Power, Corruption & Lies

C'mon... Do we really believe that Board members Susan Evans, Christine Kushner & Jim Martin aren't secretly involved with the partisan and very hateful group, Great Schools in Wake? You'd be foolish to believe otherwise. 

Back in May, I wrote this blog post. Members of GSIW were somehow completely aware of what was going to happen during the Board meeting in June the following month. How?  Because they were orchestrating it thru their members - Evans, Kushner & Martin. 

GSIW "suggested" in their email for a push to create a directive for a new student assignment plan. Voila!...the Board majority had a new directive prepared and ready to approve for the June meeting. Coincidence? I think not. 

(BTW -- here's a photo of GSIW and their "diverse" group. Notice in the article that Board member Susan Evans is referred to as a "coalition leader" - even though she continues to deny involvement with this group. Evans also placed a GSIW leader to chair her Board Advisory Committee. Does she really think we're that stupid or is she just that arrogant?)

The WakeEd blog had a post recently about Yevonne Brannon, the leader of GSIW, containing another email sent to her group. Her email blathers on and on with praise for her friends/members on the School Board yet berates Supt. Tata at every opportunity. Since then, this small group of crazy women (honestly, have you heard them before?) have organized their comments at every School Board meeting to bash and blame Tata.

So, is it really surprising to anyone that Chair Hill and Vice-Chair Sutton have now scheduled a closed session meeting to discuss "personnel matters" on Monday? 

Are they firing Tata? 

Yevonne and her GSIW biddies have ordered it -- therefore, Evans, Kushner & Martin must make it so. That's how the School Board rolls these days.

Add to this all the push-pull of student assignment (which GSIW is intimately involved with too) and you, as a parent in Wake County, are losing every chance of being heard. 

Your School Board is being controlled by a small fringe group who don't have to follow rules or ethics policies. They just make a demand -- and the Democrats on the Board respond.

The days of parents being recognized in WCPSS are slowly slipping away. Choice is being shown the door and stability will soon be a memory. To put a nail in the coffin, Board member Susan Evans, has already stated:

"...we have the opportunity through assignment to assign kids wherever we feel like is in their best interests."

Apparently, that's what GSIW wants -- because that's certainly not what the parents of Wake County have been fighting for over the years.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/wake-county-school-board-on-assigning-students-in-their-best-interests#storylink=cpy

Out of focus

Let me start out by saying that I believe assignment - and how students are assigned - should have nothing to do with achievement. For decades, the solution to addressing student achievement in WCPSS was always to fall back on student assignment. If a school wasn't performing, students were moved to other schools to make the school "healthy" once again. That solution didn't actually do anything positive to the education of those who were moved - you simply can't make a child smarter or perform better just by reassigning them. But, it made some people feel good. Really good. It was a cheap, feel-good way to perpetuate the awards for diversity and the perception of "no bad schools". It also, however, created much unnecessary instability, did nothing to improve achievement and ticked off many parents royally.

WCPSS was on its way to untangling assignment from achievement with the new Choice Assignment Plan. All parents were given choice - with a mix of proximity, calendar, and magnets. All families were promised stability at every school level and a predictable future as their children aged up. Plain and simple - this plan provided what parents wanted for their children and families -- and had little to do with raising achievement.

As a result of this new focus, Supt. Tata and his staff have worked to understand the educational needs of different schools and students and have implemented academic solutions to address achievement -- and we are now seeing very successful results. Just last week, the NC Department of Public Instruction released performance data for Wake County schools -- and the results are incredible. There have been gains across the district - at many schools and subgroups. (You can look up your school here.)

So, rather than fret over the demographics of a school and how to create and maintain a utopian mixture of students, it's obvious that our focus should remain on how each school population could be served better academically. We've seen the success - and it could be only the beginning.

Instead, however, the School Board has thumbed their noses at parents and chose to direct staff to link assignment with achievement once again. They didn't even wait to see how many more successes could be achieved. The new Choice Assignment Plan has been nixed (without even getting a chance) and we're moving back to "healthy" schools, set aside seats for certain types of student, limited choice and quotas for every school.

Back to a system that believes assignment and "diversity" will magically increase achievement. In reality, it will only serve to make the Democratic Board members feel good about themselves. After all, that's all it's done in the past.

And now for something really scary...

As I talked about in my last post, the WCPSS Board majority is raising the dead.

Yes, the horrors of nodes, multi-year reassignment plans and assignment quotas are on the verge of a unwanted return.

And that's not even the scary part.

A parent from Kevin Hill's district wrote to him with concerns about changing the new Choice Assignment plan. In his reply, Mr. Hill stated: 

"I agree with the following: 'Parent choice' proceeds from the belief that the purpose of education is to provide individual students with an education. In fact, educating the individual is but a means to the true end of education, which is to create a viable social order to which individuals contribute and by which they are sustained. 'Family choice' is, therefore, basically selfish and anti-social in that it focuses on the 'wants' of a single family rather than the 'needs' of society."

Say WHAT?!

Kevin Hill, the chairman of the Wake County Board of EDUCATION, does not believe that the purpose of education is to provide individual students with an education?!

Hill believes your children should be used "to create a viable social order"?

O.M.G.

Yeah, read that again...and again...until it really sinks in. 

It's hard to believe Hill actually admits that he doesn't think education is about educating at all. But, after years of pretending otherwise, he did. 

So, the jig's up.

It is now clear that this new Board majority isn't out to help you or your children. So, you can quit emailing them about not getting your 1st choice, or not liking your feeder pattern, or your disgust over their sneaky midnight vote to revive the old assignment plan. It does not matter.

What matters to them is what part you and your children will play in their socially-engineered agenda.  To them, you, your family and your children are just pieces of their societal puzzle.

And we should be very scared.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/06/20/2150093/change-in-wake-student-assignment.html#storylink=cpy

Were you even awake?

Well, Wake County, here's what you elected.

The School Board waited until 12:53 A.M. (yes, A.M.) to rush through a vote -- without public input -- that will drastically alter the new choice assignment plan. 

You know, the plan that our superintendent and staff have worked on for the past 2 years, the plan where everyone has already made their choices for next year, the plan that gave our families choice and our children stability, the plan that hasn't even been fully implemented yet. 

And guess what? They have directed staff to go back to a multi-year, node-driven assignment plan that incorporates socioeconomic and academic achievement goals. 

Gosh, that sounds awfully familiar. 

During the meeting on Tuesday (and into Wednesday) and just before voting on the directive that will probably reassign your child, School Board member Susan Evans felt it was important to remind everyone who she is and what she thinks of us -- in her usual arrogant and condescending fashion.

"While I acknowledge that, first of all, the Raleigh Chamber and the Wake Ed Partnership are valuable partners in our community, and I respect the input of all citizens, at these board meetings on the blogs, wherever they choose to give their input, I just wanted to remind Ms. Prickett and the board that we are the elected officials charged with making these important decisions on behalf of the school system."

In other words, everyone can go pound sand.

Wake Education Partnership called this vote a "...late-night, partisan debate..." with the "...abscence of a collaborative approach."

The Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce also issued a statement to the School Board warning them -- and reminding them of the past: 

"Based on our research we believe that an address based approach advocated in the directive will require mandatory assignment to fill schools." "With a sizeable majority of parents satisfied with the current choice plan we anticipate a change will create disruption among a new group of stakeholders."

Disruption is putting it mildly.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/greater-raleigh-chamber-of-commerce-disappointed-in-wake-county-school-boards-student-assignm#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/greater-raleigh-chamber-of-commerce-disappointed-in-wake-county-school-boards-student-assignm#storylink=cpy

So, where do we stand now? That's a good question. Some are claiming this was merely a directive; others are calling this the creation of a new plan for 2013-14. Regardless of what this turns out to be (and, let's be honest -- this really is a return to the days of yearly reassignments), you should be awake and be concerned.

This is just another step in the wrong direction.

That's what friends are for

Now wait just a minute.

Board member Jim Martin said what?

Martin said the provost of N.C. State asked him to help out.

For May 29th's policy committee meeting, Martin, the chair of that committee, added an agenda item to discuss "Student Assignment for Extended Family Professional Leave". And then, at the meeting, proceeded to talk about how to create a policy specifically to serve his colleagues at NCSU.

Is this really a pressing issue? Well, for Mr. Martin, a professor at NCSU, it is. After all, this is his employer we're talking about.

I questioned Mr. Martin about the unethical nature of creating a policy to serve his friends and co-workers at the request of his boss. His response, in a nutshell, was..."The Provost is not my boss."

Martin goes on to say in his email..."You must realize that NCSU is one of the large employers of Wake County. It is for that reason that we should pay attention to matters impacting that employer. Careful attention should be paid to policies that impact any of the County's major employers."

He isn't concerned with, as he called them during the committee meeting.."the lowest common denominator". In Martin-speak, that would be those people who aren't as fortunate to have professional opportunities but have to leave the system for a short period for other reasons.

According to Mr. Hui on the WakeED blog.."[Martin contends]...that it's not equitable to say that because famlies of transient students have less resources than professionals that it's a reason not to go ahead with a leave policy."

So, let's boil it down....

Martin isn't concerned about you and me. He isn't concerned about those with less opportunities and less resources. He only wants to serve those he works with, those that attend his son's school and those who are just like him.

So, how do you feel about that? If you work for a major employer...let's say...NSCU, for example... Mr. Martin will pay careful attention to you and your children. He'll work to create policies to help you to ensure you're happy.

If you don't, well, you know...

You're an afterthought. After MYR and years of reassignment, it's an attitude those of us in Apex are familiar with.

It appears that attitude is making a comeback.

Ethics, schmethics

Do you remember when Susan Evans was questioned about her continued involvement with GSIW? In this email, she claimed:

"I am neither actively involved in their [GSIW's] activities, nor am I given any advance notice of the content or distribution of their press releases."

Hmmm. Really?

So, how does GSIW already know what is going to happen at the June 5th Board meeting?  

Here's an email I just received:

From: Calla Wright <ccaac_aacca@yahoo.com>

Subject: [CoalitionofConcernedCitizensforAfricanAmericanChildren] Fw: May Meeting Notes, YOUR HELP NEEDED

Date: May 20, 2012 4:25:20 PM EDT

To: coalitionofconcernedcitizensforafricanamericanchildren@yahoogroups.com

Cc: parentsfordiversity@yahoogroups.com

--- On Sat, 5/19/12, yevonne brannon <ybrannon@gmail.com> wrote:

From: yevonne brannon <ybrannon@gmail.com>
Subject: May Meeting Notes, YOUR HELP NEEDED
To:
Date: Saturday, May 19, 2012, 11:11 AM

I am very sorry that you missed our meeting on Tuesday.  Your help is needed!!

Here are the meeting notes.  Please review and let us know how you can help.  ACTIVATE your friends to join you!  It is very important NOT to stand down in the month of June!! We still have many opportunities to make a difference! Some of  the critical decisions facing the board in June---from the magnet study results, the results of round one and two of assignment plan, to voting on the budget, and directives needed NOW for the 2013 Student assignment plan—let’s make sure we have a strong voice at the June 5 and June 19 board meetings.

 

Work to DO: 

1.  JUNE 5 Board Meeting: We are going ALL out to get a lot of speakers at this meeting.  We are still working to get the board to at least direct the staff for the 2013 assignment PLAN.  We need everyone to show up and speak.  We can help you with speeches. PLEASE talk to Amy W and Lynn and coordinate this effort.  Here’s the bottom line: June 5 will be the last board meeting before school is out.  We need to let the BOE know how well they did this school year!! GIVE them their Grade for the school year, did they pass?? Did they make appropriate progress in a year?  Come on, this could be fun!!!!  (other topics include the budget, the transportation mess, the horrid behavior of the feeble four, the horrid CHOICE plan in summary, the need for NEW PLAN directive for staff to start working on now!)

2. Research:

1)      Amy Lee is working on the update on Round Two of the student assignment results. Patty is working on the web site update and on various fact sheets.  Please contact Patty if you can help with the fact sheets.

2)      Call/email Amy Lee and Sharon if you can help with the IMPACT of the Choice Plan on our schools.  This is critical research and will help us in other legal actions.

 

3. Letters to the Editor: Please consider drafting a ton of LTES right away on the following three topics:

1)      Lack of transportation for those assigned without transportation. This is just as wrong as the Unassigned.  If you were an unassigned, then you will especially understand this issue. Use the I contact today to draft a short LTE.

2)      Let’s find a better way:  NEED a lot of push as the next school board meeting (JUNE 5) to MAKE A NEW PLAN for 2013.  Start by getting a lot of LTEs on asking for a directive that stops using the CHOICE proximity model and starts using a RESIDENCEY based assignment plan.  We need to set the stage for the June 5 meeting with LTEs.  If you draft, send to Patty who will edits and give to Amy W and Lynn to get published. 

3)      VALUE of magnet schools.  Clearly, magnet schools are under attack.  PLEASE take the survey and write an LTE supporting the many important objectives of the magnet program. See I contact you received for points to make.

 4.  TAKE THE SURVEY on Magnets:

1)      Yes, this is not appropriate to have a thrown together –shallow survey—only online!! But we need to make sure it is balanced in the responses.  Please get your pta to print copies or your church/synagogue and get those mailed in to central office.

2)      Make sure you add in the comments how unfair and hasty this approach to magnet reviews is and how it is not ethical to continue to attack one of our best options at attempting to keep our schools well utilized and balanced.

5.  Let’s Find a Better way.org :  Please keep putting in your stories here—this is our way to document the tragedy of the Choice Plan.  Let your contacts know of this web site.

September 29, 2012 FORUM: We are planning a statewide forum for this date.  Working title: Protecting the Public in Public Education, or Public Education is the Better Way or something positive but urgent about how we need to fight against the attacks on Public Education (lack of funding, charter schools, vouchers/tax credits for private schools, revitalization of schools services, the reformers etc.)  If you have suggestions for focus of workshop, speakers etc. please let Patty or me know ASAP. We have started a planning committee---are you interested in helping?  This will be done with GSNC (now Public Education First).

 

6.  UPDATES:

Great Schools in NC has changed to a new name due to issues with domain names/searches etc. We will now be called Public Education First.  We have new web site, Public Education First.org 

More details later.  We will have work to do in changing out our current web and face book page.  We are still seeking funding.  We had a great one day retreat this week and hope to see more progress on this statewide effort soon.  If you want to work on this project, let me know. Also, please nominate names or organizations of folks across the state who should be involved in this coalition of individuals and groups to advocate for public education. Here is revised draft of the GSNC=PEF mission: Public Education First mobilizes citizens to advocate for a system of high-quality, equitable, and diverse public schools for all North Carolina students.

Lots of work to do, let me know how you can be a part of our important work.

Peace and love, Y

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that either Evans or Kushner (maybe both?) are continuing to guide the direction of GSIW and giving insider tips to what they believe are the necessary next steps in stopping the new assignment plan.

Some of these statements are quite particular -- and some use definitive terms.

"We are still working to get the board to at least direct the staff for the 2013 assignment PLAN."

"We need to set the stage for the June 5 meeting with LTEs."

Still working? The 2013 assignment plan? Set the stage? 

Since when is there a 2013 assignment plan? 

Does this mean that the Board majority really is going to completely ignore the cries from parents for a neighborhood school (and choice and stability and predictability) and move back to node-based assignments because that's what GSIW wants? (See my last post.)

Sounds to me like there's been some improper discussions going on. How else would 
Brannon know how to "set the stage" for the next Board meeting?

I think Supt. Tata apologized to these two way too soon. 

Facing reality

Some members of the School Board are now talking about changing the assignment plan. They claim the plan is flawed and needs to be fixed. But, are they really just going to fix what’s not working? Are they really listening to what parents are asking for?

I’ve listened to the relatively few complaints over the past months. Parents – whether they have current WCPSS students, rising K’s, charter, private or home-school students – want a neighborhood school. Some were frustrated that they were left unassigned (and rightly so). But, most of them were concerned over the distance of their assigned school or their feeder pattern schools.

But, the comments made by some School Board members about this plan, once again, seem completely disconnected to reality.

Susan Evans speaks about the new assignment plan in some way at every Board meeting. Most of what she says is to satisfy her friends in the audience – you know, the GSIW crowd. The issues she raises during these soapbox speeches, however, have nothing – nada – zero – to do with the new assignment plan.

She says some parents are unhappy with their predictable feeder patterns because it keeps them in the year-round calendar rather than at a more proximate school. Evans knows full well that the problems we have with YR in our district – and throughout the county – are a direct result of MYR and previous Board’s imbalanced distribution of that calendar.

I completely agree that we are still feeling the aftereffects of MYR in our district – but Evans is intentionally misleading parents by pinning their discontent on the new assignment plan and letting them believe that changing this plan will address their concerns.

At last week’s Board meeting, Christine Kushner indicated she would like to explore a hybrid assignment model for the future – a cross between addressed-based assignments with expanded choice. I’ve written to Ms. Kushner about her comments so she can elaborate but haven’t heard back yet.

After decades of base assigning students and knowing that base assignments WILL LEAD TO REASSIGNMENT, I am baffled that any School Board member would even suggest bringing them back. It may serve to satisfy a few (magnet parents who want to opt back into their neighborhood school, realtors want a school assignment attached to the home) but we all know that base assignments are too rigid for our school system, are unable to effectively address growth, create more problems than they fix and will never be able to provide long-term stability. Who in their right mind would consider bringing them back?

Well, since writing to Ms. Kushner, I found this statement from GSIW and the NC Justice Center from last year which calls for a “fine tune” of the old node system. Both Evans and Kushner were still active leaders in GSIW when this paper was published.

Are these comments about the new assignment plan from Kushner and Evans just another example of GSIW pulling their strings? It’s no secret that GSIW and Evans, in particular, do not like Supt. Tata or this plan. Are these Board members just following their agenda with complete disregard to what parents really want?

Is this School Board interested in facing reality?