Wake County Superintendent Tony Tata is challenging former President Bill Clinton to visit the area to see for himself what's happening in the school district instead of just criticizing from afar.
Clinton had chastised Wake for abandoning the diversity policy in a speech Saturday. Tata was indignant about the remarks as he spoke with reporters during a break at today's school board retreat.
"It was a cheap shot against a great school district," Tata said of Clinton's remarks.
Tata said students should be proud of going to a school district like Wake.
Tata also extended his invitation to visit Wake to U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan and cable television satirist Stephen Colbert, who've both also criticized the district for dropping the diversity policy.
Tata said he'd be willing to meet with them if they have the "courage" to come to Wake.
Comments
Looks like Tata...
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 13:54 — bpuli9999also admires Jesse Helmes. Maybe that's where he got his "willing to meet with them if they have the "courage" to come to Wake."
What on earth are you
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 14:14 — jenmanWhat on earth are you talking about?
Jesse Helms said the same thing...
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 14:40 — bpuli9999"Mr. Clinton better watch out if he comes down here. He'd better have a bodyguard."
I think it's a stretch to
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 19:08 — jenmanI think it's a stretch to equate the two.
The whole Helms thing is interesting to me. I've met many Democrats who voted for him, which completely amazes me. Party politics is interesting down here. ;-)
Party politics is
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 20:18 — CaryCurmudgeonParty politics is interesting down here. ;-)
You've got that right. Maybe other states are like this, but it is really strange to me that NC consistently elects Democratic legislatures (except the last time), consistently elects Democratic governors, but consistently goes for Republican presidents. Obama won big in his election, but carried NC by the thinnest of margins. Before that, Jimmy Carter was the last President to carry NC.
Are you making a threat bpuli9999, that's serious
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 14:45 — Voice_of_Reason_The Secret Service will be at your door tonight if you don't clarify.
Quoting Jesse Helmes...
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 14:59 — bpuli9999is now a threat? To who?
Why don't you try sobering up before posting?
Just trying to do you a favor
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 16:44 — Voice_of_Reason_I know how the Secret Service operates, you weren't 100% clear in your post. I didn't really think you were threatening, however I didn't know Jessie Helms said those words. Normally you would put that in the body of a post when you quote somebody, I did see the quote marks but thought it could be intepreted as your statement. I'm not a Jessie Helms fan. FYI- I have heard of the Secret Service coming to interview people at their homes for similar posts.
BTW- Very sober, rarely drink more than a beer or two occasionally. Sorry to disappoint.
It's a pretty famous Jesse
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 03:29 — jeffrey1It's a pretty famous Jesse Holmes quote, and there was absolutely no chance that the SS would see it as anything else.
Exactly Jeannie!
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 13:36 — virginiadareWe've known that WCPSS has been a very good district, because we have worked as a community to keep the schools balanced for decades. Tata has a lot of damage control to do after groups like WakeCARES, WSCA, and Ron and the new board members have trashed the system so badly over the past 5 years, with never a good thing to say, and denounced the leaders who were rightfully proud of the national recognition we had received, saying it was mere spin. Jeannie is right that Clinton, Duncan, and Colbert have criticized what WILL happen IF we allow many more very high poverty, racially identifiable schools to be created, as the new majority was planning. Hopefully we will be able to avert that from happening now if we go with the Alves plan. Interesting too that Tata and the Broad Foundation definitely see WCPSS as an urban system (evidenced by the reading assignment given to the board members for the retreat) as so many here on the blog have disputed.
Have you really looked at
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 14:17 — jenmanHave you really looked at the Alves plan? This plan is not going to avoid high poverty schools since your choices are based on proximity. Seriously, look up some node numbers. Unless there are some details missing from the report, I truly don't believe that this plan is going to give diversity supporters what they want.
No, it won't give diversity
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 18:13 — virginiadareNo, it won't give diversity supporters everything they want. It is a compromise, and I think it shows that diversity supporters, like the Chamber and WEP, are willing to compromise. At least it recognizes that it is not a good thing to have too many underachieving students in one school, and has parameters to try to keep that from happening. It gives parents the stability and the proximity they want. Too bad many on the other side are not interested in compromise of any sort.
Just curious
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 14:32 — FSandYOUwho asked if the Chamber or WEP are willing to compromise? Compromise what exactly? Since when do they get a say in how our schools are run? I guess since they self-appointed themselves in charge of creating an assignment plan to meet their needs, they deserve a say?
Nice talking to ya'.
How well do you think it is
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 19:04 — jenmanHow well do you think it is going to prevent too many underachieving students in a school? Have you looked at the options for different areas of the county? I'm genuinely asking--not being sarcastic. Was it 5000 kids from SE Raleigh who are being bused for diversity? (I'm thinking that is the figure I've seen for SE Raleigh). Many of them are sent to schools that are no longer options for their nodes and they will all be going to school closer to home.
I wouldn't say that people on the 'other side' aren't willing to compromise. Don't mistake questioning the Alves model for not being willing to compromise.
I haven't looked at all the
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 10:05 — virginiadareI haven't looked at all the options for different areas of the county in detail, and am not absolutely sure how well it will work to prevent too many underachieving students in a school. However, I do think it has enough flexibility with "controlled" choice to assign students to one of their top few choices in a way that would at least prevent schools from having numbers of underachieving students above the upper limit of a broad range. I believe magnet schools can and will play a role in that effort. Your ideas about magnet schools not having a "base" would fit right in. There also seem to be mechanisms for creating "draws" for other schools that end up being under-chosen. Rather than trying to have each school share equally in the education of high needs students, the goal would be to prevent any school from having too many. Wouldn't that address your concerns about students being reassigned just to increase F&R numbers from say 4% to 10% at certain schools without really doing anything to decrease the very high levels at other schools? The stability piece of the plan, allowing all students to stay at the school they begin with unless they request a new school assignment, should also please parents who have been complaining about multiple reassignments. It just seems to me that it would provide a structure for everyone who has a stake in the success of the school system to get some of what they want in the best interest of the common good for the whole county, though obviously it would be impossible for this assignment plan, or any other, to give each and every parent access to their first choice.
I am not a big fan of
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 18:26 — woodstockI am not a big fan of compromise for compromise sake -- sometimes the other side is just plain wrong -- HOWEVER, I thought the general comments from the board was that they thought the Alves plan was a good starting point. So, how do you conclude that there is no room for compromise from that?
The Alves plan...
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 14:57 — bpuli9999is very close to JT's original "community zones" plans. And it will have the same results. In terms of creating high-poverty schools. Check for any node in downtown Raleigh.
The plan says about 85% will get their first choice (unlikely in certain densely populated neighborhoods). I think it assumes parents will select their nearest school as their first choice. If that does not happen - it will fail in that it will create greater discontent and drastically increase transportation costs.
The plan says about 85% will
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 15:25 — jenmanThe plan says about 85% will get their first choice (unlikely in certain densely populated neighborhoods). I think it assumes parents will select their nearest school as their first choice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was just thinking this exact same thing. I think it would be far more telling to know why 15% don't receive their first choice. Is it because they are in a high density area that just can't fit all the kids who have that choice as their closest school? Is it because they have lousy schools nearby and everybody is picking the only 'good' school on the list? There are still a lot of details that haven't been looked at with the Alves plan.
Among other things, I'd love to know how many kids live within the 1.5 mi zone of each school and how many have each school as their closest. Which schools won't be able to accommodate all of those kids? I imagine there will be some.
...
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 13:46 — Sideburns"We've known that WCPSS has been a very good district, because we have worked as a community to keep the schools balanced for decades."
So that's all it takes? Balance the schools to support the appearance of a "very good district"? How about you look at some data?
Evidently Tata believes
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 20:09 — virginiadareEvidently Tata believes WCPSS is a "great" school district that students should be proud of. Think he has looked at any data yet?
...
Fri, 02/25/2011 - 21:19 — SideburnsYou said WCPSS has been a good district because the community worked to keep schools balanced. My question is if that's all it takes for you to qualify it as "great". If so, all you have to do is bus more kids around to reach that utopian balance throughout the system and then sit back and relish in the greatness.
I did not qualify the system
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 09:28 — virginiadareI did not qualify the system as "great"; Tata did. Of course having balanced schools is not all it takes to build an excellent school system, but it is the first step to providing an environment in which all students can excel, by creating schools in which teachers want to teach and parents want to send their children. It is extremely difficult for very high poverty schools to provide such an environment, as evidenced by the failure rates of high poverty schools across the state and nation. Sometimes I think you are being deliberately obtuse.
...
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:48 — SideburnsYou must have really worked up a sweat deciding which poor kids to bus around year after year.
?
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:11 — virginiadare?
...
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:55 — Sideburns"... we have worked as a community to keep the schools balanced for decades."
As former BOE member Tom Oxholm recently said when speaking of busing for diversity...."Our assignment decision was never designed to help any particular student." He also said "....the move to socioeconomic diversity he helped implement in 2000 was done for financial reasons because they didn't have enough money for academic programs."
Your solution of busing poor kids was cheap and easy -- and ultimately, as Oxholm openly admitted, never designed to help any one. Rather than find ways that would actually educate children and provide academic solutions, they stuck them on a bus. And you paint that decision as "work". Hmpf.
Rather than find ways
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 17:05 — Solon77Rather than find ways that would actually educate children and provide academic solutions, they stuck them on a bus.
What I find interesting is that the achievement gap has existed all along and all of a sudden it becomes a point of interest as part of the neighborhood school movement. For as long as I have lived here, 16 years, the citizens of the county have not viewed education as a worthwhile investment. Failed bond issue in 1999, constant scrimping of the school budget, contentious 2005 bond issue, more attacking the school budget, cutting of base school programs to enhance appeal of magnets. Local support of the school budget is $800 per student less than Durham - this equates to $112m a year. The is local support - nothing to do with the state or the feds, it is a local choice. Some will argue it is not the right time to increase funding - to this I would ask, when is the right time ? During the boom of 2004-2007 there was no interest in providing additional funding for the schools, in fact the 2005 bond issue was highly contentious.
So what does matter and mobilize the parents ? - sadly it seems to be school calendar, early release Wednesdays, and proximity - none of these address funding or program equity.
Oh, no no.
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 03:53 — SDR256"What I find interesting is that the achievement gap has existed all along and all of a sudden it becomes a point of interest as part of the neighborhood school movement. For as long as I have lived here, 16 years, the citizens of the county have not viewed education as a worthwhile investment."
How has the achievement gap existed all along and only become apparent recently? Interesting question.
There was no interest in the achievement gap because the school system was healthy. Didn't you get that memo, comrad?
WCPSS has had a system the whole nation should aspire to, comrad. It was on a perfect track with busing, comrad. There was no achievement gap, comrad, there was busing. Do you argue with that? If so then you must be a neighborhood schools fanatic. And, you must be a racist resegregationist.
However, this "healthy school system" forgot the individual. Children have been doing miserably, if you were so radical as to look at them individually through EVAAS or other 'revolutionary' mechanisms. High achieving, low achieving, vulnerable and strong, our Wake County students have been gasping for air...... failing......but the healthy school system was politically fabulous! (dance, Billy, dance!)
The only reason the achievement gap has become an issue (ahem!) - so we can all see it and talk about it is because some private folks have thrown themselves out there very uncomfortably and shone a light on our children as individuals.
The system wants to label children as poor, rich, smart, dumb, white, or not, .... and so please give credit to the folks who rose up called bulls*t on this "beautiful, healthy schools" system.... because it was not doing right by our children, seeing them all as a conglomerate sum.
I believe that Solon meant
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 08:41 — virginiadareI believe that Solon meant that the achievement gap has not been of interest to most parents and voters, especially those who were unwilling to adequately fund our schools, until they could use it in their campaign to go to neighborhood schools. The achievement gap has been of concern to educators all over the country for decades. Leaders in WCPSS have had the goal of narrowing the achievement gap for as long as I can remember, with a special focus on that goal as a result of the 2007 curriculum audit. The reason we lost ground was the gross underfunding of the system since the '80's combined with the massive growth which caused instability. Maintaining balanced schools helped keep that gap from becoming even bigger than it would have been. Going to a system of neighborhood schools, resulting in the creation of very high poverty schools, will increase that gap if we are not able to flood those schools with additional funding, as CMS did. CMS was able to improve scores for some groups of students, but do you really think those gains will continue now that those funds have disappeared? WCPSS has been a model to schools all over the nation, even though it still had more work to do to decrease the achievement gap. I just don't understand how people can believe that any individual student can achieve in a school that is not healthy. Keeping healthy, balanced schools is obviously not the only solution, but is definitely the first step.
Looks like you strongly disagree with Tata that we have a "great" system. I wonder if he's as upset with all of you who have been trashing the system for years -- and still are --as he is with Clinton and Duncan and Colbert.
One more thing. You object to being called racist because you advocate neighborhood schools, but here you are, in a very deriding way, implying that Solon, and by association anyone who agrees with him or her, is Marxist or communist with your use of the word "comrad" (did you mean "comrade"?). I don't think that contributes to civil discourse, either.
It could be that you're right
Wed, 03/02/2011 - 03:49 — SDR256Maybe suburban parents weren't (aren't?) interested in the achievement gap. Maybe that's true. I don't know. All I know is that we were told that Wake County was erasing the achievement gap. We had a 'world class' school system and a nationally stellar system. I believed it, so I was - as many others - uninterested in the achievement gap. It didn't apply here in Wake County. It was being addressed. We had (have?) a Nationally Recognized School System. Why should I worry about the achievement gap? They were doing the best they possibly could. They were using innovative techniques (busing). There are so many other things that I have to worry about - my children, my job, my old parents who are getting sick.
And then I learned the truth.
Sure, I learned the truth because it came to my front door. I was anesthetized by the lovely propaganda like tens of thousands of other citizens into thinking the system was fabulous.
Because of the reassignment, we engaged. I saw the reassignment maps myself, achievement gap data myself and learned about the Effectiveness Index in action. Racist? This was the most blatantly and systematic racist program I'd ever encountered. I learned that the diversity system labeled children as more or less able to learn based on their economic level, which in every way was a mask for race. "ED" children (economically disadvantaged and minoritity) were 'problems' which needed to be 'mixed' into the 'better' schools. They were then bused more than any other group to achieve this false 'nationally recognized system' by focusing on schools rather than children. Ta-DA! Healthy SCHOOLS. And the 'diversity system' kept those labeled as less able to learn (even though they had top scores) out of challenging classes. Without those classes these children will have a difficult time, and likely never, get to certain professions. EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE SOME OF THE BEST SCORING STUDENTS. How the h#ll could anyone ignore this when slapped in the face with it? How could a system that didn't care about children and their actual achievement levels, only their social labels, ever address the achievement gap?
It made me da*ned mad when I learned about it. Madder than I had been about reassignments, for sure. We tried to shout it from the mountaintops, but it was an unpopular message. We were the mini mice. We were then conveniently labeled. Regardless, its unfair and (dare I say it?) unAmerican how this system has held certain children down with their oppressive benevolence (and, I suspect, greed for NCLB dollars) and shut them out of a challenging education.
So, I suspect that there may be many others who you frame as callously political and 'suburban parents uninterested in the achievement gap', but who, like myself slowly awakened to the fact that we'd been hoodwinked. Far worse, far far worse, we then realized - believed - that the children of Wake County, the most vulnerable, had been hoodwinked by this 'fabulous' diversity system.
Like it or not, for the citizenry of Wake County who voted for change..... reassignment led to an awakening about the system ~ led to learning about Effectiveness Index and the busing debacle ~ led to righteous indignation about the lies we'd been told about the achievement gap being addresssed. We saw instead that the achievement gap was being proliferated and encouraged. Our reaction was not politically motivated as much as you'd like to paint it that way. This is the true chain of events.
I was wondering how long until this "spin" would be tried
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:32 — WadingInMaintaining balanced schools helped keep that gap from becoming even bigger than it would have been.
As they say... "that dog don't hunt"
Ok let's try it
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:23 — Solon77Ok let's try it. Load up a school with high poverty students with no additional funding and see what happens.
How about we try this:
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:41 — CaryCurmudgeonHow about we try this: Shift the extra funding from the magnet program (which does nothing to help ED students) to one of the high-poverty schools we already have, and let's see what happens.
Sure
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:52 — Solon77Sure - give it a try. Perhaps in the next month, if not sooner, the charter cap will be lifted and the $2,500 private school tax credit will become available. In the meantime our local funding will still be $800 less per student than Durham.
" In the meantime our local
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 17:50 — woodstock" In the meantime our local funding will still be $800 less per student than Durham."
Thus proving that increased funding does not necessarily equal better schools.
Increased funding does not
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 18:47 — Solon77I agree it does not always. However, there is a point where fuunding does make a difference. Guilford, Orange County and Chapel Hill student performance exceeds and continues to improve over wcpss. These districts have local support per student higher than wcpss of $400, $1,200, and $2,400 respectively. School funding is a local issue.
In the case of Guilford
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 19:27 — CaryCurmudgeonIn the case of Guilford County, I agree with you. Their increased funding is targeted toward higher-poverty schools, and their "Mission Possible" program which pays teachers based on results. We'll be doing something similar with the four Rennaisance schools, I hope we achieve similar results. And I think you're right, funding for programs cannot be based on a prayer for state or Federal dollars, it needs to be local.
Sure - give it a try. I wish
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 12:37 — CaryCurmudgeonSure - give it a try.
I wish there were more people who thought that way.
You realize if they took
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 13:04 — magnetParentYou realize if they took away the magnet schools you would have even more (my guess 2-3 times more) high poverty schools in the school system that will need extra funding?
Yes, I realize that. But
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 16:04 — CaryCurmudgeonYes, I realize that. But I'd rather have more high-poverty schools that have funding focused on helping ED kids to realize their potential, rather than spending it on greenhouses and multiple foreign languages to enrich suburban white/Asian kids.
Some find it easy to dismiss magnet critics and being motivated by magnet envy. Many of us are just fine with the non-magnet programs our kids attend. Our problem is with the money being spent in the name of diversity that is doing nothing to help minority/ED children.
Extra funding comes from the federal government
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 15:48 — Voice_of_Reason_Not local government. If you changed the magnet program to make it less like a two school in one private school for some areas, you could still get federal magnet money. Open it up to a truly fair lottery like charter schools and the issue might even go away.
Magnet Funding
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 18:51 — Solon77The feds assist (not 100%) in the initial start up. After the 2-3 year start up period the local district must fund the program.
Oh I didn't know that
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 21:17 — Voice_of_Reason_I thought they keep helping out. It makes me angrier that this program exists in the form we use it (i.e. ITB private schools). The lottery must be fair, or we need to kill or highly modify the program to help low income children achieve.
ITB Private schools
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 22:50 — Solon77So here is one way to look at it. A 3,000 sq ft house ITB is $1m, so they pay $10k in property taxes. A 3,000 sq ft house elsewhere is $400,000 - property taxes are $4k. So ITB people are paying an additional $6k in taxes. The cost of the magnet program is maybe $300 extra per student - pretty good payback for the school system don't you think ?
Thanks for your honesty
Mon, 02/28/2011 - 08:19 — Voice_of_Reason_At least you let your real views out. So if I pay $1M for an 8,000 sq ft house in the burbs, I should get a lesser school because I didn't buy a smaller house in Old Raleigh even though I pay the same taxes...get it. So schools inflate your property values...get it. So a poorer performing burb school deflating property values there is OK with you...get it. BTW - Last time I looked it was not the intention of magnet schools to prop up property values, could you show me that in federal guidelines? Heck, if that were true we could do that all over the place. We could put 1st class magnet schools in areas the people can afford the higher property taxes, kinda like a stealth bond issue benefiting the wealthiest...got it.
What ever happened to equity
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 23:41 — CaryCurmudgeonWhat ever happened to equity in school opportunities? You're using the exact same criticism leveled against "latte-sipping" suburbanites to justify wealthy ITB parents getting private school-class education on the public dime?
...
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 23:06 — SideburnsSo, because you can afford to live in the $1M ITB home (and therefore pay more property tax), you deserve a magnet seat? OMG.
...
Sat, 02/26/2011 - 18:22 — SideburnsIt hasn't been all of a sudden. Parents were fed the line that their sacrifices (forced calendars, reassignment, not being able to attend a proximate school, etc) were for the betterment of all children. We finally understood that this wasn't true. Children weren't performing better when they were bused across the county. Much of the reassignment was caused by the diversity policy. The conversions of many schools to MYR was really all about diversity needs -- not just capacity. You can only lie so long before you are found out.
I would much rather better understand the funding currently in WCPSS and how it is used/misused before we demand more.
Understand the funding currently
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:39 — Solon77I would much rather better understand the funding currently in WCPSS and how it is used/misused before we demand more.
And just what would satisfy you and the others that are so against properly funding our schools ? Civitas has declared our school system efficient. Per pupil funding - we are one of the lowest in the state. It is not for lack of affordability as we rank 4th in the state for per capita income and far down the list in local support. I recently read a report that shows wcpss is one of the most efficient in terms of cost per HS graduate. Is your real issue the magnet inequity ? If so pull the purported $12m out of the magnets and redistribute to all of the schools - in the grand scheme of things it gets the base schools nothing - basically 2 teachers each. $12m / 160 schools
In the meantime, I guess you are ok with class sizes reaching almost 40 students per class.
...
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 13:45 — Sideburns"And just what would satisfy you and the others that are so against properly funding our schools ?"
I never said I am against funding our schools (I have no idea who the "others" are or what "they" think).
I actually had high hopes for the Democratic County Commission. With all the barking Norwalk does about school funding, you would have thought it would have been at the top of his to-do list. Sadly, he has proven to be all bark and no bite.
I dislike the magnet system. It frustrates me. I have never, however, said that magnet funding should be redistributed to all of the schools. I don't think I've ever even said the magnet system should be dismantled -- just reviewed, revised, redefined maybe.
I'm not sure why you leapt to class sizes?
Class size
Sun, 02/27/2011 - 19:26 — Solon77Class size is an obvious indicator of financial stress of the district - and for as long as you have been involved in schools your answer to the financial aspect is
I would much rather better understand the funding currently in WCPSS and how it is used/misused before we demand more.
So where have you and your organization advocated for increased funding to support neighborhood schools, calendar choice and program equity ?