Week 14: Lit Review - Lizzy

McNeal, L. R. (2009). The re-segregation of public education now and after the end of brown v. board of education. Education and Urban Society, 41(5), 562-574. Retrieved from www.scopus.com

While searching for articles on community public school enrollment and segregation I found this really interesting piece on how impactful Brown v. The Board of Education really has been over a period of 50 years, and asks us to view these sorts of monumental changes to our society as substantive or symbolic in their influence. The symbolic function of the law is meant to reaffirm cherished values and show that something positive is being done and that the problem is being acknowledged. It is meant to satisfy the community, regardless of its effectiveness in actually fixing the problem. Substantive function of law is meant to promote actual changes that have practical utility and directly help solve the issue. The article is suggesting that perhaps in the current state of our public and private schools and neighborhoods (I am in the University City group and we are focusing on lack of enrollment within the public high school) Brown v. Board of Education was a critical symbolic move, but we have yet to substantiate its purpose with real and effective integration change within communities and schools.  Substandard academic achievement outcomes, low graduation rates and poor teacher quality are all unfortunate characteristics of public schools that are separate and unequal; according to this article re-segregation continues to fester perhaps due to the limited role of courts in ensuring that desegregation mandates are followed. Missouri v. Jenkins (1995) hits close to home for us as it significantly impacted school integration efforts by further defining the point in which a school district may be released from a court desegregation order. Basically, if you can prove to the court that you as a school have (temporarily) met all your ‘required’ elements to show your school is no longer segregated, you may be released from your mandate. This ruling also established that district courts cannot require state government to fund educational improvement programs such as magnet schools for the purposes of remedying “de facto” racial inequality in schools. Essentially this case according to scholars is one of many just within this article that are seemingly responsible for re-segregation of schools by ending the mandate. This article is full of great examples of various states fighting for de-segregation well after Brown v.  Board of Education and different posed ideas to remedy the issue. I think it is important to understand that just because something has been established in the Supreme Court does not mean the issue is ‘over’; symbolic progress is important in that it sets a ‘standard’ that we are “supposed” to be following, but we have to substantiate it, just like racism, sexism and other social ills that on paper we have established are not ok, but in reality we fight with it everyday. Applying these theories to how we interpret and evaluate social progression, policy and law can be a really powerful tool for us as social workers. Regardless of the group you are in this semester give this article a read!

Week 13: Lit Review - Valerie

Flachs, A. (2010). Food for Thought: The Social Impact of Community Gardens in the Greater Cleveland Area. Electronic Green Journal, 1(30), 1-9. Retried from EBSCOhost.

I am doing some research to support the expansion of the community garden in University City. During my search for literature reviews, I found this one that shows the importance of having community gardens and how it impacts the residents in their respective towns.

The article spoke of how beneficial it is to have a community garden due to the environmental, social and nutritional factors. Community gardens that grow food allow healthier food choices and at the same time, reduce grocery expenses. This type of gardening also increases environmental sustainability through eschewing chemical and maintaining the organic food status. Other community gardens focus on growing flowers for beautification purposes and that allows a space for socialization and boosts the community appearance.

In the article, the various gardens in Cleveland, Ohio were the main focus when studying community gardening benefits. The study aimed to determine the motivation behind community gardening and general perceptions of the space. The interviews were conducted at four different community gardens in Cleveland, which were Kentucky Garden, City Fresh CSA, George Jones Memorial Farm, and the garden with no official name at 2100 Lakeside Men's Shelter. While each garden has their own structure and operations, the overall conclusion of the study is "they can be functional money-savers and food producers, spaces for exercise and fresh air, centers for socializing or networking, and the physical embodiment of one's food politics." In addition to environmental and nourishment values, the residents around the community garden also "foster personal and communal growth by providing a framework within which a community can participate in a shared experience, interact in an atypical environment, and contribute to a body of shared knowledge." The two main findings as a result of the research done in Cleveland that I'd like to share about community gardens are:

1.      Both affluent and low-income gardeners have similar agreements that community gardens provide the benefit of food production and additional green space in their respective community. This shows that regardless of what socioeconomic status one is in, community gardens are appreciated in one way or another and everyone is willing to invest time and energy to work on the garden for nutritional and/or beautification purposes.
2.      Garden is similar to an artist's artwork. The artist's work is based on his/her identity and creativity. The garden reflects the community's identity through teamwork, growth, and creativity. One example is the Kentucky Garden merges art and garden designs, which exhibit the community's personality and creativity. Another example is the George Jones Memorial Farm's characteristics shines through sustainable living, group values, and social and environmental outreach. Every garden, just like the artist's work, is different and all exhibit some sort of identity in each community, which is form through teamwork and relationship with each other.

After reading this article, I really do think there are a lot of benefits about community gardens. Where I live, there is no community garden. There are professional gardeners that do maintenance around the town. With that being said, I do not feel very connected to the community as a whole or as a resident. I feel like it is just a place to live in. If I want to develop relationships with residents in my community, I would definitely consider a community garden because of few reasons:
This acts as a physical and social activity. It allows us to get a work out in and at the same time, develop lasting relationships with other people in the community.

Community garden will allow the residents feel proud for personally making the community beautiful.
Is there a community garden where you live? Does it grow food for nutrition or flowers for beautification? If there is no community garden in your area, would you consider setting it up? Why or why not?

Week 13: News Article - Ella

Political Eye. (2014 April 10-16). Ferg-Flor incumbents prevail on school board. St. Louis American.

I was excited to find this article in the St. Louis American because it’s talking about an educational issue in my assigned community, Ferguson Missouri.  In that community there has been controversy and rallies against, and in favor of Superintendent Art McCoy Jr.’s resignation.  Prior to being assigned to this community I was unaware of this educational issue.  The article talks about Tuesday’s election, regarding the Ferguson-Florissant school board.  Despite the angry protests and rallies of support for Ferguson-Florissant Superintendent Art McCoy Jr. voters were not able to oust the two incumbents who voted to place McCoy on suspended leave in November.

In November the two incumbents voted to place McCoy on Administrative leave.  McCoy had been on paid suspension since November and subsequently resigned in March.  The Citizens’ Taskforce on Excellence in Education highly criticized the board’s November action and organized the three Grade A candidates in response.  However, article explained that poll workers from both sides were engaged in friendly conversation showing that all care for the same issue.  Working together is a powerful tool especially in the field of social work.    

Although little information was given to the public about McCoy’s suspension, it is my understanding that he and the school board have had unresolved issues/differences for several months.   It is my understanding that Mr. McCoy gave his credentials to a long time friend and previous board member who left in 2011.  However, the records have been sealed as a part of the separation and I may never know what really happened.  However, he resigned on March 13, 2014.  There was concern about Mr. McCoy’s, (an African American), removal by an all white board because the students in that district are predominately black.  Mr. McCoy was supported by parents, students, and others in the community.  His contract was to end in June 2016.  

Questions:  How do you feel about a school district that has an all white school board and predominately black students? Why?

Week 13: News Article - Danielle C.

New state plan could be a roadmap for Normandy Schools

Article found online from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/new-state-plan-could-be-a-roadmap-for-normandy-schools/article_c80ea124-6bc3-5a0a-af98-cb4c041eac32.html

This article discusses the Missouri Board of Education’s plan for the Normandy school system following the transfer of 2,200 students from unaccredited schools.  This transfer has caused many issues for the school system.  The most straining being a $15 million bankruptcy because of inability to pay the increased tuition and transportation costs for these students.   The new plan focuses on helping identify schools at risk for slipping into being unaccredited, providing interventions, and support before it gets to that point.  The focus is to look at schools and make individuals plans not one plan for all schools.   The key part of the plan is that once a school scores below 70% in its annual report a contract will be created linking the district to specific goals and targets.  Also the plan hopes to look closer at the quality of teachers and make literacy plans.
I found this article interesting especially because I have been learning about similar issues in my community of University City.  It seems like in the past, the plans put in place to help schools from becoming unaccredited have been too general and not specific to the needs of the particular district or more specifically the particular school.  I think to combat the issues of why schools get to the point of accreditation many factors must be looked at.  In this article it mentioned teacher quality, but what does that really mean?  Educators can look perfect on paper but maybe more time should be spent making sure their personality, lesson plans, student expectations etc. are an even match to the population of students they work with.

What do you think is the most important factor that effects schools being at risk for losing accreditation?  What types of interventions are out there? What strategies have schools in your community used that have or have not been successful?  

Week 13: Reading Blog - Katherine

The article “Local Economic Development Policies” by Timothy Bartik considers both the logic and the success of a variety of local economic development programs found throughout the United States in order to better inform future endeavors to build local economies.  The author categorized economic development programs to include those that focused on specific businesses to generate development as well as macro level initiatives based on policy changes.
One major point that I got from this reading was how complicated local economic development is, making the formulation and implementation of policies incredibly difficult.  While the article begins with some discussion about what prevents programs from starting in the first place, the vast majority is a discussion on the many aspects that must be considered to have success, including an understanding of who benefits from development and unintended consequences,  a shift in the balance of imports and exports, greater productivity of the labor, utilization of local resources, a comprehensive strategy, targeting of businesses with the greatest potential, job training, and involvement of a variety of groups.  Each of these aspects is discussed in detail to explain how different local areas may see different levels of success, making results highly dependent on the specific factors of the area.  Additionally, research must be conducted before programs are implemented to gain a better understanding of the conditions as well as after implementation to understanding whether they have been effective.
I found this article to be useful in thinking about community because of the critical dependence on knowing the area.  The type of land, the groups interested in being involved in development, and so many other factors completely change the intervention approach, and success with an intervention in one area does not mean the same program would be successful in another.  It is critical for us as community-level social workers to have a full understanding of the areas we work with in order to help bring greater prosperity.  Additionally, an understanding of how anything from a small, independent business to government policy will impact the economic stability of the area.  Without some understanding of how each of these involved actors plays a role in development, we could completely overlook major flaws in the design for our community.  What local government policies has your community group run into that have impacted the area’s economic development?  Is economic development an aspect of community social work that you have thought about in your work so far this semester?  What obstacles might exist in your community that prevent further development?  Does it seem that there is a significant disparity in who benefits from development?

Week 13: Lit Review - Abby

Duke, N. N., Borowsky, I. W., Pettingell, S. L. (2011). Adult perceptions of
            neighborhood: Links to youth engagement. Youth & Society. 44(3), 408-430.

http://yas.sagepub.com.ezproxy.umsl.edu/content/44/3/408.full.pdf+html

Adult Perceptions of Neighborhood: Links to Youth Engagement is a study comparing adult perceptions of their own neighborhood to the amount of youth involvement in their community.  I found the comparison of the two to be incredibly interesting, because it is not something that I would immediately look towards comparing.  However, their findings appear to be very significant.  They found that higher adult perceptions were linked to higher youth involvement and lower adult perceptions were linked to low youth involvement. Neighborhoods with high youth involvement were thought to be safer, have better physical condition, and more resources than neighborhoods that had low youth involvement.

I believe this study gives great insight to how important youth can be in an overall community.  As we have discussed in class, perceptions are a large part of a community’s identity and their ability to succeed. This study shows how important youth involvement is and encourages those looking to change a community to begin with the neighborhood youth.

Did you find this article interesting or surprising in any way?  Can you see how youth involvement can impact a neighborhood’s perception?  Would this information help guide you in a community intervention?

Week 12: Reading Blog - Erin

Green, G.P. & Haines, A. (2008). The community development  process, pp. 41 – 66. In Asset building & community  development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

This week’s reading shares with us the ultimate goal of the Community Development Process, which is to enhance community assets, a key piece of a community assessment. The Community Development Process is discussed in this chapter, and it is broken down into four main components: Public Participation, Community Organizing, Community Visioning and Planning, and Evaluation and Monitoring. I will break down the text within these four topics of community development, and then present the class with a few questions.

Public Participation:
Who should determine a community’s future other than its residents? As we have learned in class, residents must claim control so they feel as if they have a voice in their own community.  This all begins with Public Participation, which the reading breaks down into four types; public action, public involvement, electoral participation, and obligatory participation. It is important to understand these types in order to understand the factors involved when reaching out to residents. There are barriers to participation we should consider when reaching out to the public: lack of childcare, transportation, accessibility, lack of advanced information, and communication (how do we reach people?). The reading presents us with techniques to battle this, including mediation planning, community surveys, drop-in centers, advisory boards and planning council/committees, public hearings, and task forces.

Community Organizing:
The focus of community organization is all about mobilization. We can do this by tackling community problems head-on. Problem Solving approaches presented in the text include; Mobilizing (involve people in direct action of the problem), service (focus on the individual, such as unemployment and poverty – does not challenge root cause), and advocacy (speak on behalf of the group or individual). It is also important to know the difference between CDC’s (community development corporations) vs. CBO’s (community based organization). These both use development models, but CBO’s use social action campaigns and focus on public participation, which may be more relevant to us as social workers.

Community Visioning and Planning:
A community vision is all about how a community should move into the future, mainly by promoting broad public participation. A formal vision and plan allows for expansion, pro-action, and innovation. Models include: comprehensive-rational planning, advocacy planning, and strategic planning. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. While a strategic planning model may be good for local nonprofits, it is actually do-able when attempting to work with members of the community? Also, with advocacy planning, you may be able to focus on a certain issue, but does it prepare the community in a comprehensive way? Visioning is an alternative to formal planning models.  A visioning perspective focuses on assets rather than needs. This approach is similar to the video we watched in class. Plan and vision for the community with a “cup is half full” approach, once again reiterating that vision methods are the way to go. The reading also provides steps for the visioning method, which can be found on page 53, Table 3.2.

Evaluation and Monitoring:
It is essential that communities monitor their progress during and after development. The reading highlights why it is important, and strategies to consider in evaluation. Mainly, it is important to monitor and evaluate your efforts to keep people motivated, focused, and to show other communities and organizations around you that you are having an impact. Evaluations should focus on the progress, actions and successes. This is similar to the scientific method. In order to show results you must quantify what you have. Take the positive work you have done and show how it is bettering the community you are working in. This can also be done through research, including participatory action research (community-based) and survey research. The more personal you get with residents, the better!

Further questions to consider:
Discuss the different models of community development. What are the similarities, differences, strengths, or weaknesses?
What can we do to battle barriers to public participation within the community development process and increase our reach in the community?
Which type of organizing is best for your assigned community (Service, mobilizing, advocacy, or a combination of both)?