Wake County school board chairman Ron Margiotta is painting a bleak picture on the future of community-based schools as he laments last night's vote by vice chairwoman Debra Goldman.
In an interview this morning on WPTF's "Rick & Donna Martinez Show," Margiotta called Goldman's vote with the Democrats in favor of board member Kevin Hill's student assignment process "very disappointing." He said they've "lost" Goldman along the way since last fall's school board elections.
During the interview, Margiotta said they're now the former majority and Goldman has joined the Democrats to form a new majority.
Margiotta said he didn't know how things would proceed with Hill's proposal. He said that Goldman's Oct. 5 vote killing the zone plan means they lost all the "excellent progress" that the student assignment committee had made toward providing parents with proximity and stability.
Margiotta contested the assertions from Goldman that they're still moving toward community-based schools.
"I can't believe that's going to be the case with the outcome of last night's vote," Margiotta said on implementing community-based schools. "All it tends to do is slow down the process."
Margiotta was asked about the state of the board majority.
"It's over," Margiotta said. "I think it's gone now. I think it went a little far on too many issues. I would say I would believe the majority is gone."
Margiotta was asked whether personality issues between Goldman and board member John Tedesco may have led to the split on the majority. Margiotta said "it's far more than that" as he commented on Tedesco's blistering attacks on Goldman after the Oct. 5 vote.
"He reacted in a way that could be understandable but wasn't in the proper mode," Margiotta said of Tedesco. "I think he made confessions on that point, a few names, whatever. Sometimes in the heat of the argument, stuff happens."
Margiotta was asked whether he'd take away the responsibility of the superintendent search from the committee being led by Goldman because of the arguments made Tuesday that student assignment is so important that all nine school board members should be involved.
Margiotta said the work of the superintendent search committee was finished now that it has designated candidates. He said he expects things to be turned over to the full board now.
Based on the way the "new majority feels," Margiotta said they might need to have all nine board members on every committee.
Margiotta said they'll have to wait until next fall's school board elections to get the job done they committed to last October. He reiterated his intention to run for school board next year now that the "train has derailed" because of Goldman's actions.
"It's very important for me to get the job done that we started on last October when these people started campaigning," Margiotta said.
Comments
The hiring of the new
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 02:06 — eddie2The hiring of the new superintendant should be interesting -- it will give Goldman an opportunity to switch back, or not. If she sides with Margiotta, et al, in hiring someone who will implement a neighborhood assignment plan, that could get things back on track. Then, the new superintendant would be the one to finish the design of the plan, rather than Tedesco. The board could get back to policy and representing the people, and delegate the implementation to the administrators who will be getting the big bucks to do it.
Agreed. I'm personally
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 08:07 — CaryCurmudgeonAgreed. I'm personally hoping that Kevin Hill doesn't whip out his process document and make a last-minute proposal to gather input from all the stakeholders and build consensus within a framework designed to proceed at a glacial pace.
It is becoming clearer and
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:04 — woodstockIt is becoming clearer and clearer that Goldman is answering to someone other than the voters of Wake County. Her irrational actions, emotional outbursts, lack of integrity and current silent act are becoming very, very suspicious. It makes one wonder if she is being blackmailed or something. She made claims that her car was damaged multiple times and that her house was broken into... something is up with that woman.
As someone who defended
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 00:07 — jeffrey1As someone who defended Goldman after her vote to stop the zone model, I just want to say that I am very disappointed with her. As one of her constituents, I was led to believe that neighborhood schools were just around the corner. Obviously that is not the case.
I don't think it's obvious
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 08:22 — danofncI don't think it's obvious that we're not getting closer to neighborhood schools.
If Goldman's biggest problem is that the zone plan wouldn't have guaranteed people who live close to schools a seat in those schools, I think an argument could be made that she kept us on a path toward neighborhood schools.
The board is planning to move quite a few spot nodes back to SER. Eliminating those spot nodes that have been bused will move us to a neighborhood schools model.
...
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 08:55 — Sideburns"...I think an argument could be made that she kept us on a path toward neighborhood schools."
Please make that argument -- because I have heard nothing from her that would support that statement -- and her actions have certainly spoken louder.
Well, during the campaign,
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 11:10 — danofncWell, during the campaign, all the talk was about neighborhood schools and proximity-based assignments and a desire for stability.
The SAC's focus, with the zone plan, was not going to provide for neighborhood schools. The focus was being directed toward stability and choice instead of proximity.
A neighborhood schools model, with base assignments, would take care of the proximity issue. The stability issue, when there aren't reassignments for diversity purposes but only for new school openings or severe crowding, would pretty much take care of itself.
I still don't believe we have the capacity to offer as much choice as the SAC was proposing, so that's a non-starter for me.
...
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 14:52 — SideburnsI didn't ask for your case against the zone model. I know how you feel about it already. I asked for your argument on how Goldman "kept us on a path toward neighborhood schools."
We can get to a neighborhood
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:38 — danofncWe can get to a neighborhood schools model more cleanly and easily by adjusting the current assignment plan than we can by trying to reinvent the wheel and start from scratch.
There is no need to start from square one when all you really need to do is remove diversity from Policy 6200 (already done) and start eliminating spot nodes (in progress).
You always counter this fact by talking about the massive reassignments that took place under the node system in the past, ignoring the fact that most of the reassignments that drew complaints were connected to diversity balancing and would not happen under the new Policy 6200.
I never understood why JT
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:56 — user12345I never understood why JT wanted to go for the high risk reinvent the wheel when your approach would get the same result with less risk ... that is why I was thinking JT was more interested in putting his name on a new wheel than rolling the schools system forward.
Because going with a strict
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:46 — jenmanBecause going with a strict proximity neighborhood schools model will absolutely result in haves and have nots. A zone model would allow for more diversity. The zone model also reduces many of the growth related reassignments.
We can go with the true neighborhood schools model but then diversity supporters get nothing out of that. At least with a zone model there would be some compromise there.
We can go with the true
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:06 — user12345We can go with the true neighborhood schools model but then diversity supporters get nothing out of that. At least with a zone model there would be some compromise there.
I hope Ron does not read this blog because if it help diversity or hints at compromise, I am sure he will be against it.
Talks
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 22:39 — Solon77RM talks neighborhood schools but the actions support the zone plan. I wonder when his supporters are going to wake up to the bait and switch.
I am still looking for that
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:00 — woodstockI am still looking for that definition of diversity. No one, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON has provided an answer. So, what the hell are you taking about? What is anyone talking about when they say "diversity?!" There is a whole lot of angst and rhetoric infused in the arguments, and yet no one can describe the basis of what we are talking about. Does anyone besides me find that odd?
The ONLY definition so far for "diversity" is a school-by-school mix of of 40% of chlidren with parents who self-report low income status and 60% of children whose parents who do not report such status. And, over this ridiculous and meaningless definition, there are a lunatic fringe group of folks marching in the street, spewing hate-filled rhetoric, bringing lawsuits and race-hustling like there is no tomorrow. If it didn't concern the welfare of our childrens education, it would be laughable.
Rev Barbar, the enormously rotund figure head -- think Easter Island -- for the Jim Goodmon/Harvery Schmitt local old-boys network of greed that is driving all of this. For purely political motives, their irrational actions are recklessly risking acceditation and $80 million is Federal dollars. It is beyond shameful.
It might help you to turn
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:20 — user12345It might help you to turn the question around and ask, "what is not diverse?"
To me in a schools system that is 50% white to find a 100% white schools would be unusual and not diverse ... I am thinking 85% white and up is unusual ... use the same process for income ... say that 30% of the school system is low income ... so a school with 0% low income would be unusual and one with 100% low income would be unusual and not diverse.
Weak. I am looking for a
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 08:49 — woodstockWeak. I am looking for a precise definition that could reflect an actual coherent policy... then why it is important and how it would be achieved. The fringe likes to talk "diversity" but until they define it and articulate its value in terms of an individual child's education, it is just so much hot air.
The media helps to add to the confusion. The N&O, for instance, continually references "diversity" which many assume to be racial. It is not, it is SOCIOECONOMIC diversity. I guess it sells more papers and keeps certain gluttonous race hustlers busy to keep people thinking it is about race.
Also, the scenario you describe which assigns students soley by race is illegal and offensive by most people's standards, but thanks for showing us where your head is at on the issue.
Also, the scenario you
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 09:45 — user12345Also, the scenario you describe which assigns students soley by race is illegal and offensive by most people's standards, but thanks for showing us where your head is at on the issue.
I love that you find "systems" that assign students by race repudant but don't seem to have an opinion on "systems" like zoning, prerequistite, legecy preference, providing lunch / transportation that achieve the same racial segregation ok.
I absolutely HATE any and
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 12:06 — woodstockI absolutely HATE any and all things that make race an issue. Race is as irrelevent as hair color or the length of one's eye lashes ...i.e., not relevant at all. Race as an issue that only resides among the desperate extemely left-wing zealots like Barbar who use it a weapon to retain the power he sees slipping away.
BTW who gets lunch or transportation because of their skin color? What are you talking about? Please explain.
Charters use the lack of
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 15:26 — user12345Charters use the lack of lunch and transportation to limit poor and minority kids unintentionally (as Ron would say) to maintain a more affluent and White student body.
So...
Sat, 11/20/2010 - 13:58 — Bob_SconceI don't really think that's it.
Torchlight Academy, for example, does not offer lunch (but does offer limited transportation), yet attracts a sizeable population of poor kids from SE Raleigh. Exploris Middle School also does not offer lunch, is within walking distance of SE Raleigh, yet attracts far fewer poor kids.
I suspect that the demographics of charter schools differ largely because the two sets of parents value different things. That's not something that "we" should try to "correct."
I could be where they seek
Sun, 11/21/2010 - 10:19 — user12345I could be where they seek students and advertise. I think Torchlight is considered a "black school" and many whites would be intimidated by that ... it is a 3 out of 10 with many unflattering comments ...
...http://www.greatschools.org/north-carolina/raleigh/2749-Torchlight-Academy/
When my child first started at Torchlight Academy she was in kindergarten. Her teacher was excellent. We thought this would be a great school, but now there has been so many changes. The owner is very nice her husband is rude. The staff are not nice at all, they do not want to help at all. The kids are not served a proper lunch. My child would come home hungry and very thirsty. Plus if you try and talk with the teachers they have nasty attitudes. My child will not be attending this school next year. I hope that they get better.
Well...
Mon, 11/22/2010 - 08:58 — Bob_SconceIf parents start not liking Torchlight, then it will go out of business. That's how charters are supposed to work.
Perhaps...
Sat, 11/20/2010 - 15:28 — fiveblindmice......not try to "correct". But we sure as hell shouldn't encourage or facilitate the voluntary withdrawal of parents who care from our general public school population.
So...
Sat, 11/20/2010 - 16:27 — Bob_SconceI was actually talking about differences between charter schools.
In general, it seems that the district's best approach is to be the place where parents choose to send their kids. But, recognize, that the end goal of education is to educate students. Having an excellent public school system is an excellent means to achieve that goal, but shouldn't be mixed up with the goal itself. If a student is better served in an different environment, then the public schools should support that student as he moves, and celebrate that he'll be getting an education that better fits his needs.
The public schools cannot be all things to all students. Consider Quest Academy, for example -- its mission is to "provide a quality, accelerated academic program for motivated students pursuing high intensity training outside the classroom" and runs on an 8:30 - 1:30 schedule with its own calendar -- should WCPSS adopt that schedule and calendar? If a kid is involved in high intensity training and often misses school for it, shouldn't the Principal encourage him to apply to Quest?
What now, poor =
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 18:05 — woodstockWhat now, poor = minority?!!! What rock do you live under? You REALLY need to get out more.
Without a doubt
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 14:42 — gregishere"Diversity" is polysemous. Try deconstructing it, and you will have your own personal definition. Go with that and let the adults fix the issue. (Um, by the way, are you fat or skinny so I can know how to construct the pun-infused insults I might want to make about you?)
So, how does one construct
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 18:06 — woodstockSo, how does one construct an assignment policy on diversity if its definition is so elusive and undefinable?
"Um," as for fat or skinny, it is pretty evident that Barbar is in a very exclusive category as far as that is concerned. He is approaching Guiness-Book-Records territory... but let's keep pretending he is normal. LOL
I'm thinking more like Ripley's
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 23:42 — FSandYOU.
So....
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 21:15 — JanisTangoif you have a school with 50% white and 50% non-white, but no low income kids...is that a diverse environment?
If you don't bus for
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:50 — danofncIf you don't bus for diversity purposes or have unnaturally large assignment areas, you're going to absolutely end up with haves and have-nots.
When the new majority eliminated diversity from Policy 6200, they essentially made a commitment to put kids in schools close to home and then take steps to ensure that students were not inequitably burdened by their resulting assignments.
A zone choice plan is probably just a way to get "unelected".
1) Lots of people wouldn't get their 1st (or 2nd) choice, so you'd lose some of your core voters who were unhappy with their assignment.
2) You'd still have high poverty schools (to go along with high poverty zones) so you wouldn't get the diversity supporters on your side.
3) You'd have to spend $texas on busing to offer transportation to all the choices, so you wouldn't be able to point to any massive savings from the changes.
4) Achievement would likely not improve by any great leaps, so you wouldn't be able to point to drastic academic improvement from the changes.
5) People who moved here would have to take "leftovers", which is isn't really fair, and won't win you many votes.
6) The magnet program would either a) change, making a ton of magnet parents upset and politically charged, or b) not change, making a ton (maybe two) of non-magnet parents upset and politically charged. Neither is good for getting votes.
7) Someone who doesn't get the school they want has to hear "Sorry, based on the algorithm you ended up at your 3rd choice", which isn't that much different than "We needed you there for your numbers". We all know what that does for an elected official.
If you go with base assignments that are logical and based on proximity, you can basically tell that upset parent that no one forced them to live whereever they live. It's harsh, and it's not fun (it also would likely never happen in real life), but is real life and it is, on all levels, much more fair than using algorithms or Dulaney's brain to make decisions.
Don't laugh, but I think JT had noble intent with the
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:50 — Athey01community, rather than neighborhood schools. Unfortunately, his ego and his inability to develop a process for developing the community model was his undoing.
During the campaign, I thought JT was the only one of the new majority who wanted a community model; the others supported neighborhood schools, but to maintain a united front, accepted his community zone model.
I agree, the zone model, with some minor modifications, is a better long- term solution than the neighborhood model.
I agree with you. Also, I
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:07 — magnetParentI agree with you. Also, I think JT campaigned more on "stability" than "neighborhood schools" and that is where his focus was.
Could he be reacting to
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:38 — user12345Could he be reacting to polling data from likely donors and realized that "stability" was not as strong as "neighborhood" so switched what he wanted to do? That is the only reason I can see politician straying off from what they initially set out to do.
In a way, may be so. The
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:49 — magnetParentIn a way, may be so. The zone model could offer "stability", but he drew the nodes so dang small to make it look like "neighborhood" was covered as well.
How many nodes were in the
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 09:04 — woodstockHow many nodes were in the ridiculous Dulaney plan ...over a thousand? Tedesco's draft plan -- that was irrationally thwarted by the nutjob-in-training Goldman -- had 16 zones in it latest iteration. So tell me again who was drawing up small nodes and isolating neighborhoods for assignement? I look forward to your answer.
Also, maybe you can clear something up for me, what is the difference between a node and a zone, and a district? Aren't they all names for a defined geographic area? Goldman's resolution -- written by Hill, Sutton and Mayor Meeker/Perry Woods (great company you keep, Goldman) -- prohibits the use of "zones" in assigning students. So, what's next, completely random county-wide assignements based on nothing but poorly defined and managed self-reported socioeconomic status?
Apples and oranges. I'm
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 10:16 — magnetParentApples and oranges. I'm sure you know that.
The zones that JT drew CONTAINED a set of schools. They were fences that prevented someone living within that zone from crossing the line and attending a school outside of that fence. (I am talk ES here, so don't jump on me about regions).
The nodes were a mechanism for managing assignment and collecting demographics. They do not contain a school or set of schools. Instead, a collection of them are assigned to a school. I really am stating the obvious and do not understand why you are confused by this.
JT zones were too small. And they were very uneven. Some contained as low as 3 ES, others upwards to 7 or 8. (or more, I don't remember). Some had only YR schools, other had only Traditional. They would not handle growth very well. When Alves presented the concept of controlled choice to the board, he made it very clear that they cannot be too small and they must all be similar in demographics and offerings. JT chose to ignore all that. He was already at the point of fine tuning the lines without any thought as to how to execute and fund it. He skipped a few major steps.
My take on Goldman's (et. al) resolution was primarily intended to stop the train wreck. She did not like the lack of a base assignment and the rest did not like the inequities. JT was out of control and working in his own vacuum. If Alves presents a plan that included zones (though I understand he is calling them assignment areas) that were equitable, balanced and large enough to provide choice and growth and stability AND some "promise" of a base assignment, DG could just as easily present a resolution to "bring back zones (or assignment areas)" and adopt his plan (or some variant of it). I think Alves could manage to put together a plan that could even achieve consensus. That is, if JT and RM can get over their hurt feelings and consider what is best for the district.
obviously not even for a
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 06:41 — AngelaWobviously not even for a minute....not ever since she and Hill and Sutton drafted their "plan"....sorry she fooled you.....she "fooled" a lot of us, some of us just figured it out before now.
Well don't feel so bad
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 00:23 — FSandYOUshe has crapped on us all on that front.
wow, I am having such
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 06:39 — AngelaWwow, I am having such flashbacks to the Lori, Patti, Bev and Rosa show!
a new year, a pretty amazing election result and yet here we sit....in the same "crapper" as before!
Don't forget Tart
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 10:34 — FSandYOUIt was much thanks to his stupidity and "follower mentality" that we are where we are. If any of these groups come in and say this current board are the racists they will simply be liars and turning a blind eye to what the previous failed board did to us all. This new board has been trying to fix the problem, well 4 of them have, but thanks to Goldman's power trips we're done. I firmly believe we've seen all the changes we're going to see from this new board and now with the budget cuts the real screaming is about to begin. From ALL parents. At least those who pay attention and care. Which is what, at least 20% of us?
Oh the flashbacks.
"Margiotta said they'll have
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 21:56 — CaryCurmudgeonNo surprise
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 22:26 — supportwcpssAnd we are now seeing Ronny in all his glory. We have seen this over and over again from him. Now the rest of the county can experience it.
Time to get someone else in his district who bring solutions forward and works with everyone.
...
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 22:25 — SideburnsMr. Margiotta doesn't appear to be moping. IMO, he is being very honest about today's reality in regards to revamping student assignment. It doesn't mean he won't push forward -- I think he just realizes that it will be much more difficult and haphazard until we can elect people who keep their commitments.
Still don't get it
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 22:32 — Solon77Y'all still don't get it. Goldman is the only one sticking with neighborhood schools. Tedesco's zone plan was breaking up neighborhoods, sending kids all over the place (under the guise of choice). This is in direct contradiction of the neighborhood school movement in promoting parental engagement to improve academic achievement.
I Guess The Difference Was Choice.....
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 05:45 — JanisTangoI know Tedesco's plan wasn't perfect, but at least it gave parents a choice. Under the old plan, neighborhoods, schools and communities were broken up under the guise of 'diversity'.
And the plan was far from
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 09:00 — CaryCurmudgeonAnd the plan was far from "baked," it was a work in progress. All of that work getting flushed down the toilet is just a complete waste.
Goldman had an issue with where the zone lines were drawn, and that could have been worked.
Here two major problems were:
1. No base assignments. I'm not totally comfortable with the concept either, although I do understand that it is a good way to reduce reassignment. But if this was a show-stopper, she should have introduced a resolution that the SAC develop at least an alternative plan which included base assignments. Her four new buddies would have voted with her.
2. Goldman wanted to be on the assignment committee. This was the show-stopper. If Goldman had been put on the assignment committee originally, does anyone think that she would have had this sudden epiphany that all board members needed to be on the assignment committee? She has been perfectly happy to participate in all the other 5-4 votes.
It is preposterous to think that Goldman's actions are because she is a stronger advocate of neighborhood schools than the other four new board members. With the node work that's underway we may end up getting something close to neighborhood schools, but a lot of people who are paying homage to Goldman may not end up liking the result.
But if this was a
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 11:32 — jenman...
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 22:50 — SideburnsI know, I know. Goldman is right and everyone else is wrong.
Of course
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 23:34 — Solon77She is a wife and mom - I learned that lesson 18 years ago, husband/dad 101.
Margiotta is not smart,
Wed, 11/17/2010 - 16:03 — JoeTarheelMargiotta is not smart, plain and simple.
He has no college education, no experience in education and, most baffling of all, no kids in Wake County Schools!!
On another note, I love how 'northern yankees' for years, have made asinine comments about the 'racists' in the South. Then, a couple of bafoons from New Jersey and Philly (Margiotta and Tedesco) move down here and basically try to send us back to 1955.