Wake County school board vice chairwoman Debra Goldman got a mostly favorable response at Tuesday's night highly choreographed town hall forum in Cary.
As noted in today's article by Sadia Latifi, most speakers praised Goldman for slowing down the process by joining with the Democrats last week to kill the zone plan. The meeting, which drew about 150 people, took place amid a large police presence as officers guarded entrances and closed off the front section of seats.
"It’s important that I hear from my constituents about their thoughts and concerns, so I can best represent you in my role as a school board member,” Goldman said during the forum. “I’m looking forward to working with the rest of the board and figuring out what needs to happen in Wake County to further the goals we have set before us.”
Debbie Kline, PTSA president at Athens Drive, was among the parents who thanked Goldman. Kline said she thought the process behind the developing plan had been too reactive.
“It felt like we were just reacting to whoever is yelling right now,” Kline told Goldman. “It didn’t feel like there was enough attention to the whole problem.”
The only serious personal criticism came from Allison Backhouse of Wake CARES.
“Shame on you, Mrs. Goldman,” Backhouse said. “You turned your back on those who supported a new direction for our school system and our children.”
But Backhouse was in the minority Tuesday night.
After the forum ended, Goldman left without talking to reporters.
Comments
Cary Schools Actually Make Up
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 18:57 — local23Has 3 BOE Members - While Debra covers the middle to east and NO HS, Deborah and Ron cover HS and more schools with a larger base of students; so while there may be some that did agree with Debra (District 9) others in District 7 and 8 did not agree with all of her decisions. Cary is very diverse and shares borders and schools with both Morrisville and Apex...
Breaking News!
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 17:19 — JanisTangoMichelle Rhee just resigned! Maybe she will come to Wake!
I hope not! I hope you are
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 19:46 — aquaman4life68I hope not! I hope you are saying that to be funny. She was a tyrant, and the changes she was making was way to much at one time and that new evaluation tool she was implementing which basically put a whole lot of weights on the teacher's test scores from the kids. YOU people just don't know what it is like to teach and that would be the WORST thing that could happen to this county. My heart would go out to the teachers in Wake if someone like her come on board and applied such huge misleading changes. Talk about hurting moral!!! I think we would end up in double jeopardy...less money and then less teachers on top of that.
Disagreement?
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 21:02 — SDR256Did she disagree with the teachers' unions?
Education observers
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 20:34 — AngelaWEducation observers suggested that the fast pace of change and Rhee’s abrupt personality might have contributed to her downfall, though not everyone agreed. Others stressed the importance of getting stakeholders to back sweeping change.
“Michelle Rhee did mostly what she was hired to do: shake up the system, be a bull in a china shop,” said Mike Petrilli, vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a nonprofit education think tank.
If there is any lesson in Rhee’s departure for other school reformers, Petrilli said, it is that they need to pay attention to politics. Petrilli blamed Fenty for failing to sell education reform and said he and Rhee were wrong to think that just showing gains in student achievement would bring residents around.
“At the end of the day, school reform is not terribly popular,” Petrilli said. “People will say they support accountability, but if they’re gong to shut down your local school or fire your friend who is a teacher, suddenly reform doesn’t sound so good.”
http://www.wral.com/news/political/story/8449690/
She sounds perfect
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 22:54 — FSandYOU"school reform is not terribly popular"
That is the problem now. The status quo gang doesn't have the stomach for true reform and obviously many parents don't either. So, let's just squash the attempt and hold some more meetings. All while our children and families still have no idea when and if anything will ever change.
So yeah, I'm all for her or anyone like her who will come in and make things happen right out of the box.
Especially since we can't seem to do it on our own.
I thought Oprah and the
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 18:20 — user12345I thought Oprah and the facebook guy were sending her to NJ which is the model JT wants us to follow
so sorry to hear that
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 17:42 — enufalredyHopefully she will be able to continue her good work for the benefit of even more children.
She has stated she would
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 17:22 — virginiadareShe has stated she would never work for a school system governed by a Board of Education. Guess that rules us out! Can't really blame her...who would want to work for these guys?
This topic came up before.
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 18:17 — jenmanThis topic came up before. Somebody else posted that Rhee said she wouldn't want to work for a board of ed because things could change too much from election to election. But things can change under a mayor, too, as DC is experiencing now.
Besides the whole mayor thing is a moot point here since we're a countywide system.
email our Superintendant
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 17:20 — AngelaWemail our Superintendant search committee!!! oh wait.....that's Goldman, never mind.
At the end of the "pink
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 18:23 — user12345At the end of the "pink hair" / "Prom Queen" meeting Goldman and Ron were talking off mic about having three candidates and how to vet them with the board ... so, I thought she was almost done.
Experienced vs inexperienced
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:28 — SDR256What I observed last night was that parents who - again - are new to this discussion are so happy to have Debra slow the process down. Other audience members who have been following this for years, and who mainly came to also listen, were not so easy to sway. I think it could be very politically strategic of Debra to line the next bunch of worried parents up behind her. Not saying good or bad. Just really interesting.
Also what I saw last night were people who got up and congratulated Debra for voting down the zone model but in the next expressed their relief that the board would have a chance to look at the Alves model (seeming to miss the point that this IS a zone model).
Parents who expressed relief over the 'resolution' of the Lochmere discussion - which was not decided in the proposed model and not decided yet.
Most of the congratulatory crowd seemed to have missed the message that the proposed model was proposed, still open. Somehow they had been lead into fearing that it was a done deal.
Lots of individual requests that missed the bigger picture.
Oh, except for Ms. Bader who packed as much fear mongering (Federal suit, accreditation, diversity, train wreck - parents need to understand this will effect them!) into three minutes as she could manage, and even almost had to be yanked off stage as it was. Even though this was a 'friendly' meeting in her terms. Could not help herself.
No response from Debra - 'highly choreographed' is an understatement. It seemed robotic. But, as someone commented that was probably politically smart. It just leaves me wondering where, as a leader, her passion and vision are. (schools? diversity? career? magnets? superintendent search?)
Also, has anyone else considered the ramifications of leaving the node based software system in place for the next year? One of the things that I found very attractive about changing to a different tracking system this year is that it would put assignments more firmly in control of proximity and parent choice. Regardless of where the base assignment/zone model technical discussion wind blows, if that system is left in place for the next election we could indeed be right back where we started. They'll just move all the little dominos back in place, assign whatever characteristics du jour and voila! Welcome back toxic labeling and healthy schools that do not teach children.
I liked the idea that the node based system would disappear and that the model proposed (not complete) took away layers of complexity. Not that it was simple, but instead of hundreds of variables it had maybe dozens. It was moving in the right direction. Can we keep up that momentum? Is that Ms. Goldman's goal? Doubt it, on both counts.
Adding new layers of complexity
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 18:00 — Apexcitizen1"I liked the idea that the node based system would disappear and that the model proposed (not complete) took away layers of complexity.
What evidence do you have that this would remove layers of complexity? The more likely reality is that it would add as many new layers of complexity as would have eliminated the way the plan was developing.
Assignment process
Transportation process
"Promise zone"
Costs?
Evidence
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 21:11 — SDR256The evidence I have is personal. The presentation that I saw of the maps made actual sense to me, whereas the node system never did. There were fewer variables in the model that I saw than in the node based system. My husband is a mathematician. He calls the node system highly parametric and the combinatorial computation is exponential. He says that it must take a lot of CPU to do it, and wonders at how they do it. With the number of possible permutations he wonders at how you would know which results are good and which are bad. There are so many possibilities, he suggests that its highly probable they just 'get an answer and go with it'.
With the zone based model, the model actually made sense to a normal person like me. Not to say there aren't other simplifications that could also make sense, but that the attraction in simplification is strong.
How does the node system not
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 09:10 — danofncHow does the node system not make sense? It breaks the county up into small parts, and those individual parts were assigned to certain schools based upon distance, capacity and diversity calculations.
Now, I wouldn't want to have to work out all the assignments, but I understand how the system was designed to work.
You could actually take the node system as is and just assign nodes to a school close by until it is filled and then move on to the next one. You could still keep the zones, and allow people to apply to other schools within their zones as long as there is capacity.
A system without base assignments seems more complicated to me, because for every student in Wake County you have to have a prioritized list of choices. Then, you take those lists, put them all into a computer, and based on some sort of lottery/priority system you assign every single kid. It basically would turn every individual house into its own "node".
I think that most people in Wake County aren't nearly as concerned with which school their child attends as they are how far it is from their home. If you assign everyone to a school near their home, the only applications you have to worry with are for calendar changes and the few who wish to opt out of their school. That would be a lot easier to manage than getting applications from everyone.
You could
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 11:17 — SDR256"You could actually take the node system as is and just assign nodes to a school close by until it is filled and then move on to the next one. You could still keep the zones, and allow people to apply to other schools within their zones as long as there is capacity."
You could, but they didn't. They cherry picked and experimented. I just don't like the potential for the re-mix and re-match that comes with the node based system. It allows for a lot of forced fragmentation from multiple small areas next to each other being sent in different directions. I know that individual families within a neighborhood may choose to attend different schools regardless, but the fact that it is choice makes all the difference to me.
Sure, you could apply proximity factors to the node based system. And then the next bunch could apply whatever took their fancy as well. The node based system allows itself to be too much of a political kickball from what I can see.
Is there really a big
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 12:49 — danofncIs there really a big difference between using a node as a "political kickball" and sliding a zone boundary a couple of blocks in one direction or the other?
As long as there are boundaries, there will be boundaries that shift for one reason or another.
A lot of the cherry-picking (I think they are called "spot nodes") was an attempt at diversity balancing, right? Well, that has been removed from the equation.
Yes, big difference
Fri, 10/15/2010 - 07:58 — SDR256Yes, the zone model was a proposal! Under construction! Evolving! So of course things were going to change. This seems to have been completely missed on this blog and elsewhere. What was the likelihood that any proposal was going to be 100% perfect on the first draft?
I was referring to your use
Fri, 10/15/2010 - 10:53 — danofncI was referring to your use of the term "political football".
If the zone model had been started, and then a candidate ran against Debra Prickett on the promise that they would move the boundary of the Leesville zone to include some neighborhood that was "wronged" during the drawing of the zone lines, it's a political football.
What is the difference?
Fri, 10/15/2010 - 11:33 — TrailerParkGirlZone = 16 large boxes grouped into 4-5 extra large boxes (regions)
Base assignments with nodes = 1,350 tiny boxes (nodes) grouped into 150 small boxes (schools)
As user has said there will always be lines. It is just a matter of how many. 1,350 tiny boxes is nuts. No other place I have lived operates like that.
A candidate could just as easily promise to move a node that was "wrongly" assigned to school X vs school Y or fix a "base assignment" for some neighborhood.
"A candidate could just as
Sun, 10/17/2010 - 08:56 — danofnc"A candidate could just as easily promise to move a node that was "wrongly" assigned to school X vs school Y or fix a "base assignment" for some neighborhood."
Exactly.
That's why I said that the node system wasn't more prone to political football than the zone system.
There may be 16 zones and 4-5 regions, but every neighborhood that bordered one of the lines would be subject to horse trading by politicians.
Of course!
Sun, 10/17/2010 - 23:55 — SDR256Oh, of course! I totally get it! You were so right! Political football etc etc etc.
You were focused on the football and we were focused on the stadium.
That's so funny! I didn't
Mon, 10/18/2010 - 07:44 — danofncThat's so funny! I didn't know you were a comedian.
YOU said that the nodes were more apt to be a "political kickball" (my mistake calling it a football). I pointed out that a zone boundary is just as easily changed based on politics.
As a matter of fact, some of the zone boundaries had already been changed based on questionable reasoning.
Many projects of this scope
Fri, 10/15/2010 - 09:28 — user12345Many projects of this scope start with community meetings to gather requirements and priorities .... JT appeared to have skipped that step and was going to present a draft for tweaking .....
My husband is a
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 04:49 — jeffrey1Well, that's all great in
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 11:34 — SDR256Well, that's all great in theory. I can't respond to your expertise and I'm not going to bother hubby again. Its kind of dust in the wind anyway.
But as for our sad reality, as Loriac notes we visited Growth Management and found that the tools were archaic and there wasn't a computer scientist in sight (except for the ones we brought with us). Oh, strike that. There was one young intern programmer who was at Chuck's beck and call and no one else was allowed to talk to him. They, apparently, cooked up special recipes on Chuck's laptop, at Chuck's direction, that even his top administrators were not privy to. I guess he thought it would be job security? But even he needed a programmer and several days of processing before he could see how a master vision might work out on the maps. It seemed to me that it was up to him to review the maps according to his own reckoning, by sight and by hand, to see if they were accomplishing what he intended.
So, while network algorithms may have been developed 'to aid in solving these problems', if you'd seen the process and tool they were using (and probably still are using) you'd soon see why it would never be possible to incorporate anything elegant, advanced or with a hope of a predictable outcome. Too much human error incorporated. And no way to assess it or analyze it other than 'by eye' and 'move it a little to the left please'. Very personal and subjective.
There was an alternative SAS program that had been offered, and rejected. But there was so much discussion at the time over the SAS EVAAS program I can't remember what the status of the SAS assignment program was. Would be interesting to know.
Oh, I can believe that WCPSS
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 11:56 — jeffrey1Oh, I can believe that WCPSS did not have access to the technology needed to solve these kinds or problems, and that's a shame.
I have harped on other blog entries about the need to optimize bus routes, as was done in New York City schools and other large districts. Optimization of school assignment is not much different, and these types of problems are not unique to Wake.
The technology is out there whenever Wake decides to move into the 21st century.
They don't have the tools to
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 07:27 — loriacThey don't have the tools to exhaustively look at different solutions. We met with Laura Evans to work on this very thing - the 'tools' are non- existent, so everything was basically done by hand. The push in the 3 year assignment plan to fix logical progression was an attempt to put some parameters in place (though this had the wrong effect for nodes such as ours that start out at the furthest school). Of course without tools, the result is many, many spot fixes that are open to favoritism and 'who you know'. It was also true that Mr. Dulaney kept much info on his own laptop, so that even his senior administrators did not have all the info. This is what we are now back to. Kudos to Ms. Prickett for forcing the issue.
When an event is staged to
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:35 — woodstockWhen an event is staged to the extent this one was, and has an entire page of rules for speaking, it is not difficult to orchestrate "praise."
Great line from the article "Police officers, fire officials, and building supervisors in attendance likely outnumbered the 27 people who gave Goldman feedback."
LOLOL!! We all know a Queen needs her entourage and attendents, but this is over the top.
The rules
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:48 — ElevenYearsInCaryThere's no need to make a conspiracy out of this. Have you read the rules that were provided? They included such orchestrations as "speakers will have 3 minutes", "if you're part of a group of related speakers, please consolidate your comments so others will have time", "if your comments have largely been stated previously, please be considerate of others' time" and "please focus your comments on the assignment plan".
This was hardly a staged event, except that there was a designated time and place, some basic rules and I, guess, a stage. There were over 150 people in attendance -- many to listen, some to speak. All in all, a rational, sane, forum for discussion.
Orchestrated event
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 21:13 — SDR256There were NOT 150 people there. 50 if you're lucky, not counting the dozen police officers - one who stopped me from looking for my friend because I was 'loitering' in the doorway. They were bored that night. And the media, and the town staff. All told there MIGHT have been 75 people there, but not 50 who intended to speak. I think maybe 20 spoke? We ended 45 minutes earlier than Debra's pre-set end time of 8:30 - she warned everyone that she had to go then. And everyone was well mannered.
It was highly orchestrated. Even at the end one of the town staff members noted that they'd been prepared for the worst. (notifications outside the doors about sign size, etc. I wonder who paid for all that?)
Tonight's meeting
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 21:16 — ElevenYearsInCary150 was the number from the N&O reporter. It was clearly more than 50. I stopped counting at 100. And 27 spoke, again per the reporter.
I'm not quite sure the point of all this counting, except an attempt to belittle what was a very civil meeting. People came to be heard, and were heard.
And a lot of the folks that did speak were not doe-eyed newcomers to the issues. They asked Mrs. Goldman if she remembered them from the campaign, they recognized each other by name, and were clearly prepared to present their opinions.
I think it's important to recognize that this meeting was an open forum -- anyone could come, and anyone could have spoken. Most of those that spoke talked about focusing on achievement rather than assignment. That's nothing to belittle.
Maybe I'm not remembering correctly
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 02:08 — TrailerParkGirlMaybe I'm not remembering correctly, but I recall the "new" BOE members saying in their campaigns that they were interested in more dialog than just one way presentation. I thought Debra Goldman was one of those people, but maybe I'm not remembering correctly. If I am remembering correctly, then last night's format was a disappointment.
I would have liked for Ms. Goldman to address the elephant in the room - she ended the zone direction - now what? What is her vision? Her solution? How is it different and more functional than the former method? How will she accomodate moving students to proximate assignments and address growth and stability with base assignments?
Ms. Goldman wanted input - so let's hear her input.
Considering it was an open
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 07:19 — Andrew95Considering it was an open public meeting with only one board member, I would consider her to be the most progressive of the majority. I have yet to see any of the majority other then her, and maybe DebP, allow any input other than "You're awesome."
In addition to what CC said
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 10:45 — TrailerParkGirlThere was no dialogue in her format. I have attended other functions and not just of “new” members where the format was more Q&A – a dialogue. No offense to other citizens, but I’m not just interested in what they have to say, I want to hear what BOE members have to say because they are the ones that take the action, especially the week after they generate a sudden change in course.
Then you haven't been paying
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 08:14 — CaryCurmudgeonThen you haven't been paying attention. John Tedesco has attended many "hostile" meetings, by himself. He's gone to CAACAC meetings when they told him he wasn't welcome. He showed up at a meeting run by Pullen Baptist and NAACP and endured an endless stream of abuse, all in the hopes of opening dialogue. He went to countless RWCA meetings, and is now welcomed there. He has done radio shows on the Shaw University station and answered every caller's question. I could go on.
It is easy to host a meeting, say you're there to listen, and not have to answer for your actions. Even easier if you can stack the audience.
I'd credit her with having some courage if she had attended that day's assignment committee meeting instead of holding her own town hall. She stopped the work of the committee because she wanted more input, then skipped the meeting where she could have had all ears turned toward her ??????????????????????????
Why do I
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 10:49 — TrailerParkGirl"She stopped the work of the committee because she wanted more input, then skipped the meeting where she could have had all ears turned toward her ??????????????????????????"
Why do I keep thinking about kids that ring doorbells and then run away?
Civil meeting
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 01:19 — SDR256It was a civil meeting, agreed. I was proud of Cary for that. Did you help to organize it? Otherwise, I'm not sure why you'd care that much about my observations.
I guess my quibbling comes from residual frustration from a lack of 'hearing' what the intended results will be of this 'hearing'. Chuck and Rosa heard people too. The results were about the same as what the Carpenter Village people were complaining about last night. They keep coming back, they keep being heard.
People came, they were heard. What's next?
Your team owned the world
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 08:50 — user12345Your team owned the world 5-4 for the last year and made their choices on priorities like diversity, bell schedule, YR, high school locations, ... they had a chance to ram through all your concerns of previous administrations but didn't ...
People in Cary are happy
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:39 — user12345People in Cary are happy with their schools and did not understand the need for yet another reassignment plan on the heals of a grueling three plan ... Debra really knew what her constituents wanted. There was only one negative lady from one of the "W" groups in Raleigh who was probably the reason for all the police.
People in Cary are happy?
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:43 — SDR256Really? Was the woman who spoke about her neighborhood being reassigned 4 times in nine years happy? (neighborhood right behind Bond Park she said - very stable, low growth, fyi) The zone model would fix the potential for her neighborhood to be reassigned 4 more times in the next 9 years. But maybe she hasn't been following this topic long enough to realize that. Her first child just entered school.
Really??
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 07:25 — supportwcpssYou must know more about zone model then anyone else including Johnny. With no base, she could be reassigned every year....just within her zone.
We have no details of the plan so how do you know so much?
In this case, fix the specific node issues and don't make up a new fairy tale.
?
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 11:02 — Bob_SconceIIRC, the point was to have a choice model on top of the zones -- if you applied to get into a school, you would stay at that school. The only reassignments would happen if you decided to apply to a different school. (Or, of course, when you advanced to the next level.)
The interesting thing about that model is that it gives a strong advantage to existing residents over newcomers. Newcomers basically have to take whatever open seats there are in the zone until they advance to the next school.
The interesting thing about
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 12:43 — user12345The interesting thing about that model is that it gives a strong advantage to existing residents over newcomers. Newcomers basically have to take whatever open seats there are in the zone until they advance to the next school.
Do you need a zone model to make that happen? What happened to, "the school is at capacity and here is the address for Knightdale HS" ... just have an express bus from Western Wake to Knight dale for newcomers.
No you don't...
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 15:20 — Bob_SconceIt also happens when schools are capped.
I wasn't trying to make a statement about that being good or bad, just pointing out how it would work.
Bob ... some where along the
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 19:17 — user12345Bob ... some where along the line we need to make a judgement ... old residents and stability or new residents and growth ... the priority is going to the newcomers pushing old residents out of school who blame diversity ... until growth stops, or a new priority plan is put in place old residents will continue to pushed around ...
Exactly
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 21:06 — Solon77JT's assignment priority: capacity, proximity, family and stability. Initial preference given to the existing residents. Over time as the county continues to grow and the newcomers are assigned to schools on the other side of the zone due to capacity - they will in turn claim unfair. People will not be fooled by "it was your choice".
Do you really believe that
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:55 — danofncDo you really believe that the only way to avoid being reassigned 4 times in 9 years is to not have an assignment in the first place?
Last year, I think about 90% of available ES seats were filled. It seems like we could base-assign every house in Wake County, while trying to fill the schools to that same ~90% threshold. After that was done, we could allow for choice based on calendar or school preference as space allows.
It seems as though connecting certain schools with certain areas makes a lot more sense for people who value stability than just putting everyone into a lottery.
If your neighbor sells their house, and the person that buys it wouldn't automatically be able to put their kids in the same school near your house that your kids attended, how would that be a stable situation for your neighborhood?
avoiding reassignment
Thu, 10/14/2010 - 01:08 — SDR256No. I did not say that the only way to avoid being reassigned was not to have an assignment in the first place. I said that the proposed model would have fixed it. Alves model would have fixed it. Will Goldman's model fix it? Oh, wait...there is no Goldman model.
I'm not married to the zone model nor am I married to a base school model. I am allergic to the following:
- lack of focus on achievement (made worse with all of the assignment discussion)
- instability due to reassignments
- lack of calendar choice within a reasonable proximity.
- central office (unelected) having an inordinate amount of power over the whole model and the results for families.