Your children. Not mine.

Last week, WCPSS Chairwoman Christine Kushner wrote an article for UNC-Chapel Hill's Morehead-Cain Scholars website. (Yeah, that's a mouthful in itself.)

Her article is titled "The real crisis in public education, and how to fix it".

First of all, "The real crisis"? High and mighty much?

Anyway... I wrote a Letter to the Editor to the News & Observer in response to Ms. Kushner's ridiculous and insulting claim that it is the parents of Wake County that cause her and our school system such heartburn.

As it hasn't been published (yet), I thought I would share it with you here. Enjoy.

Submitted Nov. 7, 2015:

WCPSS Chair Christine Kushner has proudly announced that it is the parents of Wake County who are hurting the public school system. Yes, you. And me. And every other caring parent who has chosen to stay with the public school system yet stands up for their child. According to our School Board, you are a horrible person and simply messing things up.

Kushner condescendingly claims in the article that "individual choice" is the real crisis in our schools. She berates and belittles parents for basically being good parents. She hates parents who make decisions that best serve their own children without considering the "common good". Hates them.

So, it is a little surprising to find out that Ms. Kushner chose to send her child to one of the most exclusive publicly-funded high schools in NC. That's right. She made an "individual choice" for her child's education. A choice that was made, I would assume, based on what was best her family and her child - because I don't see how sending her child to a limited enrollment high school with a highly competitive admission process that is fully funded by the state (including tuition, room and board) helps the rest of us.

Apparently, the common good is your problem to solve...with your children - not hers.

What a patronizing hypocrite.

You should be outraged.

According to WRAL, a student brought an unloaded gun to Apex Middle School last year. Not only did he threaten other students with the gun, he also "...pointed the gun...and pulled the trigger".

Then, according to the parent of one of the victims, this student said: "Don't tell. If you do, I have the bullets in my backpack and you'll be next."

Yes, this happened at Apex Middle School. Yes, last year. And, yes, according to the article, our WCPSS School Board and their "policies" have allowed this student back into the public school system. Worse, they have assigned this student to the same high school that his victims attend.

Do your children attend Apex Friendship High School? Are you aware that this student is lurking your hallways? Will this student be reassigned to another high school in our community? Will our School Board member, Susan Evans, ever notify us or our community? Or is she too busy chasing her political dreams? 

I'm outraged. You should be too. Here's my reaction. And, if you're pissed off like I am, here's their email addresses: WCPSS Board of Education 

(And don't forget to include the elusive and secretive Supt. Merrill)
 

Mrs. Evans, Mrs. Kushner & Supt. Merrill,

It is absolutely reprehensible to read about this situation that occurred in my community - and my schools - from WRAL. 

Considering the climate we live in today and the incidents that have occurred in schools across the country, it is completely unacceptable for this information to be withheld from parents. To add insult to injury,  your so-called policies have allowed this student back into the public school system to attend the very same school as those he threatened. There is no indication that any other actions by the Board or the superintendent have or will be taken regarding the safety and protection of our children from this student. For God's sake, he brought a gun, PULLED THE TRIGGER, and then threatened to bring bullets the next time. When is the next time? Are you waiting to react after the fact?

I demand answers as to why we, as parents and as members of the Apex community, were not notified of this when it occurred last year. I demand to know why this dangerous student is allowed back into our schools after, as School Board member Keith Sutton says, "they have served their time" with a one year suspension. I truly empathize for the parents of these victims who have been ignored and lied to by this School Board. I am outraged and ashamed at each and every one of you.

Allison Backhouse
Apex, NC



 

Snow Job

Spring Break is gone. Well, most of it. Families were blindsided by WCPSS with a complete reversal decision announcement on Saturday about the winter weather make up days.

Parents are angry. So far, over 7,500 parents, teachers, and students have signed a petition to show how angry they are. Many families have long-standing nonrefundable travel plans. Many were looking forward to this one of very few opportunities to be together for the week.

I understand their anger. And their frustration. But let's make sure we understand what we really should be angry about. It's not about Spring Break. It's about why and how we lost Spring Break.

In a nutshell, this is the epitome of bad governance.

Let's begin by understanding that the 2014-2015 school calendar has built-in make up days. According to the WCPSS website: March 23, June 9, June 10, and June 11 are the Teacher Work Days "Available for Weather Make up".

Board Chair Christine Kushner and Supt. Merrill first told us that June wouldn't be used and our children would be attending school on Good Friday and two Saturdays in order to provide "quality instructional time".

What a load. Last Friday was originally planned as an early-release day. It was extended 2 1/2 hours to a full day to make up for one of the missed snow days. But then... it was delayed 2 hours again due to ice that didn't happen. Where did that "quality instruction time" go?

And what about the day WCPSS waited to cancel school until after a few buses hit the road? That "quality instruction" isn't being made up at all.

Enough of that, let's talk about the governance issue.

On Tuesday, March 3rd's work session, WCPSS staff recommended using Good Friday and two Saturdays. Go to 46:55 mark of their work session.

At the 55:25 mark of the Board work session, Supt. Merrill clearly supports use of this option as a way to protect Spring Break for families.

At the 58:00 mark, Cathy Moore asks for support of this staff recommendation and Chair Kushner responds "You have consensus support of that recommendation."

YOU HAVE CONSENSUS SUPPORT OF THAT RECOMMENDATION.

Even the so loved WCPSS Twitter account tweeted:

(They're not so sassy anymore, are they?)


So, what could possibly have happened between Tuesday and Saturday? That's the big question.

An even bigger and more concerning question is... why the quiet announcement on a Saturday? Since the Board wasn't scheduled to meet, who made this decision to use Spring Break days?

What's the point of having a public discussion and "consensus approval" from the Board about the make up days if they're not going to follow it?

Why include input from staff and communicate this to the public if they are just going to run roughshod and make up their own rules without any transparent discussion?

I understand staff met again on Friday and Saturday to discuss this. What influenced them to convene again to discuss a different option? Who was at that meeting? Was the Board involved? If so, how? I've asked for minutes from this meeting but there are no minutes taken at staff meetings.

Did WCPSS violate the public records law by deleting records from Twitter and Facebook about previous discussions and decisions?

And where in the world is Supt. Merrill? Mr. Mustache didn't even show up to defend this decision in today's press conference. Instead, he sent Deputy Superintendent Cathy Moore to do his dirty work. Coward.

So many questions...

But, again, this isn't really about Spring Break. Losing Spring Break is simply the result of bad governance, a lack of transparency, and a Board that does what it wants to do, regardless of policy.

I'm just hoping those 7,500 people will remember this next election.




 

Tomorrow is Yesterday

Well, well, well.  It really is true.

The Democratic-led WCPSS School Board is clearly rebranding the vision of the '09 Republican-led School Board and calling it their own.

You read that right.

The Democrats have not brought back diversity busing as their supporters elected them to do. In fact, according to WCPSS staff, they have no intention of using diversity assignments anymore.

Yes, yes. I know. Even after all those protests, disruptions, and arrests back in 2010; even after all the media play over how removing the long-standing diversity policy would destroy our school system and our community; even after watching Rev. Barber and his uber-liberal GSIW crew disrupt meeting after meeting with dancing, praying, singing, and name-calling over the end to diversity busing. Yup, even after all that, the Democratic Board isn't going to do it.

Instead, they are continuing the vision of the Margiotta-led Board and the work by Supt. Tata.

But, how can that be? How can Susan Evans, Jim Martin, Christine Kushner, the 3 current Board members who were part of the GSIW leadership team and who have stood side-by-side with Rev. Barber at protests and Moral Mondays, now see things MY way?

Bizarro world, indeed.

And think about it. Putting an end to diversity assignments back in '09 was an outrage. The liberals lashed out and decried the policy change as "resegregation" and said we were heading back to the days of Jim Crow. They then caused enough ruckus and created enough fear across our county to regain control in the next election.

Geez, guys. What was the big deal?

This School Board is doing exactly what the Margiotta-led Board was trying to do: End the long bus rides for poor and minority students and bring the resources to the students and schools that need them the most.

Did anyone hear that message back then?

When Supt. Tata was leading the charge, it was called Managed Performance Empowerment (MPE) and was part of his 2012 strategic plan. High-needs schools were identified and given more funding to improve academics. I blogged about the ending of this program - the Renaissance schools - and their funding back in June.

And, yet, lo and behold, the WCPSS staff announced last week that, rather than busing, they too will be using the MPE model and provide extra resources to high-needs schools.

Hmm, oddly familiar and eerily quiet.

I was hesitant to believe that Supt. Merrill and this Board were going to simply repackage Tata's work and the vision of the '09 Board when they came out with a new academic formula earlier this year - one that didn't place a priority on diversity assignments.

Today, I'm glad to see things playing out as they should have in 2009.

And without all the noise.

Irrational Numbers

A research paper about WCPSS was released this past June. It's titled "Middle School Math Acceleration and Equitable Access to 8th Grade Algebra: Evidence from the Wake County Public School System" and speaks very highly of WCPSS' math placement policy. And yet it has received no media attention, no mention of it by the School Board, and not a peep about it from Supt. Merrill.

But, why? Why would such an important document - one that shows that a simple change in policy has resulted in academic success for many minority and low-income students - not be lauded by the Wake County Public School System?

Let's go back to 2009 so you understand the whole story.

In 2009, a scathing report was released by SAS that accused WCPSS and their data reporting of "hiding an inequitable situation for students in schools serving more FRPL [free reduced price lunch] students." Under the leadership of then-Supt. Burns (the coward that left when he couldn't stand the heat), WCPSS had been purposefully withholding minority and economically-disadvantaged (ED) students from being placed in Algebra 1, even though they were academically ready.

Shameful, right? Even worse, Supt. Burns had the nerve to suppress this report for months - with no intention of releasing it to the public. No wonder he hightailed it out of town.

Fortunately, the then-School Board (you know, the ones that were painted as evil and racist) immediately worked to address this educationally-damaging practice that was restricting access to Hispanic and Black middle school students. Yes, that's right. They focused on academics; not diversity.

But this wasn't without strong opposition from the "diversity lover" Democrats.

School Board member Kevin Hill and newly-elected Jim Martin fought against allowing access to these children. Even though Hill acknowledged that some students had been wrongly held back, the Democratic Board members still believed that these minority children weren't capable of achieving.

Ironic, isn't it? The very people that were supported by the NAACP and Rev. Barber, the very people who stood arm in arm at protests and candlelight vigils, the very people who were elected to "protect diversity" were completely against implementing a policy that provided minority students opportunities to succeed.

Passing this policy was a huge step forward. Enforcing this new policy and unwinding years of a culture of low expectations was daunting. As the paper points out, "..compliance with the policy appeared more modest in its first few years." However, after a "powerful directive" from Supt. Tata, "...compliance with the policy became stronger over time".

The result? Enrollment in Algebra 1 nearly doubled from 2009 to 2011.

(Side note: let's not forget that Kevin Hill and his fellow Board members hated Tata's leadership style. Maybe because Tata demanded and expected results. Unlike Supt. Merrill, who does...what?)

And it wasn't just enrollment that increased. After the policy had been in effect for a full year and thousands of students were added to Algebra 1, much to the dismay of the Democrat School Board members, overall performance for all students in Algebra I went up 1.1%. 

So, read the paper. It's a lot to digest but here are some important facts about the policy change:

• We know from the End-of-Course (EOC) data that >95% of students placed are successful.

• The inclusion of ED and minority students in 8th grade Algebra I has significantly increased.

• Providing access to higher-level math exposed ED and minority students to teachers who were of average or greater than average effectiveness. Historically, these children have not had access to highly-effective teachers.

This is all great news but, under our current leadership, some very important questions and concerns remain:

• Has inclusion remained a goal of the system?

• Do students stay on an accelerated track once in high school?

• As the paper points out, this policy had to be mandated by Supt. Tata. What is Supt. Merrill's mandate? 

The math placement guidelines may be the same in writing as they were in 2010 but compliance to the policy is now unknown. Transparency is something this Board has lacked since day one. Are all qualified children, regardless of socioeconomic status or race, still given access to the proper math class? Supt. Tata demanded that the data regarding placement be transparent. Supt Merrill? Not so much.

So, now you know. Acknowledgement of this success by the Tata-hating School Board would be extolling the virtues of Tata's leadership and decisions. That will simply never happen.

And, considering Board members haven't changed their opinion on the capabilities of poor and minority children, don't hold your breath on any mention of this paper any time soon.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/08/19/1422077/hell-be-a-teacher-at-131000-a.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/sas-and-wakes-achievement-gap#new#storylink=cpy

The Suburban Imbeciles

I just watched the WCPSS Strategic Plan meeting...aka #wakevision.

(If you want to waste 2 hours of your time, you can watch it here.)

This meeting was held at Memorial Hall on May 30th to kickoff the development "of a five-year strategic plan that will guide the school system moving forward." (BTW, this meeting cost you at least $2,422.85.) (And...the last five year strategic plan was done just two years ago. But, whatever.)

The speaker hired by WCPSS, some guy who calls himself a futurist, was actually okay.  Engaging, sounded pretty knowledgeable, had some interesting ideas. A little nutty but tolerable, I guess. In a nutshell, his message was that we need to be teaching for our kids' future, and not from our own past. And how important this is - now more than ever - because the world is changing at a faster rate than it ever has. 

Good message. But, considering this crowd and that School Board members and Supt. Merrill were in the room, it probably floated over their heads and right out the door.

But, the absolute best part of this meeting (and well worth watching at 1:51:55) was when one parent, Becky, stood up to ask a question. Little ol' Becky was pretty confident in her question...as if she already knew the answer. Here's what she said:

"I am the parent of two students at Martin Middle School. One of the stronger points of the Wake County Public School System has been the long-time commitment to having diverse schools. What do you say to parents, and I think this is part of the visioning process, guys - who are so adamant that the worst thing that can happen to their kid is that they could be reassigned to a different school the next year?"

Good grief. 

Could Becky possibly be any more condescending while gnashing her teeth?

Uh, yes, she could. And she was:

"I'm sorry - but if my child is going to have 5 to 10 different careers, God forbid that they should have to go to 4 or 5 elementary schools. I mean, it seems like preparation for living to me."

OMG. 4 or 5 elementary schools?! 

Becky is either the worst kind of parent or she represents the epitome of a smug, patronizing, and arrogant magnet parent who thinks us "suburban" parents are idiots. 

Maybe that choice is one and the same. :)

And Becky didn't stop there:

"We don't close our schools because the population shifts; we shift the kids around. And it has worked really well - except that parents get so irate because their children, in spite of the fact that they are all digitally connected, that they are losing that connection."

Fortunately, the futurist stopped Becky from babbling and making herself look even more foolish. His response, however, was brilliant. 

He said:

"I will say that if all the schools in the district are equal quality, there shouldn't be a problem. So, that's the first thing. If the school system can stand up and say "You're gonna get the same education", that's a true statement."

And we all know WCPSS isn't about educational equality. If it was, Becky and her buddies would be very upset over losing their magnet goodies and sharing them with the rest of us imbeciles in the suburbs.

And then the futurist said something incredible:

"The other thing is... the word 'diversity'... Diversity is a loaded, social, emotional word of about 50 years standing that, if you want diversity, you have to let go of the legacy thinking of what the word diversity means and create what is diversity in this school district in 2014. Whatever that is... face that diversity, rather than some formulaic thing. But, the first thing is to make all schools good. Then, it doesn't matter."

So, was it worth the $2300 for the venue and god-knows-how-much for Mr. Futurist to tell the irate parents of Wake County what we already know?  

For those last two minutes, yes. Yes, it was.

Do you think Becky, her magnet friends, and the WCPSS School Board actually listened to those comments? 

Not in a million years. 

Understanding this simple concept would require parents like Becky to change. Parents like Becky have it too good in the magnet system. Parents like Becky have absolutely no understanding of the effect of reassignment on a child - not to mention 4 or 5 of them. Parents like Becky may understand that the reassignment of our children allows her magnet children to remain safe, secure, and untouched at their school. Parents like Becky are ignorant and offensive. Sadly, there are plenty of them in Wake County.

Even worse, they are also on our School Board.

Downhill

Think what you may - but Kevin Hill really is a smart guy. Evil and a complete jerk...but smart.

Sure, we caught him scheduling and attending secret meetings. And, we all now know that he has been secretly collaborating his School Board business with members of Great Schools in Wake. And he had the audacity to call parents "selfish and anti-social" in response to a parent's question. But, honestly, so what? He still sits in that Board chair - arrogantly and unaffected. Spouting lies and expecting us to believe them.

Hill was Chairman back in 2012 when he led the charge to fire Supt. Tony Tata.  Hill came up with numerous unsubstantiated excuses when Tata was let go without cause. But, we all know Hill's a liar and Tata's firing was the most partisan move in WCPSS.

My last public information request - the one which has numerous emails from Hill BCC'd to members of GSIW - also contained an interesting email from Hill to Tata.

In this email, Hill thanks Tata for "your letter" and then proceeds to seemingly clarify his opinions on Tata's military background. This email strongly suggests that Hill criticized Tata's military background and service to our country. So much so that Tata felt it necessary to write a letter to Hill. Could Tata's years of service to our country be the reason he was fired?

I asked for a copy of that letter from WCPSS. I was told: "Mr. Hill did not keep a copy".

That's it. Plain and simple -- he doesn't have it. No concern that this is a public document and falls with the General Assembly's definition of "public record". No concern for the contents of this letter and the possible exposure of why Tata was really fired by Hill, Sutton, Evans, Martin and Kushner. 

All Hill had to do was say "I don't have it" and we're all supposed to move along. 

Like I said, smart guy. 

You reap what you sow.

Lies?  Check.
Name-calling?  Check.
Threats?  Check.

And now you can add assault to the list.

Sadly, I'm talking about our School Board.

At last week's public hearing, School Board rep Susan Evans thought she had been deputized to be in charge. After the meeting had finished, parents hung around, very dismayed by the lack of response to their concerns, and began yelling out questions.

School Board rep Keith Sutton - who was running the meeting because our real Chair, Kevin Hill, apparently couldn't be bothered to attend - chose to answer these questions, sorta. Using the microphone from the stage, he deferred and deflected -- rather than act like a normal person and walk down to speak with parents personally. After all, the formal hearing was over.

(On a side note, Chair Hill doesn't like parents - at all - and believes our demands are selfish so maybe it's best he wasn't there. Read this blog post for a little insight to his hatred.)

Anyway -- Sutton did nothing to control the situation or to appease the masses and, as such, Susan Evans saw her opportunity. 

As Evans doesn't have an ounce of compassion nor any understanding of the very personal emotion of watching your children get forcibly reassigned (Evans' children had long-term stable assignments in the magnet system), she chose to argue with the parents in the crowd and explain how wrong they were. She placed the blame of their impending reassignment on staff and the student assignment team - even though this directive from the Board - which Evans supported - is the only reason parents are facing reassignment.

During this back and forth, as he certainly can't be outdone, Jim Martin chimed in with some mindless "I promise to listen" drivel. Surprisingly, he didn't mention he has a PhD.

School Board rep Deborah Prickett then took her turn with the microphone - asking parents about their level of content with the old Choice Plan. As the families in the audience were facing reassignment as a direct result of the Democrat's decision to abandon the Choice Plan, it was a very fair and appropriate question. 

Not according to Susan Evans.

Evans proceeded to manhandle Prickett, wrestled the microphone out of her hand mid-sentence, and declared:

"This is not appropriate. This is not the purpose of the meeting."

I'm pretty sure it was very appropriate and very relevant to the meeting. Those parents in the audience took time to express their concerns about the education of their children and the impact of reassignment on their family yet Evans didn't think talking about it was appropriate?

Evans - who protested arm in arm with the NAACP and GSIW prior to her election - obviously has different definitions of what is appropriate - depending on who you are.

Evans can be seen in this video disrupting a public School Board meeting in 2010. (Watch for the green shirt/black sweater.) She is clapping in the background after her friends crossed School Board security lines, resulting in their arrests.

That sort of behavior is apparently appropriate in the Book of Ethics by Susan Evans. But not speaking to parents at a public hearing?

Now, it's one thing to urge on your friends in their acts of civil disobedience but it is something completely different when you physically put your hands on someone. (Sounds like a Kindergarten speech.)

You would hope this would be common sense to an adult. Apparently not. 

Not only did Evans display childish and bullying behavior in her physical attack on Deborah Prickett, she managed to violate Board Policy about Harassment/Bullying. 

But, does anyone care? What does Supt. Gainey have to say about the Board's behavior? What about Chair Hill? Will he continue to ignore the abhorrent behavior or will complaints be filed against Evans?

Evans' actions have clearly created a very hostile work environment for her fellow Board members. (What's next? A punch in the gut? Keith Sutton - possibly our next Board Chair - has already threatened to kick everyone's asses.) Evans, however, has also managed to create a fear among her constituents about being in disagreement while in her presence - an obviously dangerous combination.

So, do we, as parents and taxpayers, just continue to sit back and watch? If we continue to ignore the actions and decisions of this School Board, we will reap what we sow. 

You and your family just might be next. 

Your future is your past

Have you seen your future?

WCPSS has posted the recommendations for the "bridge" plan for 2013-14. And it provides some very good insight into what is coming down the pike with the BIG reassignment plan in 2014-15. 

If you didn't know already, the new Board majority voted to move back to base assignments - which caused great disruption and upheaval to our children and families for the past decade - rather than continue with the Choice Plan, which promoted proximity and promised stability. And, yes, nodes are back too.

In a quick reading, here are some things we all should be concerned about:

1. Anyone can choose to move back to their base assignment based on their 2011 node assignment. Or can they? In the proposal, it states: "Students participating in the Base Declaration will have a guaranteed seat at their base school for the new school year."

Sounds great! But, wait...there's more. 

 "Unless the school becomes fully capped based on numbers requesting to return to their base school." Huh? That's a guarantee? Some will get their base assignment; some will not. How is that any different than not receiving your first choice, which the anti-Tata's so whined about as a problem with the choice plan?

2. This proposal includes a stay-where-you-start policy. The Dem majority on the Board have touted the implementation of this sort of policy in their push back to base assignments. In his editorial rant, Kevin Hill referred to this new policy as a way to provide stability. Well, what he didn't say is that this Board's version of stability will not, in most cases, come with bus transportation. Read it and weep.

3. Those who participated in the Choice Plan last year are now being told that their promised feeder patterns "...will be honored, to the extent possible." Doesn't sound promising, does it? And, once again, your choice to maintain that feeder pattern may not come with transportation.

Keep in mind -- this is just the beginning. This proposal mostly addresses the opening of a few new schools. Next year, the Board will address what they have coined as "hot spots" across the county - and more than likely use the same guidelines as listed in this proposal.

No bus, no choice, no stability, and no recourse. Welcome back to 2008.

What goes around, comes around

Back in January of this year, I wrote a blog post about the AdvancED complaint filed by the NAACP. (Read it first - if you haven't already. It will help with the history.)

While I stand by my claim that their complaint was ridiculous, I had to chuckle when I read that the Wake County Taxpayers Association (WCTA) has filed a complaint against the new Board majority. Now, I don't find it funny as it relates to our school system (although, accreditation is just a public perception thing, if you ask me), but it is extremely ironic. Or is this Karma?

The Democrats of Wake County - namely Great Schools in Wake - have taught others how to fight dirty and now their tactics are being used against them.

But, the WCTA complaint against the new Board is no joke. Unlike the NAACP, WCTA has their facts (and act) together. Each complaint listed is supported by documentation - whether a media article or a WCPSS document or email. They lay out a concise trail of breadcrumbs for AdvancEd on some serious issues of "...poor governance, inept and irresponsible leadership and lack of transparency and direction", as the complaint states. And this is before the 5-4 partisan vote to fire Supt. Tata!

So, where is the outrage over this? After the NAACP filed their complaint, Yevonne Brannon and her GSIW fringe group were shouting from the rooftops. In October 2010, Brannon and Patty Williams issued the following statement:

“By acting with impunity in moving forward with a massive student reassignment plan,
the Board majority has caused the public to lose confidence in and question their ability
to govern responsibly. Even citizens who voted for majority members are saying, ‘This is not what I voted for.’”

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Here's what Brannon said in January 2011:

“This majority repeatedly claims to care about the wellbeing of students, yet, when the going gets tough, they put their own self-interests ahead of those of our children. Once again, they are rushing to judgment without regard for how their decisions will impact the reputation of our award-winning school system.”

Wow. Are Brannon's words coming back to haunt her?

After witnessing the haphazard leadership and partisan actions and decisions of this Board majority, her statement is quite prophetic. And yet GSIW remains silent. And we're to believe that it's not about politics? Yeah, right.

In the last monitoring report from AdvancED, the only praise given was to Superintendent Tata. The AdvancED team acknowledged Tata's leadership and commitment:

"...but the Board has begun moving in the right direction with the Superintendent being a stabilizing force."

"A common theme during interviews was the significance of the Superintendents’ influence on the direction of the system in providing governance and leadership focused on student learning and system effectiveness. Described as a “calmer” Board, stakeholders attributed this change unequivocally to the Superintendent’s leadership."

So, how is it that the only person in WCPSS leadership who was recognized by AdvancED - a firm that is "dedicated to advancing excellence in education"- was summarily fired? 

The Board was scheduled to submit a progress report to AdvancED by November 1st even prior to the new WCTA complaint. Now, they have the onus of responding to the new complaint as well. 

Considering Supt. Tata was fired without cause with a 5-4 vote, you must wonder if AdvancED will believe the continued lie from the Board majority - that his firing was not political and not personal?

Let's hope not.