By Ranesha Lee, Guest Contributor

Leadership has been defined as a role to lead transformative change of a school. The function of effective leadership is to provide direction and exercise influence (Leithwood, K.A. & Riehl C. 2003). Providing a school direction is imperative, but integrating with the community is just as vital. The community’s culture, values and traditions are embedded into each student that crosses the corridors. Administrators have to create a vision for their school, but they need more than vision to transform a school. Leaders do not impose their own goals and visions onto others, but truly sharing the goals and creating a sense of purpose and direction (Leithwood, K.A. & Riehl C. 2003). A wise professor shared that partnership, whether outside agencies or teachers within your building, should experience a working relationship of mutuality (Murtadha, K. 2018). Mutuality is the fundamental necessity for a thriving partnership.

Effective leaders function as the pulse of as school. No one knows the exact formula for what makes an effective leader, but there are some imperative components to becoming one. Leithwood and Riehl outline them as setting direction, developing people and developing the organization.

Developing people becomes a lost art. When influential leaders fight the courageous fight and work to set a direction that benefits all and strengthens an organization’s partnerships, test scores and reputation—does that work truly leave time to develop the people that are engaged in the movement with that leader? Great leaders should empower prospective leaders. This allows the vision to evolve exponentially, but it takes more than work. It takes dedication, resilience, honesty and most importantly a level of servitude to engage and advocate for those that lack the resources or access to do it for themselves. Sharing the leadership and developing new leaders can impact the community and beyond if executed well. My parting thoughts are that great leaders are born with the innate ability to thrive under pressure and think beyond themselves—but the amount of work that it takes can make or break you. So I charge the new leaders—are you ready to work?

Ranehsa Lee is an Educational Leadership Master of Arts student in the IU School of Education at IUPUI.

Leithwood, K. & Reihl, C. (2003).  What we know about successful school leadership. Philadelphia, PA: Laboratory for Student Success, Temple University.

By Brian Collins, Guest Contributor

During the Spring of 2018, I took Dr. Khaula Murtadha’s course, “Leadership for Urban School-Community Relationships (A510).” The focus of the course was to understand the tools my classmates and I needed to become community-engaged school leaders who work to best serve the academic and social interest and development of the students we serve.  An article titled “The Understanding Latino Parental Involvement in Education: Perceptions, Expectations, and Recommendations,” by Maria Zarate (2007) focused on three areas pertaining to parental involvement: (1) how Latinx parents described their participation in the education of their children, (2) how Latinx students described the role of parental involvement, and (3) understanding educator’s perceptions of what constitutes parental involvement. The overall goal was to reveal different ways in which parental involvement was expressed among Latinx communities, a group which tends to be marginalized. Data was collected by the Tomas Riera Policy Institute (TRPI) which focuses on research in the areas of social policy and student activities.  Regarding Latinx parents describing parental involvement, parents’ description was broken down into two main themes:

• Academic involvement (some examples included engaging in activities around homework, having high standards for academic performance, and asking about homework daily).
• Life participation (providing life education such as future planning and advice on life issues, encouraging siblings to look out for each other, monitoring school, discussing future planning).

Regarding Latinx students describing their idea of parental involvement, students described examples of valuable parental involvement as including some of the following:

• Asking questions about the student’s day.
• Monitoring attendance.
• Providing transportation to extracurricular events.
• Telling contrasting stories of example of failure and success.

Regarding educators (teachers, counselors and school administrators) of the school, expectations and perceptions of parental involvement constituted the following four themes:

• School Leadership (some examples including participation in school committees, PTA membership, student advocacy and community activism)
• Administrative Support (Fundraising, hosting luncheons for faculty, attending and staffing at school events)
• Parenting (Authoritative parenting, controlling kids/monitoring behavior, monitoring attendance)
• Academic Support (observing class, making sure student completed homework, reviewing report card)

In Dr. Murtada’s class, we read two readings, (Jimenez 2010; Lopez, 2001) similar to the Zarate article addressing how the experiences of Latinx families were underrepresented simply because they did not fit the mold of what a traditional, and let’s be honest, more Eurocentric approach of viewing parental involvement looked like (attending the PTA/PTO meetings, bake sales, parent teacher conferences). As a result, this binary view of parental involvement created a negative notion that Latinx parents were not involved in their children’s education. However, it was the exact opposite, and if anything, these parents taught life lessons, and real-world applications of working environments. In some cases, Latinx mothers went the extra distance to work with the teacher to continue learning activities at home (Jimenez, 2010). Below are some of my takeaways from Zarate’s article, many similar to classroom discussions from Dr.Murtadha’s course.

• The need to challenge and problematize a particular narrative: In particular, this is regarding the need for us as leaders to always challenge our understandings of norms, beliefs, and policies and understanding who they may negatively affect. Further, we need to take the time to understand who makes and defines the rules and beliefs. Referring back to Zarate’s article, the author discusses the larger narrative of parental involvement as the ability to put on a performance (again the actions of attending bake sales, PTO meetings and parent teacher conference). However, this one definition does not, and rather should not, define the entirety of what parent involvement should look like. When we do not challenge these norms, it leads to misconceptions, and misconceptions links to mistrust.
• The need to build welcoming environments among stakeholders:Latinx parents described communications with the school as feeling impersonal and without adequate notice. As a result, Latinx families may not feel that they received substantive information to engage in the ways they would like to. This in turn may result in families not feeling welcome, marginalized and not wanted at the school. As leaders, we need to understand the importance of building a welcoming environment that fosters relationships with students and their families, but by also building a sense of welcome by communicating interest in differences in culture and language and educational support to the home culture.
• Understanding who we serve: In the case of this study, Latinx families were from two wage earner homes. As a result, their work demands were an issue that prevented them from physically attending events. Yet I wonder if the educators (teachers and school administrators) in this study, who were describing parental involvement in such binary ways, really know and understand the lives of the families and communities they serve. I bet if these educators knew the plight of the families they were serving, other methods of engaging families may have been considered.
• Understanding the benefits of out-of-class-experiences: I believe too often education is perceived to only take place in the school, and more particular classroom environment. However, this excludes lessons learned from out-of-school experiences whether that be lessons from one’s culture, family, community, church, and other outside factors as depicted from the Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory (1992).

In conclusion, I appreciate the many lessons learned during my time in Dr.Murtadha’s course, which reminded us that as leaders, we need to be open to understanding the various cultural characteristics of not just the students, but also parents/guardians and how these differences have an impact on their behavior and achievement in the school environment. Further, we need to think systematically about the ways of fostering sensitivity to cultural differences which may make education more difficult for some students than others. As a result, we need to be weary of the binary definitions that exist as it pertains to education. Yet, and probably most importantly, at the end of the day, as leaders we must understand that we are servants for our schools and communities.

Brian Collins is an Educational Leadership Master of Arts student in the IU School of Education at IUPUI.

References

Amaro-Jiménez, C., & Semingson, P. (2010). ‘Sometimes I Don’t Know How to Help You, but I’ll Try’: Latina Mothers’ Participation in Their Children’s Biliteracy Learning in the Home. National Journal of Urban Education and Practice, 4(2), 33-48.

Leonard, J. (2011). Using Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory to understand community partnerships: A historical case study of one urban high school. Urban Education, 46(5), 987-1010.

Lopez, G. (2001). The value of hard work: Lessons on parent involvement from an (im) migrant household. Harvard educational review, 71(3), 416-438.

Zarate, M. E. (2007). Understanding Latino Parental Involvement in Education: Perceptions, Expectations, and Recommendations. Tomas Rivera Policy Institute.

By Kyle Huskins, Guest Contributor

People who are differently abled are in our society and they are in our school systems. These are people and children that are often forgotten, hidden, and are interacted with from an approach of deficit thinking. Culturally being “disabled” can take on its own connotations in varying cultures. In regards to education and people who are differently abled, we as educators have to be aware that different cultures have different ideologies regarding disability and those children may demonstrate different skill sets in different settings. An article by Lake and Billingsley (2000) tries to understand the factors that lead to the escalation of conflict between schools and families in order to craft appropriate response strategies. This study specifically focuses on parents of children who are differently abled and their conflicts with schools trying to attain the best education for their child.

One of the participants in the Lake and Billingsley (2000) study, stated that we have to be aware and that all stories of ability are valid and not just the ones that we witness, either as parents or as educators. We as educators and future leaders should problematize the social and educational construction of disability because some educators believe that the school’s view of disability reflects an objective, or at least, a universal truth (Harry & Kalyanpur, 1994). Not everyone shares the dominant hegemonic view of disability as the mainstream society does and if we wish to provide equitable education to all children and families, we have to be sensitive to that fact.

What parents are stating in that study is that they wish that the educators would be more collaborative with them and they wish for the educators to treat their child as a human. That involves letting the child make decisions about their life and seeing the child as an individual. Parents reported in the Lake & Billingsley study (2000) that one of the main aspects of the parent teacher relationship that causes conflict was that parents reported that schools focused too often on a child’s weaknesses and they did not seem to take into account what the whole child is like. I think some educators do not let some of the children or the parents participate because they view both participants from the deficit model and therefore they do not feel like their input is needed. The best way to limit conflict is to view everyone from an asset based lens. Every family will not have the same level of institutional knowledge about disability services or the school system but families still should be able to voice their opinions, their concerns, and their hopes for their child’s future.

Harry, B., & Kalyanpur, M. (1994). Cultural underpinnings of special education: Implications for professional interactions with culturally diverse families. Disability & Society, 9, 145-165.
Lake, J. F., & Billingsley, B. (2000). An analysis of factors that contribute to parent-school conflict in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 4, 240-251.

Kyle Huskins is an Educational Leadership Master of Arts student in the IU School of Education at IUPUI.

By Robin G. Jackson, Guest Contributor

“What sense does it make to try to reform urban schools while the communities around them stagnate or collapse?” (Warren, 2005, p. 133).

Schools and their immediate community are inextricably linked in many ways. In addition to there being youth and families represented within the school, and property taxes being the most direct source of funding, the culture of the school is often a reflection of the culture of the community. So, it makes sense then that community reform should happen in tandem with school reform, in order to foster a synchronicity that would serve to amplify the assets that already exist within the school, community, and its families (Green, 2018). Particularly with “urban” public schools (i.e. schools typically serving minoritized students), which are statistically victimized at higher rates by the effects of historic systemic oppression, the idea of a holistic school-community partnership is one that can be the gatekeeper of students’ life trajectories through empowering academic culture—or lack thereof.

One way to attend to ensuring a meaningful school-community partnership model is through asset mapping of both the school body and the community itself, in concert with a school principal willing to position themselves as a community leader. The latter includes making strategic moves that resemble grassroots-type connectives, which positions principals as brokers between community organizations and the school; leveraging principals’ social capital in ways that bridge previously unattainable resources to the school and external community (Green, 2018). In this way, the principal can be sure that the partnerships they cultivate are both relevant to the student body, while sustaining a mutually beneficial relationship with both the organizations and the community. The former involves making strategic efforts to not only be attentive to the surrounding communities (see: the proximal communities and all entities which have a direct influence on students and families (Epstein, 2002)), but also making concerted efforts to recognize the funds of knowledge (Gonzalez, Moll, & Amanti, 2006) students bring with them every day.

Lastly, a component I will mention, that is near and dear to me, is nurturing a culture shift within the school through culturally relevant, anti-bias professional learning for staff, and the amplification of student voice and impact within the school. This can begin the process of co-creating an environment with the most important stakeholders of education: the youth. Relinquishing power through authentically including students’ ideas and input fosters students’ leadership skills; effectively strengthening foundations toward navigating realities outside of the classroom (Green, 2018).

As the leader of the school, the principal has the social capital to operationalize these practices through their influence, connections, drive, and authenticity. Never existing on an island, the principal also requires a dedicated team who believes in the mission, vision, and goals. Shifting the culture of the school requires a shift within self; that energy has the potential to shift the atmosphere of the community, build trusting relationships, and foster sustainability. Are principals everywhere, particularly principals at minoritized schools, willing to take on this charge? Are they willing to be community leaders, too?

Epstein, J. (2009). Epstein’s framework of six types of involvement (Including: Sample practices, challenges, redefinitions, and expected results). Baltimore, MD: Center for the Social Organization of Schools.

González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2006). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Routledge.

Green, T. L. (2018). School as community, community as school: Examining principal leadership for urban school reform and community development. Education and Urban Society, 50(2), 111-135.

Robin G. Jackson is a Doctoral Student in the Urban Education Studies program at IUPUI.

By Brandon Randall, Guest Contributor

Listen up White people, this one is for you.

I’m sure that whether it was in a classroom, a PTA meeting, or during professional development, we have all heard another White person say “oh, I don’t see color” or “I don’t care if you’re black, white, blue, or purple,” or “We’re really all the same, we all bleed red.” Sigh. The concept of colorblindness is not only a passive aggressive way of avoiding race-relate…d discussions, but it is a method of erasing the racial, cultural, and ethnic gifts possessed by people of color.

This is especially important in our nation’s current climate of saturated news stories of another unarmed person of color killed by law enforcement or Black and Brown patrons kicked out of establishments for no reason other than their skin color. The impact of these situations can be felt in the pain and frustration of our students. In “Colorblind Education is the Wrong Response,” Dan French and Warren Simmons discuss the classroom response to the protests in Baltimore after Freddie Gray died while in police custody. The question was raised on why it took this major incident for the school district and teachers to discuss race in the classroom. For White teachers who teach in classrooms of primarily students of color, there can be a cultural disconnect that fosters this colorblind, “All Lives Matter” methodology as a safety net to mask insecurity and the “unsure.” This approach is problematic and can cause a lack of engagement as students may not feel invested or equitably understood. French and Simmons mention that research shows using curriculum and instruction around race and the impact of racism in school promotes a sense of belonging and empowerment for students of color (2015). The absence of this specific curriculum can cause the same students to feel invisible and erased.

Franchesca Ramsey said it best on MTV’s Decoded, “impact is greater than intent.” While White teachers may have the best intentions on treating all students the same, the reality is individual identities need to be affirmed. The curriculum and the faculty need to be representative of the demographics of the student and community population.

*Disclaimer: The term colorblind is referenced in the article of this blog; however, there is an awareness that the term could be replaced with “color neutral” to avoid the possibility of ableist identification.

Brandon Randall is a is an Educational Leadership Master of Arts student in the IU School of Education at IUPUI.