It looks like we can forget about calling them the Wake County school board majority for now.
As noted in today's article, four of the five members of the old Republican majority say the recent actions by board vice chairwoman Debra Goldman mean the coalition is dead when it comes to student assignment. They say that it will take next year's elections to bring about a new majority to implement community-based schools.
“Right now those who believe in forced busing and socioeconomic engineering have found a new ally,” said board member John Tedesco.
Members of the former majority are citing both the Oct. 5 resolution and Goldman's willingness to consider Kevin Hill's proposal to slow things down.
The only one of the five who might disagree that there's is still a majority on student assignment is Goldman, who did not return repeated requests for comment.
Tedesco, whose zone plan was killed by Goldman, continues to have the harshest words to say about her.
"People indicated they want major change," Tedesco said. "The Goldman-Sutton resolution and the Hill status quo proposal are designed to stop that change."
Tedesco noted that Goldman, while discussing the resolution on Oct. 5 that killed the zone plan, said "we have a lot that is working." He argues there's a lot that isn't working with the current assignment system.
But Tedesco isn't the only member of the former majority upset by Goldman's actions.
“We’re not a majority,” said board member Deborah Prickett. “We don’t have the fifth vote and she seems to be on the other side. It’s hard to predict what she’s thinking. I don’t know where she stands.”
"She showed a lack of commitment to her previous commitment that she made in the campaign," added board chairman Ron Margiotta.
The common theme from the members of the board majority, including Chris Malone, was skepticism over Goldman's statements that she voted against the zone plan because of the lack of base assignments and not being on the student assignment committee.
All four board members noted that the resolution that was passed didn't include either of those concerns raised by Goldman. The resolution was written by Hill and Keith Sutton.
Members of the former majority are talking about retaining Margiotta's seat next year and picking up at least one more seat held by the minority faction. This would mean they could move ahead without needing Goldman's support.
“What you really have now is four and four and one,” Tedesco said.
If all five incumbents win next year, you could have this same strained situation playing out until 2013.
Democratic board members aren't declaring that they have a majority. But they're saying a lot nicer things about Goldman.
Sutton said Goldman is acting in the bipartisan spirit of past Republican board members such as Bill Fletcher and Carol Parker who worked with Democrats on student assignment issues.
“Student assignment doesn’t need to be partisan,” Sutton said. “Student assignment has never been a partisan issue. Because it hasn’t, you’ve seen people come together and work across party lines.”
Comments
Poverty v. Culture in
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 13:08 — AngelaWPoverty v. Culture in Student Achievement
<><>By Walt Gardner on
If the role that poverty plays in student achievement was not already controversial enough, the debate is bound to become even more contentious as a result of renewed interest in the influence of culture on academic performance. The New York Times published a front-page story on Oct. 17 that traced the resurgence of what anthropologist Oscar Lewis called the culture of poverty (" 'Culture of Poverty' Makes a Comeback").
Although researchers have known for four decades that poverty and culture are intertwined, they shied away from the latter as an explanation to avoid being labeled politically incorrect. But as pressure has built to narrow the gap in performance between racial groups, social scientists are casting aside their reluctance and addressing the issue head on.
According to Harvard sociologist William Julius Wilson, an expert on ghetto life, culture is the way "individuals in a community develop an understanding of how the world works and make decisions based on that understanding." His definition is not an excuse for the undeniable self-defeating behavior of some ghetto residents. Instead, it is an explanation that needs to be given serious thought. Let's not forget that in 2004, Bill Cosby was harshly criticized for charging that poor blacks had themselves largely to blame for their situation by dropping out of school and for irresponsible parenting.
Part of the reason for the brouhaha is the existence of students who have come from poor backgrounds, where ghetto culture reigns, and yet have overcome these disadvantages to succeed. If they can do it, then why can't all students follow in their footsteps? It's a fair question. The answer is that there will always be exceptions to every rule. No racial group is a monolith. However, the argument that rugged individualism is the solution to the problem is an oversimplification. Poverty and culture are not destiny, but neither is rugged individualism assurance of ascension.
Asians serve as an example. Often referred to as the model minority, there are notable deviations from their overall academic success. Southeast Asian students, for example, post low standardized test scores, high dropout rates, and low college enrollment and completion rates. Education Week published a story that cautioned against stereotyping Asian students that is worth reading again ("Asian-American Students Struggling Under NCLB, Group Says," May 8, 2008).
Trying to disentangle the effects of poverty from those of culture may appeal to researchers, but ultimately it is an exercise in futility. Both play powerful roles in student achievement. It's far more productive for reformers to recognize their existence and seek ways to work within the parameters.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2010/10/poverty_v_culture_in_student_achievement.html
According to Harvard
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 14:04 — user12345According to Harvard sociologist William Julius Wilson, an expert on ghetto life, culture is the way "individuals in a community develop an understanding of how the world works and make decisions based on that understanding."
Those are the reason we don't want to build high poverty schools which reinforce high poverty culture.
They are complaining!
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 11:47 — Apexcitizen1Bob,
Not sure what your really trying to say in your post. Seems like your making excuses for their poor performance and specifically their inability to communicate an intellectual and articulate message. JT, RM and CM are so worried about their own re-election in (2012?) that their willing to write off 2010 completely. Plus it's really disappointing to see that JT, RM and CM are using the label "forced bussing" to describe their colleagues on the other side of the debate. I could be wrong but I don't think the other side has started labeling as "anti-diversity" yet. (Only talking about BoE members here.) Extremely unprofessional IMO. I'm being to hope their wait it out agenda seriously backfires on them. If not the 2011 election cycle the one after that.
So...
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 12:02 — Bob_SconceWhy do you think they're completely writing of 2010?
My point was that this is a bit of a fabricated story -- Keung and Goldsmith clearly called up the various board members and asked them specific questions about the former majority. They answered truthfully and then those comments are reported in the paper. You could do something similar by asking them all about abortion, for example, and have a newspaper story that says "a majority of the school board members said they oppose abortion." (or vice-versa.) Then people who read the article would say "Geez... Why is the school board getting into abortion," and write letters to the editor, and so on.
The board members, and specifically Margiotta, Prickett, Malone and Tedesco need to figure out what, if anything, they want to say and then stick to that script.
It's not about keeping their own seats -- as Malone said in the article, it's about trying to forestall change with the hopes of undoing the change to the assignment policy after the 2011 election.
As to poor performance, they (1) got rid of wacky Wednesdays, (2) moved the H6 school, (3) changed the policy regarding 8th grade algebra admissions, (4) removed diversity from the assignment policy and (5) undid some year-round conversions and are moving toward a more traditional-friendly approach. I agree that coming up with a new Student Assignment plan is basically back at the drawing board. But, that's only one thing -- I'm generally pleased with those other things.
You forgot about firing
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 12:54 — user12345You forgot about firing teachers so they could hire yet another lawyer
Well...
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 15:23 — Bob_SconceI don't know about firing teachers, but I strongly support hiring an in-house attorney, largely because inside folks are in a much better position to manage legal risks than outside counsel. While it might save money from the district's legal budget, it almost certainly will save money long-term on its litigation and settlement costs. That savings could easily translate into more teachers.
I respect your opinion and
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 15:58 — user12345I respect your opinion and if you think in-house lawyer is a good idea I wish they would get on with tasks like this and start saving money now.
I agree we do indeed need to
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 19:25 — woodstockI agree we do indeed need to fire some teachers. The lemon dance must stop. Bad teachers are killing our educational system and we have the teachers' unions to thank for that.
well you have 35 kids in a
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 21:04 — user12345well you have 35 kids in a class now and will be approaching 40 soon.
This is not mention the fact
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 06:28 — willynillyThis is not mention the fact that it is expected....no, required, that teachers write an individual lesson plan for each and every student in their classroom. This is called "differentiation" which is a buzzz word for (the real meaning here) since a student can't read or write just give them something they can do so they won't feel bad about themselves. Forgte that they will not be able to support themselves 5 or 6 years from now.
Going for 40
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 10:45 — user12345Remember to vote for Woodstock ...
As to poor performance,
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 12:15 — FSandYOUI would say most of those few other things, were no brainers and required little effort. The D Policy change from where I stand means nothing. It might be changed on paper, but the point of the change was to craft a new assignment plan based on not making diversity the center element. Since that new assignment policy could take 10 or 20 more years, I see it as meaningless.
They haven't done a thing for the "majority" of us and that's the bottom line.
Any assignment decisions
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 13:10 — danofncAny assignment decisions made from here on out will not use diversity as a factor. Isn't that the basic thing that the "majority" wanted? That's done.
You don't have to have zones to make changes.
According to the 08-09 distance analysis, 51,131 ES students attended schools by assignment and 16,839 attended schools by choice. Of that 51,131, 40,766 attended schools that were 3 radial miles or less from their home. 46,740 were inside of 5 radial miles from home.
The new board majority could set a "maximum radial miles" number, and reassign kids who are assigned to schools farther than that from their houses. It would have to adjust for age, because MS and HS students have to be able to travel farther than ES students.
They don't have to re-engineer the entire thing to change the facets of assignment that you complain about so much. For them to act like it's either zones or "back to forced busing and social engineering" is simply scare tactics.
For them to act like it's
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 13:25 — user12345For them to act like it's either zones or "back to forced busing and social engineering" is simply scare tactics.
They say that because they are not interested in our kids or improving the schools .... just in grandstanding ...the rhetoric is all about gaining power for powers sake ...
That is the problem? ... you
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 14:13 — user12345What is your problem? ... are you obsessed with diversity? ... most kids go to their local school now ... there was only a little diversity (5000 out of 140k) anyway ... you would think it was every parents #1 worry from your note ... but apparently what little we had was too much for some ... without diversity in assignments and removal of a few spot nodes, diversity is dead ... so you don't need to worry about poor or black children getting into your schools anymore.
How long have you lived here? ... I have lived here 30 years and I am not anxious about creating yet another politically driven assignment plan ... I have lived though enough politicians trying to make their name on assignment plans .... I want / demand achievement now ... achievement has too long taken a back seat to assignment policy ...
You have a great point
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 17:00 — willynillyYou have a great point here. In my 13 years in education I have seen every little thing come down the pipe....AVID, PBS (now PBIS), NCWISE, ABC(eye), etc etc. NONE of these things are designed to raise scores. They are inititives that costs millions and do nothing to bring up achievement.
Every year I start off my first day of seeing if my students know where an index and a table of contents are located in their texts. Generally, using a "scavenger hunt" in the text, I find that a huge number of students do not know the difference.
NCWISE cost taxpayers over a million (maybe MUCH more) and does NOTHING to help students....just a deterent for teachers.
Now NC has adopted a new tool for evaluating teachers. DPI made this thing based on another cost to taxpayers, National Boards. The new "tool" requires teachers to jump through hoops to act like an NBPTS Teacher and little proof that NBPTS teachers are any better than any other teacher. This is not to mention that I know, for a fact, that 2 counties in NC are using this thing in totally different ways. So much for an objective tool.
Where are Sonny and Cher when you need them......and the beat goes .......on.
Republicans seem to have a
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 09:21 — user12345Republicans seem to have a strategy of sitting on their hands when they have to work with others. It seems to be "all about me" with these guys. Hey ... we are losing $100M and need public support for $1B. Pull yourselves together and lead instead of pouting.
So....
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 10:53 — Bob_SconceOne thing that Tony Gurley pointed out at the Commissioners debate last week was that the $100M federal money was being spent on projects that the district intended to terminate when the stimulus funds left. IIRC, for example, part of it went into a teacher training program. Assuming he's right (and, that does jibe with my memory since I hammered Del Burns pretty hard on not directing the money into the classroom), then the $100M isn't really going to have the negative effect that are implied by a number with eight 0's.
It sounds like it's "all about me" because they're answering specific questions from a newspaper reporter and not, say, kvetching at a board meeting. But, that distinction is lost when somebody's reading an article -- "Oh, they're complaining again."
Personally, I think the members would probably do better saying something innocuous like "Debra has always contributed passionately to the board's affairs. We can't expect to agree on everything, but I look forward to working with her on the areas where we do agree." It does, however, take a lot of discipline to say that when a reporter calls.
Gurley is only partially
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 11:30 — KeungHui (author)Gurley is only partially right. About $48 million is stuff Wake was prepared to lose such as new pre-K teachers and math coaches. But $41 million that will be lost comes from stimulus money the General Assembly used to cover their share of Wake's support staff positions. That $41 million covers all the custodians and 60 percent of the clerical staff. Wake obviously can't get rid of all the custodians so they'll have to find moey somewhere to keep some of them.
More than a year
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 08:58 — Dove314Oy vey! BoE members -- this post is for you. Get over yourselves already. It is more than a year until the next election. Between now and then, there is much that could and should be the business of the BoE. Instead of spending your time lambasting each other in the press over your loyalties and hyperfocus on a single issue, perhaps it is way past time to lose the arrogance and affronted attituded and get on with trying to do some other things of value to the students of WCPSS during the next 12 months. Stop publicly pouting and planning for far-off elections. Show us what you can actually achieve when you put your minds to collectively working together on behalf of the students in the district.
On this we agree. Leave
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 09:14 — CaryCurmudgeonOn this we agree. Leave the pouting to the voters who have been disappointed. Writing off AN ENTIRE YEAR is unbecoming.
Add me to the list
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 09:30 — Apexcitizen1Agree...
They are acting very unbecoming. (Pouting childlike comes to mind also) Odds may very well be in their favor for next BoE elections but I could actual see this strategy backfiring for them. What a waste! One other observation...their starting to go viral call the other members "forced busing" supporters. I expect that from the circus around the BoE but not the BoE members themselves.
Sutton said Goldman is
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 07:43 — CaryCurmudgeonI wonder what difference, if
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 06:31 — willynillyI wonder what difference, if any, it will make. If a "new majority" is elected then more lawsuits will ensue, more outside entities will be come involved (AdvanceED), and the FEDS will investigate.
You are oh so right
Mon, 10/25/2010 - 09:19 — FSandYOUthis is why the only thing that ever changes in the public schools in Wake County is which school and which seat your child will occupy.
Good luck getting anything changed here and to those of you who gave a valued effort, thank you. To those of you who have done nothing but obstruct, may your children be the first on the 2012-13 reassignment list!
To anyone who thinks you can sit around for another year, go through another election cycle, start the process all over and ever expect to see anything change, please make an offer on our home. You obviously have more patience than we do. Yes we are in an undesirable year round school node, but there's so much hope for the future, right?
As to this current school board,
THANKS FOR NOTHING!