it, in this case Seattle Public Schools, has to choose from one of four federally-mandated intervention models.
SPS, in 2010, in partnership with the Seattle Education Association, chose “transformation,” which replaces principals who have been at the school for more than two years, takes steps to make teachers more effective, implements instructional reforms, increases learning time, and creates community-oriented schools.
SPS Chief Academic Officer Dr. Susan Enfield told The Stranger that the district has not yet decided on this year’s model. Some AS#1 parents are worried that the district would mandate that the school’s alternative education setting be replaced by a more traditional one.
AS#1, the city’s most LGBTQ-friendly school, follows a kinesthetic learning style, encouraging students to take a more hands-on approach. It caters to children who have struggled at traditional schools, such as those with health and behavioral problems, helping them to perform better. The program was threatened with closure last month, but SPS decided that if it’s able to increase enrollment and improve academic performance, then it could stay.
So obviously, this grant is timely. If awarded, it would add instructional support for teachers. “On one hand, it’s wonderful that the district is willing to work with us to support the school rather than simply trying to close it down year after year,” says AS#1 parent Bergen McMurray. “However, since AS#1 specifically hires teachers and staff that focus on alternative education styles and since the district historically has not shown support for alternative education in general, some parents are wondering whether the district will use this grant to replace our sought-out alternative teachers with teachers that teach in a more traditional education style.”
If this happens, McMurray says, it would “change AS#1 from the inside out”, against the wishes of parents who want their children in an alternative education setting.
Enfield says that it’s too early to say if that will happen because a lot of conversations have to take place first. AS#1 site council member Chris Simpson says that the process seems very similar to what happened at the school two years ago, when SPS replaced the principal and introduced pretty rigid requirements for reading and math under the Bush government’s No Child Left Behind act. “It went against the alternative nature of the school,” he said.
As for whether parents are disturbed by AS#I’s persistently lowest-achieving school status, Simpson says that the school has been making dramatic improvements in test scores, but they “are not as high as the district would like them to be.”
For now, the district has decided to keep the current AS#1 Principal, Roy Merca, who is in his second year of leadership, irrespective of what intervention model they choose.
Rainier Beach High School, which is also eligible for the same grant, will replace current co-principals Robert Gary and Lisa Escobar with a new principal for the 2011-2012 school year. The district wants to start an international baccalaureate program at Rainier Beach with the help of the grant.
“some parents are wondering whether the district will use this grant to replace our sought-out alternative teachers with teachers that teach in a more traditional education style.”
If its so sought after and great, why is the school sucking ass? I mean a ‘traditional’ model might not be best, but this alternative one seems to be failing.
It’s “sucking ass” because it’s loaded with the most difficult students.
But should not there still be some measurable improvement? Isn’t that the whole idea? Give kids who are not doing well something more suited to them.
Until very recently, most AS#1 students did not participate in standardized testing.This caused the school to have a low test rating, thus a failing school. The recent increase in test scores should show that AS#1 is not a failing school. The school is not “alternative” in the sense that it is a place where the district ships it’s difficult students, but a place where parents could choose to send their students.
Maybe #1 could do a little research on alternative education before piping up.
All is takes is a few student exemptions to tank the scores of a school. This is both good and bad. Good, because this means schools can’t exempt large numbers of students who they think might not do well (think the so-called Texas miracle that foisted that fraud Rod Paige onto us courtesy of the Bushies), but bad because it forces students who may not test well into a high-stakes testing situation.
Of course, that brings up the question as to whether or not the one-size-fits-all test is accurately assessing the capabilities of the students, which in most cases is a resounding NO. The vast majority of state tests out there assess low-level factual recall or rote, isolated skills via fill in the bubble/multiple-guess questions.
@1 Alternative education is alternative for a reason – due to family philosophy, life situations, learning styles, or a myriad of other factors (drugs, alcohol, abuse, poverty, homelessness, etc), the traditional school setting does not necessarily work for these kids. It shouldn’t take a genius to realize that a traditional testing scenario probably doesn’t work well either.
Sometimes the strings that go with the money aren’t worth the money.
@5 Like I said, traditional may not be best, but perhaps this particular strategy is not working.
@4, Lets pretend I’m lazy and only care enough to have read this post, do you have some data on their test scores. I am not saying alternative education is bad, only that maybe this incarnation of it is. It’s easy to get attached to a concept and ignore its implementation.
@6 And as I said, it shouldn’t take a genius to realize that a traditional testing scenario might not work in an alternative education setting.
First of all, you are making the assumption that these tests and test scores are both valid and representative of the capabilities of these students. This is just one measure – of dubious value, no less – that should be used when looking at student achievement, particularly in non-traditional settings where they are less likely to engage in the “test-prep” environment that has consumed so much of the public school system in this country since the misguided introduction of No Child Left Behind.
Secondly, if a student is taught a concept via less-traditional means (i.e more hands-on or experiential rather than paper-pencil recitation), do you really think that what they learned can automatically be reduced to a multiple-choice bubble on a standardized test? This is a mismatch of instruction to assessment. When instruction does not match the method of assessment, then scores are not always as high. Thus you have to decide if you value the learning or if you value the high scores, as the two don’t necessarily go together. If you alter the instruction to more closely match the assessment – in this case the MAP or the MSP – then you typically no longer have the alternative setting or delivery method that is valued by many.
Finally, for some kids, an alternative school is often their last stop after several years of struggling in another setting – or variety of settings – thus they frequently enter the alternative school setting several years behind. It is almost impossible to overcome that much of an educational deficit in the space of 7-8 months, particularly if there are other issues (addiction, poverty, abuse, learning disabilities, behavior) that need to be addressed. It takes time.
Kids are not the same and schools should not be the same. A one-size-fits-all assessment does not really fit all, and high test scores do not necessarily make a good school. High test scores have a greater correlation to the zip code than to anything else.
If they don’t like the conditions, maybe they shouldn’t take the grant.
@6http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.c…
This article links to the test scores for 06-09.
If you can’t apply math, reading, science, etc knowledge to different situations and environments, what the fuck is the point? Blame the fact that you’re filling out bubbles on a sheet all you want, but it does see if you can apply these skills.
If this is a problem, it leads me to ask – what exactly does this school teach?
A lot of people may not realize that while families can opt their kids out of taking the standardized tests, if they do so, those kids have a big fat zero put in for their test score — and that zero, and all the zeros for the other opt-out kids, are averaged in with the scores of kids who DO take the tests, to get a school’s “performance”. If kids in the school perform at about average on the test(s), but a further half of the kids don’t take the test, it will appear that the school’s test results are only about half of the average. Shocking! How terrible! But it’s just statistical legerdemain.
This is but one reason why mindlessly using test scores to judge how well a school is doing is dopey.
Great link, @9
And what did those test scores tell you – the teachers suck and the school is doing a bad job? Are the scores static over time, or are they showing a positive trend? Did you see the free and reduced lunch percentage – 40%? What information is missing from this score listing, i.e. do you know how many students were opted out from testing, which has a negative effect on the scores? Is there any indication how these students were performing when they first entered the school?
Did you also see the other information listed about the school, namely:
“District’s first alternative/nontraditional school started in 1969 by parents who desired a school that does not label children and which fostered collaboration rather than competition. There is significant parent participation in all facets of the school.
Focus is on learning by doing — natural, visual, hands-on learning in a context of safety, respect and personal responsibility with vigorous academics including world language and arts blended into core subjects.
All classes are ungraded and multiage, older students tutor younger students and parents work in classrooms, tutor and chaperone.
Students build or carve own boats, including a 40-foot Haida canoe, have also built scale model airplanes, hiked in the wilderness, ridden the range at a working ranch, learned to play and sing the blues.”
Given the option for a test-prep curriculum at a higher-performing school or more authentic learning experiences at this school, I know where I’d be headed. Test scores on their own give an incomplete picture of schools and students.
@12 The information you have in quotes reminds me of the interview Bill Murray gave in the movie Meatballs while posing as a councilor for the enemy summer camp to a local news crew. Of course, we all knew that was satire.
Stupid hippies want their own school and want the rest of us to pay for it,
yet when only 37% of 8th graders can pass the state’s already incredibly
LOW reading standards, they come here and try to argue that ‘reading’ tests
are culturally biased.
Sure they’re biased. They biased towards readers.
“parents who desired a school that does not label children and which
fostered collaboration rather than competition. “
That will help them in jail or in line at the unemployment office at least.