According to the Board's own minutes from the September 17th meeting, it established "a task force to create plan(s) or a series of tasks to increase the socio-economic balance (+/- 38%) at Central Elementary and Hillsborough Elementary for 2008-2009."
During that meeting, the Board specifically named 6 of the Task Force's 15 members, and left a 7th member to be identified by the OCS Central Office.
"Dennis Whitling appointed Anne Medenblik and Debbie Piscitelli to serve as Board representatives." Can we at least agree that those two were picked by the Board?
"Dr. Morton and Mary Alice Yarbrough will serve as Central Office representatives." How about those two?
One Central Office representative not specifically named at the meeting was what the Board Minutes refer to as a "leader" and the Raleigh News & Observer calls a "facilitator" tasked to "coordinate meetings." It is unclear whether this person will be a full Task Force member or serve in a support role.
The Board went on to say that "The principals will serve as the administrator representatives." By specifically assigning the principals of both schools, the Board named specific people to the Task Force (Sheila McDonald from CES and Martinette Horner at HES). Surely, we can agree that those two members were "picked" by the Board.
I am guessing that this is where my use of the term "hand-picked" has offended some anonymous posters - the Task Force's teacher and parent members.
In its creation of the Task Force, the Board required that it include two teachers from each school. Principals at the two schools were instructed to "select the teacher representatives." Allow me to illustrate this point with an analogy. Assume I am your employer and control the fate of your career in my hands. Now, further assume I tell you to choose two other employees for a committee that is sure to draw public scrutiny and press coverage. What is the likelihood you will choose someone I feel might rock the boat?
That leaves us with the parents. Nevermind that the Board chose to limit the number of parents on the Task Force to only four, an inexcusibly low number given that these are the families who will most closely feel the impact of any decision the Board makes, but the Board also chose not to open participation to ALL parents.
Unlike the assertion of my anonymous commenter, parents were not simply asked to "VOLUNTEER" to serve on the Task Force. In fact, there was a filtering process that limited the pool from which parent representatives were chosen. And, at least in the case of CES, the pool of eligible partipants was closed before the need was known.
In setting up the Task Force, the Board dictated that "Parent representatives will be selected by the Student Governance Committees." That was interpreted to mean each school's PTA. Additionally, as the Raleigh News & Observer reported, it was suggested that parents be drawn from each school's "school improvement teams." And, in both cases, they were.
As it turns out, the OCS Administration's "Site-Based Management Model" prescribes the structure and size of a School Improvement Team (SIT), as well as dictates who can and cannot serve. The parental component of an SIT includes three parents chosen in a PTA-run election, typically held prior to its members being tapped by the Board for a Task Force.
This is why CES was able to name its parent representatives without delay - they already knew which three parents were eligible to participate, and there was no need to expand the search. The Board could have known with a good degree of certaintly who CES would be sending to the Task Force as well. Two out of three are pretty good odds.
While this may have been the case at CES, HES was an entirely different matter. When the Board called for parents from the group to serve, HES had only one parent on its SIT. This necessitated a delay in choosing parental representatives until the 3-week intersession ended. When HES reconvened, a call was sent out by the HES PTA for people willing to serve on the SIT. With only one evening to decide, those who answered the call were listed on a ballot sent home with every student the next day. Again, with only one evening to decide, parents selected their representatives from a list of people most did not know.
So, let's recap:
- Of 15 Task Force members, the Board picked 6 of them on the same evening they formed the Task Force itself.
- Five more Task Force members (1 "leader" and 4 teachers) were picked by people the Board directly picked for the Task Force.
- Two CES parents were chosen from the pre-formed 3-person group specifically picked by the Board as a source of eligible parents.
- And, finally, two HES parents were chosen within less than two days from a list of parents very few people actually knew.
Of the 15 members on the Board's Merger Task Force, only two names would have surely come as a surprise to the Board.
When the Board can either directly name or exert control over the selection of 11 of the Task Force's 15 members (and may have some insight into who two others may be), I think it is entirely fair to say the Task Force was "hand-picked."
10 comments:
I wonder when the "Not Hand-Picked!!!" spin doctor will say now.
Let's not get lost in semantics. We all know that this task force is a farce. We also know that the Board (6 members, at least) made a major mistake with the way the proposal was handled. We also know that the Board made the HES parents look like we were elitist bigots.
BTW--wonder what King Casey has to say about the Board these days? Probably nothing. He doesn't know what to do since his Central Office lunch buddy left.
Here's something the Task Force might consider during their meetings (hand picked or not!):
*Grants support research project*
BY GINNY HOYLE, The Herald-Sun
October 19, 2007 7:39 pm
CHAPEL HILL -- The Carolina Center for Public Service will use $375,000 in grants to address the achievement gap at three elementary schools in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools district.
The funding from Strowd Roses Inc. and the Triangle Community Foundation will support a three-year research project that will help identify "social environmental barriers" for students at Carrboro, Ephesus Road and Frank Porter Graham elementary schools.
Natasha Bowen, an assistant professor at UNC's School of Social Work, will follow a group of third-graders for three years during the project, which begins this month.
Social environmental barriers could include "threats in the neighborhood, school, family and peer system," Bowen said. "And we look at things like neighborhood safety, teacher support, being accepted by other children and family support."
Researchers at the School of Social Work have created a comprehensive assessment tool that identifies social environmental barriers to learning, which is called the Elementary School Success Profile. The online questionnaire with colorful graphics and brief animations examines students' beliefs about themselves, their neighborhoods, schools, families and peer groups.
The ESSP asks children to rate the accuracy of questions like, "I get picked on at school," or "When I am scared, worried or upset, I can talk to an adult at home."
"The immediate goal is to improve students' social environments, as well as psychological and physical well-being," Bowen said. "The long-term goal is to improve the academic performance of students, and reduce performance disparities based on race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status."
Carrboro, Ephesus Road and Frank Porter Graham elementary schools have the district's highest percentage of students who receive free and reduced lunches, and FPG and Carrboro are both designated Schools of Improvement under the No Child Left Behind Act, said Stephanie Knott, city schools spokesperson.
School officials will invite parents, teachers and students to take separate ESSP tests and, based on parental consent, will enroll as many third-graders as possible, Bowen said.
The project -- which stresses school, parent and community collaboration to maximize efforts and resources -- includes a collaborative decision-making process, an online database of intervention strategies, staff development workshops and other resources.
The strategies that each school might decide to implement will depend on the data it gets back, Bowen said, and the grants will offset costs of materials, training and supplies needed.
"A bullying prevention program, for example, might entail manuals and workbooks," Bowen said. "One of the things that we're going to be able to pay for is staff for after-school hours if they decide to put forward some kind of after-school program."
Jack Richman, dean of the School of Social Work, lauded the project's school-community partnership.
"One of the exciting things about this project is that it is a collaboration among the researchers at the UNC School of Social Work, educators in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system and resources in the community coming together to provide positive outcomes to children and families," Richman said. [end of article]
HES and Central are not the only local schools struggling with this. There are people out there with ideas, programs, and suggestions. Can we get in on this study (probably too late)? Can the Task Force contact the groups running the study to find out how something similar can be set up to examine Orange County schools? There is so much local info out there that we can use to change the situation we are facing here!
"We also know that the Board made the HES parents look like we were elitist bigots."
This blog help alot, too!
I mean this blog helped alot, too
To anonymous October 24, 2007 4:47 AM:
Don't be too hard on yourself. We don't think you are a bigot or elitist. The nice thing about America is that we are allowed to voice our opinions.
I don't think you have said anything that would make a reasonable person feel that you are elitist/bigot. In fact, there isn't anything on this blog, either, that comes out offensive.
When is this merger nonsense going to end? CES parents/teachers don't want it, and HES parents/teachers don't want it. Who's left? That is, besides a certain person who has her eyes on a County Commissioner seat.
Thank you for explaining why you feel the term "hand-picked" is the accurate way to describe the task force group. I still don't agree with you - but appreciate your explanation. By the way, I never said I liked the task force idea either - I just disagree that all of the members are hand-picked.
Please discontinue this line of discussion -- it is clearly personal attacks rather than subject-based. What are you disagreeing about anyway -- the handpicked issue or a blogger's right to say what they want to?
Let's use the blog to continue our cause, not have word wars! Our children are being neglected by the school board. They continue to spend time on the merger discussion of CES/HES while the children are getting substandard educations at both school -- DEBATE THAT! HES scores are slipping; CES is improving, but still under the goal. AND they aren't even discussing Elfland Cheeks (title 1 if you all remember) and New Hope (one year and counting toward title 1). DEBATE THE ISSUES PLEASE!!
Why is there no representation of Efland Cheeks on the task force?
This is sad and unfair. There seems to be an obsession about CES and HES being so close together. What are they going to do with Efland Cheeks? Merge it with Pathways?
Re: They Took a Meeting:
Could it be??? Members on the task force that were not hand-picked? Is that possible?? Has anyone though that before Mr. Scott in the above-named posting?
Love,
the "Not Hand-Picked!!!" spin doctor
Post a Comment