Archive for the ‘Parental Involvement’ Category
Start checking your kindergartner’s credit report
January 15th, 2008
A new database will be collecting kindergartner’s social security numbers.
The new database for kindergarten test scores also includes sections for children’s names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, gender, school identification numbers and parents’ names and addresses, educators say.
For some odd reason, some people are disturbed by this.
“As adults you don’t even put your Social Security card in your wallet,” said Mr. Lukert, an officer with the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association. “And yet here we are required to give that information out. It doesn’t make sense.”
Basically, TEA is telling everyone to just “trust us.”
“It’s quite amazing the security that OZ has in place for this information,” said Susan Landry, director of the UT group, known as the State Center for Early Childhood Development. “You are overemphasizing the Social Security number.”
So the Social Security number isn’t that big of a deal? Then why use it all?
Pearson Educational Measurement officials, who develop or administer standardized tests in Texas and 22 other states, say they use ID numbers to link students to their test data.
“I don’t think in the testing side of it that we ever encounter Social Security numbers,” said David Hakensen, vice president of public relations.
I suspect that parents aren’t required to provide Social Security numbers unless maybe they’re receiving some sort of direct federal aid such as free lunch. I could be totally wrong here.
However, I went to my local school district website to see what documents would be needed to enroll my child and it said:
Back To School : Northside Independent School District – San Antonio, TX 78238
Child’s Social Security Number (if available)
Furthermore, the TEA PEIMS Data Standards makes it sound like Social Security numbers aren’t required either.
Identification – the information necessary to identify the person. This information is Social Security number or state-approved alternative student ID and student name. It is requested for all students.
Notice, it says “requested.” So how many schools request the information and parents provide it assuming that it’s required?
While part of the issue is trust, another part is “why do you need the data?” Do they need it because they want to link it to other data that is based on social security data? Or do they want it just because it will be easier than generating their own id system? And if they can’t tell us, what does that do to the trust factor?
Technorati Tags: Texas Education, Social Security Numbers, TEA, Texas Education Agency, OZ Systems, State Center for Early Childhood Development, Susan Landry
Accountability
February 5th, 2007
There are so many who want education reform based on “running a business” and accountability that I think it’s time to explain the situation in language they should understand.
Let’s pretend that you run a plant nursery. You sell a healthy, well-kept tree to your customer. You give them fertilizer and detailed instructions. You might even go out and check on the tree every so often. If the tree fails to grow because it doesn’t receive enough fertilizer, who’s fault is it?
Or maybe you’re a mechanic and you get a new customer who had been taking his car to another mechanic. The car hasn’t been maintained so you do a tune-up and explain basic maintenance tasks. The customer takes the car home and it breaks down. Are you a bad mechanic?
How about being a doctor and you’re treating a child for asthma and the child keeps having asthma attacks because the parent continues to smoke around the child. (Okay, I’m winging it here since I don’t what all can cause asthma attacks.) Would your treatment of the patient be considered successful?
Of course, in most cases your customers hold up “their side” of the transaction. Even so, as a manager you would need to take account such problem customers as the ones described above when evaluating your employees. You would have to figure which employees have had truly difficult customer situations and which are just using it as an excuse for poor performance.
However, if you were to use the methods suggested from the Texans for Excellence in the Classroom report, you would simply provide the mechanic with three more sessions on how to be a good mechanic. And if the customer’s car breaks down again, fire the mechanic. The doctor would be given special training on dealing with asthma patients and if the child continued to have attacks, her license would be revoked.
As much as people would like to believe otherwise, education reform isn’t going to have a simple, easy solution. It’s not true in business, why should it be in education?
I don’t think all teachers are against being evaluate in their performance. I do think they want and deserve to have extenuating circumstances considered in their evaluations.
You can’t “make” people into good parents by passing laws to make them go to teacher conferences or feed their children five vegetables a day. There is no licensing process you have to go through before you can be a parent even though there are plenty of parents out there who are walking advertisements for such a system.
As long as there is such a large uncontrollable variable that effects the results, it’s not only unfair to the teachers to apply a one size fits all to education accountability, it’s unfair to the student as well. Schools that take the time and energy needed to truly address education deficiencies that originate in the home are penalized.
Do businesses succeed when they focus on short-term earnings for investors or investment in infrastructure and training? Both? It all depends? Do businesses succeed when they take a “one size fits all” approach? Can you think of a better way to set up public schools to fail than demand that “no child be left behind?”
HB 557: Holding Parents Accountable
January 17th, 2007
80(R) HB 557 – Introduced version – Bill Text:
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT relating to the failure of a parent to attend a public school parent-teacher conference; providing a criminal penalty.
???????BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: ???????SECTION?1.??Chapter 26, Education Code, is amended by adding Section 26.014 to read as follows: ???????Sec.?26.014.??FAILURE TO ATTEND PARENT-TEACHER CONFERENCE.
(a) A parent of a student commits an offense if:
?????????????(1)??the parent receives written notice by certified mail of at least three proposed dates from which the parent can choose for scheduling a parent-teacher conference between the parent and the student’s teacher;
?????????????(2)??the parent:
???????????????????(A)??fails to respond to the notice; or
???????????????????(B)??schedules a parent-teacher conference on one of the dates proposed in the notice or on an alternative date agreed to by the parent and teacher and fails to:
?????????????????????????(i)??attend the scheduled conference; or
?????????????????????????(ii)??before the scheduled conference, notify the teacher or an administrator of the campus to which the teacher is assigned that the parent will be unable to attend the conference; and
?????????????(3)??in the case of a student with more than one parent, another parent of the student does not attend a parent-teacher conference scheduled in accordance with this subsection.
???????(b)??An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
???????(c)??An offense under this section may be prosecuted in a court in which an offense under Section 25.094(b) may be prosecuted.
???????(d)??It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the parent had a reasonable excuse for failing to attend the parent-teacher conference.
???????(e)??The clerk of the court in which an offense under this section is prosecuted shall transfer the proceeds of any fine collected by the court under this section to the school district that employs the teacher with whom the parent was scheduled to meet in the parent-teacher conference. The district may use funds collected under this section only to: ?????????????(1)??provide additional compensation to classroom teachers in the district; or
?????????????(2)??purchase school supplies other than textbooks as defined by Section 31.002.
???????SECTION?2.??This Act takes effect September 1, 2007.
I don’t believe that I’ve ever been one to hold teachers’ solely accountable for student achievement since parent involvement is obviously a significant factor in the equation. And while I’m sure that there are many teachers who think that parents need to be held accountable for their actions (and many parents who deserve it), I’m not sure this is the way to do it.
Besides the various legalities involved and the burden it might place on a parent to present an affirmative defense, I don’t think this will really accomplish anything except maybe collect some additional funds for the classroom.
Think about it this way. A teacher schedules a parent-teacher conference. The parents don’t show up because a: their cultural or economic situation affects their ability to respond to the summons appropriately or b: they think it’s a waste of time. Now if the case is a, you have just added another burden on the parents to defend themselves. They can’t get time off of work (I’m sure there’s a bill to address that as well) but they will have to take time off to appear before a judge to explain why they can’t attend the conference.
Then there is case b. You now have a law that forces the parents to show up if for no other reason so that they avoid a fine. What do you think will be accomplish during that conference period? They will see the light and make sure junior does his homework every night? They will start enforcing a reasonable bed time for their kids or turn off the tv? Talk about a hostile audience.
I can just see this progressing until we have some version of NCLB for parents. As in the case of students, they will first be forced to spend a certain amount of time receiving “instruction.” Then someone will realize that it would be a good idea if they were to actually learn something from the instruction and will implement some sort of “no pass no play” rule for parents.
This may seem like such a simple solution to the problem of the lack of parental involvement. However, if we have learned anything in education reform, there are no simple solutions.
Unschooling disguised as recess
January 1st, 2007
Looks like parents might be able to save recess based on local values.
80(R) HB 366 – Introduced version – Bill Text:
SECTION?1.??This Act may be cited as the “Freedom to Play and Learn Act.”
???????SECTION?2.??Section 28.004, Education Code, is amended by adding Subsection (l) to read as follows:
???????(l)??The local school health advisory council shall consider and may make policy recommendations concerning the importance of daily recess for elementary school students. The council may consider any research regarding unsupervised play, academic and social development, and the health benefits of daily recess in making the recommendations. The council shall ensure that local community values are reflected in any policy recommendation made to the district under this subsection.
It does make you wonder what other areas parents would be interested in having some influence over. And will this provide “legitimization” for unschoolers? After all, they can use any “research regarding unsupervised play, academic and social development.” Sounds like supporting unschooling to me.
What’s the point?
December 17th, 2006
Generally, I think it’s a good thing to spell out expectations:
80(R) HB 380 – Introduced version – Bill Text:
Sec.?26.014.??EDUCATIONAL INVOLVEMENT AGREEMENT. (a) The agency shall adopt an educational involvement agreement form for use by school districts to be signed by a student, the student’s parent, each of the student’s teachers, and the principal of the student’s school. The agreement must state the respective responsibilities of the student, parent, teacher, and principal. A school district shall provide the agreement to each individual who is required to sign the agreement not later than the 14th day after the first day of instruction for a school year or the 14th day after the date a student enrolls in the school, as applicable. ?A school district must provide a parent with a reasonable opportunity to sign the agreement.
However, after reading some of the following details such as:
80(R) HB 380 – Introduced version – Bill Text:
(b)??The educational involvement agreement must include descriptions of:
?????????????(1)??the parent’s responsibilities regarding the student’s education, which may include:
???????????????????(A)??reading to the student, if appropriate for the student’s grade or reading level;
???????????????????(B)??reviewing and checking the student’s homework; and
???????????????????(C)??contributing at least five hours of the parent’s time to the school each school year by: ?????????????????????????(i)??attending school-related activities;
?????????????????????????(ii)??attending parent-teacher association meetings;
?????????????????????????(iii)??attending parent-teacher conferences;
?????????????????????????(iv)??volunteering at the school; or
?????????????????????????(v)??chaperoning school-sponsored events;
and the expectations of the teachers:
80(R) HB 380 – Introduced version – Bill Text:
(3)??the responsibility of each teacher and principal to:
???????????????????(A)??provide each student with proper instruction, supervision, and interaction;
???????????????????(B)??maximize the educational and social experience of each student;
???????????????????(C)??perform professional responsibilities in a manner that is in the best interest of each student; and
???????????????????(D)??be available to parents to discuss concerns.
I think it’s just a waste of paper as is. Why? First of all, who got decided on “five hours” for the parents? Why five, why not ten? And then who gets to decide that a teacher has “performed professional responsibilities in a manner that is in the best interest of each student?” While I think you can force parents to immunize their children before attending school, I don’t think you can mandate that they check their children’s homework.
Second, there is absolutely no mention of consequences or what should happen if one party fails to live up the agreement. Okay, for students, it’s fairly easy, fail them or expel them. But what are you going to do about the parents? Of course parents should be involved in their children’s education but how exactly are you going to force them to participate? What power are you going to give the state to make a person be an “involved” parent?
The bill doesn’t even address something as simple as if parents or students think that the teacher is not living up to his part of the contract, what should they do? I’m not talking about punishing the teachers. I’m talking about something along the lines of “the matter should be brought to the attention of the counselor or principal or special committee set up to address these issues.” By the way, did you notice how there’s nothing about the teachers getting the appropriate support from administration or adequate supplies to complete their duties?
This is basically a proclamation of what it means to be a “successful” parent, teacher, or student. I would imagine it’s not too terribly different from most school’s parent/teacher handbook. So what does this achieve by making it an “agreement” beside generating more meaningless paper and the opportunity for one of the signing parties to use it as a basis for a lawsuit?
Legislature Knows Best
November 29th, 2006
The next session of the Texas Legislature doesn’t begin until January but members can and are already filling bills. And thanks to the internet, you can now track all legislation online. Now my natural inclination would be to say that this is a good thing, open government, accountability and all. But sometimes, you have to wonder. Take the following bill for example:
80(R) HB 314 – Introduced version – Bill Text:
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the classroom placement of multiple birth siblings in public schools.
???????BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
???????SECTION?1.??Subchapter B, Chapter 25, Education Code, is amended by adding Section 25.043 to read as follows:
???????Sec.?25.043.??CLASSROOM PLACEMENT OF MULTIPLE BIRTH SIBLINGS. ?(a) ?In this section:?????????????(1)??”Multiple birth sibling”?means a twin, triplet, quadruplet, or other sibling resulting from a multiple birth.
?????????????(2)??”Parent”?includes a parent standing in parental relation.
???????(b)??The parent of multiple birth siblings who are assigned to the same grade level and school may request that the school place the siblings in the same classroom or in separate classrooms.
Apparently Rep. Eissler wants to give parents the authority to decide if their “multiple birth siblings” should be in a class together. This bill would allow them to do so with the school only being able to override the decision if it causes classroom disruptions.
When I see bill like this I have to wonder why are they necessary. My guess would be that some schools have denied the parents’ requests for their children to be in the same class because they presumed they knew what was better for the children than the parents. What arrogance!
Now I know there are some flaky parents out there who perhaps aren’t serving their children’s best interests when they insist they be in the same classroom. But don’t they deserve the benefit of the doubt? Maybe, just maybe, they know what is in the emotional best interest of their children?
Because of some imperious administrator, (I’m assuming that the final decision is such cases would be made at this level) a representative has filed a bill so that the problem can be resolved by the legislature. You would think that the legislature would have better things to do in it’s limited time but otherwise the situation may not be rectified.
Unfortunately, we will probably see a number of similar bills throughout the session. Rather than the legislature having to make rules to prevent administrators from making bone-headed decisions, maybe they should work on holding administrators more accountable for the decisions they make.
Mixed signals, ignored signals
November 14th, 2006
This is a big deal in Texas since anyone in the top ten percent in the class is automatically accepted at any state university.
Dozens of parents of high school students in the North East Independent School District let school board members know late Monday they’re not happy with how the district calculates class rankings, saying it pushes students out of extracurricular activities and hurts their chances at college admission and scholarships.Superintendent Richard Middleton told the board he’s appointing a committee of staff members, faculty and parents to review a policy in place since 2004-05, in part because of concerns recently raised by parents.
The district measures each student’s academic performance by adding the scores from selected courses: English, math, science, social studies, foreign language, advanced placement and pre-advanced placement. Electives, such as band and sports, don’t add points to a student’s rank.
The policy, Middleton said, was put in place after recommendations by a similar committee to more accurately reflect a student’s true preparedness for college work.
But many parents, who didn’t become aware of the policy until notices of slight modifications were sent out last summer or until the latest rankings were sent out earlier this year, complained it encourages students to abandon extracurricular activities or elective courses, leading to less well-rounded students.
Apparently weighting AP and Honors classes isn’t enough to encourage students to take more AP classes.
Alicia Thomas, associate superintendent for instruction, told the board that under the previous policy “there was a lack of incentive for students to take rigorous class work.”District staff told the board that enrollment in the top 30 advanced placement courses has risen 20 percent since the policy was put in place.
So why are the parents complaining now? Obviously, plenty of students got the message if the enrollments in the classes went up. Why did some parents not get the message? It could be poor communication between the district and the parents. Or it could be just another symptom of people being so self absorbed that they don’t pay attention to mere announcements until it hits them in the face.Ultimately, I don’t think band and athletics should be excluded. How many students are going to take AP Music Theory is there is a disincentive to take band? As for athletics, it would only further isolate athletic programs as feeder programs for college sports. Even colleges include PE colleges when calculating a student’s gpa.
Texas Parent PAC
October 14th, 2006
For those interested in a new and growing force in Texas politics.
Texas Parent PAC – Home – Standing Up for Texas Children:
Texas Parent PAC is a newly formed political action committee for parents, grandparents, parents-to-be, and anyone who loves children and supports high-quality public education. The future of Texas rests in the children of today, and our public schools are the best opportunity we have to ensure the state’s future is bright and prosperous. Unfortunately, state legislators continue to shortchange students by refusing to adequately fund neighborhood public schools. There are no good excuses for failure by the Legislature to meet the needs of 4.4 million students enrolled in Texas public schools!
The PAC is supporting a local candidate here in San Antonio.
Texas Parent PAC, forged a year ago to elect public education proponents to the Legislature, threw its support Thursday behind Democrat Joe Farias in the closely watched race in Texas House District 118.
Many of the PAC’s endorsements went to candidates running against recipients of campaign contributions from Dr. James Leininger, a San Antonio businessman and school-voucher advocate.
The PAC’s biggest contributor has been another San Antonio businessman: Charles Butt, chairman and CEO of H-E-B. He’s given at least $133,000 to the organization in the past year, according to campaign finance filings.
I’m generally not a big fan of one issue organizations. However, education is Texas’ second largest budget expenditure which ultimately impacts other areas such as health care and public safety. And it’s nice to know that you can still get a group of people together to challenge the status quo and win.
