Tuesday, April 15, 2008

First they came ...

Throughout the now settled discussion of what to do about the SES disparity between Orange County's elementary schools, many people have asked: What about academic achievement at our county's "failing schools"?

Unfortunately, there have been few answers to come out of the Orange County Board of Education.

Last year, three Orange County elementary schools failed to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) as determined by the state's end-of-grade tests - Central Elementary, Efland Cheeks Elementary and New Hope Elementary. For Central and Efland Cheeks, this was the second year in a row.

Because these two schools received federal education dollars under Title 1, federal law required that parents be given the choice to transfer their children to another district school. Nearly one hundred children changed schools; as was their right under federal law (ironically enough, including the children of Central's PTA President). Those days are over.

One less publicized element of Ted Triebel's failed "Original Charge", was the "redirecting" of the district's $300,000 in Title 1 money to fund a district-wide Pre-Kindergarten program. While such a program is likely to have a positive impact on the district, and should have been considered even outside the larger discussion of elementary school assignment, the only reason it was considered was that it provided an immediate way to remove Central and Efland-Cheeks Elementary schools from Title 1 School Improvement status without have to wait for those pesky test scores to improve. If the Board spends the money on something else, they don't have to play by the federal rules.

During a Board meeting held at Cameron Park Elementary School last December, former Board member and current felony indictee, Dennis Whitling proposed "redirecting" the federal funds as a way to "control" the ability of parents to opt out of either Central or Efland Cheeks.

Prior to resigning from the Board in disgrace, Whitling advocated the creation of "middle class schools" at Central and Efland-Cheeks. His reasoning was that the "peer effect" of compelling a number of affluent and middle class children to attend those two schools would raise the academic performance of their struggling students while simultaneously raising each school's average academic numbers. In essence, he argued that school choice under NCLB was hurting academic performance.

However, like in many other areas, he was wrong.

Recent research into the impact of Title 1 School Choice in Charlotte-Mecklenburg clearly shows that school choice options under NCLB actually raise academic performance and have the additional benefit of reducing suspension rates.

Published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, the research clearly illustrates an argument I have repeatedly made over the past year - Orange County parents need MORE choices for the education of their children.

However, the current Board we are saddled with seems determined to systematically reduce the choices parents will have for where their children attend school.

According to the "modified" reassignment plan the Board adopted last Monday, the next likely target in an attempt to exert its unchecked control of Orange County parents is the district's existing student transfer policy. For the 150 or so children currently attending schools other than those the Board of Education has mandated they attend, their days are numbered as well.

This process reminds me of the poem, "First, they came" by Lutheran minister and concentration camp survivor, Martin Neimoller.

First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.


Like Dennis Whitling clearly said - it's a matter of control.

And, soon parents will have the opportunity to take back that control. Early "one-stop" voting starts this Thursday at the Hillsborough Library. Even if you are not registered to vote in Orange County, you can register and vote immediately at a "one-stop" site.

Don't be in the situation next year where you have to write:

First they came for the year-round school, and I didn't speak up ...


Take the time to speak up - Vote!

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great point! A lot of Orange County residents don't think the school board's decisions affect them if they don't have kids in the current system. Where do you think the money taken out of CES will some from? That's right, another property tax increase. Orange County has the 3rd highest property tax rate in the state already. Everyone needs to get educated on local issues & vote.

Kylie Snyder said...

It has been a long time since I have posted, but I feel compelled to add my two cents (semi-anonymously).

I completely agree -- now that HES is out of the laser beam, everyone in the district needs to take a long hard look at all of our schools. The BoE can not continue to under-serve and ignore the children at Efland and CES. For the past 15 months the focus on HES has cost the kids at these two school valuable attention.

Cutting resources to CES to avoid the mandatory transfers is criminal (joking aside). What will happen to our community when these kids get older and are not at grade level? Will they drop out? The BoE is well aware that early intervention and redirection are key - so why are they redirecting critical funds? It is mind boggling.

We need to vote for candidates that will improve all of the schools and really sit down and think about what our district could/should look like in five years. Consider growth, academic achievement and getting appropriate services to kids in need.

What does 'next' look like?

Tink's mom! ;-)

Anonymous said...

Right again.

It was there on the chart:
“Ensure Transfer Policy is strictly adhered to”. The direction of this Board and the administration is clear. This was just the first roundup of children who thought they were safely in a school they call their own.

The OCS transfer policy 4125 states:
Procedures for Student Releases and Transfers:
A. Student assignments shall be made each school year according to school attendance areas.
B. Under circumstances of extreme and unusual hardship, transfers may be granted. Hardships may include sibling school assignment, daycare, or extreme parent situations.
(emphasis mine)

The policy continues, but it is clear that the words “extreme and unusual hardship” have suddenly taken on a new meaning.

All parents who have children attending school under a local transfer, prepare yourselves for what HES parents have dealt with for 14 months. Ted, Debbie, Susan, and Liz spoke at last weeks' meeting of the HES plan as a “two-sided coin” in which they capture children from one school to establish social balance at another. While they can get HES “balanced” with their restrictive measures, they cannot get Central and Efland-Cheeks balanced with only the children from HES. The numbers are not there. They will have to find additional children and they will do it through strict interpretation of policy 4125.

Know who you are voting for. Expect more of the same if any of the three seats go to someone Ted or Debbie has influence over.

Scott

Anonymous said...

Is it possible that the board will enforce this strict interpretation of the transfer policy only for students in the CES and ECES districts? I'm guessing that the board will not care whether that approach is legal or ethical. They have certainly shown that lack of care in their dealings with HES. Quite frankly, I am no longer surprised by how little critical thought goes into the decisions this board makes.

Anonymous said...

I think the current makeup of the Board has changed. Ted T. is a much better leader than Dennis. Liz is running away. Debbie has calmed down the rhetoric. Susan has constantly kept an even keel about this matter. Anne and Al are solid. The main 2 culprits with this fiasco has been Liz and Dennis.

I believe the current Board will adopt a transfer policy that will be very similar to the HES plan--grandfather current transfers.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 8:18 makes some kind statements, but then draws the wrong conclusion. Ted may be "a better leader than Dennis." Maybe not. But he is horribly power hungry. He is dragging Stan Morris around the county trying hard to get him elected. It is clear that while he is a nice guy with a compassionate sounding job, he knows little about our schools. Ted knows that Stan is his best chance at keeping the chairmanship.

Debbie may have "calmed down the rhetoric" but you seem to hold out a lot more hope for continuation of that behavior than the past would suggest. It's election season and she wants to make a good impression on the impressionable candidates. Her remark that Stan was finally someone she could support speaks volumes and all pages indicate other motives that the turned leaf you hope for.

A PS for AW and all those engaged in the "what would have happened if" debate. I know you all and especially AW and I respect and love you all for stepping up and doing what you believed needed to be done. It has been my experience that when looking back at causes that had successful (at least marginally in this case) outcomes that it is important to acknowledge the contributions of everyone who joined in. If a cause fails it can usually be readily seen where it failed. On the other hand when a cause succeeds it is difficult to say exactly what made it succeed and is always unproductive to single out the specific efforts that made it succeed irrespective of other efforts. Success is best remembered with a drink and a smile, and congratulations to all who participated. After all, we know there will be a next time.

David D.

Anonymous said...

David D,

I'll draw my conclusions, and you can draw your own. Ted T. has never been indicted of a felony. If Dennis was still in charge, the modified plan would have never been passed. Ted may be dragging Stan Morris around, I don't know. They do live in the same neighborhood. You are right that Stan knows little about our schools. I don't really see how this goes with leadership...please explain.

As for Debbie, why don't we stick around a little bit and see what happens. She's not spouting racially charged statements about HES parents anymore. If she does, then you will be right.

The bottom line is that the Board will probably adopt a transfer policy that mirrors the HES modified plan. I imagine we all have faith in Dr. Rhodes, because he is an educator.

Anonymous said...

"Ted may be "a better leader than Dennis." Maybe not. But he is horribly power hungry."

I'm not a big fan of Ted (and Ted knows), but let's give him some respect. The man was a POW in Vietnam, served his nation well under great duress, and has no hidden reason why he's on the Board. It makes me sad that we can't disagree in a respectful manner with someone. I've told Ted that the Board's plan was not practical, but in his heart, he believed the Board was going down the right path. He was wrong, of course, but to discredit a man like Ted by calling him "power hungry" because he didn't vote the way we wanted him to vote is inexcusable.

Anonymous said...

I think we need to stop the rhetoric concerning Ted, Debbie, etc. Instead of going to the negative approach of shaming Ted and Debbie via their relationship with Stan Morris (FYI--Stan does have children, and I hate for them to find out that someone is trashing their father), let's talk up our candidates!

Steve, Jeff and Al are solid candidates that have spoken up for HES. I think Eddie, Tony, and Stan are fine people, but I have not heard anything that would indicate that they would stop the attempts at dismantling HES. I would love for all the candidates running publically state that they are strong supporters of HES. So far, only Steve, Jeff and Al have been willing to speak up.

Bottom line--we are in a lot better shape than we were this time last year. There are no hidden agendas or secret plans that would eliminate HES. Dennis is gone, and Liz will be gone in July.

Anonymous said...

Oh Please. Are you saying that we had to vote for John Kerry because he served? Are you saying we have to vote for John McCain because he was a POW? I agree that these men deserve respect for what they did in the past, but that does not mean that they are somehow infallible and cannot be criticized for their actions since.

Several of you don't like Liz but she was elected too. Have you taken notice of how he talks down to her? If you can't see that because of the way you feel about Liz that's fair enough. How about the way he talks down to Ann? How about the way he argues with anyone who does not acquiesce to his position? It is degrading, not leadership. Yes, I appreciate his service, but that was then and this is now. His behavior now shows disrespect for the members and parents. Speaking of disrespectful, who made you judge of what is excuseable and what is not? You may not like it and you are entitled to your opinion just as I am to mine. As you can see, it is not about how he voted as you said anyway. It is about his tactics in getting someone in the race he can control and the way he treats people and especially women.

David D.

Anonymous said...

Enough with this argument!! Ugh!! We sound like children!

This is not helping our kids by arguing about Ted. I know Ted, and his personality does come off condescending, but I don't think he's the problem.