BiggerPicture4Wake is joining Wake NCAE in backing the same set of candidates who would support current school board policies.
In a press release today, BiggerPicture announced it was endorsing Rita Rakestraw in District 1, Horace Tart in District 2, Karen Simon in District 7 and Lois Nixon in District 9. The group said "it is critical that we build upon the past 30 years of progress in Wake County; not undo it by instituting an anti-diversity policy.
BiggerPicture formed last fall to support conversion of Leesvile Road Middle to a year-round calendar. On the flip side, Concerned and Committed Leesville Parents has backed conversion opponent Deborah Prickett in District 7.
Here's BiggerPicture's press release:
BiggerPicture4Wake Endorses Candidates for Wake County Board of Education
RALEIGH, N.C. – Sept. 1, 2009 – BiggerPicture4Wake has endorsed Rita Rakestraw in District 1; Horace Tart in District 2; Karen Simon in District 7, and Lois Nixon in District 9 to fill the four openings on the Wake County Schools’ Board of Education.
The selections were made following a thorough review of the candidates’ credentials and in-person meetings to determine their vision for the future of Wake County Schools. “Like BiggerPicture4Wake, these individuals are committed to finding the best solutions for all Wake county students and their families,” said Rhonda Curtright, spokesperson.
“It is critical that we build upon the past 30 years of progress in Wake County; not undo it by instituting an anti-diversity policy. Rakestraw, Tart, Simon and Nixon understand this and are poised to tackle the hard work and many challenges the Board will face as it continues to fine-tune current policies to effectively and efficiently serve all children, county-wide,” Curtright said.
BiggerPicture4Wake encourages the public to educate themselves about the BOE candidates and their positions on issues that will impact the district’s future direction, and the financial ramifications that may result, according to Maria Mauriello, spokesperson.
“Taxpayers need to understand the importance of this election and how the results may affect their checkbook balance, as well as their quality of life in Wake County. BiggerPicture is urging everyone to be informed and exercise your right to vote on Oct. 6,” Mauriello said.
BiggerPicture is a community-based organization that supports common sense solutions that maximize efficiency and educational opportunities for all students in Wake County. Further information may be obtained at www.biggerpicture4wake.com.
Comments
Perry, What evidence do you
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 16:04 — jenmanPerry,
What evidence do you have that any of your candidates aren't 'status quo'? They are supported by the status quo, raise BIG money from the status quo elite and have said nothing to indicate what they would change. Actually, I think it was Karen Simon who said she would NOT change anything about YR or the magnet program. That's great to know that she thinks its ok for WCPSS to discriminate against magnet applicants based on where they can afford to live and what school they attend. And that its ok to offer those magnet programs in schools serving as base to people living in $400K, $600K, even $1M houses.
The Socio-Econ balancing policy has helped impoverished downtown and SE Raleigh schools immensely and that is truly a great thing. However, the same policy and its use in magnet criteria has hurt almost everybody else. Business leaders and Raleigh politicians see this as a great thing because it makes central Raleigh schools look good. Nevermind that its giving the shaft to everybody else.
Karen Simon would not change a thing
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 16:43 — g88ky07about YR/MYR/FYR or the magnets??
Wow, the nerve of some! She sounds like some of the others who are completely clueless as to what the children and parents are REALLY going through in the wake county messed up school system!
the brilliant "choice" of Wacky Wednesdays
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 13:57 — AngelaWso, how well thought out was this??? on a three school campus with three tier buses, two MYR's get out 2.5 hours early, the Traditional HS 1 hour early......do the math=
MS=12pm, ES=1:15, HS=1:28.....and these buses travel MUCH farther (read SE Raleigh) than 15 minutes to get BACK and pick-up high schoolers who are now waiting in the media center being supervised, hopefully by teachers/staff/ who should be attending the PLT's....not to mention the traffic from ES carpool now mixing with HS carpool and HS drivers, it will be a miracle if nothing or no one gets hit!
how's that working for everyone?
It's all such pure genius
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 22:50 — rr77rr99It's all such pure genius isn't it!?
I hear the teachers are taking bets onhow long this will last. Some say a year, some say two because Del has to "save face". They know this is a major screw up, but in order not to look so bad, they will keep it going for another year and come up with some reason why it is no longer needed.
Some real contradictions on their website
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 22:04 — ApexterThey have some major inconsistencies on their website.
In the section on Year Round Schools, they say:
"Fact
Twenty seven teachers opted to leave LRMS because of the year-round conversion. LRMS has received 100 teacher applications to fill those 27 positions. A true testament to the popularity of a year-round education. "
A few paragraphs later, they say
"Myth
A large number of teachers will leave LRMS if the calendar changes to year-round.
Fact
The principal states that only one current staff member has notified her that they will not return due to the year-round calendar."
So which one is it? One, or Twenty-Seven?
Incidentally, considering that WCPSS laid off ~1500 employees, I wouldn't consider 100 applications for an open position to be a glowing endorsement of the forced year round policy; I would think that a fondness for receiving a paycheck and being able to put food on your table might be a tad more of a motivator there.
...
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 18:58 — SideburnsFor crying out loud, Rita Rakestraw said:
There's no defending that statement. She is completely out-of-touch.
(And you're helping her, Perry? Good luck.)
For the truth on so called
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 19:06 — WhalerCaneFor the truth on so called MYR, you can see my post below.
The real issue is not mandatory year round, but how you pay for school construction.
The REAL issue is
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 20:37 — g88ky07MYR/FYR, on that particular issue, got news for ya'! It will also be a major factor in 5 weeks!
I have no doubt they will
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 23:31 — WhalerCaneI have no doubt they will be. Feel free to taunt, but to me it is not about winning or losing and doing a victory dance, but doing what is best for all of Wake County. That said, I'm confident come Oct. 7, you may wake up disappointed. I'm equally confident that even if you are ecstatic on Oct. 7, you will be disappointed by February, because whomever wins, at some point has to move beyond rhetoric and deal with reality.
Yeah, right.
Sun, 09/06/2009 - 11:53 — woodstockWho do you think you are kidding? Your business is to get candidates elected. You lose, your busniess suffers. You win and it leads to more business. You may have your view of what is best -- "coincidently" it is always a Democrat Party-mandated view -- but don't try to sell the idea that winning and losing means nothing to you. Just how gullible do you think people are?
It is clear that the status quo candidates you support and work for do not represent what is best for the students in Wake County. The policies they have implemented have led to decreasing graduation rates especially among economically disadvantaged students . It is a shameful legacy that can no longer be tolerated. There are better way to serve students; Prickett, Goldman, Tedesco and Malone offer the solutions we need for positive change in the Wake County School System. They are the candidates of choice on October 6, 2009
Line of defense for the children
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 12:20 — SDR256"...not about winning or losing and doing a victory dance, but doing what is best for all of Wake County"
I guess as parents we are so hopeful that finally we have a chance to have a WHOLE board who is focused on what will be best for Wake County CHILDREN, not administrators, their awards and how their resumes look in the eyes of national school organizations.
"No matter who wins, it will be different in February, and it will also be the same. WCPSS is like a big aircraft carrier, hard to move, but also hard to stop."
Even if you're right on this point, at least with a board on our side we have one more level of the solution working for us not against us. Also, I think people don't realize the amount of power the school board has.
I do know a number of Board
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:08 — WhalerCaneI do know a number of Board members, and no matter what you think of their policies, every one of them is dedicated to Wake County Children, not administrators. Anne McLaurin is probably the most caring, decent, selfless human I know, and we are lucky to have someone of her caliber willing to serve.
Being nice is not a qualification
Thu, 09/03/2009 - 07:26 — woodstockMcLaurin may be the most wonderful individual on the planet, but that is really beside the point. If she helped create and implement the ridiculous policies -- along with their manhy unintended consequences -- that students and parents must suffer through, then she is not fit to be a BoE member. Being a nice person is not a qualification.
"Anne McLaurin is probably
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:25 — SouthEastWakeMom"Anne McLaurin is probably the most caring, decent, selfless human I know, and we are lucky to have someone of her caliber willing to serve."
Not that I know her personally, I'll agree that that is true. The issue is that as a school Board Member it is her job to direct staff, question staff recommendations and to make decisions to ensure that every child in Wake County reaches their academic potential. The problem with the current board is they are focused on everything else but that (like healthy schools rather than successful students) - and Ms. McLaurin just goes goes with the flow.......
What About Parents
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:18 — JanisTangoMy frustration is the fact the a majority of the BOE members I have contacted have ignored me, not returned my calls and basically have indicated they think they know what's best for my child. They don't want feedback from parents. That was obvious during the CEM meetings I attended. That arrogance needs to stop!
Matter of Time
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 16:18 — user12345Maybe when you have 15,000 families who all want to give you input for $14,000/yr for a part time job there just is not enough time in a day to handle each parent personally ... I am guessing it would be better to start at the bottom with the teacher and work your way up .... so, I don't think it is arrogance just a matter of time ... btw, Obama has not gotten back to me either ...
Ron Called
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 17:55 — JanisTangoActually the only member of the BOE that contacted me was Ron Margiotta. Granted it was several weeks after I initially contacted him, but at least he responded. I agree it's unlikely that they have the time to answer every call or concern, but I really think they didn't want to hear what I had to say! If you are going to ride on a campaign of representing the people, I would have at least expected to hear from my representative (Patti Head) which I did not!
I hear you and agree ... I
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 21:20 — user12345I hear you and agree ... I am guessing I would get jaded and lock myself in my office with as many people as they have contact them ... it is good Ron responded ... he represents his district well ... maybe at least frequent mini-town halls meetings would let them get feedback without consuming their entire life one on one ...
...
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:13 — SideburnsHow much were you paid by her husband (Raleigh Mayor Meeker) to say that? Don't you work for him too?
It's a nice little status-quo cirlce you run, isn't it?
Sideburns,
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 22:44 — WhalerCaneSideburns, Congratulations. Nothing I have read yet on this site has been more insulting or ill informed. Let me just say I feel sorry for you for not having the opportunity to know what truely decent human beings Charles Meeker and Anne McLaurin are, and that apparently you have allowed cynisism to overtake your heart. It is kind of sad.
Irrelevant
Thu, 09/03/2009 - 07:37 — woodstockLOL funny stuff...and a little unconfortable witnessing someone sucking up to the boss.
Also, once again, being nice is not a qualification. Jimmy Carter is apparently a nice man, but he was also one of the worst Presidents this county has ever had to suffer through. Just being nice does not get the job done.
BTW, I am not sure how "nice" Meeker really is as he spends an inordinate amount of our tax dollars on his precious part of Raleigh inside the beltline. That's more selfish than nice.
Woodstock, I never used
Thu, 09/03/2009 - 12:12 — WhalerCaneWoodstock,
I never used the word 'nice.' Too mamby pamby. You are correct, that being 'nice' is not a qualification nor enough to get the job done, but being a caring, decent human being probably helps.
You obviously do not know me, but I have worked for plenty of candidates in the past who I would never say such things about. My comments are from my heart and have nothing to do with whom I work for, but being sick at seeing good people mischaraterized or run down. That's why it is hard to get good people to run anymore. I work to promote civility because it is important to find ways to communicate and move forward for our entire community.
As to spending an "inordinate amount of our tax dollars on his precious part of Raleigh inside the beltline." If you are implying The City is spending most of its tax dollars downtown, that would be factually incorrect. In fact over 85% of the City's capital improvement budget is spent outside of the beltline.
That said, the investments to revitalize downtown have been paying dividends, and dowtown continues to serve as an economic engine for our entire region even in these struggling time.
If it makes you guys feel better, you and sideburns can now continue the insults. I will tune them out.
McLaurin will never
Mon, 09/07/2009 - 14:35 — woodstockMcLaurin will never help "move the community forward until she realizes the the reassignment policy is NOT working. Many other school systems are serving ED kids much more effectively. How many kids must continue to be by failed by the status quo policies before she decides to see the light?
It is not uncivil to point out that McLaurin and the other status quo BoE members are not doing their jobs...they forget who their constituents are.
...
Thu, 09/03/2009 - 20:56 — SideburnsNow, now.. don't get all in a bundle.
I have met Ms. McLaurin and, I agree, she is very nice. I was merely pointing out (to those who might not know who you are or what you do) your level of involvement with Meeker, his wife and their buddies.
...
Thu, 09/03/2009 - 07:58 — SideburnsHey - Thanks woodstock. I couldn't have said it better.
I was busy finding my kleenex. *sniff, sniff*
"Deal with reality"
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 00:20 — g88ky07I'll give you that. If I wake up on October 7th "ecstatic" I will start playing the "education" lottery in hopes of the big payoff. I'm not delusional and clearly understand a lot of things have to line up for a "victory dance" to be had, but on that morning in February that you speak of, I'd much rather wake up with some fresh minds and new ideas to deal with that reality!
No matter who wins, it will
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 00:46 — WhalerCaneNo matter who wins, it will be different in February, and it will also be the same. WCPSS is like a big aircraft carrier, hard to move, but also hard to stop.
The real question is if who ever is elected if they will challange Del Burns and WCPSS admin or will they rubber stamp. Despite the claims of 'Status Quo", I'm confident Rita, Lois, and Karen will challenge them. Despite Rhetoric, all is not always what it seems to be.
Simon is in over her head
Thu, 09/03/2009 - 07:48 — woodstockKaren Simon is in way, way over her head and you know it and God knows anyone who ever heard her speak knows it. She is as inarticulate and clueless on the issues as they come. I saw her speak and answer questions at an event. I do not support her -- of course -- yet I was actually embarrassed for the poor woman. As for Rita and Lois, well, they are just wrong, but just as out-classed.
I'm confident the 3 ladies you list,
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 09:41 — g88ky07Rita, Lois, and Karen have their uppity Cary contacts to draw from the wells so we'll get to hear lots more from them in the next month. I'm also confident that except for their donors, the public isn't interested in their "status quo" positions! Rakeshaw is a Jr. Stan Norwalk and people aren't interested in more of that, Lois is all about the fundraisers and who she can hob-nob with next, no substance!
I'd say in at least 2 of 3 of these cases it IS what it seems to be and I'm sure enough voters see it too and aren't interested any longer!
Such anger and more name
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 10:47 — WhalerCaneSuch anger and more name calling. Obviously not much point in enagaging with you g8.
Don't confuse anger with passion!
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 11:10 — g88ky07Engaging with me isn't your problem, relating to parents obviously is!
I'll invite you to my g8 summit when we are up & running!
Please do.
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 11:48 — WhalerCanePlease do.
...
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 20:01 — SideburnsNice hedge. Ms. Rakestraw has no idea what is going on in Wake County schools and insulted every parent trapped in a system without choice with her comments.
The real issue is utilizing seats efficiently. Since you seem to know so much, how many seats has WCPSS left empty in the current YR schools?
Crickets?
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 20:53 — SDR256And the answer to Sideburn's question is...???....Tick tick tick... What is that I hear? The marching of a solution army? Uh, no.....crickets.
I do not know the answer to
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 23:25 — WhalerCaneI do not know the answer to how many seats at YR schools are unfilled, but I do know the answer as to why they exist. It is because of the combination of trying to give parents a traditional school opt out, and the desire to maintain the stability of the three year re-assignment plan. Another Damned if you do, Damned if you don't situation. Board of Education could fill those, and then hear more screams of MYR, or they could re-assign and here more screams about re-assignment.
Let's not forget that Board of Commssioners agreed to this plan when the last Bond was offerd. I'm not sure what they will do, but I don't envy anyone who has to make those decisions.
I do also know the solution. Call your County Commisionner and demand they fund construction to a level that traditional schools always remain an option. I would suggest that might be easier if they fought for a funding source other than property taxes.
Why is it not possible to
Tue, 09/01/2009 - 23:53 — JSBinNCWhy is it not possible to start by accepting some of the voluntary YR applicants that are denied year after year into some of the empty year round seats? Isn't that a win-win? Families wanting YR would get it, freeing up in a lot of cases - traditional seats, so the traditional schools won't be so over-crowded... translating to potentially more/closer seats for children at Title one schools or needing opt out seats - all without putting a shovel in the ground!!!
When I ask my CC about building more schools he/she asks me to ask my BoE rep when they are going to fill the seats they already have built in ALL the schools operating today!! :) (tee hee, but you know what I mean...)
I think there are somewhere around 2K denials for elementary YR seats yearly - because either the school doesn't need anymore children from a specific demographic, or the school potenitally loosing the applicant cannot "afford" to give them up. Even if HALF of those could somehow be placed... would it not help?
To me the first step in defusing some of the resentment and anger over Mandatory YR is to make better use of the Voluntary YR...
JSB,That is actually one
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 00:12 — WhalerCaneJSB,
That is actually one of the more rational and legitimate questions I have seen posted on this blog.
The answer is somewhat obvious. Higher SES parents tend to embrace YR, whereas lower SES tend to fear and resist them.
Here is a flawed but honest admission. Filling all those YR seats at this time of transistion with those who request them would essentially create the same SES imbalance that that the Board has been working so hard for over 30 years to avoid. It is not ideal.
As to the CC going 'Tee Hee, when are they going to fill the seats we have built', I'm confident it isn't a she, and they are political animals, not statesmen. who know exactly what they are doing for political advantage.
And therein lies the problem
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 01:20 — TrailerParkGirlWhile there are other components of the assignment policy (I'll take your word it's 15), the 40% F&R component is given more weight than the sum of the other 14 together. This leads to those who want VYR not getting it and those who do not want YR, including many lower SES, being forced into it not to efficiently use capacity, but rather to balance F&R rates. It is the same issue with who, lower SES and higher SES alike, gets to go to magnet schools and who doesn't. Yes, everyone gets to apply but your chance of acceptence depends entirely on your SES and the SES needs at your base school. Priority actually goes to students from non-diverse areas and those who chose to live in some SE diverse areas are essentially shut out. Think long and hard about what behaviour is being encouraged as a result. For the lower SES students some are lucky enough to be base magnet, but some who live near magnets are bussed to non-magnets.
It also discourages parental involvement, takes away the flexibility to do innovative programs like KIPP, takes away the possibility of forming community schools like those supported by Arne Duncan or create a vo-tech HS because the F&R may exceed the magic bullet (that hasn't proven to be so magical) 40%, which btw many systems in this country could never hope to meet because the district is >40% F&R.
Additionally, it has this community hyper-focused on F&R rates meaning some good schools get a rap, deserved or not, as being a place where a student cannot have a good experience because their F&R rate is higher. As your side of the issue has tauted that >40% F&R schools cannot be healthy, some people now assume there is an automatic correlation between F&R rates in a school and how well their child will be educated in that school. It must be the lower the better. It is a disservice to some schools, not to mention F&R students tainted as "unhealthy".
To me, the downsides of the 40% F&R being THE component that trumps all others combined are clear but the benefits are fuzzy.
More truth here. It is
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 01:34 — WhalerCaneMore truth here. It is one of numerous components and FNR is not given more weight than the others. If it was, we would not have schools above the 40% goal, and in fact we have a number that are. The truth is most re-assignment is far and away because of growth. I do not remember the exact number of reassignments due to FNR, but it is less than 5%.
That said, many of your points do have validity, including that many school districts can't meet the 40% FNR goal because their population exceeds that. That is one of the benefits of Wake County's merger in 1976.
As to being hyperfoccused to FNR, it has been WSCA et al who have made it a focus and a priority to eliminate.
There is a correlation between FNR and the environment for learning that exists in a school.
That said, we should also be open to pilots like KIPP. In the end, the FNR policy is just a goal. We should remain open to piloting other ideas, with out throwing the baby out with the bath water.
I do not remember the exact
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 15:27 — jenmanI do not remember the exact number of reassignments due to FNR, but it is less than 5%.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I question that number because I know that it comes from Growth Management and GM has a history of distorting the facts. Not lying, but reporting them in a way that suits their own purposes. I believe that all of the kids moved into a brand new school are considered to be moved for 'growth' reasons. Yet I would not consider kids bused to Laurel Park or Green Hope from downtown to be bused for growth.
Also, to add to JSB and TPG's comments, Chuck D himself has said that he would recommend eliminating YR entirely if the Supreme Court had ruled in WakeCares' favor. YR was sold to us as a way to save $ by increasing capacity and Chuck actually suggests that we eliminate it if he can't dictate who goes there? Fact is that the BOE hasn't given Chuck any direction or priorities for the 6 assignment criteria and they've left it up to him to make the 'value judgments'. We can see by his YR comment and his willingness to bus children 18 miles to increase F&R at a school that he values the SE diversity component above all the others.
.
The hyper-focus on F&R existed long before WSCA was formed
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 11:38 — TrailerParkGirlPerry,
The hyper-focus on F&R existed long before WSCA was formed. The school system decided on SES bussing and the 40% F&R component in the assignment policy how many years ago? Where I was educated no one seems to care what the F&R% is in a school probably because F&R are not labeled as causing unhealthy schools. They do care about meeting the educational needs of each child.
I started following educational issues here during the 2008-09 assignment plan process. The write up for the schools in the assignment plan produced by WCPSS Growth Management included wording similar to "this will reduce the F&R for the school from 38% to 32%" or "will increase the F&R for the school from 10% to 19% to make it more comparable with other schools." (That would be one of those schools Ms. Gill referred to as 'elitist VYR', which btw while it has good scores overall has historically had lower scores in the F&R segment.) The only other factor mentioned was capacity. I do not recall any of the other 13 factors being mentioned. In the 2009-12 plan, there was mention of continuity but I don't remember seeing that in earlier plans.
From the various actions and statements of WCPSS and BOE it seems that the other factors do not get anywhere close to equal weighting or focus with the F&R% factor. If other factors or even common sense got weighting why would they reassign F&R kids from a traditional higher F&R school where an above average amount pass EOGs to a YR lower F&R school where a below average amount pass EOGs?
I'm sorry Perry, but it is WCPSS that can't seem to see beyond the respective school F&R rates, because they are not interested in seeing beyond the school level to what makes sense for the individual student or seeing that SES balancing may not be a magic bullet.
As to the growth cause - I have tried to figure out how that calculated. If one new seat is opened, but that leads to a string of five or six reassignments how many of those are counted as growth and how many as not for growth?
How can KIPP be piloted while meeting the current F&R policy?
tpg, I have spent way too
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 12:00 — WhalerCanetpg,
I have spent way too much time already on this thread, but let me try to answer you question about growth. It happens because proximity is also one of the 15 criteria, so when they go to fill new schools, they try to slide students in part to keep bus rides down. There is a deputy superintendent that handles re-assignment whose name escapes me at the moment who can outline what those criteria are.
The F&R goal is actually not a policy, but one of numerous criteria in re-assignment, and we have a number of schools that do not meet the goal. Some moving on as high as 70%. Perhaps one of these can be a KIPP pilot. I believe the Goal was established about a decade ago when the Supreame Court ruled assignments could not be based on race.
Although I respect her service, I think Ms. Gill should have been more sensative in her comments and interactions with the public.
I do not believe F&R is a magic bullet, but do believe that going the direction of have schools and have not schools will make the job of increasing student achievement that much more difficult. In the end, I am not a educational expert or a school board member, but I do know the value to Wake County that making diversity a priority these past 33 years has been.
Goal or Policy
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 12:50 — TrailerParkGirlToo much time on thread - perhaps. Maybe more time spent reading Board policy 6200 (i.e. the assignment policy often referred to as the diversity policy) would be helpful.
Have and have not schools. Some, like you, assume schools with >40% F&R must equal have not (that's the whole basis for the F&R policy) and some, like me, believe schools with >40% F&R can equal 'have schools'.
> 40% F&R could be have,
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 13:55 — WhalerCane> 40% F&R could be have, but little indicates they will. I go back to the Charlotte Observer article from last weekend as an example. Or as Dorris Burke said, "I lived through seperate but equal. I'm not conviced it would be better the second time."
In the end, what every parent should want are good teachers, and we should do all we can to create environments where good teachers want to teach.
What about KIPP in a YR
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 08:58 — JSBinNCWhat about KIPP in a YR school!?? I've read at least some of the books (whatever it takes, work hard, be nice) about KIPP and one of the cornerstones is longer days, and longer school years... it seems like a natural fit would be to place a KIPP pilot at a YR school! We likely can't fund the longer school day - but the 11 month school year that naturally occurs with YR might be a good compromise.
Is there something in the policy books that prevents a magnet (either YR or otherwise) from having multiple "things" done to it? Can a magnet be a YR school? Another possiblity... even a modified YR calendar - if it's supposedly so much better for retention, etc - should we be considering implementing such things at schools with high F&R? Make some mini-magnet programs at YR schools like Green and watch what happens. I bet there will be more applicants of the right SES to drive that school back to where it was 10 years ago. Green used to be *the* YR school to go to when we first moved here, and now - not so much.
In theory it would also mean a 25-33% gain in the number of students the magnet school could accept in - which across all magnets - might be a decently good gain in students able to take advantage of the magnet program.
I agree with you that more MCWF (mid class white fam) tend to choose YR - it does work better (mostly) with the two working parent schedule, and there generall isn't quite as much concern from that demographic about the cost of track out care. I guess that's where it gets confusing to me - assigning kids from families that might find that a hardship in any way seems cruel. Assigning or forcing anyone into it is not fair - but particilarly cruel to those that can least afford the downstream affects that YR has on things like that. Policy supporters will tell you (us) that track out care is comparable to summer camp, look at what the City of Raleigh has to offer, etc - truth is, and I am absolutely speaking from experience here as we just left YR for a traditional magnet (with 55% F&R last year) and track out camp is challenging to find, the most reasonable ones price wise fill VERY quickly and are often located in locations that are not convenient.
The BOARD has the policy of no more than 40% F&R lunch - not WCSA... and there are schools that have been far, far above 40% for some time now with nobody doing anything to help them. I know Rome wasn't built in a day... but really - if it's critical to have less than 40% - why are there some schools left flapping in the wind? (I think it's because they have no power - political or otherwise - and their voices are lost.)
JS, I think you make some
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 10:58 — WhalerCaneJS,
I think you make some good points. The 40% FNR goal is just one of 15 criteria in re-assignments, and is a goal. My arguement is that it shouldn't be eliminated as a criteria because that will lead to more economic segretion.
I think you raise a number of issues and ideas that should be considered. Thanks for being reasoned and measured in your posts.
As to forced YR, I agree that is not an ideal option, but the issue becomes how to we pay for school construction to avoid it. Even though I would support doing more for that, there are plenty among the 70% of Wake's popluation with no children or grandchildren in school that want all YR.
Can a magnet be a YR
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 09:23 — SouthEastWakeMomCan a magnet be a YR school?
Yes, of course, a few run on Modified YR (Centennial, SE Raleigh). BUT.... Please remember, with the current BOAE(eR) and WCPSS Admin, that while magnets were designed to help poorer children get access to classes and activities that weren't available at the non-magnet schools or their families couldn't provide for some reason, they've morphed into tool for getting the ITB elite to stay in the public schools. Given the past issues with Lacey's calendar that I've read about here (didn't live here at the time), my guess is that implementing YR at an ITB magnet is going to be a stretch.
Can KIPP be a magnet theme?
Sounds great to me. but the YR part might be a stretch given that F&R's opt out of YR at a higher rate than non-F&Rs. My understanding is that the F&R families rely on their high school students to provide childcare during summer break. A YR calendar doesn't allow for that.
One of the issues with
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 10:50 — WhalerCaneOne of the issues with implmenting YR at an ITB school is they are not constructed for it.
Yes, please explain......
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 21:13 — SouthEastWakeMomThe new schools were not to be "constructed" as YR but "operated" as year round. There is nothing special or different structurally about a school that is year round vs. one that is traditional. The only thing they added was carts for the teachers when they converted the 22 schools out in the county. No reason why those couldn't be put in an ITB school. The only deal breaker, IMHO, would be no A/C - not sure if all the ITB schools have that. I would assume that the ones that have been renovated had it installed as part of their renovations.
IMHO, we're back to protecting the ITB elite so they stay in the public schools.
Please Explain
Wed, 09/02/2009 - 11:50 — JanisTangoI don't get the comment that the ITB schools are not constructed for YR? A lot of the schools that were converted a few years back were over 10-15 year old. I don't understand the distinction. Lacy was recently rebuilt on the same campus. Was it 'constructed' to be a YR school?