Project Bright Idea will take center stage on the agenda at today's Wake County school board economically disadvantaged student performance task force meeting.
In a nutshell, the goal of Project Bright Idea is to increase the number of children from underserved populations in gifted and academically challenging programs. The idea is the students are more likely to excel and perform as if they're gifted if high expectations are set for them.
While begun as an elementary school program, this Duke Today article talks about how elements of Bright Idea have been incorporated at Fuquay-Varina High. It's credited with helping narrow the school's racial achievement gap.
School board vice chairman John Tedesco, the task force chair, said he's invited all of Wake's principals to attend the meeting to hear more about the program.
Today's meeting starts at 4:30 p.m. in Room 1400 at the Crossroads II Building, 110 Corning Road in Cary.
Comments
Bright ideas and money
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 22:55 — nriemannThe program's intellectual father, Dr. Darity, has fairly extreme views. For example, he labels current tracking models "programmed retardation" for minority students. But the program itself is interesting and the pilot demonstrably effective at increasing the number of minority students who test AG when compared to a control group. Of note, however, this was a multi county finding. It did not increase those numbers at the pilot schools in Wake. Whether this is because Wake does a good job generally or the pilot schools were not representative, you could not say from the available data.
The program is about more than high expectations. It involves a tremendous and expensive amount of demanding professional development that our current legislature, commission, and school board are unlikely to fund for every school. Someone should ask John whether he thinks this is a program that should be funded and implemented at scale or just an engaging topic for an afternoon bull session. It is often hard to tell.
Neil
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 13:19 — snordoneSandy Darity is hardly a radical. A man with a mission? Yes. But extreme? No.
What did you think of Angel's take on institutional racism?
Here is my opinion - First, his focus on empirical evidence is a thing of beauty. IF a system is failing the majority of a subgroup of children, then the evidence suggests there is a problem.
Second, his belief that children don't want to fail is 100% correct. The kids I work with want to be successful.
Third, read Karolyn Tyson's book Integration Interrupted. Her work goes hand in hand with Angel's research and clearly supports the concept that the problem is not the children, but their lack of opportunity for success. We can talk about the 3rd grade science fair at Leesville ES as an example at some point.
Fourth, I hope Project Bright Idea is funded, their data are impressive.
the missing link?
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 07:21 — valsparSo, all we have to do to ensure the underserved kids achieve as if they were gifted is to put them in an environment where high expectations are expected. Sounds like the overall missing link of our so called "failed" busing policy.
Some of the schools with higher poverty and higher scores for the bused kids got that already. Some of our lower poverty with lower scores for the bused kids were truly underserved.
So quit blaming busing.
...
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 08:57 — SideburnsDon't all our schools have high expectations for our students? You claim otherwise. So, which ones don't?
How were "our lower poverty with lower scores for bused kids" underserved? What is your solution?
Do you agree with Kushner that low performing schools waste money? I can't imagine she would support more funding solutions for low performing schools if she thinks they are wasting money in the first place.
I'm sorry if I have
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 08:19 — shearertwI'm sorry if I have misunderstood your post but its a little difficult to understand in spots...
The failure of the busing policy was that a bus can deliver child but not an education. All the effort was put into assignments taking the focus off of delivering an education which, in part, involves setting high expectations. If the focus were on the latter, we could begin to realize that, if the proper effort were made, you can set high expectations and deliver a high quality education to the children. You don't have to take them to it. Sure, if you don't plan on setting high expectations where these children go to school, you have to bus them somewhere. But that has two major flaws. A. It creates a huge fiasco that requires a lot of resources and focus to manage, not to mention it alienates many of you "customers" and B. what about the children being bused in the opposite direction? If some kids need to be bused out of a particular school, why is that school the best option for the kids being bused in or those left behind? (and please don't give me the "healthy schools" nonsense).
Bottom line, you don't have to bus kids to "high expectation" schools, take the high expectations to the kids.
The new choice plan is
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 09:06 — mnordbergThe new choice plan is founded in the same logic as the old bussing plan in that some schools are more preferred than others so there really isn't anything different. If they got rid of the achievement school option and just assigned people to the closest school, then I would believe that we have actually left behind the concept of some schools being better than others. And while you are at that, then they should get rid of magnet schools as they promote different expectations.
In the end, having multiple schools to go to is an option that keeps the school system honest in that they will never be able to "take high expectations to the kids" in every school in an fiscally responsible way. When you have some schools with kids that are not ready to learn, you are going to spend more money to get that school to the same place that another school has twice the number of kids ready to learn. And what happens there, parents of those kids that are ready to learn but are held back to ensure the other students are ready will want to leave that school.
So I don't see bussing because of diversity versus bussing because of school choice or just getting kids to school makes any significant difference until the school system decides to focus on education. Either model means they will spend some amount of time arguing about the policy. What I would like to see is a realization that you have to start splitting up grades based on ability and advancement like they sort of do in middle school and more in high school. Elementary school grades need to be split by ability so there is an advanced class, an intermediate class, a meeting expectations class and a remedial class. That way each group can be given different expectations, still high for them instead of one set of expecations for the whole class that are way too high for the remedial students and way too low for the advanced students. I seriously doubt we will ever see that because it would be politically incorrect to start doing that.
some already done
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 10:25 — localyankSome of what you are suggesting is done. My kids went to an elementary magnetic school. Part of the day was spent with kids of all abilities working on projects or other things that everyone could handle. For the rest of the academic day the kids were split up, with the AG kids working with the AG coordinator and the kids needing remedial help working with another specialist. In addition, the kids who didn't test into the AG program but who the teachers felt could benefit from the higher expectations were sent to work with that group. This seemed to work well most of the time, but there were still lousy teachers who poisoned the system with their prejudices and inability to actually teach. These are the types of things ths need to be done in all schools (if they're not already done), but of course budget cuts and other fiscal matters always seem to win in the end.
Lucky for you at the magnet
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 10:32 — shearertwLucky for you at the magnet school. Interestingly, reading between the lines, your comments show the "school within a school" we all know exist at the magnets that leave the base kids at a loss...but I'll leave that alone for now.
These things are not done at all schools. In fact, the AG program at "regular" ES is a complete joke. It might be a few hours or a half day/week or so and is basically just extra busy work.
magnets again
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:03 — localyankYes, the magnet program has served my kids well, and I wish that all of the kids had opportunities for similar experiences. So how is this the evil "school within a school", but when another poster suggests splitting classes by achievement this is a great new concept in education? The base kids aren't at a loss - they get all of the programs that these schools offer, whether it's AG or remedial. As far as a base ES AG program being a joke, that's an issue with the school and its AG coordinator. No parent or principal should put up with that. As an aside, the AG coordinator at my kid's magnet school wasn't so hot - nice woman, but she should not have been working with AG kids.
First, I didn't say it (it
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:29 — shearertwFirst,
I didn't say it (it being magnet schools within a school) was "evil" and I didn't say the splitting classes by achievement "is a great new concept in education". I only said it was something worth debating over and above assignment policy. Try to keep you bias view of my thoughts to yourself. I don't fault the AG coordinator's at the "regular" ES. AG is not an emphasis at any of these schools and they're not given the resources or the time to make it happen. Heck, some of them work at 2 schools for Pete's sake. I once heard that WCPSS spends about 1 penny on AG for every $ its spends on ED students (admittedly heard this somewhere else and need to fact check when I have more time).
If you think the base kids at the magnet schools have equal access to the benefits of the magnet program, you're living in la la Land.
Academic Tracking versus Magnets
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:07 — SatchHHLet's stop bashing Magnets for being schools within a school when they're NOT (except IB) and let's focus on academic tracking instead. Academic tracking is what typically separates kids (magnet, base, high ses, low ses, etc.) within a school and the AG magnets simply show this more. It happens at ALL academically tracked schools and not just magnets. Also - my child went to POE and I have friends at other magnets (so can't be accused of living in la la Land). At POE - all students have full access to the magnet programming, as do students at other magnets (sheare - have you been to many?), eg. Conn, Brooks, Powell, yes - even Hunter and Fuller - the AG basics magnets. The academic tracking separates students, not the magnet programming. What the magnets DO is provide opportunities for students who would not get them otherwise - if their school were a very high poverty school (which most magnets would be) rather than a magnet. It also keeps folks from fleeing downtown (check out Charlotte and all of the downtown school closings this past year for an alternative). Let's not go there in Wake. Stop bashing magnets for something they're not doing. Focus on academic tracking as the problem.
Blaim it on the academic
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:37 — shearertwBlaim it on the academic tracking if you like....then call me when la la Land gets phone service.
You are right about one thing....the magnet programs are their to serve downtown Raleigh....just at the expense of the rest of the county.
Magnets to serve downtown Raleigh
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 20:46 — Solon77Cool - tell that to Garner, Zebulon, Knightdale, Wendell, North Raleigh, Rim schools, and Wake Early.
Interesting point
Sat, 07/02/2011 - 12:33 — Dove314There are now quite a few magnet schools which are not in downtown Raleigh. Millbrook HS and EMMMS are solidly in North Raleigh. Garner Magnet HS is aptly named given it is in Garner. But that point is inconvenient to Shearer to acknowledge as it doesn't support his sound byte.
I'm with you on the first
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 10:16 — shearertwI'm with you on the first part of your post....100%. I am totally against the new "choice", but not really a choice, plan. Just give me my darn closest school and let's go to work on debating the second part of your post. I'll have to think about that part some more to see how it would work but that's the whole darn point! We should all be spending our time thinking about and debating what to do with the kids that are in our schools rather that what school they should be going to. If we're not going to give real choice (i.e. vouchers) get rid of it all together along with the magnet program. Unfortunately, that ain't gonna happen because, politically, people like their piece of the pie they've squirreled away too much to do what's right for all of us. The choice plan is designed the try and make everyone happy and it will end up making us all misearable (and not help the kids one bit). The only reason the magnet program is kept under the new choice plan is to garner political support from the magnet parents, period. Otherwise, in a "choice" system, a magnet program makes absolutely NO SENSE!
what's right for all of us
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:24 — SatchHHis the essence of this debate. Some people think "all of us" includes ALL students in the county (all cities, suburbs, rural, etc.) while some think "all of us" means what "I want for my kid and to heck with the education of other kids." Let's face it, most folks don't choose a school for their child based on proximity. Is Malone sending his child to Franklin Academy charter because it's closest? I doubt it. Is Goldman sending her child to her closest school - NO. A friend of mine sends his kid to The Raleigh School - folks come from counties away to attend. Some folks' closest school would be high poverty (and I mean really high - 90%+) if we abandoned magnets and trying to provide a balanced student body to all schools (Walnut Creek). The likelihood that these schools would provide a good education to its students without huge influxes of $$ (to recruit good teachers, etc.) plumets fast. We end up with flight from some areas - and kids stuck in schools providing what Judge Malone called Charlotte a few years ago - "educational genocide." That's WAY worse than the WCPSS we have now. If we think of WCPSS as a whole - balancing SES across schools, or trying to as the board did previously - is the best way to help ALL schools and ALL kids.
The goal is to provide a
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:42 — woodstockThe goal is to provide a high-quality education with program equity at ALL schools. Why then would anyone want to have their child(ren) bused across the county? What would be the purpose in that?
The goal is to provide a high-quality education
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 21:07 — Solon77The goal is to provide a high-quality education with program equity at ALL schools.
Another profound statement. Ranks up there with solving world hunger. The majority of the parents judge a school by its test scores. Given the choice, they will select a school that has the highest scores and will sacrifice proximity.
There is no reason at all
Sun, 07/03/2011 - 09:48 — woodstockThere is no reason at all that we cannot establish high quality educational standards at every school in Wake County. It is not at all like "world hunger" where one must deal with extremely diverse populations, resources and awareness. It's Wake County where we enjoy a highly educated populace, a wealth of readily available resources, and impressive logistical capabilities to deliver what is need where it is needed.
Busing didn't
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:31 — shearertwBusing didn't help....because it doesn't educate.
Almost 90% of the parents of the recent survey said proximate was important. Some parents will not doubt make extreme sacrifices to find the "best" school for their kids, however, most want a school close to where they live and will make that school the best if that's the one they have. See my response to Solon below for more.....In summary, busing is a lazy failure which is only good for the adults....How many more decades of data do you need?
not a failure
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:46 — SatchHHWCPSS is not a failing district. The busing policy is probably a key to that, along with the magnets and the fact that WCPSS attacts great teachers (huge numbers of nationally certified teachers). Did you see that WCPSS ranked 3rd of the top 50 large urban districts in graduation rate. Hard to say that's a failure. Saying that proximity is important is not saying that proximity trumps quality, program focus (leadership, etc), so I wouldn't interpret as such. Last year 94% of respondents said that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their child's school. I'd like to see how many people on the recent survey said they'd grandfather into their current school. I bet most did even thought they're not at their closest school.
Busing has not been a failure in Wake County. Unless you consider the failure to create a dichotomous system of have and have-not schools as a sign of failure.
Why do you think that
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:24 — Solon77The only reason the magnet program is kept under the new choice plan is to garner political support from the magnet parents, period.
The Blue/choice plan was going to be implemented anyway, since a strict neighborhood assignment plan wouldn't work. Instead of Delaney, now we have an algorithm. How are you going to mount an assignment complaint against an algorithm ?
That said why should magnet parents be pandered to when the assignment model is a done deal ?
What do you think would
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:33 — shearertwWhat do you think would have happened to the blue plan if it included dismantling the magnet program? Do you think it would have been quietly implemented?
Quietly implemented
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 21:23 — Solon77There is nothing quiet about changing assignment models - have you not been paying attention the last two years. I don't think this board had in mind to do anything quietly.
Great post!
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 09:47 — midtownmomIf only our school system and politicians had so much insight.
Great post!
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 09:48 — midtownmomdouble post - sorry
You have a great way of
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 08:48 — woodstockYou have a great way of getting to the heart of the matter. I don't see how that argument can be countered. You've described my sentiments exactly... and the essence of this entire debate.
Setting high expectations
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:35 — Solon77Sounds so simple, but what does this really mean ? How do you institutionalize that in the teaching corps ? You think putting kids in the highest class will result in the student rising to the challenge and all of a sudden turning into a stellar student ? We will make it simple - put everyone in the highest class (sink or swim), change the grade scale 98-100 = A, 96-98 = B, 94-96 = C, 92-94 = D , below 92 is fail. Change the EOC and EOGs to the same scale. That should set the expectations high enough.
Raising the acheivement of
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:10 — shearertwRaising the acheivement of ED students is by no means simple. In fact, I not sure any one person has the answer. Likewise, setting high expectations is certainly more than adjusting a grading scale...its an attitude that takes leaders to set. Its also difficult but pays off. When I was teaching in a juvenile institute, I once tried teaching some organic chemistry to these 14-17 year old deliquents to see if they could do it. You know, many of them could. The setting of high expectations begins with the principal who sets the tone for the teachers and ultimately the students. Busing is "simple", which is one reason you liberal diversity folks tend to support it. You're lazy. It's a lazy approach to solving a difficult problem and that's why it doesn't work. Setting high expectations, actually teaching ED kids is hard. That makes life hard for administrators and teachers and parents, etc. which is why you choose the easy way out......just bus 'em. Well that little failure ain't good enough in my book. I may not have the silver bullet answer but how to teach these kids is where the debate should be, not on where to send them.
Here's one idea I've been thinking of.
I propose creating an elite teaching class within the teacher ranks. This group of teachers would need at least 3 years of teaching experience and be invited/nominated into the group. They would not be forced into the group but voluntarily accept the nomination. Once in the group, they would be given several extra benefits such as paid training and extra pay....something significant like $10K/year or so, perhaps even a $10K bonus for joining. The details of the benefits can come later...However, once in the group, they'd have to accept whatever assignment WCPSS gives them for a minimum of 3 years with the option to re-join or get out every 3 years or so. WCPSS could then assign these teachers to schools that need them the most. WCPSS would also send them to specific training based on their new assignment in the summer months prior to starting their new role. OK...yes, this sounds a lot like the military but so what..... How would we pay for this you ask? By holding steady the pay of teachers who are not part of this group (a further incentive to join or be good enough to get nominated). No need to pay teachers higher salaries for working in area that arn't challenging. In other words, pay teachers with the most challenging jobs the most money.
Suggest you look at MIssion Possible
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 21:43 — Solon77I suggest you look at Mission Possible in Guilford County. Program results are in conclusive and animosity is created between the chosen teachers and those that are not. It is one thing to do something in the private sector but in the public sector where people's pay is listed - it is problematic.
As a liberal busing proponent
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 08:38 — SatchHHI object to the characterization of lazy - it's a lie. I taught in schools - mixed ability classes and tracked (high and low) classes. The mixed classes were BY FAR the best - for all students. The high ability students learned from the low and the low from the high and most of all the struggling students learned what it takes to do well. The advanced students learned the value of things beyond drill and kill (and YES, they still got challenged academically). The "non-academic" students brought in the best discussion questions and challenges to the status quo (and this helped challenge the high academic students too!). Writ large - this is what bussing does - it makes it so one school does not have a disproportionate number of low SES - or now (and better) low performing students. Having large numbers of low performing students concentrates challenges for all staff at a school and DOES NOT help the students. It is WRONG and misdirected to suggest that sending everyone to their closest school (full well knowing that this will create very high poverty schools in Wake) and then focus on teaching them - is the answer. Of Course focusing on high quality teaching/expectations is CRITICAL, but creating a good teaching environment is a necessary first step - and balancing across schools is one way to do this. The magnets help to do this too. Busing is not easy - politically or logistically. Stop with your propaganda.
You seem to be suggesting
Fri, 07/01/2011 - 13:53 — woodstockYou seem to be suggesting that all low income students are the same that that they endure the same challenges, lack the capability to succeed and create an undesirable learning environment. Some might find that suggestion offensive. I do.
There are many school systems in NC -- and beyond -- that are almost entirely low income. Are you saying the students in those schools are doomed and cannot be successful? Also, you seem to interchange low-income and low-performing. I find that sentiment rather shocking coming from an educator.
But your points are mostly moot. With the wealth of choices available in the proposed Blue Plan, no parent has to feel their children are trapped in schools they do not like. They will have ample opportunity facilitate a more desirable choice. With the Blue Plan, proximity assignment is a choice one can make... or not, depending on their priorities.