Wake County school board member John Tedesco was on the Fox Business Network today defending the elimination of the diversity policy amid all the recent national media attention.
In this interview on "The Wiilis Report," Tedesco attacked the old diversity policy on financial and academic grounds. Tedesco, who was the only person interviewed for the report, also expressed his disappointment at U.S. Secretary Education Arne Duncan's recent criticism of Wake.
Tedesco also criticized last week's Washington Post article on Wake and denied that the school changes in the district were the result of a Tea Party takeover.
Gerri Willis, the host of the show, asked Tedesco if the diversity policy was dropped for financial reasons. Tedesco replied it was "certainly a money-saving issue."
"Those buses hold 72 elementary students each but yet the average ridership is only 23 because we spend a lot of time getting 5- and 6-year-old kids on bus stops at 5:30, 6:30 in the morning on one side of the county to commute an hour to the other side of the county with 10 kids on the bus here and 10 kids on the bus there," Tedesco said. "It's somewhat inefficient."
It's a bit of an exaggeration because it's mostly middle school and high school students who are on the first tier of buses in the morning.
But Tedesco added later that the primary reason for eliminating the busing policy was academics. He noted the old 54 percent graduation rate for low-income students and test scores showing how less than half the kids in the projected Southeast Raleigh zone were passing state reading exams.
"At some point we as a system have to focus our efforts and energies on teaching children how to read as opposed to just redistributing the problem to make all the children and all the schools look like they're equally balanced," Tedesco said.
Tedesco was asked why getting rid of busing is the answer. He brought up the issues of reassignment, saying there's lack of stability that's splitting up families. In a bit of an exaggeration, he said 24,000 students were reassigned last year. That's the original three-year number in the multi-year plan.
"I represent some of the lowest income sections of our community in my district and many of those families happen to be single-parent households, single-parent moms who come to me crying, 'Mr. Tedesco I take public transportation to work in the local hospital cafeteria. How am I supposed to go meet with my student's teachers an hour away from home? Why is my 6-year-old on a bus in commute for two hours a day and yet you want me to engage in the school?'" Tedesco said.
Tedesco was asked about last week's Washington Post letter by Duncan calling Wake's actions "troubling" and an example of going backward.
"I'm very disheartened and disappointed that Secretary Duncan chose to read a skewed media article out of The Washington Post before actually talking to leaders down here and making such a comment," Tedesco said. "But the reality is that this is 2010 in the Research Triangle of America.
We're one of the most integrated and diverse communities in the country right now and quite frankly having the mindset that simply reassigning kids is the answer to education has failed us."
Tedesco added the argument he's made in the past he feels poverty will be the civil rights issue of this generation. He said they can't use 1960s strategies to fight segregation to deal with the problem.
Citing The Washington Post article, Willis asked if the whole movement in Wake was backed by the Tea Party. Tedesco answered it's "absolutely not true."
"Quite frankly, most of it was a grass roots movement of parents," Tedesco said. "For some 25 years in Wake County our school board had been run by a Democratic majority, a majority of Democrats on the school board.
This year, parents both from liberals and independents and Democrats and Republicans alike rallied together to elect a new board majority who would shift in a different direction. One that would be more focused on student achievement, more focused on families, parental choice and stability for our kids."
Willis wrapped things up saying she wanted to hear the end of the story. She said she wanted Tedesco back on when he got graduation rates up to 80 percent.
Comments
How is F&R reflective of
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 09:17 — woodstockHow is F&R reflective of diversity? That seems like a very narrow interpretation.
Here are some things to consider, it is widely accepted that the F&R numbers are enormously fraudulent, F&R status does not define the academic challeges individual students face and that must be overcome to achieve success, and F&R students perform the same whether they are in their neighborhood school or bused to another school. So what is the point of it all?
Node Number?
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 07:58 — HereWeGo"I represent some of the lowest income sections of our community in my district and many of those families happen to be single-parent households, single-parent moms who come to me crying, 'Mr. Tedesco I take public transportation to work in the local hospital cafeteria. How am I supposed to go meet with my student's teachers an hour away from home? Why is my 6-year-old on a bus in for two hours a day and yet you want me to engage in the school?'" Tedesco said.
JT - Which node is this? I would like to see their base school, where they are assigned and how many kids are in this node that makes the Mom cry? Is there a hospital in Garner?
I think the hospital mom is
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:04 — danofncI think the hospital mom is an employee at WakeMed with a child at Barwell.
I think he combined a couple of stories for that particular statement.
She said she wanted Tedesco
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 23:32 — user12345She said she wanted Tedesco back on when he got graduation rates up to 80 percent.
well that is JT's last interview .....
Personally...
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 23:14 — jonwilI think the parents & voters in Wake County need to tell the Wake Board of Education members that they need to WORK TOGETHER to fix this broken assignment policy that has been proven is not working, for a assignment policy that brings the students to a neighborhood school that is closer to the parents and can also include diversity. This can be done if every body puts aside their differences (political and otherwise-this includes the NAACP, AdvanceED, Democrats and Republicans). If I was in charge, I would boot out ALL of the board members because they will not work together. The voters elected the new board members to bring the kids back to a neighborhood school closer to them. The voters did not say to not have diverse schools. It is sheer madness to be busing kids to Garner from Cary and busing kids from Cary to Garner. If all of the board members cannot work together, then all of them need to be recalled and kicked out. As for AdvanceEd, I would kick you out of the system effective June 30,2011. Every one of you adults are acting like immature kids and need to be treated as such-play together or go home-someone else can be found to do your job!
Many of those families
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:43 — Solon77"I represent some of the lowest income sections of our community in my district and many of those families happen to be single-parent households,
Garner - approx 6% of the households are single parent mothers. Wake Forest - 4% Apex - 4% and Cary - 2%.
While I empathize with single parent households - I wouldn't consider 6% to be representative of "many".
It is one thing to have disagreements about philosophy, it is entirely a different matter to out and out lie in order to fan the flames. Fortunately for JT' his supports do not believe integrity is an important characteristic.
So...
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 23:33 — Bob_SconceAre you disputing
(a) That he represents some of the lowest income sections of our community
or
(b) That many of the families in those lowest incomes sections happen to be single-parent households?
You're using Garner's overall numbers, which isn't what he was talking about.
And, frankly, all this parsing over exactly what somebody says is a little absurd. It's a national TV show. If it were me, I'd probably look like a deer in the headlights, unable to get two words out. You gotta look for broader themes, not getting every exact phrase correct. (Not aiming that at you; just a general comment....)
It is a national TV show..
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 09:02 — bpuli9999and that is reason you should expect a WCPSS official to get the facts straight. And not make them up as he goes.
Taken in context of the whole
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 00:01 — Solon77Taken in context of the whole he is over sensationalizing on practically every point, I do not dispute Garner has some of the lowest income sections of the county but to give the impression "many" meaning a considerable number is patently false. It is not like Garner is DC or Harlem.
With regards to the parsing, if JT wants to be in the spotlight he needs to expect this is going to happen and by people a lot smarter than me. This is the sad thing, I think he has his heart in the right place but he is very immature. I have been hoping to see some growth through the year but it doesn't seem to be happening. He needs a good mentor before it is to late.
Hilarious...
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:31 — supportwcpssLittle Napolean....fleeting moments of grandeur...
And he calls the Post
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:20 — virginiadareAnd he calls the Post article skewed?!!! His interviews are like his campaigning was, with disregard for the facts.
Money saving issue
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:13 — Solon77Gerri Willis, the host of the show, asked Tedesco if the diversity policy was dropped for financial reasons. Tedesco replied it was "certainly a money-saving issue."
Here we are facing a $100m budget gap and JT is holding out publishing the financial analysis on all the $ that could be saved. A clear dereliction of his duties.
Had Debra Goldman and the
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:26 — woodstockHad Debra Goldman and the other roadblocks on the board not pointlessly brought progress to a standstill, Tedesco's student assignment committee would have had those numbers.
John Tedesco should already
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 23:27 — ncellagatorJohn Tedesco should already have those numbers. If he could state accurate facts he might be able to convince a few more to follow along. The current system needs some correction but as a taxpayer I'm not ready to throw out what we have without knowing exactly where it is going monetarily.
How could he already have
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 09:09 — woodstockHow could he already have the numbers? A lot depends on the zones established and bus routes needed... but he never got a chance to get there. Community input was still being collected when Goldman pulled the plug. BTW, what community input is being considered for the Alves plan? He is working in secret.
The single most important
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 02:33 — jeffrey1The single most important point that Tedesco raised, and it can be easily verified by crunching some numbers, is that the average school bus route in WCPSS carries 23 students per route. These buses are designed to hold 66 ES students (I believe JT said 72, but the majority of them have 22 seats designed to hold 3 kids each), 55 MS students, and 44 HS students.
All right you want some analysis, here it is:
According to WCPSS, buses traveled 16 million miles in 2007 (877 buses). JT says that we now have 925 buses, so assuming a direct variation, that would put mileage this year at 16.9 million miles. The average diesel school bus gets 8 mpg (and that is generous considering the abysmal ratings of our transportation department). That's 2.1 million gallons of fuel each year. Diesel is currently $3.50/gallon (and getting higher), so fuel prices alone this year are $7.35 million.
A cursory look at other school districts in the nation shows that with geographically closer schools (i.e. neighborhood schools), and optimized bus routes, it should be relatively easy to increase ridership to 40 riders per bus route. This is a 74% increase in ridership. Assuming an inverse variation (y = k/x), that could result in a fuel savings alone of $3.12 million per year. And the number of buses required to transport our kids could drop from 925 to 532. Less buses mean less drivers, less wages, less maintenance, and millions more in savings. With a budget of about $68 million this year, there is a potential savings of $29 million/year.
As in all analysis (think savings from MYR schools analysis), the potential savings is overstated. It is highly unlikely that the inverse relationship between ridership and costs is linear. And the more school choice you provide, the less you save. However there is no doubt that our current assignment system is responsible for a grossly inefficient ridership rate here in Wake (I've talked to school bus drivers who drive 66 seat capacity buses with 6 or 7 kids on them every single day). And there is significant savings to be gained from increasing ridership to something that is more in line with the rest of the country.
Finally, please no comments about longer routes requiring more time (you know who you are), and less ability to stick to the 3 tier schedule. We've hashed that out before, and I believe that my distance analysis (a long post in a long ago thread, that I will be happy to repost here) which shows how unbelievably close the majority of us live to a neighborhood school, will more than offset any small increase in time required for a bus to make a few more stops on any particular route.
JT makes a solid point, and the potential savings are real.
Connect the dots
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 18:10 — Solon77PLease connect the dots - how do you get from 23 students average ridership to 40 students average ridership when 85% of the students go to their closest/near closest school ?
The savings is in the spot nodes going to a closer school.
With regards to the 23 student average ridership - this is also influenced by the carpoolers. Example - We live 1 mile from the ES my kids went to. The option is - 25 minute bus ride while the bus makes enough stops to get the 23 kids or I drive the kids myself and drop them off on my way to work. In the afternoon my wife would scoot over to the school and back in for the pick up - 5 minutes. I would argue the closer you are to the school - the less likely kids will take the bus and parent will drive. Another variable is before and after school childcare through the Y. Parents drop kids off at the Y and the Y would deliver kids to the school and pick them up - no public school riderships.
That said - the bus strategy should follow that of the airlines. Stop flying the 747 from here to Charlotte and downsize to something that is more economical. As busses come up for replacement get smaller more efficient, possibly hybrid busses.
Your anlaysis is over simplified and does not consider a number of relevant variables. However, I appreciate you making the effort to put it up. This is the only way we can examine the assumptions and work towards a meaning solution. - Thanks
PLease connect the dots -
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 21:45 — jeffrey1PLease connect the dots - how do you get from 23 students average ridership to 40 students average ridership when 85% of the students go to their closest/near closest school ?
It's absolutely false to claim that that 85% of students go to their closest or near closest school. You have taken the WCPSS claim that 85% of students live with 5 radial (as the crow flies) of their school, and embellished that claim to state that these kids go to their closest or near closest school. A circle with a 5 mile radius encompasses more than 78 square miles. It is strategically possible to place just 11 schools in all of Wake County, and still make the claim that every student lives within 5 radial miles of a school. If that does not convince you that your claim is outlandish, then consider the fact that there are 23 (TWENTY THREE) elementary schools alone that are within a 5 mile radius of my home.
I have posted my distance analysis on this blog several times. That analysis showed that the majority of kids in Wake County lived within 1.8 miles of an elementary school, significantly closer than the 5 mile claim.
I would argue the closer you are to the school - the less likely kids will take the bus and parent will drive.
That is nothing more than conjecture at this point. I agree with you that parents sometimes drive their kids to to nearby schools to eliminate an early bus stop -- I do it myself. I do it because of an absurdly early bus stop - my daughter can get an extra hour of sleep in the morning if we drive her to school. But I believe that the majority of parents drive their kids to school because they are just not comfortable putting their children on the bus. I would argure (also a conjecture) that optimized bus routes would eliminate the need for some parents to drive their kids to school simply because the routes would be much more convenient from a time standpoint.
Your anlaysis is over simplified and does not consider a number of relevant variables.
I stated that the potential savings were probably overstated. However, there should be no doubt that there are significant savings that can be made with regard to busing. Consider Charlotte, where leaders recognized that busing was inefficient and costs were skyrocketing. In 2009, they did a complete overhaul of their busing routes, and in 2010 managed to save $6 million dollars when compared to 2009. And they did this without any change in the assignment process. In Wake County, we could couple bus route optimization with neighborhood school assignments to save significantly more.
Clarification
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 23:13 — Solon77I have posted my distance analysis on this blog several times. That analysis showed that the majority of kids in Wake County lived within 1.8 miles of an elementary school, significantly closer than the 5 mile claim.
Ok, so how does this translate into the basis of potential savings ? According to the distance analysis 70% of ES are within 2 miles, 80% - 3 miles, 87% - 4 miles, 91% - 5 miles.
Consider Charlotte, where leaders recognized that busing was inefficient and costs were skyrocketing. In 2009, they did a complete overhaul of their busing routes, and in 2010 managed to save $6 million dollars when compared to 2009.
Do you really know how the savings were obtained ? They stopped performing neighborhood runs and set up collection points - like express busing. Do you think the parents would go for this ?
I am sure there are some savings to be had with the current budget situation, there should be a sense of urgency to quantify at least a range of savings.
They stopped performing
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 03:29 — jeffrey1They stopped performing neighborhood runs and set up collection points - like express busing.
Why do you leave out information that does not suit you? Those collection points were just one element of their overall plan. And to set up those collection points, all they did was extend the recommended walking distance to bus stops by .2 miles - Do you think it might be worth saving millions of dolloars if students walked an additional 350 yards to the bus stop?
They did a COMPREHENSIVE review of their busing. They put GPS systems in all their buses and were able to slash driver overtime pay by $1.5 million because of it.
Ok, so how does this translate into the basis of potential savings ? According to the distance analysis 70% of ES are within 2 miles, 80% - 3 miles, 87% - 4 miles, 91% - 5 miles.
Several points. First these figures only include base students. Second, this analysis is for ALL students, not just those riding the bus. Did you not assume in your previous post that students closer to school tend to carpool? By your own assumption, a distance analysis of only bus riders might produce very different results. Third, there is a huge inefficiency in bus routes due to school assignment patterns. If you analyze bus routes (and I have), you will find that the average distance traveled by students is 16.5 miles (1 way). That's street distance - the way it ought to be measured. I'll give you a simple example: I live about 1.5 radial miles from my school. If my child were to take the bus to school in the morning, she would travel approximately 10 miles on the bus, and she is one of the last stops on the route.
I can't understand people on here that complain about "wasting" $85,000 on a superintendent search, yet don't seem the least bit concerned that we have over 900 buses, with a capacity of 66 ES students, traveling around the county with only 23 students on board. Aren't you the least bit upset? Why is it that just about every school district in the country has higher ridership rates? Don't you think the potential savings are enormous? CMS increased their ridership by just 2.5 students per route, and along with other changes, have trimmed $6 million dollars off their transportation costs, while increasing ridership.
Finally, school bus route optimization is very popular these days. GPS devices and sophisticated algorithms can make huge gains in efficiency. There are corporations that exist that do nothing but optimize bus routes. Large school districts all over the country, including New York City, San Diego, and Charlotte have optimized bus routes. Yet we still have a group of people in a back room pushing colored push pins into a large map on the wall. Doesn't that bother you?
Why do you leave out
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 09:06 — danofncWhy do you leave out information that doesn't suit you? From this blog, July 3, 2008:
"As noted in today's Charlotte Observer, the school district plans to make elementary students walk about two-tenths of a mile, while stops for middle- and high-school runs will be about four-tenths of a mile from homes. It had been less than one-tenth of a mile this past school year.
To put it in perspective, Wake elementary students now walk three-tenths of a mile to the bus stop. It's a half-mile for middle school and high school students.
Charlotte-Meck will also experiment with more “common stops” for new subdivisions, making all students come to a clubhouse or other safe stop for large numbers of students. It's something Wake bus readers know about.
Charlotte is also mimicking Wake with another change. Students who move out of their base school's attendance area after the first day of classes will no longer get transportation if they choose to remain there.
Wake currently doesn't provide bus service to those students who move during the school year and choose not to go to their new school. They're considered transfer students."
CMS' changes didn't even put them at an equal spot with WCPSS. WCPSS was already doing what CMS did to save money.
Do you really think it would be OK to have a kindergartener walking half a mile from a bus stop? That's what would happen if we moved our stops another .2 miles.
Your blog comment does not
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 22:11 — jeffrey1Your blog comment does not dispute the fact that CMS did a complete overhaul of their transportation department, and savings were not limited to simply to combining bus stops.
Do you really think it would be OK to have a kindergartener walking half a mile from a bus stop? That's what would happen if we moved our stops another .2 miles.
Not only do I think it is OK, I think it would be a huge benefit to kids. In case you haven't noticed, we have an obesity epidemic with children. Part of the problem is todays "Pansy Generation," (are you a member?), which thinks that a little walking is somehow hurting kids.
But, their complete overhaul
Thu, 01/20/2011 - 12:54 — danofncBut, their complete overhaul still didn't get them to the same level that Wake was at when they did it. For you to say we should do the same thing they did, I think it's important to note that we already had done those things. They were copying us.
I have a child in kindergarten. Fortunately, he doesn't ride the bus. But, if he did, the last thing in the world I'd want is for him to have a half-mile walk when he got off of that bus.
There are too many things that can happen too quickly. If that somehow makes me a part of a Pansy Generation, I guess I'll just have to live with that.
Doesn't that bother you ? - YES
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 08:31 — Solon77The argument that it (bus
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 22:13 — jeffrey1The argument that it (bus route optimization) can't be done until the assignment model is complete is a load of BS.
I agree. I have never said that it depends on the completion of the assignment model.
Same argument for everything
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 08:37 — Dove314This repeated argument that nothing could or can be done by the BoE until the assignment model is complete is getting ever more ridiculous as the months go by. Assignment is just one peice of a larger whole and arguably one of the lesser peices behind maximizing student achievement within the best budget available.
I will be glad when the
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 09:40 — loriacI will be glad when the superintendent starts. I'm sure this will be an area of focus - maybe those with educational backgrounds just don't like to focus on the mundane operational issues.
I can confirm
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:15 — nancyncThe passenger capacity of the standard school bus is 66 students for elementary grade levels, 55 students for middle/high school grade levels (big sticker right inside the bus from the manufacturer and required to be followed by state law).
And as a former bus driver for a period of a few years, yes, many times the buses are not near capacity at all, for those routes where students are gathered in one section and carried to another not near their homes. I drove one of those. In fact, I drove a route as a sub once that took 90 minutes to make and picked up a total of 24 students. That route was the only route that driver could run morning and afternoon because there was no time to make other runs. One driver dedicated to 24 students every day. Insane.
One of my regular routes had only 27 students on it, picked up in one town, driven to another town, past 3 other elementary schools that were much closer.
Fuel for our buses, back then (1196-2000) was the cheapest grade possible and the mechanics hated it because it caused problems for them - maintenance expense was higher as a result. Our mechanics worked miracles to keep those buses running, and they worked in the parking lots most of the time, where ever the buses were parked.
Yep...I know who I am
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:03 — danofnc#1. The majority of us who live "unbelievably close" to a neighborhood school already attend that school.
#2. If not for the three-tier system, the number of buses and drivers would currently be higher. If you make changes that impact the three tier system, you lose as much efficiency as you gain.
Suppose, right now, that a bus comes down my street at 6:30 taking kids to FVHS, at 7:30 taking kids to FVMS, and at 8:30 taking kids to our ES. If you change the bus routes so that they pick up more kids, but in the process the bus can't run any other route, you have made the route longer and you have to add two buses.
If you have 3 buses picking up 3 different sets of 23 kids and taking them to three different schools in a 30-45 minute window (the three tier system), you have moved 69 kids with each bus. If you add stops, and move 40 kids per bus, you can't make the same time windows so you need more than 3 buses.
I know you said I wasn't supposed to mention any of this, but I think it's a little crazy to make all these claims about decreasing costs by increasing ridership without considering some of the very real benefits of the current busing system. It is certainly not as simple as saying "We can save money by putting more kids on buses."
As I said, I am tired of
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 21:53 — jeffrey1As I said, I am tired of rehashing these same old arguments with you. I've shown in previous versions of this discussion why your positions are not relevant. They have no basis in fact. They ignore commonly accepted practices in school transportation. And they refuse to acknowledge advances made by school districts all over the country that realized there was a better way.
If anyone has any interest in reading through those seemingly endless discussions, search the blog.
In 2008-09, there were
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 22:17 — danofncIn 2008-09, there were 51,131 ES students who attended schools by assignment. The others (out of 67,000+ total) were by choice so for the purpose of this discussion they don't count.
34,448 of those students lived within 2 radial miles of their school. Another 6318 lived between 2 and 3 miles of their school. That is 40766. That only leaves 10431 kids. Another 8831 live between 3 and 5 miles.
There just isn't a ton of cutting to do.
What you do in these discussions is dismiss any question as illegitimate, even though some are perfectly logical. Especially since most of our discussions were centered around the assumption that we were going to a choice model.
If we go to base assignments, I think there could be some savings but I'm far from convinced that it will be a big number.
In 2008-09, there were
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 03:58 — jeffrey1In 2008-09, there were 51,131 ES students who attended schools by assignment. The others (out of 67,000+ total) were by choice so for the purpose of this discussion they don't count.
They most certainly do count.
34,448 of those students lived within 2 radial miles of their school. Another 6318 lived between 2 and 3 miles of their school. That is 40766. That only leaves 10431 kids. Another 8831 live between 3 and 5 miles.
There just isn't a ton of cutting to do.
Well, well, another reasoning error.
Error #1: If you are going to make a point about busing, then use data that specifically refers to students that are bused, not a data set describing all students. You are trying to claim that there are few cuts to be made based upon the fact that only 10431 kids live farther than 3 miles from their home, yet those 10431 kids represent less than 15% of the kids who ride the bus each day. Because you say that 15% of riders are immune form optimization, we should abandon any effort to improve?
Error #2. You make the assumption that because kids LIVE close to home, they cannot possibly benefit from optimization of their bus routes. The average bus route in WCPSS exceeds 20 miles. The average distance traveled by students is 16.5 miles one way.
What you do in these discussions is dismiss any question as illegitimate
I dismiss questions that have been raised, like those that were raised here, because they are based on flawed reasoning. In each case, like I have done here, I explain why the reasoning was flawed.
You assume something
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:24 — nancyncLocal school assignment will not increase the number of buses at all. What you fail to consider is the start time of all those schools.
If all the students go to their closest school, each driver would be able to handle more than one elementary school route, more than one high school route and more than one middle school route.
Drivers are required to run three routes each morning and three each afternoon - that is the plan and design, unless, of course, they are moving students assigned to schools so far removed from their homes that time does not allow a driver to run those three routes. And that's how it is now.
If a driver can deliver to local schools, local students, the routes would be much shorter and allow drivers to do more than three routes per morning and per afternoon as the goal is now.
Yes, there will absolutely be cost savings under a neighborhood plan because drivers would be able to have the time necessary to run additional routes due to shorter lengths.
And as an aside, the school start times are worked from transportation backwards, transportation informs the schools through meetings what will work in order to get students to school on time. It was an annual session the regional mgrs of transportation had to go through when reassignments changed the routes every year.
"If all the students go to
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:45 — danofnc"If all the students go to their closest school, each driver would be able to handle more than one elementary school route, more than one high school route and more than one middle school route."
Your post says this same thing about 4 different ways, but no matter how many times you say it, it's just not true. You will not be able to take a driver who is currently running a three-tier schedule and add extra routes to their day.
Based on another post below this one, you apparently drove a bus that transferred kids who were in a spot node a significant distance from their school. I think you are taking that experience and trying to apply it to the entire county. Well, most of the county's kids aren't in that situation.
The buses that run 3-tier schedules are already taking local kids to local schools. You can't put a 30 minute commute into a bus route that is only going to have a 45 minute window to be completed.
In most cases, the only route that could have more stops added without impacting the 3-tier scheduling would be the first routes of the day, and they would simply start earlier.
If we go to a plan with base assignments, and at the same time do away with spot nodes, we could see a little savings. If we go to a plan where more choice is offered, there simply won't be any savings. There aren't enough kids being bused that far.
no doubt. It's charming to
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:05 — JonesSausageno doubt.
It's charming to see Johnny T appear on national TV and run through a tired litany of straight-up lies.
Weak
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:55 — Solon77Then how can he make the claim in the first place ? In the business world if one wants to implement a project - closing down plant, reassigning product lines, ....ect. it is preceded by a financial analysis - not the other way around. Just another example of JT's baseless rhetoric.
Then how can he make the
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:51 — user12345Then how can he make the claim in the first place ? In the business world if one wants to implement a project - closing down plant, reassigning product lines, ....etc.. it is preceded by a financial analysis - not the other way around. Just another example of JT's baseless rhetoric.
Another rule in business is to hide the bad news if possible or wait until it is too late to act on it ... JT was hoping no one would ask about the financial impact until later ..... fortunately Goldman saw through that tactic and stopped the train wreck. JT started with "how do I get these kids out of Garner" and then everything else was window dressing.
They haven't closed down the
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 23:18 — eddie2They haven't closed down the old busing plan. They were giving themselves three years to discuss, plan, and design the new assignment plan, before putting it into operation in 2012. The first part of that process was/is the discussion phase, where they are now stuck. Now that they are still stuck in the discussion phase, I'd expect the old diversity plan to continue at least an extra year, because they still haven't gotten to the plan and design phases.
So
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 23:39 — Solon77So what is your point ? They haven't consolidated the central office to Crossroads and yet a financial analysis was presented, flawed but nevertheless an analysis. A claim has been made that the current assignment policy is inefficient. What better way to support ones case than to point out the financial savings that could result from a change. Financial savings that could save teachers jobs, financial savings that could be used to redirect resources to more directly benefit students. Anecdotally JT points to busses being under utilized on the runs - but he fails to mention that a significant factor that contributes to this is a 3 tier system.
"So what's your point?" You
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 00:52 — eddie2"So what's your point?"
You were complaining that they were implementing a project without doing a financial analysis. They were not doing that. They weren't implementing the project; they were discussing it. They didn't even have a rough design of a plan. It would have been like doing a financial analysis on a building without knowing how many offices it would have.
They were implementing parts of some plan
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 16:20 — ncellagatorIf you go back and listen to the board discussion on assignments during COW sessions you will hear new board members making statements along the lines as "this goes with the plan for next year". Which plan is being referred to b/c as of right now we are still under the 3 year plan approved by the previous board?
"Next year" means next
Wed, 01/19/2011 - 00:07 — eddie2"Next year" means next school year, 2011-2012. The old assignment plan is still in effect, expires with the end of the 2011-2012.
The "reassignments" being discussed for "next year" are the adjustments to the plan, which has happened every year recently.
folks, remember ole' 'Johnnie T" is one of the boys
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 21:45 — JoeTarheelHe dated a black girl once............it's a wonder he didn't lead the MLK march today.
Name one
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 21:23 — HereWeGoName one 6 year old from Garner who is on the bus 2 hours an day that is not a application magnet student that leaves home between 5:30 and 6:30 in the morning.
Oh boy, he still does not get it
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 20:55 — duval"We're one of the most integrated and diverse communities in the country right now and quite frankly having the mindset that simply reassigning kids is the answer to education has failed us."
In no small part because of our diversity policy!!
??
Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:34 — loriacAre you claiming that Wake County is diverse because of a policy that buses kids around the county based on their F&R%? Please explain that one.
Are yo then..
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 09:00 — bpuli9999claiming that it is already diverse? Explain, then, the concentrations of F&R kids in certain schools.
A community is diverse
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 10:48 — loriacA community is diverse because of the people who live there. Busing doesn't change that.
That's right - explain the concentration of F&R kids - this happened in spite of the old diversity policy. We need to get away from looking at kids as groups, and dealing with them as individuals.
The reason for the increase
Tue, 01/18/2011 - 18:32 — Andrew95The reason for the increase is the incredible growth in the wake county/triangle area, in all demographics. Schools could not be build fast enough to keep up, and the growth is only going to continue from here.