The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
What do you think of having teachers “grade” parents on their support of their children's learning?
Leah Mundell and Gretchen Suess of Research for Action in Philadelphia write:
The Philadelphia school district is issuing student report cards this year that will rate parents on the quality of “home support” given to children. Our response to the new report cards is based on conversations with parents and teachers impacted by the change. All in all, we support the inclusion of a teacher-parent dialogue on report cards, but propose that parents play a more equal role. As it stands, the parent “grading” system threatens to trigger a cycle of conflict and blame. The report card requires teachers to hold parents accountable for student learning without providing an opportunity for parents to hold teachers accountable. In today's environment of high-stakes testing and educational reform, “accountability” carries with it an implicit assumption of blame. Thus, merely providing an equivalent grading system of teachers by parents would not eliminate this cycle.
We propose an alternate report card that encourages a dialogue between teacher and parent. Components would include: (1) teacher's perspective on what child needs for learning, including supplies and home support; (2) parent/guardian's perspective on what child needs for learning, including knowledge of school resources, cultural respect, and clear, challenging homework assignments; and (3) a joint parent and teacher action plan to address these issues and needs. This proposal would best be implemented through face-to-face report card conferences. The teacher and parent each complete their respective portions of the report card prior to the conference, then devise an action plan together.
Teachers and parents with whom we consulted felt nervous and defensive about the implicit blaming of parents that the current report cards may foster. All expressed concern that the information would not lead to greater support for student learning and questioned the lack of follow-up. Yet all agreed that strong communication between parents and teachers is essential to support student learning. Our proposal uses the report card format to foster dialogue about student success rather than perpetuate blame for student failure.
Leah Mundell, M.A. and Gretchen Suess, M.A.
Research for Action
3701 Chestnut St.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
www.researchforaction.org
Related Reading
Snyder, S. (2003, September 18). Parents to get “grades'” from Phila.s' teachers. Philadelphia Inquirer.
Michael Hayen, assistant principal at Mt. Faulkner Primary School, writes:
I can see how it might be intuitively attractive to suggest that we should measure and report on parental involvement. After all, research clearly shows that parental involvement plays a significant role in enhancing student outcomes, and don't we want to encourage this?
One way to think about the issue is to consider it from the parent perspective. If schools want parents to be accountable for their involvement, then shouldn't schools first be accountable to parents and communities in real ways?
At one level, it cannot be denied that U.S educators are accountable like never before. They have No Child Left Behind (NCLB) with attendant state and district policies mandating adequate yearly progress targets, the threat of school closure, and so on.
While I don't want to get bogged down in U.S educational policy, the existence and nature of these federal, state, and district accountability provisions raise two issues in my mind. Do mechanisms like NCLB hold schools accountable to their parents and local communities in constructive ways? If not, can schools take a more proactive stance in the debate and show communities that they can be accountable to them independently of government intervention?
Taking the first question, I am not convinced that the answer is yes. Under No Child Left Behind, for example, parents can vote with their feet and demand a transfer if their child's school fails to meet annual improvement goals. Similarly, some districts are shutting down schools that are failing students. But under either of these measures, what is the guarantee that a student's new school will stay open and meet increasingly improbable targets as 2014 approaches? And why should students be the ones dislocated from their school because of the failings of educators? Even more problematic is what do parents do in small districts where there are no real choices?
The role of community organising in education would also suggest that, despite the existence of federal and state accountability mechanisms, communities still don't always feel that schools are accountable to them or serve their needs.¹
A distinction also has to be made between being accountable and having governance provisions in place. NCLB requires Title I Parent Councils and many districts have school site councils that seek to include parents in decision making. In many cases, however, these fail to make schools accountable to parents in a meaningful way.²
As an Australian educator observing the U.S experience, I consider the second question to be particularly important. I believe we are seeing an upping of the accountability debate in my country and that educators will need to be proactive if they want to shape the direction the debate takes. Currently in Australia the Federal government has imposed new reporting to parent requirements on state governments, and I believe it is only a matter of time before the conversation turns to NCLB-type provisions.
While I am not sure that Australian educators will be able to convince communities and political leaders that they can be accountable independently of greater government intervention, I do believe that schools will only have a chance of doing so if they further consider questions like:
- Are we implementing governance structures that genuinely enhance collaborative decision making and accountability to the whole school community?
- How can community organisations and community organisers support us to be accountable to our communities?
- How can we report to parents and school communities on school performance in more effective ways and involve them in creating responses to curriculum issues and academic outcomes?
From my exposure to the U.S system, I have seen promising practices in areas such as parent leadership and data sharing that may begin to assist in answering these questions. The challenge for Australian and U.S educators is to look at the impact of these and consider other approaches that will enable them to more actively respond to accountability concerns.
Once we have done this, then perhaps we can start arguing about whether parents should be held accountable to schools.
¹ For examples of how community organisers, including ACORN, have held school districts accountable see: Brown, C. Gold, E. & Simon, E. (2002) Strong Neighborhoods Strong Schools. Chicago: Cross City Campaign for Urban School Reform.
² For a discussion of this distinction between accountability and governance using the context of New York City see: Mediratta, K. & Fruchter, N. (2003). From Governance to Accountability Building Relationships That Make Schools Work. New York: Drum Major Institute for Public Policy. Available at steinhardt.nyu.edu/iesp/publications/pubs/drum_major.pdf
Michael Hayen
Advanced Skills Teacher (Assistant Principal)
Mt Faulkner Primary School
Allunga Road
Chigwell Tasmania
Australia
Email: michael.hayen@education.tas.gov.au