Sign up to receive our emails

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Supreme Court maps out exit strategy in school funding case

by 1 Comment

This week the State Supreme Court issued another ruling in the ten-year-old education funding lawsuit known as McCleary.

At this point in the long-running case, the Court is trying to figure out whether the new education funding plan enacted in 2017 meets the State’s “paramount duty. . . to make ample provision for the education of all children” under the Washington constitution.

Because the new plan isn’t fully implemented by the Court-imposed 2018 deadline (by the State’s own admission the plan is completely rolled out by 2019 – one year later), the Justices opted to keep jurisdiction and continue the $100,000-per-day sanctions against the State.

But that’s not why this new opinion is a critical one. In the 46-page ruling, the Court resolved several complex legal issues that could have extended the dispute for many more years, and narrowed the State’s to-do list down considerably. Here’s how they did it.

1. The Court blessed the legislature’s school funding plan – In the 2017 legislative session, lawmakers enacted a plan that overhauls how we pay for schools, with the aim of ensuring the state – not local districts – pick up the bulk of the tab for teacher salaries and other components of basic education.

The Court held that, when fully implemented, the new funding plan “will achieve constitutional compliance.” The Court’s endorsement of the new plan means the legislature will not have to go back to the drawing board and rewrite the law. And that moves everyone closer to the finish line.

2. The State’s funding formulas are constitutionally sound – one of the more complex aspects of the case involves funding formulas. The State relies on a “prototypical school” model to determine how much money to send to each district, then leaves it up to those districts to allocate funds accordingly. But plaintiffs sought a different formula – one that would require reimbursement of actual costs for all 295 school district (that’s 1.1 million students across the state).

In siding with the State, the Court held the prototypical model is an “evidence-based” formula that supports the “actual costs” of the program of basic education while giving districts the flexibility needed to meet local needs.

The reimbursement model proposed by plaintiffs did not define a precise dollar amount, and by plaintiffs’ own admission would have required more time (and more legal briefs, more hearings, etc.) to gather data from each school district. Again, by resolving this issue in favor of the State, the Court moved the case further along to closure.

3. Achievements unlocked – basic education’s components are now funded – There’s a bundle of required components rolled into what’s commonly-referred to as “basic education.” The Court analyzed these one-by-one and determined that each discrete element is now adequately funded. Again, this finding helps bring the case to a close, as the legislature will not have to revise these complex formulas.

Exit strategy – While the Court recognized the State’s substantial investments in schools, the Justices took issue with the timing of the plan. Put simply, the State missed the mark by one year. And that’s why the Court kept jurisdiction and ordered the State to figure out how to implement the funding sooner – by September 2018.

But given the complexity of the issues, and especially considering plaintiffs’ push to expand the scope – and by extension the duration – of the case, the Court’s ruling suggests the Justices very much want a solution and closure.

Now it’s up to the legislature to figure out next steps and report back to Court by April 2018 with a plan.

We’re almost there.

Elected leaders react to State Supreme Court ruling on education funding

by Leave a Comment

The State Supreme Court handed down an important decision yesterday in the now ten-year-old school funding lawsuit known as McCleary.

In their ruling, the Justices mostly gave their constitutional blessing to the new education funding plan enacted in the 2017 legislative session. That complex plan overhauls how the state funds schools, with the aim of ending years of over-reliance on local levies to pay for basic education.

The ruling – The Court held that the plan meets the state’s constitutional requirement to amply fund schools, but took issue with the legislature for missing a court-imposed deadline by one year. Because the plan as written will not be fully implemented until 2019 (the Court had imposed a deadline of 2018), the Justices retained jurisdiction and will continue to impose a $100,000 per-day fine.

What happens next? – The Court ordered the state to report back in April 2018 – the end of the 2018 legislative session – on its progress speeding up implementation of the plan. Right now various options are being floated around to meet the Court’s deadline.

Here are reactions to the decision from elected leaders:

Gov. Jay Inslee

“I’m encouraged the court recognized the incredible progress we’ve made toward fully funding basic education. As the court noted, the plan the Legislature adopted, but for the timing, will meet constitutional requirements.”

You can read the rest of Gov. Inslee’s statement here.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal

“The Supreme Court largely affirmed the state’s position that most of the mechanisms for full funding of basic education are in place. I agree with that. As the Court wrote, the state “has made significant progress” toward that goal. . ..

I applaud the Legislature’s work. They have substantially increased basic education funding during the past three biennia. . ..

But I don’t believe the work is done.”

You can read the rest of Superintendent Reykdal’s statement here.

State Sen. John Braun (Centralia) – budget writer in the 2017 session and member of 2017 education funding negotiating team

“Providing students with the support they need and deserve required us to solve a generational problem with a generational solution, which resulted in a historic funding infusion for our schools. The Legislature brought this situation on itself by shirking its responsibility to public schools for decades. Over the past five years we have demonstrated that only by making education our top priority could we pay for schools in a way that works for students, teachers and taxpayers. Judging from today’s ruling, our way also works for the court.”

You can read the rest of Sen. Braun’s statement here.

State Sen. Christine Rolfes (Bainbridge Island) – incoming chief budget writer and member of 2017 education funding negotiating team

“We are very pleased that the Legislature and the Supreme Court are in strong agreement that the state has made significant progress on basic education policy, and that some important work remains. Many lawmakers, myself included, have had conversations with our school districts since the 2017 session concluded. We know some steps need to be taken to ensure they have the flexibility and funding they need to provide students with the best education possible and in the fairest way for taxpayers.”

You can read the rest of Sen. Rolfes’ statement, along with a statement from Sen. Andy Billig (Spokane), here.

“What do you want this Court to do?”

by Leave a Comment

The Washington State Supreme Court recently held an important hearing about progress in the long-running education funding case known as McCleary.

Here are three main questions the Court tried to resolve:

Question 1 – It’s clear a lot more money has been allocated to schools. Is that enough to end this case?

Both the state’s attorney (Alan Copsey) and the attorney for plaintiffs (Tom Ahearne) were on the receiving end of many questions about whether the State has fulfilled its duty under the Washington State Constitution to make ample provision for the education of all children.

State’s position – The State argues, and previous rulings from the court have agreed, that “ample provision” means funding the formulas set out in a law passed in 2012 that overhauled our state’s education system.

The State points to recently enacted budgets to show it has either met or gone well beyond those formulas. So, over half of the state budget now goes to education, and by 2019 public schools in Washington will see an unprecedented $4.6 billion in spending. In fact, over the next four years the state will invest $7.3 billion in new spending on our K-12 schools. State Senate staff estimate that by SY 2019-20, Washington will rank 5th nationally in state funds per pupil.

Plaintiffs’ response – Funding increases notwithstanding, Plaintiffs believe the legislature should engage in more fact-finding to figure out, and then reimburse, actual costs for every school district (that’s 295 districts). Note that some justices focused mostly on the narrower issue of whether the legislature could speed up its rollout of the new teacher pay system to meet the court-imposed 2018 deadline.

Why this matters – If there’s still no agreement on how to measure “ample,” and if as Plaintiffs’ attorney suggested there should be more fact-finding (or, as the state characterizes it, “moving the goal posts”), this case could drag on for many more years. Other states are instructive. In New Jersey, school-funding litigation first filed in 1981 continues to this day.

Question 2 – How can we bring this case to an end? – The justices in their questions sought specific recommendations from both parties about how to resolve the case.

State’s position – The State offered two solutions: dismissal or continued oversight through 2019 to ensure implementation of the plan that passed out of the legislature in 2017.

Plaintiffs’ response – Attorney Ahearne struggled to set out a clear remedy, prompting several pointed queries (emphasis added):

Justice Wiggins: “Mr. Ahearne – I’m not sure what you think we should do. . .. Do you think we should remand this . . . to take evidence and make a finding of fact as to what’s ‘ample’? I guess I just don’t know, especially in light of the fact that I think is undisputed that a great deal more money is going into the K-12 education system now, but I’m not sure. So, what is it you think we should do to second guess or recalculate?”

Justice González: “I still don’t hear you answering the direct question: ‘What do you want this Court to do?’ Not repeating what you think the shortfalls or the problems are, but tell us specifically, ‘Court, I want you to order this, that and the other thing’ so that we know what the request is, so that we can decide whether to grant it or deny it.”

And the consensus among veteran Olympia reporters covering the case? The justices are frustrated with both parties.

Question 3 – Can the Court make these types of fine-grained policy decisions? – Whether they realized it or not, some questions from the bench show just how ill-suited courts are at choosing which policies are best for the state’s 1.1 million students. One exchange between Justice Mary Yu and Copsey about a new provision to help attract and retain teachers shows why:

Justice Yu: “Should I be concerned about the state adding this regionalization measure to the salary formula? I mean – I just have to say that – at a common-sense level – that doesn’t make any sense to me. . ..”

Copsey – “This is a policy choice the legislature has made. The idea is to put every school district on equal footing. . ..It was an attempt at equity – at fairness – to give every school district the money it needs to fund teachers. . ..The constitutional question is not is it the best policy judgment.”

Have we lost our vision? – Courts are well-equipped to resolve issues of access in education, such as whether students with disabilities are entitled to an education alongside their peers. But when it comes to policy, the wheels of justice (still) turn slowly. That means every back and forth between the legislature and the courts about policy choices (even those tied to funding) inevitably lead to analysis paralysis that’s not conducive to building a world class school system.

State Schools Superintendent Chris Reykdal recognized as much when he launched an ambitious long-term plan for Washington’s schools earlier this year. In his proposal, Reykdal acknowledges that after many years slogging it out over funding, we’ve lost sight of the big picture (emphasis added):

The goal of Washington’s public education system is to prepare every student who walks through our school doors for post-secondary aspirations, careers and life. To do so, we must embrace an approach to education that encompasses the whole child. In the ongoing struggle to amply fund our schools, we have lost this larger vision. The challenge to amply fund schools to the satisfaction of the Supreme Court is not the final goal – it is merely the first step in a much larger transformation that will propel Washington state’s K-12 schools atop the national conversation in quality, outcomes and equity.

School board elections – almost there

by Leave a Comment

We’re just days away from the November 2017 general election. School board candidates across the state are out campaigning, meeting voters and learning about the issues that matter in their communities.

Back in July, Eastside Education Network sent “Meet the Candidate” questionnaires out to every candidate who filed to run for school board in the districts we cover.

Our questionnaire is one of our most popular features here at EEN. It’s a simple, effective way for voters to learn more about the candidates running for this important office, and for candidates to have a platform to share their views.

Below are all the responses we have received so far. If you don’t see your school board candidate(s) listed, reach out and ask them to respond. You can assure him or her that we’ll publish every response we receive, right up until election day.

And of course, please remember to vote!

Hugh Gladner/Bellevue School District

Cassandra Sage/Lake Washington School District

Anita Damjanovic/Lake Washington School District

Amy Cast/Northshore School District

Jackie McGourty/Northshore School District

Bob Swain/Northshore School District

Sherry Krainick/Northshore School District

Lori Oviatt/Riverview School District

Stuart Lisk/Riverview School District

Gary Fancher/Snoqualmie Valley School Disrict

Melissa Johnson/Snoqualmie Valley School District

Tavish MacLean/Snoqualmie Valley School District

 

 

State PTA adopts ambitious agenda for 2018

by Leave a Comment

Approximately 200 delegates representing 134,000 members from across the state recently attended the Washington State Parent Teacher Association (WSPTA) 39th annual Legislative Assembly in Tacoma, Washington. The body adopted several positions for their existing legislative and public policy platform.

Same event, new focus – WSPTA Legislative Director Nancy Chamberlain, who organized the assembly, said she wanted to make this event different from past years. In addition to passing resolutions which guide advocacy work, Chamberlain also sought to “educate the delegates on all the issues.” This way delegates would be better informed voters during the assembly as well as knowledgeable advocates when they return to their respective schools.

In the morning assembly, delegates attended brief presentations to learn about the issues up for consideration. This was followed by class offerings with panel members from outside of PTA leadership, including Washington state legislators, school board members and leaders from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. All offered advice on how to be better advocates or inform members about new laws.

Resolutions and issues – What makes the WSPTA process unique is that issues and resolutions are brought forward by members themselves, so the final product reflects a bottom-up, grassroots effort.

“It gives the PTAs at the local level a little more clout when the individual school districts, principals, school administrator or building realizes that the PTA is not just popping popcorn for a carnival but that are actually advocating for the same things that the principal needs, the school district needs and the superintendent of the school district needs,” said Teri Davis, WSPTA Vice-President. “We are all working together for the same things.”

Resolutions adopted:

  • Mental Health Needs for Children
  • Trauma Informed Care
  • Increasing Access and Affordability of Post-secondary/Higher Education Degrees and Certificates
  • LGBTQ+ Inclusion

Legislative issues adopted (in alphabetical order):

  • Addressing the Teacher Shortage
  • Best Practices for School Meal Policies
  • Career Connected Learning, CTE and STEM
  • Dual Credit Equality and Support
  • Equity for Highly Capable
  • Preventing and Mitigating the Impacts of Gender-based Violence
  • School Construction and Class-Size Reduction

From Chamberlain: “A few of our issues that we are looking at … are already bills in the pipeline and we are excited to be able to take a position on.” These include best practices for lunch policy, as well teacher shortages.

See 2018 WSPTA Supported Issues for entire positions on issues.

What happens next? – Delegates will return their schools to share information about the newly-adopted legislative platform and resolutions with their local PTA chapter. This helps PTA members advocate effectively for students not only in their district but across the entire state of Washington. For example, members often testify in Olympia during the legislative session in support of bills furthering the aims of the voter-approved platform.

“People think of PTA as the local PTA at your school and you might have 100 members or so. They don’t realize that as a statewide association we have over 134,00 members,” Davis said. “We represent the voices of those members and the children across the state. It is a different perspective when you put it into the big picture overall to see how we are working and what we can do.”

Cami Brix is a junior at Inglemoor High School in Kenmore, where she is a writer and editor for the Nordic News student newspaper. As an EEN contributor, Ms. Brix shares the student perspective along with research and writing support for ongoing EEN projects. On October 20-21 she attended the Washington State PTA Legislative Assembly in Tacoma and filed this report.

Meet the candidate: Anita Damjanovic

by Leave a Comment

Anita Damjanovic

Anita Damjanovic is running for election to the Lake Washington School District school board (position 3). Her response to EEN’s candidate questionnaire is below.

For more information about Anita Damjanovic

email: [email protected]

website: http://www.anitaforschoolboard.com

phone: 872-222-7633

What was the lightbulb moment that made you decide you wanted to run for school board (election or re-election)?
I have always been a passionate advocate for public schools. When I heard about Ms. Bernard retiring, I decided it was time to run. I knew that there would be other community members who would undoubtedly step up, but looking at my sons’ and my students’ smiling faces convinced me that rather than wait on others, I needed to step up myself. Having been in the classroom for the implementation of NCLB, Common Core, several different standardized assessments, new graduation requirements, and various technology initiatives, etc., I have valuable insight and first-hand experience that is currently lacking on our school board. I want to share my knowledge and help improve our schools for all our students.
What work or other experiences can you point to that qualifies you for the position?
I am a teacher entering my 14th year in the classroom. I started teaching in Louisville, KY at an elementary school immediately upon my graduation from the University of Louisville. Soon after that, I moved to Chicago to pursue my doctorate in Romance Languages and Literatures. While in Chicago, I taught at several universities, most notably Northwestern University and University of Chicago, my alma mater. After completing my Master’s in Teaching Secondary Education, I started my K-12 career teaching at a charter high school. In Washington, I taught middle school and high school courses, and worked on improving student outcomes and educational experiences in the choice program where I teach. I also taught at Redmond High School for a year, ultimately resigning my position in LWSD to avoid leaving my students without a teacher only a few months into the school year should I win a seat on the school board.
What are your ties to the community and how do you give back to it?
My family is a multicultural immigrant family. We are first generation citizens of the United States, and we are fairly new to the Pacific Northwest Area. After my husband and I completed our studies, we intentionally chose the Eastside as our future home after seeing that it is a strong community that values education and hard work, values we share. We are looking forward to growing roots and raising our sons here.
What does your district do well to help improve student learning? What’s one thing your district can do better to improve outcomes?
Having had an opportunity to work for the district, I speak from personal experience when I say that LWSD encourages teacher collaboration: co-planning, co-teaching, and teaching mentors and coaches all provide opportunities for teachers to develop strategies for student individualization leading to more learning. Even at the building level, teachers work together on development of common assessments and establishing student growth goals, resulting in better instruction and better educational outcomes for our students.

We know that students learn best when they feel comfortable and safe. In the last decade I have seen more and more students suffer from anxiety and depression, which often results in absenteeism. The students’ mental and emotional discomfort, and their frequent absences both have a strong impact on their learning. I would love to see us take a more proactive approach on these issues and attempt to address them more intentionally at the local level.
Parent engagement is vital to successful schools. What can your school district do to improve meaningful family engagement, especially for families that find it difficult to engage or don’t see much value in it?
I believe our district has put a lot of effort into community outreach in the last few years, but we can always do more. For example, right now we do not invest enough into our vocational education programs, and we still emphasize college as the best path to long-term success. Creating a more robust vocational education program would allow us to reach the parents who value career training, as well as build a stronger connection between the district and area businesses. Ultimately, I would love to see us consider vocational education programs akin to those offered to students in Europe: education and paid training for all students enrolled, without any value judgments.

“It is time for this case to end”

by Leave a Comment

The Temple of Justice: Washington State Supreme Court

Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson recently updated the State Supreme Court in two legal briefs (see here and here) on the State’s progress funding education as part of the Court’s oversight in the long-running McCleary dispute.

Today the State Supreme Court will hear from lawyers on both sides of the case in oral arguments scheduled to last about an hour.

Here are key takeaways from Ferguson’s two updates to the Court:

Massive increases in school funding – Ferguson argues that with passage of three state budgets since 2011, along with a new 2017 law to overhaul how we fund schools and pay teacher salaries, the state has increased education spending by record amounts and has fulfilled its constitutional obligations. From the briefs (emphasis added):

  • “The Legislature has doubled state K-12 education funding since this Court’s 2012 decision. . .. The massive increase in funding supports numerous policy improvements and fully implements the educational reforms this Court endorsed in 2012.” (July 31st brief, p. 1)

  • “The legislation enacted in 2017 implements a new system of compensation that allocates state funding to support the full cost of salaries for staff.“ (July 31st brief, pp. 8,9)

  • “The legislature has increased funding for K-12 education from $13.4 billion in the 2011-13 biennium to $26.6 billion in the 2019-21 biennium – well beyond what enrollment and inflation would have required.” (Sept. 8th brief, p. 1)

State budgets versus local control – Ferguson addresses confusion around repeated claims that some school districts – even with the state’s record investments in education – need more money.

Under Washington law, the state funds education allocating dollars using an agreed-to model (the “proto-typical schools model”). But under our system of local control, it’s up to each school district to figure out how to best spend the allocated dollars. That’s because what works in Spokane may not work in Bellevue, and what students need in Kirkland might be different from students in Pasco.

According to Ferguson, Plaintiffs in McCleary rest their claims on the untenable premise that the State is obligated to reimburse every local expenditure. From the brief:

“Under their [the Plaintiffs] model, the State would be obligated to pay whatever amount of money each of the 295 independent school districts has expended. This is not a model for financial or educational accountability, and it has not been mandated by the Court.” (Sept. 8th brief, pp. 4,5)

Legislature, not courts – Plaintiffs, and more recently other advocacy groups, have argued for the adoption of new and different policies for how we pay for schools. Many of these proposals would require an overhaul of the state’s taxation system (e.g., adoption of a capital gains income tax, closing certain tax preferences, or a state income tax). But as we all learned in Schoolhouse Rock, the legislature – not the courts – is where laws are made – and Ferguson makes this point directly in his brief (emphasis added):

“The State does not in any way discount the value of information received from advocates for education. . .. But no such proposal – even an excellent one advocated in the course of litigation – automatically becomes an element of the State’s program of basic education or establishes a constitutional requirement. . .. Amendments to law should be accomplished by lobbying the legislature, not the Court.” (Sept. 8th brief, p. 35)

State is committed to funding – Although a recent poll showed over half of likely voters had never heard of the McCleary case, passions among those involved run high. At times that’s resulted in needlessly hostile and divisive rhetoric, including Plaintiffs’ attorneys comparing state legislators to segregationists and Nazi propagandists. But any final solution to McCleary necessarily requires trust that the legislature’s commitment to education will continue, as it has since 2012. From the brief (emphasis added):

“The time has come in this case for the Court to trust the commitment made by a co-equal branch of government, a commitment that is accompanied by unprecedented increases in funding for K-12 education over a course of years, and by a history of steadfast adherence to the deadlines committed to. . .. The State is in compliance. No further remedy is necessary. The Court need not retain jurisdiction any longer. It is time for this case to end.” (Sept. 8th brief, p. 42)

Meet the candidate: Tavish MacLean

by Leave a Comment

Tavish MacLean

Tavish MacLean is running for re-election to the Snoqualmie Valley school board (position 1). His response to EEN’s candidate questionnaire is below.

For more information about Tavish MacLean

email: [email protected]

website: http://www.macleanforschoolboard.com/

phone: 425-415-4493

What was the lightbulb moment that made you decide you wanted to run for school board (election or re-election)?
I had been thinking about what greater positive impact I could make in the community beyond my work coaching sports and leading Cub Scouts, and a friend pointed out the open position on the school board.  This was the opportunity I’d been looking for – to be able to make a positive impact for ALL kids across the Snoqualmie Valley.  I’m running for re-election because I have a lot more to give our school district, with the benefit of 4 years of knowledge and experience.
What work or other experiences can you point to that qualifies you for the position?
My work experience in Marketing and Finance, with a business degree (MBA) have given me the tools to manage people, priorities and budgets, as well as experience motivating teams and measuring progress. In my first term, I helped form and refresh our District Strategic Plan and pushed for stronger measurements on the District Scorecard. I also had the vision, leadership, and ability to collaborate with fellow board members to support building a new elementary school and a new high school to accommodate growth and provide excellent learning environments for our kids.

As a father of 3 boys, I love seeing kids learn, practice, and accomplish things they never thought possible. My role as leader of a local Cub Scout Pack required strong engagement with both kids and parents with diverse backgrounds. I recruited strong parent leaders to ensure a vibrant, engaging Pack that continues to flourish today.
What are your ties to the community and how do you give back to it?
I’m the current Vice-President of the School Board.  I also volunteer with Boy Scouts and the Mt. Si Lacrosse Club.  Over the past 11 years I’ve coached little league and soccer teams, served as Den Leader and Cubmaster in Cub Scouts, and as an Assistant Scout Master in Boy Scouts, coordinating many high-adventure trips.  I’ve taught Junior Achievement at Snoqualmie Elementary and spoken about career paths in Marketing at Mt. Si High School.
What does your district do well to help improve student learning? What’s one thing your district can do better to improve outcomes?
Our district has made great strides over the past 4 years. We’ve improved our graduation rate from 77% to 92%, launched and expanded the AVID program to prepare more kids for college, implemented rigorous evaluation & development programs for teachers & principals (TPEP), improved attendance and reduced class sizes across the district.

There are still many things we can do to improve student outcomes. One thing I’m excited by is the ‘alternating block’ high school schedule being adopted in 2018/19 that will provide more flexibility for electives and post-high school planning while distributing homework over alternating days. In addition to the new schedule, we’re evaluating later school start times this year.
Parent engagement is vital to successful schools. What can your school district do to improve meaningful family engagement, especially for families that find it difficult to engage or don’t see much value in it?
Our district is fortunate to have great parental involvement in our schools. Our PTSA support is strong and we’ve seen growth in programs like Watch D.O.G.S (Dads of Great Students) in our elementary schools. It’s an easy way for dads to engage by volunteering to help just one or two days over the course of the school year. Our activity booster clubs like Band and club teams like Lacrosse have also received strong family engagement.

We can improve by encouraging parent engagement in middle and high school – finding ways to utilize parents’ talents and professional experience in our classrooms so our kids see the link between the subject matter and the real-world application of it.  I’m encouraged by the steps we’re taking to invite parent participation in career fairs as speakers, involvement with Senior culminating projects and as 9th grade interdisciplinary project experts.

Meet the candidate: Hugh Gladner

by Leave a Comment

Hugh Gladner

Hugh Gladner is running for election to the Bellevue School District school board (position 5). His response to EEN’s candidate questionnaire is below.

For more information about Hugh Gladner

email: [email protected]

website: https://votegladner.com/

phone: 425-765-1747

What was the lightbulb moment that made you decide you wanted to run for school board (election or re-election)?
It was not a light bulb moment as much as a series of events happening in our district. I grew up in this district, and the lack of community involvement and increasing apathy needs to be fixed. I have two children in the district and I want them and their friends to have the same experince I had. That is not happening.
What work or other experiences can you point to that qualifies you for the position?
I have been a volunteer in our community for over 28 years. Mentored several several students. Worked at Jubilee REACH, a non-profit organization in Bellevue that has partnered with the BSD to work with at-risk students.
I have led and been on several boards and understand what community collaboration looks like.
I have no personal agenda other than being on the board. Not using this as s stepping stone.
Firmly belive each student is different and we must support the Whole Student.
What are your ties to the community and how do you give back to it?
Grew up in the district: Bennett elementary, Highand Junior High, Interlake High School (’84).
Volunteered on several different organizations in Bellevue to support the community and the Bellevue School District.
My work at Jubilee REACH gave me a first hand experience on the greater needs of the child and their family. Worked with several principals, the BSD cabinet and teachers in the district with a hands-on approach to help the students and teachers achieve goals.
What does your district do well to help improve student learning? What’s one thing your district can do better to improve outcomes?
I think for advanced students the district does a wonderful job with AP (Advanced Placement) classes and encouragement to take advanced classes. But if you are a student that struggles with placement testing and is not AP ready, there are not enough resources and/or interest to help students who might need a different style of learning.
Parent engagement is vital to successful schools. What can your school district do to improve meaningful family engagement, especially for families that find it difficult to engage or don’t see much value in it?
This is one of my major talking points. The communication and lack of transparency in the district is a real concern. Several parents have written and called to discuss open dialog with no return message. Topics such as: bullying (at an all time high), parent involvement, transportation, special needs students. Because of this volunteer hours are down year over year and fundraising to the foundation hit its all time lowest.

Meet the candidate: Jackie McGourty

by Leave a Comment

Jackie McGourty

Jackie McGourty is running for election to the Northshore School District school board (position 1). Her response to EEN’s candidate questionnaire is below.

For more information about Jackie McGourty

email: [email protected]

website: https://www.votemcgourty.com/

phone: 425-522-3253

What was the lightbulb moment that made you decide you wanted to run for school board (election or re-election)?
When I realized that, instead of hoping that a strong, passionate, committed person would step up to fill this role, I should be that person. I knew that my interests, experience and background make me well qualified to serve the district, and I knew that I would love the opportunity to serve the community. But I had also never run for office of any kind, and felt that someone who had already been directly involved with Northshore schools would be a better choice. When a clear, better choice did not seem to be stepping forward, it became clear to me that it was time for me to step up and be the force for good that I wanted to see.
What work or other experiences can you point to that qualifies you for the position?
I have over 30 years experience as a scientist in both academics and the biotechnology industry. I am an Analytical Biochemist and most recently served as Director of Analytical and Formulation Development in a Seattle biotech company. This has provided me with skills in: trouble-shooting and data analysis, management (as a supervisor and department and project head), staff development support and team-building, personality and conflict management, contract and protocol negotiation and preparation, budget preparation and negotiation, and project management. I was also able to teach briefly at the college and community college level, and raised two children of my own while being intimately involved in their education. So I have experience in teaching/training/mentoring as well as curriculum preparation.
What are your ties to the community and how do you give back to it?
I have lived in the Northshore School District for 25 years. It is where my husband and I have raised our family. During my scientific career, I was involved in mostly scientific pursuits and outreach with periodic volunteerism as a scientist at the Pacific Science Center and with my alma mater, but also participating in fund-raising walks and campaigns for various disease research funds and a WTA trail work crew. Since 2015 I have also become involved with several activist organizations and have been working to become involved in local community governance.
What does your district do well to help improve student learning? What’s one thing your district can do better to improve outcomes?
I believe Northshore School District has done impressive work to present and implement policies that are aimed at making sure every student has the resources and the environment they need to succeed in school Their new Diversity and Equity policy is testament to their commitment to improving outcomes for those students who have been least served. Their progress on providing expanded hi-cap and special needs resources is also commendable. Of course, there is still far to go before the district is truly providing equal support to all students. One thing that I think will go a long way toward a truly equitable education in our district is something the current board is already tackling – getting an independent assessment of the status and source of inequities and implementing policies that target those issues, such as making sure every student is assessed for capabilities and disabilities so we know how best to serve them.
Parent engagement is vital to successful schools. What can your school district do to improve meaningful family engagement, especially for families that find it difficult to engage or don’t see much value in it?
I would imagine that not many parents have the luxury of being able to take time during their day to interact with the board or attend extra meetings. So outreach is critical, and it needs to happen at the schools, so that the board, administration, teachers, are easily accessible at times that accommodate families. Sometimes persistence can pay off, so perhaps if we reach out to parents on a regular basis, even just by mail or sending surveys home with students, asking for input and suggestions, and keeping them updated on how we have acted on their input, we can convince them of the value of their participation.