Pennsylvania Organization Essay
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website!
The overall initiative to increase equity and funding in public educational institutions in Pennsylvania brought about the creation of the Good Schools Pennsylvania Organization (GSP). Since its creation, the organization has undergone many changes and lobbied for the creation of an environment wherein important actors and legislation coincides with the needs of the growing student population. These struggles brought about new trends wherein it both opened up avenues for change to occur and encourage new parameters wherein goals and objectives are integrated with mandated standards.
Recognizing the relevant contribution that GSP has done to the citizenry and target group, this proposal aims to increasingly widen the capability of the organization to address student needs. The prescribed programs for 2010 under three (3) categories seeks to intensify the approach wherein it both looks into the possibilities and scenarios that may happen during that time and appropriating the needed strategies that can intensify the needed outcomes for change.
Likewise, by allowing these diverse program alternatives, it seeks to compensate the loopholes that may be associated in the process of planning, implementation and facilitation. At the same time, these proposals take into consideration the needs of all relevant actors who serve as potential members and benefactors in the success of the initiatives of GSP. By taking into account the relevance of these people, GSP can increase its arm in reaching out and fostering the commitment towards community building and empowerment.
Such ideals clearly allows each parties to recognize their individual capabilities in the process of participation With all of these, the organizers seek to intensify the efforts given by GSP. It is in this light that the organization can remain committed in addressing the increasing challenges and trends of 21st century education. I. Introduction and Background The pursuit for creating an environment for equal opportunities among students via appropriate delegation and funding has been the integral foundation for the creation of the Good Schools Pennsylvania.
Since its inception in 2001, the organization has continued to recognize the needs of students by making sure students in the district get the sufficient and quality education needed to help them combat the trends of today’s society (Good Schools Pennsylvania, 2008). These efforts have paved the way for new alternatives in addressing public education and opened up arenas for every actor in the community to take part in the process of collaboration and change. Looking at it, the initiative of Good Schools Pennsylvania GSP can be described in one sentence.
It involves seeking new ways wherein legislators provide equitable funding in public education to ensure that students get the quality of education they need and foster increased accountability and responsibility among actors involved in the process (Good Schools Pennsylvania, 2008). With these renewed interest in seeking outcomes for development in budget appropriation and education, it has opened up the door for greater cooperation among the state and the integration of vibrant members who have paved the way for the organization’s growth.
Dwelling further, the role of the GSP is to encourage organizers to come up with new approaches that can motivate different sectors of society to come up and take the stand towards achieving equal education for all. Good Schools Pennsylvania argues that “among the constituents who have stood with us are students and retirees, clergy and lay leaders, parents and teachers, school board members and superintendents, and business and civic leaders” (p. 1).
With these continuing initiatives to seek out new members who are committed towards changing the level of education of Pennsylvania, the GSP has been vibrant in addressing the needs of public education in the community. Realizing these relevant objectives of the organization, it greatly coincides with our purpose to find alternatives that can strengthen and improve the capability of GSP to facilitate and clamor for new ways to increase accountability and equity in public education.
By elaborating on several new strategies and outlining them in three possible scenarios, our group can maximize the potential of GSP and implement the new ideas that can expand the scope of practice, intensify efforts for commitment, and be adaptive to the state’s current trends. II. Research For the initiative in 2010 to be completely realized, it is essential that the organizers understand and comprehend the developments happening within the GSP.
Under this facet, we need to know the truths surrounding education and the current legislation that outlines public education funding. This is relevant because it helps us integrate new policies in-line with specific standards and objectives mandated by law. Another significant element that needs to be considered is the cost of study in Pennsylvania. Its importance revolves around the capability to make budget estimates in proposed initiatives to actively create adequate funding to support and help students in public education.
Lastly, there needs to be an understanding on what programs are in place that the GSP provides the citizenry. By synthesizing these programs, it can create an active environment wherein it can be changed, renewed or developed to suite the needs of members, potential members and target contributors. Dwelling into the first facet, it can be seen that Pennsylvania has undergone several legislative changes that had improved the way budget is allocated. This has been brought about by the realities and scenarios that public education has faced in the region.
Good Schools Pennsylvania argues that in “2005, nearly 50 percent of Pennsylvania’s eleventh graders scored below proficient in math and 35 percent of eleventh grade students scored below proficient in reading on the state’s standardized tests” (p. 2) At the same time, there has been disparities in the way schools have been addressing the way they had adhered to the objectives mandated by NCLB of 2001. Likewise, these statistics also denote increased risk among students of getting pregnant, imprisoned or engaging into substance abuse (Good Schools Pennsylvania, 2006).
In response to this, the government has adopted several policies and amendments that sought to address these realities. For example, in 2004, Governor Rendell “appropriated funding for the first time to support early childhood education – both through the first ever state funding to expand the General Head Start pre-kindergarten program, and through an Accountability Block Grant Program that allowed school districts to target money to educational practices with a huge track record of helping students to achieve academic standards” (p. 3).
This has been considered a first step towards realizing the states role in pursuing public education that is equitable and responsible in nature. Another significant change was made in 2006 when a formal budget was introduced and implemented together with a defining the cost associated with public education. Good Schools Pennsylvania mentions that the “2006-2007 budget includes a first-time appropriation of $650,000 to fund a comprehensive study of the educational resources and associated costs of providing each student an education that is line with academic standards” (p.
3). These have been significant because it can address an equal measurement of how much student needs in order to actively achieve education under mandated standards. Operating on the second element, it is crucial to decipher the numbers associated with public education because it can determine the budget that shall be allocated per district depending on the ratio and student population within a specific area. Looking at the current research, considerable development has been seen in determining the costing-out study of Pennsylvanian students.
Good Schools Pennsylvania mentions that “by understanding these costs the state can adjust its funding system to close the gap between high-spending and low-spending school districts” (p. 1). Upon careful consideration and research, it sees that for a student to actively achieve the given state standards, an average amount of $11, 926 must be provided (Good Schools Pennsylvania, 2007). This formula has been instrumental in determining the appropriation needed to sustain the further needs of students.
Lastly, looking at the projects GSP is engaged in, it can be argued that they comprise of different models geared towards addressing the needs of its target audiences. These initiatives center on (1) engaging into legislative awareness and debate, (2) fostering community involvement, and (3) speaking out in different ways possible (Good Schools Pennsylvania, 2007). These three main facets cover a myriad of initiatives and programs that outlines the significant arenas wherein each actor can actively take part.
By allowing and integrating these diverse ways of addressing the issue of public education and funding, each one can contribute and provide help in each ones capacity. Seeing all these facets, the development of 2010 programs revolve around intensifying on these three relevant ideas. Though these findings have been supplemental in carrying out objectives in the previous years, it is also necessary that further studies be conducted on these issues. This is relevant because it can seek to determine the potential challenges that public education may face amidst these new developments.
For example, the formula for computing the cost of student may change over a period of a year for it is dependent on factors such as inflation, increasing expenditures, and other elements that are relevant to its computation. That is why further research on these topics remains to be an important concern to consider. III. Opposition Research It can be seen that the GSP has made significant progress since its inception in creating the consensus about creating drastic changes in the legislative level as far as addressing public education is concerned.
Though this may prove to be a valid analysis, there are still setbacks that continue to hinder the organization from functioning according to its prescribed goals and objectives. Seeing this, it is essential that the organization recognize its shortcomings and try to incorporate new methods to increase the possibility of adapting to the trends of 21st century education. Looking at one institutional obstacle that hinders its capabilities is the presence of other organizations that have the same objectives and purpose.
Though at a glance this may seem to be rather significant in further elaborating the needs of public education in Pennsylvania, it also denotes the limited functions associated with GSP. Being unable to synchronize its relevant goals and actions towards its counterparts would mean alienating itself with the potential of further collaboration and cooperation. Examples of these institutions that cater the same agenda as the GSP include: Education Law Center and ACCESS. These institutions in turn have overlapping objectives and ideals that are similar and related to the standpoint of GSP.
Another setback that is relevant in the GSP is its dependency on contributors and benefactors. Even if its members had shown significant improvement and effort through the years in gaining potential donors, it cannot guarantee its existence primarily on this. They must have a significant support and foundation that will make them adaptable even in times of little contribution or monetary support. By allowing this scenario to occur, they shall not solely depend on these contributions but can continue to develop on new ways in continuing to promote its specific goals and objectives.
Recognizing the setback in the previous section, it can be also observed that GSP is also susceptible to economic downturns. Since its continued existence revolved around contributions among benefactors, having a slow economy can slow and hamper its capability of recognizing its objectives. Seeing this, the organization has to constantly double its efforts and adapt new strategies that can intensify and implement new approaches for change. Similarly, during these periods of slowdown, the organization refocuses its approach and center on programs that creates limited budget but with increasing results.
Such case only results in a limited scope in both application and practice. IV. Our Plan After reviewing the relevant history and studies associated with GSP, it is now relevant to point out and outline the scope and objectives for the plan in 2010. Among the core elements of this proposal is to (1) Effectively get our message out to prospective and current members as well as potential contributors in the community, (2) facilitate active communication among different parties and (3) Intensify the efforts brought about by the Who-Ville Presentation.
These three objectives can be recognized and incorporated by including them within the scope and parameters of each specified initiative. Under these specific objectives, the proposal shall outline detailed ways wherein these approaches can be realized and achieved. In the first objective, it seeks to cater on ways wherein advertising can be made and integrating the cause and how it can contribute to the needs of the organization. While on the second facet, it outlines the communicative patterns that can maximize the potential of each project and provides new approaches that can realize the specified goals and objectives.
The last part deals with seeking new opportunities that will further recognize the contribution of Who-Vile in addressing the needs of today’s public education as well as the tenets promoted by GSP. With these objectives in place, the next part involves pointing out several programs that can be applied in the year 2010. Under this framework, three proposals shall be given and denoted by the current trends present in the target year. These include (1) period of net gain, (2) period of stasis, and (3) period of net loss.
The formation of these three initiatives is one important aspect to make the program feasible in any scenario that the state may face during the prescribed year. At the same time, it moves to adapt to the existing trends that may come along in the selected time frame. The formulation of these three facets can minimize the setbacks that may be incurred in the timeline provided. Good School Pennsylvania (GSP) is a non-profit organization that is based upon membership as well as the employment of competent personnel that fit the requirements of the specific position of the job that they are looking for.
In relation to this, GSP is also regarded as a grassroots campaign that is affiliated with other non-governmental organizations such as: the Public Education Network, the National Council of Churches, and the Children’s Defense Fund, and the Children’s Defense Fund. Even though GSP is not regarded as an organization that is solely based upon membership, this factor still plays an important role in its overall operation. The GSP has an active membership as they have devised many ways by which people all over the state could be able to participate in the attainment of the organizations objectives.
Some of the means that the organization implemented in order to influence the people participate is by convincing to take action by writing to their legislators, speaking out through various mediums like essays and photo contest, and by connecting to their community that could help in furthering the cause of GSP (Good Schools Pennsylvania). Active membership in this organization involves helping in the offices throughout the state. GSP need active volunteers that would help them with mailings, database maintenance, and other administrative functions.
In connection to these, the organization also benefit a lot from members that could help them in the next phase of their work, which involves sustaining and expanding the state policy reforms with regards to enhancing the quality and equality of education among the students in Pennsylvania. Furthermore, active members also entail aiding them in supporting the local stakeholders in making various schools accountable in the equal and effective distribution and utilization of resources (Good Schools Pennsylvania).