STATE SUPERINTENDENT'S PARENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
May 9, 2007
Members Present: Connie Hawkins, Virginia Parker, Anne Cortes, Osiris Collazos, Elaine Palmer, Diana
Beaver, Melissa Pruitt, Azell Reeves, Minnie Brown, Kenneth Shelton, Margaret Carnes, Reggie Smith,
Lynn Sanderson
State Superintendent June Atkinson began the meeting by highlighting the meeting's three major
objectives:
Identify DPI policies related to parent involvement
Develop a draft strategic plan for the Parent Advisory Committee
Receive an update about key education initiatives
Following a brief overview of the agenda items, Atkinson asked committee members to introduce
themselves. She then introduced NCDPI Coordinator of Special Projects (Parent Involvement, Section
504, Learn and Serve America Program/Service-Learning) Consultant Carolyn Foxx who discussed with
Committee members NCDPI policies related to parent involvement.
Foxx distributed a handout that identified how the Department works to promote parent engagement and
support through policy law, professional development, technical assistance/community-based capacity
building, monitoring/accountability, partnering and resources. The handout also identified the expected
results for students, parents and teachers based on the above types of involvement in addition to available
Web resources.
She said that there are over 200 references in Public School Law pertaining to parent involvement. The
question she would like to pose is where can we have input in legislation that would give parents more
power/involvement? She said that it was important for parents to be empowered and that the State Board
of Education's parent involvement policy needs to provide more parental empowerment. She said
committee members may want to look into this as part of their strategic planning process.
Currently the state provides districts/schools with various resources and guidance upon request. However,
Foxx said her position is only one-third parental involvement and that she would not be able to assist all
those who may request it.
Atkinson asked the committee: What role should DPI play – conductor of the orchestra or a player? She
added that the Department does not have the capacity to be a player but that it needs to be more of a
leader by bringing resources and players to the table.
Margaret Carnes then opened up the discussion of the development of the committee's strategic plan by
stating that she would serve as facilitator for the discussion. She asked members: do you want to serve in
a passive or active role? She said that in a passive role, members would be more apt to respond to an
agenda developed by someone else whereas in an active role, members would determine the agenda
items. Do members want to be reactive (which is typically how advisory groups work) or proactive?
Carnes also identified some possible unintended consequences should the committee decide to be
proactive. For example, members may not be asked for input on other issues if seen as advocating for
specific issues and there is always the possibility that members could alienate policy makers if they are
not careful.
After general discussion, Parker said she would like to see the members be really good advisors first then
look at more of an advocacy role to find the one issue that they would want to pursue. Hawkins said that
the committee could help identify issues and ask that they be included on the agenda but also be
responsive to agenda items. Committee members were in agreement with Hawkins' suggestion.
Discussion of the strategic plan development was interrupted to allow State Board of Education
Community Liaison Marvin Pittman the opportunity to talk about the Board's community outreach
efforts. Pittman said that in order for schools to improve "we need to look outside the school house." He
said his position was created to help the Board determine how it could do just that but only better. He
added that it was important for the state to share correct information with parents so that they could be
empowered. He thought another important question that needed to be answered was how could the
community better work with state assistance teams and turnaround teams assigned to their schools?
Finally, Pittman thought it important that staff determine the barriers that are out there and that are
disengaging some parents from being involved. He said the Board would be holding regional summits in
the fall to discuss some of those very issues. He concluded his presentation by saying that he would still
be involved in raising achievement and closing gaps' initiatives on behalf of the Board.
Committee members continued their discussion regarding their mission and strategic plan development. It
was suggested that the mission of the committee be to "identify, examine and comment upon issues
important to parent involvement and public education in North Carolina." With this mission, the
committee could serve in both an advisory and advocacy role. Cortez said she would like to see children
at the center of the mission statement and Pittman recommended that the mission also focus on ways to
support student achievement.
Carnes said that because time was running short, members could go ahead and vote on the proposed
mission statement or meet again to further discuss it and the strategic plan. Committee members all
agreed that they wanted to continue the discussion and set June 13 as their next meeting date.
Atkinson provided members with an overview of a proposal for high school accountability. She
recommends starting with high school then moving to middle and elementary school. Included in the
High School Accountability Model would be the number of students who graduate in four-five years, the
percentage of students receiving state or national credentials, the percentage of students accepted at an
accredited four-year university or proprietary school, and the percentage of students eligible to enter the
community college system without required remediation.
She said the role of end-of-course tests would be to serve as benchmarks to determine progress toward
graduation, comparisons with schools/students/districts, summative assessments, AYP and monitoring
tools. She asked members, "Have I picked the right apples to make a great apple pie?
Atkinson updated members on where Board members are in relation to the Future Ready High School
Core Curriculum. She said members support an implementation date of 2009-10 for that year's entering
ninth grade class, requiring four units of mathematics with some flexibility for course opt-outs, delaying
the second language requirement for all high school students to determine better ways to effectively teach
second languages, perhaps earlier in students' school careers in K-8, and allowing students to substitute
courses for the Integrated Mathematics III or Algebra II requirement based on consultation and
permission from parents, administrators and teachers. Discussion continues about proposals to require a
unit of art education and a unit of Career Technical Education for all high school graduates. Atkinson
took a straw vote on committee members' preference for requiring these courses and all agreed that
students should be allowed to decide.
Members were then told about the DVD in their packets from the Appalachia Regional Comprehensive
Center on parent involvement.
Atkinson said the July meeting would be held "virtually" and that all committee members would need to
participate would be a computer. Carnes added that for the June 13 meeting, members would continue
discussing steps to strategic planning and priorities as a result of the previous brainstorming session.