Former Wilmington, DE mayor Jim Sills opines in yesterday's News Journal about how schools and teachers "aren't doing enough for parents" -- specifically those from low-income and minority areas. Basically, Sills says, since schools constantly advocate for parents "to get involved," they must then also put money and personnel behind that advocacy:
More specifically, school officials are rightly criticized for publicly highlighting the significance of parental participation, but yet failing to provide definitive implementation strategies for real parental participation.This absence of parental participation plans (meaning budgeted finances and assigned personnel) has contributed to African-American and low-income parents (a) not feeling any "significant sense of ownership" of public schools, and (b) having low levels of parental participation in Parent Teacher Association (PTA) meetings. Unfortunately, we are left with a very large contingent of low-income parents, who feel ill equipped to give their children sufficient personal support in school settings.
My emphasis. First off, define "real" parental participation. What does this mean? And regarding community: Wrong, Mr. Sills. What has significantly contributed to lack of "sense of ownership" among such parents is the fact that forced busing effectively dismantled the sense of community that [formerly] predominantly minority schools possessed. When nine of the twelve years that [city] kids go to school take place in suburban schools -- which are quite a ways distant from city neighborhoods -- not only is that sense of community shot, but it's that much more difficult to even get to school/teacher meetings, especially for poorer families.
Many minorities feared just this prior to busing in New Castle County. But now that busing was (and in many respects, still is) reality -- meaning that the original plaintiffs got what they desired -- it is now incumbent upon school and teachers to get parents to "get involved"?
Sills continues,
This problem is accentuated by the failure of school boards to hold teachers accountable, in union contracts, for taking more responsibility for interaction with school parents.
Sills should really narrow this down. My district historically has set aside two couple-day spans for parent conferences during the school year, not to mention times during each day when parents can come in for meetings. Is it me, or does this sound like a fairly darn adequate amount of time for teachers to meet with parents? (Not to mention virtually almost any day after school!) But Sills brings up an instance 25 years ago when, as Christina School Board President, he wanted the teachers union to accept language that would have required teachers to attend four or five PTA meetings a year. He rips the union for then fighting a mandate to attend only one meeting per year, and now, for there not being any union language at all regarding such meetings.
Let me see if I got this straight: If there are parents who already won't (or can't) show up at parent-teacher night, at conferences now matter when scheduled, night or day, somehow requiring teachers to attend four to five (or even one!) PTA meetings a year will somehow THEN get these parents to come out?? And does Sills know the average quantity of parents that come to PTA meetings these days?
If Sills is such an advocate for "meaningful" parental participation plans, where is his own? In the article, why does he not even touch on some ideas that would be included in such a plan? I'd be very curious as to exactly what they'd be. Are they actually reality-based or just, unfortunately, more pie-in-the-sky nebulous banter?
What on earth is this crap?
These are your children, people. You don't need budgets and personnel from the school district to enable you to get involved in their educations. Show up at a school board meeting -- or run yourself. Call a teacher -- or set up a meeting. Heck, march on down tot he school and check out what is going on. You are welcome there (well, most of you are -- the ones who assault teachers or cuss us out for setting standards aren't).
What do you want? An engraved invitation?
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at August 19, 2007 04:23 PMHube,
The Mayor is clueless! Attending Red Clay School Board Meeting for the last 10 years I have yet to see Mayor Baker or any Mayor of Wilmington in attendence. He would have seen parents in action questioning the board on various polices.
Teacher's are not baby-sitter the student let alone for parents. There are only a handful of parents in each distrcit that will stand up for all students. Me, my son is starting his 3rd years of college and yet I am still involved.
Sills never had a problem with opening his mouth and saying something inane. He certainly doesn't disappoint this time. Advice from a guy who had the most corrupt administration in the History of the State and who lost the most money to discrimination lawsuits belongs in the circular file.
Posted by: orestes at August 20, 2007 04:51 AMAre teachers themselves the only folks so well aware of the severe parental deficits that exist in our homes and in support of the education of their children?
There is only so much that educators can do in this anti-education environment. My perception from the inside is that a majority of our teachers are angels visible only to students and other educators.
Too many parents attempt to turn over their responsibilities as parents to educators. Then today's educators reluctantly accept these responsibilities for the sake of the children, which is a primary cause for early burnout. It can be that overwhelming for many.
Talk to any good teacher who has been at it for 30 years or so.
The solution to our education shortfalls begins in our homes, then supplemented by quality teachers.
Posted by: Perry Hood at August 20, 2007 09:51 AMPerry: This may well be the single most sensible comment you've ever made here! ;-)
Posted by: Hube at August 20, 2007 09:55 AM