PTA Slowly Changes Its Form - What Do Parents Think?
I have been a PTA parent. I have served on Boards in nearly every postion and, I was co-president of a PTA at a large high school. I've been to Legislative Assembly and conventions. I have seen, firsthand, many, many hard-working parents - at several schools - and heard amazing stories of effort at others. (Sad to say, not every school has a vibrant PTA.)
But, just like the seeming disconnect between our schools and our district headquarters, there seems to be an ever-growing disconnect between school PTAs and their needs and our city/state/national PTAs' goals.
What has always troubled me is that local PTA leaders are always there for the meetings with the Superintendents or Mayor or other officials. They rise to endorse Board agendas for work at the Legislature. All this is great but it's high-level.
It feels like the city/state/national operates at that 10,000 foot level and yet, there are real concerns at the district and school level that you would think would be exactly where leadership would help.
For years I've asked why we don't have PTAs in every school. Wouldn't that be a good place to start helping those schools become stronger?
And when we have situations like the growth boundaries, where is the SCPTA to support parent concerns?
Because I have not heard a word from them nor heard parents say that PTA has been there to support them in their concerns. The home page for SCPTA lists needing Area Directors, arts grant, resolution for sleep time requirements and school start times, etc. (One good item is how PTA use school buildings - I'm sure your PTA has seen this but you might take a look if you have questions.)
The Advocacy/Legislative page is outdated (even as it says it was updated on September 30th.).
I got the trigger to write this thread from some unhappiness read from one of the Growth Boundary regions. A couple of parents said they felt the PTA at APP@Lincoln has been long dominated by NE voices and that they felt no support for the dilemma now for the now-current 3rd graders from the Whitman area who would have to spend 6th grade rolling up with JAMS. You could hear the frustration.
Now PTA at APP@Lincoln is a different (and probably more stressful) animal as you have kids coming from all over the region. But PTA is supposed to support concerns that come from all parents.
Is your PTA going to coalesce around a growth boundary issue for your school? I have mostly heard individual parent voices at these meetings so are PTAs rising up to fight back?
As for state PTA, they got rid of their paid legislative voice (which I believe is a mistake), are big supporters of Common Core and have McDonald's as a "platinum" sponsor.
On Common Core, national PTA got a big grant from - who else - the Gates Foundation to push Common Core. I'll have a separate thread on the PTA's "FAQs" on Common Core and student data privacy because they have left out a LOT that parents should know.
I've tried - multiple times - to contact the SCPTA president, Katherine Schomer, and the Washington State PTA President, Heather Gillette, just to ask about PTA focus, Common Core and other issues. No replies.
I don't get it.
But, just like the seeming disconnect between our schools and our district headquarters, there seems to be an ever-growing disconnect between school PTAs and their needs and our city/state/national PTAs' goals.
What has always troubled me is that local PTA leaders are always there for the meetings with the Superintendents or Mayor or other officials. They rise to endorse Board agendas for work at the Legislature. All this is great but it's high-level.
It feels like the city/state/national operates at that 10,000 foot level and yet, there are real concerns at the district and school level that you would think would be exactly where leadership would help.
For years I've asked why we don't have PTAs in every school. Wouldn't that be a good place to start helping those schools become stronger?
And when we have situations like the growth boundaries, where is the SCPTA to support parent concerns?
Because I have not heard a word from them nor heard parents say that PTA has been there to support them in their concerns. The home page for SCPTA lists needing Area Directors, arts grant, resolution for sleep time requirements and school start times, etc. (One good item is how PTA use school buildings - I'm sure your PTA has seen this but you might take a look if you have questions.)
The Advocacy/Legislative page is outdated (even as it says it was updated on September 30th.).
I got the trigger to write this thread from some unhappiness read from one of the Growth Boundary regions. A couple of parents said they felt the PTA at APP@Lincoln has been long dominated by NE voices and that they felt no support for the dilemma now for the now-current 3rd graders from the Whitman area who would have to spend 6th grade rolling up with JAMS. You could hear the frustration.
Now PTA at APP@Lincoln is a different (and probably more stressful) animal as you have kids coming from all over the region. But PTA is supposed to support concerns that come from all parents.
Is your PTA going to coalesce around a growth boundary issue for your school? I have mostly heard individual parent voices at these meetings so are PTAs rising up to fight back?
As for state PTA, they got rid of their paid legislative voice (which I believe is a mistake), are big supporters of Common Core and have McDonald's as a "platinum" sponsor.
On Common Core, national PTA got a big grant from - who else - the Gates Foundation to push Common Core. I'll have a separate thread on the PTA's "FAQs" on Common Core and student data privacy because they have left out a LOT that parents should know.
I've tried - multiple times - to contact the SCPTA president, Katherine Schomer, and the Washington State PTA President, Heather Gillette, just to ask about PTA focus, Common Core and other issues. No replies.
I don't get it.
Comments
I think the problem is there are some NW app parents who are not unhappy with the plan. Their kids get the less crowded , excellent Hamilton after the NE kids get the boot. So the NW is divided, while all of the NE is unhappy with the plan, though I think understandably sees the problem starting next year(which they will be personally tasked with mitigating) as more urgent than the problem starting in 3 years(eons in sps time, I think some people think might not happen).
I don't love the PTA format. I like site councils, but I haven't really been privy to lobbying work that the PTA has done lately, and that could change my mind.
Gen Ed Mom
At one school I do not have a PTA, and the school is not especially affected by the latest boundary discussions. It is a gen ed school, and as usual, things are going very well there. So no. At my other school the issue is very complicated, is being affected by several different splits at once at all grade levels, in all regions of town, and I think I have new light to shed on the problem, so see above for my answer to that one.
-sleeper
Gen Ed Mom
-sleeper
Gen Ed Mom
Signed,
Seattle School Mom
It's difficult to make volunteer labor truly representative, given that people have differing abilities to volunteer, organize, contribute. In general, my goal in any school I'm involved with is to have the school well enough managed organized, with sufficient resources, so that the PTA is a social body with little input in the school. I know a lot of folks don't have that luxury.
zb
ALO mom
I'm a fan of self-organized groups. I don't see the State/National PTA organizations providing much value to a school-level organization, and given the amount of revenue that flows up from those school-level organizations to the state/national entities, that's a real shame.
Ingraham and Nathan Hale both voted to disaffiliate from the state/national PTSA last spring. Perhaps other schools will follow suit.
1. I think Melissa made a typo when writing the Whitman kids go to the JAMS roll-up. I think she meant John Marshall/Wilson Pacific. I am not aware of a new plan.
2. Sleeper, your statements are inaccurate and divisive. The plan is being balanced on the backs of Whitman service area APP enrolled and eligible kids currently in the 3rd grade (1st and 2nd graders, too, but they at least avoid John Marshall and won't be starting the roll-up). There are only about 50 of these kids (at most). There will be even less if the roll-up at John Marshall happens since the APP eligible kids won't enroll for that! The only accuracy in your statement is that current 4th and 5th graders in the Whitman zone are slated to stay at Hamilton. Yes, like you, I unfortunately think many of them will keep their mouths shut since their kids will fare OK.
The plans all stink except, POSSIBLY, for the folks getting to stay at Hamilton in an established program. I say "possibly" since who knows what will happen to that program. The NE plan stinks, but it's better than what the current 3rd graders in the Whitman service area face. The JAMS kids will at least have some kids in all grades allowing for at least some math options, some sports, some music, some electives. They will also be at an actual comprehensive middle school location. Conversely, at BEST, 50 APP kids (plus some number of GenEd kids) will be at John Marshall for 6th grade and moved to Wilson Pacific for their 7th grade year.
Please note, Sleeper, I did NOT say the JAMS was a good solution. It just sucks a little less than what my 3rd grader in the NW is facing.
Now, to the PTA comments. As you can see by sleeper's comments, SPS is closer to meeting the goal of dividing and conquering a unified APP North PTA voice. People are now forced to choose what to fight for. Unfortunately, some may choose to protect what Sleeper mentions - staying at Hamilton in lieu of fighting for all kids. Next, if JAMS is a done deal, you'll have a much, much, much larger group of people working to make that the best it can be. Tell me, Sleeper, how much weight are 50 of us going to pull at a John Marshall roll-up?
My other kid is in a NW school. The PTA there is collectively fighting the boundary change to benefit all kids in the current boundary. It is much easier to unify their voice since they are geographically linked.
-sleeper
I think the larger PTA organizations (city and state) have value insofar as they amplify their members' voices. If they use their members as a backdrop for whatever other voices they present, then they're not useful.
With the PTA lobbyist gone, I can definitely see a local school PTA asking what benefit they get from the larger PTA organization and the dues they pay.
Having a kid in GenEd and APP, I really want to be respectful of GenEd concerns because I have MANY!! The rigor needs to increase 10 fold. Have pull-outs to help struggling kids catch-up instead of holding everyone back. It works well if the PTA supports a strong tutoring program.
Eric B - You are right about North Beach. It was the administration and the PTA who rallied the troops to Ballard HS. At the risk of shooting my other kid in the foot, I was happy to see the NB turn-out and not another meeting hijacked by Lincoln. The admin and PTA are rallying the entire school to rally for the current boundary to protect the community.
HP