What should the school board do with the "Lost Colony" students who live in northern Wake near Granville County?
As noted in today's piece by Ruth Sheehan, the Wake school board will weigh whether to continue paying tuition to send those students to school in Granville County. It's a decision that could cost Wake around $70,000 a year.
Due to their proximity to Granville, Wake has paid tuition for these kids to go there for school since 1931.
But the agreement was put in peril in January when Granville school officials told Wake they wanted to end the agreement. The parents complained, leading to Granville asking Wake to reinstitute the agreement for the 2009-10 school year.
The one exception, which Lost Colony families can live with, is that Granville County would no longer provide transportation. This means that the families would have to get the kids to and from school each day.
But as noted in Ruth's piece, Wake school officials say they already found other places to spend the money it had previously set aside for the Granville Schools.
Is it cheaper or better for Wake to cough up the $70,000 to resume the agreement? The alternative could be busing these kids 15 miles or more to the nearest Wake school.
Comments
Teach them some respect
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 13:43 — FalcRMC 10 "So Let's Take - The undisciplined, irresponsible, underachievers and either teach them some respect and put the fear of the Lord in them"
=====================================
I agree the teaching respect is a key element, however, I'm not sure that the "fear of the Lord" approach is the best method. That approach can backfire.
IMHO teaching respect "respectfully", modeling it and reinforcing until it becomes second nature can be very successful. I think the earlier it is started and the longer applied, the better. It is what my ES used. They focused on four Rs there. I think that is in part why none of the discipline issues in my MS came from my ES despite there being a lot of kids in my ES that came from "bad" homes.
Here's an example of what I mean by backfiring -- there was a boy (NED in case you're wondering) in my child's preschool here who was very physically aggressive (pushing, hitting, etc the other kids). One day he pushed my child in front of his mother. She grabbed him and slapped his hand while saying "we don't push and hit." I thought "really lady because apparently you do."
I think the issue in many cases is not how the respect is taught/how the discipline is handled, it is the fact that it is not being done at all or poorly at home. From what I understand there is not a lot of consistency in this area within the school system either -- methods used vary by school.
Plus, peer pressure make
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 12:49 — jenmanPlus, peer pressure make learning cool and misbehavior unacceptable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User1234--this made me chuckle. It sounds wonderful and I'm sure that in a few cases it works. In reality, the misbehaving kids make things miserable for and are a bad influence on the other kids.
I understand ... but peer
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 13:23 — user1234I understand ... but peer pressure does work many times depending on how many bad apples are mixed in ... most people obey traffic laws, don't litter, pay taxes, don't cheat ... because peer pressure makes it unacceptable ... I know there are laws and punishment but they are not why I do these things ..
No quite.Kids tend to
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 13:46 — shearertwNo quite.
Kids tend to follow "leaders", not peers. Of course a leader can lead to "bad" or "good" behaviors. Unfortunately, in the teenage years, the "leaders" are often the "cool" ones. Many times, kids from "unsupervised" homes are also strong leaders as they have been forced to be independent and fend for themselves. They also have assumed some level of "authority" by the lack of that "authority" in their lives. So.... these strong "leaders" bring bad habits and attitudes and can be very destructive, esp. when there's enough to form a "cool" crowd. It takes very strong and good leaders in the classroom and the administration to handle these kids. Expecting their "peers" to correct their behaviour is niave. Generally, these types of kids don't see the "good" kids as their peers.
I guess I was thinking of
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 15:38 — user1234I guess I was thinking of "peers" included parents, teachers, etc. too not just their classmates. I probably should have used a better word. If high achievement is expected and a tradition it can catch on ... likewise, if low achievement is the normal it is hard for good students to do anything ...
"likewise, if low
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 15:58 — shearertw"likewise, if low achievement is the normal it is hard for good students to do anything ..."
That's statement is exactly right. That is also why we must push for higher expectations and tougher EOG test, etc. If its a piece of cake for the good students, they see no reason to work hard, no reason to distinguish themselves from the "bad" apples b/c in the end, there is no reward. The "bad" apples get to have all the fun, be "cool" and still get by just fine. Why bust your behind to get a "3" just like the loser next to you. Why bust your behind to raise your EOG from a 98% to 99%? Our system that caters to the lowest common denominator brings everyone down. The opposite would bring everyone up and possibly put the pressure you're looking for on the "bad" apples.
I think your complaint is
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 17:50 — user1234I think your complaint is with the state not the county since the State creates the EOGs. If you think they should be harder, you should be lobbying you State Rep. Personally, I think 11th and 12th grades were added to keep kids <18 off the streets. Most kids with a regular education could leave after the 10th grade year if they could find employment or get an Associates Degree. Also, since the classes are segmented into difference levels chances are the person next to you is going to college too or going to jail too. So, the losers, as you call them, should all be grouped in their own class.
OT-alert State to intervene in Halifax schools
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 16:48 — AngelaWhttp://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6774904&rss=rss-wtvd-article-6774904
Isn't it amazing how...
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 14:41 — MarvinSchwartzanything posted on here becomes an example of the evils of WCPSS and its diversity policy?
Headline: "Student helps old lady across street near school"
WakeEd response: "WCPSS makes that student pass 2 old ladies who need help crossing the street just to get to that school!"
Let not the facts of Ms. Sheehan's story get in the way of a good rant against WCPSS...
*It was Granville County who wanted the agreement terminated, not WCPSS.
*The people in question are residents of Wake County. I understand they may work and shop in Granville, but they pay taxes to Wake. Lots of people who live near county boundaries experience this. I grew up near Emerald Isle (Carteret County) in the 1970s. We shopped and pumped gas and picked up the mail in Swansboro (Onslow County), 5 miles away. But I had to go to West Carteret High School, 25 miles away. Why? Because we lived in Carteret County!!! It was a courtesy that has allowed the school issue to exist between Wake and Granville for over 75 years. And one, for some reason, GRANVILLE chose to end.
*It would take an act of the legislature to adjust county boundaries. There is a whole lot more to it than just saying, "OK, now you're in Granville County, so go to school there."
*Finally, Ms. Sheehan says "Creedmoor Elementary School, by contrast, is a quick five-mile drive up the road." But the people on this blog will tell you that five miles is entirely too far for your child to have to go to school - that is bussing all over creation!
You left out a section
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 18:05 — FalcHeadline: "WCPSS supporter only presents one side of story." I can actually appreciate arguments on both sides of the story on this issue, but you left out a key section from the article.
"When the Lost Colonists complained, Granville school officials listened -- and responded.
In a letter to Wake dated March 9, Peace asked to reinstate the old Wake-Granville agreement -- minus the rumbling Granville County buses that used to cross into Wake to pick up the Lost Colony students." (parents had agreed to provide their own transport)
So yes, it was originally Granville county who wanted the agreement terminated, but after the Lost Colony citizens complained, Granville listened and responded by asking that the agreement be continued afterall, which put the ball in WCPSS' court.
Well...
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 15:23 — Bob_SconceI don't know why Granville County originally asked to end the agreement. It seemed to be working well all-around. Ending it would seem to have been a bad idea. Regardless, they ended up trying to do the right thing. Why doesn't WCPSS? (Don't tell me that they already spent them money -- they need the money to educate those 49 students.)
My problem here is Wake's attitude, basically "No. You said it. You can't take it back. No do-overs. Don't be an indian-giver." It just sounds childish when WCPSS should be asking what's best for these families.
I think you're attacking a strawman. The view is generally that closer schools are better, and 5 miles is too far to drive when there are perfectly good schools 1, 2, 3 and 4 miles away. Here, it's a choice of 5 or 15. Between those two, 5 sounds great.
Who said no takebacks?
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 21:45 — MarvinSchwartzI think you are creating a conflict where none exists. The facts are that Granville requested dissolution of the agreement for reasons unknown and Wake complied. Then, six weeks later after the parents raise hell (and understandably so), Granville wants to reinstate the agreement.
The way I read Ms. Sheehan's article is that Wake had no choice but to make arrangements for those students if Granville wouldn't take them. But since Granville has rescinded their original request, requiring the re-allocation of that money, the superintendent just cannot reinstate the agreement - the entire board has to vote on it.
Call me silly, but I don't see how that is childish or uncooperative on the part of Wake. Just sounds like procedure to me.
And while we're at it, can Mr. Hui inform us what was the actual result of this vote at the board meeting? If the board voted to restore the agreement, then by all accounts the BOE did the right thing and the WakeEd board monkeys will have to find something else at which to fling their bile.
What the BOE did
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 09:46 — FalcSee Mr. Hui's "Recapping the COW meeting" post
"The board decided not to continue paying tuition to send the Lost Colony students to Granville County. What seems to have settled the issue is that some Lost Colony students already attend school in Wake so buses now serve that area."
Marvin, Let me remind you of
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 15:07 — shearertwMarvin,
Let me remind you of the comment (by User1234 no less) that started it all:
"The government does not owe them anything. They choose to live where they do and accept the consequences."
Some of us found that to be a little hypocritical given User’s stance on busing people around and in and out of F&R nodes.
user1234 should have been
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 15:46 — Eric_Buser1234 should have been more specific.
I agree that Granville County doesn't owe these folks anything. They live in Wake County and by all rights should have to go to school in Wake County.
Wake County on the other hand certainly owes them a spot at a school and a bus ride to that school, so if he's talking about Wake County then I have a problem with that.
The fact that Granville County is accepting these folks as tuition students and providing transportation is extraordinary. Wake does not provide transportation to out-of-county tuition students.
That said, like Bob, I don't see why the agreement cannot be kept in place. I'm guessing the tuition only covers the local funding portion and that the state and federal portion would be paid regardless of where the students are attending. ncreportcards.org says that Granville County spends $1611 per student in local funds.
We'll let user confirm but I
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 15:59 — shearertwWe'll let user confirm but I believe he was referring to Wake Co. See another one of his lines below. Of course Granville doesn't owe them anything.
"If people live out in the "weeds" they are at the mercy of what government will and can provide. They should expect to have to drive into Raleigh to go to school."
Ok, Granville does not owe
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 21:27 — user1234Ok, Granville does not owe these Wake Co. residents anything. Wake Co. owes them a seat in some school in the county somewhere. Wake county does not owe them a seat at the closest school. If there is a law requiring transportation, Wake owes them a bus to go pick them up. If two governments can work out something that is convenient for these folks that is great.
One interesting point I
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 11:26 — shearertwOne interesting point I think I missed originally is that these "Lost Colony" parents don't want their kids assigned to the "Award Winning" Wake Co. schools, even if they have to provide their own transportation. Interesting.
Remember for people today it
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 11:33 — user1234Remember for people today it is all about convenience not education. Also, given four generations of being Granville Panthers they may not want to buy new sweatshirts.
I would not assume its not
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 11:49 — shearertwI would not assume its not about education to these people.
Your second point may be more to the point. Perhaps they're not looking forward to buying new sweatshirts every other year like we do here in Wake Co.
How Does Wake Co. Schools Measure Diversity?
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 05:06 — AngelaWhttp://venitapeyton.com/2009/04/how-does-wake-co-schools-measure.html
I was not seeing things. I SWEAR I saw some white people this morning. I was either on New Bern Ave, Trawick Road, Oakwood, Hedingham, Edenton St., Lane or in downtown Raleigh.
Maybe Martin Luther King and Grantland Roads are a tad bit unlikely. But walk or drive along Poole, Rocky Quarry and Barwell roads and peep through the new subdivisions!
So, Wake County Public Schools couldn’t re-segregate schools without a lot of effort! There are many diverse neighborhoods with a 27610 zip code and several near downtown Raleigh (see Southeast Raleigh map).
Yipppee!!! Bring them to
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 20:24 — amedinaohYipppee!!! Bring them to Pleasant Union! We need the students. I am NOT being sarcastic either.
I should have added that
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 10:39 — KeungHui (author)I should have added that Wake, at least in recent years, hasn't normally allowed tuition students to attend. The exceptions are people found to be illegally living in Wake or families that moved out of the district in mid-year. Wake has generally required those families to pay to stay in Wake for the rest of the school year before kicking them out. School officials had been citing growth and overcrowding for not allowing ordinary people to pay tuition to come to Wake.
Map here...
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 09:58 — Bob_SconceSo, in case anybody is wondering where this is, here's a link to a map of the area:
http://tinyurl.com/c222oj
There are basically two peninsulas of falls lake where the "base" of the peninsula is in Granville County. It seems to me that the logical option here is to just transfer this completely over to Granville County. As this mess has shown, it's a lot easier for Granville County to provide services to the area than for Wake County to do so.
I am thinking that it all
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 09:00 — user1234I am thinking that it all comes out in the wash. I think a number of families in Chatham who live on this side of the lake pay tutition to Wake. Could it be we export 200 kids and import 200 kids and the net cost is not much? Personally, I would drop the transportation. People should consider themselves luck to have a convenient school.
So you're saying that the
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 09:18 — CaryCurmudgeonSo you're saying that the choice people make of where to live should have a direct bearing on what they should expect from their school system?
If people live out in the
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 10:20 — user1234If people live out in the "weeds" they are at the mercy of what government will and can provide. They should expect to have to drive into Raleigh to go to school. I guess 50 years ago many kids rode a bus from the north part of the county to Boughton which would have been one of the few HS around. But if governments can work out something that is equitable and fair why not trade students.
I have been surprised that you have not tried to kick out the Chathem kids from Panther Creek. Can not remember how many there are crossing over.
Any idea what the socioeconomic status is of these
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 12:57 — Falcpeople in the "weeds"? Would that weigh into your approach?
Some people choose to live in the "weeds" for more freedom, country peace or to get away from city slickers, but some live in the "weeds" because it is more affordable for them.
The F&R map shows this are
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 13:15 — user1234The F&R map shows this are as very low F&R%
Last week, I argued that
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 14:15 — shearertwLast week, I argued that you, support and WCPSS were only interested in busing urban, black kids out into the suburbs to hide the existing issues in that community and I was called a "racist". And now you proved my point, exactly.
Are you on drugs? Question
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 14:25 — user1234Are you on drugs? Question was about the demographics of the area affected and the answer from WCPSS website was low F&R. Where do you get race out of that?
It somes from your stance
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 14:32 — shearertwIt somes from your stance that, suddenly, Wake Co. doesn't owe these people anything. That is completely the opposite of what you spout out daily on this blog. I'm just trying to investigate why. You have refused to answer that question. So now, its only if it is a state mandate. So its ok to choose to bus a poor urbanite up to and over 20 miles to sit by a "rich" kid in SW Cary but not ok to bus a kid in whose parents live in the "weeds" in N Wake Co. 10 miles or less unless it is a state mandate.
Everyone is entitled to the
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 16:53 — user1234Everyone is entitled to the same 20 mile bus trip independent of your race or income.
Again, what's with the urban poor? Look at your F&R map. The poor are in the rural areas. They live in the apartment near your home. Probably, some of your kids' teachers qualify.
Nice try, ace. You spend
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 10:45 — CaryCurmudgeonNice try, ace. You spend hours arguing why Wake County should bus students all over the county because they don't live near a "better" school, but these people are stuck in the boondocks because they chose to live there.
Do you have some bias against these people? Is there something wrong with them because they live in a country setting? Or perhaps you are just as happy to keep all of those country folk out of your school.
I can not tell if you are
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 11:06 — user1234I can not tell if you are for these folks are against them?
The government does not owe them anything. They choose to live where they do and accept the consequences. But if a compromise can be worked out between governments with little cost who cares?
I don't think people should be bussed all over. I think every school should be "good" so there is no need to migrate street to street in search of a golden node.
"The government does not
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 12:16 — CaryCurmudgeon"The government does not owe them anything.. They choose to live where they do and accept the consequences."
And yet you believe that people who choose to live near a high-F&R school schould not also accept the consequences, and the government owes them a bus ride to a different school.
You can't have it both ways.
And if you believe that every school should be "good so there is no need to migrate..." then does that mean you have changed your mind and no longer support busing?
User, let me venture a
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 12:46 — shearertwUser, let me venture a guess to your answer....
Everyone should live like drones in city high rise 600 sq ft apartments taking showers with luke warm water heated by the solar hot water heaters on the roof. In the morning, their kids all hop on the "light rail" out the edge of town to the previously suburban school. After school, the catch the "light rail" over the the gov't sponsered after school program until their parents get off from their govt jobs to come "by light rail" to pick them up and take them home to their cubby hole to sleep.
It should not matter if you
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 12:42 — user1234It should not matter if you live in a high F&R or low F&R area, the quality of the education should be the same – above average. There is nothing special about non-F&Rs that would allow them to get better education. There is a population of F&Rs spread throughout the county of about 30%. There are no large scale ghettos where kids get “bussed” across the tracks to the new rich white school. “Bussing” is used to evoke memories of court mandated integration to stir emotions for political gain. Having very good and very bad, very rich and very poor schools is not what people here want. Business leaders and Realtors don’t want all the poor people warehoused in projects like other cities have done. Wake is unique in having uniformity with no large scale tracts of slums like is common elsewhere. Whether that is because we were not a manufacturing city or our leaders integrated early and peacefully, etc. it is hard to say. Ultimately, there should not be great disparity between schools period and especially not based on income. The great upheaval of reassignments was brought on by unplanned hyper-growth by the beloved mayors not a desire to have diverse schools.
So, I have and always will support above average diverse schools. For most schools there is enough diversity within six miles such that most schools fit in the 20-40% F&R with a few outliers on either side. When you have schools that are a mile apart like Stough and Lacy with vastly different quality perception or create a mass migration of parents following golden nodes you know there is something wrong and inequitable in the system.
"For most schools there is
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 13:44 — CaryCurmudgeon"For
most schools there is enough diversity within six miles such that most
schools fit in the 20-40% F&R with a few outliers on either side"
Tell that to the people in Garner, where only 34% of the students who live there go to school there.
You still have not answered the question: Why do you feel that the government has no responsibility to provide buses for children in the countryside to get to school, but you do think it is the government's responsibility to provide more busing than is required to get suburban kids to the nearest school?
"When you have schools that
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 13:05 — shearertw"When you have schools that are a mile apart like Stough and Lacy with vastly different quality perception or create a mass migration of parents following golden nodes you know there is something wrong and inequitable in the system. "
Is the inequity created by the parents or the school system? If both schools receive the same funding, same quality of teachers and administrators then the system has done is part for equality. Just because the parents of aDavis Drive VER made a great school. Great schools are made by communities of great parents.
Common on … given people
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 13:26 — user1234Common on … given people can random live anywhere in the county and nucleus of brilliant parent leaders all randomly migrate to one school is improbable. While parents are important how much difference can they make? A student spends a majority of the day with the same state employees getting taught the same state curricula as every other school. Sure parents make for great PTAs, get better uniforms, raise money for band trips but they really don’t have an effect on EOGs??Davis Drive
Of Course!!
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 14:19 — Bob_SconceAbsolutely right. The Sconce children are clearly unaffected by the many hours that Mrs. Sconce and I spend with them going over their homework, teaching them things that they didn't pick up in class, reading to our kids, setting aside time for them to read to themselves, working with them on class projects, taking them on educational trips, etc.... We're all had the experience of the student whose parents picked up the slack when the student was subject to a never-ending stream of substitutes after their 3rd grade teacher had a baby.
Aren't your kids home-schooled? I'm guessing that, like many home schooled kids, they actually spend far less time learning than do kids in public schools, but are still ahead of public schools.
I am not sure how the
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 14:34 — user1234I am not sure how the excellent time you spend with your kids on school is related to whether they go to a school 2 miles or five miles away? I would hope there are parents like you in every school.
The rotating subs you experienced could happen in any school. When kids are homeschooled they get a custom curicula and full time tutor which maximizes the learning per hour. That luxury is not available / affordable in public education.
There are many schools that
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 13:54 — shearertwThere are many schools that "buck the trend", they're just not in Wake County. You are sadly mistaken if you think parents don't make a difference in a schools EOGs, they are the difference. Give them 40% F&Rs from their "community" and keep it that way for several years and they will still do great. Per usual, you totally discount the value a of a community holding govt employees to higher standards (that's where the difference is made).
...
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 12:58 — SideburnsSo, you admit that this is not an educational issue. (I love your use of the word "warehoused".)
The reality is that children are being uprooted from a school where they have connections and feel comfortable to another school purely to achieve a percentage. Stough parents have said they "need" the Lacy children to make their school healthy. I agree that something is wrong.
“So, you admit that
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 13:39 — user1234“So, you admit that this is not an educational issue.”
You define education too narrowly … don’t think EOG scores all the time … this is about taking high needs kids and not “warehousing them. Having the high needs kids distributed around helps to spread the load and not over load any single school. (Yes, I know, there is some KIPP / Title I / special program / funding that some school uses that that would meet there special needs with out us having to interact with them and the new BOE will make the magic happen).
Exactly how does spreading the kids help THEM?
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 23:38 — FalcI'm with you on the don't think EOG scores all the time but how is spreading high needs kids automatically not "warehousing" them?
"Having the high needs kids distributed around helps to spread the load and not overload any single school."
It might help the school or the school's EOG results, but how does it help the KIDS? At what point is enough, enough?
Some of the reassignments are not about redistributing from an 80% school to a 10% school, they are about redistributing from a 40% school to a 10% school.
Here's a scenerio:
Year 1 -
1) In school A at the beginning of the year, 10% of students are Level I/II and 90% are Level III/IV. A large-group direct teaching model is used and taught to the middle (Level III). At the end of the year, 90% of the students pass EOGs.
2) In school B at the beginning of the year, 40% of students are Level I/II (half of them are new to the school) and 60% are Level III/IV. More small group differentiated teaching models are used and some students get more than one year of growth. At the end of the year 68% of students pass EOGs.
Year 2 -
The Level I/II students that were new to school B are reassigned from school B to school A to "spread the load."
1) In school A now at the beginning of the year, 20% of students are Level I/II and 80% are Level III/IV. A large-group direct teaching model is used and taught to the middle (Level III). At the end of the year, 80% of the students pass EOGs.
2) In school B now at the beginning of the year, 30% of students are Level I/II and 70% are Level III/IV. More small group differentiated teaching models are used. At the end of the year 80% of students pass EOGs.
School B's EOG scores improved and it is no longer a Title I school, but were the reassigned students helped or not? Are they being "warehoused" at either school, if so, which one(s)? Was school B a "bad" school in Year 1? Was school A really a "good" school? If school B was given more time with the same set of Level I/II students could they have continued to make progress with them?
Again, I think you are
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 09:07 — user1234Again, I think you are stuck on EOG scores. You think WCPSS has a diabolical plan to mix kids in a certain way to get an optimum score or to “hide” some kids in the midst of good students. Well just like conspiracy theories about theUS
The mixing does make for a health school. My wife teaches in a high F&R school and it is a much different place thanDavis Drive
ROFLOL user1234
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 16:21 — Voice_of_Reason_First peer pressure requires a peer group (not achieved by throwing a group together without common threads). Second peer pressure can work both ways, and maybe this is a good illustration of why economic diversity busing fails. For instance, since a lot of these children are bussed together and a lot are sent to the non-Title I schools because of low grades, they may be actually forming "negative value" peer groups. And those groups can have a negative effect on others. It generally works more to the negative than the positive since that behavior is usually "the path of least resistance".
A better solution would be to turn up the ratchet on discipline in schools that have a high population of trouble makers.
The "conspiracy theory" as you call it, is written policy.
So Let's Take
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 11:34 — RMC10So Let's Take - The undisciplined, irresponsible, underachievers and either teach them some respect and put the fear of the Lord in them, like we were raised - that would be before the parents didn't want their lil darlings to be disciplined, and allowed their lil darlings to be respectful or no one.
Or, take those few bad apples and mix them in with children who have to be in school, who have been taught to respect, who's parents do not tolerate bad grades, or acting out in class, and let those bad apples mess things up, lower expectations, lower test scores, cost more money to the taxpayers, and bring their bad attitudes to all schools.
I for one do not want my child's education dumbed down so the underachievers succeed on a diminshed value EOG testing measurement, which has also been dumbed down so much, it's not even a useful tool for measuring academic success.
Forced Diversity here is beginning to be an area wide bad product to sell - to parents, students, educators, realtors, home buyers, and County Commissioners. Mediocrity for all should not be the acceptable substitute.