Listening Session Takeaways
On Tuesday, I attended the first in a series of community listening sessions scheduled for this year. Like last year’s series, these are being hosted by Superintendent Ben Shuldiner.
The discussions were held in table-based groups with each table focused on one of three topics: academic rigor, school design, and safety & security. Each table had 6-10 community members and a senior SPS staff member present to take notes.
After about 45 minutes of discussion, each group shared its top takeaways with the full room of maybe 150-200 people.
For those with only a minute to spare, I’ll highlight the top few themes here. Farther down, I’ve listed out a more thorough summary of the feedback.
Top themes included:
Academic rigor: Requests for differentiated learning were plentiful, and they took many forms (HC services in neighborhood schools, special ed services co-located with HC services, a return of walk-to-math, etc.). Opinions were mixed about the new K-5 ELA curriculum, with some parents concerned about its lack of flexibility and others grateful for its increased rigor. The crowd was supportive of the ban on 1:1 devices in K through 2nd grades.
School design: Families at option schools value this choice immensely, particularly for the innovations that blossom there. Several expressed frustration at the difficulty of determining what options exist and how to enroll in them. Long-term enrollment and facilities planning was suggested as a way to quell concerns about program sustainability and closures.
Safety & security: I didn’t notice any consistent themes within this topic beyond two mentions of bus transportation not working well this year. Other comments covered tardiness alerts, single point of entry, visibility of trusted adults, and illnesses within classrooms.
More Detailed Feedback
For those who want the full experience, here’s the video of the table groups sharing out their key takeaways. This portion of the evening ran for about forty minutes.
Here’s an organized summary of the points that were made:
Academic Rigor
Several groups requested more differentiated learning, with some of these requests earning applause. Related appeals included bringing HC services back to neighborhood schools, and a revival of walk-to-math.
At least three groups expressed a desire for stronger rigor within special ed pathways. Two of these groups highlighted twice exceptional (“2E”) kids, explaining that parents today often have to choose which facet of their child to support–the facet capable of advanced learning, or the facet with special needs–because the services to support these are rarely co-located.
Several groups expressed concern over diminished flexibility during instruction time, especially in the context of the new K-5 Emerge! ELA curriculum, where reduced recess was a specific concern.
A roughly equal number of tables expressed optimism about the increased rigor and expectations in the new K-5 Emerge! ELA curriculum.
Two tables expressed a desire for transparency of achievement, with two separate suggestions. One suggested implementing class rankings so that students know where they fall compared to their peers. The other requested an end to the zero-to-fifty grading policy that bumps the grade of any middle or high school assignment up to 50% if it falls below that threshold. [For transparency, the second table was mine and this contribution came from me.]
A few tables supported the ban on 1:1 device assignments for grades K-2, with at least one requesting similar policies for 3rd grade and up. A few additional groups requested reduced reliance on technology.
One table expressed appreciation for the summer math acceleration program piloted last summer and for the math acceleration opportunities present in middle schools.
One speaker expressed disappointment that an entire classroom’s worth of students was unable to register for an AP course due to lack of space. I confess I didn’t grasp the details of this complaint, but I am certainly curious to know more!
One table asked for the return of a culture of high expectations. The speaker noted that academic expectation has not recently been a core value of SPS in the same way that other values have, citing equity as an example.
One table expressed frustration over the low volumes of AP offerings at some schools.
Another speaker expressed that the lack of textbooks at SPS is “horrifying.” This earned audience applause. Someone at this table reported that their kid’s first exposure to a textbook was in 10th grade.
One speaker earned laughter by saying, simply, “More homework please!” She explained that she wants this for the habit building it creates, more than for any specific subject-related learning.
School Design
Option school families bubbled up a set of concerns unique to their schools:
Several tables expressed uncertainty over the future of these schools, and specifically concern that option schools may not remain open.
One table felt that option schools are “pitted against” neighborhood schools for funding and enrollment.
Another table asked the district for a clear definition of what it means to be an option school, in the new environment of expanded choice.
A few groups touched on the theme of district outreach and communication for special programs being opaque. This came up in the context of option schools, HC, and special ed pathways. Speakers said that it’s difficult for families to understand their options.
Many tables expressed gratitude for choice schools and dual language schools. Families value having these choices.
Several groups expressed gratitude for the flexibility of some classrooms—especially those at choice schools—to innovate with curriculum. They’d like to see good ideas generated in this way shared more widely across SPS.
A few tables were pleased with the clarity of waitlist movements last spring, and with the expansion of student movement within the district.
One table expressed concern that families are leaving specific schools or even the district generally because of uncertainty related to closures.
One table suggested adding differentiated or popular programs within underenrolled school buildings as a way to help balance enrollment numbers.
Several tables asked for long term planning around building & maintenance or enrollment. In the context of a long-term enrollment plan, one table suggested building a strategy to woo families back from private schools.
Safety & Security
Several tables pointed out that bus transportation is not going well this year.
One speaker expressed appreciation for trusted adult presence and visibility outside schools during pickup/dropoff times, for safety. This table also said that the single point of entry was working well.
One table mentioned that transferring “problem” students between different schools is disruptive.
One speaker asked for more timely communications about tardiness and absences. This table also expressed a desire for communications in the family’s home language. The speaker said that call-in translation services can take up to 90 minutes to provide a translator!
Another table expressed concern about sickness in classrooms, even suggesting that parent volunteers could be present to check kids’s temperatures before they enter the classroom.
Final Thoughts
Two tables shared a takeaway that transcended the meeting’s three categories: They indicated that they’d like to see more efforts to get increased K-12 funding from the state legislature. The room met this suggestion with applause in both instances.
Shuldiner spoke up to explain that district staff (with the exception of himself) is not allowed to advocate for funding, but that the community in the room tonight was more than welcome to take up this cause.
Thanks to everyone who came out to share their thoughts with the district. It was a lively crowd! It’s always energizing to see the care that families and community have for Seattle students and our public schools.
If you’d like to join the next session, it’s happening on Tuesday, October 27, 6:30 pm-8 pm at Robert Eagle Staff middle school. No RSVP required. See you there!