Student Engagement in Participatory Decision Making Through Local Control Funding Formula

• In Event: The Role of Grassroots Organizers, Federal Policy Makers, Intermediary Organizations, and Policy Making Toward Educational Equity

Abstract

This presentation will describe findings from a study of the leadership of student members of a statewide youth organizing group in ensuring meaningful student voice in the implementation of California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The report identifies key lessons, best practices, and challenges in engaging students as part of the development of district Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs), a requirement under LCFF and the primary vehicle through which stakeholders provide input into district program and budget priorities. Report findings are based on activities in four school districts: East Side Union High School District, Fresno Unified, Long Beach Unified, and Oakland Unified, as well as surveys, interviews, scans of district LCAPs and websites on LCFF/ LCAP, and a review of news articles about LCFF and LCAP and related reports.

A key lesson from the research, which has implications for California, as well as other school districts and states seeking to deepen stakeholder engagement, is the importance of investing in institutional structures to support meaningful student engagement. For example, the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) has built infrastructure to support student and family engagement, including investments in longtime partnerships with community organizations, which have been integral to meaningfully engaging local stakeholders as partners. With these structures, OUSD has been better positioned to expand outreach, increase practices that improve accessibility for engagement opportunities, and adopt participatory models that facilitate deeper community engagement. Sustained partnerships with community groups also yielded additional benefits across the districts. Collaborations led to increased student turnout at LCAP convenings and helped ensure that intentional processes allowed students to provide timely, relevant feedback to inform LCAP development, thus validating that students’ ideas were valuable pieces of the process.

Findings also suggest that for an engagement process to be meaningful for students, it needed both breadth—diversity of student voices—and depth—trainings, adult support, and student-friendly materials to bolster ongoing participation. Without deliberate efforts to engage a broader number of diverse students, outreach efforts fell short, particularly for students with the highest needs. Insufficient outreach, prohibitive meeting times and locations, and lack of inclusivity in selecting student representatives on LCAP advisory committees restricted the diversity and number of participating students.

While evidence points to promising practices that support student engagement, research also suggests that there are ongoing challenges to ensuring that students are substantively included in LCAP processes. These challenges include lack of training, support, and student-friendly materials—especially important in light of terminology and difficult-to-decipher LCAPs. Furthermore, engagement opportunities structured for adults or dominated by them often do not leave space for meaningful student participation. Students expressed concern that they tended to be “tokenized” or overshadowed in adult-dominated spaces. They also pointed out that the impact of their input was often not transparently reflected in LCAPs.

Overall, this presentation will highlight the possibilities and challenges of elevating student voice in LCAP processes and suggest how research findings can inform other systemic efforts to create decision-making process that include and empower students.

Author

• May Hong-Ying Lin, University of Southern California