Here are some assorted issues raised in the NC SPIN show on Wake County's school diversity fight.
Was the socioeconomic diversity unpopular with the public, as maintained by John Hood, president of the conservative John Locke Foundation? He pointed to the higher turnout at last fall's elections and the unfavorable poll results from the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling and the conservative-leaning Civitas Institute.
"The policy that the Wake County school board adopted a decade ago has never been popular," Hood said. "It has always been unpopular."
But the Rev. William Barber, president of the state NAACP; and Chris Fitzsimon, executive director of the liberal N.C. Policy Watch, disagreed. They pointed to the district's calendar survey results showing that 94.5 percent of respondents were satisfied with their child's school.
"It's not unpopular, No. 1," Fitzsimon said. "94.5 percent of parents like where there kids go to school."
Hood argued that the district's survey wasn't scientific and representative.
Was Wake County only committed to maintaining diversity since the past decade under what Barber repeatedly referred to as the "McNeal Plan," referring to former Supt. Bill McNeal?
Barber said Wake took 30 years to carry out the Swann court ruling that mandated that Charlotte implement a busing program for diversity.
"Prior to that, the school board here said we'll hold on to neighborhood schools until we have a court order," Barber said,
Several former school board embers would strongly disagree that Wake wasn't committed to school diversity efforts until 2000. Pre-2000, Wake's policy was based on racial diversity and not socioeconomic diversity.
Barber also repeated the argument that only 3 percent of Wake's students are bused for diversity. As I've pointed out in the past, that figure is based on the lowest possible number.
You can get 3 percent if you only count students who are bused long distances for no other reason for diversity. But that figure doesn't include cases where diversity is not considered the primary factor, such as to fill a new school.
The premise of comparable demographics under the old policy 6200 was based on trying to keep schools in a general area with similar demographics.
Comments
Since when does the...
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 06:56 — bpuli9999JLF represent the "conservatives" of wake county? And why is there a quote from them in every single article? Looks like they are making this into some sort of a fund raising topic. Like always.
Since Hood was there at the
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 07:25 — KeungHui (author)Since Hood was there at the show so it made sense to quote him. Just like it made sense to quote Fitzsimon. I've noticed that liberals tend to complain that the Locke Foundaton is quoted too much while conservatives complain that Policy Watch is quoted too much.
If it was so popular they'd
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 06:55 — CaryCurmudgeonIf it was so popular they'd be doing it everywhere.
Argh...
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 15:09 — Bob_SconceHood is generally smarter than that - whether the survey was scientific or not is almost irrelevant. The more relevant point is that the question was "How satisfied are you with your child's school?," NOT "How satisfied are you with the district's assignment-for-diversity policy?"
When Mrs. Sconce and I answered the survey for our kids (one response for each child), WE said that we were mostly satisfied with the kid's school. It's ludicrous for Fitzsimon to turn our responses into our endorsement of the assignment-for-diversity policy. But, I guess he's far more interested in spin than in integrity.
The article also doesn't
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 15:38 — wireless200The article also doesn't include Mr. Hood's full response. That is, "are you satisfied with your kid's school" is a different question than "are you happy with the prior board's diversity, reassignment, and busing policy?"
Mr. Fitzsimmon, played fast and loose with this question acting as if the response to question/survey he mentioned was the response to the question about the prior board's policies.
I thought Mr. Hood made a good point. He asked everyone to look at the data. He's much clearer than even Tedesco (who has to play politics as well) when it comes to facts. I've never heard anyone on the other side able to go head to head with Mr. Hood on the facts. They may be dry and that's I suppose is whey they didn't let him say much. Doesn't make for good television. Say what you want about the current board, but prior boards had a strong aversion to using or releasing data to support their policies. Talk about a steel trap...
The Reverend Barber and Mr. Fitzsimmon tossed out names of this paper and that paper but if one reads the papers that are often mentioned they are clearly biased, written with an agenda, and often outright amateurish. I surveyed a few and was frankly suprised that these papers passed peer review. A couple of the papers from universities in NC were embarrassing to read. What professor would let their grad students publish papers such as those unless they're involved in these kinds of socio-political issues and agendas?
Reverend Barber and Mr. Fitzsimmon tried to have it both ways. First they point to a limited and yes unscientific survey and say citizens like the policies even though that wasn't question asked. In the next breath they say the percentage turnout for the current board was small. The number of survey respondents was fewer. They also trot out that old favorite of the N&O about the "Nationally recognized Wake County school system." At least the N&O backed off of that one when called on it.
Were any of the papers your
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 07:11 — shearertwWere any of the papers your referring to published out of UNCC, perhaps including Roslyn Mickelson as an author? Do some googling around that name and follow the tax payer dollars flowing around, it will begin to make a lot of sense about why a professor would let their grad students dribble out that garbage. FYI....Prof. Mickelson still believes that we should use race as a factor when determining student assignment. Embarrassing is the correct word, but money is also part of the picture. Don't be too surprised by the "peer review" letting this stuff get published. This part of the "education research" field is one big fish bowl that needs to be changed.
Gerald Grant had mentioned
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 07:22 — KeungHui (author)Gerald Grant had mentioned on Thursday's State of Things show that a new study undergoing peer review was going to be published soon that questioned Charlotte's academic gains.
You may not want to admit
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 16:48 — KeungHui (author)You may not want to admit it, but Wake was nationally recognized for its diversity policy. Now whether you think the national recognition is deserved is a different issue. Wake was getting national coverage before the arrests at the board meetings.
What is your definition of
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 18:15 — wireless200What is your definition of "nationally recognized?" I've previously asked for attributions and received no response. I've searched with Google and see that there's been a couple of articles, that were then quoted and promulgated by bloggers, the occasionally newspaper or wire story, and of course agenda groups. The N&O keeps its readership well aware of who those groups are.
I remember the N&O also used to phrase it as "the nationally awarded or commended Wake County Diversity policy." IIRC there was one award by a agenda group. I'm open - post your attributions that support any kind of widespread notice of the county's diversity policy especially prior to the brouhaha that passes for newsprint-selling headlines of the past year. Do a poll of people outside of NC. See how many have heard of it. I'd be surprised if it's no more than the poll's margin of error above 0%.
You may not want to admit it but "nationally recognized" used to be in nearly every N&O story but it's use has receeded. The phrase can only be counted on to appear with certainty in Mr. Ford's ramblings at this point.
You can choose to ignore the
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 23:49 — KeungHui (author)You can choose to ignore the various national articles and TV stories in places like The New York Times and Education Week. You can choose to ignore how Wake was cited by the U.S. Justice Department as a district to emulate in the Supreme Court case involving Seattle and Louisville. You can choose to ignore the visits by the various educators, education foundations and others who came to Wake over the past decade. You can choose to ignore the references by The Century Foundation and groups such as the Civil Rights Projects at UCLA.
You can't realistically say that Wake didn't have national recognition for its diversity policy. Critics like the Locke Foundation readily acknowledge that Wake had a high profile nationally for the diversity policy. They and other critics contend that the policy gave Wake a superficial appearance of success that masked problems in the distirct. Supporters of the policy disagreed.
Uh...
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 05:07 — Bob_SconceSo, I don't think there's much dispute that people outside of Wake County lauded the former diversity policy, but they were largely left-leaning organizations. I consider the folks who came to see what Wake was doing as neutral -- how many of them went back and implemented Wake's policies back home? And, IIRC, the DoJ's position was that Wake County was an example of people achieving "diversity" without looking to race; it wasn't an endorsement of Wake's program (and, even if it was, so what? It's a bunch of lawyers in the DoJ, not the Dept. of Ed.)
Absolutely right. Wake got a
Mon, 08/16/2010 - 00:19 — jeffrey1Absolutely right. Wake got a lot of national recognition for its diversity policy. However, I believe most of that recognition was due to the fact that Wake was by far the largest every to attempt an SES assignment model. Only about 60 districts in the nation have attempted such a model, many of them small like Cambridge, MA, or LaCrosse, WI. Once Wake started, it became the poster child for guys like Kahlenberg who criss-crossed the country heaping praise on Wake.
I think things got out-of-hand when more and more of that national recognition began to associate that assignment policy with so called stellar results. We now know that up until 2005-06, anyone with a pulse could achieve grade level status on North Carolina ABC exams, and that Wake consistently failed to outperform other districts in North Carolina during the 10 years the plan was in effect with respect to ED students and the achievement gap.
Overtime, the recognition turned into "Wake solves achievement gap using SES assignment model," and everyone jumped on the bandwagon. And to this day, that appearance of success is so ingrained in so many people, that it is rarely questioned outside of Wake.
Well, there was that Cube
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 18:22 — loriacWell, there was that Cube award. This is where Wake County paid to be a member, then applied for the award. Wake County didn't win, but they got some kind of honorable mention for applying - this is the one that Kevin Hill and Dell Burns used taxpayer money to fly to Austin to pick up. This counts as 'national recognition'. I'm glad the BOE decided not to rejoin. This whole deal was a supreme waste of money. I asked Kevin Hill how many staff hours were used to prepare the application (it was extensive, per the website), but never received a reply.
I agree. I answered that I
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 15:35 — jenmanI agree. I answered that I was satisfied because I do like my kids' schools. The teachers and admin have nothing to do with what I don't like about our system as a whole. But you're absolutely right taht Fitzsimon is far more interested in spin. Like I said in the other thread, the real issues weren't discussed. It was mostly just the 'talking points'.
I have yet to read or hear
Sun, 08/15/2010 - 13:36 — HJ2ss2I have yet to read or hear anything that would suggest that Mr. Barber actually cares about the children, their education, standard of care or working toward a better future. Am I missing something or is his focus really just on "busing and "diversity" (by numbers)? Not to mention high profile demonstrating.
Does he even know that this whole mess is about educating children?