Pressure and opportunity

Mounting Pressure and Opportunity

Daniel I. Snchez
University of Arizona

Author Note
Daniel Sanchez
5961 N Edenbrook Ln
Tucson, AZ 85741
Daniel.sanchez@tusd1.org

Pressure and opportunity

2
Pressure and Opportunity
Abstract

Accelerating shifts in key demographics- population, age, mobility and ethnicityhave placed increased pressures on schools and leaders to adapt and address social needs and
demands. Steadily increasing changes in these demographics have produced present day
complexities that have thrown public education into a stressed state of flux. Along with
unprecedented pressure to adapt to changing demographics, there exists unprecedented
opportunity to invest our schools in diversified funds of knowledge inherent in these
demographics.
Single Parent Survey Says
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 56 million households were maintained by a single
parent in 2013; this equated to 46% of homes
((http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2013A.html) . The likelihood that multiple
learners in a given classroom are hailing from home with a single parent- more likely a mothercreates the potential for additional social emotional needs on the part of said learners. These
needs are further compounded in scenarios where there are multiple siblings, and one of the
siblings is tasked with helping to raise the others while the parent works. Under these
circumstances, schools take on the additional role of care center, and its leaders take on the
additional roles of pseudo parents and care providers. In order to fulfil these roles based on the
needs, the overall climate of the school needs to be inclusive and attentive to social emotional
development. There should be an overt strand of learning dedicated to or inclusive of youth
development and resiliency. Additionally, leaders will need to address the challenge of likewise

Pressure and opportunity

being inclusive of the parent. To this end, open and accessible two-way lines of communication
and data will need to be presented and preserved.

Speaking American
The growing influx of non-English speakers to the U.S. has produced a sizable subgroup
of English Language Learners: nearly 10% of all public school learners during 2011-12 SY
(http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96 ). Equate this tally to the classroom that averages
near 30, and one should expect significant cultural and linguistic differences. Under theses
circumstances, schools represent community-based embassies, with its leaders additionally
tasked to act as models for citizenship, social systems and local interaction of customs. States
have varied in their approach to meeting these needs; in the state of Arizona, state policymakers
enacted into law English Language Development (ELD) instructional programs, that seek to
appropriately place and service second language learners; however, models typically produce
extended segregation of this subgroup with homogenization, as those who demonstrated Fluency
English Proficiency (FEP) are quickly mainstreamed. To further exacerbate this delivery model,
culturally and linguistically diverse learners identified as have learning differences that warrant
special education seldom exit this instructional program without the advocacy of an IEP team
determination, and this is due primarily to their struggles with the literacy components for the
test, which is the only instrument of measurement used to qualify and exit ELLs from ELD.
Thus, schools and their leaders need to be outspoken proponents for socialization of immigrants
that seeks not only to teach them the basics, but strives to set them up for success in becoming
informed decision makers and active contributors to the nation. Drawing on parallels between
their cultural customs and structures of citizenship and social responsibility will help to this end.

Pressure and opportunity

Key challenges in this area would include balancing blending of cultures, given obvious
language barriers, while preserving validity of the language and culture of origin.

Next Stop, school

A growing number of families experience needs that result in the move from one school
to another. Instabilities in work and housing, coupled with continuing tides of regional migration
often contribute to student struggles in academic progress and access. Often, students and
families that are highly transient are only at schools long enough for initial screening data
detections, elongating intervention processes and at times producing learners who are mislabeled
with learning exceptionalities.
Additionally, families have an unprecedented number of choices in schooling, thanks in
large part to the growing number of viable charters. Families on the move, families displeased
public schools and families in search of a better fit for their childrens learning styles are
increasingly opting to test charters, voucher-subsidized private schools, home and cyber
schooling. This trend has contributed to increased demands on schools and leaders to act as
transit hubs and hosts, respectively. Local district leadership has attempted to address mobility
by standardizing curriculum resources, practices and pacing. Schools need to be sound and
strategic in screening new arrivals and providing instant information regarding resources and
rights of learners and parents. Challenges inherent in this situation include sustaining the
continuity of collaboration and/or network supports for their families.
Wage a minute
The growing gap (Wells 2009) between the rich and everybody else is contributing to a
social-emotional divide and aggravating racial rifts. As the cost of living rises and wages fail to

Pressure and opportunity

keep up, families are finding themselves in stressful and compromised positions: do more to
perpetuate difficult living circumstances, or do less to qualify for assistance. Few see education
as the solution Government intended it to be in Wells piece (2009). Many see education as an
imposition of education by educators that may not necessarily represent nor reflect their own
culture who are nonetheless caring for and trying to teach their children, whom parents have
limited time for as they work hard to keep up with bills on a paycheck to paycheck basis. This
predicament is also creating situations where some actively resist and stay away from schools,
while in other cases, parental distance might be a result of myriad social problems that often
characterize urban and lower income areas (Khalifa 2012). This dynamic casts schools as social
welfare centers and its leaders as advocates. As Khalifa points out, schools and leaders in this
position must earn trust of the parents by practicing advocacy that goes beyond education and
includes neighborhood and community causes. Key challenges associated with these roles
include sustainability of services and leaderships persistently positive disposition and attitude
towards the community at large.

Teach like its 1984

Given the amount of transparency and accountability levied at local educational agencies,
it is not far-fetched to be reminded of George Orwells novel 1984, in which society is under
vigilant watch of centralized government, and full compliance is a non-negotiable expectation.
Though State departments serve as the middle managers, federal funding for all things educationfrom Title I funding use to 21st Century Community Learning Center grants for intervention and
enrichment- have progressively centralized learning priorities to a skewed degree. In doing so,
policies have placed an imbalanced weight on singular instruments of measurement that are

Pressure and opportunity

increasingly less reflective of the diverse demographics. Thus, surges in demographics that boast
a burgeoning diversity belie systematic oppression and stressed systems, with schools and their
leaders right in the middle of this friction. Schools and their leaders must therefore make
conscientious informed decisions to counteract this situation or risk complacently perpetuating it
for the gain of the elite and the struggle of the cooperatively coerced.
A Plan
What is one kind of learning that is inclusive of all learners and their parents? The kind of
learning that takes into account their goals, triumphs and tribulations. This plan is based on the
function of education as defined by one of the worlds renowned transformational leaders, Dr.
Martin Luther King, who stated The function of education is to teach one to think intensively
and to think critically. Intelligence plus character - that is the goal of true education. Therefore,
Dr. Kings function would be applied to the funds of knowledge that preserve and perpetuate
families and neighborhoods. Where do the standards fit in this plan? They become the academic
means for framing growth and progress towards expansion of ones funds of knowledge and
familial pursuit of happiness. Much like technology has become the best friend of parents and
older students, so too must creative forms of communication become a constant part of a leaders
repertoire, with frequent announcements about family resource sharing and access opportunities,
comments about their child, and questions that elicit parent input and feedback. Learning must
not be limited by linguistics; rather, it should be enriched by the respective native languages of
our ELLs in a way that dignifies their intelligence. Language ought not be the barrier to critical
and intensive thinking. To this end, hiring of culturally sensitive and diverse employees will be
critical. As for addressing mobility, I would promote values and habits that help learners think
intensively and critically. In focusing on social emotional development, I would emphasize

Pressure and opportunity

resiliency for young learners and families that may not be at our school foe extended periods of
time. Furthermore, I would attempt to incorporate some of Joes unorthodox community
advocacy (Khalifa 2012), which was similar to earning confianza by going to the homes and
draw in their funds of knowledge. I would try to immerse and infuse the school in local
community culture and advocate for a school that consistently welcomes and involves parents.
Perhaps the greatest challenge to open minded trust with learning is stakeholder buy in. With so
much emphasis on student and family depths of knowledge, other rigid stakeholders must
witness the growth and successes achieved under such a plan. Consequently, leaders must
advocate to show and tell the public their stories of success. Data must be strategically compiled
and released. Finally, the multitude of roles must be shared and supported by a multitude of
leaders who are dedicated to this purpose. The greater the pressure to perform and succeed, the
greater the opportunity.

Pressure and opportunity

8
References

Wells, A. S. (2009). Our childrens burden: A history of federal education policies that
ask (now require) our public schools to solver societal inequality. In NCLB at the
crossroads: Reexamining the federal effort to close the achievement gap. Michael A.
Rebell and Jessica R. Wolff, eds. 1-42, New York: Teachers College Press

Khalifa, M. (2012). A re-new-ed paradigm in successful urban school leadership:

Principals as community leader. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(3), 424-467.

Moll, L. C. (2005). Reflections and possibilities. In N. Gonzlez, L. C. Moll, & C.

Amanti (Eds.) Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities,
and classrooms. (pp. 275- electronic version). Mahwah, NJ: Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers

U.S. Census Bureau, 2013. Single parent households. Retrieved from

http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2013A.html

National Center for Educational Statistics, 2012. Number of English Languaeg Learners
in public education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96