Anonymous wrote:PP non-paid Kindred parent here,

I’m not sure what the metrics are (not certain what data was collected before Kindred versus after Kindred type of thing).

If I had one wish for Kindred it would be that it could facilitate a pathway to increase parent engagement in existing PTOs for parents of moderate income , versus the current system at our school. Money and social currency is definitely is a barrier for participation for many parents.

One thing I related to from the article was the first statement Mike made about walking into a pto meeting and feeling unwelcomed. Not that anyone purposefully ignores or throw shade to a particular parent, but it can feel unwelcoming if one can’t rattle off a list of academic or social credentials just to participate and be treated with basic human kindness.

This makes so much sense. And it's also really unfair for white people to ask people of color to educate them on white privilege and racism. It isn't their job or responsibility. It's emotionally draining at best ... There are so many who just refuse to accept that white privilege exists, or that they are benefiting from structural racism.

I've mentioned this before on this board but if I were the dictator of DC for a week, I would force every white person to read White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414

PP non-paid Kindred parent here,

I’m not sure what the metrics are (not certain what data was collected before Kindred versus after Kindred type of thing).

If I had one wish for Kindred it would be that it could facilitate a pathway to increase parent engagement in existing PTOs for parents of moderate income , versus the current system at our school. Money and social currency is definitely is a barrier for participation for many parents.

One thing I related to from the article was the first statement Mike made about walking into a pto meeting and feeling unwelcomed. Not that anyone purposefully ignores or throw shade to a particular parent, but it can feel unwelcoming if one can’t rattle off a list of academic or social credentials just to participate and be treated with basic human kindness.

Anonymous wrote:Non paid Kindred parent here.

If I reveal the school I’ll definitely be outed so please no pointed questions.

After being involved bi-weekly for over a year, I probably won’t do it this year. I see the intent that Kindred has, but they have a long way to go with actually achieving the goals expressed in the article.

I left every meeting feeling exposed, emotionally drained, and highly weary. It’s like being a victim of abuse and discrimination, then having to explain and teach other people who haven’t experienced the pain about it, then the meetings over and we all return to either our comfort or our hardship with no real solutions.

What was supremely frustrating about it was that it would have all been worth it if there were actual school policy and procedure changes that impacted the children in direct ways.

I like that I met people who I wouldn’t have otherwise met, I also feel like since they met me in that space it kind of marginalizes me to the caricature they see versus really building something based on our kids.

At our school Kindred seemed to be competing with the OTSo versus authentically supporting the existing pto which disturbed me.

Thank you for sharing. This was the alternative side I was hoping to hear. The danger in the article posted is that it was all sunshine and rainbows. Parents in my PTO are clambering to join forces with Kindred, without stopping to figure out the full picture. I am not saying it is a bad organization- and perhaps our PTO should decide to pair with them. But I do think it is important to hear all sides before aligning with a program no one knew about last week.

Anonymous wrote:Non paid Kindred parent here.

If I reveal the school I’ll definitely be outed so please no pointed questions.

After being involved bi-weekly for over a year, I probably won’t do it this year. I see the intent that Kindred has, but they have a long way to go with actually achieving the goals expressed in the article.

I left every meeting feeling exposed, emotionally drained, and highly weary. It’s like being a victim of abuse and discrimination, then having to explain and teach other people who haven’t experienced the pain about it, then the meetings over and we all return to either our comfort or our hardship with no real solutions.

What was supremely frustrating about it was that it would have all been worth it if there were actual school policy and procedure changes that impacted the children in direct ways.

I like that I met people who I wouldn’t have otherwise met, I also feel like since they met me in that space it kind of marginalizes me to the caricature they see versus really building something based on our kids.

At our school Kindred seemed to be competing with the OTSo versus authentically supporting the existing pto which disturbed me.

So was anything actually achieved? I guess I come at things from a workplace view; what were the metrics?

Non paid Kindred parent here.

If I reveal the school I’ll definitely be outed so please no pointed questions.

After being involved bi-weekly for over a year, I probably won’t do it this year. I see the intent that Kindred has, but they have a long way to go with actually achieving the goals expressed in the article.

I left every meeting feeling exposed, emotionally drained, and highly weary. It’s like being a victim of abuse and discrimination, then having to explain and teach other people who haven’t experienced the pain about it, then the meetings over and we all return to either our comfort or our hardship with no real solutions.

What was supremely frustrating about it was that it would have all been worth it if there were actual school policy and procedure changes that impacted the children in direct ways.

I like that I met people who I wouldn’t have otherwise met, I also feel like since they met me in that space it kind of marginalizes me to the caricature they see versus really building something based on our kids.

At our school Kindred seemed to be competing with the OTSo versus authentically supporting the existing pto which disturbed me.

Anonymous wrote:I completely related to this article. We left a school in a gentrifying neighborhood because the UMC parents taking over the PTO had absolutely no regard for less wealthy families. They demanded that the afterschool program be revamped to have more enrichment activities at a cost of $400/month for one kid and a nominal discount if you have a second kid. Even though many families said that they could not afford it even with a discount and assistance through fundraisers, the PTO steamrolled ahead. One family was so distraught because they had 2 kids but their combined HHI was just too much to qualify for discounts but not enough to afford afterschool for two kids. WE threw in the towel at that point.

This is the whole problem with DC! It is full of rich and poor. Poor families have different wants and needs than rich kids. It is everywhere in DCPS! For example, my 7th grader reads at a college level but his history textbook is written for 5th graders. This is unacceptable to me but I also realize their are kids for whom this textbook is good. I guess DCPS serves no one well?!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like basically an infomercial for Kindred.

I thought there were a few red flags here too. I mean, generally speaking, I think that this is an important conversation to be had in DC schools, and can lead to greater interaction among different demographics at schools. Kindred is probably, for the most part, a good thing for these schools.

But I agree it felt a bit like an infomercial. Are there any other programs happening in DC doing similar work? Have any PTA's or Schools accomplished similar programs without an organization like Kindred? What are Kindred's political motivations? Where does their funding come from? For a new organization, the article felt like it was doing a lot of praising and not a lot of critical questioning. I am sure they have had some challenges and have room for improvement- most organizations do. So where is the alternative side of this story?

Great points. Also, circle back with Kindred schools and see if any changes were lasting. Or were they just swamped by gentrification anyway?

Anonymous wrote:I love how natives talk about respecting the old way when the old way wasn’t working and deep down they want schools run the way the new parents are demanding. If you want your schools to run like the tony white schools, the incessant white parents are showing you how that happens. The legacy way may have been comfortable but it didn’t produce much. A comfortable and highly desirable black school with just enough quite white parents isn’t really a thing.

"The natives?"

Really?

I completely related to this article. We left a school in a gentrifying neighborhood because the UMC parents taking over the PTO had absolutely no regard for less wealthy families. They demanded that the afterschool program be revamped to have more enrichment activities at a cost of $400/month for one kid and a nominal discount if you have a second kid. Even though many families said that they could not afford it even with a discount and assistance through fundraisers, the PTO steamrolled ahead. One family was so distraught because they had 2 kids but their combined HHI was just too much to qualify for discounts but not enough to afford afterschool for two kids. WE threw in the towel at that point.

Anonymous wrote:Seems like basically an infomercial for Kindred.

I thought there were a few red flags here too. I mean, generally speaking, I think that this is an important conversation to be had in DC schools, and can lead to greater interaction among different demographics at schools. Kindred is probably, for the most part, a good thing for these schools.

But I agree it felt a bit like an infomercial. Are there any other programs happening in DC doing similar work? Have any PTA's or Schools accomplished similar programs without an organization like Kindred? What are Kindred's political motivations? Where does their funding come from? For a new organization, the article felt like it was doing a lot of praising and not a lot of critical questioning. I am sure they have had some challenges and have room for improvement- most organizations do. So where is the alternative side of this story?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how natives talk about respecting the old way when the old way wasn’t working and deep down they want schools run the way the new parents are demanding. If you want your schools to run like the tony white schools, the incessant white parents are showing you how that happens. The legacy way may have been comfortable but it didn’t produce much. A comfortable and highly desirable black school with just enough quite white parents isn’t really a thing.

Respecting the people whose community you are joining doesn't mean respecting all the old ways. It means trying to understand the people and why things are the way they are.

As for "the old way" doesn't it depend on your perspective and what we're talking about? To me, aftercare is the perfect example. Wealthier families always seem to want 'enrichment' and 'clubs' and 'healthy' snacks. Thi sisn't to say that the natives wouldn't like some of this too, but they may be unwilling or unable to pay.

And running two aftercares -- one for wealthy kids and the other for anyone else -- is an awful solution.

I don't love the two aftercares thing. But you have to understand, it exists for a reason. OSTP aftercare is subsidized, but has a limited number of spots (at our school at least). If a school wants more spots, or to have any before-care at all, they have to contract with a vendor. Then parents are put to the choice of paying a market rate for the vendor, or displacing a more needy student by accepting one of the OSTP subsidized spots. It's kind of bad both ways. At our school, we do have low-income people participating in before-care, and some low-income people in the vendor aftercare because they didn't get a spot in OSTP. Those low-income people wouldn't be better off if the vendor program disappeared. So it's not as cut and dried as you seem to think. Also, if the vendor is YMCA, they do have scholarships.

I only know of one school that has managed to use OSTP funds to create a single aftercare. And apparently it was quite difficult. I'm not sure if that's even still possible. They keep changing the kind of federal funds that pay for the OSTP and then everything has to be figured out anew. One year they weren't even going to start OSTP until October FFS. Downtown makes this kind of thing so unnecessarily difficult. They could get it together to come up with a better plan, or make the OSTP aftercare not quite so crappy. But they won't.

Anonymous wrote:I love how natives talk about respecting the old way when the old way wasn’t working and deep down they want schools run the way the new parents are demanding. If you want your schools to run like the tony white schools, the incessant white parents are showing you how that happens. The legacy way may have been comfortable but it didn’t produce much. A comfortable and highly desirable black school with just enough quite white parents isn’t really a thing.

Respecting the people whose community you are joining doesn't mean respecting all the old ways. It means trying to understand the people and why things are the way they are.

As for "the old way" doesn't it depend on your perspective and what we're talking about? To me, aftercare is the perfect example. Wealthier families always seem to want 'enrichment' and 'clubs' and 'healthy' snacks. Thi sisn't to say that the natives wouldn't like some of this too, but they may be unwilling or unable to pay.

And running two aftercares -- one for wealthy kids and the other for anyone else -- is an awful solution.

I stopped reading the comments here, but Kindred doesn't just come in and set up meetings and hope people show up. They recruit interested parents and get them to sign up for groups. It's a commitment to Kindred and the other people in your group that you will come and participate at every meeting throughout the year. They run separately from the parent group (at our school we didn't even really have a parent group, and they launched a whole year-long program of conversations about race and equity.)

I love how natives talk about respecting the old way when the old way wasn’t working and deep down they want schools run the way the new parents are demanding. If you want your schools to run like the tony white schools, the incessant white parents are showing you how that happens. The legacy way may have been comfortable but it didn’t produce much. A comfortable and highly desirable black school with just enough quite white parents isn’t really a thing.

Anonymous wrote:Coming in and getting to know people before advocating for big changes is not walking on eggshells.

It's both respectful and common sense.

And given what has been state above and in the article, OF COURSE the teachers will tell you they appreciate what you do. Because you are a white person who has more power than they do.

Implicit bias runs in every direction, and the reality is most of us rarely confront it head on.

A volunteer having to ensure that every t-shirt buyer feels personally validated and appreciated is walking on eggshells.