The Wake County school board could vote Wednesday to pull out of AdvancED just as a a team from the accreditation agency is about to begin its special review.
As noted in this online article, Ann Majestic, the school board's attorney, said that pulling out of AdvancED will be discussed during a Wednesday closed session meeting. Some school board members have been vocal in complaining they felt AdvancED was overstepping its authority with the wide-ranging special review prompted by a state NAACP complaint.
AdvancED President Mark Elgart sent Majestic an e-mail message Monday complaining about Wake's lack of cooperation with the review.
“I am disappointed and deeply concerned regarding the continued attitude and resistance of school system leaders,” Elgart wrote.
Elgart noted that the accreditation process is “voluntary and collegial by design,” and described Wake’s attitude as confrontational.
“I seriously doubt the school system can benefit from the accreditation process with this attitude and approach,” Elgart said. “As such, I ask the system to seriously consider withdrawing its accreditation unless it can move forward in a more collegial and collaborative manner."
School staff had still been in the process of setting up meetings with AdvancED when Majestic e-mailed the group this morning to postpone the trip until after the closed session.
Withdrawing from AdvancED would result in Wake's 24 high schools losing accreditation. How significant that would be depends on who you talk to.
A loss of school accreditation could make it harder for students to get scholarships, loans and college acceptances. But some school board members said the impact of losing accreditation wouldn't be that severe.
Wake could try to get accredited by another group but that takes time.
Wake had discussed AdvancED on Friday, during the closed session that also saw board members meet with new Superintendent Anthony Tata. The meeting was recessed until 5:30 p.m. today. But the weather conditions caused it to be moved to 5:30 p.m. Wednesday at Millbrook High School, just before the start of the reassignment hearing at 6 p.m.
UPDATE
For the umpteenth time today, the school board has revised the agenda for Wednesday's meeting. They've now scheduled a public discussion and vote on AdvancED for after the end of the reassignment hearing at Millbrook. The AdvancED talk would likely begin after the public comment ends at 8:30 p.m.
Click here to read the latest e-mails between Majestic and Elgart.
Comments
American Decline - This time it's for real
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 18:02 — user12345Keung -- Question
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 00:24 — Bob_SconceThe emails refer to communications with "Mr. Bergman." Any chance you have those as well? thx.
Bergman is the general
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 10:38 — KeungHui (author)Bergman is the general counsel for AdvancED. Click here for the letter I believe Majestic is referring to from Bergman.
Any more recent letters?
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 10:49 — WadingInThe reference in Ms Majestic email was to ".... Mr. Bergman’s response to our request that Board members and senior staff members, if they desire, be permitted to have legal counsel present..." so it appears that AdvancED may have set some new "parameters" on the visit (i.e. no counsel) as recently as last week.
I don't have that one but
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 11:38 — KeungHui (author)I don't have that one but have requested it.
Has everyone read the email exchange?
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:21 — valsparIt is obvious this board feels they hold no accountability to anyone, not even the students. They would rather remove accreditation than allow AdvancEd speak to anyone in Wake County about their actions. AdvancEd was meeting with more than board members - they were meeting with stakeholders too. They would rather damage every child's education and the economy of our county than be scrutinized or be held accountable. If this board has done nothing wrong, having AdvancEd here should not be a problem. It reminds me of when my teenage son yells at me to not go in his room. Lets me know I need to.
Is it time to vote again? Apex - are you watching your fearless leader?
AdvancED's Jack-Booted Thugs are on a WITCH HUNT
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:52 — woodstockDo you teach your son to succumb to arrogant bullies? Apparently you do since you seem so eager for the BoE to do so.
You clearly are ignorant of what AdvancED has claimed it wants to "investigate." It is so far beyond their purview it is laughable. No rational person would agree to their idiotic and oppressive demands.
The more AdvancED's accreditation is discussed and the more we learn, the more obvious it becomes that it is essentially meaningless and has no bearing on a student's post secondary opportunities. It is a complete sham.
Speaking of voting, I cannot wait until McLaurin-Meekers, Hill's, and Morrison's seat are up for election... then Margiotta, Tedesco, Prickett and Malone will have more company to help them bring WCPSS into the 21st Century without having to deal with foolish partisan politics from the extreme left-wing race hustlers.
BTW, Mr. Elgart is a fool if he thinks this is going to turn out well for him or his jack-booted organization.
?
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:38 — Bob_SconceDid you read the same email exchange? There were two issues:
(1) Denying the board legal representation
(2) Overbroad inquiry outside the scope of the schools' accreditations.
I didn't see anything in there about forbidding AdvanceEd from speaking with others.
The Board certainly has accountability for its actions, but that accountability is to the voters, not to AdvanceEd. Its accountability to AdvanceEd only goes so far as the Board's actions reasonably affect the 7 accreditation standards for district high schools.
Yes I did
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:02 — valsparAnd by the board potentially removing the system from AdvancEd accreditation tomorrow, negates AdvancEd talking to stakeholders. Why does one ask for legal representation if one feels strongly one is in the right? They are accountable to AdvancEd for their governance practices. It is here they do not wish scrutiny. Rightly so. Eventually, the voters will decide.
"Why does one ask for legal
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 00:16 — woodstock"Why does one ask for legal representation if one feels strongly one is in the right?"
Are you kidding? Even you cannot be this stupid.
BTW, why does AdvancED need lawyers?
"They are accountable to AdvancEd for their governance practices."
No, they are not. That is what elections and voters are for.
"Eventually, the voters will decide."
"Eventually?!" The voters already decided, that is what those landslide victories were all about.
It's all about the small
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 21:02 — DavidEisenstadtIt's all about the small percentage voters in certain districts, isn't it Woody? The students have no say whatsoever.
Seth seems to be doing pretty well
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 22:15 — FSandYOUWhy don't you join him more often and you can have all the say you want. Behind bars!
Imagine, an arrest record AND graduating from a non-accredited school. The dreaded double whammy!
That would be Mr. Woody to
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 21:35 — woodstockThat would be Mr. Woody to you, young man.
What it is "all about" is student achievement... something the status quo forgot about and failed at.
Argh...
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:17 — Bob_SconceWell, of course, if they decide to punt completely, that moots the whole discussion. But, that's not really the thread of the emails.
Why does one ask for legal representation if one feels strongly one is in the right?
Ask yourself that if you're ever charged with a crime you didn't commit. I discussed this more in a post to Dove314, below. The short answer is that if you don't tell the truth exactly the right way, what you say will be used against you later.
They are accountable to AdvancEd for their governance practices
That's the point -- no they're not. AdvanceEd offers two different accreditations: schools and districts. If WCPSS had district accreditation, then AdvanceEd would be right to inqure into all sorts of governance practices. But, WCPSS is not accredited as a district -- only its schools are accredited. And that's where AdvanceEd's inquiry has to remain.
Here's another way to think about it: if the school accreditation allows AdvanceEd to examine all the district governance practices, then what's the difference between the two accreditations?
LOL
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:07 — starsonoursLOL so only people who are guilty need Lawyers?
...
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:29 — SideburnsApex is proud of our fearless leader. He's used to dealing with bullies. Usually they're from Raleigh though.
AdEd's Ball
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:18 — occum_sharpeThe main problem is this game has to be played with AdEd's ball because it's their game. In reality, the student assignment changes that have been made so far can be defended as a cost cutting measure, if anything, although the board has put no real numbers out there to defend it as a cost cutting measure. With the reassignment, the board would most likely have to present a plan detailing equal access to programs from school to school, which staff could develop and provide.
It is concerning that the leadership of the board does not understand this. There are many accredited school systems who have much more segregated situations than we do and many of them did so recently, and in many cases cited financial troubles as the reason. Perhaps AdvanceEd's concern is that we are so hellbent on ending the diversity policy without any tangible reason for doing so other than the "people who elected us have spoken."
There is a major financial crisis upon us and that is a great excuse to go to neighborhood schools. The leadership in Charlotte Meck was able to figure this out as they have touted a 100 Million dollar budget shortfall as the impetus for change in their system, while we are still trying to convince people in Wake County that the cuts won't be that bad.
This is a situation where our board needs to be a gracious host, play ball, and secure accreditation for the good of our children and their constituents. They don't have to lay down or compromise their principles, they just have to be able to discuss their intentions in a clear and sensible manner and it pains many that they are not willing to even attempt to do so. Every inquiry into the actions of the board doesn't have to be deemed a liberal, left-wing attack on them. There are a lot of fiscal conservatives in Wake who don't have children in the schools who have serious concerns about why there is not a financial framework to support these reassignments and everything the board does and their concerns will be voiced when the system tries to float a bond. Will they be liberal left-wing nuts when that time comes? It's not about sides and blind loyalty, it's about good ideas that are supported by reason and defensible with a well thought position. Every one who disagrees with a position is not an evil segregationist or a flaming liberal. Even though I am opposed to ending the diversity plan, the process to do so could easily be defended from a financial standpoint. I just can't understand why the board, with all the resources at their disposal, fails to recognize this fact.
saving money with neighborhood schools.
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:34 — stan_norwalkI agree with much of what you say but the following does not calculate.
There is a major financial crisis upon us and that is a great excuse to go to neighborhood schools. The leadership in Charlotte Meck was able to figure this out as they have touted a 100 Million dollar budget shortfall as the impetus for change in their system, while we are still trying to convince people in Wake County that the cuts won't be that bad.
CMS, by closing several of their neighborhood schools of poverty, is moving toward a more diversified system. They spend more than double in operating cost for such schools than they do at middle class suburban schools. Getting good teachers into such schools reuires bonuses. High poverty, segregated neighborhood schools are typically under-utilized - raising total system construction costs.
The only possible savings, is a reduction in the cost of busing, which is largely paid for by the State and is low compared to the other costs. Please tell me where is the savings?
No Savings
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 18:34 — occum_sharpeI don't think there are any savings in doing away with the diversity policy either, but I think that savings would be a good excuse for the board to justify their actions. To those who believe thousands of children are being bussed 100 miles a day, it would be a rally cry and the bottom line is that the general public isn't smart enough to know that high poverty schools cost more in the long run.
You 1st, tell us where the savings are
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:13 — FSandYOUat all these under capacity year round schools?
Agreed
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 00:27 — stan_norwalkGetting rid of highly under-utilized YRS will save money.
Now we get to the root of it all for many Stan
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 09:37 — FSandYOUThank you for acknowledging that the public was lied to by the previous failed school board and its miserable leaders who walked away when things didn't go their way. These lies caused huge schedule, family and life issues for MANY and to this very day still do.
I would argue that a "highly under-utilized" YRS is any school under 100% capacity. So making the decision of which ones to get rid of should be extremely easy. All of them!
Did you really just say
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 02:45 — jenmanDid you really just say that, Stan? I agree 100%, but I'm surprised to see this coming from you.
Stan last time I checked the
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:52 — starsonoursStan last time I checked the State collects part of its money from the residents of Wake Co., if we save this "State money" it is considered a savings for Wake Co. Just because it comes from another tax source does not mean we should waste it.
saving money
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 01:03 — stan_norwalkWe shouldn't waste any of the publics' money.
If State $'s are saved by taking away the convenience of free busing, there is no guarantee it will be used for WCPSS. All it does is transfer the cost to the parents...a hidden tax. Once the State gets the saving, it can spend it anywhere it pleases...for a new bridge for Senator Basnights district.
This is analogous to the County - WCPSS relationship. Say WCPSS saves big $ by building modular schools. Some parents will complain about the change. The County could use the savings for a court house or an animal shelter. This is a disincentive to saving money by WCPSS. If you include such societal costs, they may be higher than the buses.
None of our school systems in NC are independent financial entities with powers to raise or lower taxes. They are not like a business. They cannot control customer volume, sales price or their biggest cost...teachers or the major drivers of most major expenses and revenues. In 48 states that not true. In those states you can save money and cut taxes by cutting buses.
There is a possibility that you could save Wake County the part of busing cost it supplies and then use it for teaching and learning - but there is no agreement, statute or policy to do so.
Anticipating your response, it is unconstitutional in NC to eliminate public schools by making them private schools.
Stan, All tax money comes
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 07:55 — starsonoursStan, All tax money comes from the public, Federal, State, County ect..any savings we have is a benefit. Unfortunately politicians seem to say "If I don't spend it someone else will" Just because the money will not come back to us to add to the bottom line for school operating expenses does not mean we should spend it foolishly. All of the money comes out of our pockets.
what does higher ed really think?
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 20:34 — changewcpss1Keung, did the N&O do a story a while back asking colleges/universities how they view the lack of SACS accreditation?? Shouldn't their opinions tell you how important it is? While some universities may rely on it less, is there ANY institution of higher learning who thinks it is a GOOD thing for a system to lose accreditation?
We address it again in the
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:01 — KeungHui (author)We address it again in the print story that will run tomorrow.
UNC accreditation
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 20:57 — FairnshareWhen this issue first arose back in August, either The N&O or WRAL interviewed the UNC-CH Admissions Director and posed the question about the importance of high schools being accredited. The Admissions Director confirmed that the UNC system does consider accreditation extremely important when it considers applicants. I was left with the impression that if an applicant is not from an accredited high school, their chances for admission are slim to none.
I remember seeing the
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:07 — jenmanI remember seeing the opposite. That UNC and other schools deal with students coming from unaccredited schools often enough that it wasn't a deal breaker. Also that they know the reputation of WCPSS's schools. I'll have to try to find the article.
From WRAL August 17, 2010
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:22 — Fairnshare"It alone doesn't determine whether or not we accept someone," said Christof Guttentag, dean of Duke University's undergraduate admissions. "On the other hand, if a school is not accredited, it could reflect that they may not have the resources to provide a student with the education to make them competitive for a school like Duke."
The undergraduate admissions policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, however, states that a candidate must have graduated from an approved or accredited secondary school.
Steve Farmer, associate provost and director of undergraduate admissions, says it's possible that the university would offer admission but that it's fairly rare to see a candidate, other than home-schooled students, attending a non-accredited high school.
thank you
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:24 — changewcpss1Very good, Fairnshare...thank you for looking that up. Let's hope the BOE reads the blogs :-)
please do
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:17 — changewcpss1I would love to see the article. It is my understanding that most universities don't deny admittance to students from unaccredited High Schools, but that it is much harder to get in. Look at it this way - say your son or daughter is graduating from an UNaccredited high school in Wake County with the same GPA, extra-curriculars, as a graduate from a high school in Charlotte. And it comes down to one or the other. Who do you think the university will pick? Also, for universities who are not in-state and likely not as familiar with Wake County schools, what would they be led to assume if we are NOT accredited by the same agency that accredits many many other public and many private high schools in the country? This doesn't even begin to cover the whole question of financial aid? Has anyone looked into the difficulties of getting financial aid to go to college for a graduate from an unaccredited High School?? Talk about financial impact to thousands of families in Wake County.
quick search
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:17 — turnerk1I did a very quick search and discovered that some schools aroudn the country require significantly more information from students graduating from unaccredited high schools. In one case it was three SAT subject tests in addition to the regular SAT. I found a scholarship that required the student was attending or a graduate of an accredited high school. I imagine that for schools in NC that know Wake county and the situation, they won't be overly concerned if we lose our accreditation. But for out of state schools, or scholarships administered outside of NC (and there are many, many small scholarship programs throughout the country that give money to students), it could make a difference when they are down to evaluating students with similar backgrounds. In the end, I think that no matter how distateful it is, rather than risk even one student not getting into school or being denied a scholarship, it would be better to deal with AdvancED now and look for a different accrediting situation for the future.
I found this from
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:56 — jenmanI found this from www.wral.com/news/education/wake_county_schools/story/8336730/
School district staff members made some quick calls Thursday to area universities to determine the impact of a loss of accreditation.
"We are told, at Duke (University), they don't consider it at all. At (the University of North Carolina), it wouldn't factor in because they are familiar with Wake County schools," Majestic said. "But it may factor in at universities that are not familiar with Wake County schools."
I agree that out of state schools will be more difficult to deal with. It will take more on the part of the applicants, for sure. I think that NC colleges will deal with it if it happens. They are all aware that this is a possibility and they are all aware of WCPSS high schools. I imagine that they are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of each WCPSS HS as well. There's no way that NC schools won't accept Wake students.
If this is an ongoing thing (not being accredited by some agency) then I could see it being a problem. But I really believe that the universities will be understanding about this if it happens and won't punish the students. Out of state schools are whole other issue, unfortunately.
UNC Director of Admissions Steve Farmer
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:28 — FairnshareI place more value on the opinion of the UNC Director of Admissions than Ann Majestic's hearsay.
If Wake High Schools lose
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 21:55 — zandeIf Wake High Schools lose accreditation the private schools will be inundated with applications. Loss of SACS accreditation would really hurt. I really hope cooler and saner heads prevail.
Please calm down
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 20:16 — turnerk1I had not read the blog in a few days and hoped that in light of what happened in Arizona, everyone would be watching their language a little bit. Instead, I was disappointed to see that the name-calling, descriptions of spittle and general rudeness level was just as high as ever. Everyone feels strongly about all of this, but wouldn't it be nice if we could all discuss these very important issues in a rational, dignified way? It doesn't make the message any weaker to write about it rationally, and it actually makes it stronger as it is all too easy to dismiss someone's comments who spends most of his (or her) comment calling someone else a name.
"I had not read the blog in
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 00:03 — woodstock"I had not read the blog in a few days and hoped that in light of what happened in Arizona, everyone would be watching their language a little bit."
What does AZ have to do with anything? A mentally ill individual pulls a gun and you want to blame it on the language people chose to use? Please, that is just silly.
OY!
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 19:53 — Bob_SconceI don't know why this wasn't included in the article, but the main problem appears to be that AdvanceEd refuses to allow board members to have their attorneys participate -- basically, AdvanceEd is willing to allow the attorneys to sit there observing, but not to provide legal advice to their clients.
That is a HUGE problem. The right to be represented by counsel is a fundamental right. There are two complaints before the D.Ed. office of Civil Rights and, guaranteed, the NAACP will use ANYTHING the board majority says against it.
Also, note that the AdvanceEd letter lists 6 things that they're trying to investigate, but ONLY ONE of them has anything to do with the accreditation standards, and even then misstates the scope of that standard.
It is a witch hunt of
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:47 — woodstockIt is a witch hunt of enormous proportions. Only a partisan race hustler or a complete imbecil could fail to recognize that. No rational person would support AdvancED's mission to further the NAACP's race hustling efforts.
The legal counsel issue is
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 20:15 — KeungHui (author)The legal counsel issue is mentioned in the print story.
Missing it
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 20:54 — loriacI don't see where in the print story (if it's the same as the one on the N&O website front page - 'Wake may drop high schools' accreditation') where you talk about advanced rejecting the request for the board members to have their attorney present and able to provide counsel during the interview. You talked about the hiring of Farr, but thats a different issue.
I agree this is a huge issue given the NAACP complaint.
The print story is the much
Wed, 01/12/2011 - 00:15 — KeungHui (author)The print story is the much longer one that will be appearing in tomorrow's paper.
This seems to me to be the issue
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:48 — FSandYOUNo legal representation, no dice.
In Other Words...
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:33 — chaboard....let us lawyer up to save our own butts or we'll hurt the kids. Nice.
Why does AdvancED want its
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 23:42 — woodstockWhy does AdvancED want its lawyer? Who are they trying to hurt?
Print edition...
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:49 — Bob_SconceI think he's referring to the story that will be in tomorrow's paper. I would hope so -- it's central to the entire issue, and it appears to be the entire purpose for tomorrow's meeting. What rational reason could AdvanceEd have to keep the board from having the assistance of counsel during the meetings?
I love how AdvanceEd talks about "cooperation" and "collegiality," yet wants to deny this right to board members.
Yes, and that point is
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 22:18 — loriacYes, and that point is missing from any article on this subject.
...
Tue, 01/11/2011 - 21:12 — SideburnsI don't see it either.