Capitol Broadcasting CEO Jim Goodmon, former school board member Tom Oxholm and several university professors are among the speakers at next month's Great Schools in Wake Coalition fall forum.
Not surprisingly, the GSIW forum will support the group's position that maintaining socioeconomic diversity in student assignment in Wake County's schools would be a good thing. The title of the forum, "Costs and Consequences: What’s at Stake for Wake," sums up GSIW's perspective.
In a press advisory today, GSIW touts how the forum will "will allow citizens to learn more about the economic impact of Wake County School Board policy changes on the health and prosperity of our local economy."
One of the forum topics will be a comparison between Wake and Charlotte schools. An event flier proclaims "they're not telling you about the extra $60 million dollars it's going to cost you - every year" to match Charlotte's local funding.
The $60 million gap is outdated because Charlotte's local funding has been cut sharply in recent years because of the economic situation. Wake is actually getting more county funding now than Charlotte. Wake is getting $313.5 million this year while CMS is getting $302.3 million.
Other forum topics will include the benefits of balanced schools and the challenges of getting teachers to work in high-poverty schools.
The forum will run on Oct. 16 from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. at N.C. State's McKimmon Center, 1101 Gorman Street in Raleigh. It's free and open to the public. Click here to register.
Comments
And don't forget to bring your own pumpkin
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 13:14 — g88ky07You'll want to make sure to take part in the "carving up more schemes and strategies" contest Goodmon and Brannon will be holding. With few attending, your odds are very good to win a prize!
Well, if Tedesco/Margiotta
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 15:55 — changewcpss1Well, if Tedesco/Margiotta and Company think it will cost less, please tell us what it will cost. Many of us, on both sides, I am sure, would LOVE to know what the new assignment policy will cost vs. the current one.
Not really more.
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 09:59 — nraleighmomJust wanted to point out that you cannot look at funding without looking at enrollment. On the surface what looks like more money is really less. Wake will be getting approx. 3.7% more county funding than Mecklenburg, but that has to be spread out among approx. 5.8% more students (including the charter students).
How Much Does it Cost to Educate a High School Graduate in Your
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 08:04 — AngelaWhttp://www.nccivitas.org/media/publication-archive/policy-reports/how-much-does-it-cost-educate-high-school-graduate-your-cou
Three main points emerge from an analysis of the costs associated with educating one high school graduate. First, communities vary widely in the amount they spend. Even though state government provides about 65 percent of LEA revenue (local and federal support comprise about 25 percent and 10 percent respectively), some communities can educate two graduates for the same amount it takes some communities to educate one.
there is more to it
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 16:01 — changewcpss1There is much more to an education than how much it costs. For instance, what is the QUALITY of that education? Do you honestly think a HS graduate from Hoke county has the same level of education as someone from Wake county? So yes, you could educate 2 graduates for the price of one, but at what cost to their education?
Thank goodness we'll be getting information
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 05:51 — SatchHHon what the changes proposed by the new board will actually mean to Wake County beyond just the potentially devastating school-level changes. There has been a surprising lack of analysis by the new board on what their changes will do to the county and I, for one, want to know. It will just take a few board meetings for some of the WCPSS policies that that the new board hastily abandonded to be brought back, and I would like to have some more information about all of this in the meantime. I do know that Wake has much lower tax rate than other counties. Is the new board going to propose new taxes to pay for their changes (not likely) or simply abandon poor students to poor schools (more likely)? That's not what this county needs. Sign me up for this forum!!!
Let's focus on solutions.
Mon, 09/20/2010 - 22:35 — petehsMany of this blog, including myself, continually argue that more important than a child's school assignment is the effectiveness of the teachers they will have at that school. ALL children can achieve--it's the adults in our system that are to blame for their failure.
So, instead of sitting through another forum rehashing the past, let's spend our time and energy researching and replicating techniques that are being used at schools like this:
http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/6-Groundbreaking-Charter-Schools
We simply must look beyond NC for examples of how to achieve better results for the children.
If you can watch Oprah's show from today, it is also very worthwhile (and I never watch her show--I am following stories surrounding the release of the "Waiting for Superman" movie this Friday).
On this, we partially agree.
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 17:56 — Dove314I enjoyed the episode on Monday, reviewed the stuff available at Time.org and am looking forward to her second show on Friday. One segment was on Charter schools but there were several ideas presented there including, of all things, the successful charter school based on nothing but diversity in the student population. a great chat with Michelle Rhee, public boarding schools, private schools, and more.
The upshot of the show was the achievement levels of children nationwide is declining and we need to take a hard look at what is working where and why to fix it.
ot-Scientifically Tested Tests
Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:40 — AngelaWThere is also scant evidence that these tests encourage teachers to become better at helping individual children; in fact, some studies show that the tests protect bad teachers by hiding their lack of skill behind narrow goals and rigid scripts. And there are hardly any data to suggest that punishing schools with low test scores and rewarding schools with high ones improves anything. The only notable feature of our current approach is that these tests are relatively easy to administer to every child in every school, easy to score and easy to understand. But expediency should not be our main priority when it comes to schools.
Instead, we should come up with assessments that truly measure the qualities of well-educated children: the ability to understand what they read; an interest in using books to gain knowledge; the capacity to know when a problem calls for mathematics and quantification; the agility to move from concrete examples to abstract principles and back again; the ability to think about a situation in several different ways; and a dynamic working knowledge of the society in which they live.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/opinion/20engel.html?_r=1&WT.mc_id=OP-SM-E-FB-SM-LIN-STT-092010-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click
Late and Waste of Time
Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:01 — liveonourporchesAll this effort for a policy that has already been officially abandoned, regardless of your view point of that policy, is such a waste of time, and comes off as a sore loser/sour grapes forum. This sounds about as productive as attending a campaign rally for John McCain's 2008 presidential election next month. All of these efforts should be directed at working with the new policy, and today's Board, not last year's Board, and a policy that no longer exists. Try rolling up your sleeves and working with the current Board on the new Policy at this critical juncture in implementation and planning of the new policy, not planning a moot point forum.
Amen to that. Like your
Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:24 — CaryCurmudgeonAmen to that. Like your term "Moot Point Forum."
Lack of accountabiliy
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 05:55 — SatchHHit's only moot if you want to stay in the "no info zone" that the board majority is keeping the public in. No fiscal analysis, no real analysis of their proposed changes. I, for one, welcome the chance to actually find out what all of these changes mean for Wake before we go down the road of others (such as Charlotte). They are still in turmoil after 8 or so years and are considering closing 14 schools! That's not the future I want for WCPSS!
CMS "turmoil"
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 09:07 — sstarksMuch of the "turmoil" you claim we have in Mecklenburg County has recently been created by some board and community members who want a return to busing. Several assignment decisions in the past year appeared to be made based on trying to balance free and reduced lunch rather than the "close to home" policy many believed was guaranteed. Also for years schools were not built with regard to honest projected growth patterns and the system is now reaping the "rewards" for that past policy. True turmoil is what we had in the 90's under busing, as assignments frequently changed, communities were pitted against one another, monies were spent on building schools where they didn't need to be, and the achievement gap was oh so conveniently hidden by our assignment policies.
Number one question continues to be: if busing was so effective, why do today's students continue to struggle? Many of their parents were educated under busing--they should be doing well but instead we hear that they had bad school experiences, that they don't know how to help their children, and they are living in poverty. How can that be after 30 years of busing?
If neighborhood schools are
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 12:21 — carson79If neighborhood schools are so effective, why do today's students continue to struggle? Who are you talking about "we hear that they had bad school experiences, that they don't know how to help their children, and that they are living in poverty"?
Who in are you talking about - is this racial code?
Lastly, Charlotte does face turmoil mam, isn't public school enrollment declining? Isn't private school enrollment as a % of students up (and higher than Wake)? Isn't enrollment up in districts surrounding CharMeck? What is driving this?
sstarks: if busing was so
Thu, 09/23/2010 - 00:38 — jeffrey1What?
Thu, 09/23/2010 - 07:27 — fiveblindmiceLike hell they're not.
Fri, 09/24/2010 - 03:38 — jeffrey1I have not heard one board
Fri, 09/24/2010 - 11:12 — user12345I have not heard one board member say that assignment will improve achievement. I have heard them say, and I totally agree, that a community assignment model will allow them to stop hiding under-achievers, and to stop relying on diversity to improve achievement.
So we are investing thousands of dollars in a massive reassignment program that won't provide any academic benefit? And we are doing it to help identify students who need help?
ugh ... we have the individual records of every student NOW ... we know every student needing help NOW ... we don't need to make massive changes and wait for new assignment plan to identify the students and start helping them NOW where ever they are NOW.
So we are investing
Fri, 09/24/2010 - 22:02 — jeffrey1Eye of the beholder
Thu, 09/23/2010 - 13:09 — TrailerParkGirl“Diversity at bottom wasn't about improving achievement, it was about avoiding disaster. And it worked very well at that.”
It may have worked well at keeping people blind to disasters, but whether it actually worked well in avoiding disaster is entirely in the eye of the beholder.
I consider the fact that the lowest poverty district in NC (Wake) is 103rd in graduation rates for low income students a disaster. I consider the fact that the lowest poverty district in NC is STILL in Title I improvement status while 28 other LEAs (including the dreaded CMS) exited that status, a disaster. I consider the fact that <40% of low income students are proficient at a number of our low poverty and “balanced” schools a disaster. I consider the fact that <50% of ES and MS students living in SE Raleigh are Reading proficient a disaster (I’m wondering if the jump at the HS level is because some of those that can’t read have left the system, and therefore, are not in the HS data). The societal cost of all this is a majorly expensive disaster no matter how much people want to be blind to that.
The other thing that defining the health of a school by its F&R status worked in keeping people blind to is which schools (a disservice to those schools) actually aren’t disasters – like Dillard, which is “high poverty” per the former policy yet has all demographic groups outperforming district average and some groups by a significant amount.
Uh you sure about your
Thu, 09/23/2010 - 13:36 — carson79Uh you sure about your figures?
lowest poverty district in NC = Wake - where do you see this?
The policy did not say that all schools over 40% were bad - for hundredth time, go re read the actual policy please!
Uh, pretty close
Thu, 09/23/2010 - 16:56 — TrailerParkGirlI got it from the disadvantaged student supplemental funding formula data on NC DPI web site – a while back when looking at funding formula questions. I realize in looking it up for you now that the data is getting a bit stale (not sure if this means the funding formula is as well), so I looked up more recent data and apparently Camden and Union counties have now barely surpassed Wake in the lowest poverty category. I don’t think the fact they have a couple tenths of a percentage point lower poverty rate, making Wake third by a hair, really changes my point though.
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/fbs/resources/data/disadvantaged/
http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/povertyrates/PovListpct.asp?st=NC&view=Percent&longname=North%20Carolina
The policy didn’t have to say on paper “all schools over 40% are bad.” It’s about the PERCEPTION created based on the policy. If 40% is of concern, if F&R % of school is such a huge concern, people start thinking the less the better and the more the worse. I’ve had people say to me “my school is 26% F&R – that’s high isn’t it – that’s bad isn’t it.” A sadly ironic effect, I’d say.
What made people believe that they can get to the positive diversity nirvana of having people accept others of different backgrounds and points of view from a negative foundation of fear of high poverty schools I will never understand.
"If neighborhood schools are
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 14:27 — sstarks"If neighborhood schools are so effective, why do today's students continue to struggle?"
Note test scores--they are steadily improving. Busing proponents argued that 30 years was not long enough to see major change in achievement, so how can you (and they) expect the gap to be erased in 8 years time? Again, scores are improving--is it realistic to expect things to turn around overnight? I don't think so.
Racial code? I'm talking about struggling students whoever and wherever they are. One of the rationals for their struggle given by many of our pro-busing activists is that their parents had bad experiences in school and don't know how to help their children or aren't prepared to provide well for their children. These same people argue, though, that we need to return to busing. Just seems to me (and others) to be a bit of a paradox. If busing didn't help the parents why would it help the children?
Finally, enrollment is indeed up in surrounding counties because those counties have firmly committed to stable neighborhood schools. (Same thing has happened in Kansas City, Missouri. School districts in Johnson County Kansas--Shawnee Mission and Blue Valley Districts--just across the stateline, have soared in population and achievement because they long ago committed to neighborhood schools) CMS continues to struggle with truly commiting itself to a neighborhood school based assignment system. There are those constantly arguing and opining against it. Many parents are wary of what the future may hold and have opted for the stability that private schools or nearby county systems provide. I think you would find, though, that CMS still has a very large, strong, and committed group of middle class parents and students, who are working quite hard to keep our schools strong. The business community also is a strong supporter. And for the most part we have avoided the toxic, nasty, divisive confrontations that have taken place in Wake County.
Johnson County?
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 20:47 — Dove314Check Johnson County Kansas demographics over time. That was where all the "white folks" went when the downtown schools were desegregated. The average home price for many years was well above the range that most minorities of that time could afford. There was no real commitment to neighborhood schools. There was no need as the schools were filled with affluent white kids. As of the 2000 census, the district was still 91% white (89% white for the county as a whole). The median household income was $105K.
The future is Barwell ...
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 16:08 — user12345The future is Barwell ... the kids are all almost in walking distance so it is the model neighborhood school we will try to emulate ....
I've never said anything
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 15:50 — carson79I've never said anything about kids' parents not being prepared to provide well etc or that busing was supposed to help those parents - I don't know how you can even claim to know who was bused and who wasn't.
You seem to be trying to have it both ways - what do you mean CMS has not fully committed to neighborhood schools? To make this question easier for you - what changes do you think need to be made to get CMS enrollment to grow back up like the surrounding counties are where parents are fleeing CMS to and newcomers are moving to?
What can Wake do to prevent this situation that yall are in?
What are these "nasty toxic divisive confrontations" in Wake you mention?
"What are those nasty tosic
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 19:50 — sstarks"What are those nasty tosic divisive confrontations in Wake you mention?"
You've got to be kidding!!!!!
What are you talking about -
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 20:01 — carson79What are you talking about - I am thinking you've had similar community outcry in Charlotte so just asking you what you are talking about so I can see if your assessment is fair...
No one has tried to take
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 21:06 — sstarksNo one has tried to take over a school board meeting, there have been no mass marches protesting assignment, our mayor does not comment on school policy, Meck Ed (the equivilant of WEP) does not criticize the sitting board, and no one has publicly accused board members of being racists. Parents turned out at community meetings last year to comment on unexpected assignment decisions (decisions that lead some to question the board's commitment to neighborhood schools) but everyone was civil. A few people (usually the same ones each time) speak angrily and passionately at school board meetings about a variety of topics but all are respectful of time limits and board mandated constraints. This summer there were a series of community meetings regarding the direction of CMS--all had polite and respectful exchanges of ideas. No rancor.
They are still working on
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 07:49 — CaryCurmudgeonThey are still working on the zone/assignment plan (far too long for my liking). I also look forward to knowing what, if any, new costs are involved. But I have no interest in sitting around and listening to the GWIS people speculate about how much anything is going to cost, because we don't know enough yet to even make an intelligent guess. As Keung points out, they are already running with bad information, $60M worth. It seems to me that they are creating a "misinformation zone" which is no improvement over a perceived "no info zone."
The point is that the CMS
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 10:48 — virginiadareThe point is that the CMS scores your group has been claiming are so much better than Wake's are the result of CMS spending over $60 million a year more than Wake for at least the past decade. That is also only in local funding, which is not dependent on their higher numbers of F&R students. Their spending cuts weren't made until the past year or so and have had no effect on their scores -- yet.
So..
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 13:11 — Bob_SconceIf you presume, as many do, that poor students are more expensive to educate, then it should surprise nobody that CMS spends more to educate its students -- it has a lot more poor students than Wake County does.
Comparisons
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 10:54 — SDR256It was 'your group' (?) which brought up CMS in the first place. Let's stop comparing ourselves. And stop the us vs them. Once we find out what the real budget and the real assignment plan is let's focus on what we can each do to roll up our sleeves and make this system blow the socks off any system in the country.
We already have a set of good examples, which would be more constructive to focus on than the plethora of bad ones. What mechanism is best to evaluate these together and publically? (as opposed to separate, private evaluations which turn into an us vs them food fight here and elsewhere, as has been the habit) And then post the findings and PROPOSALS?
It is still speculation.
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 10:53 — CaryCurmudgeonIt is still speculation. The plan has not been developed, and there is no factual foundation supporting a statement that Wake will spend $60M more. On the other hand, we do know that WCPSS faces a very real $100M budget cut next year. If GWIS is truly concerned about securing the best education for all children, they'd be talking about that instead. But, unfortunately, their single mission seems to be resurrection of the old diversity policy -- and that train has already left the station.
I am late to this
Wed, 09/22/2010 - 11:45 — festusI am late to this discussion, but I think it is important to note that returning to the diversity policy may be less expensive than the proposed changes. That seems to be one of the concerns driving the Wake Education Partnership, which is largely a business organization. I think it is worth thinking and talking about that aspect of the diversity policy: It efficiently used resources. With the economic crisis we are facing, we need to consider that aspect of the policy as well.
Again, the point is that the
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 11:31 — virginiadareAgain, the point is that the diversity policy is NOT what caused Wake to lag CMS in improvements in achievement for certain groups. It was the gross underfunding (promoted by your allies in the Republican party and the Taxpayers Association) combined with the massive growth creating unprecedented stresses on the system until the recent economic downturn. And you're right, the funding issues will only get worse. The proposed assignment policy will divide our county into rich zones and poor zones, which will cost more money to try to provide equity to very high poverty schools, and impede efforts to improve achievement. They are not trying to resurrect the old policy, but to improve it by focusing more on stability and choice, while still considering balance.
I'm not talking about the
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 12:09 — CaryCurmudgeonI'm not talking about the diversity policy, nor am I making academic achievement comparisons to CMS.
I'm talking specifically about GWIS's speculation that a new assignment model will cost $60M. They are making up numbers, plain and simple.
They are simply saying it
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 13:32 — virginiadareThey are simply saying it would take $60 million in local dollars a year for Wake to "match" what CMS has been given in local dollars each year over the past decade (admittedly, until last year when cuts were made because they could not sustain that level of spending) to go to neighborhood schools as CMS did a decade ago. It was not a "made up" number.
Nobody on the board has
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 13:38 — CaryCurmudgeonNobody on the board has asked for the $60M, and there is no analysis of what causes the $60M difference (it could be anything). There is NO analysis that says neighborhood schools will cost $60M more. This is pure sensationalism, trying to tie a price tag to a change in school policy. If these people ever expect to be taken seriously, they should start dealing in facts.
A good chunk of that $60
Tue, 09/21/2010 - 21:53 — jeffrey1A good chunk of that $60 million (about 30% by my calculations) was spent on busing. CMS buses a significantly greater percentage of their students than Wake. If I remember, CMS buses about 20,000 more daily riders than Wake. In addition to the extra riders, the busing in CMS has historically been very inefficient, something that they have addressed in the past year or two.
So there's a lot of that $60 million that never made it to the classroom. I would not be surprised if there were other "outside the classroom" areas where CMS outspent Wake.
Doesn't CMS also run a two
Thu, 09/23/2010 - 12:18 — jenmanDoesn't CMS also run a two tier busing system rather than a three tier like Wake? That means more buses and more bus drivers, which = more $.
Yes, but they have made a
Fri, 09/24/2010 - 03:32 — jeffrey1Yes, but they have made a concerted effort in the past two years to reduce busing costs.They are going to three tiers on many more buses, they've increased walk zones, they've installed GPS units in many of their buses to find and correct the bottlenecks, and many other things to optimize their bus routes.