The last installment was the Q&A, or perhaps more accurately the "make a statement and eventually ask a question time."
It's going to be hard to hear but the first question was from Stan Norwalk, who attended Thursday's conference with fellow Commissioner Harold Webb. Norwalk asked if the speakers had factored school funding into their work.
Norwalk cited his usual mix of data on how school funding in Wake is lower than in much of the state.
It was during this question that Richard Kahlenberg, senior fellow at the Century Foundation, took a sharp shot at Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools. He noted how CMS has increased spending on high-poverty schools since walking away from assigning students for diversity.
“Charlotte is trying to spend its way into making separate but equal work,” Kahlenberg said.
For those who may not grasp that allusion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the concept of "separate but equal" was unconstitutional when it shot down racially segregated schools in its landmark 1954 Brown V. Board of Education decision.
Comments
In case you missed this in the paper today
Sun, 04/05/2009 - 08:40 — user1234http://www.burningcoal.org/
In the summer of 1960 an event took place in the auditorium of the old Murphey Elementary School.
It was an event that would impact the growing Civil Rights Movement and forever change the City of Raleigh. Forty-nine years after that historic moment, Burning Coal will present a play derived from Interviews with the people who lived to tell the tale.
Forty-nine years after that historic moment,
Mon, 04/06/2009 - 07:22 — g88ky07we still have idiots like Stan Norwalk and Harold Webb who think it's STILL 1960 and apparently didn't get the memo that we're NOT!
Stan Norwalk
and
Harold Webb,
doing their best to bring the "Civil Rights Movement" back to life in Wake County in 2009 one stupid comment and one like minded school board candidate at a time!
Not a sacrifice
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 18:18 — SDR256I don't understand why there is such a dearth of logic and lack of creativity in the entrenched status quo WCPSS advocates. It does not necessarily translate that serving LI children BETTER will break the bank. It does not equate that because we criticize Wake that we (presto, bingo!) we automatically want Charlotte's model. How about something NEW?
Lets look at KIPP schools. What they do is provide a specifically focused program for kids who are not yet at their tipping point in learning. These are programs that include parents who may not have a 'culture of learning'. They are specialized services, with soft techniques proven to work in some of the toughest environments - LA and DC - and they cost about $7200 per child. Huge, huge results. These low income schools blow our 40% F&R schools out of the water in acheivement.
Surprise! Not an either/or solution, but an AND/AND solution that works.
Segregation was when any child of color, rich poor or middle class could not attend certain schools. They were legally ostracized. That was terrible and wrong. But it is no longer the case. No one is turned away from a school because of their color. No one is turned away from a school because of their income. Everyone can work toward the American dream. And KIPP schools (or other models) would enable many more currently challenged kids and families to grab the brass ring on their own.
Most of you know that the enjoyment of having something handed to you pales in comparison to sheer joy and satisfaction of earning it on your own. This is what makes for strong citizens. I find the administrations' assumption that low income kids 'can't do it' and that low income schools would automatically fail - paternalistic, arrogant and revolting. Are they Caesars, giving the thumbs up/thumbs down now? Let's prove them wrong. I think there are talented, intelligent, effervescent, creative, wonderful children waiting to be given a chance. Why do they have to be shown by their school system that they cannot get what they need from their own neighborhood? Shipping them away teaches social fragmentation, shame of place and cultural bereavement. Let's look for an And/And solution for them.
Let's be honest about the problem and deal with it head on. All this mudslinging doesn't help the children.
And dumping them on the steps of a school far from home, far from friends, where they do not feel a sense of community, where it feels strange is just a cheap shot. Children are not little sacks of potatoes. Anyone who has been a child with an ounce of sensitivity knows what I'm talking about. All children deserve a haven of excellence that provides a warm, stable network of supportive adults within a reasonable distance to their home.
Can't we stop with the sorry old solutions that don't work and find new, creative ones? Please? They are out there.
Come to the next WSCA meeting in Garner on April 16 to hear a few possibilities. At least its a start.
One thing I noticed
Mon, 04/06/2009 - 08:52 — gunfamwhen looking at the KIPP website is how they bring ALL familes into the picture. That's been a missing link in many models. Whether you bus or not (ie Charlotte vs Wake) if these kids (any kids) don't have support from their family they can only go so far. Its important to hear how vital education is at home, as well as at school.
New creative ideas - that's definately what is needed!
Don't you know.....
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 23:06 — WuptdoBob -- don't you know? Norwalk believe every homeowner in Wake County has a magic money tree in their backyard and raising taxes in hard times is not a problem.
"Separate but equal"
Fri, 04/03/2009 - 17:45 — Bob_SconceThat was a reference to the policy of forced segregation, *not* to the cumulative effect of the decisions people make about where to live. One of the reasons for the original claim that separate but equal cannot work was that the white majority would continually short-change the all-black schools. Applying that phrase to Charlotte is more propaganda than reality.
Stan Norwalk is now in the ideal position to remedy his issues with school funding in Wake County. We'll see how well that pans out for him.
"One of the reasons for the
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 09:49 — chaboard"One of the reasons for the original claim that separate but equal
cannot work was that the white majority would continually short-change
the all-black schools."
And the same principle applies today. Over time, and with each budget shortfall, the middle-class suburban voters in Mecklenburg County will ask why their kids are gettig less money than the inner-city Charlotte kids (whose parents don't vote in the same numbers and so will evetually be ignored). Eventually the result will be that they don't.
Separate but equal cannot work. Then OR now.
But you miss the point
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 19:47 — Voice_of_Reason_The socio-economic busing is not working either. The graduation rate is not increasing. The performance gap is not shrinking. If it was I would agree with the whole program. The only ones winning is the school system because they can target lower performing nodes (note I am not grouping all F&Rs) for busing and majically make scores in Title I schools look better. By keeping the other schools below 40% F&R they can decrease the performance of those schools without penalty. Its a money thing. At Elementary School level it actually lowers the performance of the smarter children. The biggest problem are the ESL students, not the nglish speakers since they tend to require more time of the teachers.
The problem is not money either. One school district, the famous Kansas City Experiment was given unlimited money and the schools still couldn't produce. See:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
Draw your own conclusions, but explain one good reason why any class should have to shoulder any pain for programs that don't produce results. Socio-Economic diversity busing might make some feel good, but it's not the answer.
Pfft...
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 18:18 — Bob_SconceFirst, even ignoring CMS' assignment policies, WCPSS' policies are FAILING the F&R students they purportedly help. F&R students actually do slightly better in WCPSS schools with high F&R ratios than they do in WCPSS schools with low F&R ratios. On a number of occasions, the district has moved F&R kids from a school which serves them relatively well to a school that will serve them worse. For example, in the most recent reassignment round, kids from Fox Rd (where ~50% of F&R students pass their EOGs) were reassigned to Wakefield (where ~33% do). No surprise -- 5 hours on a school bus every week is 5 hours less time available for homework.
Second, the "separate but equal" idea was a thin veil used to justify
forced racial segregation. No district, CMS included, has done that for decades.
Given that the funding from
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:24 — SouthEastWakeMomGiven that the funding from the county and state follows the student - how can you possibly shortchange any school?
Except Title I Schools
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:57 — Voice_of_Reason_The NCLB Act specifies that Title I schools get extra money from the Federal Government. However the pool of money is fixed by the US Census poverty numbers. More Title I schools = less money per school. But still, high F&R schools get more to work with, the F&R students that are manditorily bused away get shortchanged.
Actually high poverty "inner city" schools would be seperate but better funding wise.
I knew the Title I funding
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 16:33 — SouthEastWakeMomI knew the Title I funding here was funky - but couldn't recall the exact details. Thanks for posting them.
It's only funky because of socio-economic busing & size
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 19:35 — Voice_of_Reason_The NCLB law and the way Title I is uniform nationwide and based of US Census poverty rate (lower end of F&R) of the LEA [Local Educational Authority]. Since our LEA is all of Wake County the money is spread out, but our county is the second largest recipients in the state [Char-Meck #1]. The state gets the money and doles it out to the LEAs minus admin costs. The LEAs must holdback some of the money for penalties such as voluntary busing and private tutoring if schools fail to meet AYP in a subject area for multiple years. Wake county this year has said they won't do voluntary busing anymore in violation of federal law because they claim they can't do it. They also said they will use part of the money for teacher bonuses.
I'm curious how you happen
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 12:52 — sstarksI'm curious how you happen to "know" that suburban voters will want to shortchange inner city schools. Hasn't happened yet, although the News Observers editors very nastily predicted back in 2002 that poor children would soon be suffering once CMS changed assignment policies. Every year both the NO and the Charlotte Observer trot out the worry that soon those selfish suburban voters will want to leave the inner city behind. Only problem with that argument is that it hasn't happened--inner city schools continue to have higher funding, building programs support both the inner and suburban schools, and, of course, there's the little item about CMS's high poverty scores versus Wakes.
History
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 14:58 — chaboardThe idea that majorities when asked to pay extra for services to minorities will eventually use theor power to stop it is not exactly a controversial proposition. It's demonstraed by not only by 50-60 years of experience with urban/suburban school systems, but also by such varied examples as the push for welfare reform in the 90's and even by the stated reason behind FDR's insistence way back in the 30's that Social SEcurity benefits be a general entitlement rather than a means-tested entitlement hat the well-off would eventually stop paying to the poor.
One could even argue that you are seeing a non-financial aspect of the same principle in the current furor over school board policies HERE. The diversity policy is a policy that intentionally requires sacrifices from better off families to benefit poorer ones...and it no accident that the most vocal opposition to the diversity policy is coming from the suburban areas being asked to bear the sacrifice. Are we supposed to believe the same principle won't hold if it is money they are being asked to sacrifice instead? I'm not buying it. History tells us otherwise...resoundingly. As for Charlotte....their program is in its infancy. In time the pressure will mount.
Requires sacrifices from better off families
Mon, 04/06/2009 - 10:02 — Falc"The diversity policy is a policy that intentionally requires sacrifices from better off families to benefit poorer ones"
Some better off nodes are assigned to magnets, some better off nodes have basically no chance at a magnet. Some ED kids are able to attend magnets and others are assigned to failing MYR Title 1 schools, with their opt out being an hour long bus ride to an already 30+% LI non-magnet school this year and next year they are on to another school. Last year ESL kids were reassigned out of Combs magnet. Under the current diversity policy and implementation, some "better off" families are sacrificed, some are benefited and some ED families are sacrificed, some are benefited.
If you think the only ones being sacrificed are those who are "better off", please take a closer look at the details. I used to think the diversity policy was all about helping ED students, until I started finding out the details.
Having grown up an AG student in good schools with 40-70% ED, I find the current approach here lacking and arguments that the diversity policy is the only way and let's not even study it or consider other options narrow-minded. I would have expected better out of a highly educated area with above average median income and below average F&R rates. Why are people applauding a district with below average F&R rates whose F&R population is underperforming districts with higher F&R rates and holding it up a model? This makes no sense to me. If this district had above average F&R rates and the F&R segment was performing at or above state average then it would be something to applaud. Here mediocrity is not only tolerated, it's celebrated.
Based on my own experiences, I know 1) there are other options and 2) some of the diversity policy supporters' theories are naive. If we really want to turn things around for some of these kids, it's going to take a whole lot more than dropping them off at yet another school far from home.
Wealthier do sacrifice more
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 20:15 — Voice_of_Reason_You seem, like most people to group all non-F&R families in the same category of the ultra-rich. Many middle class families struggle too and pay property taxes and state income taxes to help the schools. The wealthier pay even more. And the ultra-wealthy pay and generally don't even use the system, in essence they are taxed again to pay for private education which relieve the burden on public schools.
The real risk is to lower the performance of the middle class schools so they are balking at what they pay. That is part of what we are seeing today in Wake County + the turmoil reassignments due to socio economic balancing. Of course with a topping of MYR, but that's a different issue.
If you want to use the social security model, lets examine that. The more you put in the more you get out, money isn't paid equally. Yes the rich and younger workers contribute to the poor's share.
Title I funds for poverty date from LBJ administration
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 19:54 — Eric_BThe extra Title I funds that are provided for high poverty areas are the result of legislation that was put in place 40 years ago in the LBJ administration. I don't see any concerted effort by the middle class to do away with this program. In fact, No Child Left Behind gives families stuck in failing schools school choice with transportation provided by the school district.
What is your position when
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 16:40 — DrActualFactualWhat is your position when it is not money that is sacrificed? Does it strengthen or undermine support for the diversity policy to separate siblings from the same family into different schools? Money is not the only sacrifice they ask of parents. The intentional sacrifice is ok when the participant is a voluntary subject. People that endure oppressive policies for too long eventually revolt--history teaches us that as well.
I'm Not Saying that
Sat, 04/04/2009 - 17:32 — chaboard...any specific sacrifices are (or are not) ok to ask a family to make. I'm just saying that's it basic human and political nature that when a majority is asked to sacrifice for the minority they will at some point use what power they have to resist. And then the minority will lose.
(Altough I should probably be talking about power and influence rather than majority/minority)