Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Tracked Back In!

I know that you haven’t heard much from me lately, but I can explain.  We just completed our first track out and were out of town during that time.  We enjoyed our rearranged vacation back home.  By rearranged I mean we usually go to visit family and friends back home around the 4th of July time.  We go then well because quite frankly we can count on it being warm at that time.  But because of the YR conversion this year we just couldn’t make it happen.  So we stepped back and looked at it.  We figured we could still go on the kids’ first track out.  Being September, though, it is kinda hit or miss with the weather but we thought at least we would be able to catch the fall colors changing.  The weather was quite frankly a little cool when we got there and down right hot when we left.  All in all a great get away with lots of fun activities for all. 

We returned to school this past Monday.  The children knew, at least two of them, that their rooms would be different and they knew right where they needed to go.  I had the opportunity to take my kindergartner to school that day and she was a bit confused.  I kept asking her if her room was changing prior to the track out and she insisted that she was in the same room.  Come to find out that wasn’t entirely true.  As we ventured down the hall and realized we were not where we needed to be, her teacher heard us and popped her head out to catch us.  They had only moved the the room next door so it wasn’t much of a move but still a move none the less.  I kept waiting for the teachers to send home reminders of classroom changes prior to the track out but that never occurred.  Luckily my 2 older kids where keeping close track of that but I feel bad for the younger one.  At least I was able to take her that first day back, but what of all those young and confused kids like my daughter that didn’t have that luxury?  I bet they were scared.  My suggestion is that with the younger children the teachers should send home a reminder over break of their new room number so that the parents can reiterated that to them prior to returning to school.  Sounds fair.

I also found something very lovely when I walked through the front doors of the school.  On a board sitting for all to see in front of the office was a welcome back poster for all those returning teachers on track two.  I thought that was just a real nice thing to do.  I do have to give a shout out here to my son’s 4th grade teacher Ms. Dudley who was unfortunately forgotten on the board.  While all the other teachers names were placed on nice old school house shaped cards, Ms Dudley was on a yellow post it note.  So here is a very warm welcome back to you Ms. Dudley. 

I know that you haven’t heard from me in a while and quite simply that is because everything is going fine.  Our school is adjusting well to the new schedule with no major hang ups.  I have finally had an opportunity to speak with the Principle about how things are going and it’s true that they did have to close on track of I believe 4th graders but she assured me that this happens every year the only obstacle is that when a class is consolidated now they have to contend with the track system.  How has everyone else found their new system working?  If your from Rand Road let’s hear from you. 

My elementary school has gained over 125 new students this year. They are utilizing storage spaces as classrooms. They have also combined a 4th grade class so it has 52 students with 2 teachers because we have simply run out of space. Meanwhile, our old converted elementary school is not even changing classrooms for track in/track out so classrooms are sitting completely empty for 3 weeks.  This “new system”, as you called, is a failure.

Sounds like you are at a traditional elementary school.  Would that be correct?  If it is and you opted out of the converted school to go traditional it’s not the school systems fault.  The only failure here is people’s lack of vision.  Everybody, almost anyway, opposed to the converted schools will now see that the board of education was correct in their assessment of the growth in the area.  How sad that it had to happen after the fact.

Sheryl,
I can’t believe you are saying it’s my fault for my “lack of vision”. Is that just “the price I have to pay” for wanting a traditional school?  Unfortunately, your attitude is exactly how the school system feels about the situation as well. Blame me, blame WakeCares, blame the judge, blame anyone and everyone but those who are in charge.

Growth is not the reason for our today’s situation. Poor planning and bad decisions are why my school is overcrowded and the YR schools are underenrolled.

Blaming me for the situation at our new school indicates to me that you really don’t understand the situation at hand. Just turn a blind eye and be happy planning your next track out vacation.

We all have to remember that there are 2 sides to every story. 

In regards to the overcrowded traditional schools, unfortunately the people with the lack of vision happen to be the WCPSS growth management and school board.  Many parents HAD vision, which is why they continued to insist over and over that the School Board needed to have a “Plan B”.  They (we) saw that the reassignment proposal was flawed and was not going to be able to accomplish what it promised.  We tried and tried to convince the School Board to look outside the box to find other ways to handle the growth.  Instead, the reassignments and conversions were pushed forward without a contingency plan, and look where we all are today.

The fact that parents opted for traditional schools says nothing about lacking vision.  In my opinion, it shows that the year-round option just would not work for their families.  They were looking out for what was most precious to them, and no one should fault them for that.  They were going to have to sacrifice and leave the school they knew and loved for an “unknown” in order to keep their family together.  I’m guessing that there was a lot of “soul searching” that went on during that process, so I can truly feel for the families in that situation.  Sadly, these families DO have vision and presented their “vision” to the school board, but it all appeared to fall on deaf ears.

We opted to stay at the school we were at instead of being subjected to “the unknown traditional school”, and in turn my family is split.  My “vision” included driving far across town to a traditional school just to keep my children on the same calendar, and I didn’t want to put our family through that, so we stayed at the converted YR school.

I’ve had trouble coming up with blog topics because quite frankly, there’s not much to report unless I want to just show all of the negative that has come out of this mess.  For my family, the positive is that we are at the school we all love with teachers and friends we know. 

Sadly it’s tough to find many people who are happy with the conversions.  A few think it’s OK “but just for the next year or 2 until my older child has to go to a traditional middle school”, but the only people I can find who are truly happy with the YR conversions are those who have wanted YR for a long time because both parents work.  They couldn’t keep their children “entertained” during the summer and didn’t want to find 10 week long “daycare” for their children.  I can sympathize with that situation, but on the flip side my family enjoys being together and we enjoy spending summer vacation time together.  We loved having a long summer vacation to just be together—-no European vacations, no month-long cruises—just being together.  Now we will get Thanksgiving, Christmas, and a week in July.  I chose to be a full-time Mom so that I could be with my kids TOGETHER, and the conversions took much of that time away from me.

I still strongly believe that school calendar should be a true CHOICE and not something forced on families against their wishes.  I can only hope that the new assignment plan is more realistic, converts some of the MYR schools back to traditional, and allows those who want YR to get into a YR school.

I’m sure not looking for an argument, but just showing another side of the issue.

Sheryl said “Everybody, almost anyway, opposed to the converted schools will now see that the board of education was correct in their assessment of the growth in the area”.

I don’t think anyone doubted that the area was growing at a fast pace.  I sure didn’t hear anyone doubting the fact that Wake County is growing rapidly.  The problem as I saw it starts with the fact that the growth didn’t happen overnight and proper planning wasn’t put into place in the past to help us NOW.  That is in the past, and not worth rehashing.  No reason to place blame on past administration.  We need to look at 2008 and beyond.

The problem with this year’s plan is, we all knew that Wake County has been growing—-No big secret there.  It is the WAY that they chose to “handle” the growth that I have had the issue with.  The plan was built on the assumption that there would be 8000 additional students in the schools this year, when in actuality it’s more like 6,000 (we’ll know more after tomorrow’s 20-day count)  That prediction itself is off by 25%.  THAT is major, considering the fact that the conversions were pushed through BECAUSE of the “magic number of 8000 students” without giving consideration to so many factors that should have been considered.  What we’ve actually seen is that their “assessment of the growth” was extremely inaccurate.

The 8000 student issue is old as well.  NOW we need to work on the FUTURE to have a plan that is realistic, workable, fair, handles future growth, and takes into account what calendar people want.  I think calendar choice should be KEY in this new plan, or we’ll all be an even worse situation next year. 

Fortunately, the judge’s ruling gives us choice over school calendar, so now the School System should look at the “needs” and the plan should take that into account.  Overcrowded traditional schools and under capacity YR schools is NOT the answer.

Sheryl,
The supply of traditional seats has been reduced by the school system, therefore they have exacerbated the crowding in those locations.

Well I seem to have hit a nerve!  Maybe there is something to that!

Sheryl,
You really should consider retracting that last statement.  Don Imus calling the Rutgers women’s basketball players “nappy-headed hoes” hit a nerve too.  Was there something to that as well?  That line of thinking is clearly a dangerous one.

The foundational fact here is that the school system created a supply of year-round seats without basing it on a solid estimate of demand.  That is poor practice.

Hi Sheryl: 

I’m just curious.  Please clarify what you meant by “Well I seem to have hit a nerve!  Maybe there is something to that!“

If by saying that you are now realizing that there was truth to what the anti-MYR crowd was saying all along, you’re right.  The whole MYR fiasco hit a lot of nerves with a lot of people, and unfortunately many have been hurt by a plan that (as we’ve all seen) has failed.  It’s the families who are suffering now.  If things don’t drastically change this time around, there will be many more negative consequences to many more families.

This system has not failed.  The schools were converted to make room for more students.  More now and more later.  It was never intended to fill up the converted schools now with the new students coming in just this year.  That would be irresponsible planning.  In our schools area there are no new schools planned to be built for several years.  That would mean that we are needing these conversions to work for us for several more years.  Several more increases in the student population.  Whether the increase be 6000 or 8000 new students, does it really matter?  The school system bases their proposed population increase on good numbers from the past.  It is the only way to budget effectively.  If they had under projected the numbers would that make you feel better about the school board or would you be rallying against them for poor planning? 

I agree that this in not an ideal situation for all families.  It really is not an ideal situation for our family but we have adjusted and made it work.  My neighbor, who has children on two different tracks, agrees that there was something that needed to be done about the population growth and handles her situation with grace.  She does not complain.  She is not upset.  She just does what is best for her family.  At the end of the day they are still a family that comes together and enjoys their time with each other. 

Personally I think all schools should be on the YR schedule to accommodate the growth in a responsible way.  That will never happen and I know that in a couple of years my family too will be split. We will adjust when the time comes but we will still be a very close family. 

I will not apologize for any comments I have stated on here and Rich you should be ashamed of yourself.  What Don Imus said was wrong in so many ways I can’t even go into it here.  You repeating what he said is what is irresponsible.  Maybe you should apologize.

Sheryl,
There is so much wrong information in your first paragraph I don’t know where to start.

“More now and more later.  It was never intended to fill up the converted schools now with the new students coming in just this year.  That would be irresponsible planning.“

WRONG. According to CIP 2006…

  “Key considerations in the final CIP were
    the limitation of year-round conversion in
    elementary schools to that level required
    to generate 3,000 seats to address crowding
    in 2007-08…“

Key words..ADDRESS CROWDING IN 2007-08.. not later. Our YR schools are not underenrolled for future growth. Anyone involved in this issue will tell you that.

Many of your statements about the school system are baseless and just plain wrong. You should stick to your mantra: “My kids get bored at home so I like year-round”. That works better for you.

Sheryl:

I’m not sure if your last comment was in response to things I’ve written, but I want to make it clear that I have been respectfully been working WITH the school board for the past year and not “rallying against them”.  However, I have always been completely against the MYR mess because of what it has done to thousands of families when it was clearly NOT an appropriate solution to the problem.

I never said the system had failed—-I said that the reassignment plan and specifically the MYR conversions failed.  Ask any of the school board members if they think the MYR conversions were successful, and they’d tell you the same thing.  We have under enrolled YR schools and severely overcrowded traditional schools.  The F & R percentages are so far off that now they’ve actually adjusted their definition of what is “acceptable” to compensate for these increased F & R percentages.  I see that as a huge problem.

I’m ready to help make positive changes in our school system, and I’m still very willing to work WITH the WCPSS. I have been all along.  I truly hope that this time around they will be willing to work WITH families too.

Allison,

Just to clear up any misconception that you may have about me, I never said that my only reason for wanting YR was because my kids get bored during the summer.  I have left specific aspects of my life out of this conversation because quite frankly it is none of your business.  That being said, I will add that my job is one that does not always allow me to engage my children all day everyday.  That does not make me a bad mother.  Your implication of that is wrong.  Especially when you don’t have all the facts.  You don’t know me.  My children understand the situation and that is all that matters.  Being a working mom doesn’t equate to poor parenting. 

Also, the conversions were intended to be done over a two year period with half the converted schools going to MYR in 2007-08 and the other half converting in 2008-09.  So your assessment of the schools converting to accomodate only the growth in 2007-08 is simply incorrect.  The school board is attempting to help ease the overcrowding we are experiencing now in and in the future for our part of the county.  Every single Elementary school in this part of the county was converted to MYR.  There simply isn’t a traditional option that is close.  Those schools are Vance, Rand Road, and Willow Springs.  Timber Drive was the only YR choice in the area.  Now we have 4 schools that are accomodating the influx of new students in an economical fashion.  You can’t have it both ways.  You can’t want traditional, uncrowded schools without paying the price for it!  Whether it be higher taxes for new schools or MYR to help ease the growth.  You must choose.

Lisa,

No you didn’t say the system failed but you did say that MYR has failed.  “unfortunately many have been hurt by a plan that (as we’ve all seen) has failed.“  I my experience MYR has not failed.  Our school is enjoying much less congestion in its hallways, play ground and carpool lane which used to spill out onto highway 50 causing many a traffic nightmare.  I, unlike you, have not run into many people who are unhappy about the MYR situation.  Most people I run into say that they are enjoying it. 

There were 30,000 families converted to MYR when the YR schedule started on July 9th.  Where are all those families?  I believe I represent the silent majority.  The majority that is too afraid to voice their opinion for fear of attack by the few that oppose this situation.  We don’t hear from them because they are happy! 

The school system now needs to open up those YR seats to families that want them so that the traditional schools can be released from their overcrowding.  That, of course, won’t happen until the appeal process has run its course on Judge Mannings ruling.  That will be interesting.  This is the reason why school board members believe MYR has not worked out.  The school board had a plan B which I found unacceptable.  Split schedules.  Morning classes or evening classes.  Not an appropriate fix to the growth problem.  Let’s not forget that the board had a good plan in place until Judge Manning’s ruling.  They did not create a supply of YR seats without merit. 

The F&R;lunch percentages have always been high in the Garner area.  That does not make for a bad school.  We have enjoyed F&R;lunch percentages in the 40-50% range for years while the rest of the county had percentages in the teens.  Most of the 2,500 or so families that opted out of MYR for traditional come from low income families.  Of course the F&R;percentages where going to be affected. 
 
I too want to help make positive changes with our school system but change is always going to come with turmoil.  Even when you know that the right change is happening.

Sheryl,
Never did I say or imply that you were a bad mother or that a working mother equates to poor parenting. I take offense to your conclusions.

Again, your statement “the conversions were intended to be done over a two year period with half the converted schools going to MYR in 2007-08 and the other half converting in 2008-09” is WRONG. Please show me the WCPSS plan to support that statement. What other “half” is going to be converted in 2008? That would imply 44 schools were on the list.

You appear to make things up as you go. I’ve never heard some of the “defenses” you have for MYR. As a blogger, you do hold some responsibility in providing accurate information.

I think your last comment sums it up for me:

“You can’t want traditional, uncrowded schools without paying the price for it.“

YES I CAN! Why should anyone have to “PAY THE PRICE” for choosing what is best for their children?  We are all in the same school system and should have the same opportunities and the same quality schools. I understand schools vary across the county however my family should not have to “PAY THE PRICE” to maintain a traditional calendar school. I realize that traditional calendar schools are over-capacity but that is WCPSS’s fault not those who opted-out. Please try to understand that.

Your belief that “I have to pay the price” shows you are truly unaware of the facts on this issue and what this “fight” is all about. Again, be happy with YR as it seems to work for you but don’t berate those who fight for what is best for their family. And, if you do criticize others, make sure you know what you are talking about first.

Sheryl,
What Don Imus said was wrong, but he got a reaction.  You got a reaction to your statement, but you assume that what you said could be right.  Why the difference?  Also, I didn’t ask you to apologize, just to consider retracting the statement that hitting a nerve meant you were on to something.  I was not asking you to retract what you said about YR schools, just that eliciting a reaction is indicative of a statement’s validity.

If you read Chuck Dulaney’s affidavit in the Wake CARES case, you will see that he explicitly states that the conversion were needed for 2007-08.  If they didn’t happen, they would need split shifts.  The contention that the conversions were needed for something other than this year is contradicted by the sworn statement of the man in charge of Growth Management.

For what it is worth, I think that you are probably right; the conversions were part of a multi-year capacity plan.  But that is NOT what the school system has maintained.  Thus, we are stuck in the unenviable position of either pointing out that they were dishonest or pointing out that their plan was foolhardy for the stated purpose.  You have chosen the former, I the latter.

Hi Sheryl.  Just a few comments.  It looks like Allison and Rich have already clarified some of the misconceptions you mentioned.  Sadly, the media in general has reported the issues with a slant to have everyone believe what you are saying too, so you’re not alone in believing what you’ve heard.

I stand behind my comment that “MYR HAS FAILED”.  As a plan to handle growth it HAS failed MISERABLY.  Again, speak with any member of the school board or Growth Management and ask if they have seen the results they hoped to achieve by forcing the MYR conversions, and you’ll get their answer too.

Individual families may enjoy the conversions because the YR schedule works for their situation—that’s great.  The plan AS A WHOLE did fail.  The fact that our cafeteria is now only half full and some classes are a LITTLE bit smaller than they were before the conversion doesn’t prove that the conversions succeeded—NOT BY A LONG SHOT.  (remember, one selling point of the multi-track year-round schedule was that children wouldn’t be eating lunch as early as 10:30 AM or as late as 1:45 PM—but guess what—-one of my children DOES eat at 10:30 AM and the other one is at 1:45 PM so nothing changed there)

You see, you have to consider the other side.  Someone had to take in those students that opted out, and the flip side of having under-capacity YR schools is that now there are some GROSSLY OVERCROWDED traditional schools.  I won’t sit back and say that I’m thrilled to have slightly smaller classes when my neighbor’s children at a traditional school are sitting in a closet or bathroom because there is not enough space for the kids.  I’m sympathetic to their situation, and don’t feel it’s right for me to stress “how great things are” when I see what they’re experiencing.

As for a “Plan B”, you can ask the school board about that too.  They never offered a “Plan B”, and they admitted that many times in many different situations.  (even while waiting for Judge Manning’s ruling they admitted it)  Split schedules were NOT a “Plan B”—they were a scare tactic that they realized could never be implemented this year.

Change does NOT have to come with turmoil.  Proper research and planning can do a LOT to alleviate turmoil.  You can never please everyone, but when you cause hardships for so many families by implementing a plan that you were told upfront was NOT going to succeed, I think you’re just asking for trouble.

Allison,

My statement about the conversions is not, as you put it, WRONG!  I do research my topics and would never just make up things to appease myself.  That would be simply inaccurate.  I will dig up the information that you are stating as inaccurate.  In the mean time I think maybe you should do some more research yourself before you accuse someone of fabricating stories.  Just a thought.  And yes there is always a price that has to be paid.  Just presents itself differently depending on your position.

Rich,

You know that I am right about what the intention of the school board was but to break it down to semantics or left out words of intent is not responsible.  I don’t believe they intentionally lied or misled anyone.  They have nothing to gain from it.  Absolutely nothing.  Prove to me that they do have something to gain.  Affidavits are notoriously misleading because they depend soley on the questions being asked.  So because the right question wasn’t asked we are to just assume that the school boards intent was just targeted for the 2007-08 school year.  Do you realized how absurd that really is?  That would make them poor planners for the future growth of this county when they are presenting numbers of growth through 2025 (give or take)  How could they focus on one year?  They can’t and they didn’t.

Sheryl,
Affidavits are not question based.  They are statements.  Statements such as the one made by Dulaney that said without conversions “the only viable option in those areas would be split shifts.“

You don’t believe that they intentionally misled anyone.  I cannot see how the above statement is accidental.

Sheryl,

Please provide a link to a WCPSS document that supports your statement: “half the converted schools going to MYR in 2007-08 and the other half converting in 2008-09”. Could you also include a list of those schools that are converting in 2008-09? I think the whole of Wake County would like to read that one.

What is it, specifically, that you feel I need to research? I’m happy to oblige if you find any of my statements inaccurate. I’ll be the first to admit when I’m wrong.

Let me know what you find.

First off, of the 22 schools that were converted this year the plan was originally to convert 11 of them this year then convert 11 next year.  But the school board decided that it would be less of a hassle to convert them all in one year.  This year.  22 schools.  Call Horace Tart at 850-8866. Or email him at .  He is the one who told me that.  I will be going through my wide selection of notes from way back in July to find the paper form of this.  But please feel free to call him.  He is very personable.  He was also the one that told me that the tracks were assigned by the Principles at each school which was news to me.  Quite frankly you can believe it or not.  What ever.  I can only presume that no matter what I say you’ll take issue with it.  And now I am going to enjoy my family for the weekend.  Have a nice one yourself.

Sheryl,
I’m not talking about what it was originally, what was discussed over the 18 month planning period or what they “intended” to do. I’m talking about what the CIP detailed and what the voters approved.

Here’s a link to a CIP fact sheet which states:

“Transition 19 elementary schools to the multi-track year-round calendar to gain 3,000 seats in 2007-08.“

http://www.wcpss.net/bond/downloads/cip_fact_sheet101906.pdf

I do agree with you that Principals had an involvement in track assignments.

Let me know if you find any written documents to support your claims.

Sheryl,

Considering you have recently invited others to read this blog, I find it important to follow up with some of your statements. You said you would dig up the information I claimed was inaccurate. What documents have you found?

With the release of the new enrollment numbers, I’m interested in your take on what you have called “people’s lack of vision”. Do you still stand by your claim that “its not the school systems fault” and “the board of education was correct in their assessment of the growth in the area”? Do you still contend that we are in a crisis, as the BOE has called it?

According to the recent numbers, Rand Road Elementary has 49 less students than last year.

Yes I do. 

Rand Road may only have 49 less students but at any given time there are approx 160 less students in the school at one time than last year.  Room to grow I would say.  Exactly what we needed. 

Sheryl