Magnet schools are becoming an important part of the 2011-12 Wake County student reassignment plan.
As noted in today's article, school board members are facing requests for new magnet programs while also balancing how to provide both community schools to Southeast Raleigh students and enough seats at magnet schools. The decisions the board finally makes will be heavily scrutinized.
Let's start with the calls from parents at York Elementary School to become a magnet school. They're talking about having a global leadership and science theme.
At both public hearings on the reassignment plan last week, parents argued that it doesn't make sense to leave York at only 73 percent of capacity. They said an influx of magnet applicants would fill up the school and also possibly relieve overcrowding in the Leesville area.
Noting that there are no magnet schools in District 7, parents said York would be more convenient for families to attend than to go all the way to Southeast Raleigh for a magnet school.
The board also heard last week from parents at Daniels Middle School who say they don't have the cafeteria capacity to handle 170 additional Southeast Raleigh students.
The Daniels moves are part of staff's attempt to deal with the nodes they're now recommending be sent to Walnut Creek Elementary in Southeast Raleigh. Staff wanted to send the middle school and high school students to a closer school without taking away magnet seats so they recommended sending them to Daniels.
In addition to the crowding issues, Daniels parents said that another influx of high-needs children could cause families in the base to opt for charter schools or private schools instead. This argument should sound familiar because it's a reason the magnet school staff had given for unsuccessfully urging that Daniels, located near Cameron Village, keep its magnet program.
The Daniels parents say the board should either leave those students at their current schools or send them to the Southeast Raleigh magnet schools instead.
Magnet capacity in Southeast Raleigh is also an issue in the Walnut Creek Elementary School calendar debate.
In the original three-year plan, staff had recommended opening Walnut Creek on a year-round calendar like all new elementary and middle schools. But staff is now recommending that Walnut Creek open on a traditional calendar.
School board member John Tedesco wants Walnut Creek to open on a year-round calendar so as to gain extra capacity to assign students there without sending them to magnet schools. He says that families who want out can go to Bugg Elementary, which has the space.
But school board member Keith Sutton wants Walnut Creek to be a traditional-calendar school, citing the problems that low-income families have had finding affordable childcare in the year-round calendar. He says parents who want the year-round calendar can apply to East Garner Elementary, which has the space.

Comments
Maybe we should look at job postings to find our answer
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 22:05 — mtbgaitWCPSS has reposted the principal position for Walnut Creek to start employment on 3-1-11. Traditionally, year round school prinicipalships begin on February 1st for the new schools. This allows 5 months to plan the opening of the school. Walnut Creek's position is now slated for March, still giving 5 months of planning for a traditional calendar opening. Just an idea!
Wow...
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 08:55 — Bob_SconceWell, Sutton has made a significant shift over his predecessor, Rosa Gill, who completely ignored the childcare issue.
Rosa Gill is a doofus.
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:06 — JonesSausageRosa Gill is a doofus.
Yeah, I find it really funny
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:04 — jenmanYeah, I find it really funny that Sutton has never expressed this concern before. If Tedesco said the school should be traditional, Sutton would probably argue for year round. It's interesting how the two have sort of swapped sides on this one. I think they both have valid arguments and they've both provided doable solutions. Should be interesting.
Magnets have always been the isse.
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 08:54 — bpuli9999The new board got elected on the magnet issue. The burbies want magnet schools in their neighborhoods. And don't want to send their kids downtown (and be exposed to kids who live there, I suppose).
Actually, there are many
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 09:59 — jenmanActually, there are many people in the 'burbs who want to attend downtown magnets but are denied year after year.
it's called explosive
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:03 — JonesSausageit's called explosive population growth in the last decade.
Everyone's singular desires cant' be met to everyone's satisfaction.
And yet, 94 per cent of parents surveyed last year were pleased with the plans as they were...the BoE politely and blithely ignored that survey to keep their 6 percenters happy.
What's best for ME and MY convenience always trumps what's best for the system as a whole, right?
First, they were denied year
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:07 — jenmanFirst, they were denied year after year because they were applying from the 'wrong' school. Hard to get in when you're in the last 10% round each year.
Second, if the explosive growth is the cause of there not being enough magnet seats then that's a good argument for increasing the number of magnet programs. There are a number of 'suburban' schools that would be good candidates.
Which ones? The only
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:15 — danofncWhich ones?
The only possible reason to consider making a school a magnet now is under-enrollment.
The last thing this board wants to do right now is take kids out of a crowded school and reassign them so that other kids can apply for a magnet program. They were elected by saying that was wrong.
The only possible reason to
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:36 — user12345The only possible reason to consider making a school a magnet now is under-enrollment.
Also, I think there is hope that the BOE will fulfill their promise to create a VoTech magnet one day.
"Also, I think there is hope
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:52 — woodstock"Also, I think there is hope that the BOE will fulfill their promise to create a VoTech magnet one day."
----------------------------
User, I said it before and I will say it again. I agree 100% in the need for vocational training. This is a must. A school system without a vocational option is a school system that is lacking the all resources needed to serve all students. Having a VoTech will immediately address and improve drop out and graduation rates; AND, will serve the community by providing workers with real employable skills.
where is the printing press?
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 20:55 — stan_norwalk....its surreal in this year where money is ecdedingly in short supply to talk about a votech magnet or any other kind of new magnet - without talking about where the money is going to come from.
Remember the recent federal grant we lost for start-up money for new magnets. So, now where do we get the money?? To start up a new magnet you have to take the money away from somewhere else or save it from some new source.
I fully agree with you on
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 12:44 — JonesSausageI fully agree with you on this one, friend.
As I said yesterday, none of the current SB does, though Mr Tart was a strong advocate for Vocational Ed.
You are not correct about
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 12:53 — woodstockYou are not correct about the current BoE not being in agreement with that. In fact. in the community effort to develop a student assignment process -- the one Tedesco acted as chair of and that Goldman, Hill and Sutton pointlessly shot down -- there were discussions of themed academies, and vocational ED was one of the suggested "themes."
Yes, Mr. Tart was indeed for vocational ED, however he too was shot down repeatedly by the former Democrat-led BoE.
Wouldn't that actually be
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 12:59 — danofncWouldn't that actually be part of the problem?
Shouldn't the Student Assignment Committee have been worrying about how to get students assigned to schools instead of trying to reinvent WCPSS?
Isn't there another committee (or the board as a whole) that would be expected to determine what programs would be added or eliminated?
I think there's a problem if you form a committee to make an assignment plan and they come back to you with a plan to change/create/move a bunch of different programs. They were the Student Assignment Committee, not the Program Assignment Committee.
Maybe you are appraoching
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:44 — woodstockMaybe you are approaching the issue too literally or simplistically. The components of a school system do not exist independently. Like most things they all connect to each other and -- ideally -- work in some coordinate manner. As I understand it, part of the effort in the inclusive community effort to develop an assignment plan, one goal was to offer choice to students/parents and to attract -- similar to magnet schools -- students to the various schools and areas around the county to balance enrollment across the county and address various academic and vocational interests. For instance, instead of a low income student in S.E. Raleigh having essentially no choice except to be bused to North Raleigh somewhere, he or she would actually have a choice to apply to a themed academy. And votech would have just been one option, there may have been other themed academies or choices... in other words it was to be a comprehensive plan that took into consideration all the elements of where students go to school, including their motivation for choosing one school over another.
The truth is, it is all moot at this point. Debra Goldman is in the driver's seat -- the dictator's throne so to speak -- and there ain't nothin' happenin' 'til she agrees to it. So, if I were you I'd hound her to bring up the subject of vocational schools.
Approaching
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 21:14 — Solon77This is all very nice, but once again JT is not seeing the reality. The reality is we don't have $ for themed schools, vo tech or anything else. At the same time JT has publically acknowledged that he will not ask for more money. So then pray tell why is he working on vision/model that the district would never fund ? I say never fund because in the good times the tax payers did not support funding of the schools - barely passed bond issue. Unless the board is willing to stand up and ask for the funding, which they will not do, then they should be working on plans that fit witihn the budget - anything different is incompetence and a waste of time.
You don't plan long-term
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 21:29 — woodstockYou don't plan long-term based on what the current economic conditions are... that is always changing. Sure, it is a factor in the short term, but a vision has to look beyond that... and should include an element of optimism. You are very cynical... maybe it is due to your support for the status quo, that will do it to you.
BTW, what is your problem with Tedesco? He is a pretty smart guy with a good heart and passion.
An Element of Optimism
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 22:36 — Solon77My cynicism is not based on support of the status quo but based on the historical lack of financial support for the public schools. One does not obtain the illustrious 42nd National ranking based on a short term economic set back. A ranking of 42nd is the result of systematic starving of the education system.
With regards to planning ahead - I agree with planning ahead, I just disagree with putting assignment as the priority. VoTec, early intervention of students at risk of not graduating are not dependent on an assignment policy. Proactively identifying 250 at risk AA students and getting them across the finish line to graduate will improve the graduation rate by 10 pts. Allowing base schools to start adding back some electives is not dependent on an assignment policy. I see no other major districts - Houston, San Diego, CMS, Fairfax County, Montgomery County putting assignment as a priority - the priorities are the budget and achievement - not where kids are sitting.
I bet none of those counties
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 17:25 — loriacI bet none of those counties are stuck with the results of years of SES busing, so they have nothing to 'fix' regarding assignment.
Counties stuck with
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 22:07 — Solon77Perhaps the difference is they do not feel they are "stuck" with something.
San Diego assignment policy
H–2550 Board of Education policy provides for the establishment of magnet school programs
which offer specialized programs or an emphasis different from other schools, and a
voluntary ethnic enrollment program which has the specific objective of improving racial
balance at participating schools.
(Approved 3–88. Related Procedures 4105, 4106, 4250, 4251, 4261, 4262, 4310, 4311,
4312, 6135.)
H–2575 It is the policy of the San Diego Unified School District to reflect, at each school, the
racial/ethnic balance of the district’s non-White (African American, Alaskan/Indian,
Asian, Filipino, Hispanic, Indochinese, Pacific Islander)/White balance within a five
percent span based on the annual “Pupil Racial/Ethnic Census Report” while maintaining
at least a 50 percent resident population. If a school’s nonresident students exceed 50
percent of a school’s enrollment, the school site and community shall consider requesting
the board for a waiver of, or exemption from, the 50 percent resident requirement.
WOW!
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 15:23 — stan_norwalkA super post. Suggtest you get promoted to Solon 95.
"I see no other major
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 13:01 — woodstock"I see no other major districts - Houston, San Diego, CMS, Fairfax County, Montgomery County putting assignment as a priority."
Well said.
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:07 — ncellagatorCould not agree with your statements more.
That's why I'd like to see a
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 12:58 — JonesSausageThat's why I'd like to see a discussion of Vocational Ed as a separate issue, and not as a rider or adjunct connected tenably to other issues.
It deserves its own independent discussion.
It clearly would have become
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 13:00 — woodstockIt clearly would have become a seperate issue had the planning process and community engagement been allowed to continue.
Held hostage
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 13:15 — Dove314Are you saying that moving a Vo-Tech initiative forward is being held hostage and will only move forward if and when Tedesco's student assignment moves forward? Why can't it be brought up and moved forward now ireegardless of what has transpired within the student assignment committee?
Vo-tech
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 15:38 — stan_norwalkI see no one discussing the many vo-tech courses offered by WCPSS - at leat up to now. Secondly, no one has discussed whether the community college system is a better home than WCPSS for such courses. From where I stand the Wake Tech system obtains state and local funds far easier than WCPSS as it is job oriented and is far less politically controversial.
Thirdly, If, e,g,, the auto repair shops felt there was a shortage of trained mechanics, they could band together and start a an auto-mechanics private school. That would be my preferred approach. I believe builders have already done this at Wake Tech.
However warranted, we cannot scratch every itch. Those who proclaim the need for smaller government cannot seek to expand the scope of WCPSS programs...especially without acknowledging the need to pay for same.
Yes, but are they free to the poor? Stan
Fri, 01/21/2011 - 22:26 — Voice_of_Reason_If you want to transfer them to Wake Tech, doesn't that cost? Aren't they the ones that can least afford it. And a private auto mechanics school would even cost more. So Stan, aren't job skills just as important as college entry skills? Even if it were basic level skills like brick laying, painting, welding, or carpentry. Heck, maybe we could get some free work done for the schools in the process of teaching. At least they would have a marketable skill.
My brother went to a Vo-Tech that where they paid poor kids to go there. He said a lot of those children were only there for the extra money and really didn't take advantage of the training. So I support the free approach rather than post school grants.
I said nothing resembling
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 21:13 — woodstockI said nothing resembling that. I merely indicated that they were headed down an encouraging path that likely included a votech option and that was brought to a screeching halt because.... I have no idea why. We went from an open and inclusive process to one that now has an outsider working in secret with folks who for the most part oppose change. If you can figure that out, let me know.
JT needs pouting time before
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 14:32 — user12345JT needs pouting time before he will owe things to go forward.
...
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 13:17 — SideburnsProbably because Goldman doesn't support it. Or does she? It depends on the weather, I think.
Are you further saying
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:26 — Dove314Are you further saying that such an initiative would only be brought forward if it would be approved by the exact combination of Goldman, Margiotta, Malone, Prickett, and Tedesco but not by any other 5-4, 5-3, 6-2, 7-1, or 8-0 combination of votes?
...
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:27 — SideburnsNope. You said that.
Nope
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:36 — Dove314I asked if there was no other means to progress the idea of a VoTech program. There does not seem to be a good reason why it cannot be moved forward independent of the student assignment initiative and with a simple majority of votes regardless of how that majority is constructed.
yeah...our current school
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 13:04 — JonesSausageyeah...our current school board is absolutely renowned for their transparency and openness to the public.
Yes they are. It is good of
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 13:19 — woodstockYes they are. It is good of you to notice.
You probably noticed that instead cutting public comment off after 30 minutes like the old board used to do, the new board has given every speaker at every meeting a chance to have their say. Additionally, they are currently touring the county in a series of community engagement meetings.
Then can you get your team
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 12:43 — user12345Then can you get your team to keep them on task to complete what we both think is important? Maybe vote on a resolution to have a plan by the end of the year. Just a plan.
Which programs they start
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:51 — danofncWhich programs they start and where they start them are entirely different discussions.
Garner should be stripped of its magnet program today. With all the talk of crowding and trailer-terias and everything else, the last thing they need is to be inviting more kids into the school.
Stripping Garner of their Magnet Status!
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:57 — acsimsWhat an Incredible Statement! Obviously you do not know what is going on in the rest of the County, only in your part of the world. Garner has taken it on the chin for 30 years. As far as I am concerned no one in the media, on the board, in politics knows what is going on in the county. For the last 10 years, building has been going on in Southeast Raleigh. Yes people brand new homes, thousands of them! Is there a middle school or high school in sight. (only in Garner)? Where is it written that Garner has to take on all the F&R kids in SE Raleigh ? Where is the NAACP? Where is AdvanceED? Where is Arne Duncan? Where is Mayor Meeker? Surely, someone recognizes that it is not only fair to Garner but an insult to the population of SE Raleigh? Where is the outrage? HERE IS A NEWS FLASH! YOU CANNOT HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS WHEN YOU DO NOT HAVE SCHOOLS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD!!!!!!! UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!
You are absolutely right.
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 05:50 — jeffrey1You are absolutely right. Garner has been the whipping post of WCPSS for many years. When Amy White represented Garner many years ago, she ran, and was elected on the platform that Garner was being treated unfairly.
I think that when they made North Garner Middle a magnet school, it was partly in consideration of all the unfair treatment that Garner had received.
It would be disastrous from a public relations standpoint to take a magnet school away from Garner.
75
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 17:13 — danofncWhat you're complaining about and Garner's magnet program are totally separate issues.
Last year, 75 kids at GHS attended as magnet-choice students. 75.
The school is notoriously overcrowded ("40 MOBILES!!! TRAILERTERIA!!"), so which of the criteria for having a magnet program is it meeting?
I agree that Garner's
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 12:30 — jenmanI agree that Garner's crowding problem is not condusive to growing a magnet school. However, having only 75 magnet students is due to other factors as well. Actually, WCPSS lists 125 magnet kids this year. Still not a lot but more than 75. Garner High's magnet program had a fairly small draw area for a while if I recall correctly. Broughton was the school that most of the county had as their IB high school. A few years ago they gave Garner a larger draw area but they still failed to attract as many applicants as Broughton. Now Broughton is no longer a magnet and the county is split between Millbrook and Garner. I personally don't think that the IB program was as big of a draw as Broughton itself was.
There are some people who are just never going to send their kids to Garner no matter what. It has lower test scores, a higher F&R & suffers from a not so great reputation. East Millbrook has the same problem and is not as popular as other magnet middle schools. Doesn't matter if the reputation is deserved or not, its really hard for schools to overcome a negative rep.
Anyway, I agree that Garner needs to grow it's magnet program. Hard to justify being a magnet if a school is over 90% base. Just pointing out some of things that I think have exacerbated the situation.
Actually, Garner's draw area
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 12:54 — magnetParentActually, Garner's draw area was not that small. They became a magnet the year my child was entering high school. That year, our IB Magnet option was shifted from Broughton to Garner. Basically they split the county in half and made Garner the southern IB magnet and Broughton the Northern IB magnet. (I do not live that close to Garner). Millbrook came later.
They had a hard time getting magnet students because it was the lowest performing high school in the county, and the magnet program was new/undeveloped. I haven't looked at it that closely lately, but I don't think there is much improvement in that area.
No doubt. If they hadn't
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 13:45 — JonesSausageNo doubt.
If they hadn't demagnetized the largest and most successful IB program in the state, there'd be less of a problem here.
I feel badly for Garner folks, who do also deserve the magnet, because they don't have the necessary support to build their program...they're still floundering trying to get it off the ground, but it's not for a lack of effort on their part.
Millbrook's program will most likely be off the ground next year.
If they hadn't demagnetized
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 14:31 — jenmanIf they hadn't demagnetized the largest and most successful IB program in the state, there'd be less of a problem here
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you mean by that? There'd be less of a problem here? Besides, Broughton gets to keep their successful IB program. They just don't have to let anybody else in now.
I agree with your other statements, though. I also feel bad for Garner and wish them well. I agree that Millbrook will get up and running soon.
Thank you for that
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 12:56 — jenmanThank you for that correction.
I was thinking in terms of
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:08 — jenmanI was thinking in terms of the old policy, which is what drives most of the magnet discussions. I was including schools that were underpopulated as well as schools in higher poverty areas.
I think it would be more
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:12 — JonesSausageI think it would be more cost effective to increase the magnet % at existing magnet schools rather than to spend much more money to create new magnets.
But I do agree in principle with your second point.
I agree that the magnet
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:11 — jenmanI agree that the magnet percentage should be increased. I don't think that any magnet should have a high income base. I would move those kids out to nearby non-magnet schools (most of the magnets in question are located in areas that have other schools nearby) and open those seats to magnet applicants.