You can hang out tonight with Wake County school board member John Tedesco to watch a movie that bashes the role of teacher unions in the U.S. public education system.
Tedesco is the special guest for a 6:30 p.m. showing of the documentary "The Cartel" at the Guilford County Republican Party Headquarters, 3950 West Market St, in Greensboro. The showing is sponsored by the Triad chapter of Americans for Prosperity, the conservative organization that has played a big role in the Tea Party movement nationally.
"Tonight I'll be in Greensboro to speak to the Guilford Americans for Prosperity," Tedesco says on his Facebook page. "They will be showing the movie, "The Cartel" documenting the Teachers Unions affects on state and local education and budgets."
Tedesco is called a "School Choice Champion on Wake County School Board" on the Facebook event page listing the showing.
Comments
What a farce
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 13:17 — occum_sharpethis movie and it's agenda is. The charter schools that are glorified as being successful with poor children (like KIPP) are successful with the poor children of the parents who are motivated enough to fill out a lengthy application, provide transportation and lunch in some cases, and attend meetings and make sure homework is always complete. For those who aren't willing, or have children with special needs, they either never get in or are shown the door pretty quickly (in some KIPP schools the dropout rate is in the 60% neighborhood.) In NC, the money almost never follows that student who is shown the door out of charter school. In Public Education, teachers and administrators don't have that choice. They can't throw away the students who are unmotivated or whose parents are unmotivated. They have to make it work with every student. Some charters won't take special ed. students. Public Schools don't have that choice.
So when people can use public funds to make a school that is extremely selective (a 10 page application will make many uneducated parents think twice about applying), requests funds from Pre-K, transportation, and free lunch even though they don't provide those programs, and asks for a cut of local PTA funds and school enterprise accounts, then there's no wonder why they would be sought after.
As for choice schools and the Alves Plan. The parents of poor, minority students rarely make a choice. They take what they're given. This was the case with the Charlotte choice plan. Schools became high poverty just because no one chose them, so they were filled up with the children whose parents didn't make a choice and suffered mightily because of it.
So, there should be
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 14:01 — woodstockSo, there should be contingency plans and available public funds for every single potential act of irresponsibility, careless beahvior or stupidity, is that what you are saying?
To the contrary
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 15:28 — occum_sharpeI'm saying compare apples to apples. There's a lot out there about how public schools are failing and how charter's are the answer, but they don't play by the same rules. It's kind of like comparing the deaths of patients under an Oncologists care to those of patients under a Podiatrists care. Most patients who come to the Podiatrist aren't at a high risk for death, those who come to the Oncologist are more likely to be. When you talk about performance and say that our country's public schools are failing, you are lumping in schools in tremendously high poverty areas that are almost doomed to fail with other schools that are tremendously successful. When you look at the data that compares schools in Finland for ex. with economically like public schools in the U.S. we are kicking their tails. If you want to compare us to Finland, fund public education, public health, and infrastructure like Finland. If you want to compare us to China, send all the kids who you don't think can make it out to the fields or the factories. In the U.S. they all come to school and public schools are charged and judged with educating everyone.
The answer to that problem
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 02:38 — eddie2The answer to that problem is diversity. Not diversity of students within a classroom or school, diversity of school offerings. The traditional public schools are great for the vast majority of kids, the middle of the bell curve, but they fail the tails of the curve. We need more diversified offerings for the tails. Pretending that what works for the middle of the curve will work for the tails is destroying public education.
For example, KIPP schools meet the needs of some of the "tails" students. They fill a niche. (As podiatrists fill a diffferent niche than oncologists.) One poster above criticized KIPP schools because they don't work in ALL cases. Well, neither do the traditional public schools work in ALL cases. The answer is to provide some other solution for kids who fail in traditional public schools, and also fail in KIPP schools. They represent another niche that is currently not being filled. The answer is not to keep adding hoops for traditional public schools to jump through to meet every conceivable special need.
If you can't make a choice you get leftovers
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 13:35 — FSandYOUWhose fault is that?
Thanks
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 17:47 — DallasWoodhoJohn, thanks for attending our event in Greensboro. Our members enjoyed your visit.
The fact that Stan Norwalk does not want to come to our meetings our join our organization is fine with us.
I think the tens of thousands of North Carolina based members, who support free market economics and school reform would disagree.
AFP is an organization of grassroots leaders who engage citizens in the name of limited government and free markets on the local, state and federal levels. The grassroots activists of AFP advocate for public policies that champion the principles of entrepreneurship and fiscal and regulatory restraint.
Of course Mr. Norwalk who is an extreme leftist, would not agree with us.
Thanks again John,
Dallas Woodhouse
Americans for Prosperity-North Carolina State Director
200 West Morgan Street, Suite 100
Raleigh NC 27601
Thank you Dallas
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 18:11 — stan_norwalkDallas,
Thanks for making my day. I often feel powerless in the face of the Pope-Koch network - but you just told me I;m getting under their skin. It gives me more strength to go on,
Stan Norwalk
To go on and do what exactly?
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 21:50 — FSandYOUThrow a few more rants our way?
to go on being completely
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 22:35 — starsonoursto go on being completely irrelevant and delusional....to go on pointing a finger and trying to assign blame...to go on explaining what needs to be done while doing nothing....to go on being a partisan political hack...
Petite Bourgeoisie
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 20:06 — gregishereCalling AFP grassroots is like calling the House of Lords an alms house. Geez, how does it feel to be a handmaiden to the Oligarchs of the world? You're not a conservative, you're a tool that Koch One or Koch Two uses to wipe the riff-raff and assorted societal niceties from their shoes. The rules, as Leona Helmsley said, apply to the little people, not her or them. John Locke believed that there is a public realm for whom the rich shouldered a larger portion of the shared burden of sacrifice. AFP is not anything but a tool to give the Kochs and others an avenue to ruin the public sphere in order to take more for themselves. Shame on you, you petite bourgeoisie lackey. I'm glad your brother knows better. Oh, and thanks for giving Wake County a chance to see once again who John Tedesco really is.
Would you be willing to...
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 19:03 — bpuli9999tell us where most of your money comes from? How "grass roots" are your donors?
Could not find that information on your website. Is it possible that your organization is not as "grassroots" as it claims to be?
Get it RIGHT!
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 12:00 — JTedescoWell so the distortions appear to be setting the tone and fueling some of those bloggers who have personal angst towards me. There are some bloggers here (and the same few people who repeat it on the WRAL Blog and the NC Blue/NC Policy Watch Blog) who seemingly live to just spew hatred and lies about me. So on the issue related to this particular post and some of the false comments I wish to get a few things straight.
First, all went wonderful last night - great people in the Triad! I thank them all for a nice evening. My meeting was far from secret - it was in fact very public.
My concern with this N&O post is it subtle attempt to mislead and divide us. Media has worked hard to divide us from our treasured teachers of whom we have a great deal of respect and admiration. I had similar comments with Mr. Hui (who does not write the headlines) recently about the article titled "Board CRACKS DOWN on Teachers" - There was no CRACKDOWN. An overwhelming number of our teachers are professionals who exceed our high standards everyday. In a system our size there are likely a few isolated incidents here and there (maybe with some younger staff) and the Superintendent was encouraged by a small committee meeting (never even made it to the Board table) to remind them of our standards. End of Story NO BOARD CRACKDOWN on Teachers.
The post above notes the movie is "BASHING" teacher and tries to be slick in tying me into that. FALSE! The movie praises highly effective teachers. The movie talks about many many issues such as federal and state education mandates, charters, choice, and administrative waste. It does note about the challenges of removing ineffective teachers due to tenure and unions/associations, but praises an overwhelming majority of teachers. The Cartel is very much like Waiting for Superman in the fact that it touches a lot if issues impacting public schools today. The main difference it this movie digs deep on one state, NJ, known for the highest education spending to see if more money equals more results. I would encourage people to see the movie before recycling falsehoods about it.
Additionally, the note that I am a champion of School Choice (from the host's event page) is lacking understanding of my position and allowed some to portray me with a broad brush against Public Ed. I set that record straight last night. I said clearly last night that I support school choice to offer more families options, increase innovation and drive competition to promote reform. Education should not be a monopoly of the establishment. Yet, simply advocating for school choice without reform of traditional public schools will not solve the problems. It will only leave millions of children behind to failed public schools. We ALSO need to reform traditional public education to be able to compete fairly and be a viable real choice. We need to build bridges for our traditional public schools, public charter schools, and private schools to education for all children. This is where my commitment stands.
Among those choices (which I believe should exists) I am a champion of public education. It helped me rise out of poverty, and if the Lord wills to grant me my own children they will attend public school - by my choice. I will always fight to make public education better for ALL children - and that does not mean simply fighting to pour money into the system. Much of the dollars spent never make it into the classrooms. To me, that is not using our money wisely. Paying more for the status quo will only keep us sliding further away from success in education reform. Pay
So let's be clear - REAL REFORM is needed in public education. Teachers are NOT the problem, they are and must be part of the solution. Choice is not the only answer but needs to be part of the solution. More money is not the solution and the belief that it is adds to the problem. Bureaucracies at the Federal, State, and Local levels protect the needs of more adults ahead of the needs of our children. These are the beliefs I stand by.
John Tedesco
P.S. As a side note, I do not know anything about any Koch brothers talked about by those with rampant conspiracy theories (probably the same people think 9/11 & Pearl Harbor were inside jobs). I know about the Tedesco brothers - my youngest James will graduate from Garner High this year as did our two sisters (both at Wake Tech now). My mother would have been proud. My brother Mike (a year younger than me) went through hell and back with me together in life and I am proud of him. His 3 boys (my nephews) are all in WCPSS elementary, middle and high schools in Holly Springs.
Competition
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 23:28 — jsneezeYou mention competition a couple of times in your post as a solution to the supposed problems in WCPSS.
In any competition there are losers, by definition. Here's what concerns me: What will be the penalties of losing and the prizes of winning in WCPSS? How will the students at the losing schools be affected? Will those schools close and new ones have to be built? How will this me more efficient and cost effective? How will this make things better for all, and not just for those who get to go to the winning schools?
Choice = competition, right? People who have a choice will send their kids to the best schools, if they can get them in. So schools will have to get better, or they will lose students. And some will get better. But some won't. Those that don't will lose resources -- because students and their parents don't just bring resources, they ARE resources.
What do you suppose the percentages of winners and losers will be? What's an acceptable percentage of loser schools?
Of course, there may be a scenario in which all the schools are winners. But that wouldn't be a competition. That would be cooperation.
?
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 00:10 — Bob_SconceIn any competition there are losers, by definition.
Perhaps that's true in sports, but that's the wrong analogy. There are plenty of places in the economy where competitors don't go out of business. Coke and Pepsi, for example, have been around forever, and neither shows signs of disappearing. McDonalds and Burger King have been fierce competitors, but neither seems to about ready to keel over.
Competiton has forced Coke, Pepsi, McDonalds and Burger King to constantly improve the products and services that they offer their customers. 25 years ago, there was no Sprite Zero and you couldn't buy espresso at McDonald's. Those improvements happened because of competition. Why did Apple just announce the iPad 2? Because the Motorola Xoom is coming out, and it was going to give the original iPad a run for its money. Competition forces competitors to get better. And, in doing so, it provides better products and services to consumers.
It's true that there may be a few loser schools that just can't offer an education that students want more than what other schools provide. Those loser schools will close, and their buildings will be bought by new schools that do a better job.
Your analogy . . .
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 08:44 — jsneezeis flawed. You're assuming two monolithic competitors with realtively equal market share and resources to begin with. We're talking about every school, every student, some of whom will be stuck with generic brand Kola.
But thanks for admitting that you want to run education like a fast-food business and that there will be loser schools that will close. Not many people view those two things as allowable options.
Pfft
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 09:04 — Bob_SconceOk. Add char-grill to the burger king/mcdonalds mix. And snoopy's hot dogs. They have nowhere near the resources of those big guys, yet still manage to compete against them successfully. Why does Goodberrys survive when there's Baskin Robbins? How does a Mom & Pop pizza joint stay open with Papa John's, Dominos and Pizza Hut?
You think you're being clever with the "run schools like a fast-food business" crack, but you're partially right: fast food is constantly innovating to meet the needs of their customers. School competition is intended to bring a similar dynamic to education.
As to your last comment, I would rather have loser schools that close than the current situation in much of the country, where loser schools stay open and fail students year after year.
You can include . . .
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 13:50 — jsneezewhatever you want in your market analogy. Some businesses will dominate the landscape and take the lion's share of the profits. Others will manage to survive by finding a niche. Still others will fail. If you have no problem replacing "businesses" with "schools" in that example, then I think you are in a far-right-wing minority, and I hope you continue to be as open as you are here about wanting to run education like a business and let some schools fail, because it will work against you. Failed schools are a waste and the idea that they are OK or part of a natural process treats the students who go there like acceptable loses.
We need to be looking for ways to make sure every school and student succeeds.
Heh....
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 14:35 — Bob_SconceI agree that failed schools are a waste, which is why I think they should be shut down. The current public education system in this country has hundreds of schools which have been failing students for decades. (Heck, look at just about every school in Detroit.) What an utter waste -- how many thousands of former students are dead or in prison today because their school districts kept running their failing schools? It's absolutely criminal to suggest that these schools should be allowed to keep going. At some point, the only moral option is to shutter them and sell off the buildings to somebody who has an idea of how to do a better job.
As to the "looking for ways to make sure every school and student succeeds" comment, I'll quote Voltaire: "The perfect is the enemy of the good." We have been looking for DECADES and have not found those ways. The best approach is to find ways to make more students successful, and stop discarding approaches simply because they won't make every student successful.
Your description of "some businesses dominating the landscape and taking a lion's share of the profits" is a great description of what's happening in Wake County now -- WCPSS is taking that lion's share, and various charter, private and home schools are providing those niches. I don't see why that's a bad thing, or why it would change if a voucher program were to be implemented here. (Incidentally, I think vouchers in NC, and in Wake County in particular, would be an awful idea, but that's based on completely different reasons. Lifting the charter cap, though, makes a lot more sense.)
As to the "far-right minority" comment, I'll note that switching to ad-hominem attacks is a pretty weak defense when you can't win on the merits of your own argument.
Comparing public schools...
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:12 — bpuli9999with private enterprises. A lovely republican trick argument that has no merit - knowing full well that the basis for comparison does not exist.
?
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:29 — Bob_SconceI agree that it really doesn't exist now. The entire point of the school choice movement is to put public schools into a framework where the comparison makes sense.
What? Would you prefer that
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 08:49 — woodstockWhat? Would you prefer that inferior schools survive? Why?
I would prefer . . .
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 13:55 — jsneezethat the board do everything in its power to make sure that WCPSS has no inferior schools, rather than promote a strategy that is guaranteed to cause some schools to fail.
Who is promoting a strategy
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 17:22 — woodstockWho is promoting a strategy that will ensure school failure? What are you talking about?
Which schools...
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 10:09 — bpuli9999would you close first? And where would you send those kids? Private schools or charter schools?
I would make sure schools
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 17:26 — woodstockI would make sure schools succeed, YOU are the one imagining failed schools. The point was, why keep failed schools? Do what is necessary for them to succeed; closing them would be a last resort. As for where the students would go, that would be up to the parents to decide... certainly not me or some bureaucrat.
Huh?
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 21:11 — bpuli9999LOL! So you will do everything to make them succeed and yet there will be failed schools (that you will close as a last resort)? Does that even mean anything? Another one of your nonsensical answers.
Koch and Americans for Prosperity
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 16:07 — stan_norwalkDavid Koch is one of the financial backers of AFP through the AFP Foundation. Art Pope is a director. This can be confirmed at muckety.com (registration required).
If you don't want to be associated with Koch, I suggest you do some research beforehand. He gives so much money to conservative causes, that its hard to avoid his indirect presence at any republican sponsored event especially if its an organization that abhors taxes and wants to see oublic education fail and replaced by private education..
I agree that teachers are part of the solution. I'd like to hear your thoughts as to how we raise teacher quality.
Stan Norwalk
not quality, effectiveness
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 20:09 — snordoneProfessional development is the answer. Along with changing the cultural belief within our schools - all children can learn, all children can be academically successful.
We are done with "quality." It means nothing to the children in the room.
There are exactly the same
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 21:35 — CaryCurmudgeonThere are exactly the same amount of facts out there supporting the idea that JT is a follower of the Koch brothers as there are that you are a follower of George Soros -- none. Can you honestly say that you have never attended an event that received at least indirect funding from Mr. Soros?
Heh...
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 16:20 — Bob_SconceDid you just say that if you go to any Republican event, then you're associated with David Koch? Since Koch is your side's boogeyman, you're really not leaving much in the way of middle ground.
You're older than I am. Did you go to any Democratic party events in the 1970's? If so, why did you want to be associated with George Wallace:
In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever
?
You can't take one guy who you don't like, even a rich one, and tar your entire opposition with him.
JT was trying to distance himself from Koch.
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 17:55 — stan_norwalkHe can't if he goes to AFP events.
Some of my best friends are people I admire are Republans. They are by and large disgusted what Koch/Pope/Luddy/Stam are doing. Republicans aren't the issue, its their libertarian branch that wants to desrtooy public education.
And it isn't about a single person, its about a network...see Muckety.
So...
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 19:59 — Bob_SconceIt is clear that public education in the US, in general, is falling down on the job. There are two general approaches to solving it: (1) add substantially more funding to the current public education system to create new programs targetted at the kids who are doing the worst, (2) letting parents choose options outside the public school system that are either wholly or partially funded by public money, in hopes that some of those schools will do a better job than the public education system and will thus force the public school system to innovate.
Option (1) works in some places, but not universally. The Kansas City experiment is a perfect example where giving as much money to public school educators as they could possibly want didn't improve matters at all. But, there are smaller school districts (typically in upper-middle-class towns) that spend significantly more than that national average, and get great results.
Option (2) is different, but it's hardly extreme. Voucher programs have been used with success in DC until scrapped by the last Congress, and similar programs in other areas have met with some marginal success in Florida and Milwaukee. (If nothing else, the fact that families are taking advantage of vouchers to move to private schools means, by definition, that they are made better off.) Charter schools are also part of this model, and have also had some substantial successes -- the best high school in North Carolina is a charter school.
So, to me, the people who say "Option (1) is the only way to go, and if you like Option (2), you're an extremist" are just as extreme as those who take the opposite view. Personally, I'd like to see a mix of the two: fund public schools better and either substantially raise the Charter cap (to, perhaps, 500 schools) or lift it completely. The proposed $2500 tax credit is far too expensive to make sense, especially now -- there are simply too many NC students already outside the public school system; there's no way to give them all $2500.
No one wants to "destroy
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 19:24 — woodstockNo one wants to "destroy public education," you crazy old nut. LOL
Just...
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 21:13 — bpuli9999privatize them. FTFY.
The producers did bad job...
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 15:18 — bpuli9999of naming the movie. They named it "The Cartel" because of all the positive connotations the word "cartel" has and how it can be used to promote good and effective teachers. There's no union bashing there.
Some reviews (from the Wikipedia article on it):
"The lessons to be learned from The Cartel, with its boogeyman title and Bowdon's supercilious narration, seem to be limited to filmmakers-cum-propagandists. Want some tips on appealing to a Tea Party mentality? Count the number of Mercedes-Benzes in a school parking lot and pretend that it says something about profligate spending. Castigate former New Jersey Gov. John Corzine for not cutting spending on education, and spin it into a hypothesis that schoolteachers (and let's not forget the custodians) are controlling state coffers. Most important, don't have a serious conversation with anyone who doesn't already agree with you, because you might have to do some work. Production values are adequate, unlike most of this film."
"There's no history offered. Not a peep about No Child Left Behind. What's more, there's no breakdown of urban Jersey's demographics - the percentage of kids on school lunch aid, perhaps? - or any attempt to link classroom woes with urban problems. Yet even these gaps wouldn't have doomed the movie if Bowdon had sexed it up with a bit of old-fashioned cinematic salesmanship. The film plays more like a 90-minute TV special than a feature release. It's all talking heads, clanging music, substandard graphics, long scans of Web-page headlines and Bowdon's heavily cadenced voiceovers."
"The verdict: It makes no sense to approach a nationwide issue with such a limited focus. The Cartel presents several shocking examples of a system in disarray, such as principals charged with pocketing field trip money from parents. Yet the film simultaneously acknowledges that dollars don’t equal educated students while going on a grueling crusade against New Jersey’s misspent educational budget. Bowdon would have something if he scaled back the outrage and analyzed the causes of these practices and, ultimately, why so many children around the country aren’t being properly taught. Instead the filmmaker tries to position New Jersey as a microcosm of America and turns “The Cartel” into a local news report that goes on forever."
If I were a board member
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 14:38 — MiraMilIf I were a board member truly concerned with uniting a fractured community, I would avoid the appearance of being partisan. I would not attend events sponsored by highly partisan organizations (especially those on the far side of EITHER political spectrum). If I truly wanted to garner the support of teachers, I would avoid lending my support to movies entitled "Cartel" (which clearly has a very negative implication) which attacks teacher unions (which, as others have noted, do not exist in North Carolina). I think if you truly wish to unite the community, you would be well advised to watch General Tata very carefully. Although ostensibly he appears to be a strong conservative, he has been diplomatic, has carefully wooed both sides of the debate and has stayed away from partisan politics for the most part.
Mr. Tedesco, you are bright man. I find it hard to believe that you did not anticipate criticism for attending this tea party event. If you really do want to bring us together, talk less, listen more and stay away from politics.
Do you think that McLaurin
Thu, 03/10/2011 - 23:58 — jenmanDo you think that McLaurin should not attend Dem events? What about her wearing the GSIW No Disintegration button?
I agree that it would be best for the board members to maintain a low political profile right now, but I hope that you would hold all the members to that standard.
What is wrong with wearing a
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 10:10 — virginiadareWhat is wrong with wearing a button that indicates you are against the destruction of integration in our school system? GSIW is not a partisan organization, just as WSCA says they are not. I also can't recall a single time McLaurin has been a featured speaker at any Democratic event. It seems to me that all of the Democratic board members have kept a very low political profile. This is a great example of false equivalency. The Democrats are not the ones who have politicized this school board.
I believe it is particularly inappropriate for a school board member to speak at a partisan event sponsored by a group which promotes policies that would defund public education. All school board members should support public education in every way possible.
GSIW is absolutely partisan
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 14:35 — jenmanGSIW is absolutely partisan and is a divisive force in the community. They actually removed people from their mailing list because they disagreed with them. It was a general mailing list, not a leadership mailing list that involved confidential strategy information. Key members of that group behave horribly on a regular basis at board work sessions and meetings.
I was disappointed in McLaurin for wearing that button because it just encouraged the divisiveness. If Tedesco shouldn't be speaking at an event in Greensboro, then McLaurin certainly shouldn't be wearing that button at a board meeting. I'm not aware of McLaurin speaking at any events but that was never an assertion. MiraMil said, "If I were a board member truly concerned with uniting a fractured community, I would avoid the appearance of being partisan. I would not attend events sponsored by highly partisan organizations (especially those on the far side of EITHER political spectrum)." I asked if McLaurin should not attend Dem events. What about the comments that her husband has made about her fellow board members? Not just the direction they are heading but the personal comments about them and their supporters? Imagine if Paul Coble's wife was on the school board. Do you think for a minute that wouldn't be a source of contention for GSIW and the Dems? That they wouldn't be screaming about it all the time?
Keith Sutton turned the Feb ED Task Force meeting into a political game and made snide comments to some of the attendees who happen to disagree with him. He even took pot shots (one by name) at people who weren't even there. That is absolutely inappropriate for a board member to do. Incredibly inappropriate and only served to be divisive. In particular I think it was disrespectful to the people who were there to actually discuss the topic at hand. Community members, parents, teachers, principals, WCPSS staff members who all came to discuss AA male achievement and instead they got to attend a political rally that was drummed up by his supporters as a show for Tata. How very kind.
The Democrats on the board are not innocent in all of this. They create and further the partisanship as much as the Republicans do,
I don't believe GSIW is any
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 16:59 — virginiadareI don't believe GSIW is any more partisan than WSCA. I know many Republicans who agree with the mission of GSIW. Just look at all the groups affiliated with them such as the YWCA, many churches and PTA's and neighborhood associations. And I really don't understand how you can say THEY are divisive when they are the ones who want to keep this community united rather than splintered into municipalities with separate schools or divided into many different zones and to essentially have two separate and unequal school systems, one with affluent schools and one with high poverty schools. And how in the world do you interpret a button that is pro-integration as divisive? Being integrated is the opposite of being divided! Seems to me that it's the people who want to see our schools re-segregated (at the very least, they do not want to take any measures to keep it from happening) who are divisive by definition!
I'm not familiar at all with GSIW's email lists as I do not receive emails from them, and I am not aware of what Sutton said at the task force meeting, but I am sure there is more context and another side to the stories. I don't hold McLaurin responsible for what her husband says. And I think there is a huge difference between people who are fighting mightily to maintain a strong public school system and those who are trying to tear it apart. It's pretty obvious which side of that divide Paul Coble is on, along with Skip Stam, John Hood, AFP members and most of the Republicans in the GA. Have you been paying attention to what they're trying to do to cut even more funding to the schools? Public education in North Carolina is headed to the rock bottom thanks to their efforts.
It's pretty obvious which
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 18:27 — jenmanIt's pretty obvious which side of that divide Paul Coble is on, along with Skip Stam, John Hood, AFP members and most of the Republicans in the GA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
None of these people are affiliated with WSCA. They may agree with our stances and support us but so do people of all political persuasions. The fact that we agree on one issue doesn't mean we agree on others.
I realize that there is a long history with these people and groups but try to step out of that history to see what is really happening now. The majority of people have no idea who those people or groups are and what they have to do or had to do with any of this. Truly. There are a few people who want to make this partisan and the rest of us don't care. We just want to work together for a good school system that serves all kids. Now we may disagree on what that is or how we get there, but that is what we are all working towards. It crosses party lines and there is no one truth in all of this. The answer is somewhere in the middle.
I am talking about what
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 01:18 — virginiadareI am talking about what these people and groups are doing right now, this very legislative session, to hurt public education in North Carolina. I do not think it is appropriate for one of our school board members to be the highlighted speaker for one of those groups. Several of them have publicly stated their desire to get rid of all public schools! How can you say they are working toward a good school system that serves all kids? I still maintain it is dangerous for people of any political party who really value public education to join forces with them and to allow themselves to be used for their partisan ideology, which does not believe in public schools. That is what gets people like the current Republican majority elected to the General Assembly and we will soon see what harm they do to education in NC. It will take us decades to recover. If most people who want good schools which serve all kids do not know the truth about who these individuals and groups are and what their real agenda is, they need to learn, if it is not too late already.
the democrats in Wake
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 20:21 — snordoneneed to get on the right side of the issues and the truth. We have lost 2 elections, we will lose a 3rd if we don't start to deal with reality, not how things were supposed to work. There are viable solutions to our problems, but first we have to admit there are problems. The problem with denying our reality is that is impacts thousands of children every year - children who are tracked low and away from college and a life outside of poverty. I admire Anne McLaurin a lot, she has quitely but effectively moved towards acknowledging our problems and is now working to solve them. She is not acting on political cronyism, she is doing what is right for children. Others in the democratic party need to follow her lead.
Are you saying the
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 21:27 — virginiadareAre you saying the Republicans in Wake are on the right side of those issues? There is no way that creating high poverty, racially identifiable schools and defunding public education will do anything to help those children. Those measures will make the problems worse. It is not productive to join forces with the very people who are working toward those goals. They do not have the best interests of any children in mind.
No, that is not what I am saying
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 21:51 — snordoneI am saying that if we had acknowledged the problems with massive instability and declining academic achievement we could have dealt with them. If we had acknowledged that demographics is neither the problem nor the solution we could have created schools that work for all children. We did not listen to the people and we did not look at the data. I am an Obama democrat, not a Jack Nichols democrat. I believe that all children are capable of academic success, and I understand the burden of generational poverty. There are people in both parties that get this, and they are working together to solve our problems. The rest are just noise.
It's going to take decades to recover
Sat, 03/12/2011 - 09:58 — FSandYOUfrom the previous board(s), Del and Chuck's destruction, you're are right about that. Hopefully you won't pop a vein in the process.
Just look at all the groups
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 17:36 — CaryCurmudgeonJust look at all the groups affiliated with them such as the YWCA
Would that be the same YWCA that helped sponsor the protestor training camp held by NCheet (which is aligned with NC FIST)?
And I think there is a huge difference between people who are fighting mightily to maintain a strong public school system and those who are trying to tear it apart.
Pure partisan talking point
rather than splintered into municipalities with separate schools
You're just making this up, WSCA never suggested this.
or divided into many different zones and to essentially have two separate and unequal school systems
WSCA never endorsed any zone plan. GWIS, on the other hand, seems to be pretty busy selling the plan they endorse.
I'm not familiar at all with GSIW's email lists as I do not receive emails from them, and I am not aware of what Sutton said at the task force meeting, but I am sure there is more context and another side to the stories
Exactly what makes you "sure" that there is more context?
It's pretty obvious which side of that divide Paul Coble is on, along with Skip Stam, John Hood, AFP members and most of the Republicans in the GA
None of these people have anything to do with WSCA, and a number of WSCA leaders have spoken out for better funding. Nice try.
Take a look at the GWIS facebook page, their leading contributer is Greg Flynn of NC Policy Watch.
GWIS is sponsored by Democrat-leaning organizations and led by Democrats. WSCA's leadership includes Dems, Unaffiliateds and Republicans. Where's the money coming from to fund GWIS, do you think their funding is non-partisan? Go back and look at the campaign reports for WSCA. You'll find a contribution from Bob Luddy for $4,000 (less than 10% of what was raised), nothing from AFP, John Hood, Paul Stam, the Tea Party or any other group you've tried to associate us with. What you will find is hundreds of small contributions from parents whose party affiliations very much mirror Wake County.
I don't mind GWIS advocating for a return to old policies, but they should not be presented as a non-partisan organization.
"GSIW is not a
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 10:44 — woodstock"GSIW is not a partisan organization,...."
LOLOLOLOLOL!!! Thanks for the laugh. Good one!
I suppose you'd say the same about the NCAE, NAACP, Goodmon's political actions committees NC Policy Watch and the NC Justice Center, WakeUp Wake, etc. ... and you'd be wrong there too.
Of course she'd say the same
Fri, 03/11/2011 - 13:28 — FSandYOUShe's as partisan as they get. As for GSIW, they are as irrelevant as any group I've ever seen. I can't point to one constructive thing they've ever done. Where obstructionists gather is where you'll find GSIW. End of story.
Slanted for sure
Wed, 03/09/2011 - 12:56 — choice4allIt is disgusting how this first liner set the tone to light the fire. I thought reporters were supposed to report the facts? Not twist them with one sided opionions
"You can hang out tonight with Wake County school board member John Tedesco to watch a movie that bashes the role of teacher unions in the U.S. public education system."
Thank you John. Hang in there.