April 25, 2007 (Nashville, TN)—Last night’s presentation to the Metro school board about the school system’s planned implementation of Small Learning Communities (SLC) stood in stark contrast to the recently approved concept of Standard School Attire (SSA). While school board members and MNPS Director Garcia himself spoke in favor of redesigning high schools into individual, personalized communities, they seem to have forgotten that the basic philosophy behind SLC is in direct opposition to the principles behind SSA, points out parent advocate group MPASS.
“Small learning communities that are implemented correctly have been shown to improve student achievement,” said MPASS member Diane Willard. “Unlike the school uniform program, this reform is grounded in research and based on facts.”
Other hallmarks of SLC include a grassroots, nonadministration-driven approach; wholesale involvement of parents and community; and—most importantly—recognition of and respect for each school’s individuality. Those presenting SLC information to the school board last night emphasized that SLC is about schools making decisions for themselves—“What works at White’s Creek might not work at McGavock”—and that each school will have autonomy in its efforts to improve student achievement. School board member Gracie Porter commented that she was glad each school would look different, while school board chair Marsha Warden commended the reform’s reliance upon best practices in education—again, another striking difference between SLC and the planned implementation of SSA, which flies in the face of state and national guidelines regarding school uniform policy.
“Our schools are not one-size-fits-all,” said MPASS member Laura Creekmore. “Why does the school board recognize this when discussing small learning communities, but ignore it when it comes to school uniforms? There is an underlying inconsistency in philosophy here.”
Moral Opt-Out a Must
MNPS will most likely present a final proposed uniform policy to the school board in upcoming weeks. Director Garcia has indicated that he has no intention of including an opt-out policy for those who object to school uniforms on moral, philosophical, or conscientious grounds. But his claim that an opt-out will hamper the policy is not based in fact. The very districts held up by the administration in promoting SSA—Memphis and Long Beach, CA—have broad opt-out policies. Memphis has not released its opt-out data, but Long Beach reports that only 2 percent of parents choose to opt out of the program. In a district the size of MNPS, that would come to about 1,480 of 74,000 students, too small a number to have any effect on the overall policy—but significant enough to indicate to parents that their personal beliefs are being respected.
“Other districts have found it wise to include this kind of opt-out,” says MPASS member Ashley Crownover. “NYC, Miami, the entire state of California—all these districts have an opt-out, presumably because they don’t want to be sued for violating parents’ rights.”
A number of legal cases are currently underway throughout the United States regarding parents being forced to adhere to a school uniform policy they do not believe in. According to a legal analysis conducted by the ACLU of Tennessee, the policy’s current opt-outs for medical and religious reasons threaten students’ legally protected rights to privacy. Students are given the ability to obtain an exemption for medical reasons, but the burden is then placed on the student to reveal confidential health information to school administrators in order to justify an exemption.
Further, the existing policy raises important concerns about possible infringements on students’ religious freedom. Although there is a religious exemption, it is narrowly constructed to include only “bona fide” religions as determined by a school administrator. School officials will exceed their bounds should they try to make such judgments, and doing so will invite legal challenges under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
“These potentially serious legal problems could most likely be avoided with an opt-out for moral, philosophical, or conscientious reasons,” said MPASS member Ashley Crownover. “We hope the school board will show that they care about ALL Metro families, not just those who believe as they do, and insist on a moral opt-out.”
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
MNPS Administration Ignoring Parents' Concerns About a Sensible Opt-Out
Director Garcia makes it clear once again that working with parents is not a high priority for him: City Paper article 4-24-07
Now is the time to let the school board and the media know that not including an opt-out in the uniform policy will cause a variety of problems, including potential legal challenges and the alienation of parents.
Click on the link to the right to email the school board.
Email or write a letter to the editor:
* The Tennessean: letters@tennessean.com
* The Nashville Scene: editor@nashvillescene.com
* Nashville City Paper: letters@nashvillecitypaper.com
Now is the time to let the school board and the media know that not including an opt-out in the uniform policy will cause a variety of problems, including potential legal challenges and the alienation of parents.
Click on the link to the right to email the school board.
Email or write a letter to the editor:
* The Tennessean: letters@tennessean.com
* The Nashville Scene: editor@nashvillescene.com
* Nashville City Paper: letters@nashvillecitypaper.com
Monday, April 16, 2007
Email the Director of Schools
The school board will meet April 24, during which the school administration may present its revised uniform policy. Email the director of schools to insist on an opt-out for those morally opposed to uniforms.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Sensible Opt-Out Is a Must!
The current draft of the MNPS uniform policy does not include an opt-out for those who object to uniforms on conscientious grounds. This is a must. Click here to email all school board members at once.
What Will My Child Have to Wear?
The following is a summary of Metro's uniform policy as it stands right now. It is currently under revision. See the entire policy here.
• Shirts must have collars and be solid white, navy blue, or one of four additional solid colors designated by each school
• Straight-leg or boot-cut pants; cropped pants; straight-legged capri pants—all of dress or casual-dress style (e.g., Dockers) in the colors of navy blue, black, or khaki
• Dresses must have a collar and be of a solid, approved color
• No blouses or shirts without buttons along the front opening
• T-shirts may be worn beneath polos but must be solid white, navy blue, or an approved solid color (with no writing)
• Clothing with belt loops must be worn with a belt
• Blazers, suit jackets, vest, sweaters, and cardigans must be in an approved color and must be worn over a shirt or dress with a collar
• No denim jeans or hooded sweatshirts
• Blouses and shirts must be tucked
• Clothing logos or manufacturer trademarks must be no larger than two inches
• All clothing must be hemmed—no drawstrings, cut-offs, or rolled-up cuffs
• Shirts must have collars and be solid white, navy blue, or one of four additional solid colors designated by each school
• Straight-leg or boot-cut pants; cropped pants; straight-legged capri pants—all of dress or casual-dress style (e.g., Dockers) in the colors of navy blue, black, or khaki
• Dresses must have a collar and be of a solid, approved color
• No blouses or shirts without buttons along the front opening
• T-shirts may be worn beneath polos but must be solid white, navy blue, or an approved solid color (with no writing)
• Clothing with belt loops must be worn with a belt
• Blazers, suit jackets, vest, sweaters, and cardigans must be in an approved color and must be worn over a shirt or dress with a collar
• No denim jeans or hooded sweatshirts
• Blouses and shirts must be tucked
• Clothing logos or manufacturer trademarks must be no larger than two inches
• All clothing must be hemmed—no drawstrings, cut-offs, or rolled-up cuffs
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Board Approves "Concept," not Policy
Nashville Scene writer Bruce Barry explains the difference at Pith in the Wind.
Urge the Board to Insist on Opt-Out
While Metro school board members voted last night to approve a proposed standard school attire policy, the discussion would have been much different had parents and other interested parties not been involved. The two school board members who voted against the policy—David Fox and Mark North—obviously based their decisions in part on the SSA “study” committee’s flawed process and the research showing that uniforms have no positive effect on students. Further, the school board also discussed legal ramifications and the opt-out policy, two important issues that our group has been instrumental in bringing to the fore.
We urge you to keep emailing the board to insist on an equitable opt-out program for those who object on principle to the uniforms called "standard school attire."
The students who spoke and attended last night are to be commended for their initiative and dedication to what they believe in. This is not something that everyone appreciates, and in fact, some of the youth felt attacked by the negative comments several speakers made about magnet schools and “perfect children.” We are proud of our students from both magnet and nonmagnet schools, and disappointed in a system that believes equity can come from oppression.
Thank you again for your commitment to this issue.
We urge you to keep emailing the board to insist on an equitable opt-out program for those who object on principle to the uniforms called "standard school attire."
The students who spoke and attended last night are to be commended for their initiative and dedication to what they believe in. This is not something that everyone appreciates, and in fact, some of the youth felt attacked by the negative comments several speakers made about magnet schools and “perfect children.” We are proud of our students from both magnet and nonmagnet schools, and disappointed in a system that believes equity can come from oppression.
Thank you again for your commitment to this issue.
Monday, April 9, 2007
Let Your Voice Be Heard!
We will gather for a rally Tuesday in advance of the school board meeting.
When: Tuesday, April 10
Where: The MNPS central administration building,
2601 Bransford Ave.
Gather: 3:30 p.m.
Protest: 4 p.m.
School Board Meeting: 5 p.m.
When: Tuesday, April 10
Where: The MNPS central administration building,
2601 Bransford Ave.
Gather: 3:30 p.m.
Protest: 4 p.m.
School Board Meeting: 5 p.m.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
Opponents of Proposed SSA Policy to Hold Rally at School Board
April 7, 2007 (Nashville, TN)—Parents and students opposed to the proposed uniform requirement for Metro public schools will gather Tuesday afternoon for a rally at the MNPS central administration building at 2601 Bransford Ave. The protest is planned for 4 p.m. in advance of the 5 p.m. school board meeting, during which the school board is expected to vote on the proposed policy.
“We urge school board members to vote no on this ill-conceived and poorly constructed policy,” said Ashley Crownover of Metro Parents Against Standard School Attire (MPASS). “The process leading to the policy was biased, did not follow Tennessee State Board of Education guidelines, and has resulted in a deeply flawed product that has the potential to expose the school system and the taxpayers to a myriad of costly legal headaches.”
The proposed standard school attire (SSA) policy is unnecessary given existing Metro schools policy, which already allows individual schools to require standard attire. A handful of Metro schools—such as Isaac Litton Middle School—already have a standard attire requirement in place. “Duplicating the existing policy and inflicting SSA on school communities that do not want it makes no sense,” said MPASS member Tricia Blumenthal, “especially in light of the fact that there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that shows standard school attire does what it has been claimed to do—namely, improve student behavior or achievement. It just doesn’t do that, and school officials who insist that it will are ignoring the research. Is that what we want our school system teaching our kids? To ignore the research evidence?”
MPASS member Dean Masullo notes that the list of speakers granted time in front of the school board on Tuesday appears to have been “arranged” so that those favoring the policy come last. “It is notable that Director Garcia will be the last to speak, preceded by Ralph Thompson, Garcia's assistant superintendent in charge of student services,” says Masullo. “We already know that the ‘study’ process leading to this proposal has been tainted all along by a pro-SSA bias, so it comes as no surprise that pro-SSA administrators want to rig the ‘public’ part of the school board meeting in their favor as well.”
Should school board members vote for the policy despite the evidence and the legal risks, they can be certain it won’t end there, said Crownover. “This is our children’s education we’re talking about,” she said. “We hope that the school board will be guided by reason, but if not, we will continue working to ensure that Nashville’s education policy is based on facts, not educational fads.”
“We urge school board members to vote no on this ill-conceived and poorly constructed policy,” said Ashley Crownover of Metro Parents Against Standard School Attire (MPASS). “The process leading to the policy was biased, did not follow Tennessee State Board of Education guidelines, and has resulted in a deeply flawed product that has the potential to expose the school system and the taxpayers to a myriad of costly legal headaches.”
The proposed standard school attire (SSA) policy is unnecessary given existing Metro schools policy, which already allows individual schools to require standard attire. A handful of Metro schools—such as Isaac Litton Middle School—already have a standard attire requirement in place. “Duplicating the existing policy and inflicting SSA on school communities that do not want it makes no sense,” said MPASS member Tricia Blumenthal, “especially in light of the fact that there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that shows standard school attire does what it has been claimed to do—namely, improve student behavior or achievement. It just doesn’t do that, and school officials who insist that it will are ignoring the research. Is that what we want our school system teaching our kids? To ignore the research evidence?”
MPASS member Dean Masullo notes that the list of speakers granted time in front of the school board on Tuesday appears to have been “arranged” so that those favoring the policy come last. “It is notable that Director Garcia will be the last to speak, preceded by Ralph Thompson, Garcia's assistant superintendent in charge of student services,” says Masullo. “We already know that the ‘study’ process leading to this proposal has been tainted all along by a pro-SSA bias, so it comes as no surprise that pro-SSA administrators want to rig the ‘public’ part of the school board meeting in their favor as well.”
Should school board members vote for the policy despite the evidence and the legal risks, they can be certain it won’t end there, said Crownover. “This is our children’s education we’re talking about,” she said. “We hope that the school board will be guided by reason, but if not, we will continue working to ensure that Nashville’s education policy is based on facts, not educational fads.”
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Report on Student Rally
Friday, April 6, 2007
Student Rally Today!
Metro students have organized a “Rally for Reality” today at Centennial Park to show their opposition to the district's proposed SSA policy.
When: Today, April 6, from 1-2 p.m.
Where: Centennial Park, 25th Ave. N & West End, across the street from the Wendy's
The rally will include a letter-writing campaign to Dr. Garcia and School Board members. Students AND parents are invited!
When: Today, April 6, from 1-2 p.m.
Where: Centennial Park, 25th Ave. N & West End, across the street from the Wendy's
The rally will include a letter-writing campaign to Dr. Garcia and School Board members. Students AND parents are invited!
Thursday, April 5, 2007
SSA Committee Misrepresented Scholarly Research
MPASS member Mark Schoenfield has interviewed David Brunsma, PhD, the nation's leading researcher on standard school attire. This information was sent to the board today; cover letter is reprinted below. Read the interview here.
April 5, 2007
Dear Board Members,
I write to raise a very serious issue regarding the misrepresentation of David Brunsma’s work in the presentations to you by the SSA Committee. Because Professor Brunsma is the leading researcher in the field and because his reputation, like that of all PhDs, depends on his integrity, it is important that you be aware of this impropriety. Further, because Professor Brunsma’s work was not given an adequate hearing, and instead pages and pages were spent on marketing surveys, incomplete data, and unreliable surveys, it is clear that the repeated “belief” of the committee is nothing more than that—a belief deeply held, no doubt, but unsubstantiated. To follow a recommendation based on such flawed work is a violation of public trust.
The key misrepresentations that the Committee has perpetrated are:
1) That Dr. Brunsma said his work to be inconclusive. He knows that its conclusions are scientifically valid.
2) That his work is not relevant to “Standard School Attires” and that “Standard School Attires” are not uniforms. SSA is the typical public school uniform.
3) That there is insufficient research in this field and that other studies have not corroborated his work. His research both represents the best work in the field, but further has been substantially corroborated by additional studies.
I do understand that these principals felt they were under tremendous pressure to produce a particular result, but to misrepresent a scholar in the field in order to achieve it is unacceptable. It raises, I think, serious questions about the top-down nature of the current organization of the School System and the problems of a doctrine of ruling by “fear.”
Because the SSA Committee never provided a chance to hear from an expert on this matter, I am attaching my interview with Dr. Brunsma. Beside addressing these substantive misrepresentations, he also provides other useful information. I urge you to read his work, just as I urged the Committee to do so, but this interview certainly points to the highlights which make clear that the District-wide implementation of SSA is a very bad policy choice. He also puts the “tuck-in” regulation in an appropriate perspective. I am certain he would be willing to discuss the matter more with the board.
Sincerely,
Mark Schoenfield
April 5, 2007
Dear Board Members,
I write to raise a very serious issue regarding the misrepresentation of David Brunsma’s work in the presentations to you by the SSA Committee. Because Professor Brunsma is the leading researcher in the field and because his reputation, like that of all PhDs, depends on his integrity, it is important that you be aware of this impropriety. Further, because Professor Brunsma’s work was not given an adequate hearing, and instead pages and pages were spent on marketing surveys, incomplete data, and unreliable surveys, it is clear that the repeated “belief” of the committee is nothing more than that—a belief deeply held, no doubt, but unsubstantiated. To follow a recommendation based on such flawed work is a violation of public trust.
The key misrepresentations that the Committee has perpetrated are:
1) That Dr. Brunsma said his work to be inconclusive. He knows that its conclusions are scientifically valid.
2) That his work is not relevant to “Standard School Attires” and that “Standard School Attires” are not uniforms. SSA is the typical public school uniform.
3) That there is insufficient research in this field and that other studies have not corroborated his work. His research both represents the best work in the field, but further has been substantially corroborated by additional studies.
I do understand that these principals felt they were under tremendous pressure to produce a particular result, but to misrepresent a scholar in the field in order to achieve it is unacceptable. It raises, I think, serious questions about the top-down nature of the current organization of the School System and the problems of a doctrine of ruling by “fear.”
Because the SSA Committee never provided a chance to hear from an expert on this matter, I am attaching my interview with Dr. Brunsma. Beside addressing these substantive misrepresentations, he also provides other useful information. I urge you to read his work, just as I urged the Committee to do so, but this interview certainly points to the highlights which make clear that the District-wide implementation of SSA is a very bad policy choice. He also puts the “tuck-in” regulation in an appropriate perspective. I am certain he would be willing to discuss the matter more with the board.
Sincerely,
Mark Schoenfield
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
ACLU Releases Legal Analysis of Proposed SSA Policy
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee has conducted a legal analysis of Metro's proposed standard school attire policy. Read the analysis here.
In response, MPASS has issued the following statement:
April 4, 2007 (Nashville, TN)—The proposed uniform requirement for Metro public schools is not just bad educational policy; it also exposes the school system to serious legal risks, according to a legal analysis released Wednesday by the ACLU of Tennessee.
The analysis indicates that the school board will risk costly and potentially successful lawsuits if it adopts the “Standard School Attire” (SSA) policy slated for a board vote next Tuesday. “We already knew that this proposal was based on a biased study process that drew flawed conclusions contrary to research evidence on school uniforms,” said Ashley Crownover of MPASS (Metro Parents Against Standard School Attire), a group committed to the distribution of relevant information and research about SSA and opposed to its district-wide implementation. “Now, experts are asserting that the board is on the verge of adopting a policy that is legally very troubling, and potentially costly for the taxpayers of Nashville.”
The ACLU of Tennessee’s letter to the school board identified a number of potentially serious legal problems with the policy recommended to the school board last week by its SSA study committee. Among them are constitutional questions raised by aspects of the proposal that permit students to use their clothing to convey certain messages (such as clothing brands and school emblems) while disallowing expression of all other viewpoints. Another troubling provision in the proposal allows for certain designated groups, such as athletes and student clubs, to receive exemptions from the SSA requirements. School administrators would have discretion to determine who qualifies for these exemptions and who doesn’t.
These policies invite legal challenges on grounds of impermissible “viewpoint discrimination” if school administrators are permitted to make subjective decisions regarding which student groups and messages are “acceptable” and which are not.
The proposed SSA policy also threatens students’ legally protected rights to privacy by virtue of the procedure it creates for opting out of the requirement. The policy gives students the ability to obtain an exemption for medical reasons, but then puts the burden on the student to reveal confidential health information to school administrators in order to justify an exemption.
Lastly, the proposed policy raises important concerns about possible infringements on students’ religious freedom. Although the policy does allow for a religious exemption, the exemption is narrowly constructed to include only “bona fide” religions as determined by a school administrator. School officials will exceed their bounds should they try to make such judgments, and doing so will invite legal challenges under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
“These legal hazards are neither theoretical nor remote,” said MPASS’s Crownover. “They are the very real risks of a policy that was poorly conceived and carelessly constructed. The school board next Tuesday should just say no.”
In response, MPASS has issued the following statement:
April 4, 2007 (Nashville, TN)—The proposed uniform requirement for Metro public schools is not just bad educational policy; it also exposes the school system to serious legal risks, according to a legal analysis released Wednesday by the ACLU of Tennessee.
The analysis indicates that the school board will risk costly and potentially successful lawsuits if it adopts the “Standard School Attire” (SSA) policy slated for a board vote next Tuesday. “We already knew that this proposal was based on a biased study process that drew flawed conclusions contrary to research evidence on school uniforms,” said Ashley Crownover of MPASS (Metro Parents Against Standard School Attire), a group committed to the distribution of relevant information and research about SSA and opposed to its district-wide implementation. “Now, experts are asserting that the board is on the verge of adopting a policy that is legally very troubling, and potentially costly for the taxpayers of Nashville.”
The ACLU of Tennessee’s letter to the school board identified a number of potentially serious legal problems with the policy recommended to the school board last week by its SSA study committee. Among them are constitutional questions raised by aspects of the proposal that permit students to use their clothing to convey certain messages (such as clothing brands and school emblems) while disallowing expression of all other viewpoints. Another troubling provision in the proposal allows for certain designated groups, such as athletes and student clubs, to receive exemptions from the SSA requirements. School administrators would have discretion to determine who qualifies for these exemptions and who doesn’t.
These policies invite legal challenges on grounds of impermissible “viewpoint discrimination” if school administrators are permitted to make subjective decisions regarding which student groups and messages are “acceptable” and which are not.
The proposed SSA policy also threatens students’ legally protected rights to privacy by virtue of the procedure it creates for opting out of the requirement. The policy gives students the ability to obtain an exemption for medical reasons, but then puts the burden on the student to reveal confidential health information to school administrators in order to justify an exemption.
Lastly, the proposed policy raises important concerns about possible infringements on students’ religious freedom. Although the policy does allow for a religious exemption, the exemption is narrowly constructed to include only “bona fide” religions as determined by a school administrator. School officials will exceed their bounds should they try to make such judgments, and doing so will invite legal challenges under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
“These legal hazards are neither theoretical nor remote,” said MPASS’s Crownover. “They are the very real risks of a policy that was poorly conceived and carelessly constructed. The school board next Tuesday should just say no.”
State Guidelines for Exploring SSA
Today’s City Paper article about MPASS and the proposed SSA policy mentioned the Tennessee State Board of Education’s guidelines for districts considering a school uniform policy. Though not a legally binding document, the guidelines represent the right approach to this issue according to educational policy experts. Ironically, while the SSA Committee selectively quoted this document as part of its “study” process, it ignored many of the guidelines—specifically, those on parental involvement, opt-outs, and when to use voluntary, rather than mandatory, approaches (see Points 1, 4, 5, 7, and 8).
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Minority Report from the SSA Committee
The student representative to the school board's Standard School Attire (SSA) Committee has issued a report documenting the committee's blatant rejection and misrepresentation of research findings on SSA. Read the report here.
Monday, April 2, 2007
Press Release to Media 4-2-07
April 2, 2007 (Nashville, TN)—A parents’ group opposed to uniforms in Metro public schools is charging that the study process which led to a proposal before the school board was hopelessly biased. With the school board slated to vote on a Standard School Attire (SSA) policy in just eight days, the group MPASS (Metro Parents Against Standard School Attire) is raising questions about the methods used by the committee appointed to examine the issue.
The MNPS “study” committee examining SSA was co-chaired by pro-uniform principal Tonya Hutchinson, whose school, Isaac Litton Middle School, instituted uniforms this year but has not yet evaluated their success. The committee included five other pro-uniform principals, and—toward the end of the process, at the insistence of Nashville’s Parents’ Advisory Council—two parent representatives.
Along with a student representative, the parents appointed to the committee attempted to persuade the group to look seriously at arguments on the other side of the issue, but met with little success. The principals on the committee were “so passionately in favor of implementing an SSA policy that they were guided by that desire, rather than any dispassionate exploration of the evidence,” said Mark Schoenfield, one of the committee’s parent members. “What was meant to be fact finding morphed into propaganda when they realized that no solid evidence supported a district-wide implementation.”
MPASS is charging that the SSA Committee ignored the facts and misrepresented published research evidence that clearly shows there is no scientific correlation between school uniforms and improvement in discipline, safety, or academic achievement. In the committee’s March 27 report to the school board, evidence was contorted or simply ignored so that the desired result could be achieved.
Until this report was presented to the school board on March 27, the vast majority of Metro parents had no reason to expect that the process would be so biased and flawed. Most parents have been kept in the dark about the research evidence on school uniforms.
The SSA Committee’s effort to gauge parent opinion on the subject of school uniforms was also unacceptably biased. In the school board’s unscientific telephone “survey” last month, parents who participated were not informed that current policy already allows individual schools to choose SSA on a school-by-school basis.
The “discussion” portion of the SSA decision process also seems to be missing. Is it sound policy making to present a plainly biased report at one school board meeting for the first time, and then schedule a board vote on it at the next meeting, with no time allotted for discussion of that report? An issue so important to the lives of MNPS students and parents should involve those most affected, especially when the officials appointed by the school board to fairly examine the issue have clearly not done their job. Tennessee Department of Education guidelines require parental involvement from the beginning of the process. Parents who have objected to the implementation of a district-wide policy have repeatedly been ignored by the school board—just like the evidence.
MPASS is urging school board members to vote against the proposed policy because it is both unjustified on the merits and the product of a tainted “study” process. MPASS encourages school board members to inform their constituents about the existing school-by-school uniform policy that can be used to explore whether standard school attire works in Nashville’s school communities. Equally important, MPASS reminds our education leaders that scientific evidence should not be disregarded when such a far-reaching policy is being considered.
The MNPS “study” committee examining SSA was co-chaired by pro-uniform principal Tonya Hutchinson, whose school, Isaac Litton Middle School, instituted uniforms this year but has not yet evaluated their success. The committee included five other pro-uniform principals, and—toward the end of the process, at the insistence of Nashville’s Parents’ Advisory Council—two parent representatives.
Along with a student representative, the parents appointed to the committee attempted to persuade the group to look seriously at arguments on the other side of the issue, but met with little success. The principals on the committee were “so passionately in favor of implementing an SSA policy that they were guided by that desire, rather than any dispassionate exploration of the evidence,” said Mark Schoenfield, one of the committee’s parent members. “What was meant to be fact finding morphed into propaganda when they realized that no solid evidence supported a district-wide implementation.”
MPASS is charging that the SSA Committee ignored the facts and misrepresented published research evidence that clearly shows there is no scientific correlation between school uniforms and improvement in discipline, safety, or academic achievement. In the committee’s March 27 report to the school board, evidence was contorted or simply ignored so that the desired result could be achieved.
Until this report was presented to the school board on March 27, the vast majority of Metro parents had no reason to expect that the process would be so biased and flawed. Most parents have been kept in the dark about the research evidence on school uniforms.
The SSA Committee’s effort to gauge parent opinion on the subject of school uniforms was also unacceptably biased. In the school board’s unscientific telephone “survey” last month, parents who participated were not informed that current policy already allows individual schools to choose SSA on a school-by-school basis.
The “discussion” portion of the SSA decision process also seems to be missing. Is it sound policy making to present a plainly biased report at one school board meeting for the first time, and then schedule a board vote on it at the next meeting, with no time allotted for discussion of that report? An issue so important to the lives of MNPS students and parents should involve those most affected, especially when the officials appointed by the school board to fairly examine the issue have clearly not done their job. Tennessee Department of Education guidelines require parental involvement from the beginning of the process. Parents who have objected to the implementation of a district-wide policy have repeatedly been ignored by the school board—just like the evidence.
MPASS is urging school board members to vote against the proposed policy because it is both unjustified on the merits and the product of a tainted “study” process. MPASS encourages school board members to inform their constituents about the existing school-by-school uniform policy that can be used to explore whether standard school attire works in Nashville’s school communities. Equally important, MPASS reminds our education leaders that scientific evidence should not be disregarded when such a far-reaching policy is being considered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)