Members of the Wake County school board majority are getting more proof that their every word is being scrutinized by the opposition
Since the Aug. 10 board meeting, critics of the board majority have noted how school board chairman Ron Margiotta whispered "I didn't say that" into his microphone. The whisper was in response to speaker Susan Evans' claim that Margiotta had publicly said "he won't create high poverty schools."
The whisper was mentioned in a letter to the editor Saturday by Lettice Rhodes.
The point of contention is Margiotta's opening statement at the July 20 board meeting that "this board does not intend to create high poverty or low-performing schools in the new zone assignments."
In case that wasn't clear enough, his next sentence was "again, let me repeat that this board does not intend to create high poverty OR low-performing schools in the new zone assignments."
The statement was initially interpreted by some critics of the board majority to mean that Margiotta was offering a compromise. The reality is he was simply saying that the board majority isn't intending to create high poverty schools, not that it won't happen.
Margiotta's whisper couldn't be heard by those at the meeting. But it could be heard on television and over the WRAL feed.
This is the second time people have focused on remarks Margiotta made over an open microphone that weren't intended for public consumption. An issue was made over his "here come the animals out of the cages" remark at the March 2 board meeting.
Comments
Classy Guy
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 08:50 — jgegbgmgMargiotta is such a classy guy - wonder what idiotic comment he will make next! It's fun watching him try to run a meeting - Anyway, ever wonder why the chairperson of a committee is letting someone else (Tedesco) speak up on all issues - Maybe it's because he really doesn't understand what's going on with the system - He is in way over his head and before his term ends he will be asked to step down or volunteer to step down (sort of like Tedesco stepping down from his previous job / or maybe being asked to step down from his previous job) - Another thought about Tedesco - He must be mighty wealthy to continue on without employment - Or just maybe some on his Republican friends are supporting him - At this stage I wouldn't be surprised with anything about him - He's just a clown with a squeaky voice !!!!!!
Great Video
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 18:49 — HereWeGohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIoeuopiYfw
Great Video
I knew it
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 17:24 — user12345The statement was initially interpreted by some critics of the board majority to mean that Margiotta was offering a compromise. The reality is he was simply saying that the board majority isn't intending to create high poverty schools, not that it won't happen.
Of course not
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 18:20 — kbrooks500As long as the board wants to lay school assignment at the feet of parents in a zone plan with school choice the board will always be able to abdicate any sense of responsiblity for their policies creating high poverty schools. Pretending poverty and diversity don't exist doesn't make them go away. They can and will say, we didn't create those schools the parents chose them.
It means the Board does not
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 17:30 — starsonoursIt means the Board does not intend to create high poverty schools, I am sure prior Boards did not intend to create high poverty schools either. I have no idea how to determine a high poverty school, so it would be hard to create something that there is no clear definition of.
High poverty schools
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 18:03 — earlyeducatorHigh poverty schools are typically defined as schools having 70% or more students on Free and Reduced Lunch. The link below provides information and cites research about effects of high poverty schools:
http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/poverty/publications/high_poverty_schools_memo_lane.pdf
High poverty schools are
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 20:48 — jeffrey1High poverty schools are typically defined as schools having 70% or more students on Free and Reduced Lunch.
Then why does Richard Kahlenberg say that 40% is the tipping point - the point where schools begin apparently begin to suffer from the effects of too much poverty?
Why has WCPSS policy for so many years been to keep schools below the 40% threshold?
Or are you stating 70% because it is conveniently just a point or two above Wake's highest F&R school, thereby allowing you to claim that no schools in Wake are high poverty?
I didn't make up the
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 13:38 — earlyeducatorI didn't make up the number. I gave you a link to the information. You can choose to read it or not.
Kahlenberg has said 50-70%
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 23:02 — virginiadareKahlenberg has said 50-70% is the tipping point. I've never seen where he's said 40%.
Kahlenberg helped craft the
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 09:16 — CaryCurmudgeonKahlenberg helped craft the original policy. Richard Grant has pointed to the 40% number as the reason there are no "bad" schools in Raleigh.
I think Wake is around 32% overall F&R right now, and that number is increasing. So if we move the cap to 50%, does than mean that all those "high poverty" schools that have 40-49% F&R suddenly become "diverse?" And if our overall F&R hits 50% (Which is I think around where CMS is), do we raise the cap to 70% and say that schools in the 60's are then considered "diverse?"
Just arbitrary numbers.
I think so, yeah. I think
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 15:03 — danofncI think so, yeah.
I think you need to have the goal be a number that you can reach (or approach) with as little shuffling as possible. When the 40% goal was put in place, I think the district was at about 20%. I don't think it took too much shuffling at that time (of course I understand that probably depends on whether or not you were one of the shuffled).
Then, there were more F&R kids, more kids total, more schools, and it became a big mess trying to maintain the 40% so they let it slide a little.
Kahlenberg says 40% African
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 00:33 — jeffrey1Kahlenberg says 40% African American, and 50% ED:
http://books.google.com/books?id=9GwxXpOP738C&lpg=PR1&ots=ASgOhTHZEM&dq=kahlenberg%20tipping%20point&pg=PA112#v=onepage&q=tipping%20point&f=false
1) Ask him. 2) When the 40%
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 22:57 — danofnc1) Ask him.
2) When the 40% was put in place, I think it was a reachable goal. The growth made it much more of a hurdle.
3) Brentwood is almost 78%. It's over 40% LEP. In 08-09, they got 333 of their 404 students from a base assignment. All 333 of those students lived within 2 radial miles of the school. I haven't looked, but I bet their performance didn't set the world on fire.
Why does everyone talk of
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 07:05 — starsonoursWhy does everyone talk of growth and the increase in F&R lunches. During our growth period people were moving here because of the availability of jobs and moderately priced housing. Did these same home owners then apply for F&R lunches?
Go look at the numbers. The
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 07:20 — danofncGo look at the numbers.
The F&R population (%) increased during the growth period.
So am I the only one who
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 11:25 — starsonoursSo am I the only one who finds it odd that in a period of low unemployment and record new home sales, we also have an increase in F&R applicants? Logically it doesn't make sense. But then again the system is rampant with fraud.
Logically, job growth drives
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 14:07 — danofncLogically, job growth drives housing growth, which drives retail growth.
Retail growth requires people to work in those new stores, restaurants, etc., and that is where the F&R growth comes from.
Employed doesn't mean employed making $60k+.
Working a retail job does
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 14:21 — starsonoursWorking a retail job does not mean F&R. If the rate of F&R increased in the past year (with the current rate of unemployment and under employment) this would make sense. put during a time of prosperity to have an increase defies logic. Those retail jobs you mention are new jobs (or if currently employed) better jobs than the prior job. This would mean more income not less, the possibility of a double income family instead of a single income one, or 2 jobs instead of 1.
I don't think it is just
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 14:28 — CaryCurmudgeonI don't think it is just retail, I think there is an overall 'drag' effect. If a RTP company hires a senior engineer from somewhere else, then that drives the hiring of a portion of a person in construction, landscaping, teaching, police, fire department, retail, etc. A person working in any of those professions may qualify for F&R. If there is no growth, then there are no construction jobs. Many who work in that sector go where the jobs are.
Important to note
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 07:35 — g88ky07the "growth period" is long over and can no longer be used as an excuse.
Non-issue.
1) Unlike you, I have spoken
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 00:38 — jeffrey11) Unlike you, I have spoken with the man. His numbers are just taken from reports he has read from his cronies.
2) So if 40% is unreachable, what, in your opinion, is a reachable goal
3) My bad, there is one school over 70%, but many more that are dangerously close to the 70% stated by the original poster. I still suspect he used that number because it makes Wake look good.
I used the number because it
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 17:35 — earlyeducatorI used the number because it is in the research. I am a female, in case you are interested. Do you really think that having schools with 68% Free and Reduced Lunch "makes Wake look good"? I also find it interesting that some of you assume you know what I think about the issue, when all I did was provide readily availble information about high poverty schools.
You said 70%, but I could
Sat, 08/21/2010 - 18:54 — jeffrey1You said 70%, but I could not find that figure in the link you provided.
say what you mean and mean what you say
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 16:58 — prescott2no. Board members just need to say what they mean and mean what they say. His open letter to the community on July 20th is posted on the wcpss website. Margiotta is clearly heard on the WRAL feed disavowing the very statement contributed to him on the website. Oddly the main theme of his community newsletter was that it was time to "trust". huh???
Hmm...
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 15:25 — Bob_SconceBoard members need to start whispering things like "While I disagree with what this person is saying, I'm listening intently" or "This is a very interesting public comment period, don't you think?" or "isn't it wonderful that these Enloe students are so involved?" Perhaps "I feel your pain."
Perhaps...
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 19:40 — GreyhoundToNJthey could just start listening instead of note-passing.
LOL Do you honestly believe
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 08:53 — woodstockLOL Do you honestly believe the oppsition has not been listened to? LOL They repeat themselves so incessently that even I know their every argument and talking point by heart.
So Glad, Woody!
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 11:25 — bluedaisySo glad you are getting the words of the message, Woody! Now if we could just get you to see the forest..........
I think you're missing it
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 11:52 — Bob_SconceBased on that comment, I suspect you believe that your opposition is hearing your words, but dismissing them without evaluating them -- without really understanding your position. Further, I suspect that's why the "you're not listening" line is repeated -- you know the words are going into their ears; you just think they're being dismissed far too quickly.
Have you considered that you could be wrong? That maybe your opposition has listened and understands your point of view, but nevertheless disagrees with it, in good faith?
If that is the case, then if you want to change minds, you really have two alternatives: (1) change your viewpoint -- find an alternative that you're willing to get behind and argue for that, or (2) find more substantial evidence to back up your viewpoint.
"find more substantial
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 13:53 — xmarkspot62"find more substantial evidence to back up your viewpoint."
A 3-ring binder of the evidence to which you refer was presented to the BOE in March; it has been ignored, because it doesn't fit their ideology, plain and simple.
So...
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 14:40 — Bob_SconceMaybe I didn't phrase that correctly -- I meant "additional substantial evidence." In other words, give them something new. Don't just repeat what you said before.
What evidence do you have that the binder was ignored? It seems to me that the only thing you're going on is that the board hasn't changed its mind after receiving it. YOU are attributing that to the board ignoring the material, projecting that they did so out of ideology. Has it occurred to you that the board may have reviewed the material (or, alternatively, that they had already reviewed much of the material beforehand) and considered it, but ultimately decided not to do what you wanted?
Unless the binder contained information other than what those groups have been publishing, I've read a substantial amount of it, and it's not nearly as conclusive as your side is making it out to be. Further, it doesn't answer the fundamental question: If socio-economic diversity is the key to improving poor performance among ED students, then why are ED students in Wake County doing so poorly?
I'm not trying to argue over the diversity policy again -- I know the standard answer to that question ("because the previous board didn't push the policy hard enough and allowed higher-poverty schools to be created") and the response ("but ED performance is low even at non-high-poverty Wake schools.") Instead, I'm pointing out that the board's failure to do what you want does not imply that they're not paying attention to what you're saying.
If socio-economic diversity
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 16:05 — user12345If socio-economic diversity is the key to improving poor performance among ED students, then why are ED students in Wake County doing so poorly?
Do you need to ask? WCPSS is the world leader in affluent , White education ... we beast everyone ... but non-White / non-Affluent (Black, Hispanic, LEP, ED) get the leftovers ... I think the previous board was trying to borrow as much from the affluent / white community as possible by sharing the load with these other kids ... and yes they did not provide a world class education for non-White / non-affluent using the sharing method but it was all they could do given financial constraints ... the old board just borrowed a little too much and put a few too many non-White non-Affluent kids in the wrong schools and started a backlash that brought in the new board to end the practice and get them back into their own neighborhood. We have already seen poor minorities kids are locked out of math classes which keeps them out of college and how poor kids get a slim selection of AP courses of subtle discrimination that plague the system ... through in young teachers, high turn over, etc. why in the world would you think they had a chance?
Where do we
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 19:12 — user12345Where do we excel more than the state average? (hint: see 91% and 85%)
EOC
White
Black
Hispanic
ED
NED
Wake
91.00%
58.50%
66.40%
58.50%
85.80%
CMS
88.90%
64.70%
68.80%
64.70%
81.70%
Guilford
81.40%
48.50%
57.50%
50.10%
75.20%
Cumberland
79.50%
55.70%
68.60%
56.30%
74.30%
Forsyth
81.90%
45.10%
55.70%
46.20%
76.80%
Union
84.40%
59.00%
69.70%
63.00%
84.30%
Durham
82.20%
44.00%
47.40%
40.40%
64.50%
State
81.00%
53.20%
63.60%
58.00%
79.10%
You are conveniently
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 10:35 — NWRaleighMomYou are conveniently omitting CH-Carrboro school district. Wake's NED demographics is very similar to CH, so I would expect to see the similar scores. Wake's policies has nothing to do with NED achievement.
No conveniently ... first,
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 12:06 — user12345No conveniently ... first, is just CH is so small ... it is only 12k kids or 8% of WCPSS ... and second they invest 30% more per child than WCPSS ...
132%
The policy actually has much
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 10:45 — virginiadareThe policy actually has much to do with NED achievement. What studies have shown repeatedly is that NED kids score worse in a high poverty school than ED kids score in a middle-class school. If we had multiple high poverty schools, like Charlotte and others, with 10-20% NED kids in them, the NED scores would be much lower. Even Jenman's numbers showed this effect in some of the analysis she did on her blog. She reported that having balanced schools does help NED kids, but not ED kids as much. Again, the policy was not in place solely to advance ED kids, but to do the most for ALL kids.
WHich
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 20:11 — Bob_SconceEOC is that?
End-of-Course (btw, same
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 22:27 — user12345End-of-Course (btw, same results for End-of-Grade too)
So..
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 22:44 — Bob_SconceI knew it mean end-of-course; I was asking which EOC test -- you're saying all of them? Mind if I get your source?
np ... I typically use the
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 08:34 — user12345np ... I typically use the NC DOE site since it should be audited and uniform.
...http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/servlet/srcICreatePDF?pLEACode=920&pYear=2008-2009&pDataType=1
You are so Racist! How can
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 16:16 — starsonoursYou are so Racist! How can you write post like this? Do you stop and read the BS you write?
Probably Only if it's printed
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 16:27 — g88ky07in the Sunday blog regurg.
?
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 16:37 — Bob_SconceI admit to not reading the Sunday paper in a while. Are our comments reposted? I've seen excerpts of Keung's posts on occasion, but not the comments.
Bob -- Have you seen that twice
Fri, 08/20/2010 - 10:47 — virginiadareBob -- Have you seen that twice your comments have been printed at the top of the editorial page, above the cartoon? One was a comment from this blog, and the other a comment on an article about a different topic. I don't remember what days they were printed, but I don't think it was necessarily Sunday. Congratulations!
Isn't one usually in part regurg'd?
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 16:44 — g88ky07Maybe not. I use my occasional copy for dog training and oil leaks.
One more suggestion... If
Thu, 08/19/2010 - 13:22 — CaryCurmudgeonOne more suggestion... If you want their attention, be polite. If I stepped up to the podium and called the board a bunch of neocon segregationists who are taking payola from Bob Luddy, I wouldn't expect them to take what I had to say very seriously. They are people, after all.
Note-Passing
Wed, 08/18/2010 - 19:48 — HereWeGoMr. Chair needs to start note passing like Goldman and Malone or texting like JT.