The vote is yes for redistricting Stokes County Schools
(The Stokes News) - After months of discussion, the vote is finally in. The Stokes County Board of Education voted 4-1 on Tuesday night to go with option three of the proposed redistricting plan. Of the board members, Yvonne Rutledge was the only one to vote no, with four yes votes from Becky Boles, Sonya Cox, Bill Hart, and Steve Shelton.
Option three involves using Highway 66 as a dividing line with some stipulations. Students who live west of Highway 66, on Highway 66, or whose road dead-ends onto Highway 66 will go to West Stokes High School. Students who reside east of Highway 66 or not on Highway 66 or whose road does not dead-end onto Highway 66 will go to South Stokes High School. The timeline for the implementation of this new plan is still unclear.
Option three involves using Highway 66 as a dividing line with some stipulations. Students who live west of Highway 66, on Highway 66, or whose road dead-ends onto Highway 66 will go to West Stokes High School. Students who reside east of Highway 66 or not on Highway 66 or whose road does not dead-end onto Highway 66 will go to South Stokes High School. The timeline for the implementation of this new plan is still unclear.
posted by BP News Bureau | 9:54 AM
12 Comments:
Students who live west of Highway 66, on Highway 66, or whose road dead-ends onto Highway 66 will go to West Stokes High School. Students who reside east of Highway 66 or not on Highway 66 or whose road does not dead-end onto Highway 66 will go to South Stokes High School.
Other stipulations include, if your left earlobe hangs lower than your right one, you will go to South Stokes and if you wear a white T-shirt on Thursdays with odd-numbered dates, you will go to West Stokes.
Is it any wonder that Mark Twain said, "God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board?"
How else would you do it, Steve? They had to determine some sort of guidelines if there were to going to redistrict the schools.
Well, how about if they stop screwing around and find the demographic line that balances the school populations? They are so busy worrying about who is going to be coming after them in the next election cycle, they can't even figure out a simple statistical function.
Isn't the problem that these two potential districts are growing at very different rates? Simply splitting the student population in half would just leave them with the same problem in no time, correct?
If King now serves a "more affluent clientele," as a letter to the school board insists, maybe King residents should pay city taxes for the high school they want and/or feel they deserve?
Or finally, how's this: if you make above a certain grade point average, you can choose to go to any high school in the county you want. If you make below that GPA, you may just have to go where you're told to go. But that may be a ridiculous idea ...
If the demographics are unbalanced, you just have to redistrict more often. If you're not a coward, it's not that hard. Once you actually try to balance the populations, the growth differences aren't all that great. Moving districts every four years or so would probably amply cover the difference. Look, we're talking about a factory here anyway. Why bother coaxing the angels to dance on that pin's head?
OK. Here, you apparently have little to share but trite dismissals of your public education system and its operation ... after your own children have completed their public educations where you willingly sent them. What you're saying is not very helpful. It just seems bitter. Is this your goal?
Your liberal is showing, Strother. You have reverted to form in your response. Instead of responding to the substance of what I said, you attack what you perceive to be my motives and and attitude and then you throw in some pointless ad hominem about where my kids went to school, as if that had anything to do with anything. My dismissals of public education are only trite because you're tired of hearing them and equally tired of failing to adequately respond to them.
This is a typically content-free response worthy of any random member of the American liberal elitist class.
Look, we're talking about a factory here anyway. Why bother coaxing the angels to dance on that pin's head?
Actually, you reverted to form before I did; matter of fact, I gave you the opportunity to explain any substance behind your original jab at the school board in finding a solution. Public schools = factories and angles pin head dancing? Those are trite references to the situation used for what reason? That's all I'm asking. Further, it can be assumed that your own experience with public schools would be connected with your disdain for everything associated with them.
This is a typically content-free response worthy of any random member of the American liberal elitist class.
Talk about ad hominem. To debase whatever I have to say that may contradict you on a 'conservative,' predominantly Republican blog, you roll out the most popular election year 'fightin' words: liberal and elitist. Was that an easy one for you?
As much fun as it might be on another day, I don't think I'll play the "you said it first" game today.
And you have yet to substantively respond to my comments.
As much fun as it might be on another day, I don't think I'll play the "you said it first" game today.
Because you'd lose?
...respond to my comments.
Which comments? Name one or a few; I'll substantively respond if it's possible.
How about these?
If the demographics are unbalanced, you just have to redistrict more often. If you're not a coward, it's not that hard. Once you actually try to balance the populations, the growth differences aren't all that great. Moving districts every four years or so would probably amply cover the difference.
You got your panties in a bunch over the factory remark and your brain shifted into defend-the-sacred-public-schools mode.
Setting yourself up to do something every four years that everyone gets into such an uproar seems unnecessary, as far as I'm concerned.
From the story: Students who live west of Highway 66, on Highway 66, or whose road dead-ends onto Highway 66 will go to West Stokes High School. Students who reside east of Highway 66 or not on Highway 66 or whose road does not dead-end onto Highway 66 will go to South Stokes High School.
This seems to be pretty common practice and is no different that what is done in Winston-Salem. When my son enters elementary school, he will have a place at a particular school. The kid across the street will have a place at another. Yes, the district line is right down my street. No sweat; it has to go somewhere. If we don't like it, we can get him into another city/county school where there's room. Or, we can send him to a private school, or home school. I call it ‘school choice.’
However, I’m still enthusiastic about my GPA-based high school districting plan, as I mentioned earlier in this thread. Of course, no one would go for it because a child's (or, more accurately, the parental) physical address would play no role in where they went to high school; GPA would allow the best and brightest to determine what was the 'best' high school in Stokes County — or the dorkiest school, who knows — because they could go to any of the three schools they want. But it would be quite fair and motivational, as good grades would be rewarded with as much freedom of choice that a public school system could provide.
Clearly, I know nothing about public school systems! Sorry.
Post a Comment
<< Home