It would be an understatement to say that relations are strained between the new Wake County school board majority and the Wake Education Partnership.
As noted in today's article, school board members are questioning such recent WEP publications as the school assignment analysis and the assessment of Del Burns' resignation as superintendent. It's a departure from when the WEP worked closely with the old school board majority.
“They seem to be going against everything we want to do," said school board member Deborah Prickett. "I feel like a salmon swimming upstream against them.”
Intentional or not, the WEP is becoming the defacto research arm for critics of the new school board majority. The WEP's reports are regularly cited by opposition groups.
School board members are particularly upset about the WEP report which found that sending students to their closest school would result in crowding problems.
Members of the new board majority say they've never said they're solely going to assign students based on proximity.
School board vice chairwoman Debra Goldman said the WEP could have tried to develop a scenario which would have allowed for more community-based school assignments while still trying to provide the socioeconomic balance the group wants to preserve.
“Let’s work together to bring something positive," Goldman said. "Even if you don’t like the general concept of what we’re trying, try to work with us to make it more positive.”
Goldman said she's been asked by school board chairman Ron Margiotta to serve on the WEP's board of trustees after he turned down the invitation.
School board member Chris Malone said he looks at the WEP reports to see if there's anything worth finding. But he said he hasn't found much.
As for school board member John Tedesco, his blast on the WakeEd blog following the WEP school assignment report has gotten a lot of attention. He accused the WEP of spreading 'fairy tale hysteria" and "waxing philosophical lies."
But Tim Simmons, communications director for the WEP, said the report noted that the approach it analyzed was not under consideration by the board. But, he said, it spoke to questions the public might have about community-based schools.
"I know that the general public thinks that school choice means they get to choose the schools close to home," Simmons said in the article. "The primary reason for doing this is to make it clear that this is not possible."
The school board majority has at least some reason to be skeptical of the Wake Education Partnership, which has been a longtime supporter of the diversity policy.
In 2002 the WEP's board of trustees passed a resolution in support of the diversity policy.
More recently, WEP President Ann Denlinger attended the Friends of Diversity Press Conference that was held the day before the October elections. She was joined at the event by several people who are on the WEP's board of directors and board of trustees.
Comments
lol
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 15:30 — supportwcpssshowing up late equals F&R? wow...your views are backed up with so much hardcore data. I know plenty of non F&R parents hwo dump their kids late.
If the teachers don't know, how can they discriminate against them.
VOR may have answered
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 19:09 — jenmanVOR may have answered already, but I think he's referring to the low income kids who are bused in long distances. It has been an issue at some schools that their buses get to school late and then the kids have to go eat breakfast. This leads to them missing much of their first period of the day.
When the same kids are always late and you know that they ride the same bus together, its not too much of a stretch to figure out what is going on. Especially since they are excused for being tardy--the teachers know what the deal is.
This was a big deal at Leesville Middle school a few years ago. One staff member had to fight to get the bus to get to school on time and several parents thanked this person. (Some of the parents had complained but nothing was done). Of course, then the bus was getting to school 20 minutes before the kids could even enter the building. This person offered to sit with the kids in the cafeteria so they could at least be inside the building instead of waiting on the bus for those 20 minutes, but no dice.
But s/he was thankful that the kids were finally getting to school in time to eat breakfast and not miss any class time.
It's that kind of story that makes me crazy-
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 01:01 — raleighlauraI wish common sense would find its way back to WCPSS. And that transportation had to report to the principals. Currently, no one at the school has any control over bus drivers, and the people who run the transportation department have been wholly unimpressive every time I've run into them.
and the people who run the
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 10:24 — jenmanand the people who run the transportation department have been wholly unimpressive every time I've run into them.
----------------
I agree with this 100%. I know that Vice Principals are the ones who deal with transportation issues at each school, but sometimes getting them to act on an issue is a struggle.
I'm glad you had your laugh SupportWCPSS
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 16:05 — Voice_of_Reason_What I referring to is a possible way. There are certain buses a some elementary schools that show up late or very near the morning bell. These kids (a lot bussed for diversity are then allowed to eat breakfast. They show up regularly to class late and the teacher is informed it is excused and why. My you are quick to pounce. And I ask, why would a teacher discriminate? If I was one, I would help these kids more and be more understanding if they get behind. Is that discriminating in your mind?
Also, if teachers don't
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 15:36 — woodstockIf teachers don't know who the F&R kids are, how do they provide these students with the extra resources they are supposed to get with the Title 1 funds?
I am very interested in this answer.
Are Title I funds tied to an
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 16:15 — user12345Are Title I funds tied to an indivual student or school? I think it is by school ...
I think that the money is
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 19:14 — jenmanI think that the money is supposed to be used for low income kids at the school. One of our elem schools had a literacy night and each and every elem age child who attended was given a free book, including pre-school siblings. I heard from a staff member afterwards that they got in trouble because they were supposed to use those funds for low income kids, not the entire school.
Our current elem school had special Title One programs a year or two ago that my neighbors and I never got invites or notices about. I think the money is used to target programs specifically for low income kids and their families.
Title I funds go to the school
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 21:07 — kbrooks500Title I funds go to the school and are to help increase the performance of low performing students, not necessarily low income students. Of course Title I funds go to schools with more poverty because that is the population which tends to stuggle most to meet standands. Students' skills are assessed and they are placed in proper intervention for their needs based on their scores not their F/R status.
There are two types of Title I schools, school-wide and targetted assistance. In a targeted assisted school only students performing below grade level would receive services, which would explain why you and your neighbors were not invited to literacy night. At school wide schools all students get remediation or enrichment and there are school wide events such as parent education nights and school-wide book give aways.
For a school to be Title I it has to have a F/R higher than the district average. So if Wakes average is 31% then all schools over 31% are Title I schools. The higher the F/R the more likely they will be school-wide schools. Title I schools are the only schools which can be sanctioned by NCLB.
AS NCLB targets continue to rise more schools will fail to make AYP.
I would assume a teacher would know a students F/R status because the student would not need to bring in money for lunch. A teacher or staff person can never announce a students status publicly.
As an afterthought, Title I funds pay for the staff to provide the remediation services. I know this because I am paid with Title funds. The number of staff a school has will determine the number of students that can be helped. There are rules as to how many students can be instructed in a small group setting.
Thank you for the
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 10:20 — jenmanThank you for the clarification/info. Much appreciated.
Are you doing this as Suplemental Education Services (SES)? OR
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 22:04 — Voice_of_Reason_OR just Target Assistance (BTW which schools do that? - I wasn't aware we did that at all in WCPSS) The Title I office only identified schools with >40% F&R pops as Title I. It does look that the LEA has a choice of a school wide OR a targeted assistance approach.
I see this can be used in schools as you stated, but it is up to the DISCRETION of WCPSS (ref: ESEA Sec.1113), not mandated by the law. Interesting, we are further dilluting Title I money out of schools that need it the most. [IMHO that is not a good policy].
BUT, I still think you have to be more than just academically challenged to participate, the law specifically identifies the group:
``(2) Children (under 21 years of age) included.--
I Read this differently
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 23:21 — kbrooks500I see the words "may be eligible" in each section which to me implies that students receive services if they need it based on performance not solely on their status as F/R or other disadvantaged status. Of course they are the ones who are most likely to qualify and need Title I services.
I have only worked at school-wide schools. I am not aware if any schools in WCPSS are targetted assisted at this time.But I will try to find out.
You are changing the equation
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 07:05 — Voice_of_Reason_The fact that you are working at a Title I school that has a school wide program you can serve any low performing child. Only Supplemental Educational Services and voluntary busing due to failing AYP penalties are targeted solely to the F&R population.
I disagree with your interpretation of the law, in targeted Title I schools, only F&R status kids can be served. If the paragraph is read with the previous paragraph it is a little clearer. I am not a lawyer, but I used to work in an Inspector General's staff and had to read my share of government regulations and law. The NCLB Act is a bit deceiving in it's Title; it should be the No Economically Disadvantaged Child Left Behind if They Go to a High Poverty Percentage School Act. It has little benefit or protection to others. The exception is to children that attend Title I schools that get the advantages of school wide programs paid for by Title I money.
I know that's the theory but...
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 21:47 — lferreri"In a targeted assistance school only students performing below grade level would receive services"
I know that's what's supposed to happen but didn't the E & R report on the Hodge Road Tutoring program say that students were placed in the program even if they were at or above grade level. I thought that was one of the problems with Title I, that ED kids are often put into those programs whether they need remediation or not because they are assumed to be below grade level. (I'm not saying that this is happening in your program, but I understand that it is a common problem.) It seems as if, as long as the children are ED, there is no checking to make sure that the students need remedial work.
The Title I funds go to a school. (AND)
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 17:00 — Voice_of_Reason_NCLB stipulates that the apportionment is made to the state and the state allocates it accordingly after they take their cut for administration. The allocations are made based on the people at or below the poverty level using US Census data. Local School district allocate the money to Title I schools in their district with I think 15% held back for voluntary busing and remedial tutoring for high risk students in failing Title I schools. In that case, the money is allocated to the student. WCPSS has been circumventing this by busing involuntarily out high risk failing students (using poor performing nodes )out of Title I schools. Those students got no benefit of the Title I money, only the promise of "osmosis learning" in a more affluent school population. This is not my opinion, it was BOE policy. It was how they made Title I schools look better than they were. I suspect we will have more failing Title I schools in the near future unless they really put an emphasis on the kids. Remember it was never about kids, it was "healthy schools", they couldn't claim the kids were being helped because they weren't.
It goes to a school, but
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 16:44 — woodstockIt goes to a school, but still the funds are supposed to serve low-income student obviously. If teachers do not know who the F&R students are, how do those students get the services supposedly provided by the Title 1 funds?
It is okay if you don't know, Burns did not want to provide an answer at a recent meeting. However, I suspect the answer may reveal one reason Burns is leaving.
Disagree
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 17:09 — Voice_of_Reason_Title I funds are to assist the school and in return the school does provide schoolwide programs to help them meet their AYP in the manner they see fit.
OF COURSE all this talk of NCLB AYPs is gonna go out the window. The Obama Administration is saying that they plan to eliminate the AYP portion of NCLB and the penalties associated with it. I believe this will in essense gut the entire program and it will be just a money redistribution plan for low income population schools. I don't think they have finalized their plan yet.
You disagree that the Title
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 17:58 — woodstockYou disagree that the Title 1 funds are supposed to provide benefits to low income students? Interesting.
not sure if this was directed at me but feel need to clarify
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 23:33 — kbrooks500I do think Title I funds are to help low income students. I do not think a student's F/R status is the sole criteria a school uses to provide remediation services. If that was the case there would be no need to assess students' skill levels or monitor for progress. In some cases other services such as special ed or ELL might be considered more appropriate. Though lED children will be the ones most frequently receiving services a NED student who is below grade level should also qualify.
I realize many find fault with some of the E&R reports about tutoring services in WCPSS. I have read them as well but have a different perspective on what the reports say. That does not mean I do not think there is ample room for improvement.
It the way the law is written
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 19:46 — Voice_of_Reason_The money helps the schools and thus in theory it helps the children. It is targeted at schools with high levels of low income students. Low Income students at other schools do not benefit, that is the #1 reason why I am against economic diversity busing. The money only goes directly to low income children if they get Supplemental Education Services (i.e. private tutoring) if the school does not achieve results and fails Annual Yearly Progress goals in the same area after multiple years. The majority of children that were bused out of low income school base areas were in nodes that had lower performance, this achieved two things: a)avoided penalties by helping Title I schools achieve their goals avoiding penalties, b) avoided having to spend extra money to help these children. You have to listen to WCPSS, they speak up the healthy schools, not high achievement rates. And of course our wonderful Magnet programs that ITB families primarily enjoy (the majority).
Now, do you think it benefits all the low income students?
Title I provides financial
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 16:50 — mbgjwaltersTitle I provides financial assistance through states to local school districts and public schools with high numbers or percentages of poor children. Schools are eligible for School-Wide Title I funds if at least 40% of the students are from low-income families. In other words, School-Wide Title I funds may be used for services that benefit all children enrolled. On the other hand, schools are eligible for Targeted Assistance funds if at least 5% of the students are from low-income families. Targeted Assistance funds may be used only to provide academic services to specific students that qualify for those funds.
It's my understanding that WCPSS does not keep track of the funds once they have reached the school. It would be very interesting to see how these funds are used school by school.
That is what they have been
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 09:48 — J8307200That is what they have been saying in Charlotte all along. Their school board asked the federal govermnet for permission to audit more than the 5% allowed by law. Evidently their numbers were thru the roof. Their attorney was told under no terms were they allowed to audit anymore than 5% of applicants. (This is one of the stipulations of the program....) If they were to do so they would be in jeopardy of losing the program. Sounds like a great way to breed dishonesty!
The Federal Government invites F&R fraud with open arms
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 11:12 — Voice_of_Reason_The Dept of Agriculture manages this program and has never prosecuted anyone in the US of fraud for the reduced lunch program. If you made $200K/yr and applied you have over a 90% change you wouldn't get caught and if you did the worse they would do is ask you to justify why you applied, and if you don't respond they will simply disenroll you. The free lunch program is slightly different because you have to be on food stamps in most cases, which does have some prosecutions. IRS records cannot be used to cross check due to federal regulations. There are lots of people who don't blink an eye lying about this when they know the facts.
School systems throughout the country push the program because they make money from it. I have always thought that the Free Lunch percent would have been a much better method to use in allocatting NCLB Title I money and for WCPSS to use in their economic diversity policy (even though I am still against it because it does not produce results in student achievement).
F & R
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 16:02 — lferreriI don't know anything about these programs so I'm not saying that you're wrong. There may be a lot of fraud. But I still don't understand why the number of high poverty schools in the WCPSS would go up so much in the last few years. Is there any reason to believe that the fraud has increased tremendously in the last few years? (I guess it could be the economic downturn but, of course, that could have led to a lot more genuinely low income people too.) Is a flood of new F & R kids the reason there are so many high poverty schools or are the F & R kids just less spread out than they used to be?
I hate fraud
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 15:00 — festusBut the federal funders are probably most concerned about getting food to hungry kids. I'd rather see some fraud than kids go hungry. When the consequences vs costs are so dramatic, I think some tolerance is reasonable.
Has anybody from WEP or on
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:03 — AngelaWHas anybody from WEP or on these blogs spent any SIGNIFICANT time INSIDE any of the schools in WCPSS?? Seriously? any? high F&R? low F&R? spent time with teachers? seen the lack of supplies, texbooks, staff?? volunteered? Tutored? Taught? served lunch? served breakfast? been on the PTA? the BAC? Leadership? School Improvement Team?
Anyone?
I've done several, I think a
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:34 — carson79I've done several, I think a lot of us have.
if so, then why don't you
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:40 — AngelaWif so, then why don't you "get it"? this is about kids and education....all other posts referencing politics, people's political parties, etc...are minutiae and take away from the seriousness of the problems within WCPSS.
if WEP and others truly cared about education they would STOP their politcal manueverings as well.
When busing ended in
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 15:33 — sstarksWhen busing ended in Charlotte reactions were very similar to what you are experiencing in Raleigh. Staunch busing supporters (including editorial staff of the Observer) predicted gloom and doom--the poor would suffer, the suburbs would demand all of the resources, our schools would "resegregate", the community would fracture. The new assignment system was constantly criticized. ( I found this odd since "old Charlotte" was so proud of how the community came together when busing started--however, they were not willing to even give the new assignment system a try before criticizing).
8 years later our minorities are doing better in most areas than their counterparts in Raleigh. Our buildings throughout the county are in much better condition than they were under busing. There is less crowding. And recently it was revealed that suburban schools receive far less money than our urban schools (even with PTA fund raising including in the totals). Are things perfect? Of course not (does anyone really believe they ever will be?). But it's getting harder and harder for critics to claim that the system is unfair to poor children. Yes, we still have the naysayers who are convinced we are doomed without their version of diversity. But for the most part I believe most now recognize that we are a far different community than we were in the 70's and 80's, and that old solutions no longer serve the current needs of our students.
Really...
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 22:26 — duvalhttp://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/01/26/1205573/cms-suburban-schools-spend-less.html
So this is where we are headed
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 23:29 — user12345The report indicates CMS is meeting most of its goals and making progress toward the others. However, the higher-poverty schools remain less likely to offer a full slate of activities ....They also have teachers with lower average time on the job and fewer advanced degrees, and have significantly fewer teachers with National Board Certification .... CMS allots more teachers based on higher poverty levels, and provides extra pay and other incentives at some schools where it is trying to boost achievement. Schools where at least 75 percent of kids are poor ....
Is this your preception or is it based upon some
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 18:09 — Athey01factual information that you can point us to? Your information appears to mingle fact and opinion, but if you could point me to a source, I would appreciate it.
You can comparge EOG and EOC
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 23:53 — sstarksYou can comparge EOG and EOC scores at http://www.ncpublicschools.org/vol2/rsds2002/index.html
For 2008-2009:
Wake's EOG scores for African Americans: 45.2% passing, Hispanic: 46.9% passing, Economically Disadvantaged: 43.9% passing.
Wake's EOC scores for African Americans: 58.5% passing, Hispanic: 66.4% passing, Economically Disadvantaged: 58.5% passing
CMS EOG's: African Americans: 47.9% passing, Hispanic: 51.7% passing, ED: 46.7 passing
CMS EOC's: African Americans: 64.7% passing, Hispanics: 68.8% passing, ED: 64.7 passing
None of these scores are anything to be proud of, but Wake's diversity policy certainly doesn't seem to be doing much for minorities.
As for the skepticism about improvement of CMS faciities--under busing there seemed to be no urgency to properly maintain any schools, urban or suburban--the first school my son was bused to in 1994 had no hot water after 1:00, bullet holes in the windows. Once busing ended most inner city schools were renovated or completely rebuilt to provide equitable facilities as new schools were built to (finally) accomodate suburban growth.
The following link explains pupil expenditure per school:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/01/26/1205585/high-and-low-how-much-is-spent.html
As I said before things are not perfect in Mecklenburg County--we have not yet figured out how to best educate every child. But without the distraction of assignment issues I believe we are gradually growing stronger community based schools which will eventually lead to well educated citizens. It's not going to happen overnight!
Of course those were the boom times for Charlotte
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 15:03 — festusWhen money was flush. Different story now, and different story in Wake today. Realistically budgeting for more money for poor kids in the new extreme poverty schools in Wake means either 1) raising taxes or 2) cutting spending.
Hi sstarks, Thanks for
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 09:41 — Eric_BHi sstarks,
Thanks for sharing. Before the school board elections I looked into WCPSS vs. CMS in terms of test scores and was shocked that WCPSS seems to only outperform CMS among white and NED students. The only reason WCPSS has better scores overall than CMS is that we have fewer ED and minority students.
For all of the people here who say "we don't want what happened in Charlotte-Mecklenburg to happen here," I expected CMS performance to be much worse.
Thanks for taking the time
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 11:51 — sstarksThanks for taking the time to check things out. There are many here, as well as in Wake, who would prefer the public believe CMS is in shambles since we no longer bus. I think this is terribly unfair to our teachers, the community, and especially to high poverty kids--they do not need to be pawns in the game the "diversity at any cost" crowd is trying to play.
Of interest--headline from an Observer story in 1992 about test score results (California Achievement Test, which was used at that time):
Charlotte Observer, The (NC) - June
30, 1992
Racial gap remains, or widens
An example of the results reported: for 3rd graders in 1991 composite score for African American 3rd graders was 36, for whites 78. In 1992 3rd grade composite for African Americans was 36, for whites 84.
Yet, some here in Charlotte still perpetuate the myth that minorities were doing so much better under busing. "Healthy Schools" are not really healthy if they are not properly educating all of their students.
what do you say to the fact
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 18:38 — carson79what do you say to the fact that cms has a rising % of F&R students ? what about the fact that Wake has a higher % of kids attending public school ? what is behind these trends?
"When busing ended in
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 15:45 — user12345"When busing ended in Charlotte .....8 years later our minorities are doing better in most areas than their counterparts in Raleigh. Our buildings throughout the county are in much better condition than they were under busing. "
Ending bussing renovated the buildings ... did it solve male baldness too?
I'm losing less hair now....
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 10:15 — shearertwI'm losing less hair now....
Intelligent people read that
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 17:51 — woodstockIntelligent people read that as meaning that the focus has changed and that available funds are spent on resources rather than transportation.
Also, do you really think nit-picking and parsing every single word is helpful?
Woodstock ... you seem to
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 23:22 — user12345Woodstock ... you seem to believe everything you read ... bussing changes happen ....the sun comes out ... must be related ... think for yourself ... question ... research ... don't just repeat everything Rush tells you ...
Believe everything I read?
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 09:49 — woodstockBelieve everything I read? Hardly. Anyone who knows me at all knows that is not the case. I question everything. You should try it some time; you'd discover the narrowness of your vision.
Rush? Nice non sequitur. LOL What does he have to do with the discussion at hand? I have nothing against him, but I can't remember the last time I listened to his program.
I believe sstarks is a
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 15:55 — DrActualFactualI believe sstarks is a researcher from that area, an opinion I would give more weight to as it is his/her area of study. I especially like her point........old solutions don't work in today's environment.
All of the above, except
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:10 — shank56All of the above, except serving breakfast to F&R.
you should try that too then
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:15 — AngelaWyou should try that too then it gives even more perspective.....trust me, been there, done all that.
Of course...
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 22:50 — supportwcpssAngela has done everything...taught the class, drove the bus, yadda, yadda....I'm guessing you have also scaled Mt. Everest.
No one can have an opinion because Ms. Angela knows it all...
more
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 22:58 — loriacActually, more - she has 3 kids on different schedules courtesy of WCPSS.
More perspective in what way?
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:30 — shank56You are at Leesville El? Approx 200 F&R kids total - divided by track, I assume.
More perspective in what way?
Giving the joy of food!
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 12:58 — DrActualFactualIf you get the chance to go to school and stay for lunch, linger in line near the end by the register. If kids don't have enough money they won't let them buy dessert. They can walk by longingly eyeing the cake, cookies, ice cream but never, ever get any. The poor kids (particularly Kinders-first graders have to be told that they are not allowed this food, because it is not covered by their "lunch program". (Parents can usually specify that they don't want their kids to have certain foods due to allergies, or just a "no sweets" preferance.) It is possible to let the lunch person know that you want to discreetly pay for special treats and they may work with you (they are quite happy to be able to provide a treat to a child they usually have to deny). Sometimes it is the little things that can make a kids day go better that will mean so much to them.
Thanks, nice post
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 15:06 — festusI've worked in the cafeteria too, and it is really hard to see the small inequalities, no matter how small they seem. Here's my tip of the cap for today--to cafeteria workers, paid and volunteer. I know many of them are subsidizing kids out of their own pockets, because I've seen it.