I agree with Tim. Possibly find out who is the School Committee member for your Ward. Contact them regarding this, but make sure you have your facts ready. Try to feel them out about the subject. You can even go so far as to discuss the idea of presenting at a School Committee meeting. Also, reach out to the other PTO Presidents and see what they think. They may feel the same way as you and a united front would go a long way.
Also, you may need to mantion to your School Committee member that you heard that "Some people were talking about going to the local media, and you didn't want to see that happen". It's not necessarily a threat, but might be enough to make the issue important enough for the School Committee to take on.
Advice? I'd definitely continue the dialog, and I'd think about going to the media, as well. Sounds like you guys are doing a great job (as so mnay PTOs do) of keeping your ducks in a row.
I can see why a district would want to put in place minimum expectations for their groups. Exactly the kind of stuff you are already doing. Many times the district folks are told by PTA state-level officials that PTA is the only way to have those measures in place. As you know, that is just not true at all. How can you educate folks on the facts? The superintendent works for the school board which gets elected by parents.
The true benefit of PTA confuses me too. Our superindendent has issued a mandate that the entire district ( 2nd largest in TEXAS ) change from PTO's to PTA's. The only reason given is that is more organized. I have to question the intergrity of the mandate and if there is any financial incentive for the district. There is obviously no incentive for us. We have out tax-exemption, , we are audited annualy by a CPA, we are Incorporated and hold liability insurance. We raise $75K in funds yearly for our kids and dont see the point in making a change. Any words of advise?
I should have added above, that I have no doubt about your motivations and 100% respect the work you're doing, the time you give and your passion. Thanks for doing it.
Don't want the good discussion above to be mistaken in any way for my thinking that PTAs (or PTA unit leaders and volunteers) aren't doing great work.
Thanks for the thoughts, Ann. Agree with a good amount of what you say.
Couple of replies:
1. I think the model of PTO I described does a ton to empower parents. As parent involvement builds, parents naturally get a greater voice ata school and the connections are formed that allow for the collective voice. We see it all the time here in Massachusetts, when towns face override (similar to bond or budget override) votes. There is almost always a separate committee formed to support the school budget request, and almost always that group is formed and volunteered by very active PTO volunteers. the voice and the network was formed by the involvement, but they don't mix the advocacy in with the PTO.
Trick is, as the PTA has found, if they did -- then many, many of the anti-override parents (who we do want involved at school) would leave or get dissatisfied or grow less connected with the PTO.
2. As far as parents being too busy for a second group, I can see your point, but I don't think it wins the day. One of the funny/frustrating things about PTA is their members are nearly all derived at the local level from parents who just think they're joining their kids' school's parent group. Their expectation of that is a lot like what I described. I think it's paternal or presumptuous for PTA leadership to just say "we should be an advocacy group because it's the right thing to do even if our members aren't joining for that." When PTA makes "join our political advocacy group" the forefront of even the local membership campaigns -- then I'll find it more palatable.
Instead, the membership campaigns are run exactly like PTO membership campaigns (all about supporting the school and pulling the heartstrings of Johnny or Janey's mom or dad), but then the dollars go to a state and national structure that the vast majority of the members have no idea about and didn't buy into getting involved with.
That's why I like the split structure. Then there's literally nothing to worry about/no confusion. I expect that the LEF would be made up largely of PTO/PTA leader types and former leadert types who's kids have gotten older. They'll all be involved for the same reasons and the mission will be clear.
3. Competition? Still don't know why PTA thinks of PTOs as the competition. That always amazes me. That's like the National Cancer Foundation thinking that the local unaffiliated cancer walkathon is the competition. Seriously, I don't think I'll ever get that. It speaks to a "save the institution"-think that is very common as organizations get older. Shouldn't the National Cancer foundation be rooting for that walk-a-thon to do great and to raise more money than ever and help cure cancer?
Here's a hypothetical: If you were to put the 400 top national- and state-type PTA leaders on a lie detector and asked: Would you rather 1) a world with great parent involvement at every school and no PTA; or 2) a world with a good chunk less parent involvement but PTA as only organization helping parent groups? What do you think the response would be? Just something to think about.
(Sorry for the length... it's like a monsoon here today. I'm cooped up inside.
