OPINION: APS governance model is ruining district's relationship with parents

This is in response to the article in the April 21 Albuquerque Journal, “APS board gives itself an F on self-evaluation.” After attending the last two board meetings and hearing how the parents of Alvarado Elementary School were treated in the re-purposing of Taft Middle School, I couldn’t agree more.

The Albuquerque Public Schools contract with the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) to implement the Student Outcomes Focused Governance (SOFG) model is wreaking havoc on the board’s relationship with community members and even with each other. The family engagement policy authored by Families United for Education (FUE), a collective of family and community members, has been archived under a “policy diet” initiative that came from CGCS coaches who intervene in real time in board meetings while community voices are stifled. The rationale is to put responsibilities into the hands of the administration on matters CGCS declares should not be in the board’s purview. However, the policy was written to apply to everybody — board members included. Not surprisingly, key elements of the policy like “safe and welcoming environments,” “building relationships and capacity” and “expanding communication” are exactly what are missing from board meetings under this new governance model.

The emails of board members are no longer on the APS website. Constituents now have to fill out a form that is sent to APS administrators who screen them. Individual board members no longer respond to public comment. Rather, the board president summarizes what was said for the record in a way that censors important content. The authorization to reply to press inquiries now is limited to the board president alone or her designee. Board members are interrupted and at times chastised for speaking in a way that does not fall in line with SOFG. This is making the work of the board less efficient, with hours spent on a flawed time-use study, and multiple corrections coming from the board president when a fellow board member asks a question in a way that is deemed to be incorrect. It is also making the work of the board less relevant. Not only do constituents struggle following what is going on in a board meeting now more than ever, but things like school safety, culturally welcoming schools and smaller class sizes are not considered student outcomes.

Absenteeism is increasing in APS under this new framework, which points to another element of our FUE policy: “utilizing the histories and cultures of our families and communities as a foundation for education.” Research out of Tucson, Arizona, and other school districts shows that ethnic studies classes increase attendance and academic performance because students see themselves in what they are learning and thus are more invested in attending school and engaging in all course content. Data from the University of New Mexico/APS dual credit Chicana/Chicano studies program from 2023 show that students have a 96% high school graduation rate compared to a 72% graduation rate overall, and 93% went on to enroll in UNM. The coaches and other interventions from CGCS cost APS $60,000 a year. Why not invest that money into more dual enrollment ethnic studies classes to include Africana Studies, Native American Studies and Asian Pacific Islander Studies in addition to more Chicana/Chicano Studies classes? APS should be shaped by our families and communities rather than the school district being wrongly shaped by outside consultants.

Please contact your board member and show up to the board meeting on May 7 to urge APS to discontinue its contract with CGCS.