Dan Coleman, president of the Raleigh-Wake Citizens Association, is stepping up his pointed criticism of Wake County's magnet school program and the old diversity policy.
In a letter to the editor today, Coleman complains about how Southeast Raleigh students are bused out of magnet schools that "are loaded with extras to attract affluent families from other sections of the county." Instead of those extras, he says those Southeast Raleigh kids are attending "just plain old traditional schools in other sections of the county."
"The magnet school component of our diversity school assignment policy is nothing more than the repackaging of separate and unequal," Coleman writes. "All children should expect the same equal access to an extraordinary education."
If we are going to augment the process then those who are being moved about should expect the same experience at the end of the bus ride, nothing less. It could be argued that those children that need the most are given the least," Coleman continues.
Coleman argues that African Americans like himself should be able to examine how Southeast Raleigh children are at the bottom of the county's test scores "without being called re-segregationist or Uncle Toms."
Comments
Translated to the state
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 05:21 — AngelaWTranslated to the state level, only 66 percent of North Carolina's students graduated on time in 2007. Based on calculations by the Alliance for Excellent Education, if these students had graduated on time, their lifetime income would increase by more than $10.6 billion.
Fortunately, there are model efforts under way to provide comprehensive "cradle to career" support systems for our least-advantaged children.
A standout is the Harlem Children's Zone in New York City. Over the past decade, it has woven together a powerful mix of services for children within a 97-block neighborhood. This comprehensive program involves parenting classes with early-childhood education services, partnerships with proven public charter schools, high-quality after-school opportunities, and employment and medical services. The result: Test scores have risen steadily, and increasing numbers of Harlem's children are heading to college
Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/12/674754/lets-get-kids-what-they-need.html#ixzz0zOqWMxU1
if these students had
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 08:29 — user12345if these students had graduated on time, their lifetime income would increase by more than $10.6 billion.
But that is long term ... bureaucrats probably think they are "saving" 34% by getting these kids off the dole sooner on a cost per kid funding model ... <cynical view off>
A standout is the Harlem Children's Zone in New York City.
Why does only Harlem get this program? If it is so go great why hasn't it been rolled out city wide .. same argument seen with KIPP is that these programs may not be scalable ..
Dreaming of a segregated past
Thu, 09/09/2010 - 14:29 — RonBThe problem is Danny doesen't realize how much worse schools would be in SE Raleigh if they did not have parental advocates from the rest of the county. Mr. Coleman has never had to step foot in a school in the neglected, poorer communities in other school districts.
SE Raleigh kids bused elesewhere get a better education than they would in a neglected SE Raleigh-only "zone/neighborhood" school. They receive more than free/reduced cost meals; to suggest otherwise is disgusting. If there really is no educating going on in the 'burbs, that is a problem with the environment fostered in those schools, not busing.
Why is there success at Southeast Raleigh HS? Location, or its IB magnet? Reality says it is the latter, though the economic segregationists want to belive it is the former. The school board transferred students from Garner to SE Raleigh WITHOUT A HEARING. Mr. Coleman wants to belive neighborhood schools will work like they did in the 1940s and 50s, but in reality the GOP-backed, Tea Party approved Wake School Board Majority has demonstrated its own, anti-SE Raleigh "seperate and unequal" stance.
Danny would be correct to complain when (not if) SE Raleigh schools had 50% + failure rates like the nine schools in Charlotte.
Time after time, Danny and other "community leaders" look fondly back to the segregation era, when there was students of only one race in their schools, regardless of how underfunded those schools were compared to others in the city and county. Most leaders of "the community" (and suburban voters who elected the current board majority) came from a tight knit, middle/upper class neighborhoods. The resourses available at home were responsible for student success -- not segregation.
Curious
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 10:35 — TrailerParkGirlDo you live in SE Raleigh? Are you a magnet parent?
I came from a tight knit, lower income neighborhood in a lower income community (compared to Raleigh or Wake County) and have a graduate degree, so to what should I attribute my success?
I think you are missing Dan Coleman's point. The issue isn't the existance of magnets, the issue is who is getting access to the magnet resources. Sure, now the resources are in SE Raleigh, but it is still the middle class, suburban students who by and large have been the ones getting access to the resources rather than the students living in SE Raleigh. The middle class kids are still getting the resources and the lower income kids are still not getting them because they moved the resources and the middle class kids followed the resources. Meanwhile, the SE Raleigh students were bussed away from where the resources are now located.
I have no doubt that those middle class families that currently have access to those resources will take whatever measures they deem necessary to try to maintain their corner on the resource market, including trying to misconstrue Mr. Coleman's points and astute and analytical questions about the system.
...
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 10:48 — red_balloonThe issue isn't the existance of magnets, the issue is who is getting access to the magnet resources.
That point is lost on people like drecj (the post below). I doubt Coleman wants to dismantle the magnet system. I suspect he is questioning if the system benefits the right people. And I am surprised Barber, Wright, etc. haven't teamed up with Coleman on this issue.
Selection Process
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 10:15 — Solon77I believe you are an advocate of entrance exams and yearly re-examinations in order to qualify to attend a magnet school - how does this open up the magnet resources to the majority base population that is behind and struggling ? Sure, you may catch a few, but by and large many will not pass the exam - how is this helping the base ?
You would have to catch them
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 13:10 — red_balloonYou would have to catch them early i.e., provide learning opportunities before entering the K-12 stream. Secondly, I see the magnet as a vehicle for additional courses/ funds. So, and this probably might be in line with Coleman's thinking, it might be necessary to maintain the magnet level funding but re-allocate the funds to better serve the base population.
Cake and eat it to
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 17:02 — Solon77You would have to catch them early i.e., provide learning opportunities before entering the K-12 stream.
So in the meantime ?
Secondly, I see the magnet as a vehicle for additional courses/ funds. So, and this probably might be in line with Coleman's thinking, it might be necessary to maintain the magnet level funding but re-allocate the funds to better serve the base population.
The base population has access to the magnet offerings today. I believe what Coleman is referring to is the 50% of the base that is bused to the burbs. They should have access to the magnet school that is in their neighborhood. Therein lies the challenge - under the neighborhood assignment model, the kids bused out will now attend their neighborhood school. There is not enough capacity in these schools to accommodate the base + the kids bused in from the burbs. If the school becomes only a base and is not able to accept students from the outside to promote diversity - the school then loses federal and state funds. Further if the funding is redirected to remedial education - no parent from the burbs is going to send their kid there. Why do you think JT and Goldman want more capacity in the Central Zone ? They realize they do not have the seats for neighborhood schools + magnet program. And they can't very well say, neighborhoods schools for only the burbs while we still need to bus kids out of the central zone in order to make room for magnet seats. In addition - when they lose federal and state funding for magnets, they will have to find funding for the extra programs that Coleman is looking for.
Why would parents pull out
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 11:46 — red_balloonWhy would parents pull out kids from magnets if funding is redirected to remedial services? The schools would resemble the schools in the suburbs where students needing remedial services are mixed with students not needing remedial services. But with a big difference. There is the added bonus of having 'diversity'/ ED kids.
As for funding, federal funding is through MSAP and it has averaged $1.5m per year. That's about 0.15% of the total operating budget. I can't see losing MSAP funding as a big cause for worry.
What state and federal
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 20:13 — jenmanWhat state and federal funding would they lose? The MSAP grants are only good for 3 years and a school can't just reapply for more money every 3 years. The grants are only intended to start up a new magnet or a changed program at an existing magnet. WCPSS is paying for the upkeep of the magnet schools. I don't think Enloe, Ligon, Powell, etc are getting any federal funding anymore for their programs. WCPSS is paying for it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is how I understand it to work.
Enloe, Ligon, Powell, were
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 20:34 — klanders65Enloe, Ligon, Powell, were all part of the MSAP grant years ago and would no longer receive any grant funds.
I may not be reading the post above your correctly. I wonder if they don't realize that currently, the magnets with the wonderful electives and abundance of rigorous courses pretty much only let the "kids from the burbs" take those courses. The bussed in low income kids get their remedial classes bussed along with them. It is not that they need remedial classes. But that is what they get. It is easier, cheaper, and keeps the classrooms segregated. Some Title 1 funds may come with these kids. I don't know if those funds go to schools or are associated with the kids.
Which magnet schools bus in low-income kids to schools where the base is "kids from the burbs"? When the low-income kids get there, what kind of classes do they get?
It is so important to have accountability for the math placement. That will help us see what they get at the end of their bus ride. If they are being bused, and meet objective criteria for top math placement and are not getting it, then we have a problem and I hope we don't lose focus and forget about this.
I am not quite following you
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 19:49 — klanders65Usually I am sarcastic. But this time I actually don't understand what you are saying.
If the school becomes only a base and is not able to accept students from the outside to promote diversity - the school then loses federal and state funds.
Do you mean, if the school in the burbs becomes a base only school, it will lose the federal funds now being used to provide enriched electives to the kids in the burbs? Or do you mean schools in low income neighborhoods will lose federal funds? What federal funds are those?
Further if the funding is redirected to remedial education - no parent from the burbs is going to send their kid there.
What? Why would funding be redirected to remedial education? I guess that is what WCPSS offers low income kids. They get remedial education whether they need it or not, and do not get to take advanced courses even when objective criteria exist and they meet it. So, are you saying if they pull the "diverse" kids back to their neighborhoods, then funds previously used for enriched courses for kids from the burbs in "diverse" schools will be used for remedial education in low income schools?
I really can't tell.
Clarification
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 23:26 — Solon77Funding - as I interpret it, Wake County is able to shift costs from local funding to state funding. So all highly paid teachers, whether in a magnet school or an non magnet school are moved to the state vs local. This amounts to $8m of state funding.
A magnet's primary purpose is to facilitate voluntary desegregation. This is done by bribing affluent suburban parents with enhanced course offerings to allow their kids to be bused into the not so nice areas. In order to create the seats for the bused in affluent kids, the base students are bused out to the burbs. In the neighborhood assignment model, these base kids will not be bused out to the burbs - they will go to their neighborhood magnet school. As a result there will not be seats available for the kids from the burbs. Without a diversity element - the school will cease to be a magnet, the school district will lose the ability to shift funding to the state, the enhanced course offerings will disappear, and there will no incentive for suburban parents to voluntarily send their kids into the not so nice areas. The magnet program will be no more.
?
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 08:50 — Bob_SconceA description of how North Carolina funds its schools is here: http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/fbs/resources/data/highlights/2010highlights.pdf
I see nothing in there that allows Wake County to shift part of its costs from local to state funding (at least not without a corresponding shift back in some other part of its budget). The closest thing is additional state funding of "Small, Specialty High Schools," which would seem to apply to the East Wake academies, but not to magnet schools generally.
I've also looked at the Proposed 2010-2011 WCPSS budget (http://www.wcpss.net/budget/2010-11-bpb/2010-11-bpb.pdf ) and found nothing to suggest your interpretation. In fact, p. 98 indicates that funding shifts from Local to State when a school is *demagnetized*. The previous year's budget (http://www.wcpss.net/budget/2009-10-official-budget/2009-10-adopted-budget.pdf See p. 262) indicates that magnets are funded locally.
So, it appears that magnet programs are either funded by local dollars or by federal magnet grants (which expire). Once running for more than 3 years, the entire cost of that magnet program is borne by Wake County taxpayers, and, is money which could be reallocated elsewhere.
We have two types of
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 23:44 — jenmanWe have two types of magnets--ones like you describe and then those whose function is to keep the middle class neighborhood base from leaving. I think that is an important distinction to make.
I agree
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 11:28 — lferreriIt's important for people to understand that all magnets are not in economically-disadvantaged neighborhoods. There are a number of them (by my count about 6 or 7) that are in affluent areas.
Do you mean like, "we don't
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 11:20 — klanders65Do you mean like, "we don't want you to leave and go to private schools, so we'll give you the equivalent of a private school right here?" Which are those? Do they bus in "diverse" kids? If so, do the bussed in kids also get the equivalent of a private education or are they in separate classes getting their Title 1 worksheets?
"we don't want you to leave
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 17:29 — jenman"we don't want you to leave and go to private schools, so we'll give you the equivalent of a private school right here?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------
That's exactly it. TPG was right with her list of magnets. I would add Brooks & Douglas to that list as well. At the work session where the intial 'straw vote' for demagnetizing Daniels MS happened, about 3 or 4 BOE members voted to keep Daniels' magnet status. The only argument for keeping the program was given by David Ansbacher from the magnet office. He said that without the magnet program, Daniels families would take advantage of the many private options they had nearby. That was also the same argument used by Broughton parents for keeping their IB program.
There are base neighborhoods for some of those magnets where the houses are literally $700K or more. I've heard the term 'bringing back the base' when those magnets are discussed.
Most of them do bus in low income kids from downtown. Farmington Woods in Cary also buses in kids from downtown.
Which ones
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 12:51 — TrailerParkGirlJenman is more familiar with this topic, but off the top of my head - I think start with Joyner, Wiley and Underwood ES and I think Martin MS. Try overlaying the Magnet school map with the F&R distribution map and looking at the base assignment maps for the magnets and you can get an idea. Take a look at the ED pass rates on their school report cards and you'll have your answer. The schools I listed have some of the lowest ED pass rates around (not just for magnets, but for all schools).
Joyner - 36%; Wiley - 25.9%; Underwood - 25.8%; Martin - 31%
So, a question to ask would
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 13:05 — klanders65So, a question to ask would be "which kind of magnets promote success for ED kids, and which do not? " It looks like this kind of magnet does not promote success for ED kids. I guess you'd have to compare. Or, they could look at how kids predicted scores compare to observed scores in the different situations. And using EVAAS would be very important because EI adjusts the predictions down down down for these kids. We would want to know which situations are best for the ED kids.
I know E&R did a study to try to figure out what attributes of ED kids sometimes result in success, and found sometimes they are "resilient" and this can lead to success. But I think it is time for a study on which school situation leads to promoting the most success for ED kids. They would have to control for not only what kind of school but also what type of courses kids enrolled in once in the school, compared with their predicted success levels. That is, if a kid has a 99% prob of success, and meets all criteria for 8th grade algebra, but is tracked low, the school setting may not account for the low scores this kid eventually has. We'll have this variable by school as soon as JTedesco gets his accountability report regarding compliance with the math placement criteria. Instead of adjusting expectations for poverty levels, we need a statistical model that adjusts expectations for opportunity barriers.
Why hasn't E&R already done this study?
Agreed
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 15:17 — TrailerParkGirlI've been saying/asking this for a while. Why do we have some schools (ES for example) where the ED pass rate is 70% (Dillard) and others as low as Wiley and Underwood? Dillard actually has a higher percentage of FRL students, so it's certainly not the "lower the FRL%, the better achievement will be" theory.
Why are the ED pass rates all over the place - school to school? Why hasn't the system seem to have been asking itself this question all along? If we figure out the whys, then maybe we can keep doing and replicate what works and stop doing what doesn't.
A little while back, someone had looked at all the schools and found that on the whole, ED EOG/EOC results were lower at magnets than non-magnets. I pulled a handful of demographically comparable magnets and non-magnets (mostly community based diverse Rim schools) and found the same thing. In some cases the non-magnet results were significantly higher than magnets. I mostly looked at ES.
Given the known tracking and placement issues in MS math, I can't help but wonder if a similar issue/pattern is driving some of the magnet/non-magnet ES differences. Many magnet ES have a high number of specials/electives whereas non-magnets the students are together in one classroom most of the day. I can't help but wonder if in essence there isn't some level of tracking issue introduced at magnet ES through electives as a result of that structure. As I've posted before, the Q&A sessions at some magnet open houses I attended indicated that students were steered toward certain electives.
The other thing that I can't help but wonder is if the "at risk" model thinking is stronger at some magnets. Afterall, one of the key points of magnets is to mix students who are deemed "different" from one another. As you know, here "different" became based upon SE class - those "better, have" middle class kids and those "at-risk, have not, lesser" ED kids.
Definately, a study is in order to understand the current state in order to make improvements.
Before magnet supporters get up in arms, I'm not suggesting that magnet programs in theory are flawed, rather perhaps the manner in which they have been operating here due to the "at risk" philosophy may not have been equitably benficial for all demographic groups or students.
Seems unlikely
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 19:16 — Dove314The challenges will increase as any study done in the next year or two will be pretty hopelessly confounded in not made outright impossible by the changing assignment policy and returning the 5,000 children currently bused to a non-magnet school back to SE Raleigh.
Well
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 00:40 — TrailerParkGirlWell, usually when a study is done it uses historical (not future) data, so I guess I'm not sure why those questions can't be looked into now or what the changing assignment policy has to do with whether or not a study can be done.
One of the potential challenges in doing a study will be having to take into consideration the variations of the underlying student populations due to previous reassignments. Interestingly, going back to 2001-02 EOG results, Dillard's results have been above district average every single year and Underwood's results have been below every single year. I don't know about Underwood, but I am aware that Dillard has had reassignments out and in (including from different areas of the county).
BTW - wow, in looking back I just saw that the year the Reading test was renormed (2007-08) only 14% of ED students at Underwood passed both the Reading and Math test, so the 25.8% pass rate in 2008-09 is an improvement - although I believe 2008-09 includes retests whereas 2007-08 doesn't. In the same time Dillard went from 52.1% to 70.4%.
I'm wondering now if reassignment may provide helpful information - it would be interesting to look at students that were reassigned and see if relative to district average the same students seemed to do better, worse or the same at the various schools to which they have been assigned. Also, what about nodes from the same area but assigned to different schools - how do they compare to one another.
have to disagree.
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 11:50 — Dove314If the study is on EVAAS results applied historically up until this calendar year, then such a study in the one area might be feasible. In fact, I seem to recall someone saying a broad study to identify predictors of high student achievement taking into account student / teacher / principal / district level variables came too close to applying the Ruby Payne concepts when it was raised many months ago as something that would be useful to inform the reassignment process. Must admit I have to continue to point out the considerable confounding you will encounter. You are now including all of the following variables:
This is by no means a comprehensive list. There are many more variables to consider including in such study utilizing existing and potential upcoming available data. The number of time dependent covariates for each student's history is daunting. You would almost have to create an array of all of these variables for each child by grade leading up to their current grade and performance.
Why do we have some schools
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 16:26 — user12345Why do we have some schools (ES for example) where the ED pass rate is 70% (Dillard) and others as low as Wiley and Underwood? Dillard actually has a higher percentage of FRL students, so it's certainly not the "lower the FRL%, the better achievement will be" theory.
Why are the ED pass rates all over the place - school to school? Why hasn't the system seem to have been asking itself this question all along? If we figure out the whys, then maybe we can keep doing and replicate what works and stop doing what doesn't.
TPG ... good questions ... maybe all ED are not the same. Maybe the EDs at Dillard are different than the EDs at Willey. For example, maybe the EDs at Willey might be really poor and the ones at Dillard "working poor" ... ED is too broad a category almost like White ... there are probably other factors ...
Second, "who cares?" and "what does it matter?" ... I ask those questions because you easily found the information ... not like it was hidden ... it is not like the principals at Wiley or Underwood don't know that Dillard beat them ... it is not like the principal at Willey or Underwood could not drive over to Dillard and spend the day seeing how a better team did a better job ... but why do that? ... does the principal and teachers get more pay, some award for doing that? ... why spend the time? take the risk? to do what Dillard does ... the BOE, area Supt, parents, etc.don't care ... why should the "system" ... until there is an incentive to change and improve, we won't see much of either.
Why
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 02:29 — TrailerParkGirlWhy do it? Because it's the right thing to do. I know I'm crazy for thinking that.
However, this is where I get confused with the education profession. I understand (and support) your concept of incentives, but people who have gone into the education field know how it works going in don't they? I keep hearing they went into it "for the children" not the money, so then why wouldn't they care enough to spend the time? It's like when I worked at a non-profit - I made peanuts (less than teachers) and there wasn't much compensation differentation within my job level whether you did a good job or not (a slightly higher percent raise of not much is really not much), but that didn't stop me from wanting to do my best for all my clients (even the ones that through their actions made my job harder).
A different kind of ED - danofnc has previously raised this debate.
Of course, not all ED are alike, just like not all NED are alike - we are all individuals (that's actually what they teach at diversity seminars). However, as I previously responded to danofnc, it's not like there is some giant sorter out there - you are ED type A, you go live in node A and you are ED type B, you go live in node B. When I lived in higher poverty areas, there were all sorts of ED in the same area, on the same block even. There were even people who were of equally low income level, but acted completely different from one another - shockingly people of the same income level are not all exactly alike. People are not widgets or stereotypes. You can't cast one person from the mold made of the material of another person.
Actually, if you think about it - the income and education distribution levels for NED are generally significantly larger than for ED - yet, I rarely hear people saying "well maybe they are a different kind of NED." Why is that? It would make a lot more sense as you can be "working class, without a college degree" NED making $45K or you can be NED with PhD/MD/JD/MBA making $300K (or whatever), but it's more unusual to find an ED person with a graduate-level degree (unless they are still in school getting another degree).
Do we have schools where all the ED students in the school are really poor (do you mean actual poverty level vs qualifying for FRL which is up to 185% of poverty level) and some where all the ED are working poor?
The only thing I could find that breaks out "F" (actually up to 130% of poverty) and "R" per school is the application data on NCDPI. I'm not sure why the percent needy for some schools seems to be signficantly different than the actual F&R% per wcpss (rejected applications maybe?), but it should give some idea of the break out for each school. Looks to me like both schools' applications were almost all for "F".
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/fbs/resources/data/
BTW - Dillard's percent ESL/LEP is also higher than Underwood, so the answer isn't that Underwood's ED score is being brought down more by LEP students who are also ED. Not too surprising to me, the Hispanic and LEP scores at Underwood are well below district average (as are black), but hey the white and NED kids are rock'n it at Underwood with above district average scores. Interestly, at Dillard the Hispanic, LEP and black scores are all well over the top (black pass rate is 74.6%) and guess what - the white and NED groups are also outperforming by a little bit the same groups at Underwood.
Hey, I just realized something - Dillard is like my hometown, where everyone is beautiful and above average :-) So, it is possible even here in Wake County.
So, as upon further investigation there is nothing that obviously points to demographic differences being the driver/explanation, what other drivers could there be?
"I keep hearing they went
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 09:07 — user12345"I keep hearing they went into it "for the children" not the money, so then why wouldn't they care enough to spend the time? "
Take a look at the ED kids
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 15:09 — jenmanBut why
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 10:36 — TrailerParkGirlPlease read again. I stated that I AGREE with you about incentives, but that I’d heard from some educators that they were in it for the kids not money. One thing to keep in mind though about incentives is that not all people are equally motivated by the same things (i.e. money). Try looking up Maslow’s hierarchy theory if you’ve never studied it.
Why do we see differences? What is driving it and how do we change it?
OTB – ITB and large housing projects:
You make it sound like Raleigh has one giant Cabrini-Green like community and they are all assigned to the magnets. The largest section 8 community is Walnut Terrace at 300 units, but Walnut Terrace is not assigned to Underwood, and in fact many of the students living in Walnut Terrace are not attending any magnet because they are assigned to non-magnet schools OTB. All the other housing communities are less than 100 units (not counting the Senior housing units) and are scattered around Raleigh (Kentwood area, Cameron village area, Glenwood South area, a few in OTB North Raleigh like Fox Rd and Millbrook areas). Maybe you can tell me which RHA communities are assigned to Underwood and the other magnets.
Johnston County:
So, I looked up their Goals and Values – diversity is not mentioned at all; nothing about middle class students and families being better or better for schools than lower income; nothing about “higher needs” populations; nothing about students being labeled “at risk” based solely on their demographic group; and nothing about burdens. Instead, there is mention of leadership, high achievement, data-driven decision making, and the word positive is in there more than once.
You don’t think it is possible that the fact that they have been operating under a different philosophical approach than Wake (focusing on high expectations for all rather than spreading “burdens” and cow towing to the middle class) could explain why they are blowing us out of the water? We could just go right ahead and keep blaming it all on the victims (the kids) here and whether they live in a housing project or trailer park instead of considering that maybe the difference is also due to factors like program structure or educational leadership and philosophy. Yup, that’s the ticket – then we don’t actually have to do the analysis, ask ourselves the tough questions or do the hard work – we can just keep writing off certain kids. You were born into the projects, there’s no hope or positive expectations for you and you were born into an OTB trailer park – congrats, you have a chance because we think you’re a “different kind” of ED. You don’t suppose there an element of self-fulfilling prophecy in that?
http://www.johnston.k12.nc.us/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=112509&
I know you agree on the
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 11:52 — user12345I know you agree on the "incentives" ... I just felt you did not understand that I see "incentives" "telegraphing" a strategy not motivating teachers. I know they sound the same but the strategy comes first and the employees are educated on the strategy of which one part is "incentives" ... starting with "incentives" with no strategy confuses employees because there is no consistency.
and why the ED kids sent to
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 15:36 — jenmanI was comparing GH ED 69% to
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 15:52 — user12345I was comparing GH ED 69% to Wake's NED 79% which is 10 points different but better than Garner's 55% ED and close to Garner's 75% NED. Obviously, GH is doing something right ... and note, GH initiated the grant to share their abundance of AP classes via video with Knightdale which shows some leadership. Moving kids into a high performance environment is not a guarantee of success but a factor that can help.
Maybe the ones at Green Hope are a different kind of ED
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 15:16 — TrailerParkGirlGot it, so you are talking about what is being incented.
Can’t blame everything on diversity – what do you mean? Do you mean the stereotype “at risk” notion of diversity that has had Wake spellbound for so long or what diversity is supposed to be? They are different things. You are the one trying to attribute differences to demographic causes versus other factors.
So, in Johnston the poor folk are white and the minorities there are not poor?
I looked on city-data and Johnston County has 12% living in poverty (7.0 of whites and 19.7 of blacks) while Wake’s numbers are 9.1% poverty (5.2 for white and 16.5 for black). That looks pretty comparable to me.
For kicks you may want to look up the demographics and 2008-09 science scores for Johnston’s Corinth-Holder ES, which has a Zebulon address and compare to Wake’s Zebulon ES. So, do you want to explain the difference away with - well Wake’s portion of Zebulon includes the big, bad urban center of Zebulon while Johnston’s does not or maybe there is some sort of magic “kids of all demographics are more able to learn science” dust that only gets sprinkled on the Johnston County side of the line? Maybe all the people who care about education looked at the school score comparisons and high tailed it over to the Johnston side? Of course, 2008-09 was the first year of the science test so I guess they wouldn’t have known Johnston would be so much higher out of the gate, which makes that theory less plausible. I’m sure it had nothing to do with the schools’ approaches (sarcasm font).
Hey I just challenged your
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 15:43 — user12345Hey I just challenged your view that all ED are the same ... that difference at one school and another's ED population was due solely to teachers, school, diversity, etc. .... I am just pointing out that EDs populations are not all the same ... I am guessing we can look at the NED population and make the same argument ....so, West Johnston's NED EOC was 82% and Green Hope's was >95%. So, is Johnston's NED population suffering because they don't have diversity? Again, I think the whole look at what ever population is doing poorly at magnets to hurt the magnet program is unproductive. It's like people have zeroed in on ED to feed their magnet envy and forgotten there are Hispanics, LE, American Indians, etc.
How about we untwist what I said
Mon, 09/13/2010 - 16:36 — TrailerParkGirlI did not say that all ED are the same. I said ED were different as individuals. However, I would not expect similarly situated individuals as a whole to perform significantly different unless there was a difference in external factors, such as teaching method. In other words, if the teaching approach were the same between the two schools in Zebulon I would expect similar results. The fact they are so different indicates to me that there may be something different in the teaching methods with one having been a more effective method. You keep trying to say there must be something different about the student groups whereas I’m thinking it is the approach being used that may be different.
Try going back to my much earlier post where I said that I did not think magnets were flawed in theory, but rather the way they functioned in Wake in conjunction with the “at risk” model could be an issue similar to MS math placement. If so, that means that the way they operated could be improved, leading to improved results (like with math placement). Based on your defense of the status quo of the magnet program, are you good with only 25% of ED kids and 29% of black kids passing at some schools? Do you want to just keep doing the same thing with the same results? You can support the magnets producing those results if you wish. I can’t envy that.
Incentive to care
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 16:35 — klanders65If we evaluated teachers based on the outcomes for their students, then there would be an incentive to care. But you are right. There is no incentive right now. Right now, we can just say those lowest achieving must be really poor, since how poor you are determines how stupid you are. (My kids would be starving before I'd let them get a free lunch.)
Have you noticed the GT magnets seem to be the worst for the poor kids?
"Have you noticed the GT
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 19:03 — user12345"Have you noticed the GT magnets seem to be the worst for the poor kids?"
I would not call them the worst but they are poor performing. I am guessing that is because 1) The base kids left behind are really poor ... I imagine the base kids at Hunter who walk to school from the project next door are a different lot than those who live in the country in a trailer ... I imaging there are some poor parent who read to their kids and other who don't ... also, I imaging that most of the extra resources at GT Magnets go into the AG kids and the poor base kids get short changed (e.g. reading tutors, remedial math programs) when they have special needs.
Effectiveness Index
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 16:53 — lferreriIsn't it also likely that the Effectiveness Index tells those principals that they are doing fine with the ED children? As I understand it, the EI takes the student's previous EOG score, then adjusts it downward if the student is ED. I also think it adjusts upward the expectations for AG students. Since the GT magnets seem to have a lot of AG students I believe, this could easily create a big gulf between the expectations for the ED students and the AG students. (It would be interesting to know how much of an overlap there is--how many ED students are AG. From what I know about the subjectivity of the designation process, I expect the percentage would be low.)
Yes
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 13:53 — lferreriYes, we need a study of this kind. Until we know what school situations, programs, etc. best promote success for ED students, we are not using the available information to recommend changes. I think we can safely assume, however, that students who qualify for the top math track (or AG or honors or AP) and are not placed in those programs are not receiving the education that would most benefit and challenge them.
By the way, I think evaluating programs and schools in a study like this has the potential to benefit all students.
Concern
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 19:41 — Solon77Yes, we need a study of this kind. Until we know what school situations, programs, etc. best promote success for ED students, we are not using the available information to recommend changes
This is the concern of the changes being made - does not appear to be data driven.
Two major changes
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 20:27 — lferreriTwo major changes that I've seen so far, the revamping of long-term suspensions and the attempt to increase advanced math placement, seemed to be well-researched and data driven. In my opinion, though, there are many other measures that need to be taken to raise student achievement. In order to do this effectively, the study proposed above seems like a good idea to me. We have the EVAAS data to analyze programs and schools. It makes sense to use it.
Interesting story
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 00:19 — SDR256That would be a VERY interesting story, and one that a real investigative reporter could make their national name doing. On the other hand, we have a very clear political channel for this news paper. So, they likely won't.
I have lots of quetstions, N&O, about what - TRUTHFULLY - the SE Raleigh neighborhood has to say about this?? Who is brave enough ( :P) to go and knock on doors and see?
Do WE need to do it, or will you please do a story? Seriously, I think someone needs to go do a d---ned poll. Otherwise, how will we know?
FEH.
Ya'll just frustrate me.
Dan has fired the first shot
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 09:59 — drecj56Dan has fired the first shot toward the dismantling of magnet schools, which is part of the majority boards agenda. In a few days his BOE friends will follow with their agreement of his assessment and it will all be downhill from there. Good-bye magnet schools as we know them.
"Goodbye magnet schools...?"
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 07:57 — woodstock"Goodbye magnet schools...?" NO. "Goodbye magnet schools as we know them?" I sure has heck hope so; I am in constant awe that the elitist and discriminatory practices of the WCPSS magnet school system have been allowed to contunue for so long.
As we know them
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 09:50 — Solon77Since magnets today only serve to cater to the affluent elitist - would you care to share with us what you see it becoming ?
I would like to see them
Sat, 09/11/2010 - 10:06 — woodstockI would like to see them become obsolete. Ideally ALL students would have access to the same academic opportunites now enjoyed only by application magnet students. I don't like playing the race -- er, I mean the socioeconomic "diversity" -- game, which magnets help perpetuate, but I know that will likley not end in the short term.
Don't expect me to shed
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 10:45 — red_balloonDon't expect me to shed tears over ending an abomination that discriminates against non-magnets and where enhanced offerings are available through a 'lottery'. Nor over a system of integration that needs to be held together by offering incentives.
Follow CMS lead
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 14:04 — Solon77Could follow Charlotte's lead. Cost savings and choice all rolled into one - what is not to like
CHARLOTTE, NC (WBTV) - This school year Charlotte Mecklenburg school (CMS) district established 27 magnet shuttle bus stops for students to catch a bus.
So far the school district reports 5500 CMS students are assigned to ride the shuttle buses, but 55% of the students assigned to catch the buses are not showing up.
CMS superintendent Peter Gorman explains where the students are.
"Majority of the individuals are getting to school on their own," Gorman told WBTV. "There are some who have left the school for different reasons, and some have left the school because the shuttle stops didn't work for them. And those are the ones we are concerned about."
CMS is concerned because it doesn't want students to opt out of a magnet education because of the inconvenience of shuttle stops.
One parent says the shuttle stops are a hardship for some.
"I have people in my area who had to pull the kids out of the magnet program," CMS parent Charlotta Griffin said. "And it's a disadvantage and a misfortune."
Gorman says he will keep an eye on the enrollment numbers at magnets, but adds right now there is nothing the district can do.
"We made that decision because we couldn't afford it financially," Gorman said. "And right now I don't see the budget changing."
CMS will soon unveil enrollment numbers for magnet schools. That's when the district can determine if the shuttle stops caused a major shift in students' education.
The shuttle stops saved the district $3.5 million
I can see this step
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 15:36 — red_balloonI can see this step impacting parents who either have constraints or value convenience over education. For those currently using WCPSS' express transportation, I doubt the CMS model is any different from their current experience. As for those magnet seats vacated by a switch to 100% express transportation, given WCPSS' magnet acceptance ratio, I am not expecting the vacated seats to be vacant for long.
Only the GT/AG schools have
Fri, 09/10/2010 - 15:19 — jenmanOnly the GT/AG schools have neighborhood service. The rest of the magnets are already on the express bus schedule. Some magnets offer no transportation options to certain areas.