Wake County school board member John Tedesco isn't making drastic changes to the agenda for today's student assignment committee meeting.
Tedesco. the committee chairman, said he decided not to add any new topics to the agenda following last week's vote scrapping work on the zone-based plan. Tedesco, who set the agenda before last week's vote, said they'll discuss school funding and program choice today.
Tedesco said the one thing he did change was drop agenda topics relating to the zone plan the committee has been working on for the past several months.
Tedesco said they would have discussed today the idea of removing the magnet schools from the proposed Central Region while moving non-magnets such as Athens Drive High to a different region. He said they would have talked about making the downtown/Southeast Raleigh magnet schools as countywide magnet schools separate from any zone or region.
Tedesco said they would have also discussed the idea of reserving seats at the magnet schools for Southeast Raleigh families who live around them and want to attend school there. In addition, Tedesco said they would have discussed setting aside seats in schools outside the zone for Southeast Raleigh students to have priority to attend.
Tedesco said just drawing up base areas around schools, particularly in Southeast Raleigh, will create 25 high poverty schools. He said that wouldn't occur in his zone model.
School board vice chairwoman Debra Goldman, who backed last week's resolution, has said that they need more community input about what to do with the thousands of Southeast Raleigh students who are now bused out for diversity and to free up seats for magnet applicants.
Tedesco said that not giving Southeast Raleigh students a chance to attend neighborhood magnet schools would mean saying that community schools are only for people who live in places such as Cary.
Focusing on what will be discussed today, Tedesco said staff will present information showing funding per school. Tedesco said the data will show wide disparities and how some low-income students who are bused for diversity are being sent to schools with fewer resources.
Tedesco said the school funding issue is still just as relevant moving forward even if the zone plan isn't used. He noted how the resolution passed last week talks about equity.
The meeting is scheduled for 11:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. at 3600 Wake Forest Road in Raleigh. Tedesco had planned to meet in the main board room and not the conference room because he wanted to have the committee break up into small groups to discuss the magnet zone idea. it's uncertain now whether he'll have it moved back to the conference room.
Comments
ugh ..Fastest Growing Cities - Raleigh-Durham
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 11:50 — user12345...http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/the-fastest-growing-cities-in-the-us.html
(Don't tell Mayor Meeker
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 12:43 — DrActualFactual(Don't tell Mayor Meeker "others" not like him are coming!)
Why would he do this
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 22:29 — Solon77Why would the assignment model look to do this ? How would these parents become active participants in the school ? how would they get to teacher conferences ? school events ? what if their kid was sick and needed to be picked up from school ? Why Southeast Raleigh students ? Do students in other zones have priority to cross zones as well ?
In addition, Tedesco said they would have discussed setting aside seats in schools outside the zone for Southeast Raleigh students to have priority to attend.
Solon--I can't tell if
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 12:01 — jenmanSolon--I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
We've heard from groups like CCCAAC, NAACP, etc that the parents in SE Raleigh are happy to have their kids go to school in wealthier areas and don't want to go to their 'neighborhood' school. To me, this is a way to give them choice like the rest of us have had. Like TPG said, it goes to the issue of minority isolation.
I've always said (as have others here on the blog) that if there are parents in SE Raleigh who truly do want their kids going to school in Cary, far North Raleigh, or Apex then I think we should look at how to offer that to them.
How will they get to the schools? I don't know. The same issues will still be there but maybe some of the families will think it's worth the sacrifices. CCCAAC thinks the AA community would rather be at the suburban schools even with the long distance. I think more will choose to stay close to home. However it turns out, I think they should be offered the choice.
So...
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 11:33 — Bob_SconcePresumably, if you chose to have your child attend that school, then you either have a solution to those problems, or they aren't particularly relevant to you. The problem in the assignment-for-diversity policy has been that parents haven't had that choice.
Why
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 23:58 — TrailerParkGirlTo address minority isolation. That area of the county is the only one that meets generally accepted definations of minority isolation.
TPG??Any idea how optional
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 06:11 — DrActualFactualTPG??Any idea how optional or how much discretion WCPSS has to address minority isolation? I have been looking at the Dissimilarity Index (measurers segregation demographics) and a recent report shows Wake in the mid 30's (less than Nashville--studies comparison) . The report was a 2010 AERA WCPSS report. Nationally and locallly the suburbs with influx of many cultures does not meet isolation parameters.
Not sure
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 13:45 — TrailerParkGirlNo, and I can’t find anything that spells it out. However, it seems mandatory-type efforts to prevent have not done well in court. I’m not aware of an area in Wake outside of SE Raleigh that would be considered isolated. I did run across this report, which makes some interesting points.
http://www.thernstrom.com/pdf/Thernstrom_for_USCCR%20.pdf
Very interesting article.
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 15:40 — jenmanVery interesting article. Thanks for posting the link. Now off to check out the stuff Doc is talking about.
ot
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 12:20 — AngelaWShow Enlists Communities in 'Extreme Makeover' for Schools
By <>Andrew L. Yarrow on October 12, 2010 7:00 AM |
"A school decimated by budget cuts and neglect is transformed through the efforts of its kids, parents, staff and community."
Believe it or not, parent and public engagement in schools has become a hot enough topic that this is the tag line for a new NBC prime time series, "School Pride," which debuts October 15 at 8 p.m. Eastern time. The series dramatizes stories of communities working to invigorate "aging and broken public schools." Community organizers are the heroes, with huge supporting casts of parents, teachers, students, and other community members.
A trailer shows hundreds of people mobilizing to rebuild a school in Compton, Calif., in 10 days. With shows about similar stories at schools around the country, "School Pride" is also about "revitalizing the community, and encouraging student pride and academic improvement," according to the web site of producer Cheryl Hines.
An accompanying web site, My School Pride, offers tool kits for parental involvement and "causes, issues, resources, and information you need to make a difference."
Will the series be compelling enough to captivate and motivate audiences, or at least get them to think about issues of community engagement and school improvement? Will the show attract more than those already committed to these causes? While unlikely to be a breakaway hit, one can only hope that it does help to change the public mindset about engaging with schools and, maybe, becomes a new model for public service-oriented reality TV
Tedesco said that not giving
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 12:15 — jenmanSES
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 23:34 — Solon77Was SES in the application process removed only for SE Raleigh or all magnet schools ?
I think it was removed as a
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 23:51 — DrActualFactualI think it was removed as a consideration in all schools.
SES was removed from
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 10:12 — KeungHui (author)SES was removed from consideration for all magnet applications. The difference is that Growth and Planning had apparently left a couple of hundred seata at Southeast Raleigh High vacant in the past because it would have meant taking F&R students who would have changed the demographics of the sending and receiving schools.
Tedesco is feeding you a
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 12:42 — shannon998Tedesco is feeding you a line and you bought it.
Only 25-30% of any magnet school in SE Raleigh is open for magnet application. The rest are all LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS. Yes, some do get bussed away -but not all of them.
Tedesco and Margiotta would have you believe that the only kids going to magnet schools are rich white kids. My son is one of 3 white kids in his class of 24. If I am rich, someone forgot to let my bank know.
As Hui says below, the
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:15 — jenmanAs Hui says below, the percentage of base kids varies a lot at the different magnets. I don't know where you got your 25-30% magnet seats figure from but it is wrong, especially for the SE or downtown Raleigh magnet schools.
I've not been fed anything about magnets by anybody. I've done a lot of research about magnets over the years and my kids have been at a magnet at the elem and middle school levels.
Actually, the percentages of
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:04 — KeungHui (author)Actually, the percentages of magnet students varies widely. The more popular magnets such as Enloe tend to be closer to 70 percent magnet. Newer and less popular magnets are more likely to be majority base kids.
Enloe's magnet percentage
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 21:28 — KeungHui (author)Enloe's magnet percentage was 62.1 percent last year. It has been closer to 70 percent a few years ago.
My experience is in relation
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:17 — shannon998My experience is in relation to elementary schools. When touring elementary schools, every magnet we toured (five total) reported 20-30% magnet enrollment depending on node reassignment. One was a GT/AG school. I'm pretty sure that is a very popular program.
Shannon, here is a link to
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:38 — jenmanShannon,
here is a link to the 2009-10 figures showing the percentage of base students at magnets. There are two columns--base and application. The 2 numbers don't add up to 100% because it doesn't include transfer, special program or traditional calendar students.
http://www.newsobserver.com/content/media/2010/6/8/basepercentage.pdf
Another link that may
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:58 — user12345Another link that may help
...http://www.wcpss.net/demographics/distance/pdf/summaries06_distance.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks&page1
Tedesco is feeding you a
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 12:41 — shannon998Tedesco is feeding you a line and you bought it.
Only 25-30% of any magnet school in SE Raleigh is open for magnet application. The rest are all LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS. Yes, some do get bussed away -but not all of them.
Tedesco and Margiotta would have you believe that the only kids going to magnet schools are rich white kids. My son is one of 3 white kids in his class of 24. If I am rich, someone forgot to let my bank know.
Two, things. 1. Some magnets
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 14:10 — woodstockTwo, things.
1. Some magnets -- Enloe is one -- are about 70% magnet students and 30 base. Please compare the academic performance of the base students vs. privileged magnet students in this almost ideal status quo setting.
You are right about the misconception of "rich" or affluent in this fight over our schools (I almost called it a "debate," but it is a fight.) Most people are neither, they are in the middle. Rich and affluent are terms used by supporters of forced busing, elitist magnet schools, and the status quo to describe all non-poor folks. It helps raise the temperature a in the room.
"rich" is also a relative
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 14:14 — jenman"rich" is also a relative term. Some of us might as well be millionaires in the eyes of a kid who doesn't have food in the house to eat.
Mr. Hui? I thought this
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 11:53 — DrActualFactualMr. Hui? I thought this would be streamed live by WRAL like it was last week. Has the media coverage changed?
WRAL is recording but not
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 11:56 — KeungHui (author)WRAL is recording but not streaming the meeting live because of the crummy audio quality. They're meeting in the main board room for the small group discussions that would have taken place about the magnet school discussion. They've placed tables in front of the baord dais. There are no microphones at the tables being used by the board, committee members and staff.
Thanks for the reply (Mr.
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 12:32 — DrActualFactualThanks for the reply (Mr. Hui--you are the best!) It has been so helpful to have these recorded to be viewed at times that are convenient for working folks. It is helpful to watch the proceedings so that we as a community can provide intelligent input and keep up with the changes going on within the meetings. I guess I'll watch for the final, posted file.
Looking at data
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 11:27 — TrailerParkGirlLooking at data:
1) Original Request – in a choice zone model, equity is a key component to ensure all schools are attractive choices so that some schools are not underchosen leading to inefficient use of capacity. I believe both the gentleman from Duke with the long name that begins with an A (in April) and Michael Alves (more recently – was he here in July?) mentioned this when explaining the way those plans function.
2) Still look – regardless of which model is used zone, base assignments, non-base assignments, choice, no choice, magnets, no magnets, etc. equity between schools will always be a point of interest and contention. It already was – how long have we heard about disparities and inequities in access to resources between magnets and non-magnets and this area over that area or that school versus this school. This has been, is, and will continue to be an issue unless transparently put on the table and openly examined and addressed.
3) Why now – because we now have BOE members willing to ask the tough questions, make things more transparent and address accountability, instead of just taking the position “they just know it is working.”
4) Another reason to look – consideration and assessment of impacts to achievement and efficient allocation of resources. We have some schools getting extra resources but not apparently producing achievement results with those additional resources, so we need to consider if resources are being maximized and used efficiently. It is my understanding that the assignment committee is not the only one asking about this data.
JT may need another "whoop
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 09:08 — user12345JT may need another "whoop up side the head" to make sure he understands what Goldman said.
You really just don't get
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 14:11 — woodstockYou really just don't get it, do you?
I am in total agreement with
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 09:00 — red_balloonI am in total agreement with Tedesco that funding data is relevant to the SAC effort regardless of the model being pursued. I hope Tedesco can drive the SAC to examine funding and related issues.
Al magnets have bases around them
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 08:59 — bluedaisyTedesco doesn't look at his own maps - all magnets, especially SE Ral High, have a base population that live around the school. No wait - he should know that - he increased SE Ral's base last year by removing nodes from Garner to SE Ral. This guy is a piece of work. Either he has no clue about the magnet borders, or he thinks YOU don't - Keep watching!
Where did JT claim that no
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 12:18 — jenmanWhere did JT claim that no magnets had base populations?
Speaking of SE Raleigh HS, did you notice how many more students got into that school now that SES was removed from the criteria?
I'm confused by your second
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:40 — magnetParentI'm confused by your second question. Are you making the assertion that more students were able to get into SRHS as magnet students because of the removal of the SES criteria?
If you are looking at the graphs, I see that the total membership has increased, but the percentage of magnet students has decreased. Using rough estimates (since I see no actual numbers) it appears that the number of magnet students at SRHS is about the same. The increase in enrollment was due to JT's last minute move of Garner students to SRHS. But he was able to increase the FRL percentage by a sizeable amount (increase about 10%). Sorry, but the change in demographics at that school had nothing to do with the removal of SES from the magnet application criteria.
I don't have the numbers
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:51 — KeungHui (author)I don't have the numbers directly in front of me but I do recall that the number of magnet acceptances was up by a couple of hundred kids this year at Southeast Raleigh High. I asked Laura Evans at the time about the reason and she acknowledged it was because they didn't use SES anymore, which along with the reassignment of the kids from Garner helps explain why the F&R percentage is projected to be up so much this year. The official F&R percentage for this school year haven't been released yet.
I'm confused by your second
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 13:46 — jenmancurious - why is garner a magnet?
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 14:32 — croaswifeIf SE Raleigh students were pulled out of Garner because of crowding and 91% are there as base and only 3% as application, what is the purpose of Garner being a magnet?
From what I understand,
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 18:17 — jenmanFrom what I understand, Garner was made a magnet to help reduce its F&R. It takes a while for some of these newer magnet programs to catch on though, and some never seem to take hold as well as others do.
I think it will take a long time for Garner HS to become a 'coveted' magnet school, and it may not ever happen. East Millbrook MS is the same way. The F&R is high enough that people don't want to go there, and it suffers from the fate of not being Ligon. Garner will never achieve the status of Broughton (particularly if Broughton does indeed get to keep its private IB program) and will certainly never reach Enloe in terms of desirability.
I agree that it does seem odd to have a magnet program at a school that is 90% base and is overcrowded. This is just one of many reasons why I think a review of the overall magnet program is needed.
Don't count on Goldman's
Wed, 10/13/2010 - 00:14 — red_balloonDon't count on Goldman's support to review the current magnet program. Her antenna will only pick up feedback on anti-zone assignments (apart from pleas to keep the current magnet system).
Missing the point
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 09:50 — Bob_SconceRecall that in the zone model, bases disappeared. So, JT was stating an exception to that rule.
Fist fight today!
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 08:07 — sachivalayWhat is JT going to do today? Name calling last week. I guess fist fight this week.
Circus continues....
JT should have scraped this meeting and saved staff some time. It is time JT and gang to set policy (written) and leave staff to develop plan.
Is this new data?
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 07:59 — bpuli9999"Tedesco said the data will show wide disparities and how some low-income students who are bused for diversity are being sent to schools with fewer resources"
Is this new data that was collected after the scrap-diversity decision? If not, why now?
probably because it was
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 08:07 — AngelaWprobably because it was never asked for by previous BoE's.
Blame the current BOE and SAC
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 09:54 — Apexcitizen1Angela,
How long are you going to continue to blame the previous board? Ownership belongs to the new BOE now, not the previous. JT never built a compelling reason for his idea of change. Having data developed into logically presented information is critical aspect he overlooked. He assumed that people would just fall blindly behind his ideology. This may be very informative data as to an issue with the current assignment model but its to little to late for his vision. Seems like his ego still has the best of him and he's going to try and "prove" to everyone that he was right, instead of moving on.
good grief, get over
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 10:26 — AngelaWgood grief, get over yourself. I was simply pointing out that this data was never asked for before JT asked for it.
do you understand "planning process"? that's why he asked for THIS data...if Goldman hadn't jumped the gun, this data would be very useful.....duh.
Having some issues this morning?
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 11:04 — Apexcitizen1You need to look forward and you can't continue to live in the past. That was the point of my post. Why blame this BOE's failures on the failures of the past BOE its not logical. If it makes your feel better I understand. Explain to me JT planning process please if your such an expert. The reality is JT and RM in their postion paper claimed they had already done the research and had data to support their position but now its abundantly clear they had very little data and about zero on the research. DG had given them a good faith effort and they simply failed, you can type what you want but the facts are the facts. You wanted to hold the old BOE accountable now its time you do the same for this BOE. If the old BOE failed in accountabilty it's inmaterial at this point so move on.
Amen
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 14:29 — Dove314Each election cycle brings a new mix which inherits both the good and the bad from the previous mix. Each new mix also insists on making their own mark with their "new" and "wonderful" changes. This new BoE majority may not have inherited anywhere near a perfect system but things in WCPSS could have been much worse. The major points of discussion should be what are the people who currently BoE members doing with the WCPSS we have right now and how.
Worse??
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 15:16 — NWRaleighMom---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pick a dimension
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 16:52 — Dove314I'm partial to achievement and achievement gaps. Here is one school system that has faced more explosive growth than WCPSS, was already larger than WCPSS, has a white-minority demographic profile, and more -- Clark County School District in Nevada.
ccsd.net/schools/acc_pdfs_2009/districtAcc2008-2009.pdf
There are many districts who have even more achievement issues than WCPSS much less a totality of issues. Do you really believe WCPSS is the worst performing school district in North Carolina? or in the United States as a whole? Does WCPSS need to improve performance? Absolutely. But to act as though we've got it worse than anyone else is not accurate.
Agreed....
Tue, 10/12/2010 - 14:12 — JanisTangoYou wanted to hold the old BOE accountable now its time you do the same for this BOE. If the old BOE failed in accountabilty it's inmaterial at this point so move on.
I agree this new board needs to be held accountable, but at the same time you have to accept a lot of the problems this board is facing is due to the failings of the previous board. Several people that I have chatted with that are against this new board wants to go back to the policies, etc of the previous board and ignore the real problems that existed when they were in power!