Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most schools can not afford Kindred on their own. I am a parent at a DCPS school that has partnered with Kindred and the program was brought to our school by our outstanding principal who has made race and equity work a top priority for our entire community. He got the program funded by reaching out to stakeholders in our neighborhood (local businesses, neighborhood organizations, churches, and the PTO itself). Kindred has not been a quick fix and the work is ongoing, but the impact of just a year partnering with Kindred has been invaluable. For our school, the burden of addressing these issues has not been placed solely on one subgroup or another. It’s all a matter of the powers that be making it clear that this should be and can be a top priority for all stakeholders. Treating this work as critical to a school’s success is half the battle.
Instead of blaming families for their lack of engagement, I would suggest holding your school leadership accountable for engaging the entire school community (including the systems and organizations responsible for the harmful affects of gentrification and displacement) in critical conversations about race and equity. An organization like Kindred won’t be a magic bullet. But I can say from experience that it’s a great place to start.

Thank you for the reminder that the school admin needs to take thie lead not PTO alone. Partly just due to the costs involved.

Also...which school? I think some are worse hit by gentrification than others.

Garrison Elementary in Shaw.

Good work, Garrison. I really think it's unfair when people attack a small PTA for not successfully solving this problem in a few years of existence. There are so many large and serious obstacles, and often the school administration itself is a big part of the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White PTO president here, and it was an interesting read, although, like another poster said, the article read as a promotional piece for Kindred.

It's really tough because the parents that tend to step up to help are white and/or UMC. We flier, send text messages, emails, etc., but we rarely get new faces at our meetings or volunteering at our events. The dad at YY walked into a room, didn't see a lot of faces that looked like his, and walked out. How is that the fault of the PTA leadership? And how would Kindred get him to stay and help?

Kindly, did you read the article? The point is -- that your methods of engagement are literally premised on facilitating involvement of white people. If you want engagement, you have to change what you're doing. Sending out emails and fliers then throwing up your hands is not enough. It is absolutely your fault if you don't make more of an effort. Perhaps you don't care because you just think there's work to be done, and that what you are doing benefits everyone regardless of race. That's not a completely wrong position. But if you are troubled by lack of engagement and think the beginning and end of your responsibility is to send out an email to the listserve -- then yeah, it is your fault.

You do have to try different things and never give up. But look, it's hard. Most of the high-income parents don't engage either. Some people just don't want to do PTA stuff and they wouldn't even if they had far more money. A small PTA has a hard time affording the level of food and childcare that would really make it easy for people to attend. It's a ton of work, people burn out, and it's tiring to be criticized and get little credit for a lot of your efforts. So hang in there, PP.

Got it - so you don't care about parent engagement. That's fine, and you're not wrong that you deserve credit for doing the work. But you will have to withstand the (accurate) criticism that you are not doing the work to create a climate of inclusion.

Huh? I said that you do have to try. You're being really rude. Some people really just don't want to do PTA and that's okay to acknowledge. I'm so burnt out I don't even want to do it myself.

Parent engagement is a priority but it isn't the only priority. And sometimes a PTA with a few accomplishments seems more attractive to people to participate in.

Anonymous wrote:White PTO president here, and it was an interesting read, although, like another poster said, the article read as a promotional piece for Kindred.

It's really tough because the parents that tend to step up to help are white and/or UMC. We flier, send text messages, emails, etc., but we rarely get new faces at our meetings or volunteering at our events. The dad at YY walked into a room, didn't see a lot of faces that looked like his, and walked out. How is that the fault of the PTA leadership? And how would Kindred get him to stay and help?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:stupid white liberals who are afraid to fix their school

look the majority of schools in DC suck until higher income folks come in. That's just a fact and in DC that means whites who have higher income than the existing mostly poorer black residents

To what article are you referring? The article discussed here is: white rich people, who may or may not be liberal, are fixing schools but minorities feel excluded. Go back to sleep troll.

boo f^&8inh hoo you had decades to fix these schools and you did nothing

and now that people actually give a dam and are trying to fix the schools its somehow bad give me a f%^&ing break

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My worry about this is that the bar set for engagement is above the level of engagement of a normal parent with their neighbors, fellow parents, and often even friends.

I am involved in the PTO and if I had a job that took more of my time or mental energy, I would never be able to do this.

Engaging with other parents is not easy for an introvert and you only can talk to so many during dropoff or pickup.

The chance that people get left out when the norm in America is disengagement in every sphere is really high.

I think that society should have some more sympathy for parents who want to be involved but do not have unlimited time or temperaments suited for deeper engagement with people they don't know.

Certainly meetings can be welcoming and open. But they can't last forever and they eventually need to make decisions. Or leaders need to make decisions on things like organizing fundraisers or events. Or deadlines get blown and events don't happen at all.

I just don't know where the expected equilibrium is for a group like Kindred. Is it "be a little more like this!" or "end parent email because people without email can't email you."

I want life to work, for everyone, but I've only got 24 hours in a day.

Pp Kindred parent here, This! You’ve hit the nail spot on!

The idea of being inclusive to the extent bolder above taps into many parent engagement voids. Great insight here. Sorry that the post article spent so much time on race ... not new as race/gentrification used in the title as clickbait. YY isn’t even a gentrified school.

Huh? YY's at-risk rate is in the single digits.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:stupid white liberals who are afraid to fix their school

look the majority of schools in DC suck until higher income folks come in. That's just a fact and in DC that means whites who have higher income than the existing mostly poorer black residents

To what article are you referring? The article discussed here is: white rich people, who may or may not be liberal, are fixing schools but minorities feel excluded. Go back to sleep troll.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Just re: the White Fragility book - I'd just respond with some narrow criticism toward that book in that it needs to be a little more prescriptive. It rightly hits people who can't cope with having their advantages in life getting called out and the "pain" that can come with having to identify the ways they can hurt other people through the lens of race and power. But these (we?) are people who aren't doing a great job of engagement - so we need another chapter, at least, on approaches to bridging racial divides, e.g., approaching situations with humility, emphasizing sympathy to others' perspectives, defensiveness should never come first, there is no congenital need to be right, accept room to grow in your own life and you'll get along better with others - that kind of stuff. Obviously this is not that book in one paragraph, but I think that's where the author needed to go next.