The first attempt at using the Trigger is in California has resulted in charges of corruption and is now entangled in a laws suit. The "trigger" was pulled on a school and Compton only to have some of the parents that signed the petition withdraw their support because they were deceived about the intent of the petition. The paid organizers of the petition drive also have a hand in the proposed Charter operator that was set to take over the school. Reform at its worst maybe. In this case it was poor Hispanics that may have been mislead to a "historic" event.

I have heard that BCPPS has a model Parent and Community Engagement policy that for the most part has been allowed to gather dust on the shelf. Why are new laws are needed to enforce what is already in place? Where does the resistance come from? The CEO and principal are accountable for implemented this policy and the Board is the enforcer. Someone has to ask why isn't it being done?

@OverTheTop

I understand that you think this is an example of a charter operator "deceiving" parents. From what I've read, I think there's a lot of room for improvement in what's required to be on the petition in order to inform parents as much as possible.

However, that's no excuse for the shameful behavior of district officials, who are requiring parent signers to go far above and beyond what the law requires to verify their signatures and doing so in a way that especially disenfranchises these "poor Hispanic" parents. Read about it here: http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2011/01/compton_forces_parent_trigger.php

It's also important to remember that in order for McKinley to qualify for the parent trigger, it had to have been a school that hadn't made AYP in at least 5 years. This was a failing school and had been for years.

Regarding the parent trigger in general...giving power to the masses is a scary thing, precisely because you run the risk of allowing all sorts of groups to influence decisions. This is the risk in any kind of democracy. I think that if there's one lesson a school can learn from what's happening with Parent Revolution and McKinley Elementary it's that a school under the threat of the parent trigger can't afford to fail to have good communication with parents and build the community's investment in the school and the reforms it's undertaking, and I think that's a good thing, especially in communities with a history of low parent involvement.

Sounds like Bill is working hard to please his one constituent: AAA. We've just been through the mid-year evaluation, and it is scary how quickly poor administrators can arbitrarily and ineffectively execute a process. So far what I've seen in my teaching career is that the problem is with people who run the schools, not necessarily teachers.

"The demand is likely in response to opposing complaints -- from parents organized by McKinley's Parent Teacher Association -- that Parent Revolution staffers and volunteers lied about the terms of the charter-school petition, telling them it was only for beautification and pressuring them into signing."

What is shameful about that? A charge was made and the best way to resolve it is to go face-to-face.

The shameful part is making working class parents come in during a narrow window during the work day. The shameful part is requiring more restricted photo ID than is required to vote, especially for parents who aren't legal citizens. The shameful part is teachers intimidating students of parents who signed the petition. Again, more info can be found here: http://www.dfer.org/2011/01/parent_trigger.php

But look, this blog and the comments section aren't for debating school policy in Compton, they're for discussion Baltimore and Maryland issues. And what Bill is doing is actually taking power AWAY from Dr. Alonso and giving it to parents and communities. So let's please talk about THAT instead. Does anyone have comments about whether or not a parent trigger law is good for US?

No! The test should be like that PTA commercial, name your child's teachers. If 51% of the parents can do that then maybe they have been paying attention and could offer meaningful input into the operation of their school. Otherwise this opens the reform process to manipulation.

Yes, it opens the reform process to manipulation, and think this is a serious concern, but any democracy is vulnerable to manipulation in this way.

If this law were in place, do you think it would provide incentive to schools to take a more active role in doing outreach to engage parents in the reform process before they organize against the school? Maybe there are parents who don't feel like there are opportunities to get involved in their children's school or they don't know how to start. Perhaps this law would encourage everyone to be more proactive?

@Simon-I do not kow where you teach or how your school functions but I can tell you that at my cty school(a pretty good one) we have tried everything under the sun to involve parents;meetings at all times of day and night, meals, door prizes, special invitations, performances, kindness, unintimidating attitudes,parent rooms,relaxing community corners, computers, gifts, roundtables, parent led events, PTA, newsletters,classes, letters, fliers, websites, outdoor signage, SFC, FCE, and more. Administrators and teachers reach out. We have tried all the initiatives form FCE and from other programs, as well. Our efforts are not short lived. They have been tried through several principals and numerous superintendents. And sure, we will keep on trying. But at recent parent conferences, turn out was low and too many parents could not tell you their child's teacher's name or their grade. And my effectiveness is based on this? I for onw haveand will do anything to increase my effectiveness but many factors are totally out of my control.

@wise educator

The schools I've worked in and with here in the city have also tried a great many things to involve parents more and have also struggled to find success (even the pretty good one). I don't think there are easy answers and I certainly don't think struggles are always due to a lack of effort, care or strategic planning on the part of school personnel.

However, I think that if parents can be rallied to reform a school, they can also be rallied to support an existing school. I admit that there is a strong argument to saying, "that's not where resource-strapped schools should spend their time and energy," but with all the educators on this blog talking about parents parents parents, maybe (as a district/city/state/country) we SHOULD start putting more serious resources towards this issue? Clearly, the status quo isn't effective.

@w e
I see lots of vague statements in your post. What is low turnout? How do you know you were unintimidating and kind (surveys or just your opinion), how many teachers does a kid have and how many names do I have to tell you to pass the test? When you say you’ve tried all times of day and night do you mean you tried it once and it didn’t work so you abandoned the idea or you actually gave people an opportunity to miss a meeting and say “darn, I won’t forget next time!” and then actually make it next time?

I’m sure we’re talking about different schools and different parents, but I’ve got to say I have never, in 7 different schools plus 5 ESY programs, seen excessive communication like you are talking about. Where I’ve said “Enough with the newsletters, I just got an email, plus I know that the Website is consistently updated so I already know all of this is happening!” Never anywhere close. I have found out how to get information from schools that actually do want to share the information I am interested in (more than a few had no interest in publishing information that could lead to complaints or questions).

Consider the constant whining on this board that a single statement that says there are some bad teachers in some City Schools is "TEACHER BASHING". Why is it OK for there to be tons of general statements about how the vast majority of City School parents are totally incompetent and responsible for every aspect of academic failure? Here’s an idea – maybe parents are figuring that they need to give their kids some responsibility and that they are choosing not to micro-manage their school work. Or maybe it’s a single parent who is working two jobs and has figured making ends meet for the family as a whole trumps a mind-numbingly dull PTA meeting (without an agenda where the same people drone on again about the same issues that never get solved). Or maybe a parent has multiple kids with conflicting needs for support and they picked a different kid then the one that goes to your school. I could go on, but I think you get my point.

Does anyone else find it incredibly condescending that the union's press release uses the words, "the right way to get parents involved in the school community"? With the poor level of involvement we have in city schools, it seems like we should be encouraging any and all involvement - especially one as powerful as being engaged in school governance.

So the union (or the school or teachers or someone else) gets to decide what the "right" way of being involved is? Or some outside group gets to decide which families meet some sort of criteria (as being glibly suggested by the comment about knowing the name of a child's teacher) for families to have any voice?

Rather than oppose a bill like this, if the union truly cared about students in failing schools, it would be coming up with a strategy for how it work in collaboration with parents who wanted to activate a trigger so that there was also a teacher voice.

A postscript to my last post. Have you eer thought of asking parents what would work as far as getting them to come to school. I put my answer on a blog post at this address - http://survivingthesystem.blogspot.com/2011/02/getting-parents-to-come-to-school.html .

@ a parent and others-

I promised to drop out of this blog and I am but I felt the need to respond to a parent in particular. I have followed your posts and your blog. I have responded to you knowing that you are an excellent and involved parent. I am also a parent with MSK and four others. I am a dedicated educator who has almost no family life due to my dedication to my school kids and their families. I have won numerous awards including one parents issued. I have chaired SFC(SIT) ans FCE commitees. I could respond in the affirmative to all your questions. I can sincerely say that my school staff is genuinely caring and has tried every thing I mentioned many times. I thought you, of all the bloggers would have gotten a sense of my deep caring and concern for my students. I serve my students exactly as I wish my own children to be served.Most of my staff do the same. Clearly, we do not give each other credit for intelligence and trying many alternatives to do the right thing. I am the one who wanted to show you my school when you were seeking a middle school for your MSK. To be misunderstood or judged as some kind of idiot that had not already thought of and tried almost all your suggestions is very hurtful. Yes, hurtful because I gave you more credit for "knowing" some of us. Over the years this blog has been alternately helpful, enlightening, and frustrating but now it is just painful for me. I will never check Inside Ed again. My job provides enough stress without loooking for more. I am sorry that I could nor express myself better and I will always work for "my" students but I have much too thin skin for this blog.