Wake County school officials announced today three changes for public comment signup that will go into effect for Tuesday's school board meeting.
Potentially the most significant change is you will only be allowed to sign yourself up to speak. You won't be allowed to sign up other people.
This means that if you want to be among the first speakers that you'll have to arrive early. If you're not early you could have to wait until the end of the meeting to speak.
Speakers will also no longer have to list their address and phone number on the signup sheet. They'll only need to include their name and town or city.
The final change is that people will be asked to put their voucher seat number on the signup sheet. School officials say it will make it easier for them to find people who may be in an overflow room.
You can still sign up to speak if you don't have a voucher.
"These changes are in an effort to make signing up for public comment faster, more efficient and equitable," according to a school district media advisory.
Comments
Ever sign up to speak in front of the legislators?
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 21:31 — nancyncGo ahead, have someone try to sign you in - it won't happen.
I think it's perfectly normal for a governing public body to require the person who wishes to speak actually sign themselves in. Imagine that, put your own name down!
I guess everyone expects you can do as you please in public meetings, not only in your behavior but now you're complaining you have to sign your own name to speak?
How pathetic and whiny this has become, even moreso than before. Where are the adults??
The Flaw in the Plan
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 22:47 — civesorbisterrarumI actually tend to disagree. It makes sense that you should have to sign yourself in to speak, obviously. However, there are a large number of people who simply can't do that. The two most prominent groups are students (who are in school when sign-ups start, and sometimes there after the board meeting starts) and working parents (who have students to feed). This is a double whammy for families in which both parents work. Let me ask you, which family is more likely to have both parents work: The rich family, which stands to benefit from the new plan; or the poor family, which does not?
As far as the students are
Tue, 08/10/2010 - 15:01 — red_balloonAs far as the students are concerned, I don't know if it makes a qualitative or quantitative difference. We know the student representation is near unanimously from the magnets. We know the number of magnet applicant students. We know your position on 'diversity'. In fact, this applies to both sides. Unless it is a new agenda item, I doubt we are going to hear new thinking or from a new person.
The BOE should dispense with public comments and have an "Abuse & Accolades" time.
If it's that important to you
Tue, 08/10/2010 - 07:34 — g88ky07you'll find a way to get there. That's how L-I-F-E works!
Public comment period
Tue, 08/10/2010 - 04:32 — jeffrey1Public comment period generally starts ay 4:00pm and speakers must be signed up 10 minutes before. A majority of high schools end around 2:30pm so there should be ample time for students to speak at board meetings.
Regarding two parents working, I think you will find that a high percentage of middle income families have two working parents. It's only anecdotal evidence, but I look at my middle class neighborhood, and I cannot think of a single family on our street that does not have two working parents.
Every post missing the big point
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 10:06 — bluedaisyFolks - the BOE made a policy change without due process. I don't care which side of the fence one is on, this is indeed a policy change without a vote. Is no one concerned about that?
?
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 10:44 — Bob_SconceFirst of all, it's not a policy change -- WCPSS policies are enumerated here: http://www.wcpss.net/policy-files/
There's no requirement that the board approve every microbial change in how the district conducts its business. That's why it delegates authority to the administration. And, there's no evidence that the administration has violated due pricess.
I read it
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 10:55 — bluedaisyI read it - I disagree. Any time a board restricts public comment, when they have a public comment policy, should be written in that policy. But since its OK by you - what other policies are you willing to have them change without due process? You'd be screaming if it was the old board doing this.
Huh?
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 12:55 — Bob_SconceThese changes don't restrict public comment. People are as free as they were before to talk. Heck, if anything, not having to list your address encourages comment.
I suggest that you may want to brush up on Due Process- - it doesn't have the meaning it appears that you think it has.
As to what I would do, you clearly don't know me very well.
NOw you know that NCAE will
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 04:32 — aquaman4life68NOw you know that NCAE will not come out and say something about this. I mean, come on, you know better than that. I'm sure they have Jim Hunt ranked up there right under God. Since he was the education governor, they will not find fault in anything that he says.
Yeah Aquaman, I know. But
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 10:23 — CaryCurmudgeonYeah Aquaman, I know. But if I was a teacher paying them dues, I'd be pretty mad about my profession getting trashed and not having them speak up.
I love how flimsy the first
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 18:02 — Andrew95I love how flimsy the first amendment becomes once one considers someone who is not on their side of the argument. God forbid anyone touch any freedom of republican protesters, right? But the second someone speaks out against something you support, they should be shut up. This country was founded on the idea that you can say anything you like, and anyone listening has just as much a right to plug their ears and wait it out.
Why don't you try getting on
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 21:03 — CaryCurmudgeonWhy don't you try getting on a plane and telling people you are carrying a bomb on board, let us know how that works out for you.
Pfft...
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 19:11 — Bob_SconceThis county was founded on the idea that all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. It certainly was NOT founded on the idea that people can say anything they like -- the 1st Amendment wasn't even enacted until 1789, and, although its meaning has evolved over time, it certainly has never meant that you have the right to say "anything you like" and force others to "wait it out." The Board can, as a matter of law, put all sorts of restrictions on the public comment period. None of what people have proposed here would prevent a protestor from speaking at a board meeting about students assignment or anything else related to the schools' business.
Promises
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 14:12 — HereWeGoThey campaigned on “I will listen to parents”. So much for promises.
I'm a parent
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 15:01 — Bob_SconceThey listened to me.
Not sure what requiring people to sign their own name to the list has to do with listening, or are you just carping out of habit?
The expectations was ALL
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 15:43 — user12345The expectations was ALL parents not just donor parents.
So...
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 16:27 — Bob_SconceWhat evidence do you have that they're not listening to all parents? You cannot say "Well, the board didn't do what parent A wanted," because parent B might have wanted just the opposite. As Kevin Hill has said, "the fact that we don't do what you want doesn't mean that we're not listening."
In any case, you have to admit that these changes to the public comment period do not change who is being listened to.
Based on what I've seen of
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 16:32 — CaryCurmudgeonBased on what I've seen of the public "comment" sessions, most of the speakers certainly were NOT contributors to the campaigns of majority members.
The post above concerned
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 16:51 — user12345The post above concerned "listening" not "speaking" ... speaking is what the people at the podium do while the members are suppose to be "listening" (some like Goldman spend the "listening" time passing notes and whispering)..
I'll agree that some board
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 18:02 — CaryCurmudgeonI'll agree that some board members do not always appear to be listening. And I can't blame them after they sit through hours of hearing the same message from the same people, all with a generous helping of abuse. Seriously, when was the last time a speaker brought up a substantive new idea?
I have always found that holding someone's attention is easier if I'm not telling them something they've already heard, and if I'm speaking to them respectfully. If I got up to the podium, started pointing my finger at board members and was rude or condescending, then I would not expect them to pay much attention to me. If I went over my two minutes and was using someone else's time, then I would not expect them to pay attention to me. And if I lied to them about how long I would speak, then I would most certainly not expect them to pay attention to me.
The right answer here is to follow protocol and close the public hearing after 30 minutes. If the hearing is limited to 15 speakers, then perhaps only those who really have something to say and can say it professionally will sign up.
I agree ... this seems so
Tue, 08/10/2010 - 12:10 — user12345I agree ... this seems so simple ... 30 minutes of public input ..10-15 speakers (2 minute talk) ... maybe once a school year to speak if there are others who have not spoken ... BOE listen to abuse for 30 minute and moves on ... they can ignore the folks, text, whisper, pass notes to get through the 30 minutes... just get it over and move on ... they really don't want to hear it but should make the appearance of getting input ....eventually, people will understand that the time is useless and won't show up.
I can listen and pass a note
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 17:04 — Duhhuh666I can listen and pass a note and whisper at the same time...Humans are capable of doing more than one thing at a time.
Next TIme
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 21:39 — HereWeGoThe next time you want to say someting important to one of your children have them pass notes and whisper while you are talking and see if you think they are listening.
they seem to be able to text
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 23:05 — CaryCurmudgeonthey seem to be able to text and listen at the same time.
John T
Mon, 08/09/2010 - 23:08 — HereWeGoSo can John T. He is always texting during school board meeting.
Well To Be Precise
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 21:28 — fiveblindmiceit was founded on the idea that all white male landowners were created equal. It was long, long after 1789 before it got expanded beyond that.
But we digress.
Andrew95, if the N&O doesn't
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 20:16 — DrActualFactualAndrew95, if the N&O doesn't like what you write(say) in the post they delete it, people can mark the "abuse" column and censor what is free speech to someone else. Decorum in a public setting has its boundaries to which we all must abide in order to maintain civil discourse.
The rule I'd like to see
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 22:04 — ApexterThe rule I'd like to see added is to restrict speakers who are not Wake County residents. Let's make it 3 lists:
1. Wake County residents speaking about agenda items,
2. Wake County residents speaking on non-agenda items, and
3. Non- Wake County residents.
I agree. Let them speak,
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 07:52 — CaryCurmudgeonI agree. Let them speak, but only after all Wake County residents have had their chance.
Oh that's a goooooooooood idea
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 13:10 — g88ky07Absolutely they should come last AND only get to complain once per school year!
online sign-up
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 17:43 — stepbystepI'd like to see the board use online sign-up in addition to paper sign-up for added flexibility for speakers trying to get to the board meeting.
Disagree...
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 20:51 — Bob_SconceIn the normal circumstance, the handful of people who want to speak sign up at the beginning of the meeting -- you should be rewarded for showing up first. It's only the days when Rev. Barber's doing his self-aggrandizing that this would be come an issue. And, those are the days when that system would most likely be abused.
So that accusations
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 17:56 — red_balloonSo that accusations reminscent of the survey being online can surface?
If they spent as much time
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 17:36 — user12345If they spent as much time on academics as trying to control speakers they might actually improve the school system.
True. But when you have
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 18:12 — red_balloonTrue. But when you have speakers medicated by publicity, you can be sure the circus isn't leaving town in a hurry.
another politico weighs in
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 17:14 — AngelaWModified Thu, Aug 05, 2010 04:34 PM
Hunt blasts neighborhood schools policies
Former Gov. Jim Hunt says neighborhood schools don't work.
Hunt, who has been dubbed "the education governor," condemned policies that drop diversity as a consideration when assigning students to schools. He did not specifically mention the Wake County School Board and the pitched battle over diversity in the state's largest school district. But his forceful comments drew applause at the N.C. Chamber-sponsored Education Summit today in Durham.
He urged the business community to support the concept that all of the state's public schools should succeed and all students should succeed.
"Here's one thing that won't work -- packing certain schools full of low-income, poor, low-achieving students," Hunt said. "That will not work. We do need to have reasonable diversity. I understand about wanting students to go to school pretty close to home. I think there's a way to work this out fairly if we work at it. But we can't ignore it and say it doesn't make any difference who is in these schools. It does make a difference."
Then the former governor posed a hypothetical question. If you were a teacher, he asked the audience, would you rather work in a poor school with no parent involvement or a rich school with parent support?
"Which school would you choose? You know the answer."
Question
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 19:25 — loriac'...packing certain schools full of low-income, poor, low-achieving students," Hunt said.'
Does the 'education governor' believe all poor students are low achieving?
He Said Nothing Of The Sort
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 21:32 — fiveblindmiceAnd you should be ashamed for trying to imply that he did.
No one has to imply
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 23:11 — woodstockNo one has to imply anything. The former Gov said it ...in fact, a whole host of extreme left wingers are saying the same thing. It is insulting, bigoted and elitist.
'...packing certain schools
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 21:44 — jeffrey1'...packing certain schools full of low-income, poor, low-achieving students," Hunt said.'
Souns to like he said that certain schools were full of
students. It sure sounds to me like he implied that all the low-income students were low-achieving -- at least in all the certain schools he was referring to. I suppose one could make the case that Hunt's statement implies there are other schools full of low income children who are not low-achieving, but that's just speculation.
BTW, I remember hearing this on the news while I was in my car the other day, and I have to say that I cringed when I heard it. I asked myself, "Did he just say what I think he said?"
Seems like the Gov' did a
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 21:34 — CaryCurmudgeonSeems like the Gov' did a pretty good job all by himself.
Sadly it seems so and he has plenty of company
Thu, 08/05/2010 - 23:53 — TrailerParkGirlSadly it seems so and he has plenty of company among educational and political "leaders."
I have come to the conclusion that I find myself in a place with the some of most socioeconomic prejudiced, most classist local leadership in a state with some of the most socioeconomic prejudiced, most classist leadership in which I have lived.
According to the clip I heard on the radio, Hunt believes that low-income kids never come to school and rich parents are all supportive. I was literally screaming "Stop it, just stop it" at my radio.
I was screaming too!
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 10:54 — MichYankeeI thought his comments were totally offensive, not only to the lower income population but to our teachers as well. There are many teachers that would choose to work in a school full of "low-poverty kids", and they DO. It is a calling, sure it is not for everyone, but many teachers enjoy it, are great at it, are motivated by the challenge .... who is he to say that all the teachers will flock to "rich" schools. What a crock of ---.
Where's the NCAE in this?
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 11:39 — CaryCurmudgeonWhere's the NCAE in this? These statements are a slap in the face against teachers.
It is already happening
Fri, 08/06/2010 - 12:26 — user12345who is he to say that all the teachers will flock to "rich" schools. What a crock of ---.
All you need to do is look at the transfer data sheet to see teacher movement ... or go to a teacher job fair of previous years to see the favored schools which are the affluent ones... it is simple economics ... the more affluent the school, the more likely all your kids will pass the state test even if you goofed off, the more time you have to work on board certifications, the more challenging classes you get a chance to teach, etc. .... while teaching in poor schools is a calling, there are few who pick up the phone (mostly young naive idealistic fresh out of college types) ... and they are gone when they realize they can make more money, be promoted faster, teach more challenging courses and spend less time on remedial lessons teaching at affluent schools ...
This subject came up in April - here are some of the posts
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 14:42 — TrailerParkGirlFri, 04/30/2010 - 20:41 — TrailerParkGirl
One angle to consider would be schools that had changes in the pricipal position. I believe Creech Rd. has a new principal starting in July.
There could be situations where either the principal was new this year and some teachers didn't mesh with their style, situations where the principal is transfering to another school and the staff that like working for that principal are following or situations where a new principal is coming and based on "reputation" some teachers want to leave before they get there.
Based on the former blogpost (below) on Creech Rd. the third situation might explain the Creech Rd. standout.
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/new-principals-named-at-four-schools
Mon, 05/03/2010 - 09:00 — cncrndtchr
I share your view that it is all about the principal. Last year Creech Road had 12 teachers on the transfer list, and this year their f and r percentage has remained the same. The former principal there left suddenly earlier this year, and throughout this year 6 teachers have also fled. Now there are 30 more teachers trying to leave. (to put that in perspective, there are not even 30 classroom teachers at that school). I doubt that all these teachers suddenly decided that working with children from poverty was too hard. I think that the principal matters ...or at least to the 36 teachers who have already left or want to, having committed and inspiring leadership is the most important reason to stay or transfer.
Fri, 04/30/2010 - 15:02 — user12345
FYI ... here are the schools on which did not appear on the transfer list ... could be something unusual or good schools no on wants to leave. Brassfield Elementary Aversboro Elementary Olds Elementary Timber Drive Elementary Swift Creek Elementary One school on the list that surprised me was Highcroft ES with 24 transfer requests which puts it in with high F&R schools like Barwell. I thought HCES was a neighborhood school with very affluent families ... so not sure why they would have so many moving.
Fri, 04/30/2010 - 21:12 — TrailerParkGirl
school - %F&R
Brassfield Elementary - 13.3
Aversboro Elementary - 54.9
Olds Elementary - 25.6
Timber Drive Elementary - 47.4
Swift Creek Elementary - 27.1
Also of interest - school (transfer request) - F&R%
Lake Myra (4) - 47.7; Lead Mine (1) - 40.6; Smith (3) - 66.7; Stough (4) - 44.9
Middle Creek ES (15) - 19.7; Olive Chapel (16) - 14.4
I'm having a hard time reconciling these with the "teachers only want to teach at low F&R schools" mantra.
Could it be that there are other relevant factors beside student SES?
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 12:27 — user12345
You are too smart to ask that question ... of course other factors can overcome the difficulty of teaching at a school with a high number of poor kids ... with so many schools there had to be some poor schools with a really good principal and some affluent schools who got a really bad one. In general, I think you would agree that teaching in a poor school is more difficult than teaching in an affluent school ... that teaching a variety of course is more fun than only teaching remedial classes all day long... and not having to worry about the EOC/EOG because affluent kids normally pass at >90% makes the job less stressful ...
_______________________________________________________________
You, among many, continue to base assumptions of "good school" on "rich" and "affluent" and "not good school" with "not affluent." By continuing to do that you and those like you perpetuate the cycle of people wanting to flock to "affluent" schools (and the more "affluent" the better) and avoiding schools that are "less affluent" because their presumption becomes that the "more affluent" the better the school and the "less affluent" the worse the school, regardless of the reality.
People should be basing the defination of "good school" on those with Principals with leadership skills, dedicated teachers, ones where all demographic groups are achieving, and/or student achievement for all is high growth, rather than on the SES of the school and the overall school score while ignoring differences among achievement by demographic group in the school and all the other factors that matter.
"You, among many, continue
Sun, 08/08/2010 - 10:45 — user12345"You, among many, continue to base assumptions of "good school" on "rich" and "affluent" and "not good school" with "not affluent." By continuing to do that you and those like you perpetuate the cycle of people wanting to flock to "affluent" schools (and the more "affluent" the better) and avoiding schools that are "less affluent" because their presumption becomes that the "more affluent" the better the school and the "less affluent" the worse the school, regardless of the reality."
Thank you User
Sun, 08/08/2010 - 12:22 — Duhhuh666Thanks for letting us know how you view the world.
Highcroft ES is one of the
Sat, 08/07/2010 - 15:28 — DrActualFactualHighcroft ES is one of the 22 converted MYR schools. Other area schools including Mills Park ES/MS now are traditional--could the transfers be a reflection of teachers wanting to be on the same calendar schedule as their kids???? perhaps.