Schools and Society as the New School

Schools and Society

As the new school years begins, the speech that the teacher gives on back-to-school night illuminates some sensitivity to parents. At the onset of the speech, the teacher thanks the translators that are present, an important component of the evening since the faction of people being spoken to do not have a strong grasp of the English language yet. The translator is a way to allow an open line of communication between the teacher and the parents of the students. Another sensitivity that the teacher demonstrates is the disclosure document that explains the general framework of the classroom and allows insight into the school life that students will foster while away from their parents. The disclosure document is a method to keep the lines of communication opened between the teacher and the parents, and is a tool to keep parents and the teacher to be working together. Finally, another sensitive thing that the teacher did was understand the student's parents and their work lives. By staying late once a week, it shows that the teacher is willing to go the extra mile, so to speak, in order to ensure that communication between parent and teacher is not hindered because of work schedules.

Hopefully, these three instances of sensitivity would affect the parents in a positive way. By the teacher taking these measures and actions to understand the parents better, it allows for a stronger relationship between the two agents in a student's academic life. The teacher sensitivity to the parents not having English be their first language, by showing up front what students are expected to learn during the year and to extend office hours around that of the parents, are all important components in building a strong relationship. It has been asserted that "partnerships" between parents and teachers "tend to decline across all grades, unless schools and teachers work to develop and implement appropriate practices of partnership at each grade level" (Epstein, 2001). By the teacher taking actions and doing the things that he/she did, it helps build a strong relationship with parents and also communicates to them that the teacher is willing and able to work with their needs for the good of their children/students.

Although the teacher did do a good job of being sensitive to the parents, there are certain points in the speech that could be construed as being insensitive including when the teacher asserted that "a web site is a place you can visiting using your home computer to get more information about our school and my class" and when he/she builds on that idea and "provides step-by-step instructions to help" the parents "communicate by e-mail," which will help parents and teacher communicate via e-mail. The teacher defining what a website is condescending as it assumes that these parents fall in a low enough income level where they would not know what a website is. Furthermore, the step-by-step instructions is also insensitive. If the school in which the teacher works is located in an area where federal funding is provided, it may be that email communication is neither acceptable nor accessible form of communication.

By not taking into consideration the accessibility of Internet for these parents, it highlights the insensitivity of the teacher and distances the teacher from the student's parents. It is been observed that "single parents, parents who are employed outside the home, parents who live far from school, and father are less involved, on average, at the school buildings unless the school organizes opportunities for families to volunteer at various times in various places to support the school and their children" (Epstein, 2001). That being said, having the Internet being such a strong component of the communication relationship is something that can be seen as counter-productive as the school is organizing opportunities that may not be accessible to all. To further reinforce that idea, research has noted that "parents cannot use information that they cannot understand" and "access to information can be seriously compromised by differences in reading level and home language, and by understanding of jargon and vocabulary, among parents and program staff" (Mendoza, 2003). This insensitivity to the parents having access and then being able to further understand the information once they get there is definitely an issue. This could contribute to a rift between teacher and parents, as parents may view this insensitivity as a macrocosm for a larger issue that the teacher does not care to communicate with them and a teacher that does not make effort too.

There are a few places in which the teacher could have exhibited greater sensitivity to the parents- when he gives them the disclosure agreement in English, likely and when the teacher asserts that email is the best way to communicate. The intellectual access that the parents in this classroom may have to this information outlined in the disclosure agreement might be limited, as many parents did not speak English as their first language. To further the complication of not being able to understand the language there was also more advanced information that was included in the disclosure agreement. The information that was included in the disclosure agreement was complicated as it included state and national expectations for the students. As previously noted, parents cannot always understand the jargon and vocabulary. Furthermore, as noted by researchers, "Internet access becomes" a more common problem "among low-income families," which is definitely a barrier between the teacher in his speech and his student's parents (Mendoza, 2003). He could have demonstrated greater sensitivity by having the disclosure agreement also available in another language and also have an alternate form of communication with the parents- perhaps a journal that can go back and forth with the students that could contain correspondence between parents and the teacher.