The Wake Education Partnership isn't backing down from commenting on the issues in the school board races.
A little less than two weeks after a complaint was filed against the WEP, the group revisited the board races today in this week's In Context e-newsletter. This edition addresses remarks made by candidates about Wake's graduation rate, the size of Wake's bureaucracy and the achievement gap.
The Partnership addresses the complaint by saying "the newsletter will continue to cover current school topics in an effort to provide a fuller understanding of education issues."
In terms of graduation rates, the WEP revisits the criticism about Wake having a low graduation rate for low-income students. The Partnership says you also need to look at the passing rates for students on state end-of-course tests.
"When large numbers of high school students are graduating even when they fail the end-of-course exams required by the state, it’s likely those students aren’t expected to meet very high classroom standards," according to the newsletter.
The WEP points to how graduation rates can be 20 to 30 percentage points higher than EOC passing rates in poor and rural areas such as Bertie or Halifax counties. The group notes that the gap is much less in a place like Wake.
(BTW, something that's not mentioned in the newsletter is that Charlotte-Mekcklenburg's EOC passing rate for low-income students is higher than Wake's rate.)
On bureaucracy, some candidates have accused the district of having too many administrators. But the WEP says that when candidates talk about the cost of administrators "it’s amazing how quickly the numbers get jumbled."
The WEP says 8 percent of Wake's central services jobs were eliminated compared to a 5 percent reduction for teachers at schools.
"The changes have clearly left many classrooms shorthanded this year, but when it came to deciding whether to cut teachers or administrators, it appears school board members and the superintendent also prefer teachers," according to the newsletter.
When it comes the size of the achievement gap, the WEP compares it to raising the bar on a high jump. So when the bar, a.k.a. the passing rate, gets raised, does it mean the jumpers are "jumping lower?"
"It is possible to compare gaps over time, but the results don’t tell you whether a school system is gaining ground or losing ground on another district when the standards change," according to the newsletter.
Comments
501(c)(3) Political Activity
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 06:39 — Bob_SconceSo, Public Citizen has a summary describing what nonprofits can do. It's here: http://www.citizen.org/documents/ACF2691.pdf
Look at the section "Electioneering Activities", described as ". . . political activity designed to influence the election of any person to federal, state or local office, including issue advocacy . . ." That sounds to me to be exactly what WEP is doing here. As a 501(c)(3), they are generally prohibited from doing this.
It seems that the next complaint should go to the IRS.
Hmm....
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 06:32 — Bob_SconceI love how WEP talks about candidates fudging the numbers but then completely ignores the biggest gloss: the claim that year-round schools save $350M. Lois Nixon said it on WPTF the other day, and Rita Rakestraw's been spewing the same line. (Perry, any hand in that talking point?)
That number is totally false. $350M was the amount that supporters of the last Bond Referendum claimed would be saved by doing the year-round conversion. And, it was based on two things: (1) getting 1/3 more students into all the converted schools and (2) opening all new schools on year-round schedules.
Because (2) talks about future schools, that $350M is the amount that would be saved *over time*, not immediately -- even if everything else was correct, we would not have saved $350 yet.
Even so, everything else was not correct -- the year-round conversion fit far fewer than 1/3 additional students into schools (data's been posted here recently). Heck, some school capacities even dropped after the conversion.
Given those two things, the true amount "saved" so far appears to be on the order of $25M. The district could easily have saved that much by using purely voluntary assignments.
You're exactly right Bob!
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 08:04 — g88ky07Perry has had the status quo bunch spewing the $350 million figure so much I now puke when I hear it from laughing so hard! They get a talking point and a $ number and they are locked into it! Talking point #3, everybody, just say it the same every time and we'll be alright. I think Karen Simon inflated her # some when she last used it. I think she's gone under ground since.
The fact remains MANY of the latest 22 forced converted schools are under capacity and not saving us a dime!
Don't forget the newly
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 08:54 — SouthEastWakeMomDon't forget the newly opened ones. Banks Road is under capacity according to WCPSS numbers from last fall's reassignments (estimated to be 65%). And east of 401, it's opening put Willow Spring and Rand under capacity. I'm not sure how the schools to the west fared.
Add Laurel Park to that list
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 11:11 — SDR256YR capacity: 1200 - opened at 650. This is less than it could hold as a straight traditional school all on one schedule. I think this year there are about 700?
Its called bait and switch folks.
or Brier Creek and Sycamore,
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 09:05 — AngelaWor Brier Creek and Sycamore, opened as YR and both @ around 700....
Blame Horace Tart!
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 09:00 — g88ky07We have 5 schools, at least, within a mile or 2 as the "crow flies" in the FV area and ALL of them are well under capacity. How'd that happen Horace Tart????
Cathy Truitt's side on D2 capacity
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 12:31 — TrailerParkGirlIn a letter to the editor (Garner Citizen), a member of Cathy Truitt's election committee complains about students being bussed into Garner and how WCPSS wants to build more schools there to accomodate those students instead of building more schools in Western Wake where there is more growth. She complains that Garner is a victim of partial implementation of policy 6200, which sounds to me like they want even more bussing to get to full implementation.
She also rails against Western Wake again, and of course John Tedesco's broad support. Heaven forbid we should act like adults and understand that our school system is COUNTY-WIDE and pitting district against district doesn't help fix the issues that are not helping the children that have been created by the status quo approach.
One important thing that Ms. Truitt's camp needs to get straight is that if the beef is that students have been bussed into Garner, then their beef is with WCPSS NOT Western Wake, WSCA or John Tedesco, NONE of whom have controlled where WCPSS assigns students.
Does Ms. Truitt's camp understand why WCPSS wants to build schools in Garner instead of Western Wake? Because Garner is considered a "bussable" location, plain and simple. It's been done in my area of the Rim too for the same reason. That is why it's referred to as the bussable Rim. That way WCPSS can tout that 86% of kids go to school within 5 miles as the crow flies. Due to the distance between higher poverty areas and WW, if they built the schools in WW they'd have to say 86% of kids go to school within 20 miles as the crow flies and spend four hours on a bus each day, and the other 16% are bussed even further and THAT doesn't sound good on the PR front. If people don't like it, they need to take it up and direct their frustration where it should be, with WCPSS, their policies and their glossy PR to hide the achievement gap behind "healthy" schools.
What WCPSS is doing now is taking the ED students in the diverse Rim areas closest to WW and shipping them out of their diverse community school (in some cases where they pass at a much higher rate than county average) to diversify WW, so the green-eyed monster and defeatists can be satisfied that everyone is getting their "fair" share and WCPSS can still tout a reasonable bus ride, regardless of what it is doing to these children and their education.
Just what are Ms. Truitt's camps priorities - to improve student achievement for all or to get "those" kids out their schools and make Western Wake take their "fair" share of "them", impact to the children and their achievement be darned. People, school system leaders and supporters, and business leaders have got to stop playing a game of hot potato where children are the potato.
By addressing the issues of
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 21:15 — woodstockBy addressing the issues of only certain candidates and acting in a way out of their normal routine in releasing information as we head into the final days of the campaign, WakeEd Partnership is violating the rules pertaining to their organizational status. A new complaint needs to be filed, and this time it needs to be enforced. There is a clear violation.
Wow, where to start on the
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:39 — Eric_BWow, where to start on the latest WEP newsletter...
I guess we should be concerned that black, hispanic, and low income students have higher EOC passing percentages in Charlotte-Mecklenburg than Wake County then. It seems they must have higher classroom standards than Wake and that must explain the slight (2 percentage point) difference in graduation rates among ED students.
Were those jobs where employees were let go or just where open job positions were left unfilled and eliminated? Also, weren't 1500 teachers on terminating contracts let go? 1500 let go out of 15,000 is a 10% cut. Sure, 2/3rds were hired back, but that's still a lot of stress for teachers. WCPSS refused to used stimulus money to save teacher jobs.
This is complete nonsense. Of course it is possible to compare gaps over time. You can't do it by accurately by comparing passing percentages, but you can use z-score or units of standard deviation to compare the differences in the normal distributions (bell curves). WEP should look at the work of Dr. Bill Lynch to see that WCPSS student performance has dropped relative to state average over the last 10 years. ED students scored higher than state average 10 years ago, but now score lower than state average. Any statistician could tell you that this argument is nonsense.
Your data is always spot on!
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 21:25 — g88ky07I wish I had the understanding of it all as your info and facts always do. Great work as always. As we've been called, the "opposition", I prefer just "parents who care", is lucky to have you!
sheesh...
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:14 — AngelaWbetween the newsletter and this: Education Partnership brings Wake County leaders together http://news14.com/triangle-news-30-content/top_stories/615509/education-partnership-brings-wake-county-leaders-together they are starting to pile it on! not to mention "attack ads" have started....Perry? that you behind that curtain? focusing on the "raised taxes" aspect? trying to convince that 70% who don't have kids in the system you are always referring to?
If it was up to me, attack
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 23:31 — WhalerCaneIf it was up to me, attack ads would never have run. I think it a mistake to mention opponents name in low turnout races.
Parents Live It!
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:29 — MamaLynnEven before I got involved in this school board election, I never trusted 'sources' such of WEP for my information. They have a stake in the game that I'm convinced is not 100% about education. What I will base my vote on it this...I look at the faces of these kids that I see impacted by these decisions in my children's school. I remember 'Hunter (not his real name)' in Kindergarden....not a day went by where he didn't say hi and appear to be eager and happy to learn. He was always to excited to show me his homework folder and the stickers he earned. In second grade some of that enthusiasm was gone, but the smile was still there. I could tell he was struggling a bit. Now in 5 grade he is not the same child. He's not as happy go lucky and he doesn't even bother turning in his homework anymore. He doesn't great me the way he use to. When I address him he will be polite, but I just see the light dimming in his eyes! That is the reason I'm voting for change. I'm hoping that there is someone that will speak up and try to reach 'Hunter' before it's too late. He's worth it!
As I've mentioned before,
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:20 — KeungHui (author)As I've mentioned before, please electronically forward me the mailers and ads you see from candidates. I'm not going to assume that the candidates and their allies are sending me everything.
Mr. Hui
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:29 — AngelaWthis is apparently a TV ad, I've not seen it, just heard about it....
I haven't seen the TV ad
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:32 — KeungHui (author)I haven't seen the TV ad yet. If you or anyone has, please let me know who put it on so I can contact that group.
all I heard was that it was
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:38 — AngelaWall I heard was that it was on WRAL, if that helps...
Thanks. I'll try to watch
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:44 — KeungHui (author)Thanks. I'll try to watch for the ad tonight. But what would really help is knowing which group put it on.
The organization is
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 05:34 — woodstockThe organization is Citizens for Good Government, and an individuals name was included: Jacqueline (didn't catch last name, but it begins with "E")
Just caught the ad. Thank
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 06:41 — KeungHui (author)Just caught the ad. Thank goodness for DVRs. Will post it now and track over the course of the day with more info.
hmmmm...
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 05:59 — AngelaWhttp://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/north_carolina_raleigh_27613.asp?cycle=08&mode=s
Is this the same Citizens
Fri, 10/02/2009 - 06:26 — CaryCurmudgeonIs this the same Citizens for Good Government PAC which is from Chicago? Keung?
Perhaps a phone call to WRAL
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 20:57 — woodstockPerhaps a phone call to WRAL would solve the mystery.
yeah, you and me both! :)
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 19:52 — AngelaWyeah, you and me both! :)