PTAs: Are they the new political power?

Kim Gokce made an interesting observation in a recent blog discussion. In response to a question about Mike Jacob's email supporting a certain redistricting plan, he said that didn't concern him as much as the power of PTAs.

I do believe in many ways we are our own worst enemy. Anyone who reads what I post or who will chat with me off-line knows that I support our teachers, parents and children in Chamblee and Cross Keys attendance areas and beyond with full dedication. It is when our PTAs turn into PACs that I get cynical and discouraged.

Could our most powerful PTAs and parent groups be steering our school board and possibly drowning out the voices of weaker, poorer parents? I was interested to see a report on Channel 2 News last night, that focused on DeKalb's redistricting, the parent groups debating the issue and the survey. The reporter actually showed the bar chart of the responses from the online survey which clearly shows that the majority (88.5%) of respondents are from north DeKalb and have children in elementary school. Less than 2% of the responses came from Sarah Copelin-Wood's district—the district slated to have the most schools consolidated and closed.

Now, TIME magazine has published an article on that very subject called "PTA Wars".

School budgets are so strapped these days that parent groups are not only battling to keep basics in the classroom, but some parents are even fighting one another. The superintendent in Albany, Calif., last fall suspended PTA-funded chess, music and art classes at two elementary schools after the parents at a third school complained they couldn't afford a similar curriculum. Why, the parents at Marin and Cornell elementary schools wondered, is the PTA at Ocean View trying to keep our kids down?

This is the same quandary we have in DeKalb. Some schools have those things listed in TIME: Chess Club, art and music classes, foreign language instruction, special curriculums, etc.—many don't.  Is this what we want for our public schools? Is it acceptable to have extras funded by parent groups in public schools while nearby schools have so little by comparison? I would make the case that this is exactly the reason we are where we are right now in the redistricting battle. Our school system leaders have for far too long abdicated their responsibility to create a system of schools that are by and large equal in offerings, balanced in enrollment, staffed with similar teachers and administrators and focused on a quality education in each and every classroom. For far too long, our school system leaders have catered to the most vocal communities as well as individuals in order to quiet "squeaky wheels". The management policy has been, "no squeaking = no problems". There has been no formal overall districtwide educational plan.

Sadly, now that redistricting has pulled back the curtain we found that it is not only the numbers of students that need balanced, it is the education those students are receiving inside those schools that need to come into balance. Our school board and superintendent have an enormous task in righting this ship. It will require a clear vision and teamwork to get there. We are a decade into the "New Millennium" and many of our schools are not keeping up with the rest of the world. Our resources must be reeled in and more wisely spent. Our administration needs streamlining and updating. We need to truly become a student-focused school system.

It's time.

Is DCSS leveling the playing field between schools?

Our talented researcher known as DeKalb Parent has looked into PTA spending and will have you wondering if we couldn't level the playing field better by bringing Title 1 funds directly into the schools.  Read on:

Maureen Downey who writes the AJC Get Schooled blog brought up an interesting question in a recent article titled “Should parent affluence influence how schools are funded?”

I took a look at a few affluent areas of DeKalb to see what their PTAs fund for students. In particular I pulled data for some of the schools that have the greatest percentages of responses to the online survey regarding redistricting.

The parents at these schools work hard for their money, and they work just as diligently to raise money for their schools. Reviewing their PTA’s income and expenditures gives an idea of the “extras” these school provide. Although this is only one reason parents might want their children to stay at these schools, the impact made by the PTA is substantial and obviously beneficial for the students.

Regarding the PTAs expenditures, the local PTA scrutinizes and controls the funds. The money is spent in a variety of ways. I didn’t see any single expenditure taking up the lion’s share of the budget. There are many different programs to appeal to the varied interests of students. They fund programs for struggling learners, average students, and gifted students. Teachers have a say in what their classrooms need. Money is earmarked to honor teachers. Many of the programs foster critical thinking skills and a respect for the environment.

This brought to mind the question - Are Title 1 funds being used as wisely in Title 1 schools as these PTAs use their funds? If you look at the allocation of Title 1 dollars that are supposed to level the playing field between more affluent schools and schools that are not as affluent, you will see that most Title 1 funds per DCSS Title 1 school are substantially greater than the funds raised and spent by these affluent PTAs. Should Title 1 schools have more local control over how their funds are spent? Would that allow them the accountability and flexibility to offer the variety of educational experiences that these more affluent schools have provided for their students? Couldn’t Title 1 students benefit from some of the programs that these students have access to? In other words, is there a better way to level the playing field than DCSS currently has in place? Regarding transparency, is there a full accounting of these funds on the DCSS website?

Fernbank Elementary:
Below is a sample of what Fernbank publishes as its PTA income and expenditures. They are to be commended for their transparency and extremely low administrative cost. Here is the link if you want a full view of their online balance sheet. They keep meticulous accounts:

Projected: $ 131,100.00
Actual: $ 132,596.23

Community Enrichment (funded by Membership Dues/self supported))
TOTAL Community Enrichment $21,255.80

Fund Raising Expenses
TOTAL Fund Raising $39,666.54

PTA Administration (funded by $$$ for Education/Tshirts/Box Tops)
TOTAL PTA Administration $6,501.20

Staff Enrichment (funded by Wrapping Paper)
Counselor
Reflections Art Exhibitions
Retirement Recognition
Staff Appreciation $1,755
Staff Gifts
Teacher of the Year
Teacher Stipends $5,150.65
Teacher T-Shirts
TOTAL Staff Enrichment $8,024.54

Student Enrichment - (funded by School Pictures & School Store/Bookfairs/or self supported)
Library Gift Book Program
Scholarships
Agendas
Chess Club $13,812.83
Lego Club $1,840.00
Field Day
Fifth Grade Fun Run $2,678.50
Writing class
Yoga $7,400
TOTAL Student Enrichment $31,917.42

Vanderlyn Elementary:
The Vanderlyn PTA webpage says that its primary vehicle for revenue generation is an Annual Fund that parents can donate to. Its goal is $100,000, and currently it stands at $73,000+.

Take a look at the FAQ page to see that this money is very well spent giving students many enrichment opportunities:

Austin Elementary:
Austin’s PTA doesn’t publish its revenue figures, but look at their PTA webpage to see some of the enrichment they provide:

Oak Grove Elementary:
Oak Grove doesn’t publish its revenue either, but it does quite a bit of fundraising, foremost being the Fall Festival. I’ve been to some of their Fall Festivals, and they’re big events. It also has a foundation similar to Vanderlyn. Take a look at its stated goals for expenditure of dollars raised through this foundation by clicking here.