Sign up for our newsletter
Contact

Engler, Allen To Headline Roundtable Discussion on Role of Private Companies in Public Education

October 3, 2012 By

Media Advisory
October 3, 2012

Former Governor John Engler will join CER President Jeanne Allen, and other experts for an in-depth roundtable discussion exploring the critical issue of the growing role of private companies in American public education. The roundtable will address the critical question of whether education can be run as a profitable business and still stay true to a humanitarian vision.

The panel will also include Brian Jones, Chairman of the D.C. Public Charter School Board which is the chief authorizer of charter schools in D.C., and James Tooley, author of From Village School to Global Brand: Changing the World Through Education which examines the history of global education management organization SABIS.

The evening – co-hosted by CER and SABIS – will also include a reception and book signing following the roundtable.

What: Can Education Be Run as a Profitable Business and
Still Be Guided by a Humanitarian Vision?
Roundtable, Reception, and Book Signing
When: Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Roundtable begins at 4:30 PM
Where: 300 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Suite 800
Washington, D.C.
The Business Roundtable
Who: Jeanne Allen, President, The Center for Education Reform
James Tooley, Author, From Village School to Global Brand: Changing the World Through Education
Honorable John Engler, Former Governor of Michigan
Brian Jones, Chairman, D.C. Public Charters School Board

Please contact [email protected] for additional information.

Watch the Roundtable event online here.

Filed Under: Press Releases

What the Candidates Debate Has to Offer Ed Reformers

October 3, 2012 By

October 3, 2012

Who knew education would come up repeatedly tonite?

Romney: After the president opened the debate about his jobs plan, Romney introduced the education component into the debate, combining jobs and skills, which come from education.

Obama: We have to improve our education system — we have a program called Race to the Top and now we are going to hire 100,000 math and science teachers.

Romney: I agree education is key to the future of our economy but we have 27 different training programs across government not working together. (we are fact checking this)

Obama: Says he inherited 18 programs for education that were well intentioned but not working for kids; that one teacher in NV has 42 kids and 10 year old textbooks. (we are fact checking this, too!)

This smattering of their words scratches the surface of an engaging, competitive conversation that highlighted education six times (at least) before the first 15 minutes were up and despite having been asked no direct questions about education. The candidates would go on to amplify their points throughout, and eventually address the proper federal role, which, despite suggestions among education reformers to the contrary, really is very, very different. And by all twitter, news media and pundit reports, even on this issue Romney was the winner.  READ MORE…

 

For more information, review, and comparisons on Romney and Obama’s views on education, be sure to check out these resources:

Presidential Candidates Focus on Education

Opinion: Schooling Obama

Where Do Romney, Obama Stand on Education?

School Choice is Key Issue in Election

GOP Convention Highlights Ed Reform; Now It’s the Dems Turn

Paul Ryan: Education Pioneer

And don’t forget to check out CER’s Field Guide and Mandate for Change, which serve as guides for the kinds of reforms candidates should be embracing and talking about.

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: , ,

The Sad, Sad SAT Factor: How Long Do We Accept Dismal Scores?

October 2, 2012 By

“Does the expanded population of test takers explain the decline in reading and writing scores?”

The simple answer is no, it does not – despite the College Board’s continual insistence to the contrary. What these SAT scores, combined with the equally dismal ACT scores, confirm is that the majority of kids in this country are not ready for college, that more of our students are not being adequately served by their schools, and that a dangerous achievement gap still persists among ethnic groups.

When looking at the total scores of reading, math, and writing combined, white students have made no progress in the last six years, but continue to score higher than their African American and Hispanic peers whose scores have been in a steady decline since 2006. Conversely, the scores of Asian students have been steadily increasing. The average combined score for white students in 2012 (1578) is almost identical to their score in 2006 (1582). African American students’ scores have declined from 1291 in 2006 to 1273 in 2012 and the scores of Hispanic students went from 1371 in 2006 to 1350 in 2012.

We need to ask ourselves, how many more years of dismal test scores are we willing to accept? How many more kids are we willing to sacrifice to a bad education on the altar of the status quo? Because what we have been doing is clearly not working. Student achievement on college entrance exams remains stagnant and we continue to let this failure fester in our education system. Not only are we not preparing our kids for college and careers, but we are jeopardizing their future and the future of their country.

So how do we turn things around? We need reforms that expand educational choices, encourage innovation, and put power in the hands of parents as demonstrated in the film Won’t Back Down. It’s going to take strong reform-minded leaders willing to stick their necks out and insist on real education reforms, who shake things up to increase student achievement that will move us forward. In other words, leaders who won’t accept lip service and platitudes as real reform from those who have a vested interested in protecting the status quo.

(Originally posted to the National Journal‘s Education Experts blog.)

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: ,

How Long Do We Accept Dismal Test Scores

October 2, 2012 By

The Sad, Sad SAT Factor
by Fawn Johnson
National Journal
October 1, 2012

The College Board reported last week that 43 percent of college-bound students are academically ready for college. This means that less than half of those who took the test this year are likely to maintain a B- average or higher during their freshman year of college. The figure shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone involved in higher education. In community colleges, it isn’t unusual for three-quarters of the entering students to need some sort of catch-up course. Still, it’s a problem for a country that seems to be in agreement that an increase in college graduates would help grow the economy and shrink the poverty rate.

Let’s look at these numbers a little bit more closely. Math scores have remained stable over the last four years. That in itself is good news, since falling behind in high school math is the surest way to eliminate the most lucrative of college majors–the science, technology, and engineering fields that both President Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney are encouraging. Moreover, educators are well aware that reading and writing is harder to teach and harder to test than math.

Writing scores have declined by four and five points respectively. That’s not good, but it could be worse. And the population of test takers is also expanding, largely in disadvantaged populations. The SAT test takers grew from 1.56 million in 2008 to 1.66 million this year, making 2012 the largest class of test takers in history. The number of test takers who qualify for a fee waiver has increased by 61 percent over four years. Almost half of the test takers this year were minorities (45 percent), up from 38 percent in 2008. The proportion of test takers who came from non-English speaking or bilingual homes increased by 10 points over 10 years.

How significant is the 43 percent figure in judging the quality of the future workforce? Does the expanded population of test takers explain the decline in reading and writing scores? How could the SAT test be improved? Are there other measures that can predict a student’s success in college? What can be done to improve tests on reading and writing? What can be done to improve reading and writing instruction?

Response – How Long Do We Accept Dismal Test Scores
by Jeanne Allen
September 12, 2012

“Does the expanded population of test takers explain the decline in reading and writing scores?”

The simple answer is no, it does not – despite the College Board’s continual insistence to the contrary. What these SAT scores, combined with the equally dismal ACT scores, confirm is that the majority of kids in this country are not ready for college, that more of our students are not being adequately served by their schools, and that a dangerous achievement gap still persists among ethnic groups.

When looking at the total scores of reading, math, and writing combined, white students have made no progress in the last six years, but continue to score higher than their African American and Hispanic peers whose scores have been in a steady decline since 2006. Conversely, the scores of Asian students have been steadily increasing. The average combined score for white students in 2012 (1578) is almost identical to their score in 2006 (1582). African American students’ scores have declined from 1291 in 2006 to 1273 in 2012 and the scores of Hispanic students went from 1371 in 2006 to 1350 in 2012.

We need to ask ourselves, how many more years of dismal test scores are we willing to accept? How many more kids are we willing to sacrifice to a bad education on the altar of the status quo? Because what we have been doing is clearly not working. Student achievement on college entrance exams remains stagnant and we continue to let this failure fester in our education system. Not only are we not preparing our kids for college and careers, but we are jeopardizing their future and the future of their country.

So how do we turn things around? We need reforms that expand educational choices, encourage innovation, and put power in the hands of parents as demonstrated in the film Won’t Back Down. It’s going to take strong reform-minded leaders willing to stick their necks out and insist on real education reforms, who shake things up to increase student achievement that will move us forward. In other words, leaders who won’t accept lip service and platitudes as real reform from those who have a vested interested in protecting the status quo.

Filed Under: Opinions Tagged With: ,

Charter vote about educational choice

October 2, 2012 By

Opinion
by Jim Geiser
Athens Banner-Herald
October 1, 2012

On Nov. 6, Georgia voters will be asked to decide on the following question: “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow state or local approval of public charter schools upon the request of local communities?”

As an advocate of public education reform, I will be voting “yes” for several reasons, the main one being that it’s the right thing to do for kids. In short, the amendment will allow the innovation and entrepreneurial spirit that well-run charter schools can bring — innovation that also can infuse traditional public schools with energy.

Why is the amendment needed? Because groups in Georgia communities wishing to start a public independent charter school — not a school-district-run charter — currently have no options for approval but their local school board, the very group that views independent charters as competition funneling away “their” money. This amendment would allow a state commission to authorize charter schools, thus allowing multiple authorizers, a practice in 16 other states as of 2011.

Not coincidentally, 78 percent of the nation’s charter schools are in states with multiple authorizers, or a strong appeals process, according to the Center for Education Reform. The 16 multiple-authorizer states also have the highest-quality charter schools, based on test scores, research studies and ongoing observation.

In a Sept. 23 commentary headlined “Do the math on charter amendment,” local columnist Myra Blackmon writes that she supports charter schools. Her commentary, though, doesn’t support the independent charter schools the proposed amendment seeks to allow. Those schools are governed by independent community boards of directors comprising parents, teachers and community representatives. These independent charter schools take the same standardized tests and are accountable to the state, or to the local school board, if approved locally.

But unlike traditional public schools, charter schools are subject to closure if they don’t perform, and will go out of business if parents don’t choose them.

The financial numbers obviously are important in this conversation, but the bigger issue is why independent charter schools are necessary. First, public charter schools are needed because traditional public schools aren’t adequately serving all children, and many parents are looking for options. Yes, there are some great things happening at some of our schools. My son is at Clarke Central High School, and I am expecting a high-quality education. But the reality is that 1-in-3 kids in Georgia drop out of school, and in Clarke County the numbers are even worse. I think charter schools can serve as a model for raising standards and expectations.

In a hypothetical scenario in her column, Blackmon asks readers to consider a “local board of education (that) denies the (charter) proposal on legitimate — not political or personal — grounds.” The truth is that school boards do reject charter schools for personal and political reasons. School boards are unwilling to relinquish the control and the educational dollars, even when groups propose high-quality, accountable charter schools.

The vast majority of charter schools in Georgia (and the two in Clarke County) are district charter schools — and yes, school districts fully support these schools because they are run by the school districts. They use the term “charter” for effect, not substance.

But I most disagree with Blackmon’s view that traditional public schools are entitled to all the K-12 education dollars and that public charter schools will deprive traditional schools of their money. Public schools do not create money, they operate on our tax dollars. As a parent, if I choose to put my child in a public charter school rather than a traditional public school, that’s my choice — true local control — and the money should follow that child. Incidentally, the amendment allows local school boards to keep their share of the money, even though they aren’t educating the student. The state will provide a percentage of the local dollars.

And, charter schools don’t have the large bureaucracy that characterizes many traditional schools. The governance structure of charter schools allows them to be innovative and to implement decisions quickly.

In Georgia, charter schools serve higher percentages of minority or economically disadvantaged students than the traditional public schools and have consistently outperformed traditional public schools.

I think it is important that we continue to expand public educational options for all students. I encourage a “yes” vote on the amendment.

• Jim Geiser coordinates a high school internship program at the University of Georgia. He served as principal of Children’s Charter School in Baton Rouge, La., and as executive director of the Louisiana Charter Schools Association.

Filed Under: CER in the News

Voucher Talk Resumes

October 1, 2012 By

“Tennessee planning for school vouchers nears final stages”
by Richard Locker
Commercial Appeal
October 1, 2012

A special commission appointed by Gov. Bill Haslam is about to begin drafting its final recommendations on how a Tennessee school-voucher program would operate, including who would be eligible for taxpayer dollars for private school tuition.

The voucher issue returns to the state legislature in January after a year’s hiatus. The state Senate narrowly approved a voucher bill in 2011, sponsored by Sen. Brian Kelsey, R-Germantown, that allowed students whose family incomes were low enough to qualify them for free or discounted school lunches to take half the taxpayer money spent per-pupil in their school district to pay private school tuition.

House leaders were more reluctant to open a political battle over vouchers and just before the 2012 session opened, Haslam asked lawmakers to stand down and let him appoint a task force to examine the issue and make recommendations this fall for the 2013 legislature to consider.

He said Tennessee needed time for the major changes in state education policy to get up and running before embarking on another. The earlier changes included the end of collective bargaining by teachers, major changes to teacher tenure and performance evaluations, and higher standards for a revised core curriculum for K-12, plus a shift from enrollment-based funding for higher education to performance-based funding.

The “Governor’s Task Force on Opportunity Scholarships” held its fourth meeting Wednesday and although differences among its members continue, its chairman, state Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman, made it clear that the panel’s charge from the governor is not to debate whether to have a voucher program but rather how a program should operate — its legal parameters — if lawmakers create one.

Key issues include when to launch a program; whether to put family-income limits on participation; whether to limit participation to students from low-performing public schools; the size of the “scholarships” — the amount of public money diverted to private schools per student; whether to start a program on a limited, experimental “pilot” basis in a few districts; whether to allow for-profit private schools to participate; and what kind of accountability measures should be put in place, if any, for the private schools accepting the public money.

In addition to limiting eligibility to low-income students, the bill senators approved in 2011 would have limited the program initially to Tennessee’s four largest counties, Shelby, Davidson, Knox and Hamilton, on a trial basis. School districts in those counties have formed a Coalition of Large School Systems, which has opposed vouchers because they divert public funding away from their districts and to private schools.

Advocates of vouchers say they promote school choice by allowing students from low- and moderate-income families to attend private schools that will accept them.

Despite the governor’s assignment for the task force, he said he’s still not sure if he will fully support a voucher plan. “A lot of it depends on what it looks like,” he said.

Joining the large school systems in opposing vouchers is the Tennessee Education Association. “They hurt public schools in a lot of ways,” said TEA lobbyist Jerry Winters. “They directly pull money from public education and send the dollars to private and parochial schools. They also have the great possibility of cherry-picking students and pulling away parental support for the schools left behind.

The nine-member task force includes state education officials, legislators, education policy experts and a representative of the Coalition of Large School Systems. It will meet again in October to draft its final recommendations.

Filed Under: Breaking News Tagged With: ,

“Parent power” film stirs hopes of education reform activists

October 1, 2012 By

by Stephanie Simon
Reuters
September 28, 2012

Education reform film “Won’t Back Down” opened Friday to terrible reviews – and high hopes from activists who expect the movie to inspire parents everywhere to demand big changes in public schools.

The drama stars Maggie Gyllenhaal as a spirited mother who teams up with a passionate teacher to seize control of their failing neighborhood school, over the opposition of a self-serving teachers union.

Reviewers called it trite and dull, but education reformers on both the left and right have hailed the film as a potential game-changer that could aid their fight to weaken teachers’ unions and inject more competition into public education.

Private foundations, nonprofit advocacy groups and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have pumped more than $2 million into advocacy efforts tied to “Won’t Back Down,” including 30-second ads, promotional bookmarks, websites, private screenings and a six-month, cross-country discussion tour that will keep the film in circulation long after it leaves theaters.

Their goal: To attract new foot soldiers who will help them fight for legislation that allows parents to seize control of local schools, as dramatized in the film; eliminates tenure protections for veteran teachers; and opens the door for more competition to neighborhood schools in the form of charters, which are publicly funded but privately run.

“This movie has the potential to be one of the most transformative vehicles in the history of education reform,” said Ben Austin, a longtime Democratic activist.

Austin now runs Parent Revolution, which promotes “parent trigger” laws allowing parents unhappy with struggling schools to take control, fire teachers and bring in private management.

His organization is holding 35 private screenings of “Won’t Back Down” in states from Georgia to Utah to New York over the next month to rally more parents to the cause. “This movie is telling a story that’s relevant to hundreds of thousands of parents across America,” Austin said.

Union leaders, for their part, have slammed the movie as a propaganda film that bears little resemblance to reality.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, has called it “egregiously misleading” and complained that several scenes seemed designed for “the sole purpose of undermining people’s confidence in public education, public school teachers and teacher unions.”

Parent groups that support teachers’ unions have organized protests outside some screenings. And they’ve been gleefully posting negative reviews of “Won’t Back Down” on Facebook and Twitter.

PUSH FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS

So far, the reform coalition has ignored the bad reviews and pushed ahead with their marketing efforts.

The drive to capitalize on the movie grows out of lingering disappointment within the education reform community over the last major film to carry their message, the documentary “Waiting for ‘Superman.'”

Produced by Walden Media, which is also behind “Won’t Back Down,” the documentary chronicled dysfunction in urban schools and the desperation of parents trying to find alternatives for their children.

“Waiting for ‘Superman'” was well-received and widely viewed, thanks to backing by the Gates Foundation. But activists hoping for a big boost from the film were disappointed.

“We didn’t feel we captured anyone,” said Matt David, a consultant to Michelle Rhee, former chancellor of Washington D.C. public schools and a major figure in the reform movement. Many viewers walked out angry at the public school system, he said, but had no way to channel that emotion into action.

This time, Rhee is moving quickly to provide a channel. Her advocacy group, StudentsFirst, has bought 30-second ads to run before showings of “Won’t Back Down” in 1,500 theaters and sponsored marketing efforts to drive viewers to her website.

That website has been revamped to feature an “action center” where people moved by the film can sign up to join StudentsFirst, view short videos about its agenda (including one from comedian and newly appointed board member Bill Cosby), and share their own experiences with public schools.

The Center for Education Reform’s website urges viewers to launch their own charter schools to compete with public schools. “You don’t need a PhD or a teaching degree to start a school,” the center’s website advises. “Remember, you can do it now.”

The most enduring campaign linked to the film may be the six-month “Breaking the Monopoly of Mediocrity” tour arranged by the Institute for a Competitive Workforce, an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Drawing on a $1.2 million grant from the Daniels Fund, the group plans to stage private screenings and discussion forums for business and civic leaders in cities from Memphis, Tennessee, to El Paso, Texas, to Trenton, New Jersey.

The American Federation of Teachers is countering with its own series of town hall meetings and workshops across the country designed to present teachers – and unions – as natural allies of parents seeking to better their schools.

Filed Under: CER in the News Tagged With: ,

Urgent Reform Update

September 28, 2012 By

September 27, 2012

Dear Friends,

I wanted to write to you immediately to share three critical things, and one of particularly timely importance:

Won’t Back Down opens Friday!: It’s been a long road since CER first started talking to and advising the filmmakers of this important and inspiring film, but opening day is finally upon us.  Anti-reform groups are out in full force and want to be able to say after the fact that their hard “work” prevented you from seeing it.  Don’t let them get away with it. I was at the premiere Sunday night at the Zeigfeld Theatre, and the anti-reform folks were shouting at the stars. It’s nice to have Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal on your side in this battle and they think telling the real story about parents and teachers fighting back for their schools is worthy of all the controversy!

Trust me. You won’t want to miss it. Watch the trailer and you’ll see why.

Got Parent Power?:   While I was in New York I was interviewed by Fox & Friends and was able to promote our new, popular Parent Power Index© (PPI) which was released in conjunction with Won’t Back Down so that parents who see the film and are inspired by it have a tool to find out whether they have the same power over their child’s education as the parents and teachers in the movie. We’ve already had thousands of visitors per day. It’s extraordinary. So tell your friends and visit the Parent Power Index© and see how much parent power you have!

NBC’s Education Nation: I joined a host of merry (and not so merry) education watchers, activists and yes, the Blob, for a busy and productive few days at the third annual Education Nation Summit in New York.  We blogged live from the Summit to make sure there was always the right emphasis or another point of view. Visit our Education Nation Live! blog to see our live play-play.

If you’re a distant observer, thank you for staying informed. If you’re an activist, thank you for your efforts. If you’re a strong educator, we are grateful for your commitment. But no matter who you are, get out and get involved. Start by seeing Won’t Back Down on Friday. Even those of us who’ve been at this for years are still taken when we are treated to such real life stories of courage and perseverance.

Thank You!,
Jeanne Allen
President

Filed Under: Opinions Tagged With: , ,

Union Wins All In Chicago

September 27, 2012 By

A summary of what the Chicago Teachers Union said it “won” and “wanted to win but didn’t,” published in the Chicago Tribune:

“Our brothers and sisters throughout the country have been told that corporate “school reform” was unstoppable, that merit pay had to be accepted and that the public would never support us if we decided to fight. Cities everywhere have been forced to adopt performance pay. Not here in Chicago! Months ago, CTU members won a strike authorization vote that our enemies thought would be impossible- now we have stopped the Board from imposing merit pay! We preserved our lanes and steps when the politicians and press predicted they were history. We held the line on healthcare costs. We have tremendous victories in this contract; however, it is by no means perfect. While we did not win on every front and will need to continue our struggle into the future; we soundly defended our profession from an aggressive and dishonest attack. We owe our victories to each and every member of this rank and file union. Our power comes from the bottom up.”

“[This chart] is a side by side comparison that demonstrates how far we’ve come in these tense, protracted negotiations with the Board.”

Filed Under: Unions & Establishment Tagged With: ,

Suing For Monopoly On Parents

September 27, 2012 By

“Non-profit PTA sues amid dwindling membership, claims deceit by for-profit rival PTO Today”
by Associated Press
Washington Post
September 26, 2012

The nonprofit PTA sued a for-profit rival on Wednesday, accusing it of denigrating the established group in a bid to siphon off members — a dispute that highlights underlying tensions as parents consider changes in how they interact with their children’s schools.

The National Parent Teacher Association, an iconic group that’s been part of America’s cultural backdrop for more than a century, has seen its membership fall by more than half of the 12 million members it had in its heyday in the 1960s. That decline, at least in part, motivated the PTA to file the lawsuit against PTO Today.

The upstart group put itself on a collision course with the PTA by setting itself up as an alternative.

The 15-page lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago accuses PTO Today of engaging in false advertising, trademark infringement and other deceptive practices to “further continue to encourage members to leave” the PTA.

PTA President Betsy Landers accused PTO Today’s parent company, School Family Media Inc., of “disparaging PTA to drive business their way.” She added that “PTA had no choice but to take legal action to protect its respected name and reputation.”

The lawsuit also accuses School Family Media President Tim Sullivan of contacting PTA members “in an effort to induce them to leave” the older organization.

Sullivan, though, said his group is not to blame for PTA’s woes.

“Their membership started to drop years before our company was in existence, so we are not the cause of their membership dropping,” Sullivan said, adding that a call from an Associated Press reporter Wednesday was the first he heard of the lawsuit.

He added, “I don’t know a single thing we are doing that is against the law.”

The PTA — founded in 1897, now with primary offices in Alexandria, Va., and Chicago — has a vast network of affiliates. One of its selling points is its tremendous influence in the corridors of power from state capitals to Washington, D.C.

Massachusetts-based PTO Today, founded in 1999, offers such services as insurance, resource kits and advice to independent parent-teacher organizations nationwide. Sullivan said 90 percent of its income comes from sponsorships and advertising, including in its magazine; he declined to provide financial details.

The lawsuit says PTO Today deceptively hints it has a relationship with the PTA as a way to secure advertising for its website and magazine.

Far from trying to create misperceptions, Sullivan countered, PTO Today has sought to address public confusion over the names “PTA” and “PTO.” PTA is a shortened name of the National PTA and PTO is a generic term for independent parent-teacher groups.

“That confusion existed for decades,” he said. “It’s not something we did.”

The PTO Today website, while mildly critical of the PTA in places, also praises it for its historical role providing support that led to lunch and inoculation programs in schools across the country.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and asks a judge to order PTO Today to destroy business cards and other materials that allegedly suggest an association to the PTA.

The PTA was such a fixture of American life that it even became the subject of a hit song in the late 1960s, “Harper Valley PTA.”

Now, parents have a host of established groups and budding movements, some focused largely on single issues such as charter schools, said Andrew P. Kelly, an education researcher at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

“There is more competition for parents’ allegiance than there used to be,” he said.

He said some critics say the PTA has cozied up too close to teachers unions, though he said such traditional parent-teacher groups aligning with teachers was natural and “not necessarily insidious.”

As a counterweight, he said, parents in some states have also begun forming what they’ve dubbed “parent unions.”

“These new groups are making the case that students deserve better and that parents need to advocate for better,” he said.

Racial rifts in the 1960s and ‘70s and the PTA’s support of school desegregation led to a relatively quick drop in PTA membership at that time.

More recent declines stem from an increase in households where both parents work and can’t find spare time for school functions. Some parents have also complained that a share of their PTA dues goes to its state and national arms instead of the local school.

The PTA president said she doesn’t worry her association will lose its iconic status.

“It’s so woven into the fabric of this nation,” Landers said. “I’m very confident that will continue — that it’s not slipping away.”

Filed Under: Breaking News Tagged With:
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »