The New York Times has just published an article about a new plan by the Chicago School District for parent involvement/engagement.
I’ve posted previously about the absolutely awful job the New York City schools seem to do related to parent involvement/engagement (Does The New York City Dept. Of Ed Have Any Clue What They’re Doing In Parent Engagement?).
Well, this week the new NYC Schools Chancellor fired the head of parent engagement for the city’s schools and hired a new person.
Teachers go door-to-door to meet students, parents is a nice newspaper article, with photos, from a Kentucky newspaper.
As regular readers know, I’ve written a lot — in my book, and in this blog, about teacher home visits — and have also done a lot of them….
“The Roles Of Parent & Community Engagement In Student Success: Work Works In Illinois” is a new report published by advocates of Community Schools.
Even though it’s focused on Illinois, a lot of the info can be applied anywhere.
‘Just right’ parents and No Child Left Behind is a piece in the Washington Post offering some good recommendations on changes that could be made to a new Elementary and Secondary Education Act and increase parent involvement.
It’s worth a read.
Parent trigger rules are, with a nod to Colbert, ‘reforminess’ is a good take on the recently-approved California regulations for the Parent Trigger.
It’s written by Gary Ravani, vice president of the California Federation of Teachers.
School officials search for funding for parental involvement program is the headline in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
The budget for an ambitious and apparently successful parent involvement program is going from $2 million to $100,000 or so and from 35 schools down to…two.
I usually just do a year-end list on parent engagement posts and many other topics, but it gets a little crazy having to review all of my zillion posts at once. So, to make it easier for me — and perhaps, to make it a little more useful to readers — I’m going to start publishing mid-year lists, too. These won’t be ranked, unlike my year-end “The Best…” lists, and just because a post appears on a mid-year list doesn’t guarantee it will be included in an end-of-the-year one. But, at least, I won’t have to review all my year’s posts in December…
You might also be interested in:
In addition, you might want to consider subscribing to this blog.
Here are my choices for My Best Posts On Building Parent Engagement In Schools — 2011 (So Far):
Feedback is always welcome.
If you found this post useful, you might want to explore the 700 other “The Best…” lists I’ve compiled.
Two months after completely bungling elections for Parent Councils (and that election was a “do-over” because they had completely bungled it the first time), they have announced spending $2 million dollars for a survey to parents.
I have voiced my concerns about the use of surveys in previous posts. I am amazed, though, the the survey is not even to ask parents about what they think should be done in schools. It’s about “what parents want to know and how they want to receive information.”
The comments following the newspaper article very articulately express a clear critique of the plan. Here’s one:
In other words, there’s no money for classroom supplies and we’re going to lose several thousand teachers through attrition. Yet money is found for pet projects like this one. If the DOE wants to know what parents are thinking, ask the schools and staff (e.g. parent coordinators) who are on the front lines every day dealing with them. That wouldn’t cost a dime. Secondly, parents and the communities they come from know that their voices are not heard. At the PEP meetings to close schools, parents were ignored by the thousands. The community school boards have been stripped of all power. The real stakeholders are the private corporations who “support” the schools and eat up money with no-bid contracts.
What are they thinking in the DOE offices?
Here are two more articles providing more information about yesterday’s approval of California parent trigger regulations b the State Board of Education:
New parent trigger regs approved is from Thoughts on Public Education.
Regulations approved for schools’ ‘Parent Trigger’ law is from The Los Angeles Times.
Calif board OKs rules giving parents school power is the headline of an ABC News article describing the California State Board of Education’s approval of regulations to govern use of the parent trigger law.
As I’ve written many times before, it’s a bad law that should have never been passed. Given that it is the law, however, it’s important that it have much clearer regulations than it had under the temporary rules.
And, at this point, it doesn’t matter a great deal since it’s safe to say the parent trigger law appears to be disappearing on its own….
Why parents love a lower-rated school is an interesting post from Jay Mathews.
It’s about a school that is presently mixed between lower and middle income families. The District now wants to move many of the middle income families to a different school that is “higher-rated.” The middle income families are fighting it.
I guess teachers aren’t the only people who don’t believe that test scores are the only thing worth measuring and valuing…
Legislative Momentum Stalls for ‘Parent Trigger’ Proposals is the headline in an article today at Education Week.
Here’s an excerpt:
The momentum behind “parent-trigger” proposals, one of the hottest ideas for overhauling struggling schools, has slowed in statehouses amid political opposition and vexing questions about how those bold plans should be implemented at the local level.
Numerous states this year have introduced parent-trigger proposals, which would allow parents the opportunity to restructure or close academically struggling traditional public schools or convert them to charters.
Most of those proposals, which have drawn varying levels of bipartisan support, have stalled or died, while others have been scaled back significantly.
Some of my education predictions for 2011 might not come to pass, but it certainly looks like I’m going to be right on for at least one of them:
Efforts to implement the so-called “parent-trigger” will fail miserably, and the idea will fade from memory…
Gloria Romero, the former California State Senator who attacked the PTA and compared schools to batterers, was warned by the state ethics agency for violating lobbying restrictions in her advocacy for the parent trigger.
You can read about it in the Los Angeles Times: Former state Sen. Gloria Romero warned about lobbying.
A very major effort is getting underway in Birmingham, Alabama, to create a series of “Parent Universities” throughout the school district.
I’ve written quite a bit about “Parent Universities” in the past.
Elisa Gonzalez, our school’s Parent Engagement Coordinator, has done an extraordinary job working with parents to create an extremely popular Parent University — on that focuses on what parents say they want to do and learn, and one that does not have a pre-packaged curriculum. In addition, parent leaders and Elisa work with the University of California-Davis to identify learning resources.
Many classes done in the name of “parent university” around the country, however, do not seem to share that same emphasis on parent leadership.
I hope that’s not the case in Birmingham…
Family Engagement: Four Great Ways to Get Involved is a report on the Department of Education’s blog about a family engagement forum they recently hosted.
If the blog post is an accurate indication of what occurred, then it’s a sad commentary about the level of the Department’s sophistication and leadership on this topic — just bland obvious recommendations.
Let me know if you think I’m being too harsh in my reaction…
Editorial – Bad Cut: PTA’s winner becomes a budget loser comes from The Fayetteville Observer, and criticizes the state for cutting funding for a PTA program that, among other things, supported teacher home visits.
I’ve previously written quite a few posts on the effectiveness of home visit programs.