Conversation on HCC, Part Two
For this part of the discussion, I want to reiterate a few things I said in Part One.
There are some parents don't believe that there could be that many children who are highly capable. To that I can only say that the feds, the state and the district all believe it is true and have allocated resources and services to that end. I note that the new McCleary budget includes extra dollars for programs like Sped, ELL and yes, highly capable.
There are some parents believe it's all based on a single test score in order to get into the program. That is not true and you can examine the application process and how the district's own committee decides on admission.
There are some teachers/administrators don't like HCC because some of their best learners leave the school after they are admitted into the program. One reason could be the loss of test scores. Another reason is the loss of students who help teachers drive the classroom by being generally engaged.
I can understand their unhappiness but it is not the right of a teacher or principal to decide what program parents want their children to be in for the best academic outcomes.
If your belief system on highly capable students falls into either of those two groups, you probably won't be interested in what follows.
This discussion is about changes to make the Highly Capable Cohort program more equitable and stronger. In Part Three, we can discuss the other two parts of Advanced Learning, Spectrum and ALOs.
I will base most of this discussion not around what is currently provided in HCC but around how to find and serve as many students who could benefit from the program. That's where the equity deficiency is and that's what needs the most attention.
That brings me to the Work Session in late spring called "Equity in Highly Seattle Schools Community Forum: Conversation on HCC, Part Two:
