“We Really Want to See the School Succeed; That’s Number One”: Parent and Community Engagement in Philadelphia’s Renaissance Schools

• In Event: An Educational Renaissance? School Transformation, Turnaround, and Restart in Chicago and Philadelphia

Abstract

Objectives:
The theory of action underlying Philadelphia’s Renaissance schools assumes that parent and community engagement through school advisory councils (SACs) is an important lever in the turnaround process. Literature on school turnaround does not emphasize parent/community engagement as key to turnaround (Baroody 2011; Herman, Dawson, Dee, Greene, Maynard, Redding, & Darwin, 2008). This study examines the role parent and community engagement can play in turnaround and identifies contextual factors that contribute to the effectiveness of SACs.

Perspectives:
In the late 1980s and 1990s, a number of urban districts implemented school councils to encourage parent/community engagement. Research on these councils identify characteristics that contribute to their effectiveness (Parker & Leithwood, 2000; Ryan, Bryk, Lopez, Williams, Hall, & Luppescu, 1997), including:
• Clear understanding of goals and roles
• Strong partnership with the principal, who is willing to share power and collaborate
• Strong chairperson who can maintain the focus of the group
• Familiarity with the school and teachers, through previous volunteering or other direct contact
• Familiarity with the community, through networks of relationships and organizations
• Continuity of participation of members over time
• Training in both skills of group processes and in education programs and practices, and
• Resources to carry out objectives

In addition, the Philadelphia model invests the SACs with responsibility for monitoring reform efforts and reporting to the district, to ensure reform fidelity.
Methods/Data:
Data for this study were qualitative and collected in three rounds between March 2010 and July 2011, providing a full picture of start up and year one implementation. Data included interviews with SAC chairs and principals (all three rounds), and with district and charter provider staff, as well as observations of SAC orientations and meetings and a review of relevant documents. SAC chairs completed a brief survey on their demographics and longevity of service.

Results:
We found that SACs could be characterized in three different ways: Active (6), In Process (5),and in Suspended Development (2). These characterizations, however, do not reflect a developmental trajectory; SACs are fluid, and can change in either direction over time. SACs in charter managed schools were somewhat more directed than Promise SACs, because there was better district support for their monitoring role, and none fell into the suspended development category. Across all Renaissance schools, however, there were discrepancies among SAC chairs, principals, district staff and charter providers in their understanding of the role and responsibilities of SACs. Instability in principal and or SAC chairs, as well as a lack of training and resources also affected SAC effectiveness.


Significance:
Philadelphia is unique in its emphasis on parent/community engagement as a key lever of turnaround. The district’s assumption is that parent/community engagement is critical for sustainability of innovation, and that past reform efforts have been short-lived in part because they lacked this emphasis. For this reason, it is critical to keep a close eye on how Philadelphia implements its school advisory councils, and the success of these councils in investing parents and community in its turnaround efforts.

Authors

• Eva Gold, Research for Action

• Deborah A. Good, Research for Action

• Michael Norton, Research for Action