The U.S. Education Department reports that the high school graduation rate is at an all time high at 80 percent. Four out of five students are successful in studies completion and graduate within four years. While these statistics sound like a reason for a standing ovation, they are overshadowed by the crisis that is sweeping the United States. While 80 percent of high school seniors receive a diploma, less than half of those are able to proficiently read or complete math problems.
The problem is that students are being passed on to the next grade when they should be held back, and then they are unable to complete grade-level work and keep up with their classmates.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the largest standardized test administered in the United States, reports that fewer than 40 percent of graduating seniors have mastered reading and math and are poorly equipped for college and real world life. These students who are passed to the next grade are at a serious disadvantage and have an increased chance of falling behind and dropping out of college.
Luckily, the problem isn’t going unnoticed. The chair of the National Assessment Governing Board, David Driscoll acknowledges the sobering scores. He points out that it is necessary to determine the performance level of high school seniors, and that the data obtained is useful. It can instill a sense of urgency throughout the U.S. education system to better prepare students for college and the real world.
While this isn’t new news to me, I do feel that this crisis is alarming. I agree with David Driscoll and feel that this data can be used to make improvements in education. All students should be able to proficiently read and do math problems prior to high school graduation.
The United States is becoming more diverse every day. We are rapidly approaching, if not yet solidly in, an era where the majority of students are from ethnic minority groups. Because of this, it’s really important to know the role multiculturalism plays in the United States and in American education.
Here are 7 questions you’ll want to know the answers to. You will be that much more prepared to face any unique challenges that come with educating with multiculturalism in mind.
What does “culture” mean in the United States? Culture in the United States can be separated into several elements, including behavior, beliefs, traditions, and values. In the early years of the republic, American culture was indelibly associated with European-derived, English-speaking Protestant culture. More recently, however, the influx of new languages, religions, and other cultural ingredients has created a more diverse and challenging environment. Many elements of personal freedom, including freedom of religion and speech, are protected by the legal system. But there’s a conflict between autonomy and assimilation: Is it better to press students into a monocultural mold or to celebrate their diversity?
What is the role of ethnicity in our schools? Determining ethnicity can be complex and includes factors such as race, religion, customs, and culture. The United States is becoming increasingly diverse. Americans of Asian, African, and Hispanic origin are on the rise, and this is reflected in classroom populations. Furthermore, individuals who are multiethnic (who associate with more than one ethnic group) form an increasingly large portion of the student population. Laws have changed in the United States to reflect the value of cultures and languages other than the traditional European ones. It is important that teachers are aware of and are prepared to deal with racism in the classroom.
What is the role of multiculturalism in today’s schools? Multiculturalism is the acceptance of multiple cultures coexisting in a society that provides equitable status to distinct ethnic groups. The former “melting pot” ideology is being replaced by a “patchwork quilt” perspective, in which cultural identity and language are preserved. A number of theories have been floated to explain the variety of performance levels in children of different backgrounds, including the cultural deficit theory (students don’t do well because of an inadequate home environment), the expectation theory (teachers have lower expectations of certain students), and the cultural difference theory (students from different cultures have different ways of learning).
How can teachers embrace their multicultural classrooms? Currently, 37% of U.S. students view themselves as coming from multicultural backgrounds, and the percentage is increasing. By 2040, children of color will make up a majority of students. Schools are currently engaged in producing more inclusive curricula, which reflect the backgrounds of their student population. Teachers should be “color aware,” rather than “color blind,” and should encourage students to share and celebrate their diverse backgrounds and experiences by being inclusive and particularistic.
How religiously diverse are our students? Today, only 51% of U.S. students are Protestant. Groups such as Hindus, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists make up around 5% of the population, though this percentage is growing rapidly. The separation of church and state in the educational sphere has grown more pronounced in recent years, and it is now against the law, for example, to have school prayers. But it is important to encourage students to share about their religious experiences, and to celebrate all forms of religious experience.
How linguistically diverse are our students? In the early part of the 20th century, laws were passed limiting the teaching of languages other than English. More recently, however, those laws were challenged. Students may now be taught in languages other than English, and transitional services are offered in many schools.
Does America promote linguistic and intellectual diversity in the classroom? The United States does not have an official language. About 80% of Americans speak English at home. Other families speak languages such as Spanish, Tagalog, Hmong, French, and Chinese. As a result, most schools now include language programs for non-English speakers. The Bilingual Education Act and similar legislation stipulate that ELLs must be provided with the tools to acquire English. Models vary, however, and include the immersion model, the transition model, and developmental bilingual education.
Do you have any beneficial information on the role of culture in our society? What is your personal experience with multiculturalism in the classroom? I would really appreciate hearing your thoughts, so feel free to leave a comment.
As more and more governors and local politicians denounce Common Core initiatives, and more states officially back away from the standards, the debate over the place and effectiveness of Common Core heats up.In fact,Indiana’s Republican Governor Mike Pence made headlines when he announced that his state would soon abandon the Common Core standards. But what is really going on and how does this affect those who matter most—the teachers and students?
What Indiana did may have appeared groundbreaking to outsiders, but anyone following the Common Core debate knows it is just the tip of the iceberg. There have been a significant number of bills filed in the U.S. that deal with ways for students to become college-ready. Of those, 100 are designed specifically to slow, halt or overturn Common Core requirements. So there are a lot of non-federal entities that feel their legislative toes have been stepped on when it comes to K-12 college readiness curriculum and testing.
Federal versus State Rights
Beyond academics, the Common Core requirements are at the heart of a war that has been waged between state’s rights and the role of the federal government in uniform K-12 standards. On the surface, it does appear that Common Core standards are meant to give federal authority. In truth though there is some wiggle room for states to make the standards their own and places like Tennessee, Mississippi and Arizona are doing just that. If implemented in the way they were designed, Common Core requirements will actually put more control in the hands of the states and not the federal government.
Are Teachers Happy about It?
There seems to be a lot of conflicting information when it comes to what teachers think about Common Core standards – and what they think matters. After all, they are the people who are most accountable for any standards and testing systems that are put in place. They are also the ones who see firsthand how education policies impact students. So what is the truth about what teachers think about Common Core testing?
75 percent support Common Core, says a May 2013 American of Federation (AFT) poll that surveyed 800 teachers.
76 percent strongly, or somewhat, support Common Core based on an Education Next Survey from 2013.
More than three-fourths support Common Core Standards “wholeheartedly” or with some minor reservations, according to a September 2013 National Education Association member survey.
73 percent of teachers that specializes in math, science, social studies and English language arts are “enthusiastic” about the implementation of Common Core standards in their classrooms, from a 2013 Primary Sources poll of 20,000 educators.
Beyond those numbers, a higher amount of elementary teachers are optimistic about Common Core than their high school counterparts. A survey conducted by The Hechinger Report Scholastic and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation found that just 41 percent of high school teachers are positive about Common Core standards. A recent survey by the National Association of Elementary School Principals found that more than 80 percent of principals (out of 1,000 from 14 states) say that Common Core standards have the potential to increase student skill mastery, create meaningful assessments and improve areas like conceptual understanding.
It seems that the basis of Common Core is a solid one, then, when it comes to the people who understand teaching the most. Today’s teachers are in overcrowded, underfunded classrooms with higher accountability standards placed on them than ever before. If there truly was an unfair setup, teachers would certainly be the first ones to point it out.
What do you think is really going on? Are the common core debates simply political or do they hold water—academically speaking?
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
As a rational academic, living in one of the most conservative states, where legislators are planning to allow firearms in virtually all public places, including the University of Wyoming, I have labored to understand my own deep antipathy to the idea of my students and colleagues being armed.
Gun advocates and opponents can each fire off statistics; however, the debate will not be resolved with data when the fundamental conflict is a matter of ideals. I could dredge up statisticsabout the frequency of gun accidents, while advocates could offer numbersshowing that people with concealed gun permits rarely shoot innocent bystanders.
But dueling spreadsheets fail to get to the heart of the issue. Rather, my resistance to a well-regulated militia crossing the quad between classes is rooted in non-quantifiable principles.
Fear undermines classroom learning environment
The proliferation of virtual courses notwithstanding, the soul of a university remains its classrooms. These are the places of genuine human engagement, debate, thought, and passion. Students must come prepared -— ready to learn (by having done the reading), ready to argue (by thinking critically about ideas), and ready to change (by cultivating intellectual humility).
Here they are tested and challenged. This is where they flounder and flourish. Arming students seems inimical to learning. The presence, even the possibility, of a loaded weapon casts a pall over classroom discussion.
Arming students is inimical to learning as classrooms are meant to provide a safe space for intellectual growth. K W Reinsch/Flickr, CC BY-NC
Fear undermines the openness and vulnerability necessary for learning. When getting ready for class means preparing to die (or to kill), an academic community has failed.
I remember going back home to Albuquerque – a city with a violent and property crime rate well above the national average– for Christmas when our kids were little to find that my parents had installed burglar bars in their windows. I was overwhelmed by a sense of sadness that the city of my youth had failed so miserably that the people barricaded their homes.
Universities are meant to be safe spaces
My parents were free to live behind bars to protect their property, and the legislature wants to free me to arm myself in the classroom to guard my life. Somehow, these don’t feel like liberties. I want to work at a university that is big enough to provide students with a hundred opportunities and small enough to notice one anguished student.
Maybe I’m safer if a student in my seminar is carrying a gun. For that matter, maybe I’d be safer if I wore a Kevlar vest while lecturing. But I don’t want to teach where we prepare to shoot and be shot. I don’t want to be a part of failure. In all likelihood, no armed student will take (or save) my life. But the same cannot be said of that student’s life.
Suicide rates are already high
Suicide rates on college campuses are appalling. I said that numbers wouldn’t resolve the issue, but the fact is that suicide rates among young adults has tripled since the 1950s, having become the second most common cause of death among college students. Given current statistics, the University of Wyoming with an enrollment of 14,000 can expect at least two thousand of these students to contemplate suicide, two hundred to make an attempt, and perhaps two to succeed.
I was the first person to arrive on the scene of two suicide attempts when I was in college. I mopped up a lot of blood, but razor blades are not all that effective. Guns work much better. Filled with shame, my friends asked me to hide the evidence and lie in the emergency room. I did.
They were both extremely intelligent young men. But laboring under enormous stress and failed relationships, on a dark, lonely night, collapsed into a moment of utter despair. Lonely but not alone -— nearly halfof all university students report symptoms of depression.
Enough of the numbers. Consider this simple statement from a college athlete who was battling depression: “If I’d had a gun, I’d have probably put a bullet in my head.”
Campus grounds are not for killing or being killed
Perhaps my perspective is darkened by experience, but my deepest fear is not that a student with a gun comes to my classroom in the morning, but that the student leaves his dorm room in a body bag that evening.
Campuses are places fraught with doubt, conflict, angst, disorientation, and drama. A university education is not easy intellectually -— or existentially. College is where assumptions die, identities expire, and beliefs perish. But this should not become a place where students come to kill or be killed.
A university should be where the dying dream of being an engineer is resurrected as a graphic artist, where an identity as a straight Christian gives way to being a gay ethicist, and where the parental narrative of being a biology teacher is reborn as a student’s own aspiration of becoming a doctor.
But once the trigger is pulled, there will be no artist, philosopher, or doctor. Maybe I’m an idealist, but how else does one avoid cynicism and fatalism? If we aren’t willing to imagine and risk, then there’s no “good fight” left in the professoriate. An academic life worth living requires courage, hope, defiance and compassion. It does not require guns.
The issue of guns on American campuses is a subject of vigorous debate. By 2013, at least 19 states had introduced legislation to allow guns on campus. Seven states now allow concealed weapons on campus. We carry here both sides of the debate. Today, we are carrying this article opposing concealed weapons on campuses. Later this week, we will be carrying another article arguing in favour of guns on campus.
Each day 8,000 American students drop out of high school. Over the course of a year, that amounts to 3 million total students who give up on the American right to education through 12th grade and decide they will be better off without a high school diploma. Within those numbers are even more telling statistics that show students of color and from low socio-economic brackets are dropping out in much greater numbers than their white middle- and high-class peers.
In my new book The Call to Teach: An Introduction to Teaching I explore the “real world” of teaching, particularly how new educators are ill-prepared to face the challenges of teaching in urban settings. Traditional university programs for K-12 educators do not adequately prepare students for what awaits them in the urban schools of America where the achievement gap and dropout rates are highest. So how can this problem be remedied? In three ways, as a start:
Target urban backgrounds. Teachers with connections to urban locations and educations are prime candidates to return to these schools and make a difference. Universities are not doing enough to find these qualified future educators and then place them on specific tracks for career success at urban schools. There needs to be greater customization when it comes to college learning for future educators who understand firsthand the challenges that urban students face – and then job placement programs need to be built around the same concept.
Require urban student teaching. All educators-in-training should spend at least a few hours in an urban classroom, in addition to their other teaching assignments. Seeing urban challenges firsthand must be part of every educator’s path to a degree, even if he or she never teaches full time in such a classroom. I believe this would not only raise awareness of issues that tend to plague urban schools (like overcrowding and the impact of poverty on student performance) but may also inspire future teachers to want to teach in those settings. College programs must expose teacher-students to real-world urban settings in order to make progress past the social and academic issues that bring urban K-12 students down.
Reward urban teachers. The test-heavy culture of American K-12 classrooms puts urban teachers at a distinct advantage when it comes to resources and even lifelong salaries. If a teacher whose students score well on standardized tests is rewarded with more money and access to more learning materials, where does that leave the poor-performing educators? Instead of funneling more funds and learning help to teachers with student groups that are likely to do well, despite the teacher, urban teachers should be receiving the support. At the very least, the funding and attention should be evenly split. In almost every case, failing urban students and schools should never be blamed on the teacher. That mentality is what scares away many future educators who may otherwise have given urban teaching a try. There is too much pressure to perform and that leads to many urban teachers leaving their posts after the first year, or not even looking for those jobs in the first place.
Strong teaching in America’s urban schools is the key to overcoming dropout and achievement gap issues. With the right guidance, urban K-12 students can rise above their circumstances to be stand-outs in academics. They may even return the favor as teachers themselves one day. For urban teachers to succeed, however, they need more support and encouragement from their industry, government and society as a whole.
What do you think can be done to recruit more inspired educators into urban schools?
As a criminal justice instructor in a career college, I gave my students an assignment that relied on 75% imagination and 25% research. They were so lost that I was shocked. “What are we supposed to do!” They were frantic. “How are we supposed to work this?” I wondered why they had no idea how to use imagination, or what creativity encompassed.
Later, I taught criminal justice in high school, and again was dismayed at my student’s lack of imagination. I began to study the system requirements and noted the curriculum we utilized did not require the students to use inventiveness or creativity, unless it was a music or arts class. Even then, the music and art projects were determined beforehand; students were taught to follow the lesson. If I made a suggestion for change, my supervisor would look at me in horror. “I am going to take them outside one day,” I told her, “and we’re going to sit on the bleachers and use the environment for the lesson.” She thought I was crazy; the idea was extinguished.
Instructors obviously cannot have students run amok in the class in a fit of anarchy, but with guidelines set in place, they could give the students free rein to complete the task, as the student sees fit. This would work well in a group project, where each individual could both show and discover their strengths and learn from their weaknesses. The instructor would give “helpful hints” along the way, but allow the students to think and solve on their own. This is how the real world works. According to a 2010 Newsweek article, “a recent IBM poll of 1,500 CEOs identified creativity as the No. 1 ‘leadership competency’ of the future.”
The education system is not preparing students for the real world by stifling imagination. Every workplace, every profession, relies on creativity, problem solving, and exploration of ideas. Professional athletes, architects, journalists, and accountants will go no further than the initial job interview if they say, “I need someone to tell me how to do everything all the time.”
Stifling creativity leads to problems in the classroom. Bored students stop learning: they act out, drift off, or shut down. But “getting up and doing” creates positive change. In a study conducted by Howell Wechsler, director of the Division of Adolescent and School Health for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “physical activity breaks of about 5 to 20 minutes in the classroom can improve attention span, classroom behavior and achievement tests scores.” Less that 20% of high school students are meeting this goal of such activity breaks.
A creative assignment does not have to be elaborate. For example, rather than lecture on the affects of alcohol on the body, the brain, and physical activity, I split the class into three groups. Each group had a large sheet of butcher paper, their textbooks, and free pamphlets I ordered from Alcoholics Anonymous. They traced a fellow student onto the paper, drew in the corresponding “part” (i.e. the brain) they were assigned, and then presented on the affects of alcohol on each. For example, with arrows drawn to hands and feet, the words “motor skills” were written. With arrows drawn to certain internal organs, that group listed affects alcohol had on each organ. The students kept the pamphlets, and some gave them to family members and friends they felt needed the information. We did a follow-up and they could answer all questions, and the students did well on the test.
Within “teach for the test,” learning by memorization, and standardized curriculum, we have lost imagination and creativity. Students have learned to follow by rote and perform rather than ask and explore. Getting creative does not have to cost money or much time. Creativity is not going to take away from what we are paid to do. In the end, it will pay off, with happier students who are actually learning in a healthy environment.
___
Judith A. Yates is currently completing a PhD in Criminal Justice. She has taught at several schools, within the field of law enforcement; has worked as trainer, attended classes across the country, and has been a mentor in several programs. Her website can be found at judithayates.com.
There are a lot of metrics in place that gauge the effectiveness of P-12 schooling in the U.S. and shine a particularly bright light on public schools, particularly when they are failing students. Dropout rates are just one of the factors taken into account when these numbers are calculated and tend to weigh heavily on the schools and districts who have low percentages. The same does not seem to be true once the high school years pass though. Compared to P-12 institutions, colleges and universities seemingly get a pass when it comes to dropout rates – perhaps because in the past, higher education was considered more of a privilege and less of a right. A college dropout was simply walking away from the assumed higher quality of life that came with the degree, but still had opportunity to excel without it.
That’s not the case anymore. As of 2013, 17.5 million students were enrolled in U.S. colleges and universities. More than ever, colleges and universities have a responsibility to not simply admit students, but ensure they are guided properly to graduation. In other words, institutions of higher education should not be able to just take their student’s money and say “good luck.” They should provide the tools necessary for students to successfully achieve a college education and anticipate the issues that could prevent that.
Authors Ben Miller and Phuong Ly discussed the issue of the U.S. colleges with the worst graduation rates in their book College Dropout Factories. Within the pages, the authors encouraged educators at all levels to acknowledge that colleges and universities should share responsibility for successful or failing graduation rates, and that the institutions with the worst rates should be shut down. Perhaps the most terrifying suggestion in the book (for colleges and universities) was that public institutions with low graduation rates would be subjected to reduced state funding.
The book was written based on findings from Washington Monthly that ranked the U.S. schools with the lowest six-year graduation rates among colleges and universities, including public ones like the University of the District of Columbia (8%), Haskell Indian Nations University (9%), Oglala Lakota College (11%), Texas Southern University (13%) and Chicago State University (13%). These stats were published in 2010 so they are not the most current available but a quick scan of the University of the District Columbia’s official page shows graduation rate numbers through the end of the 2003 – 2004 school year. The past nine years are nowhere to be found. The school boasts 51.2 percent underrepresented minorities in the study body, including 47 percent that are Black – but what good are those numbers if these students are not actually benefitting from their time in college because they receive no degree?
In the case of Chicago State University, the latest statistics show some improvement from the 2010 ones. The six-year graduation rate is up to 21 percent – but the transfer-out rate is nearly 30 percent. The school has 92 percent underrepresented minorities that attend – 86 percent who are black and 70 percent who are female – but again, what good does any of that do if these traditionally disadvantaged students are not graduating?
In all cases of college dropout factories, the P-12 institutions chalk up a victory on their end. They graduated the students and also saw them accepted into a college. What happens after that is between the students and their higher education choices.
This, to me, is a problem. The accountability for student success extends beyond the years that they are in P-12 classrooms. Graduation from high school, and acceptance into college, should never be the final goal of P-12 educators. That is not a victory. That is only halftime.
As far as the colleges and universities are concerned, higher accountability should be demanded from educators, students, parents and really any Americans that want the best economy and highest-educated population. Public institutions, in particular, should be subject to restructuring or take over if dropout rates are too high. The lack of delivery on the college degree dream at many of these schools is appalling, frankly, and has gone on long enough.
What do you think an accountability system for colleges should look like when it comes to dropout rates?
Operating within the academy will be a “complimentary, one-day professional development event hosted by Santa Ana (CA) Unified School District (SAUSD) on December 4th, 2015.”
Lightspeed’s key note leader for the start of the development series will be Santa Ana’s deputy superintendent of California’s sixth-largest school district, Dr. David Haglund.
Dr. Haglund’s keynote address will be titled “Driving Instructional Change in the Classroom” and will deal with how the district he helps to lead has added educational diversity and a flexible learning environment.
“At SAUSD, we’ve made a commitment to giving students 24/7 access to learning resources and providing a personalized learning pathway for each student,” Dr. Haglund said while talking about his upcoming presentation at the academy’s event.
Those in attendance for the one-day event will be given a tour of the Santa Ana Advanced Learning Academy and will also have access to a leadership webinar that will include ideas on how to keep students motivated and the best ways to reach them.
Flexible learning options are so important when it comes to giving our kids the right tools for success. While this is just the start and kick-off, the Lightspeed Learning Academy is sure to continue grow once this event has concluded. Learning from the success of other leaders in education and being shown different ways of keep students engaged is certainly a great opportunity for any educator to soak up as much information as possible.
For more information on the Lightspeed Learning Academy, please visit this link.
There are many external influences that impact public education. In this series the top four will be reviewed including the influence of professional education organizations, the involvement of parents, the businesses, and the federal government and court systems. For this part professional education organizations will be discussed to reveal their direct impact on public education.
There are two major professional education organizations to which teachers can belong: the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). These are discussed in greater detail in subsequent chapters. Teachers can belong to these national organizations by becoming members of local affiliate associations. The prominence of teachers’ professional organizations, and teachers’ voices in educational concerns and policies, has increased in recent years. The NEA and AFT affect policy at the national level and are influential due to their large membership numbers and their ability to convince members to vote for or against a particular political tenant. Locally, teachers’ organizations have been particularly effective at influencing policy and decision making, largely due to approaches such as threatening to strike if their demands aren’t met or if their concerns remain unheard.
Many teacher associations have come to fulfill the role of official bargaining agents for their members. Several of these associations have insisted that certain issues, such as professional salaries, curriculum creation, class sizes, and professional development, become part of the collective bargaining process. In some instances, teachers’ attempts to negotiate working conditions have not been met favorably by either superintendents or local school boards. This situation has been ameliorated somewhat by the provision of site-based management and decision making. This concept dictates that because most changes must occur at the school level, most decisions should be made at that level as well. So, budgetary and administrative decisions are made at the school level, with the administrative team seeking input from their teaching staff. The site-based decision-making model has increased the power of teachers to effect change within their direct work environment.
You’ll likely belong to a local affiliate of either the NEA or AFT. It’s imperative that you use appropriate channels to voice your concerns as an educator. Attending local meetings to be aware of current issues and trends is an excellent way to be knowledgeable and to make informed decisions pertaining to your career. You could consider running for office in one of the local chapters of your teachers’ association. You may also wish to join a school-based committee to take part in site-based management, to determine how funds will be spent, or to have a say in how educational policy will be interpreted in your school.
School officials, the local superintendent, and the school principal are not the only influences on your career as a teacher. Many other interested parties can impact what you do in your classes. Therefore being aware of the potential professional education organizations that are available or affiliated with your public school system can aid in your involvement as an Educator or community leader. Professional education organizations are only one type of influence, hence continue to read about the four influences on public education.
There are many external influences that impact public education. In this series the top four will be reviewed including the influence of professional education organizations, the involvement of parents, the businesses, and the federal government and court systems. For this part the influence of parents and their involvement will be discussed to reveal their direct impact on public education.
Parents comprise the single most-influential force in the lives of their children, wielding authority over virtually every aspect of their children’s lives, including their education. Teachers also have considerable influence over the children they instruct. It therefore seems natural that parents and teachers would collaborate in educating children; unfortunately, this is not always the case. Parents and teachers are frequently involved in adversarial relationships with one another. Teachers may be apprehensive about parental interference in the teacher’s primary area of expertise: educating children. Parents may be too busy working to be actively involved in their children’s education, while others may be overly involved. Several research studies suggest that without parental support and engagement, students tend not to succeed in school.
As an aspiring teacher, you can do many things to increase parental involvement in education and improve your relationships with parents. Maintaining contact with parents through frequent parent–teacher meetings, habitual contact with the home via e-mail or phone, and possibly maintaining a class Web site are ways to improve teacher–parent relations. Encouraging parental volunteerism within your school or in your classes is a way to help parents feel invited to be a part of the school community. Finally, interacting with parents through service on the school council, sharing your views with parents, or working with parents on projects to improve your school are additional ways to establish a relationship with parents, which may in turn increase their overall involvement in education.
Parents of school-age children can belong to the Parent Teacher Association (PTA), a national organization with 26,000 local affiliations. There are also locally based Parent Teacher Organizations (PTOs) that are not specifically connected to the national group. Typically, these associations serve as a liaison between parents and the school. Many teachers serve as school representatives and attend PTA or PTO meetings. If you are interested in fulfilling this function, it will give you an interesting glimpse into the educational concerns of parents and may help you to learn how to communicate with parents about their children.
You may also wish to explore other means of involving your students’ parents in the education of their children. You could organize workshops on a variety of topics of interest to parents, for example. These could include promoting effective study skills, understanding the content of a new curriculum, and other topics that target parental educational concerns.
Many PTAs and PTOs are relatively powerless to effect change at the school level. This has caused concern among some school reformers who believe that transformation can only occur with continued parental support. NLCB dictates that schools must actively engage parents in decision making at the school level. However, many districts have neglected to empower parents with an appropriate level of decision making power.
Parents certainly compose one of the largest stakeholder groups, but virtually any concerned citizen can have a say about what happens in public education. Therefore working with parents involves understanding their impact and best practices for dealing with them as an Educator. Parents are only one type of influence, therefore continue to read about the four influences on public education.
