Wake County school board chairman Ron Margiotta has finally got the rest of the board to back his request to not have board members hear transfer appeals.
At Margiotta's urging today, board members on both factions backed his proposal to have staff serve as hearing officers. Board members would still make the final decision on each appeal but they wouldn't have to sit through the hours of hearings with parents.
Margiotta has been pushing this idea for years. In the past he's suggested having former board members act as hearing officers. This time it will be staff.
A lot of the details still need to be worked out, such as which employees will hear the appeals.
Thousans of families request transfers each year. Around 1,000 go on to file appeals.
Historically, the board is split into two-member panels to hear the appeals. Parents make their two-minute pitch to the panel. Margiotta again likened it to attending a wake.
The panel would then make a recommendation to the full board, which would vote on each request.
Under this new system, the staff member serving as hearing officer would hear the appeal and make a recommendation to the board.
Hearing days, usually held in June and July, have stretched all day. Under the new system, the board would only have to show up at the end of the day after the hearings are held to hear the recommendations and vote.
Comments
So let me get this straight...
Tue, 05/04/2010 - 22:06 — MarvinSchwartz...under the old way, parents would get two minutes with two board members and could make their case in person to an elected official. Under the new plan, parents would appeal to an unelected staff bureaucrat, who would then make a recommendation to be rubber-stamped by the board (that is, unless the parent somehow had a way to get to a board member outside of normal channels).
Utterly ridiculous and yet another way to shut out people who do not agree with the new ruling junta's way of assigning students. I am disappointed the ruling junta (with the old board's assent) is further insulating themselves from parents.
Where are all the people who said the new ruling junta was all about listening to parents? It seems to me they only listen to those whose voice they wish to hear.
This must be the way it was
Tue, 05/04/2010 - 22:03 — HJ2ss2This must be the way it was done in June 1977. I requested a transfer in January which was approved sometime in Feb or March. At the end of May the principal at Sanderson spoke to me alone in her office with the "news that I" was going to have an evaluation this year and it wasn't going to be pretty"....was that a threat After all .over the span of my 30 year carrer, my evaluations were no lower than "well above average" or superior.
I believe that there is a test for promotions in administration. If you can identify a faculty member who is too bright for the school systrm, you are challenged to get rid of of that person by threatening to lie about them. Involved in the challenge is that the faculty member has to be a hard worker who is liked by others, someonoewho has worked for ther good of the students, teachers and families.The game involves offereng them an action plan (under the principal who is determined to fire them) or. youy have the opportunity to turn in a resignation.....knowing if you don't you will be harrassed until they fire you. Once the principal procures that resination they are then assigned a Superintendant position.
Wrong place...
Wed, 05/05/2010 - 08:42 — openmindI think you posted in the wrong place. First of all, this has nothing to do with teacher transfers, it is about student transfers. Secondly, principals don't try to get good teachers out of their building. Based on your comments and attitude within the post, I am guessing you tended ruffle some feathers.
You are absolutely
Wed, 05/05/2010 - 09:27 — HJ2ss2You are absolutely correct.
Meant to comment on the article about the "porposed ban on personal attacks". If wanting to implement programs that were in the students' best interest, developing a trusting, mutually respectful relationshop with the "at risk" students. initially contacting and working with the professor at Duke University regarding a drug intervention (Now being piloted at Wakefield in the PE dept) and an unwillingness to jeoprodize my integrity or my profession's code of ethics resulted in a principal's "ruffled feather", I will admit that I am guilty as charged.
I have one question, If your child approached a faculty member to express concern about a potentially unsafe situation at school, would you want that faculty member to address the problem or would you prefer they discount your child's concernand and deny the problem exists?
But some do
Wed, 05/05/2010 - 09:24 — g88ky07make it very hard for good parents, families, and children to stay in their building and to support their building.
Now where's my can opener ...
"Likened it to attending a wake"
Tue, 05/04/2010 - 21:23 — Solon77Is this what it is when concerned parents come to appeal for what they believe is best for their kids. So much for giving these parents a little respect.
So much for listening to
Tue, 05/04/2010 - 19:51 — allkidsfirstSo much for listening to parents. At least the old board would give families the time of day. If your decisions cause heartbreak (and yes, the new board has hurt families already) then you ought to sit and hear it.
Good call ... BOE members do
Tue, 05/04/2010 - 16:29 — user12345Good call ... BOE members do not have the time and we do not pay them enough to sit through hours of hearings ...