You guys may want to say hello to Gerald Grant, who viewed the blog Thursday before speaking at Quail Ridge Books & Music on his new book "Hope and Despair in the American City: Why There Are No Bad Schools in Raleigh."
In front of around 100 people, Grant forcefully articulated his support for Wake's diversity policy. Citing a February article, he took Dana Cope, leader of the Children's PAC, to task for saying, "how dare they use my children for a social experiment that has gone wrong and needs replacing."
"The experiment has not gone wrong as Dana Cope says," Grant said. "It doesn't need to be replaced. It needs to be replicated."
That drew an appreciative response from the crowd. Upon the prompting of a person in the audience, a majority of the crowd indicated they were either teachers, principals or administrators. (Add in some school board members as well.)
This prompted Grant to ask his own question of whether anybody in the crowd wanted to elect a new school board majority that would end the diversity policy. No hands were raised.
"They're too busy at home blogging," Grant quipped, drawing laughter from the crowd.
Earlier in the talk, Grant referred to some of the colorful comments made about him in Thursday's blog post. He also mentioned the negative quotes from Thursday's article, including the one from Terry Stoops of the John Locke Foundation, who called him a "modern day snake oil salesman."
The mention of Stoops name drew mild booing from the crowd.
Grant noted on more than occasion during his talk that he was "speaking to the choir."
The Q&A from the crowd touched on some of the hot topics facing Wake.
Former school board member Susan Parry asked about the recent Queens University studies that compared Wake and Charlotte. One noted similarities in test scores for some groups while another showed Wake clearly doing better in the UNC system.
Grant called Wake and Charlotte outliers in terms of performance among urban school districts. He said that both are good school systems from a national perspective.
But Grant attributed Charlotte's success to be the residual benefits of the district's busing program that ended in 2002. He said he's not a fan of the district's new neighborhood school approach.
"The road they're going down is the wrong road," Grant said of Charlotte.
County Commissioner Stan Norwalk asked if a district like Wake that's "healthy" would benefit from getting more funding. This came after Grant had earlier said that resegregated districts are unsuccessfully throwing money at high-poverty schools to help them.
Grant's answer was a resounding yes.
"Raleigh has been doing it on the cheap and can't do that much longer," Grant said, which drew the loudest applause of the evening.
Caroline Massengill, who was Wake's magnet school director and later special assistant for year-round schools before retiring, said she's worried about how "fragile" magnet schools are now and could be lost.
Massengill said the problem is that due to the rapid growth so many people have come here who see what's in the magnet schools and ask why they can't have them at their schools. She said people don't realize why the magnet schools are so important.
Grant said he agreed with her concerns. As mentioned before, he's got a grandson at Washington Elementary and another at Ligon Middle, both magnet schools.
For those interested in hearing Grant directly, he repeated many of the same arguments during yesterday's "The State of Things" radio show on UNC Radio. Click here to download the audio.
Comments
Data Question
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 14:22 — klanders65I am looking at the data you guys are posting and wondering where it is coming from. I looked at that link provided by Bob_S. Somehow, I think things are confusing on purpose. I have a printout of a ppt that was presented by staff from WCPSS research dept in a meeting earlier this year. They show graphs and charts of percentages of students at grade level by category. They looked at kids who are F&R only, and do not have other disabilities or what they call "academic risk factors." Risk factors are SWD (Students With Disabilities), F&R, and LEP (Limited English Proficiency) The data presented here shows:
EOG Reading Proficiency Grades 6 through 8, % at or above grade in 2006-07
FR&SWD&LEP (n=144) 43.8%
FR&SWD (n = 1587) 57.3%
FR&LEP (n = 989) 61.1%
SWD&LEP (n = 46) 63.0%
LEP Only (n=327) 75.2%
SWD Only (n=2231) 84.3%
FR Only (n=5537) 88.3%
Not any of FR/SWD/LEP (n = 17,365) 97.9%
All students (n = 28226) 90.7%
From this and other handouts that I have gotten at meetings where the research dept presented, it seems that the FR students are not doing that bad, if they are only FR. When you see the percents, you have to ask how many kids are in the category.
When kids are not SWD, they get to have the regular curriculum. Schools get money for every SWD kid. Once a kid is SWD, they may be pulled from class for services like Title 1 funded services that are remedial. Maybe they don't even need them. The FR&SWD seems to do a lot worse than the NOT FR&SWD. There are different kinds of SWD, some where the kid get support to succeed in regular classes and some where the kid gets something easier than regular classes. The FR kids are more likely to get this.
These numbers are only middle school. I've seen similar numbers presented for elementary. I don't see anything as low as what you guys are posting. I think the state report cards look consistent with what you're saying but not what we get internally.
Sorry...
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 19:14 — Bob_SconceNot trying to confuse. The comments of a blog are not really the best place to make a good argument using data.
Also, note that the school district has a lot more data available to them than rest of us do. For example, the SWD information isn't publicly available. That means they can produce studies that I cannot. But, it also means that they can selectively use data to make things seem better than they are. Without having their raw data, there's no way to confirm their results.
(I know that sounds a bit paranoid. But, if you ask social scientists to cite a study that they find to be done rigorously, but that disagrees with their personal belief system, I think most will be unable to do so. All too often, especially in the social sciences, studies are performed with conclusions already in mind. And, if the results don't come out as predicted, well, run a few hundred more regressions until you come out with your result. Nobody ever got their Ph.D. on a dissertation saying "I studied X, Y and Z and didn't find any connection at all."
The WCPSS demographics department surely knows that if it came out with a study showing "the diversity policy doesn't work," Del Burns would be down there, red-faced and furious.)
not you
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 19:51 — klanders65I didn't mean that you are confusing. I meant the school system is confusing.
I looked at your data and it seemed to match what was on the school report card, but nothing like what they present internally. I don't know how the two can be so different. I know they do things with their Effectiveness Index that "adjusts" results and makes them look better for schools with high F&R.
From what I see, F&R kids so fine. It is the F&R kids who are SWD who have trouble.
Someone needs to do a dissertation to show whether there is any correlation between what you pay for lunch and academic ability. If there is no correlation, that would be worth publishing so they can quit doing enrollments based on lunch status. What are they going to do as the economy goes bad and a lot more people need F&R? Will that make their kids less able to learn?
I am not sure your data
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 07:02 — designmanI am not sure your data proves anyone is not "ill served." In fact, it proves that a whole lot of F&R kids are ill served. Perhaps there is slight improvement when they are in a lower F&R school, but is not nearly where the school system needs to be. It is becoming more and more obvious that change is needed in the Wake County school system and the current school board does not have what it takes to identify and implement solutions that work.
I agree .. my data shows
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 07:55 — user1234I agree .. my data shows that the best chance for EI to pass is bing in a low EI school and the worst chance comes when they are in high EI schools. That should be no surprise, otherwise if clustering low income made for better scholars, housing projects would be universities.
Bob's data shows no correlation in the middle group with no one being ill served. I think the top schools with the highest % ED passing results is much greater than "slight" being more than 50% compared to the average of 30% for the entire system. If we could send all the ED kids to the top schools list above, we would have the highest % pass anywhere ??
Finally, remember that WCPSS is the lowest cost provider, investing the least amount per student of any system almost anywhere??. Any average or above average results would be on sheer willpower given the meager resources provided.
Who prepares F&Rs best?
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 23:51 — user1234I took the schools (half of them) with the highest F&R% (>20%) and the lowest % (<20%) and included their scores above. I sorted from highest F&R pass % to lowest to see who was doing the best job with the F&R population.
The data shows that F&R's kids score highest when the F&R population is lowest and they score poorly when they are a high% of the population. The schools in green are especially interesting in that they have high scores and high F&R populations. Highcroft elementary bucks the trend having a small F&R populations and preparing them very poorly.
Hopefully, this data puts to rest the claim that F&R kids are ill served being placed in low F&R% schools.
Green Team
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 15:24 — user1234Isn't anyone familar with the schools in green above who have 3X the number of F&R and the same passing % . They are out of order in the list above which means they are doing something good compared to other schools.
" I took the schools (half
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 17:41 — Apexter"
I took the schools (half of them) with the highest F&R% (>20%)
and the lowest % (<20%) and included their scores above. I sorted
from highest F&R pass % to lowest to see who was doing the best job
with the F&R population.
The data shows that F&R's kids score highest when the F&R
population is lowest and they score poorly when they are a high% of the
population. The schools in green are especially interesting in that
they have high scores and high F&R populations. Highcroft
elementary bucks the trend having a small F&R populations and
preparing them very poorly.
Hopefully, this data puts to rest the claim that F&R kids are ill served being placed in low F&R% schools."
On what basis did you choose the data schools to include in this analysis? I counted about 60 schools, which is less than half the schools in the system. Valid analysis methods would include choosing a random subset of schools, or the entire set of schools, or providing a clear and reasonable rationale defining how the subset was selected. Otherwise, you open yourself to the question of whether you cherry-picked data points to prove the point you wanted to prove.
I did not want to consume
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 20:11 — user1234I did not want to consume the entire blog with a list of all the schools so I just picked the top and bottom quartile. Like Bob noticed the middle half has no correllation. I still believe the data shows that low income kids in school with a low % population typically do better than when they are in a high % of the population. I think that makes logical sense that if being smart is cool, peer pressure dicates doing your homework, etc. that poor students will step up. If the expection are low they will meet them. That does not mean that high F&R schools can not have high expectation they just to work at it.
Positive Reinforcement
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 21:41 — Bob_SconceI don't buy the "positive peer pressure" angle. I grew up in a fairly well-to-do area. My recollection from my own experience is that being "smart" was generally frowned on by other students. There were a number of times when I didn't do my homework, or just generally did a sloppy job at it, and I don't remember any peer pressure to do better. I do remember lots of peer pressure surrounding parties, drinking, acting "cool", and so on.
I also used to do a lot of volunteer work with High School kids, and it appeared that peer pressure was almost uniformly negative.
I agree that expectation has a lot to do with performance. But, I think that expectation is rooted at home. Moving kid A to a different school does not automtically mean that everybody at the kid's school will expect the same from A as from everybody else. I've seen that in 2nd grade: "So-and-so was bad today. But, he rides the bus and everybody who rides the bus is bad."
A question
Mon, 05/25/2009 - 06:28 — user1234Bob what do you think the participation in this blog is from anyone whose kids goes to the lower scoring schools - Conn, Barwell, etc.? I only know the HS and I don't think I have ever seen anyone with a kid from Garner HS (I saw one Stough parent). Most of the people wanting to get rid of the diversity policy seem to be from schools toward the top with the highest school and lower ED - Panther Creek, Apex, Green Hope, Leesville, Lacy.
Well...
Mon, 05/25/2009 - 08:59 — Bob_SconceSure, the regular commenters here are not a good cross-section of the county. [Of course, if we had a "good cross-section", the blog would be so inundated with comments that it would be useless....] But, be careful -- you cannot infer anything about their preferences from silence.
Here's a potential solution: make the reassignment voluntary. If you are an F&R student, then you (or, really, your parents) can choose to keep you at the neighborhood school, or be bussed to a school someplace else in the county. If a kid would benefit from being moved, then the parents can move him. If not, then he can stay local.
A pro-liberty option
Mon, 05/25/2009 - 07:25 — Dadof3I'll offer a suggestion. I desire a much higher F&R % at the Salem schools; just not the way its happening now. The rubs are: mandatory year-round and mandatory re-assignments. I'm for increased diversity (as defined in the one-dimensional usage common with the WCPSS), but I'm also against decreased liberty for my family.
If we were to switch to an all voluntary (pro-choice) model, the entire dynamics would dramatically shift. But I'm not holding my breath.
And I offer all this with the caveat that I still believe this whole adventure with social theory extends public education well past it's core mission.
Peer pressure
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 22:05 — klanders65I agree. I have taught at private schools for wealthy kids and in public schools that serve all incomes. The wealthy kids don't do homework, have social pressures for al sorts of party behavior, etc.
The low expectations come from the school system. They have low expectations for F&R kids. It is institutionalized. They call them "academically at risk," teach "how to deal with kids in poverty" in some expensive training that teaches low expectations. All staff takes the training. They give them less challenging instruction, poor quality teachers, and pull them from class for Title 1 services even when they don't need them.
Supposedly no one knows who the F&R kids are. Heaven help your kid if he gets mistaken for an F&R kid. They'll track him low regardless of his scores, refer him for tutorials, and expect very little of him.
Question
Mon, 05/25/2009 - 06:33 — user1234Is it easier to instutionalize low expectation for low income kids when they are 10% of the mix or 60% of the mix? I am thinking that when they make up the majority it is easier to give up in mass. When they are minority, they get sucked along with the flow and may even think they are going to college too like the kids around them which explains why schools like Panther Creek bring ED kids almost up to NED levels.
Low expectations
Mon, 05/25/2009 - 12:27 — klanders65Many variables impact low expectations. One of the biggest ones is that Effectiveness Index they use to give feedback to teachers and principals. If they are using it to decide where to put resources or which teachers are fine and which need support, etc., then 60% F&R has a much bigger impact. The Effectiveness Index is a statistical regression analysis that says whether schools or classes or kids are scoring "as expected" or better/worse. The model adjusts both for the income of the kid and for % F&R in the school. A school with 60% F&R would have the expectations adjusted to be much lower than a school with 10% F&R. So, the kids in the 60% school could be doing pretty bad and the feedback to principals and teachers would be "every is fine/as expected" but kids in the 10% school could be doing even better than those kids and the feedback would be "below expected." The built-in statistical outcomes have lower expectations for schools with higher F&R. Of course, no one understands this and all their hear is "as expected" and think the kids are fine when they are doing terrible in a high F&R school.
A lot of things come into play. Title 1 money is a huge variable in this mix. And they just got a ton more Title 1 money as part of the stimulus from DC so someone should keep an eye on that. Everyone thinks they have to spend their Title 1 money on remedial stuff, even though that is no longer true. It has been around since the 60s and they are slowly changing the rules but not really telling anyone. If a school has a ton of Title 1 money, they will spend it on salaries of people hired to teach remedial stuff. Then whether the poor kids need it or not, they'll pull them out of class and give them remedial work while they miss core instruction. This creates low expectations.
There is the resource variable in some schools, like the gifted and talented magnets. People do anything to get into Ligon so their kids are on track to Enloe. They don't go there to get a normal class. They want the top track. So, the neighborhood kids at those schools don't have access to the more rigorous courses regardless of how high scoring they are. Wake is trying to correct this by for the first time ever, including academic achievement scores in the decisions about who has access to the rigorous classes. But this is being ignored in large part. To justify keeping the best and brightest low income kids in the bottom track when they outscore the NED kids in the top track, they create low expectations for them with "poverty training" for teachers. http://www.ahaprocess.com/ is a link to the Poverty Training they've used for a decade. It teaches low expectations for low income, and is almost comical. It costs a fortune, also.
The principal is key. The principal can lead the expectations. Some of the low income schools have great principals. I can think of two that have wonderful strong leaders as principals and the main thing they are doing is working to change expectations from low to high and quit providing remedial work for kids who don't need it. There is always resistance to changing expectations for low income from low to high.
All these variables come into play for expectations.
Not persuasive
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 08:19 — Bob_Sconce(1) You're equating EOC results and EOG results at different levels. You cannot compare the number of students at Conn who passed one set of tests with the number at Lufkin Rd who passed a different set.
(2) As the school board loves to point out, F&R percentages in high schools are underrreported.
You could correct this by looking at elementary, middle or high school students seperately. At the elementary level, I think you'll find that things are a lot more random.
School F&R %FRPass %FR
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 08:38 — user1234"(1) You're equating EOC results and EOG results at different levels. You cannot compare the number of students at Conn who passed one set of tests with the number at Lufkin Rd who passed a different set.
(2) As the school board loves to point out, F&R percentages in high schools are underrreported.
You could correct this by looking at elementary, middle or high school students seperately. "
I know there are differences in the EOG and EOC which is why I took every score and every school to find a trend - where do the high % pass, either EOG or EOC, tend to group - places where they are a minority or majority?
Drop the HSs ....Bob ... pretty much the top scoring school for low income kids both in Elementary, Middle and High School are schools with low % of low income kids and the worst scoring schools are the ones where there is a high % of low income kids.
Not Full Story
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 15:54 — Bob_SconceHere's a scatter graph of every elementary school in Wake County, showing the trend line:
http://s622.photobucket.com/albums/tt307/Bob_Sconce/?action=view¤t=ElementarySchoolCompare.jpg
The rightmost point is Cedar Fork, the leftmost is Wiley. Note that I used the NC report card data, and so the F&R percentages are those of the students who actually took the test (ie 3-5th grade), not the entire school. I did the analysis before last year's data became available (retyping it all is a royal PITA), so it's based on 06-07, not 07-08. So, it's before the redo of the EOG tests to make them harder.
Bob, I am not sure if we
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 07:37 — user1234Bob, I am not sure if we are using the same data but do we agree on a few things:
Do you have the same school at the top and bottom like I listed above? I have Ceder Forks but have a number of schools (Reedy Creek Elementary,Stough Elementary,Douglas Elementary,Conn Elementary,Barwell Elementary) on the left most side.
Hmm...
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 08:42 — Bob_SconceWell...
(1) I think the original idea behind the diversity policy was to increase the scores of F&R students. I think that it's only when it turned out that this effect was not particularly significant that the district turned to its "B" argument: healthy schools.
(2) I fully agree that passing rates are horrible among F&R students, and also think that they're mediocre among non-F&R students. The district has a long way to go on both fronts. This crap about being a "World Class" district doesn't add up when 1/7th of *NON-F&R* students don't pass. (Using the 07-08 data.) Median non-F&R passing rate was 85.6%; that should be 98%.
(3) In my data, the schools with the worst F&R pass rates were Wiley, Root, Partnership, Poe, Brasfield & Wakefield. Of those, three had F&R ratios under 20%. At the other end (best F&R pass rate) were Cedar Fork, Willow Springs, Carver, Turner Creek, Brier Creek & Cary.
A number of high-F&R schools do very well: Vandora Springs, Creech Rd, Carver, Forrestville Rd, Knoghtdale. A number of low-F&R schools do poorly: Highcroft, Brassfield, Wakefield, Brooks.
There are some low-F&R schools that do a good job with F&R students. But, there are some that do a lousy job, and the same is true of high-F&R schools.
Give the full listing
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 09:34 — Eric_BCome on, give the full listing. You snipped out most of the elementary schools just so you could make your point.
As for the Highcroft Drive low F&R student performance... Highcroft Drive is one of the schools with low income kids being bused 20+ miles from ITB. Draw your own conclusions based on the data whether that is helping them or not.
“Draw your own
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 15:21 — user1234“Draw your own conclusions based on the data whether that is helping them or not.”
I did … academic genocide … is that the phrase the Judge used?
Every other school on either side of them did well with their meager F&R population but Highcroft could not even take care of the 17 low income kids they were responsible for … they must have worked at it to do so poorly compared to every other school …
Well...
Sun, 05/24/2009 - 19:24 — Bob_SconceOr maybe those 17 students were spread among 17 different classrooms with students far ahead of where they are and these 17 (or, really, 12 of them) were unable to keep up.
Note, though, that they were about the district average -- 5/17. Had one more kid passed both tests, they would have been 3 points above average. With small numbers like that, a couple of kids who were up too late the night before makes a big difference.
Group the data into 3
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 07:12 — Eric_BGroup the data into 3 separate charts by elementary, middle and high school and look at it again. You've lumped all schools together even though overall F&R percentages decline in middle and high school due to fewer students claiming free & reduced lunch.
You'll get a very different picture, especially in elementary school.
Statistics
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 07:03 — Voice_of_Reason_Do this one. Take the scores of the bused nodes and compare them to those in their old base population. The figures will show they do worse.
You can also show lower scores on non-F&R's when the percent of LEP students increase.
Your data also assumes all F&R's are equal. Do you accept that a family making $42K a year vs. one only living off welfare is the same. The data can be shown in different ways to "prove" a point. If your figures prove anything, why hasn't the school system shown that? And why does the BoE refuse to study the benifits.
BTW- What is the source of your data and what are you using for scores, you left that out.
Always more questions
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 08:23 — user1234“Do this one. Take the scores of the bused nodes and compare them to those in their old base population. The figures will show they do worse. “
Ok … either kids are “bussed all over the place” or they are not and live in the “neighborhood” If they are “bussed all over the place” than each of these school metrics would be similar. If the kids are NOT “ bussed all over the place” and all live in the community, than all the diversity criticism is false since stopping bussing won’t change the make up of the school materially. Let’s assume all these kids are “bussed all over the place” and each low F&R school would have none without bussing. Then the data shows the low F&R schools preparing low income kids very well. You should be excited about that finding / possibility.
A more interesting question is how does a school like Highcroft with so few low income kids and do so poorly with them compared to the other Elementary schools
%FR %FRPass
Baucom Elementary 12% 37%
“Your data also assumes all F&R's are equal.”
I am just using publically available data. I don’t have access to further break down within the F&R segment.
I think your response shows how little you are genuinely interested in correcting this problem. The fact that I took virtually every school and showed that the top scores for low income kids come exclusively from school where they are a minority and the bottom scores come exclusively from school where they have a large population and you did not celebrate that finding shows me you are not serious about finding a solution to this problem.
===================================
"BTW- What is the source of your data and what are you using for scores, you left that out. " Scores
http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/
http://www.wcpss.net/demographics/reports/book08a.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks&page1
Secede from Wake County?
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 18:20 — momiamhttp://kansasprogress.com/wordpress/index.php/2009/04/25/cities-vote-to-secede-from-cook-county-chicago-cunningham/
http://rwarn17588.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/needles-may-secede-from-county-or-state/
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/20/nyregion/should-the-east-end-secede-the-suffolk-county-executive-pleads-for-unity.html
Now here's an idea where the county is unable to meet the basic needs of it's residents (like some stability in education and school choice)
If only a majority vote of citizens were enough
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 18:45 — FalcInteresting articles, but sadly a majority of citizens voting for something does not make it happen. Look at what happened with the referendum to incorporate Swift Creek here.
I'm about to spend a week with folks from Palatine, so now I have something to ask them about.
How to secede from a county in Maine
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 19:11 — momiamFound how they do it in Maine. Not sure how they do it in NC...
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_123rd/billpdfs/SP065601.pdf
I found out today, that
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 17:23 — dryeraseuserI found out today, that Grant's son, who is an administrator in WCPSS, use to teach at Washington. This is how his grandchildren were so lucky to attend. They did not have to go through the "lottery pick" like the rest of the citizens of Wake County. This would make any parent like myself, question how he sees things. He can see things like the rest of us. I just love how no one raised their hands when asked if they wanted to elect a new board. Who does he think attended this book signing?!?!?! People like him, which are people like the WCPSS Board. GEEZ, give me a break!
Diversity is bullshit
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 10:37 — PercyKutionI'd like to see ONE piece of evidence that "diversity" EVER helped ANYONE, ANYWHERE.
proof
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 16:10 — SolutionsThis:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0418_0717_ZS.html
was one of the causes of this:
http://www.detnews.com/article/20090514/METRO08/905140408/Charlie-LeDuff--Off-Woodward--life-hits-a-dead-end/?imw=Y
Not Proof!
Sat, 05/23/2009 - 09:54 — choice4allDetroit was in deep trouble way before this court case. I remember when they burnt it down. I remember being under curfew because things were so bad. Detroit was destroyed in the latter part of the '60's. And that is so sad. So before you spread your rederick that this lawsuit was the downfall of Detroit, check your facts first. This lawsuit did not come until the mid seventies. There has not been 1 Republican Mayor since the late 60's when Colman Young came in and destroyed Detroit. Followed by every other thief that held office including Kilpatrick. Even now the current council are corrupt and quite frankley they are proud of it. ie. council members walking away from their homes and forcloseing all the while proclaiming that while they cannot balance their personal budgets does not mean they cannot represent the people and balance their budget. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30311735?GT1=43001 .....Give me a break!
And then there is Chicago
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 16:32 — Falcwhich is gentrifying without merging with suburban districts. There are much more significant factors in Detroit's downfall than this court case.
Diversity helped my wife
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 13:18 — user1234Diversity helped my wife and I have children ... it is so much harder between males ... :-)
Grant is pompous, arrogant and misinformed
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 10:17 — jberkley17I heard Grant on WUNC yesterday. I was angered and disappointed by his single sided viewpoint and his unwillingness to respond to the basic concerns of parents regarding their children's education. He consistently cited how well Wake County does because of the experience of his two grandkids at the Washington magnate school. What Grant needs to do is expand his sample size and visit some non-magnate schools to see the dismal state of public school education in Wake. He derides anyone who believes that a local neighborhood school populated with children from that neighborhood (and parent who are proxemic) is a better solution. Grant is committed to the Vulcan epitaph that the so-called good of the many trumps the needs of the view. He fails to understand that a parent, while sympathetic to the many, has one job: take care of your kid.
Because of the poor WC school system, I will likely be moving to Chapel Hill. Because my kid's education is my #1 job.
Yes and we twitter too!
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 10:07 — choice4allMr. Grant do you? Welcome to the 21st century. It is sad that your thinking is so way behind. This venue IS the only source to know what is going on in this school system. It is pretty pathetic that, via this blog, most of us were able to notify Teachers about the many issues facing their jobs. Such as "making the school bell early and releasing 1 hour on Wednesdays", and that’s only the tip of the iceberg (yes the one that is melting). Mr. Grant, I am so pleased that you are so happy with this school system that you wrote a book about it. I am so happy that you are happy with the unequal magnet programs where those children, if lucky, are safe from reassignments and receive a quality education with the proper supports in place. (No offense to the other great Teachers and staff that put up with this sham). I am so happy that your Grandchildren never had to suffer a life altering change (FYR) only to be reassigned the next yr to Traditional then right back to Year Round. The flowers smell pretty from where you sit and I and MANY parents object to your DEMOGAGARY. I am also pleased that some, not all, in this EQUAL school system we have, are required to attend school on a National Holiday i.e. Memorial Day. Where is your patriotsim? (sarcasm off) Quit reassigning these children all over Wake County to support your so called Healthy schools (where only magnets are eligible for these services). You should be ashamed about reassigning these children that you claim to help, without THE PROPER SERVICES IN PLACE!!!!! I really cannot understand how you all sleep at night.
YEAH!
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 13:28 — g88ky07Well said on all accounts! Looks like the "majority" grew in #'s today! Welcome to education reform! Where parents will get their say back!
"Quit reassigning these
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 10:54 — user1234"Quit reassigning these children all over Wake County to support your so called Healthy schools "
I think 2/3 of the reassignments are due to growth and opening of new school and only 1/3 is due to rebalancing to keep the high needs kids from getting concentrated in any one school. I assume now that the growth has stopped so will the reassignments until a new school opens up.
Last year, 2/3 of the low
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 12:11 — jenmanLast year, 2/3 of the low income kids were NOT moved out of high poverty schools. They were moved from a school under 40% to a school under 25%. If these moves were truly being done to keep low income kids from being concentrated in any one school, I think most people wouldn't have a problem with it. But there were plenty of schools over 50% that were left untouched and the focus was on raising F&R at far flung schools.
Look at the track record of WCPSS. You are fooling yourself if you really think that the reassignments will stop until a new school opens.
It would be interesting to
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 15:17 — user1234It would be interesting to know the logic ... for example, it might have been more possible to rebalance nearby schools that were 40% and 25% than concentrate on the hard core poverty schools. Just keep the middle group from deteriorating more. Note, I only see five schools >50% which seems less than "plenty". Finally if they wanted to increase the % in far flung schools they appeared to have failed unless moving from 5% to 7% was the goal.
I think
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 15:27 — JSBinNC... the only reason they have "failed" so far is because the re-assignment of F&R kids to the far flung MYR schools went to court, and many of the families they wanted to move opted out - so the numbers as we see them don't maybe show how the BoE expects it to look.
Next school year will be more telling - right? Now that they can assign at will, not ask, and not allow any opt outs. Some of those kids are going to have to move (whether it's good for them or not - we'll see...)
5 schools at more than 50% is plenty in my book... they should be focused on them for sure.
"5 schools at more than 50%
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 15:40 — user1234"5 schools at more than 50% is plenty in my book... they should be focused on them for sure. "
So you are not of the school of thought that grouping (I might say warehousing) all the poor kids in a few school makes them smarter? Seriously, I think the data shows that if you have 50% F&R, few will pass and you are not going to be recognized (progress, distinction, etc.).
I don't think so...
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 19:11 — JSBinNCbut I am not sure I am following you either! :) I was (I think...) agreeing with Jenman that there are schools over 50% F&R that need help, yet have been untouched (helped).
I am not of the train of thought that warehousing any population of children is good for anybody! I agree with you (I think!) that the data does show that higher F&R results in fewer pass rates and less distinction.
Some of the schools with high F&R - Brentwood is a good example I think - just got a magnet program. Maybe Smith too? It will take a few years to turn those schools around I would imagine - but that to me is a form of "help". There are more schools that need it - whether its 5 or 50 - they still need help! In my book 5 schools over 50% is still plenty of schools to be focused on!
I think that's what I meant...
Sensible ... I am with you
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 20:26 — user1234Sensible ... I am with you
:)
Tue, 05/26/2009 - 20:57 — JSBinNCok... its good to know I am understandable!!
And that makes the 1/3 OK?
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 11:53 — FalcWhat if it was your kid in the 1/3? What if it was your kid being reassigned from a school 2 miles away to a new school 18.65 miles away? What if it was your kid being reassigned out of a magnet to a non-magnet, Title I school?
When Alston Ridge opens next year for "growth", they can't find enough kids closer than 18.65 miles away to fill it, so they have to bus two nodes 18.65 miles. I'm sure it has nothing to do with those nodes' current base school being Title I.
In opening Laural Park for 2008-09, they moved a student from Adams (VYR) to Laural Park (MYR), a NED student from Oak Grove (VYR) to Adams (VYR), an ED student from Dillard (traditional) to Oak Grove (YR base, non-voluntary), an ED/LEP student who lives near Combs from Combs (magnet, LI% has decreased from 36% to 32%) to Dillard (non-magnet, Title I, LI% has increased from 37% to 39%), and filled a newly opened magnet seat in Combs.
How many of those reassignments were for growth, how many were for "balancing" and how many were to make room for another NED kid from a non-diverse area ITB or far western Wake to get into a magnet, taking the seat of a neighborhood ED kid who was reassigned out to a school with an even higher ED% that is not a magnet?
Yeah, that's something to be proud of - we kick the kids deemed "high needs" out of ITB magnets to OTB non-magnet, Title I rim schools to make room in the magnets for kids living in $500K homes - great job! Let's plaster that example of the "diversity" policy at work in a book and peddle it. Oh, and yes, the BOE/WCPSS knew darn well about it because a group of those "uncaring, won't be involved no matter what" ED/LEP parents showed up to the public hearing with a community representative to translate their plea for them. It got them nowhere - maybe because they are not the kids of WCPSS administrators, or grandkids of an author who will write a favorable book about WCPSS, or have ITB parents with clout and connections.
Did you help these people
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 12:03 — user1234Did you help these people fight these reassignement? MacGregor Down's had four spots on TV to stop their 25 kids from moving 2 miles from Apex to 4 miles to Athens. So, these issues can be fixed with enough money and influence.
Helping to that level
Fri, 05/22/2009 - 12:42 — Falcwould require I have that kind money and influence, which I do not. I don't live in a place anything like MacGregor. Stay tuned though if I win the lottery (about helping others, not living in MacGregor - it's not my cup of tea).
I was at the public hearing to speak about a portion of the plan (my nonmonied and noninfluentual pleas were for not as well), but was not aware of the Combs details until they spoke. To be honest, after the public hearing I still thought the Combs reassignment was some kind of mistake and it would be corrected and those nodes would be pulled out of the reassignment plan. I was still naive then and thought the "diversity" policy was about helping high needs students. I didn't realize it was only about "healthy" schools. Watching the actual BOE meeting about those moves cured me of my naivitee.