Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
PAReport.ParentalEngagementReport

PAReport.ParentalEngagementReport

Ratings: (0)|Views: 354 |Likes:
Published by Bill de Blasio

More info:

Published by: Bill de Blasio on Mar 30, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/18/2013

pdf

text

original

 
1
BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS: AN EVALUATIONOF PARENT ENGAGEMENT IN SCHOOLCLOSURES AND CO-LOCATIONS
A Report by:Public Advocate Bill de Blasio and the Alliance for Quality EducationJuly 22, 2010
 
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
 
Executive Summary2.
 
Introduction3.
 
Backgrounda.
 
Understanding Closures and Co-Locationsb.
 
Understanding the Law Related to the City’s SchoolGovernance Structurec.
 
Issues Raised by the Current Policy and Lawd.
 
Metrics and Tools that Inform Closure and Co-locationDecisionsi.
 
Standards Applicable to Closuresii.
 
Analysis of Progress Report and Quality Review Scoresfrom 2006-2008 for the Closing Schoolsiii.
 
Standards applicable to co-locationsiv.
 
The Need for Clear and Consistent Standards andAccountability4.
 
Analyzing the Public Engagement Process for Closure and Co-locationsa.
 
Analyzing School Closuresb.
 
Co-locations: Space Utilization vs. Educational Impactc.
 
Parental Engagement in Major Educational Changesd.
 
Public Hearingse.
 
Analysis from the Hearings5.
 
Parental Engagement in Other Cities6.
 
Engagement the Parent’s Way – Inside the Parent Surveya.
 
Methodologyb.
 
Survey Findings7.
 
Conclusions and Recommendations8.
 
Appendices
 
31.
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Education’s (“Department”) decisions to close or co-locate schoolsfrequently involves the loss of critical space and programs, which can have serious impacts onstudents’ education. Historically, in making these decisions the Department has a poor track record of soliciting and incorporating parental and community input. Despite new parentalengagement procedures added to the law in 2009 to facilitate greater parental consultation inmajor school change decisions, this year’s story does not seem to be markedly different. TheDepartment treated these hearings as procedural hurdles in order to satisfy the letter of the law,rather than an opportunity to engage in a productive dialogue about the impacts of proposedschool closures and co-locations on students and what is in the best interests of affected students.By examining the New York State Education Law, Educational Impact Statements (EIS),transcripts from public hearings, and by conducting a parent survey of 873 parents at 34 schoolsaffected by co-locations, the report concludes that the Department’s parental engagement processprovided insufficient information and left too many questions unanswered questions about howstudents and the school community will be affected by these major school decisions.The report’s key finding is that the EIS – the official document assessing the impact that aproposed change will have on school services – does not provide adequate information formembers of the school community to understand and comment about how students will beaffected by these decisions. This finding is consistent with the courts’ recent decision that theschool closure process is flawed.Further, if not well-planned and coordinated, closures and co-locations can disrupt students’education and decrease their access to school facilities such as classrooms, gymnasiums andcafeterias.Among main findings revealed by the survey are:
 
Parents don’t know how the programs in their school will be impacted by a co-location:
42% of parents responded that the Department did not provide specificinformation on how existing education programs will be affected by school changes.
 
Parents whose children’s schools will be co-located beginning in September reported that their children’s school could have less access to gymnasiums, classrooms,cafeterias, and auditoriums.
At least a third of parents surveyed reported that theirschools’ access to the following areas could suffer after the co-location: cluster rooms(44%), gymnasium (41%), cafeteria (43%), classroom space (41%), auditorium (35%).
 
Department’s Educational Impact Statements, which are supposed to thoroughlyevaluate and explain the impact of a co-location or closure, confuses parents and aredeeply flawed:
62% of parents did not know about the EIS (44%) or knew about the EISbut did not see it (18 %); and 52% of parents said the DOE did not address questionsabout proposed school changes.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->