JoeCiulla
10-05-2009, 09:14 AM
Back in June, SAS issued a report which was highly critical of WCPSS. Specifically, the report says that WCPSS is over-stating the academic performance results of Economically-Disadvantaged students. Worse, the report states that WCPSS is discriminating against these children by setting lower expectations, and by not promoting them to higher-level math classes when they were qualified.
Follow this link to the WakeEd blog, Keung has the report posted in three parts:
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/sas-and-wakes-achievement-gap#new
Here's the scandal part. Del Burns and Tom Oxholm had this report in June, and have been suppressing it ever since. When two school board members heard about the report's existence, they pushed to obtain copies. The board members were Ron Margiotta and Eleanor Goettee. Last Friday, Del Burns released the report. But it turns out he only release part of the report, omitting the first two pages (which happened to contain the strongest criticism of WCPSS reporting and promotion rates). When the omission was brought to Mr. Burns' attention by a media member, he stated that an error had been made, and he re-released the full report [Note: the omitted pages were pages 1 and 2].
I encourage everyone to read the report, question why it was suppressed, and question why the school administration conveniently forgot to release the most critical two pages.
Follow this link to the WakeEd blog, Keung has the report posted in three parts:
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/sas-and-wakes-achievement-gap#new
Here's the scandal part. Del Burns and Tom Oxholm had this report in June, and have been suppressing it ever since. When two school board members heard about the report's existence, they pushed to obtain copies. The board members were Ron Margiotta and Eleanor Goettee. Last Friday, Del Burns released the report. But it turns out he only release part of the report, omitting the first two pages (which happened to contain the strongest criticism of WCPSS reporting and promotion rates). When the omission was brought to Mr. Burns' attention by a media member, he stated that an error had been made, and he re-released the full report [Note: the omitted pages were pages 1 and 2].
I encourage everyone to read the report, question why it was suppressed, and question why the school administration conveniently forgot to release the most critical two pages.