The Wake County Republican Party is declaring victory in the District 2 school board race.
In today's press release, Wake GOP Chairman Claude Pope Jr. praises Cathy Truitt for stepping down from the runoff election, "thus saving the taxapayers of Wake County thousands of dollars."
Pope is wrong. The ballots have been printed. Early voting has already begun. Voters will still see Truitt's name on the ballot even though she conceded today.
Here's the GOP press release:
Wake County GOP Congratulates John Tedesco on his Election to the Wake County School Board
RALEIGH, NC. -- The Wake County Republican Party is thrilled to congratulate John Tedesco on his victory in the race for the District 2 seat on the Wake County School Board.
“The voters of Wake County have spoken loudly and clearly that they desire a return to neighborhood schools and a school board that is responsive to the needs of parents and students. With today’s announcement by Cathy Truitt that she will not seek a runoff for the District 2 seat, the path is now clear for John Tedesco and the other newly-elected school board members to deliver on this promise and work together to reverse the failed policies of the past decade,” said Claude E. Pope, Jr., Wake County GOP Chairman.
Pope went on to state that, “The Wake GOP commends Dr. Truitt for her decision to step down from the runoff election, thus saving the taxpayers of Wake County thousands of dollars that can be better spent elsewhere. John is clearly the best candidate, according to the voters in District 2. Dr. Truitt remains a member of the Wake County Republican Party and we welcomed her participation in the democratic process. Her campaign made this a better race, and her ideas and her membership continue to be an asset to the Wake GOP.”
We continue to encourage voters to support all of the GOP-endorsed candidates on November 3. Strong support for school reforms from the municipal boards will help to ensure a new school board’s success,” Pope concluded.
Comments
"If they are going to
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 20:37 — Apexter"If they are going to dismantle the magnet program, will every elementary and middle school have an orchestra, band, multiple foreign languages, chorus, drama, math, science, and AG electives? Will every high school offer education for every trade?"
It won't be my decision. But it's not a case of all or nothing. For instance, why not drop orchestra at the elementary school level for the magnets, and instead offer it at all (or most) middle schools? (I say "most" instead of "all" because perhaps a particular middle school would prefer to have, say, additional foreign language options in lieu of orchestra.)
It's interesting that you feel that the need for these programs are unique to the select few students that have been offered them to date. What of the children in the rural or suburban areas who live too far away to attend, or the children who live in neighborhoods that are effectively being banned from attending them because their demographic is needed in their base school, and the magnet faux-lottery is specifically designed to exclude them?
I haven't heard a "First, let's kill all the magnets" platform from any of the board members-elect. I do hope that they come in with an open mind, and ask for a complete study of the pros and cons of the magnet program which asks the difficult questions that have not been addressed in the more recent cupcake studies that have ignored the real elephants in the room. How does the achievement gap in magnet schools look in magnet schools in comparison to non-magnet schools? Is having too many magnet schools increasing stress on low income schools in East and South Wake schools by dramatically increasing the proportion of low income students there? (From recent data, I would say that answer is clear.) Is it ethical to offer unique and desirable programs only in a few schools, and then essentially forbid students from particular areas entry into those schools because their demographic is needed at their base schools?
I think these are questions that are long overdue.
Again I favor expanding the
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:07 — RevHiDAgain I favor expanding the programs so that more can access them. AND I favor dropping the SES satus limits on the lottery. Unique programs address the needs of individual children who don't fit the mold. It's unethical to avoid providing programs that meet their needs because every school can't be the same.
Simply amazing that these
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 15:36 — CaryCurmudgeonSimply amazing that these people are in the business of politics and are so without a clue. As Keung points out, the ballots have already been printed. The statement about saving taxpayers thousands by not opening polls is also in correct - polls without municipal races will still be open because Truitt filed for the runoff. The GOP is praising the candidate who COST taxpayers thousands of dollars.
In their continuing quest to claim this as a GOP victory, they jumped the gun with this press release. Ms. Truitt hasn't even turned her letter in. And her name will still be on the ballot. How many Tedesco voters will not feel they need to come out since the GOP has declared victory (note: political parties do not declare victory, victory comes in the form of a certification from the board of elections). This lady has continually attacked other members of her own party, WSCA and all of Western Wake County, but the GOP feels that Ms. Truitt has made this a better race?"
I may have jumped the gun too, but at least I called the board of elections before spouting off.
Mr. Hui, Will you please
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 15:21 — RevHiDMr. Hui,
Will you please interview our new board majority about how they intend to respond to the concerns of the Magnet parents? Or are we all to be dismissed as "failed socio-economic engineering?
If they are going to dismantle the magnet program, will every elementary and middle school have an orchestra, band, multiple foreign languages, chorus, drama, math, science, and AG electives? Will every high school offer education for every trade? How will they pay for all this without raising taxes?
Are they going to break up our one nationally acclaimed high school, or are they going to keep its full programming and add more like it?
We need to know, because our children might not only lose their school and their friends, they will lose the alternative programs that addressed their unique needs.
We don't think the N&O is fearmongering, we have legitimate concerns about how the new board majority plans to carry out it's promises.
Show some empathy please.
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 08:41 — changewcpssShow some empathy please. Where were you when thousands of children were reassigned, had to leave schools and friends, and *excellent* schools took a complete 180? It's all about you now and it is not pleasant is it?
Actually, I fought year
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 12:50 — RevHiDActually, I fought year round conversions when it was being decided how big a bond to offer. I hated the year round schedule decision, primarily because the chief argument was to save money. I wrote a letter against them before the first bond issue. When polling indicated that the bigger bond would not pass, I gave in. If our taxpayers weren't going to fund enough traditional calendar space to meet anticipated growth, something had to be done. The growth has slowed due to the economy... but if it picks up again, we will have to find more funds for traditional calendar schools.
Where was everybody back before that bond issue? I felt like I was shouting at the wind. People didn't get involved until it was THEIR school that would be changed, and their kids who would be affected. But everybody pays taxes and the polling showed taxpayers weren't up for a much better option.
Aahh... A newbie
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 15:58 — Bob_SconceYou were dealing with the outgoing board. Dealing with them was like shouting at the wind, no matter what you were saying. I think if you look through this blog's archives, you will find a lot of vitriol for the idea.
Most of the "polling" was done along the lines of "If you knew the district could save $350M by going to year-round schools, would you vote for a bond package that didn't require year-round schools?"
That $350M has yet to come anywhere close to materializing -- in fact, the enrollment gain is so small that the increased costs of year-round schools may have eclipsed any savings.
Actually...
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:00 — louiselee44"Where was everybody back before that bond issue? I felt like I was shouting at the wind. People didn't get involved until it was THEIR school that would be changed, and their kids who would be affected."
I did - very openly too, even though my child was not affected. :^)
Thank you!!! If only they
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:13 — RevHiDThank you!!! If only they had listened then, we wouldn't be in danger of losing many of the good things that this county still has to offer.
If the new board throws out some of the good things that have happened in this county, then the year round expansion of Wake county will go down in history as one of the worst, most damaging decisions we ever made. It had disaster written all over it, but people said if we could save a buck, then great.
It's still bad no matter how you slice it... but will it be a contained problem, or will they ruin something else to fix it?
Back then, we tried to argue that year round was good if it was a choice. Now I say neighborhood schools will be good, if magnet choices remain on the table.
and those of us who know
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:10 — AngelaWand those of us who know that, thank you for it! :)
Weren't you a status quo supporter?
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 21:55 — TrailerParkGirlSpeaking only for myself here -
"We need to know, because our children might not only lose their school and their friends, they will lose the alternative programs that addressed their unique needs."
So, you were OK with other people's kids in non-magnet schools being reassigned under the current policies and losing their friends and schools, including some three times in four years as long as it wasn't likely to happen to YOUR kid because of the magnet protection.
As for the alternative programs that addressed YOUR kids unique needs - did it ever cross your mind that under the current policies that you supported there are thousands of kids in Wake County that have needs that have never had ANY unique class, let alone an entire program, because their base school is "not right" but still hasn't been allowed to "compete" with magnets by offering ANYTHING unique? Did it ever cross your mind that ED nodes where parents can't afford to provide dance, etc. privately were reassigned out of magnet schools to make room for students whose parents should be able to provide those things privately? Sounds to me like that was OK with you. As long as your kids already have access to special priviledges, your're willing to support the continued inequities in the system.
BTW - from another one of your posts which neighborhoods are you concerned will be left out in the cold - the non-disadvantaged ones that have been given magnet priority under the current policies?
I have written several times
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 08:23 — RevHiDI have written several times that I am for dropping the bias of the magnet lottery that makes it "not right" for kids in a certain neighborhood or school to have a shot at magnets. You can be for changes, and not agree with the changes that may happen.
One magnet school does not offer ALL the options I listed. You choose which one fits your child's needs. Our magnet only recently offered Spanish, we're there for the arts. I have also said that one benefit of this change will be that people who really need to have expanded options will have a better chance of getting in. Seats won't go to those who just wanted stability or calendar.
I also stood against year round conversions before the bond issue.
I have also previously said that I'd be happy to face reassignment if it meant expanding magnet options so more people had access. Magnets are assigned by program, not by school. If you expand our program, and keep it accessible to low income families, and that means a new school for us, great! I merely meant to point out that by ending magnets, you would be asking kids to give up even more than their friends.
Friend stability isn't a high priority for us. I do recognize that it is a high priority for others. I only disagree that the biggest reason for multiple reassignments was diversity. Magnets should offer program options for those who want something different, not increased stability.
We win or lose kids in elementary school. We can't wait until middle school to offer expanded arts programs to those who need them to stay engaged.
Finally, and most importantly, It was ABSOLUTELY not ok with me when ED students were moved out of our magnet to make more seats available to affluent kids!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The correct move would have been to expand magnets to meet demand, and offer more opportunities to kids of all economic levels. But the WSCA actively opposed the candidate who put that in her platform, and favored the one who says they are a failure. They campaigned against the one person who had the guts to say that doing the best for our kids might cost more. So yes, I am concerned that we will move in yet another wrong direction.
We made huge sacrifices to stay here because we like the magnet program and the diversity it offers. So yes, I'm concerned about change.
"But the WSCA actively
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 09:30 — CaryCurmudgeon"But the WSCA actively opposed the candidate who put that in her platform"
Which platform, hard to tell on any given day. You will never know how much was the platform and how much was the candidate. Some parents have embraced magnet programs, and I hope the new board is sensitive to that -- as Matthew Eisley pegged it, in a large way this election was a backlash against board members who ignored parents.
But please, don't kid yourself about magnets being a beacon of learning for all students. ED and minority students perform no better in magnet programs, on average, than they do across the county, and the achievement gap is the same. These schools do NOTHING to improve ED performance, and Cathy Truitt acknowledged that on WPTF.
You are putting your own desire for part-time diversity ahead of the needs of these at-risk kids.
Test scores are only one
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 12:57 — RevHiDTest scores are only one measure of success. I would argue that base students at magnet schools ARE getting benefits that help in the long run, even more so if they are not being taught to the test. Harder to measure, sure, but no less important. Any evaluation of the magnet program has to include parent and alumni satisfaction as well.
I am also against reducing students to percentages and nodes. But I add that we can not reduce them to test scores either. As an accomplished test-taker, I can witness to the fact that the ability to spit back information is not the best indicator of future success.
"Test scores are only one
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:36 — CaryCurmudgeon"Test scores are only one measure of success"
Funny, when we brought up graduation rates we were told that graduation rates are only one measure of success. Graduation rates AND test scores for ED students stink. Maybe "healthy schools" is our measure of success, and to heck with these kids?
Unless assignment the assignment policy continues to account for economic status, there is no way to guarantee diversity. So, if your magnet became less diverse, would you walk away from the special course offerings and stability to go find another school?
I don't agree that
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 15:02 — RevHiDI don't agree that neighborhood schools are the solution to those problems.
If my magnet became less diverse, we would move. We make huge sacrifices to stay in Wake County, and we can get either arts OR diversity somewhere else for much less money. Both at the same time, was priceless.
We specifically chose our magnet because it was a Title I school. We wanted that, even though another magnet option would have given us higher priority to stay in the magnet program without testing AG.
Aw Mudge - the kids are just doing what's expected
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 12:11 — TrailerParkGirl"ED and minority students perform no better in magnet programs, on average, than they do across the county, and the achievement gap is the same. These schools do NOTHING to improve ED performance"
That's because nothing more is expected of them in magnets than any other school here, so they are simply doing what is expected of them by WCPSS - growing at a lower rate than their NED counterparts. <sigh>
Wonder what's going to happen at the BOE meeting with the EVAAS discussion...
You can have high
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:22 — RevHiDYou can have high expectations, but not teach to the test. Given that many magnets specifically do not engage in repeated drilling of practice tests, I'd say that an even score between a magnet and non-magnet actually indicates BETTER academic performance. And how much more likely is college success and acceptance when you have demonstrated an area of interest and leadership in a non-academic setting? Magnets offer these opportunities to those who can't afford them. Can they do more? Yes. Absolutely. But comparing test scores in a non-drill school to schools that repeatedly drill and test is not an apples-to-apples comparison.
Think you misunderstood the point
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 14:41 — TrailerParkGirlI was commenting on WCPSS' evaluation system, which discounts expected growth for ED students (2x if also in a higher ED school), not on magnets vs. non-magnets.
Rev please step up to the pulpit
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 18:38 — g88ky07and put an icepack on it! You know what, I think ALL schools should have the same offerings to ALL children! I've never really bitched about magnets, but for your child to have "orchestra, band, multiple foreign languages, chorus, drama, math, science, and AG electives" and the rest of ours to not have them is reason enough to pull the plug, in my opinion, if that's what's needed. I don't think anyone has said that's what they want, but then, many of us didn't want forced year round, school on M. Day, early release in the middle of the week, hotdog Friday instead of Fish Friday, wear your PJ's to school day on a 12 degree day ...
Go pour yourself a drink and watch Barney. We'll get to your concerns once we take care of a few other more important issues!
No single elementary school
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 08:17 — RevHiDGet a grip. Do you get this
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 17:38 — woodstockGet a grip. Do you get this frantic whenever you are faced with change?
...
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 16:54 — SideburnsWhat unique needs are being addressed at your magnet school?
Orchestra?
Chorus?
Magical mask making?
International folk dance?
When my daughter was in
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 08:36 — RevHiDWhen my daughter was in preschool, it was clear to us that if she was in an all-academic setting she would quickly become disconnected and unmotivated. Music taught her writing, it is how she explores math and science as well. She wouldn't practice spelling words if practicing music hadn't shown her the value of perseverance. Perhaps she would, but she would be learning to hate school at the same time. Without access to music programs, she would not be prepared for 11% unemployment. She would not be able to creatively apply knowledge to a rapidly changing marketplace.
Not every child learns that way. So it is not cost effective to offer those opportunities to the same extent at every school. But if you're going to go for it, great! Expanding programs that address unique needs is important, if we say we value the needs of individual children.
...
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 13:18 — SideburnsThat's great. My child needs that as well but I have to pay for music lessons because I can't get into a magnet. From what I've read, your family is not low-income so why should your child get those services but mine can't?
You do know that many low-income children that live near your magnet are being bussed miles away so your child can have this advantage, don't you? Are you really concerned with low-income children or just the unique needs of your child?
Yes I am.... and MORE
Tue, 10/20/2009 - 14:31 — RevHiDYes I am.... and MORE SO.
We made huge sacrifices to stay in Wake County, and our primary motivation was the magnet program. We cannot make our life here work without it. We already stopped spending money on extras like vacations or cars, bought the smallest home manageable, and honestly don't know what else to give up if we had to pay for music lessons besides moving away.
Even so, our biggest concern IS the neighborhood kids from our magnet. They don't have near as many choices as we do. My argument is NOT that my child should benefit at other's expense. I'm simply saying we need to take a good thing and expand on it to make it great, not ditch it.
Japanese paper making
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 18:50 — fiestamomThose are all going to be useful to students looking at 11% unemployment when they graduate!