Here is my completed version of the keystone project of this class: the Advocacy Essay. I was able to articulate the possibility of solutions with a fully developed thesis statement; this gave the essay a contract and provided a road map to the remainder of the essay, so the reader was able to engage in the essay's argumentation and analysis of evidence. Though this draft still did not have an abundance of counter arguments, the proposed solutions addressed concerns regarding causality, cost/benefit, and feasibility. Overall, I was able to re-purpose the knowledge from my Historical Conversations Project and create a new, evolved version of the argumentation of my problem: a lack of parental involvement in the American public school system.

 

 

Insufficient Parental Involvement: Tackled by a Deeper Understanding of the American School System

Abstract

            Parental involvement is crucial in a child’s educational upbringing, and a lack thereof results in a community gap, reduced student participation, and low-performing schools. More often, parents of different ethnicity who decline active participation feel misunderstood by teachers. Moreover, parents of a lower SES feel that it is the teacher’s responsibility to educate their child, so they reason they do not have time to contribute. Additionally, a national focus on teacher and test-based accountability alleviates parents of pressure to be involved, causing a deficit for the child. By creating community centers, hiring staff to enhance inclusion of diversity, and encouraging the growth of charter schools, the students suffering from a lack of parental involvement can enjoy an enhanced educational experience.

 

Figure 1: Can the American school system strengthen only by trying to reform the teachers and principals when finding solutions for unengaged parents?

 

Presentation of Solutions through a Glimpse of the Causes

A lack of parental involvement consistently plagues students in the American School System, especially minority students or students of a lower socioeconomic status. Children typically perform better in school when a parent or guardian is involved, so students are worse off when the parent is not actively committed to their education. One political cause of parental alienation, in this case for less privileged parents, stems from No Child Left Behind, which greatly influenced the public school system for years. The law failed to efficiently increase parental involvement in public education, as even though Title I (part of NCLB) pushed for parental engagement, the program’s test-based accountability resulted in more focus on the teacher’s performance. NCLB, according to author and historian Diane Ravitch, became a “law [that] forgot that parents are primarily responsible for their children’s behavior and attitudes” and made teachers ultimately responsible(Ravitch). A significant effect of the alleviation of parental responsibility is the “laissez faire parent”; they do not express negativity towards the education system, but they do not communicate with teachers and over sympathize with a student’s poor behavior (Reid). Additionally, the Qualitative Report, a research-based scholarly journal from Nova Southeastern University, finds that parents participate less in the school system because they “feel it is the school’s responsibility to do the teaching”(McDermott). Though reformers and advocating politicians scoff and reason that parents simply take a “scapegoat” approach to nurturing their children, underprivileged parents don’t have much time to commit to their child’s public schooling because of jobs and time restraints. As a result, children miss a piece in their educational upbringing, and some students even go as far as dropping out of school because of this lack of support. Additionally, ethnic and minority parents (some of them also in the lower SES demographic) face teachers and peers who don’t connect with or respect the culture of their students. Parents consequently refuse to participate in the school community because of a disbelief in the school system. According to the NEA, “students tend to earn higher grades, attend school more regularly, stay in school longer, and enroll in higher level programs” when families and parents join with schools and their communities to support student’s learning. Because of the trend of advantaged students performing better, two subgroups of students form. The students surrounded by their high-achieving peers are inclined to perform better while those who lack resources have trouble reaching proficiency. As a result, a community gap forms between high-achieving and low-achieving students, and the school system lacks a balanced middle ground. Moreover, case studies such as “The SAT and Admission: Racial Bias and Economic Inequality” conclude that standardized tests like the SAT are biased against minority children, as questions are directed towards white students. The result of poor teachers and tests is parents who don’t believe in the efficacy of their children’s school system; thus, they do not participate. Some solutions to minimize the societal conflict of unengaged parents are community centers, diversity programs, and charter schools; working in tandem, these three steps will encourage students and parents to be active in the school community.

 

 

Figure 2: Though schools have great influence over children’s learning, their educational development begins in the household. For this reason, students whose parents or guardians are more involved perform better in the school setting.

Are the problems resulting from unengaged parents at the fault of parents of school children? Scholars often debate whether the problems revealed as a lack of parental involvement can be completely pinned on parents themselves. Some find that though parents are responsible for a child’s upbringing, schools are ultimately responsible for student education and a failing school system cannot be saved by blaming parents. However, organizations, politicians, and school systems constantly work towards solutions for these problems by targeting parent accountability. The question is: do the solutions created by advocacy groups benefit parents and students of every ethnicity and SES? Additionally, do they work to strengthen the school system? Most of the time, reformers create solutions based on an oversimplification of lacking parental involvement, and these solutions only tends to a niche group- it may either advocate for a group of parents to be more engaged or teachers to be more avid about their communication with parents.

 

Solutions Towards Increased Parental Involvement: Analysis

Because the solution lies in targeting a whole community’s shortcomings, the proliferation of community centers will give teachers, students, and parents an opportunity to come together. Already implementing the phenomenon, Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City introduced the “one-stop community center”, where parents can receive support and resources. The ideal center, according to De Blasio, would contain resources such as medical and dental clinics as well as adult courses(Taylor). This center operates similarly to another recently introduced center in Ohio, which is a product of the state’s decision to use the ESEA’s School Improvement Grant funds. The center provides resources for low-income families by giving grants to different organizations and providing out of school services. The centers in Ohio and New York both tend to the lower SES community by offering parents resources that they don’t usually receive. Moreover, the system “supports high-quality, out-of-school time learning opportunities and related activities for students who attend eligible schools”(“21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC)”). Even if parents do not choose to participate in programs offered, students can benefit from programs in community centers, as they tend to one of the root causes of parental involvement: parents who do not have time to add to their child’s education. Therefore, the proliferation of school community centers would alleviate parents facing a time deficit, making this optional program a good resource for the families or individuals who need it.

            Additionally, as parental engagement happens in families who are confident of their inclusion in the school system, another step towards solving the problems from absence of parent engagement lies within schools that can promise a social climate that welcomes diversity and awareness of culture. Because parents feel undermined by teachers that do not respect their values, they opt out of activities in the school system.

Figure 3: The graphic represents the percentages of ESL students in public schools by state, which makes up a large percent of the population. For this reason, these students will make up a large portion of the work force, and because their parents are typically uninvolved they demand attention from supplemental school programs.

 

With programs educating and addressing teachers about the various cultures of the school community, and even other members of the community within community centers, everyone will be respected and ready to engage in tandem within the school community. This may include teachers gaining a higher understanding of the student’s cultural background or fostering a teaching style that will benefit every student in the class. At the same time, students who understand and appreciate the diversity of their peers will create a more welcoming school environment. This will address the ethnic parents and students that feel out of the system by making them feel more secure about their child’s educational surroundings. One program that has attempted this, the IECA (International Educational and Cultural Awareness Organization) works to “support and facilitate communication to prevent racially based discrimination between youth”, which provides opportunities for students through workshops. For this reason, the IECA fits nicely into a funded afterschool program. Similar to afterschool programs but within classrooms and teacher training, a “culturally responsive curriculum”, according to “6 Ways Teachers Can Foster Cultural Awareness in the Classroom”, would attack a root cause of parent frustration: the way children are taught and treated(Lynch). Teacher and administrators make up a crucial element of curriculum, so schools with a higher ESL (English as a second language) population should be introducing bilingual staff members. Success with this addition of staff appeared in 1989 where Fred Carrigg, part of a school district in Newark, implemented a program that introduced more bilingual and ESL (English as a second language) teachers; as a result, more parents were welcomed into the school environment (Kirp). This success of bilingual staff in public schools should also be implemented in community centers, as both programs work towards combating cultural exclusion and communicating with parents. Yet, in order for cultural programs to see success, they would need flexibility to perform based on unique communities. Luckily, the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) signed in December of 2015 granted “decision-making power back to state and local governments”, allowing more opportunities for specialized programs in the education system(Fabian). Therefore, creating a safe environment for all cultures can be directly implemented in community centers and can also benefit students within the classroom.

            As many students can benefit from the programs implemented in both schools and community centers, charter schools will also allow choice in a community and more confidence in parents who can participate. The original intent of charter schools was to give students access to specialized, competitive public schools. In more recent years, charter schools have taken the form of small-scale schools within a community that foster their needs and specific student population. Because of this, many states have attempted implementing specialized charter schools in areas with lower SES and minority populations. Carolyn Thompson of The Huffington Post, who reviews a National Charter School Study from Stanford involving fifteen different states, reports one successful example where black students who attended charter schools “gained the equivalent of 14 days of learning” through charter schools and that those same students in poverty gained “the equivalent of 29 days in reading and 36 days in math”. The study revealed that the greater deficit the student faces in their normal education due to a lack of resources, the greater their improvement of an educational experience from charter schools. One reason may be that the staff is more specialized, able to tend to particular students and approved by the parents who enroll their students. Parents are typically more comfortable taking part in an educational system that they trust, thus they are more inclined to get involved in the charter school system.

 

Figure 4: Though charter schools are technically classified as public, they tend to experiment and more often and are less transparent in their practices. However, they are created by and tend to parents more often than in a standard public school setting.

 

            Along with a more engaged group of parents, the charter school system effectively provide parents more opportunities. This includes parents having direct communication to parent groups and school officials. Though parents can engage with a child regarding school work, they find greater significance in their involvement when communicating with representatives and staff from the school system. Some parents are unengaged in this realm because they do not feel appreciated by school staff. Maria Pena, a single mother from Brooklyn was asked a number of questions in the New York Times article “A Push to Get Parents Involved at Struggling Schools” regarding her desires for programs in schools; she states that she “would definitely sit” and collaborate with a community school team, but “the problem is if they would listen.”(Taylor). Pena and other similar parents are not declining participation because they are  “laissez faire”; rather, these parents doubt the value of their communication with school officials and will not get involved. To reverse this trend, legislature for charter schools has attempted to make the significance of parental involvement lucid. The Utah Charter Schools Act created new legislation that mandates the system so that “The purposes of charter schools are to…provide opportunities for greater parental involvement in management decisions at the school level”(USOE). Because the schools advocate more actively for a board of parents, they provide parents the confidence to provide resources needed for their children to succeed.

 

Weaving Solutions Together

            Charter schools effectively address the root causes of disengaged parents within a community. However, when looking at the solutions posed- community centers, cultural programs and staff, and charter schools- a combination of the three on a select group would waste resources. Therefore, the best theoretical approach to solving unengagement of parents involves charter schools tending to one group in the community and diversity program-enhanced one stop community centers tending to the remainder. Charter schools already implement programs that parents are encouraged to participate in, which weed out lazy parents, treat under nurtured students, and reassure parents who don’t believe in the efficacy of the schools, if there are any. However, this leaves standard public schools with more under privileged students whose parents did not place them in charter schools, and public schools do not offer many programs to students. Though public schools undoubtedly need attention, many are on a tight budget, which causes politicians to be weary of putting funds into multiple small-scale school programs. Yet, Ohio’s 21st Century Community Center successfully allocated district funds to three subgroups of non profit organization recipients for their program and totaled an estimated $14.9 million. The numbers presented are feasible and even minor compared to other presented school reforms, such as De Blasio’s initiative launched in 2015 which aims “to boost graduation rates, improve collaboration between district and charter schools, and improve math and technology instruction” and costs New York City $186 million (Shapiro).

The reforms directed towards parents, students, and the community are not quick fixes to the problem. Community centers grow slowly and must be approved by local educational boards, and diversity programs must be recruited by these centers. Moreover, charter schools require a catalyst, such as a community group or entrepreneur. But the large-scale reforms such as NCLB and ESSA assumed that parents would automatically become more involved in schools without addressing why parents weren’t participating. Because the creation of charter schools would give parents an opportunity to be heard, and community centers and diversity programs will work to include the disengaged parents outside of the charter school system, these solutions are the best choice towards a brighter future full of more nurtured students.

 

Works Cited

Biamonte, Ethan. “The SAT and Admission: Racial Bias and Economic Inequality”. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 15 November 2013. Web. 25 January 2016.

Fabian, Jordan. “Obama signs education reform bill.” The Hill. Capitol Hill Publishing Corp. 10 December 2015. Web. 29 January 2016.

George Mason University Student Organization. “Purpose of IECA.” International Education and Cultural Awareness Organization. n.d. Web. 15 February 2016.

Gutierrez, Elli. “Public Schools vs. Charter Schools.” Blogspot. 13 October 2014. Web. 16 February 2016.

jeffdowd. “The Problem with ‘Failing Schools’”. The Society Pages. 10 March 2011. Web. 10 February 2016.

Kirp, David L. “How to Fix the Country’s Failing Schools. And How Not To.” New York Times. 9 January 2016. Web. 25 February 2016.

Lynch, Matthew. “6 Ways Teachers Can Foster Cultural Awareness in the Classroom.” Education Week. 30 November 2014. Web. 15 February 2016.

McDermott, Peter and Rothenberg, Julia. “Why Urban Parents Resist Involvement in their Children’s Elementary Education”. The Qualitative Report, Volume 5. October 2000. Web. 21 January 2016.

NEA Education Policy and Practice Department. “Parent, Family, Community Involvement in Education”. Washington D.C.: National Education Association. 2008. Print. 29 February 2016.

Ohio Department Of Education. “21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC).” 16 February 2016. Web. 21 January 2016.

Ravitch, Diane. The Death and Life of the Great American School System. New York: Basic Books, 2011. Print.

Reid, Ken. Truancy: Short and Long-term Solutions. Florence: Routledge, 2004. Print.

Shapiro, Eliza. “De Blasio to announce $186 million in new education policies.” Politico New York. 16 September 2016. Web. 1 March 2016.

Taylor, Kate. “A Push to Involve Parents at Struggling Schools.” New York Times. Print. 21 January 2016.

Thompson, Carolyn. “Charter Schools Benefit Minorities, Poor Families Most, Study Shows.”The Huffington Post. Huffpost Black Voices. 25 June 2013. Web. 22 February 2016.

Utah Charter Schools Act. Chapter 150, 2015 General Session. Print. 25 February 2016. United States Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. English Language Learners. 2012-13. Web. 6 March 2016.