District Parent Advisory Council Survey Results
Responses to January 2004 DPAC survey of Vancouver Parent Advisory Councils
Section 1: Communication
The great majority of respondents seemed satisfied in this section:
Over 90% were satisfied with the amount/kind of information received from DPAC
A slightly smaller number – 87% - found area meetings useful.
Approximately 70% had access to the parent section of the VSB web page and found it useful.
Over 90% of responding PACs either produced their own newsletter or contributed to their school newsletter.
Suggestions were varied – from wanting more information sooner about VSB issues to feeling overwhelmed at times with receiving too much information from DPAC. We received many valuable suggestions about additions to the VSB web page and electronic communication between/among DPAC and PAC.
Section 2: Involvement at the school and district level
PACs reported more interest and involvement of their parents at the school level, reported it declining somewhat at the district level.
A resounding 100% (all 36 PACs answered this question) reported that parents are welcomed by administrators and staff at their schools. Many added positive comments, such as "Very, very, very!"
The great majority of responding PACs – over 80% - hold PAC meetings once a month. Other responses were every other month, 3or 4 times per year, and as needed.
Over 60% of PACs report the average attendance at PAC meetings in the 11 – 20 range. In descending frequency, the next responses were 21-30 parents, 31-60 parents, and 1-10 parents.
Over 70% of PACs responding reported that their parents were not interested in participating at the district level, whether by serving on VSB committees, the DPAC executive or as a volunteer in the Parent Advocacy Program.
Over 65% of PACs reported that the views of their parents are well represented at the district level. A number of PACs who responded "No" to this question tied their response to their parents' lack of interest/participation at the district level.
Over 70% of PACs responding did not want to see any changes in how parents are represented at the district level, but just over half of the PACs participating in the survey chose to answer this question.
Over 75% of PACS think that the current method of electing 3 DPAC executive members from each VSB administrative area (Fraserview, Jericho, Marineview and Sunrise) is working.
Over 75% of PACs responding do NOT want to see changes to the way the DPAC executive is elected, but again just over half of the participating PACS chose to answer this question.
Suggestions included comments about the term of office, the difficulty of finding parents to run at the district level, the opinion that DPAC executive members need to be more outspoken and the opinion that DPAC executive members are too political. There were several ideas for improving 2-way communication between PAC and DPAC.
Section 3: fundraising
PACs reported raising funds in myriad ways to meet myriad needs. They also reported wishing they did not have to constantly fundraise to make up the shortfall in education funding.
· The most common form of fundraising listed – by all respondents – was accessing gaming funds. Food sales, direct donations and special PAC events were next, followed by book fairs and a variety of sales (gift wrap, chickens, plants, cards, clothing).
· We were not able to get a meaningful look at how much PACs raised annually, as we did not ask PACs to separate gaming funds from PAC-raised funds. Some said they included gaming funds, some said they didn't, and most didn't say. This is where we will be more specific next time! Answers ranged from under $100 to $40,000.
· PACS spent fundraised money on student enrichment, libraries, computer hardware and software, art and music supplies, sports equipment, school and classroom supplies, field trips and special events, gardens and playgrounds, textbooks and scholarships.
· 80% of PACs responding reported that the PAC made the final decision on how funds were spent, many after consultation with administrators, staff and student council. Other responses included principal and teachers, principal, staff. This may be another question where we were not specific enough in the way we asked the question.
Section 4: library
The answers in this section are not as specific as they could be, but the basic theme is clear: PACs report wanting the libraries open, staffed by the librarian and available to students more often, and want more librarian time.
Most PACs reported that libraries were open before school, at lunch, and after school on some days. Many PACs did not indicate (since we did not ask) whether they had every day or only some day library availability. Many commented that they wanted them open these times every day.
All but one PAC responded that they have a teacher-librarian who works with teachers and classes, but many commented that the librarian worked only part-time.
Section 5: resources
As they have for many years of budget cuts, PACs report their schools short of resources.
Over 85% of PACS reported that their schools do not have adequate resources to pay for textbooks, field trips, art supplies, etc. One of the few schools that indicated they had sufficient resources attributed this to parent fundraising.
PACs reported a now-familiar list of budget-cut impacts on their school: shortages of administrator and secretarial time, and of support staff, non-enrolling teachers, ESL and LAC support, learning resources, and all kinds of supplies. They report increases in staff and student stress levels and absenteeism, as well as in class sizes and behaviour problems. They report outdated textbooks, fewer field trips, fewer capital improvements and a decrease in inner city funding.
Section 6:Corporate support
Opinion was clearly divided on this topic:
20% of PACs were okay with visible corporate support in schools, equal numbers (just over 30% each) were opposed or said "it depends", and the remaining PACs reported their members were evenly divided on the issue.
Some comments by those in the "it depends" category included no logos, secondary only, athletics only, local businesses okay.
Section 7: Junk food
Despite a flurry of media attention earlier this year, junk food does not appear to be a 'burning issue" for the majority of PACs responding to the survey.
Over 80% of PACs responding indicated that this is not an issue at their school.
Over 65% of PACS responded that their schools do not have vending machines that dispense junk food.
Junk food is sold in other venues (e.g. cafeteria, school stores etc.) in @ 50% of the schools responding.
Again, @ 50% of PACs have been involved in decision-making around food sold in their schools.
Some PACs suggested that each school be allowed to make its own decision about junk food.
Section 8: Anything else
Comments that were listed by one or more PACs when asked if they have other areas of concern (not covered in this survey) that they would like DPAC to address included seismic safety, Ministry of Children and Family Development funding and funding for non-enrolling teachers.