School board members are miffed at the fallout from their decision not to do a study on the diversity policy.
During Tuesday's committee of the whole meeting, board members argued that they weren't against a study, per se. Board member Beverley Clark said the problem was that the question was framed in a way that was unanswerable.
Board members Horace Tart and Ron Margiotta had wanted staff to see if students who were reassigned from North Garner Middle School to West Lake Middle School for diversity reasons are now doing better academically.
Board member Lori Millberg said there's no way to know how the students would have done if they had stayed at North Garner.
Clark said there are other ways that the results of the diversity policy can be answered. For instance, she said you can look at school-level performance and teacher retention data.
(BTW, Wake is touting a new state report that found that the district's 2007-08 teacher turnover rate of 11.67 percent is lower thatn the state average of 13.85 percent.)
Eleanor Goettee said Education Week will publish a study soon which notes the problems found in high-poverty schools.
Those kinds of studies likely won't appease critics who'd point out that it still isn't looking at the impact on individual students.
For instance, Margiotta told Clark he just can't "focus on the big picture" because he needs to see if individual students are being harmed.
Supt. Del Burns suggested that board members propose questions to see if staff can answer them.
(Barring any additional posts today, this is it for the next week while I'm on vacation. I wish you all a Merry Christmas.)
Comments
You might want to point out
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 21:09 — Eric_BYou might want to point out the numerous schools in Wake County with high needs (F&R > 40%) that are excelling with >95% pass rate due to their community school pride. I think a few local examples would help.
---
ncdad1 - If you think the current policy is working so well and assigning high F&R nodes to low F&R schools will help these "high needs" kids, why don't you point to some examples of schools with F&R < 20% where the F&R kids have pass rates >95% due to their busing? I would think a few local examples would help.
I've already given an example of a school with the highest F&R percentage in the district (Smith at 69.4% in 2006-07) that scored higher than a school with an F&R of 21% (West Lake). Smith even beat many other schools like Brassfield that year that had only a 11.8% F&R percentage. Of course, I'm talking about the F&R kids' performance themselves rather than a school average.
"I've already given an
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 21:16 — ncdad1"I've already given an example of a school with the highest F&R percentage in the district (Smith at 69.4% in 2005-06) that scored higher than a school with an F&R of 21% (West Lake). "
Eric,
I thought we already went over this that Smith is a Title I school and the students receive individual tutoring they don't get at WestLake which puts them at an advantage.
btw, it appears that most of the Westlake's base area is with in walking distance except for a small node in south Raleigh which I would not consider massive bussing.
http://wwwgis2.wcpss.net/prod/mapscript/WCMapscript.php?MainOption=FindNodes&NodeType=BASE&MagProg=&SchoolInfo=606+West+Lake+Elementary&ProgramTitle=Base+Attendance+Area&MagName=&CalendarYear=2008-2009
Huh - What Tuturing ?
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 22:17 — Voice_of_Reason_Who's paying for that ? (or you stating things you know nothing about). Title I shows only give individual tutoring when they have a track record of failing and then only to low-performing F&R children. This is the first year WCPSS has had to do that and I believe it is only one school, not Smith.
Sorry , meant individual
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 01:24 — ncdad1Sorry , meant individual attention afforded by Title I funds ... tutoring was probably technically wrong.
Huh - What individual attention???
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:04 — Voice_of_Reason_Title I
Title I money is allocated by the feds to the state based on US Census poverty levels. The state allocates money to the counties based on this data. The number of eligible schools then divide that money up with some being held back (15%) for transportation and supplemental services.
If school has 40%+ F&R, then eligible to use Title I funds for school-wide programs to benefit ALL students in the school. Principal determines how money is spent. This money is divided by the number of schools eligible (this is where F&R fraud hurts).
- If THESE school fail to meet Average Yearly Progress (AYP) goals in the same subject for more than 2 years, they MUST offer busing to another school.
- - If THESE school fail to meet Average Yearly Progress (AYP) goals in the same subject for more than 3 years, parents may elect busing to another school or free Supplemental Educational services outside of school hours. These can be private agencies or church groups, but the state must approve them. All F&R students, regardless of their performance are eligible for this.
- If 4 years of failing occurs, then school may replace staff or implement curriculum changes.
- If 5 years, the "nuclear option" occurs and mandatory restructuring must take place. This can mean state takeover or a private management team.
Only one school is in the #3 year as far as I know. BTW- one year of passing resets everything.
If the last column in the
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 16:54 — ncdad1If the last column in the chart (AYP Status) is the school's progress, it appears that WCPSS is in trouble, right? It appers visually that at least half the schools were "no". Did I read that right?
http://www.wcpss.net/demographics/special-need/needs-achieve08.pdf
Interesting
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:24 — ObserverNYSo if I am reading this correctly VoR, Title I funds don't "travel" with the F&R student, they are awarded to the district as a whole to distribute as it sees fit. It is then up to the district to determine how to spend those funds.
IF the district let neighborhoods be neighborhoods and certain neighborhoods had a higher percentage of F&R students, would anyone consider it "unfair" if the BoE awarded a greater share of the Title I money to those schools?
No, funds are divided equally among Title I eligible schools
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:39 — Voice_of_Reason_They do not follow students. This is one of my main complaints about Wake County busing policy. If a non eligible school fails, it doesn't matter. There are no penalties assigned to non-Title I eligible schools. If there is fraud in the F&R program, it only hurts the real F&R's when a school is incorrectly designated, then that school gets part of the pool money for the county.
This is federally mandated, WCPSS bypasses the law as it was intended.
upon reflecting further...
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:58 — ObserverNY...it would seem, and this is just a lay person's opinion so I could be wrong, that the intent of awarding Title I money to schools with high F&R was to supplement programs and supplies that are often provided by parents and booster groups in non-Title I, wealthier areas, no? I seriously doubt it was the Feds intent for a district to try and CREATE MORE Title I schools in a district, just so it could spread the money around more "equitably". Am I wrong?
No, think about this
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 11:17 — Voice_of_Reason_The money is fixed, you don't get more for more Title I schools. In fact, if you want to help the highest F&R% schools with more money, you should try to have less of them. BTW- The money goes to the LEA to use, not all of it goes to the schools. I wish we could have a better accounting of how the money is being spent.
so???
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 23:10 — Forget_not_the_...VOR--let me ask your honest opinion about something. If you were going to help each individual F&R student the MOST with the Title I funds would it make more sense to you to group the F&R students together in schools with high F&R numbers or spread these students out among the non F&R population?
Second question: Does the diversity policy of WCPSS support the education of F&R students via efficient use of Title I funds?
"would it make more sense
Tue, 12/23/2008 - 10:07 — ncdad1"would it make more sense to you to group the F&R students together in schools "
Probably the same question could be asked about Special Ed and Limited English kids. It is probably more effecient and maybe more effective to concentrate them in a few school but we choose to mainstream them.
ANSWERS
Tue, 12/23/2008 - 09:05 — Voice_of_Reason_Honestly
First off, I don't agree with NCLB, but it the law. All schools should be treated the same and the money should follow the student. There is a need for even more funding than allocated. Funds should also not be spend on school wide programs.
Answers given the law
1.A: The most efficient use would be community schools and let the population of F&R naturally be high in certain areas. Those schools that are eligible shough get the money. If you would try to group F&R un-naturally together, I do think all of a sudden our F&R rolls would drop and lawsuits would spring forth from all directions.
2. A:NCLB, as intended, is being circumvented by WCPSS and that also go for the original intent of magnets. The diversity policy in itself, if their published theory is correct, should make both of those other programs a mute point. But we all know it doesn't work. BL- NO!
thanks
Tue, 12/23/2008 - 13:16 — Forget_not_the_...vor--great reasoning and thinking..yes the funds should follow the child that is the logical course of action....however the funds would be diluted by being sent with a F&R child to a school with 90% non F&R
where the F&R funds can be concentrated the greatest use of these funds can be utlized--more intensive programs, higher quality teachers, etc.
so wcpss moves the f&r kids around why? not academics, not diversity, not for Title I funding, and I can't figure out how moving these children helps with NCLB...can you help? surely this not just a capricous whim to move children out of their home communities is it? vor?
Well I do believe it is money
Tue, 12/23/2008 - 14:31 — Voice_of_Reason_Title I schools incur penalties if they don't produce results. My suspicions (at best I can tell with the data I was able to get out of the school system) is that they are using node data to help them balance the schools academically. They take lower performing nodes (I found out they track academic information by node when they go through the assignment process) and bus them out to non-Title I schools. This makes it appear the Title I schools are doing good compared to the rest of the country. The schools get the extra funds and the problem nodes are moved. On the surface, this is good. But what is really changed in the spirit of the NCLB Act --- A: Little if anything. They are saving money they would have to spend on targeted improvement, manditory busing, and supplemental education to use for other purposes. BL- they are using the money for purposes other than it was intended by skirting the law. I personally think this is very wrong and unethical (maybe illegal). The original intent of busing (race balancing) is illegal now, so I don't see any other reason given the lack of results. It looks good on paper only.
Yes this make sense economically in the short run, but at the detriment of our children's education; both rich and poor.
.
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:59 — ObserverNY.
Excellent point
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 10:49 — ObserverNYThis goes to the crux of the issue. Sadly, the bottom line is always "Follow the money".
I guess I missed the part
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 21:49 — Eric_BI guess I missed the part where you admitted that better results for F&R kids could be obtained by staying at their local community school and getting extra resources directed there, just like you are saying is done for Smith.
I never said kids were bused into West Lake. I said that it is possible for F&R kids to do well at high F&R schools--even better than at many low F&R schools in some cases.
BTW, I see you didn't say anything about Brassfield. With only 11.8% F&R in 2006-07, the F&R kids at Smith still outperformed those at Brassfield. Brassfield F&R kids scored only 45.7% proficient on the grade 3-5 mathematics EOG test while those at Smith were 61.7% proficient. That's a pretty significant difference, wouldn't you agree?
Maybe Brassfield's low performance is due to how far kids are bused. Look at how far some of the kids are bused to Brassfield from the Capital Blvd. area:
http://wwwgis2.wcpss.net/prod/mapscript/WCMapscript.php?MainOption=FindNodes&NodeType=BASE&MagProg=&SchoolInfo=334+Brassfield+Elementary&ProgramTitle=Base+Attendance+Area&MagName=&CalendarYear=2008-2009
I admit it ... with
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 23:15 — ncdad1I admit it ... with individual intense personal tutoring at their Title I school F&R kids can do bettet that being at another school where none of that is available.
ncdad1 - This has been what
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 09:36 — Eric_Bncdad1 - This has been what people on this blog have advocating for a while now. Stop busing F&R kids out of their nearest school where they may have Title I funds available to another school where they will not be served as well.
"intense personal tutoring"
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 00:11 — Bob_SconceIf I recall correctly, the district only needed to offer it. It's up to the parents and the students to take advantage of it. Do you have evidence that they have been doing so? If they are, then doesn't that go against your premise that the parents of F&R kids aren't going to be involved?
I chipped the ice a bit - Wow
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 13:37 — Voice_of_Reason_Your last paragraph is still a problem I see. I actually am against fundraising by PTA's for direct educational use (parties, social events, landscaping, and things like that are OK); but that's a side issue. But sharing is not the answer. Tuturing?, where is that happening? I know that some people use private tutoring, but parents at school would be cool but where is that happening? I used it with my AG daughter because she was bored at the pace in math at elementary school and I was afraid she would lose interest in math altogether. I think parents and church groups could work wonders if a local concerted effort was made (but if the kids are spread out....it would be much harder to organize). And you use the term before...well I guess that a big problem with you; you are trying to put a cart in front of a horse. As far as the self-interest issue, that will never go away no matter how much you try. If you do find a method that works, it will be much easier to advocate, the current method of busing doesn't work! I feel most people think it is in everyone's self interest to educate the lower economic strata, but advocating something that doesn't work and is harmful to individual's self interest will never play the way you want. Let face it, the current system may make some people FEEL good that they are trying to be fair, but if it doesn't produce results---WHY DO IT?
I am tired of the WCPSS cheering squad call anyone that has a different approach racist, self centered, uncaring, etc. -- show us that what they are doing does work --- prove it --- and I for one will shut up. We (several of the regular board posters) once offered $500 (for quite a while) for proof the economic diversity busing would work and nobody submitted any evidence at all. Not even a try. I am also tired of this "smoke and mirror", tax money wasting, school administration that cares more about looking good to liberal leaning groups, than producing positive results in closing the achievement gap.
ncdad1 - A good leader in the principal position at those low performing school is what is needed, parents help more at home. A strong leader can motivate and instill pride. In the military we had a saying, "if you want to prove yourself to be an excellent commander, volunteer to command a poor performing organization and turn them around; not chose an excellent performing organization and maintain the status quo".
“the current method of
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 14:12 — ncdad1“the current method of busing doesn't work!”
Didn’t we already determine that it depends on your definition of working? If every school is passing that can be the definition of working for the State and Federal governments. Simple mixing everyone together achieves that goal though you think at too high of a social and possibly actual cost.
“A good leader in the principal position at those low performing school is what is needed, parents help more at home.”
I think you will find that the “system” puts the best folks at the best school where they are least needed. Since high needs schools are in constant need of teacher because of the higher than average turnover rate, it is mainly young, new, idealistic teachers that apply and get those jobs. Note, there may be some old tired teachers left behind in these schools too. The teachers, who achieve, get further education, and certifications typically gravitate to the high performance school because the lower hassle factor and personal and professional satisfaction.
I think taking our best principals, putting them in the hardest jobs and paying them well to initiate change may be a good start. A good principle can attract and retain good teachers who can make a difference in a school.
So, we have agreed that a priority should be keeping elementary kids near home with Middle and High school kids may need to be more flexible and putting your best principles in the schools that need them the most is a good first step to addressing low performance.
From the December State
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 11:33 — AngelaWFrom the December State Board of Education meeting , an item of interest(High School Honors Courses) came up that may interest our AG parents:....
New Business
-NCDPI Honors Course Review In 2004, the SBE approved standards for developing and implementing Honors Courses in North Carolina . After passage of standards for the Honors courses, the NC State Board of Education’s Rigor Committee asked DPI to review and report on the implementation to determine if the standards were making a difference. The review revealed a lack of complete, convincing and consistent evidence of written curriculum and supporting documents for honors courses and suggests that teachers at many of the schools might be teaching these courses without adequate preparation or planning (specifically designed for these courses). The findings indicate that of the 86 courses submitted for review from 27 high schools only 20 percent were rated exemplary in any category. The courses were taken from six content areas: Arts Education, Career and Technical Education, English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Social Students Some courses used the same syllabus and/or objectives for standard and honors versions of the same course or used previous Standard Course of Study objectives, which are no longer current and/or used course codes that do no align with state course codes eligible for honors credit; some courses provided evidence of honors level expectations through course descriptions and teacher preparation, but there were no artifacts to support these standards or some courses provided Standard Course of Study goals and objectives without evidence for how these were correlated with instruction and student learning. Lessons learned reported the need for future reviews to take into account currently offered honors courses as well as the number of students served, have the superintendent and central office staff be the first line of contact working with schools, include NCVPS courses and on-line courses in future reviews, provide student access and equity in honors courses and professional support, such as websites, on-line exemplars, and strategies for implementing honors courses. A follow up report will be presented in February with possible recommendations.
Don't know much about history....
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 08:04 — ObserverNYThe bottom line is that WCPSS got nation wide recognition for their diversity program. It was considered innovative to look at socioeconomic status instead of race for balance.
Could anyone tell me exactly when this economic diversity policy was implemented? Did it happen to coincide with 1997 and the "magnet" programs?
Read by paper
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 18:50 — kmisegadesObserverNY - you'll find the details here; see pg. 12
http://www.ullisart.com/images/Misegades_Balance_rebuttal.pdf
It started in 2000, and was in fact a continuation of previous race-based assignment schemes. Academic performance have pretty much continued downhill since in Wake County, however our neighborhoods are about as culturally diverse as one could imagine. Some here find it unfair that poor people can't afford to live in an affluent neighborhood, go figure.
Great Research & Article
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 19:53 — local23Ken,
What a great article! Your research was really informational and even more astounding than I originally thought...it really appears as if WCPSS is failing our kids and getting worse ever year!
I really hope you can get the attention of the State Education System..not just Wake:)
kmisegades
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 09:54 — ObserverNYWhat an incredibly well written and researched report! I'm afraid however, that at least for the next 4 years, WC is not going to give up the "politically correct" educational scheme it has in place, no matter how much data you provide them with to show it isn't working. Somewhere in this mess of posts I wrote something similar to your conclusion about ethnically based communities like Chinatown. It's human nature. WC can't change human nature by busing it elsewhere for 6 hours a day.
"Some here find it unfair
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 20:27 — ncdad1"Some here find it unfair that poor people can't afford to live in an affluent neighborhood, go figure. "
Are you inferring that affluent neighborhoods have access to better schools? A person's income level, race, enthicity, etc. should not determine the quality of public education the government provides. There should be little difference in the PUBLIC schools servicing affluent neighborhoods and less affluent ones.
Difference
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 23:09 — Bob_Sconce"A person's income level, race, enthicity, etc. should not determine the quality of public education the government provides."
I fully agree. But, that does not extend to what parents at a school choose to provide, because those are *not* things the government provides. When those parents buy a second computer for every classroom and (as a result) students at school do better then their counterparts at other schools, it's a good thing, even though there is now greater "disparity."
Unfortunately, the liberal (or, actually, communist) solution is to say "Great. The parents provided a second computer. Now we can take away thei first one and give it to somebody else." That approach does the same thing that actual communism did--kills the incentive to improve.
Right
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 21:31 — SDR256So, why can't we find a way to make all the schools at the same high achieving level so that none of our children need to be treated like sacks of potatos shipped around the county? A school next to neighborhood A will be equal to a school next to neighborhood B. In this model there should be no need for children to be shipped like potatoes around the county. No child should be treated like a potato.
I agree .. I don't think
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 00:48 — ncdad1I agree .. I don't think they move the kids to be mean. They just are poor planners with limited creativity. The WCPSS uses has empty seats in one place and people in another and I bet their computer programs just try to fill them.
I think the biggest problem is how do we educate such a growing mobile population. Seems similar to changing a tire on a car going 60 mph. Folk are moving to places where there are not any schools. We have expensive facilities where kids don't live anymore. WCPSS has it facilities in the wrong place to where the population has moved this year. I think if we could solve that logistic problem creatively we would have the answer. I agree they have done a poor job of planning which is to be expected from people who are educators not planners. I am sorry that the result has been people's kids going all different directions. I think if folks could spend less time fighting the bad idea and more time developing some creative ideas to work this problem out we could solve it.
Barn raising
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 00:57 — SDR256Don't discount the potential energy of an old fashioned barn raising. My mother went to a one room school house. She keeps asking me (yes, she's still with us thank God) why our society doesn't go back to that model. It puts SO much on the shoulders of the parents - buy the books, pay the teachers, build the building, heat it, clean it. And in the end you have what is best for the children...their parent's direct involvement. Dump those high growth kids into their local neighborhood building. Its too small? Get those parents in there to figure it out. Believe me, they will. They will either haul in trailers and clean them THEMSELVES - which many wish they could do to these trailers that sit for months and are full of mold! - OR, hold a real barn raising and with their own hammers and nails build some additions. I mean, - WHY NOT?
Or, am I getting all wild and crazy and too creative on ya?
SDR, I think many in
Sun, 12/21/2008 - 11:14 — ncdad1SDR, I think many in society have made the decision to have both parent's work long hours to buy a bigger house which needs more money to repair, run and furnish which allows less time than our parents had who lived more modestly.
I am not sure we can bring back those times and values. I think each generation laments that their childhood was simplier and less complicated than their children's.
I think government will eventually fail to meet our expectations to such an extent that people will rely on them less and take over some functions (e.g. clean the trailers) like you mention.
For us it was selling the big house, buying a small house so we could live on one income and homeschool our kids when they were in elementary school. I did not hate the WCPSS for not providing what I thought was important (e.g. mastery of a language in elementary school and stronger math and science courses), I just withdraw and did it myself. Now, WCPSS has exceeded our ability (Calculus, Chemisty, and other AP courses) so we returned to the system. I think parents have to make those hard choices to depart from the government offering sometimes when it does not meet their needs and expectations.
Falc, again having
Fri, 12/19/2008 - 23:42 — ncdad1Falc, again having schools at 60% passing and others at 100% and some schools at single digit F&R and others at >40% and having some schools with >30% turn over and some with none is not what a PUBLIC school system likes to see with wide disparity between schools in score, number of poor, and teacher retention.
I think you know the answer that good teachers gravitate to "good" school where they stay a long time and continue to make them better. Most people here fighting change live in a low F&R, high scoring, low turn over school and they want to keep it that way.
ncdad1, again you know what
Mon, 12/22/2008 - 14:06 — Falcthey say about the word "assume". My personal experience would say that your assumption about good teachers only gravitating to "good" schools doesn't always hold water, if by "good" you mean low F&R. My child attended a notoriously low F&R school in K and 1st grade. I would not describe the K teacher as "good". Current teacher at our higher F&R school (33%) is "great" and so are many of the other teachers there and some have been there for a very long time. So, I personally do not automatically equate low F&R with "good". To me that is oversimplifying a complex issue. I know of one awesome teacher (not in Wake County) who has taught in an 80% F&R school for 30+ years. Also, are you defining a "good" teacher as one that only wants to teach "easy" students? I'm pretty sure that if I only wanted to take on the "easy" projects at my work, I would not be considered a "good" employee.
So, we agree ... that is
Fri, 12/19/2008 - 23:35 — ncdad1So, we agree ... that is the what they are required to do and they won't rest until every school is passing. If some high scoring schools have to decrease to meet that goal that is what they will do.
Joe, you will never win this until you can find a way to make every school pass. Mixing the kids will make it happen tomorrow. If you suggest some program that gives extra resources to some schools to keep those kids out of your school and it take 3-5 years to see results I just don't think folk will wait.
unfair
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 18:45 — Forget_not_the_...ncdad, your accusations are unfair and ungrounded--to accuse the parents here that they do NOT want F&R children at their school is trolling, rude and anger producing
the parents here care about the schools in this county and the decisons that are made that impact all the the students
if these parents wanted an experience that lacked in diversity, trust me, they would have their children in private school or be home schooling their offspring
if WCPSS can prove that busing children (NO matter their demographics) can help these children pass and acheive thus making the schools pass then I would bet that these parents would be more supportive
how you can make a school pass without helping the students achieve and be the best they can be is beyond me
so you are saying send the failing kids to the high scoring schools and pull their scores down.....smart...once again the kid gets the short end of the shaft.....
to me the bottom line is to teach the child...
I am not an education
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 20:15 — ncdad1I am not an education expert and don't know all the means to get optimum performance but I do know that in a PUBLIC school system there should not be a lot of school failing and a lot excelling which would indicate mismanagement and favortism. The disparity between poor and rich areas should not be great for a PUBLIC school system.
I think it is the PUBLIC school systems primary reponsiblity to bring every child's school up before worrying about the kids that are well above the bar. I think private school is the best place for really smart kids and driven parents that exceed what the PUBLIC schools can offer.
I don't think poor kids pull down rich kid's scores. They just dilute the schools of the school. So, mixing poor kids at 60% and rich kids at 100% gives you 80% in a simple example. None of the individual kid's scores changed which is not really what we want but it does get the school administers off the hot seat with State and Federal authorities.
Opportunity
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 21:38 — SDR256I think it is the public school's responsibility to provide the opportunity for every child to succeed. Sadly, there are factors beyond what the government, you or I or the public school can control - that is part of the tragedy of the human experience - that will limit how much some can take advantage of that opportunity. So, its the same anywhere. There were plenty of kids at the schools I attended - who some would say had every advantage, who fell to the wayside for whatever reason. Too spoiled, drugs, family troubles. Some will make it. Some will not. We can't pretend to be able to solve it all for everyone. But for those who really will achieve and can be inspired - ABSOLUTELY - the opportunity must be there! Doesn't mean their life will have a storybook ending. Does yours?
NO IT WONT. You put the
Fri, 12/19/2008 - 23:43 — vsheehanNO IT WONT. You put the facts together on west lake and smith . the kids did worse at west lake while smith had the resources to deal with it.
I think just like the
Fri, 12/19/2008 - 23:30 — ncdad1I think just like the connect folks work to keep F&R out of their school, they work harder to keep low cost housing out of their community even more. Segregated housing leads to segregated schools leads to all the issues of school disparity we are dealing with now.
If they followed your examples, people from all income levels would live close by each other, attend the same schools, and participate and show that sense of ownership Bob mentions.
"your inability to get along with your neighbors. " I love mey neighbors many of whom are F&R. I am not afraid of them like many here are. Their kids have special needs which I don't mind and expect the school system to address. I am not the one fighting to keep them put and out of my schools like you are.
I am not the one fighting
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 12:40 — gwaihirI am not the one fighting to keep them put and out of my schools like you are.
==========
From what I read, looks to me like you are.
What I think, is that you are making a frantic attempt to keep the bussing going because you want the poor kids kept put where they are, out of your school, and unable to return to it.
I think vsheehan has you pegged.
"What I think, is that you
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 13:13 — ncdad1"What I think, is that you are making a frantic attempt to keep the bussing going because you want the poor kids kept put where they are, out of your school, and unable to return to it. "
Not sure that makes sense ... "keep the bussing going because you want the poor kids kept put where they are" ... bussing gives them more mobility not less and it gives them access to programs and resources that may not be available at their school.
"out of your school" ... "My" school is has the poor kids and vsheedan is trying to protect her node which has few poor kids though she will tell you that is because the poor in Apex are too proud to admit it and therefore undercounted. Actually, most of the schools all share an qual load for the poorer kids except for a few "golden schools" which don't reflect the county average.
I just want the great disparity between the school addressed.
Finally, no one has been able to say how many non-neighborhood kids (e.g. outside say 5 or 6 miles) are bussed to their school. It is not a lot compared to the school population. I can understand that "v" hates them because they take up a seat in "her" (emphasis on PRIVATE ownership of a PUBLIC school) school and she get bumped to the next school down the street though I don't agree with it.
I just want the great
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 16:43 — gwaihirI just want the great disparity between the school addressed.
++++++++
So you say.
I think the truth is, some of the bussing advocates want their nearby poor kids bussed out of their schools and kept out.
I cannot see any other reason why Raleigh F&R kids get bussed to Smith which has nearly 70% F&R, while there are schools like Lacy which are (a) very low F&R and (b) in Raleigh not Garner (closer).
I don't think bussing advocates should get away with saying "It's all about equity". From where I stand, it looks more to me about not having poor kids in certain schools, rather than about equity.
Ya know, I've been thinking
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 21:58 — SDR256Ya know, I've been thinking very intently about this today. Its not Cary's fault. Its not the fault of Southeast Raleigh, or Knightdale or Garner or ObserverNY ;). Its not ITB problem, its not old segregation issues. Its not that your kids are smarter than those kids or visa versa. That's just a bunch of baloney. I think it is the failure of BoE and the current model which has everyone in an uproar. AND I think the media pumps up these 'wars' to sell papers and time.
I don't know anyone in my neighborhood who would turn their back on ANY child. They will bark if their own kid gets moved. But they would, and have consistently and often, helped other people's children from lots of corners of the county. It is not a problem with the quality of the population. They are all great if you connect with them personally - every last blessed one of them. We pay too much attention to the system and don't spend enough time with the people. That's a fact. We the people can find a solution. I'm confident of that, if we could only connect.
I think it is a weak position to only believe in, pray for, pay homage to... this busing solution that the BoE holds out as the single answer to helping these challenged children. Why can't they have their cake and eat it too? Why can't they be near their family and friends, where things are familiar, have a normal schedule that doesn't require them to be on the bus for an hour in the morning? Why do they have to be far from Mom so if they get sick she can come and get them? Why can't they go to school with friends- what every child wants - AND have the opportunity for a quality education. HEY! This county is full of smart people. Why are we any less capable than SC which found a way to bring schools with 87 - 90% F&R to blue ribbon status? Is SC smarter than NC? I don't think so. I just think we've had the same bozos in a paid positions in Growth Management arrogantly bestowing on us plebes the 'only shining way'. Rubbish. Throw out the bums! These kids deserve more!
I agree with you .. it
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 20:01 — ncdad1I agree with you .. it seems like most schools should reflect the county averages and if there are some schools like Lacy (you mentioned, I don't know it myself) that appear to be getting special treatment than that should be surfaced.
I am guessing there are very poor schools who have been sadly neglected and wealthier schools that appear to get more than they should. Overall, it seem each school should be about same within a range.
Neighbors?
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 01:25 — SDR256Your neighborhood kids attend the school your child attends? Wow! Congratulations. I wish I had that. I wouldn't care if they were purple from Mars. I just want my kids to have a consistent community to connect with.
How far away is your kid's
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 12:12 — ncdad1How far away is your kid's school? 3, 4, 6 miles? That is still part of your neigborhood. I will give you that if every kids around you goes to a different school it break the continuity. But once we stop growing I assume the "churn" will end.
Assumptions
Sat, 12/20/2008 - 22:10 — SDR256Yes, you think I'm just another perfectionist PTA mom who yelps when Johnny gets a B.
Of the 7 kids generally in my children's age on my street - 14 houses, not big - they attend 4 different schools. 7 kids, 4 schools. OH, and since one of those is a YR, count that as 5 schools because the two kids who actually do attend the same school are on different tracks. Makes it kinda hard for kids to see each other casually - like run next door and see if you can play EVER.