The Wake Education Partnership will be looking for a new leader in the near future.
Ann Denlinger, the group's president, said she recently told the WEP board that it's time to start succession planning for her replacement. But Denlinger said no departure date has been set yet. She plans to stay on until her successor is named, which could take awhile.
Denlinger explained that when she took the WEP job in 2007 she told the group that she'd stay on for three to five years. After nearly three as WEP's president, Denlinger, 66, said she reminded the board of her earlier plans.
In a letter to the editor published Friday, Graham Marlette of Durham suggested that Wake hire Denlinger to replace Del Burns as superintendent. Denlinger was superintendent in Durham for several years after leaving Wake.
"The Wake board may not agree with her position on diversity, such as it is, but her commitment to student achievement is without question," Marlette writes.
The potential change at the top of the non-profit group comes as its role is channging. The WEP had been a strong advocate of many district policies back when the old school board was in charge, frequently defending Wake in its publications.
But now that the new school board majority has taken office, the WEP has often found itself raising questions about the new policies being considered and implemented. You can likely expect the WEP's white papers on reassignment and magnet schools being used by supporters of the diversity policy at the March 23 board meeting.
Comments
Dulaney, then Dell, and now
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 18:14 — woodstockDulaney, then Dell, and now Denlinger. Wow, that was one hell of election last October.
Onward and upward!
As long as the D's are
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 18:18 — CaryCurmudgeonAs long as the D's are bailing, perhaps David might soon consider a different line of work.
3-5 years...is that a prison sentence?
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 16:02 — dgraffI was at the WEP celebration (over the bond victory) where they had raised 1 Million dollars and welcomed AD to the organization.
Perhaps here departure in 3, rather than 4 or 5 has something to do with no longer being favored by the school board.
We bloggers are beleagured by the incessant diatribes of those exhaustively procaliming the WCPSS new maj to be "puppets" of Pope and Luddy.
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze.
User1234....and others insisting on bashing the new majority.
Check out the who's who on the WEP and find out who's been running things for the last 5-10 years in Wake Co.
AD's position is paid, and perhaps she doesn't want to play on a losing team.
I hope the WEP finds someone
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 10:38 — red_balloonI hope the WEP finds someone of Denlinger's caliber who can exploit a child's education for economic gain.
what economic gain? are
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 14:05 — carson79what economic gain? are you just saying that this is paid work? or are you trying to insinuate something else?
try following the money,
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 19:09 — loriactry following the money, it's not about the kids
what money? Can you point
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 21:46 — carson79what money? Can you point us to a link or better yet, if you think people are reaping financial gain for harming kids, why not just say WHO and HOW?
You seriously cannot be that
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 22:13 — red_balloonYou seriously cannot be that naive. Or can you?!
It would take volumes to get
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 18:11 — woodstockIt would take volumes to get you up to speed. Please pay attention.
several of us have noted
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 21:32 — carson79several of us have noted that this is your typical response when you don't have the answers. Something snappy and rude that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.
I has everything to do with
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 22:21 — woodstockI has everything to do with any discussion when you chime in with your incessant questions. You don't seem to know anything about any of the subjects discussed.
Here's the answer: The reference to money and WEP is the fact that WEP is for all intents and purposes an arm of the Chamber of Commerce and shares their focus on using WCPSS's "healthy schools" fallacy as a business development tool. You only need to look at where the WEP gets its funding and who is on its board to understand that. WEP has little interest in raising student achievement in WCPSS; they are perfectly satisfied to reassign students and hide the fact that the performance of ED students is declining and that minority students are discriminated agaisnt.
If you can't take the
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 23:00 — carson79If you can't take the questions, don't make the arguments that don't stand up to scrutiny.
Can't take questions? You
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 08:11 — woodstockCan't take questions?
You are like a child that didn't study for the test. You are unprepared and have no idea what it you are talking about.
Have you read the
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 22:48 — danofncHave you read the "Suspending Disbelief" paper that WEP released? Have you seen the presentation of that paper? Did you ask questions of the gentleman that gave the report? How did he respond?
When I heard/read it, I didn't get the impression that they were a "status quo" group.
It seemed like they were advocating a need for more, longer school days and more rigorous curriculum to get WCPSS students more prepared to enter the world.
"Suspending Disbelief" is a
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 07:38 — CaryCurmudgeon"Suspending Disbelief" is a nearly worthless piece of work. It is mildly interesting to hear their ideas for what students need to enter the global workplace. But with a 54% ED graduation rate, 50% for black males, I'm really more interested in what these students need to enter the Wake County workplace. Having longer school days and more rigorous curriculum is not insightful, we know other countries do this today. Having students learn Mandarin Chinese, as opposed to spending that time on math and science, is a waste.
This paper borrowed a few commonly-available statistics, repeated some common calendar comparisons to other countries, and made some bad curriculum recommendations.
When today's system is doing so poorly, I found the paper to be irrelevant. Where are WEP's ideas for fixing today's problems? They are encapsulated in one statement: We need to keep the diversity busing policy.
WEP is joined at the hip to
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 23:14 — woodstockWEP is joined at the hip to the false concept of "healthy schools," busing for Wake's idiotic and fictitious version of diversity, and the Chamber of Commerce. They are as status quo and political as you can get.
Ann Denlinger stood with the so-called Friends of Diversity the day before last year's BoE elections, a group that insulted the new BoE members and essentially called them racists/segregationists. Her poor judgement highlighted what WEP is really all about. If she truely wanted to work with WCPSS and have WEP be a meaningful partner in helping to improve student achievement, she would have remained at least neutral. As it is WEP was more concerned with adhereing to the status quo and aligning with the left-wing powerbrokers than attempting to work collaboratively with the new BoE.
Insinuate? What part of that
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 15:45 — red_balloonInsinuate? What part of that sounds like an insinuation? It is an unambiguous, unequivocal statement about WEP's priorities. A more clear, precise, and blunt statement I cannot wordsmith.
Ok, then prove your
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 21:43 — carson79Ok, then prove your accusation of "exploitation" and then list all the "economic gain" that has been reaped. Are you just talking about her salary? (this is what I asked you before, is there some other $$ changing hands or are you just noting the fact that this is a salaried job and your opinion is that WCPSS has exploited kids)
The proof is simple. 1. My
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 22:07 — red_balloonThe proof is simple.
1. My kid gets zero electives.
2. The school cannot offer electives lest it competes with the magnets.
3. My kid's education suffers.
4. WEP supports this model.
5. WEP is backed by for-profit entities.
Q.E.D.
P.S.: I would have humored you by disptaching an investigative journalist if I had the resources of Quarles or Goodmon.
A-ha!
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 05:38 — ksdavisAnd herein lies the fundamental flaw of the suburban argument.
The school system does not fail if "your kid" can't get what you want them to have. The school system does fail if ALL kids can't get what they need.
You are, I imagine, a caring parent who's going to do what's right for your child. Electives or not, you'll make sure they end up fine.
I pay for public schools so that all children end up with a good education and are able to find legal, honest work rather than requiring social service or criminal justice intervention.
I'm suspecting your child is fine no matter what.
If you want MY tax dollars to subsidize YOUR desire for "excellence" for your child, well, no. Send 'em to a charter or private school for all I care. Or (gasp!) send them to a magnet school.
Why are you asking me as a taxpayer to subsidize the educational whims you have for your child? What do conservatives say about getting out of my back pocket?
gasp
Thu, 03/18/2010 - 22:46 — loriac'Or (gasp!) send them to a magnet school'
.
You say this like we have a choice. Oh, right - we have the choice to APPLY! But, our chances are almost nil that we get to go to a magnet school. Meanwhile, our schools are prohibited from offering more electives. Guess that's one way not to finance those educational whims.
"If you want MY tax dollars
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 21:56 — Apexter"If you want MY tax dollars to subsidize YOUR desire for "excellence"
for your child, well, no. Send 'em to a charter or private school for
all I care. Or (gasp!) send them to a magnet school."
If you want MY tax dollars to subsidize magnets for Raleigh families while geographically excluding students from other areas of the county, and specifically excluding people from the "wrong" areas, well, no.
However, as far as I know, neither of us has been given a line-item veto for taxes.
Not sure how this is a
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 09:29 — jenmanNot sure how this is a 'suburban' argument. It applies to families in Raleigh as well.
OK, let me play your game
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 06:50 — red_balloonOK, let me play your game and extend your argument.
I would love for my tax dollars to not fund education beyond the bare minimum. I am vexed at the amount of my income being vaporized by taxes to the point it is demotivating to work hard. It does not need $8K and twelve years of schooling to get children past the bare minimum. Are you up for this? Can I expect a scale back of government largesse? How about at least having more charter schools?
But, if on the other hand you do want my tax dollars to fund your concept of education, then I expect equitable allocation of resources to maximize academic outcomes for all students. For now, I am forced to be a sponsor of social engineering games and the notion that taxpayer dollars are better spent on a skewed educational delivery model.
Heh...
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 06:23 — Bob_SconceIn general, the staunchest conservatives say that if the district is going to spend money educating students, then it should let those students' parents decide how the money is spent by, for example, using a school choice model.
That's a great solution to your problem -- a child at a charter school actually costs less than a child in the public school. If the cap on charters were lifted, I suspect that most of this issue would just disappear.
You are completely detached
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 22:11 — carson79You are completely detached from reality if you believe a lack of electives in elementary school equals exploitation.
I didn't know WEP was "for profit" so that is my bad.
Feel free to live in your
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 22:16 — red_balloonFeel free to live in your fantasy world of magnets and buses.
Are you sure WEP is a for
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 23:02 — carson79Are you sure WEP is a for profit enterprise?
Pretty sure you are wrong about that so I take back my "my bad." :)
vgWEP is backed by entities
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 23:12 — red_balloonWEP is backed by entities that are for-profit. Check WEP's core values (I think it is the second entry).
I see, I thought you were
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 23:13 — carson79I see, I thought you were saying that Ann D financially benefited from the exploitation, which didn't make sense to me other than her salary. If you are saying businesses in Wake benefit, I get your point.
Denlinger does benefit from
Wed, 03/17/2010 - 06:57 — red_balloonDenlinger does benefit from serving the interests of WEP sponsors. However, that in itself is not an issue. The problem is with WEP sponsors influencing a school system in order to derive profit. Again, I don't know if this would be a problem to me if the following happened:
- an acknowledgement from WCPSS that education is important but even more important is core value #2 on the WEP list.
The above would alert me to WCPSS' priorities. If that is followed up with more charter schools and/ or scaling back of taxes, I believe peace and harmony will reign! And better educational outcomes too. Imagine that!
I heard Del Burns is
Tue, 03/16/2010 - 10:35 — CaryCurmudgeonI heard Del Burns is available.