Pyramid Hill lights up
Women of Excellence Awards
16th Annual Music Festival
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2008 > April > 13 > Entry
Parents: Volunteer … or else
(Parent volunteer Charmaine Trayvick with fourth-grader Kevin Russell at the Richard Allen charter school’s Edgemont campus in 2006.)
Sandra Williams, a Cleveland Democrat, wants to help schools with a bill she proposed last week in the Ohio legislature. She wants parents spending more time in their kids’ schools.
So why is the ex-head of the a suburban Cleveland Parent Teacher Organization calling the bill a “stupid idea?”
Here’s what Williams proposed — a $100 fine for any parent who doesn’t log at least 13 volunteer hours each year at their child’s school.
“This is just one of those stupid ideas that surface every now and then,” Elizabeth Papp Taylor, former council president of the Shaker Heights Parent Teacher Organization told the Cleveland Plain Dealer. “It will get crushed.”
Williams’ bill says parents who don’t put in the hours and don’t pay the fine will have $100 reduced from any income tax refund they are due to receive.
Taylor and other advocates of volunteering say that it simply is not something that can be mandated. People either feel the call to volunteer or they don’t. To force those who don’t to spend 13 hours in school is a formula for disaster, they say. Some of those folks probably shouldn’t be there if they don’t want to be. They may be more of a burden than a help to the school.
And then there are those who simply cannot be there because of their work schedules. This bill, critics say, is unfair to them.
I am fortunate to have a pretty flexible schedule so I regularly volunteer about an hour a week in my daughter’s first grade class. But my wife works in a school herself and simply is never available during school hours as much as she’d like to volunteer. Now imagine she were a single parent or perhaps had to have a second job to make ends meet. That would seem to make volunteering impossible for her.
Just about everyone would agree that parents spending time in their kids’ schools usually will benefit everyone — the student, the parent and the school. But is this well-meaning bill simply impractical? And if so, is there a substitute approach that might work? Tell us what you think.
(Image credit: Chris Stewart, DDN)
Permalink | Comments (20) | Post your comment | Categories: The Parent-Teacher Divide
Comments
By lou
April 18, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this
Beleive me or not. I was there and saw it in person. I never read it anywhere. Noone told me. I saw it.By null
April 17, 2008 11:49 PM | Link to this
Cal, I couldn’t find it either, not to sure it’s even true.By cal
April 17, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this
My comment should have read - I tried a couple more searches and couldn�t find anything on NZ requiring parents to take their kids to the library. If anyone has any success in it let me know. Thanks.By cal
April 17, 2008 7:48 AM | Link to this
I tried a couple more searches and couldn’t find anything on NZ requiring parents to take their kids to school. If anyone has any success in it let me know. Thanks.By lou
April 15, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this
Just learned about it when I visited. My mother working on a degree in children’s international lit.By cal
April 15, 2008 7:51 AM | Link to this
lou, Could you post a link or shoot me an email with info on the NZ law about going to the library. I did a quick search on google and couldn’t find anything. Thanks.By Good idea, bad plan
April 15, 2008 2:20 AM | Link to this
More parent volunteers is something every teacher would like to see. Anytime a kid knows that their parent is likely to turn up, they act better and work harder. But, you can’t mandate it. The truth is, some schools have lots of volunteers, while others have none. It’s a matter of what the school feels is a priority. I do wonder though, will volunteers have to get an FBI and BCI background check like all the paid employees have to now (by state law)?By Laura
April 14, 2008 9:57 PM | Link to this
Requiring parents to volunteer wouldn’t get the results Ms. Williams is attempting to achieve. What I would like to see is a requirement that every parent must have at least one conference with their child’s teacher during the school year. As I realize it is almost impossible for some parents to find the time to actually visit the school, a phone conference would be acceptable. I would also like to see some way of insisting parents make contact with the school if a child is in danger of being suspended. Too many students know they can pretty much get away with anything because their parents won’t answer the phone or respond if a principal sends a request for a conference. Some parents would just as soon have their child suspended rather than take the time to even call the school. Most principals are very accomadating when it comes to conferences so it is highly unlikely that even a working parent can’t attend a conference. We can all be thankful that Mary isn’t in charge of teachers lives outside of the classroom. I don’t want any parent, teacher or not “volunteering” in my classroom with their child/ren in tow. To say that teachers don’t understand the difficulties other people have with their jobs and employers is ridiculous. Most teachers have held jobs in many other areas before and even sometimes while teaching. Many also have spouses in other fields and are well aware of the difficulties many face. As Lou said, most teachers spend far more than the hours for which they are paid. Few other jobs expect their employers to take home hours of work on a daily basis, spend their own time and money taking classes just to keep their jobs.By Concerned Mom of 3
April 14, 2008 7:44 PM | Link to this
I don’t have a good feeling about this particular proposal. I personally volunteer at the schools when I am able, BUT- I don’t know if it is right to require people to do it… And then, there is the problem of policing everyone… Who would be in charge of that? And what happens when a parent has three kids in three different schools because one is high school age, one is middle school age and one is elementary age??? It is a good thought to hold parents accountable for being involved in their children’s education, but this might not be the best way to go about doing it. I think a law such as this would just create more frustration than it would be worth. The parents, teachers, and administrators would have to put a lot of time and effort into making it happen- would the payoff be that great? And how do you justify taking a $100 fine from somebody struggling to provide shelter, food and clothes for their family? Would the working poor be exempted from the fine? The poverty in the Dayton district is very real- and very widespread. Do you really want the undereducated poor parents coming to volunteer in the school? Making this a law could end up being more disruptive/detrimental than helpful. I guess I would want to know more of the specifics of how this would work before I could support something like this… This well meaning bill is impractical- especially in the urban districts.By lou
April 14, 2008 7:40 PM | Link to this
Correction, my last comment should be 98% not 09% sorry. That’s what I get for not wearing the glassesBy Rick
April 14, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this
This proposed law is terrible idea for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it would impose involuntary servitude. I wish more parents were involved with their children’s education, but this law is a bad idea. BTW, I recognize that teachers work hard.By JT
April 14, 2008 6:16 PM | Link to this
So Oldprof if we follow your elitist logic, the idea of having volunteers at hospitals is also a bad idea because they are not trained medical professionals. That kind of elitist mentality is what has caused the conservative base to rebel against the educational establishment and forced accountancy within the schools. Your elitist ideals that only trained professionals can educate children is ludicrous and disgusting. My classroom is open to parents because I have nothing to hide. Even though I have taught for nearly 15 years I know that I still new at educating every student that walks into my door and I welcome the help that help. Volunteerism is the backbone of this country and your declaration that “volunteerism is just another variation on patronizing the poor” is a disgusting and elitist view on par with Barack’s views of guns and religion. This country is always better off relying on the generosity of the people than on the hand outs of the government. Just ask the people in New Orleans. And the idea that the government should force people to volunteer is ridiculous as well. LESS GOVERNMENT THE BETTER!By lou
April 14, 2008 3:01 PM | Link to this
New Zealand has a law that parents must take their children to the library at least once a week. There are lines to get into the library and they have a 09% literarcy rate, highest in the world. Mary, I do volunteer at my son’s school when I am able. I don’t have summers off. I am in school like the rest of the teachers, paying for classes so I can keep teaching. I would like to know how I work less, you must mean I get paid for less hours. After my 7.5 hours at school, with no lunch or bathroom break, I work about 3 hours at home grading papers, calling parents, getting cool science stuff together for my students.By joe
April 14, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this
I don’t know what is more depressing…an elected state official that thinks its okay for the state to use its police powers to force people to volunteer or the dictitorial and socialist pablum coming from some of the commentators calling themselves teachers who happen to agree this would be a great idea. I hope this isn’t representative of most teachers.By cal
April 14, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this
I’m not trying to be glib or anything. But didn’t the 13th amendment of the US Constitution outlaw involuntary servitude? How does this proposal get around that?By Alice
April 14, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this
It should be more encouraged, but not law. I spend a lot of time helping my daughter with her school work in 3rd grade in addition to my full-time job, and the other younger siblings to take care of. My daughter wouldn’t pass unless I was involved in her education because they have a lot of “busy work”, quotas to meet, but I don’t feel she’s learning what she should. My fear is that this generation will have a huge gap in education. You’ll have the kids who didn’t have involved parents and they’ll fall through the cracks and then you’ll have the kids whose parents logged in the time, and they’ll graduate, but the diploma won’t mean much because they weren’t really taught anything. Our school system needs to be fixed and passing this law doesn’t contribute anything to the solution.By Linda
April 14, 2008 8:55 AM | Link to this
Oldprof - it may be true that Scott isn’t a trained teacher’s aide, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be truly helpful in the classroom. He can still listen to kids read, help with a project set up by the teacher, play a game (ex. sight word bingo) with a small group of kids, or do some prep work for the teacher - laminating, running off copies, cutting out things, etc. I volunteer in a kindergarten classroom. I do have a teaching background, but I’ve seen parent volunteers with no specific training come in and be extremely helpful. Sometimes just having another adult in the room who can follow the teacher’s lead in walking around the room to help keep the kids on track can be a big help. But I don’t think it should be a law. Some parents, because of their personality (especially some with little patience), shouldn’t be placed in a classroom. And it would be a hardship for families where both parents work, or there’s only one parent in the home.By Vicky Kupec
April 13, 2008 11:15 PM | Link to this
Wow! What a powerful idea, the government stepping in and demanding parents to volunteer at their child’s school. I’m a 4th grade teacher in Phoenix, Arizona, and a graduate of Wright State University, and I applaud and respect Ms. Williams’ bold move. It’s unfortunate that in today’s world we must present a bill in the legislature, or threaten parents to become actively involved with their child’s education. However, this idea got me thinking. How many hours do students spend in school a year? In Arizona on average, students are in school about 35 hours a week, 140 hours a month. We’re in school 9 months so a child attends school roughly 1,260 hours a year. Is it that difficult for a parent to find the time to volunteer 13 hours within the 1,260 hours that their child spends in school? There is even a possibility that if this bill passes employers would have to make exceptions for parents to meet their yearly 13 hour quota. And in those house holds that are lucky enough to have two parents, well then the expectation is reduce to an expected 6.5 hours a year of volunteer work.Unless these parent don’t share in parental responsibilities. This bill probably is impractical, but definitely not stupid. However, when you look at the alternatives, simply believing that parents will volunteer because it’s “the right thing to do”, then maybe passing a bill forcing parents to become actively involved with their childs education is the best alternative.By Oldprof
April 13, 2008 10:47 PM | Link to this
Here’s the alternative idea. Work deserves pay. Volunteerism is just another variation on patronizing the poor—it makes the volunteer feel good but does little to provide reliable services that the public deserves. America needs to quit congratulating itself for its ineffective charitible efforts and instead mandate that everyone contribute to the costs and that properly paid professionals provide the services. No offense, Scott, but you are no substitute for a properly trained teacher’s aide.By Mary
April 13, 2008 10:17 PM | Link to this
A bill that might make just as much or more sense is that no parent can spend any more time in the bleachers or watching their child’s afterschool activities than they spend asking their child about their classes and homework. That would make a lot of “involved” parents out of compliance, but difficult to catch. I agree these are stupid ideas that crop up from time to time. Most parents spend much more time on their own jobs than school employees. Maybe there should be a bill requiring teachers and other school employees with children in tow to visit the parents on the job throughout breaks in the summer and the holidays, or during the school year, to get to know the parents and their employers better and vice versa. Maybe employers should be required by law to support these visitations and distractions by children and school employees. Families are caught in the middle of both work and education institutions, and all is being blamed on the family.