How much weight should be given to the disapproval coming from the business community over the Wake County school board's approval of the student assignment directive?
As noted in today's article, the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce and the Wake Education Partnership both expressed disappointment Wednesday over the vote. During the board discussion, the Republican board members had pointed to the support both groups had provided to the choice plan, including paying to bring Michael Alves to Raleigh.
"I’m just suggesting that the option of tabling it for 60 days to allow the staff to show us potential impact, to allow the community to have greater conversation in depth on that impact would be reasonable considering the amount of turmoil we as a community have gone through over the last couple of years, the amount of investment the staff and the system has already made both financially and with time, the amount of investment the community has made with the hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Chamber of Commerce and the Wake Ed Partnership and other community partners," said GOP board member John Tedesco. "To move in this direction asking for 60 days I think is very reasonable."
Fellow GOP board member Deborah Prickett said that the Chamber and WEP were "just invaluable to us" in developing the choice plan.
"Have either the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce or Wake Ed Partnership made a statement about the proposal?" Prickett said. "And the answer is yes. I looked in my email today and I had an email statement from Harvey Schmitt today with the Greater Raleigh Chamber and it was excellent, well worth reading.
We’ve also been given some other information from the Wake Ed Partnership that Ms. Goldman mentioned earlier today that we certainly need to consider. So the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce has been supportive of this plan and they actually paid for some of the Alves charges. And remember along with the Alves plan we have purchased software too that we have set up to go along with this plan.”
Prickett also singled out comments from Bob Sconce and JanisTango criticizing the directive on the WakeEd blog during her remarks.
After the lengthy recess that led to the final version of the directive, Democratic board member Susan Evans had her response.
"While I acknowledge that, first of all, the Raleigh Chamber and the Wake Ed Partnership are valuable partners in our community, and I respect the input of all citizens, at these board meetings on the blogs, wherever they choose to give their input, I just wanted to remind Ms. Prickett and the board that we are the elected officials charged with making these important decisions on behalf of the school system and while I welcome that input, we have to be mindful of that," Evans said.
It's an interesting bit of role reversal here considering how the Republican board members weren't big fans of the Chamber or the WEP when they felt they were opposing their efforts to end the diversity policy. But things changed after they backed the choice plan.
On the flip side, supporters of the diversity policy became less than thrilled with both groups when they backed the choice plan.
On Wednesday, Democratic board vice chairman Keith Sutton said that the Chamber and the WEP have misconceptions about what the board majority intends to do. Sutton said they’re trying to develop a new plan that has the best elements of the old plan and the current choice plan.
“It’s not an effort to go back to the old plan, “ Sutton said. “It’s not the intent.”
Sutton said he's envisioning a base plan that might incorporate choice elements. Sutton said he doesn't see how a base plan, as stated by the Chamber email, will necessarily result in mass reassignment.
Sutton said he hoped both the Chamber and the WEP will continue to work with the district in developing the revised plan.
In their statement, the WEP said "we will continue to work with the district to improve public education."
In Schmitt's Wednesday email, he said the Chamber will "remain engaged in this discussion and seeking the best solution for our community going forward."
Comments
Are all the people talking about privacy....
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 15:32 — bpuli9999and misuse of information the same folks who don't care about the DOT taking pictures of you going up and down I540? Local and state governments giving away all sorts private information - from voting records, to age and to how much your car/house is worth? Your date of birth, social security number, medical records and everything else is available to anyone with $9.95 and in a lot of cases for free (if you know where to search). The federal government is wiretapping all your phone calls and reading all your email.
And you are worried about what the school system will do with your education and demographic information? Now that's funny in a sad sort of way. Be outraged about the right things.
Get real! This is about assignment! And outrage is merited!
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 18:29 — raleighlauraDo you want Wake to demand that info and use it to decide where children are eligible to go to school? That is a whole 'nother ball o'wax from traffic cams and public record requests.
Yes, but that information
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 15:58 — jenmanYes, but that information does not determine the job I am able to get, the neighborhood I am able to buy a house in, the church I am able to attend, the college I am able to attend, the stores I am allowed to shop at, the parks I am allowed to go to, etc.
There is a huge difference between NCDOT snapping a pic of my license plate on a toll road and WCPSS using my income or education level to determine where my kids go to school.
No different than what's in
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 22:04 — bouncing_rockNo different than what's in vogue. Education > better income > more wealth > better house > better address > better school. Degrees or addresses, take your pick... they still want to use your personal information for assignment.
"There is a huge difference
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 16:20 — woodstock"There is a huge difference between NCDOT snapping a pic of my license plate on a toll road and WCPSS using my income or education level to determine where my kids go to school."
I disagree. There isn't much of a difference at all. They are both wrong.
Agree to disagree. I find
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 17:03 — jenmanAgree to disagree. I find one much more damaging than the other.
Conceptually, it is the same slippery slope...
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 19:59 — woodstockConceptually, it is the same slippery slope... with one perhaps being in a slightly faster lane.
For me, the point is that
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 15:39 — shearertwFor me, the point is that the school system is far too stupid to figure out what to do with that information so I am scared of what moronic plan that will devise with it. I'd rather them not have it so they can't do any more stupid things with it. In this case, the school system is better off with less data...
No worries. We can fix
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 22:06 — bouncing_rockNo worries. We can fix stupid with Alves' smart programs.
Clearly, some levels of
Mon, 06/25/2012 - 08:11 — shearertwClearly, some levels of "stupid" cannot be fixed.
simple question; do you
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 15:35 — AngelaWsimple question; do you currently have children in WCPSS?
Can the Board require parental data for assignment?
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 22:30 — raleighlauraI don't think parents ought to have to disclose income, educational data, or other information. Is it legal for the board to ask this? Must parents answer? Does it become public record? What happens if a family refuses, are options limited for that child?
Maybe I'm being paranoid, but this seems very big brother to me.
From the directive:
"In addition, the Board will revisit Policy 6200 to develop appropriate socio-economic factors to consider in the assignment process. These may include the use of census data, and/or individual data provided by parents such as income, educational attainment, or other information."
how about...can the board
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 22:11 — spiffy1how about...can the board direct staff to develop a plan that "will" contain various things that violate the current--policy 6200 without a two-thirds vote?
One would think not...however, for some reason Ann Majestic said it was okay...but if you read the Board's policy---it is NOT.
Bit scary...
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:31 — Bob_SconceIf Joe Bob knows how the district is going to use the data he reports, he can report whatever the heck he wants. Will saying he's below the poverty line and never graduated from high school mean that his kids have a better chance of getting into the local school? Guess what -- his salary just dropped 80% and Joe Bob's suddenly become an 8th grade drop-out.
That could happen.
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:42 — raleighlauraI'd rather not disclose than lie, especially if they don't have the right to compel the information. Who would know the legal question's answer?
Agree...
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 07:35 — Bob_SconceBut, there are plenty of folks out there who won't be quite as honest.
There was an article several
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:39 — jenmanThere was an article several years ago that mentioned a community activist in SE Raleigh who told parents not to apply for free/reduced lunch because it would result in their kids being assigned far from home.
I fear they will start doing
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:41 — spiffy1I fear they will start doing the opposite too...if you make what they deem is "too" much...bus you out to bus those with the lower income in...
Don't see a reason why most
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 22:46 — bouncing_rockDon't see a reason why most parents would hesitate to provide educational attainment information. Between data mining companies and social media sites, most information is public anyway.
And we shouldn't pay data mining companies, either.
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 22:59 — raleighlauraMaybe we should just cut to the chase and get the parent's political affiliation for assignment decisions. Might make the magnet choice period move faster.
To me, it's Intrusive.
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 22:56 — raleighlauraWhy do they need to know? Is there data that shows my degree means my kid should go to a certain school, or be denied entrance to another? How will they use my income level to ration resources for my child?
It's beyond intrusive
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:31 — FSandYOUand isn't going to happen because lawsuits will fly so fast ole Jim & Sue won't be able to keep up.
How much money a parent makes, what grade level they reached or what hair style they wear has nothing to do with where/when/how a child is educated. If it takes court action to stop Jim Martin and Susan Evans then so-be-it!
It won't be the first time will it!!
Why not? Not all kids
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:10 — bouncing_rockWhy not? Not all kids benefit from the same education. Maybe this can be one step in exploring new paradigms in public education. Besides, why is assignment based on wealth okay and not assignment based on degrees? Maybe it can be deemed intrusive but, seriously, even a privacy freak like me realizes privacy is an illusion in our times. So if the mom-n-pop shop down the road is sending me targeted messages, why not use data for the public good?
that ship has sailed
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 12:07 — snordoneyou just chose not to listen or look at the data. In Wake and in the rest of the country a child's demographic profile does not determine their academic achievement. The only factors that matters are the effectiveness of the teacher at the front of the room and the resources she has available to facilitate learning.
Demographic data will do nothing but continue to stereotype minorities and ED children as being incapable of learning.
We do know that there are more low performing children in the ED group than the NED group, and so the only assumption that can be made is for resources. The more ED kids the more likely it is that we will need more resources in a school. Once we have data on those individual children (i.e. after they walk in the door and are assessed) we can then target the resources based on need (literacy, etc...) to the individuals who need it. Not a demographic group, but the individuals. And simultaneously we need to give those children who need enrichment, again, irrespective of demographic group, more enrichment. We also know that ED child are less likely to have exposure to enriching activities at home. So we should know the schools with higher ED populations need more field trips, more clubs, more opportunity. NOT less.
Should we attempt to use median housing prices in a node/area to achieve balance in a school when possible? Yes. For the purpose of resources ONLY. ED children do not make a school unhealthy; fixing a school is only possible when the adults in the room assume responsibility for educating all children. We can't take care of kids when we outstrip need with resources. But we can't continue to do damage to children because of their color or income, we can't continue to stereotype children and treat them as if they are useless and a threat to the stability of a school.
The mindset of your crowd has prevented progress and done damage to thousands of children in Wake. I know you don't get it, but it has set us back for years and prevented us from educating all children.
Unfortunately, you got on a
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 22:19 — bouncing_rockUnfortunately, you got on a soapbox for something I agree with. I was talking about how different kids have different educational needs. Not about race being a determining factor in academic achievement.
I live on this soapbox
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 16:37 — snordonebecause I have seen just how much damage we have done to children over the last 10 years. The problem is that the data do not mesh well with our ideology about demographic balancing - supposed to be good but in reality was really, really harmful. We created a system that stereotyped children based on race and income.
Did you see the recent article about racial profiling and police stops? I think it was on WRAL. Of course everyone will be horrified that a study showed that Blacks are twice as likely to be stopped and arrested than whites. But yet we do it in our public schools and it is OK? And we want to reintroduce this back into our assignment policy? It is a very slippery slope my friend.
In the magnet assessment they found Hunter has the largest gap of the magnet elementary schools. That school is crazy with the stereotyping. Someone in intervention services told me they put all their ED kids into an afterschool program that was for remediation, not looking to see if the kids were working at grade level or above grade level or actually needed remediation. Wonder why there is a gap?
We need to look at one thing only - academic achievement data at the individual child level. And we can plan for resources using median housing costs. Nothing more.
But weren't you saying that
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 11:50 — jenmanBut weren't you saying that using the parent provided info such as income or their own education levels would be good for assignment purposes because not all kids need the same type of education?
That's where we are saying that just because somebody's parents are blue collar and trades workers who didn't go to college doesn't mean that their kids need anything different than those whose parents went to college and work white collar jobs. There will be individual students within those groups who need different things from their education, but you can't judge those groups as a whole.
well said. how can i super
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 12:52 — JSBinNCwell said. how can i super like this post!
"Not all kids benefit from
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 12:06 — jenman"Not all kids benefit from the same education."
I absolutely agree with this statement, but it has nothing to do with a parent's income, SES status, level of education or anything else. It has to do with each child's needs and interests.
How is that possible?
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 22:25 — bouncing_rockHow is that possible? Imagine teaching two kids who show up at school... one kid watched TV the night before while the parents worked a second job. And the other kid's parents sat down with her, got the homework completed, and gave her extra stuff. Given this, I wouldn't go on to say there is no correlation.
Which kid is which?
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 00:54 — nmoskalI can't tell. How do your scenerios relate to income or education level?
There are lot of higher-income families that are higher-income because both parents have professional jobs, which can often be demanding with significant OT, and therefore they don't provide much homework help or the kids watch TV while the parents work on what they brought home from the office. There are a number of lower income families that are lower income because only one parent works outside the home. So, which kid is which?
The next conundrum would be
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 07:07 — bouncing_rockThe next conundrum would be to evaluate kid A vs. B based on the educational value of the TV program they saw the night before.
You are talking of the exceptions. I don't know if we have the capability to drill down to that level yet. Before we go down farther down this path, note that I prefer kids be evaluated on their own merit than on parental and societal factors.
Not exceptions - people who don't fit the stereotype
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 15:03 — nmoskalPick any stereotype about any group - I would venture that most in the group do not fit the stereotype or that just as many outside the group do the same thing. I don't think that makes them "an exception". I've known many people all over the socioeconomic spectrum that do not fit into the typical stereotypes of their income level. In your world is every non-dumb blonde, every white person who can dance or is good at basketball and every non-angry black woman an exception?
well...
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 14:51 — localyankYes and no. You certainly don't want to pigeonhole a kid who steps in the door of a classroom because of his/her status as ED, wealthy, black. white, etc. My father, for example, was extreme ED growing up and faced all sorts of prejudices because of it, but he went to college and eventially earned a PhD. But if you look at the school report cards that are on-line at wcpss.net, the ED kids as a group are already well behind the other kids in terms of test scores by the 3rd grade. So the issue, as you allude to, is how to treat an individual kid's learning needs in the classroom, but at the same time allocate resources according to what the groups of kids attending a particular school are likely to need.
I agree with what lferreri
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 11:42 — jenmanI agree with what lferreri responded with. Yes, you can look at the demographics of a school community and see that maybe one school might need more support for basic needs at home such as food and clothing. Or that more kids at one school need help learning English. But those don't have anything to do with the individual child's ability to learn.
I'm also of the opinion that 'extras' like art, music, theater, dance, science electives, athletics, etc are just as valuable for low income and/or academically struggling kids as they are for high achievers.
Your comment
Sun, 06/24/2012 - 10:13 — lferreriYour comment about kids needing to learn English got me to thinking about the parallels between that situation and others. The passing rate for Hispanics in reading at WCPSS last year was 59%. I think it's fair to say that some portion of the 41% who failed did so because they don't speak English well. But it doesn't make sense to assume that all Hispanics need help learning to speak English. (After all, 59% passed the reading test. I've had many Hispanics students whose English skills were better than non-Hispanic students.) Conversely, there are probably many non-Hispanics who do not speak English.
The same situation could be said to exist for any other group that does not fare as well on the EOGs. A bigger percentage of that group (ED students, minority students, special education students, etc.) may need help in reading, math, etc. But that doesn't mean that everyone in the group needs extra help. It also doesn't mean that there aren't students who need help who don't belong to that group. Putting all ED students into remedial classes, whether they need them or not, is like putting English-speaking Hispanic students into classes to help them learn English. It makes no sense.
My point is that making assumptions based on overall statistics for a group is harmful. We know which students struggle with English and which schools they attend. Those should be the students (and schools) that get extra help. The same can be said for math, reading and other subjects.
I agree with you about art, music, dance, etc.
?
Sun, 06/24/2012 - 12:00 — Bob_SconceWith regard to your second paragraph, something interesting came to light when the original SAS report came up before the '09 election: the school district's "Effectiveness Index" was systematically placing ED students into remedial math classes, even when they were performing at or above grade level. The EI predicted, basically, "Oh, you're poor, so you're going to do poorly in math, so we're going to place you in remedial math." That sort of progressive logic heakens back to the worst of the original progressive movement -- eugenics.
Incidentally, I doubt that there are 'many non-Hispanics who do not speak English.' How did these non-Hispanic non-English-speakers get to the US? Not having a common border between the US and your country makes immigrating (legal or illegal) much more difficult. There are likely some, but I doubt there are many.
Actually there are many non-Hispanic immigrants
Sun, 06/24/2012 - 13:27 — nmoskalI went to a presentation last year given by CIS and the speaker noted that the second fastest growing language after Spanish here is Arabic. There was recently a news article that in the US, Asian immigration just overtook Hispanic immigration as fastest growing. I believe Fox Rd ES has students that speak something like 34 different languages, including some that most people here have never even heard of before.
BTW - because people tend to get confused on this, per US Census - (“White” refers to a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicated their race(s) as “White” or reported entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan, or Caucasian.)
So, just because a kid is "white" doesn't mean they are not LEP, especially given Arabic is the second fastest growing language here. At my kids non-magnet school, we have a mix of kids from all over that are first or second generation (Africa, Middle-East, Asia, Europe and Central and South America) and their and their parents' English skills are a mixed-bag - from each source area some have a pretty good command of English and some not so much. It's made setting up playdates for my kids interesting at times as there are both language and cultural knowledge gaps going both ways :-)
My understanding
Sun, 06/24/2012 - 12:50 — lferreriStaff told us at one of our ED Task Force subcommitte meetings that there are a substantial number of both Asian and African immigrants in our schools. I guess it depends on what you mean by "many". I don't remember them giving us a number. I'm sure that Spanish-speaking immigrants are the vast majority, but I don't see any reason to assume that all Hispanics don't speak English nor to assume that there aren't non-English speaking immigrants who speak another language. The latter need help learning English and the former do not. So resources should be allocated on the basis of the number of students who don't speak English not on the number of Hispanic students.
You are right about the Effectiveness Index making assumptions although I don't think that was the reason for placement in remedial classes. There are a number of E&R studies of programs like Hodge Road tutoring and the Academy of Reading that show that students who don't need remediation are being placed in remedial programs. It seems to be based more on stereotypes of ED or minority students than on the EI. Still I think the EI assumptions contributed to the stereotypes.
Allocating resources
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 15:04 — lferreriIt seems to me that it makes the most sense to allocate resources based on actual needs rather than membership in a particular group. For instance, we are able to determine which children are behind on the basis of test scores in 3rd grade. Wouldn't it make the most sense to provide extra support to those students regardless of which group they belong to? As for lower grades, I'm sure there must be some way to determine which children need some extra help other than basing it on their parents' income or education level or on demographics like race or ethnicity. E&R research reports on a number of remedial programs have shown that students who don't need remediation are frequently placed in the programs anyway and, likely, others who need help don't get it. I suspect that this happens because of assumptions based on irrelevant criteria. Since we have information about actual achievement, it seems sensible to use it. Of course, we also have to be careful that the resources are used for effective programs.
OK
Tue, 06/26/2012 - 12:18 — localyankI understand your points and they are well taken. A student is not a statistic and shouldn't be treated that way. But....the examples that you and others cite, "...a number of remedial programs have .... students who don't need remediation... frequently placed in programs anyway...." are really about educators, adminstrators, and politicians being too lazy, ignorant about statistics, too overburdened, or having another agenda to use statistical data in a meaningful way. Detailed statistical data is used effectly everywhere (internet search engines, military logistics, etc), and there is no doubt it can be used here to optimize limited resources to raise the achievement level of as many kids as possible. It's not about using statistical data regarding student achievement, it's about using that data correctly and without other bias.
I'm not sure
Tue, 06/26/2012 - 12:52 — lferreriI'm not sure I get your point. I don't know why you are saying, "It's not about using statistical data regarding student achievement...". I agree that, for whatever reason, administrators and teachers are failing to use information about individual students to place them appropriately. The problem as I see it is that they often use information about groups of students (like ED students or minority students) rather than about individual students to make placements. Both the individual and group data are statistical data but one is appropriate for placement and the other isn't.
OK
Tue, 06/26/2012 - 13:27 — localyankI don't think we are far apart on opinion, really. First, I don't believe in assigning kids to a particular school out of their neighborhood based on a demographic. Voluntary assignments (magnets) can keep some balance w/o forcing kids around the county.
One thing that has struck me over the years in looking at the breakdown of EoG scores at the ES level is that while there is a correlation between race and achievement, there is an even larger correlation between ED status and achievement. In other words its not about skin color, it's more likely about what opportunities a kid has at home (single parent, no summer camps or other enrichment, etc). So if I were going to effectively use statistics, I would look for an even stronger correlation; for example maybe I find out that a vast majority of kids who go home to an empty house because both parents are working read way below grade level. If I knew this, it would mean that an after school reading program for those kids from this group (not all of them, of course, just the ones who need it) when other kids would normally be doing homework might be a more effective use of limited resources. In other words it is looking for both causal effects and outcomes, and treating both in a cost effective manner. This is just a made-up example, but I hope it clarifies what I'm trying to express.
Why?
Tue, 06/26/2012 - 15:58 — lferreriWhy search for correlation factors like kids going home to an empty house reading below grade level when we can just offer programs for kids who read below grade level?
I understand that, in your example, knowing that kids who read below grade level could benefit from an after school program is useful. But I think we could get that information more effectively if we just study the students who need help with their reading and forget about trying to correlate their lack of reading skills to some specific characteristic of their families or them. Looking for correlations like race, ethnicity, poverty, single parenthood, parental education, etc. seems to lead the schools into putting all students with those characteristics into these programs whether they need them or not.
Looking for predictive factors only makes sense to me when we are dealing with future events like dropping out of school. If we are talking about lacking skills like reading or math, we don't need predictions. We already know which students are having problems.
Edited to add: Also, if we look at the actual students who are having trouble with a subject, we might find that different schools would benefit from different interventions. Some schools may have many students who don't speak English while another school might have students who don't have much reading material at home. I think these groups would need different programs.
so wrong
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 10:10 — loriacWho will sit around the table and decide who gets which education based on these 'factors'. Will the kindergarten kid with the single mother be diverted to a different class that the K kid with a CEO mom and stay at home Dad? Will magnet schools only admit kids from certain zip codes? What if someone is mixed raced Asian and Caucasian? Do they get a different class than a plain old white boy with the redneck dad who owns the service station?
Who gets to define 'diversity' now that F&R data is off limits? This is so wrong on so many levels.
You don't need people to
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 22:28 — bouncing_rockYou don't need people to make arbitrary decisions. Over time, with the proper analysis, maybe we can arrive at figuring out how to deliver education than the current shotgun based lowest common denominator approach. Think evidence based medicine as a rough analogy.
frustrating
Tue, 06/26/2012 - 12:24 — localyankI am reading replies to your posts, and getting frustrated. You are making excellent points about proper use of statistical analyses and planning, and people keep countering with examples from a broken system. It's too bad that the WCPSS can't clean house top to bottom, and bring in people who can actually think rationally about these issues. Good luck with your posts.
Right
Sat, 06/23/2012 - 09:25 — loriac'Don't need arbitrary decisions'. 'over time with proper analysis'...
Yes, i saw this method in action when I talked to Mr. Dulaney about one of the proposed node moves. Our node was being sent across town, meanwhile another node of equal size from across town was being sent to our school. We asked why, volunteered to go talk to the parents and see if they would be willing to stay put. Mr. Dulaney basically told us that they didn't matter, they were transients who lived in apartments and would never bother to walk across the street to talk to their kids' teachers. They needed our node at this other school to fix it. Yes, this is what we are in for again, and this is based on anything but proper research.
Why not use that
Fri, 06/22/2012 - 09:17 — DrActualFactualWhy not use that info--because it may not be accurate and/or true (especially if retrieved by data mining). Even the census info from 2010 is old and out-dated; people may have lost jobs since then and the income could be off. Some of my neighbors never even completed the census. Will the information be verified (who is going to go back and check where you got your degrees from?) Why would you give a child a better or worse education based upon whether or not their parent has no degrees or has five degrees? If that information is used for/against the child it is not being used for "public good" because it will be used to the detriment of one child in lieu of providing an advantage to a different child. If you base placement on degrees obtained then two Ivy-league parents should get a better placement than two NC State parents--(who on staff is going to be in charge of properly coding which degrees are better?) Income is also bogus--what if you earn $100,000 but spend it all on healthcare or gamble it away? It is lost income--remember it only matters what you keep, not what you earned and spent. Are you ready to open your savings/asset accounts to WCPSS?
Where ?.
Thu, 06/21/2012 - 23:12 — JanisTangoAre any school districts assigning based on wealth?