Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Wake school board votes 5-4 to end year-round assignments -- somehow

Posted by Bob Geary on Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Bless her heart, not 30 seconds after she'd voted in favor of the resolution ending "mandatory" assignments to year-round schools, helping to pass it by a 5-4 vote, Margiotta-5 school board member Debra Goldman piped up with an urgent "parliamentary inquiry, parliamentary inquiry" to anyone who could answer it.

How's this going to work? Goldman asked.

To which Superintendent Del Burns, who might've been asked that question earlier but wasn't, could only reply: "I don't have an answer now as to how implementation will occur."

Burns said he'd get back to them asap.

In short, it was a fitting end to a day marked by the Wake board majority's new approach -- or to be accurate, the same approach it came in with on December 1 but which it seemed, for a time in mid-December, to have reconsidered.

That approach: Take a position first, deal with its implications later.  "Leading with the vision," John Tedesco calls it. But to critics, it sounds like: Cut once, measure twice, or measure as often as you want, but not 'til it's severed!

Once again, as we noted in our earlier post, the majority put a resolution on the agenda at the last minute, without notice to their colleagues, the public or (it seemed) even to Burns, and passed it as quick as they could before anybody could marshall an argument against it.

The question a plaintive Goldman seemed to be asking afterward was, now that we've banned sending kids to year-round schools against their parents' wishes -- a rare occurrence, apparently, though the only person with any data about it today was a parent in the audience who said it happened in just 134 cases last year -- does that mean there will be no assignments to year-round schools at all?

That could leave the year-rounds very empty if every students must be assigned to a traditional-calendar school first and only later allowed to opt out to a year-round.

Or perhaps what should happen is that parents would be asked to state a preference -- traditional calender or year-round calendar -- and kids would be assigned based on their responses?

But wait a minute. The board majority has chewed over a survey of parents' views about year-rounds for two consecutive committee of the whole sessions, including the one earlier today, with Magiotta & Co. insisting throughout -- as they hurried up the process -- that they were not trying to pin down anybody's intentions, only their general ideas.

Keith Sutton, who voted against the resolution, wondered why the majority waited until after those COW discussions to show their hand. He didn't get an answer. "Because we didn't need you to pass it" would've been, well, gratuitous.

Deborah Prickett, who offered the  resolution, resisted Sutton's and Anne McLaurin's efforts to get her to say what it would mean in practice, or even to define what "mandatory year-round assignments" are. "We'll be reversing," Prickett answered in circular fashion, whatever the policy was that resulted in mandatory year-round assignments in the first place.

But no it won't, because the resolution also bars any use of socio-economic data ("diversity") in the process of filling year-round schools. Diversity has been integral to every student assignment policy in Wake for 30 years. Not to mention that the number of students in year-round schools is far, far higher today than when the first year-round assignments were made in 1999.

Summing up the day, the board majority:

* Reversed course on year-round assignments, ending them for 2010-11 after having seemd to decide to take no such action until 2011-12 at the earliest.

* Did so this time without giving the public a chance to react or comment.

* Did so without giving Burns or his staff a chance to comment, and in fact after leading them to believe that they'd have several months -- and a survey of parents -- to guide their future planning.

When it was over, an unhappy McLaurin wondered if the majority still wanted the survey, and whether it was fair to ask the staff to do it while directing them to simultaneously overhaul the year-round schools process. "I think it's a lot to ask of staff," she said quietly, "to handle these things at the same time."

Try as he did to suppress it, Margiotta could've keep the smirk off his face. "I think they can do it," he said.

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments (5) RSS

Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment

I am embarrassed to be "represented" by Ms. Prickett.

Posted by Jeff S on | Report this comment

If I was a staff member for the schools, I'd be VERY tempted right now to start a quiet little revolt in the ranks. These yahoos on the new majority have no idea what they're doing and they're just storming through resolutions based on what the special interests that got them in their seats want. Because apparently, in their eyes, campaign rhetoric and sound policy decisions are the same thing. I fear for Wake Schools now.

Posted by RaleighRob on | Report this comment

Boggles the mind doesn't it. Seems to me they have given themselves the perfect alibi of "You asked for it, we gave it to you, not my fault."

Posted by apexmom on | Report this comment

apexmom, You hit the nail on the head. They will ignore the survey results (Prickett, who asked for the survey, is now saying it's not to gauge intentions but to generate ideas) and forge ahead. Then if everything gets messed-up they can say "we were just giving the parents what they asked for." Never mind that your kindergartener has 35 kids in her class. JeffS - I'm with you. She's not representing anyone in her district except the small number of people who worked on her campaign. I think everyone who voted for her should have to attend one of these 8-plus hour BOE meetings and watch her in action. They'd be just as embarassed as you and I are. They'd get to see her deer-in-the-headlights look every time she's asked a question. Watch her give ridiculus answers showing she has no clue what's she talking about. And her best performance to date: Keith Sutton, sitting next to her, asked why she didn't mention the during the hour they'd just spent discussing the survey. She just sat there and didn't say anything. Nothing. When the silence was becoming ackward Malone, another embarrassment, jumped in and said he'd be proud to vote for the resolution.

Posted by mal99 on | Report this comment

How do we do this is certainly one of the questions, along with what is the cost? Will the fiscally conservative majority continue to move ahead if the cost is greater than the current plan? Has anyone asked that question yet? Does anyone know how much this will cost? As a watcher of school boards in the Triangle, I have always been impressed with the thoughtfulness of the Wake Board. In contrast, the actions of the new board seem to be thoughtless and frankly a little scary. Getting this plan together in four to five months is a daunting process. I, too, feel for the staff charged with implementation.

Posted by Spencer on | Report this comment

Add a comment

Things To Do

»

July

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Comments

Hi, Wisperjet..

to borrow an analogy, you "missed the train". The Tier I part of the project
(completed …

by mattmckrell on High-Speed Rail thru Raleigh: What route? At what price? (Citizen)

I appreciate your column in The Independent of July 28 regarding Wake County school assignments. I appreciate that Michael Alves …

by WFHardiman on What does the Wake school board majority "intend"? As Michael Alves says, we'll know very soon (Citizen)

Indyweek Mobile
Giveaways
Cocktail Compass
Hopscotch
Buy Indy Photos
User Survey

© 2010 Independent Weekly • 302 E. Pettigrew St, Suite 300, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919 286 1972 • fax 919 286 4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation