"no taxation without representation' means that you have right to be represented, not that you have the right to push your individual values/opinions on others.
As noted, it is groups who get together and can therefore be said to be representative. Not individuals with bees in their bonnets. Groups like African American parents who formed the pressure group APPLE ('African-American Parents for Purposeful Leadership in Education') or a group like the parents (aka the Booster Club) who campaigned for years for lights for the football stadium so the team could play night games and the community could have a night out and appreciate the school. Soon after the lights were installed the team got new safety equipment after many community members saw the state of the helmets the boys were using, shoulder pads coming loose from jerseys, etc.
Parents have the right to input into schools, they do not get to dictate policy, democracy means that the needs of all are served ( something the original "taxation without representation" forgot, many needs were not served.)
The needs of all are served when certain groups of students do not feel school security is targeting them disproportionately. Discipline in general is improved and that is good for all. More students feel the school welcomes them and cares for them as individuals and reflects them as people (which is great in a huge school) when teachers are recruited from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds. When the whole community feels it has a stake in a school the tax dollars keep on pouring in. The school is seen as receptive to the community's needs and all can move forward together as those needs change.
The fruits of this include a sense on the part of students that they belong, a willingness of parents to attend policy meetings, to be in contact with teachers wrt academic progress, to be confident and proactive advocates for their students sen, racial/ethnic/linguistic minorities, lgbt and in effect the needs of all are served. This takes the form of excellent SN services, bathroom and sports participation policies to meet transgender student needs, sensitivity to the needs of immigrant families, religious and racial and ethnic minorities, and everyone benefits when everyone is basically happy. I think you have in mind a model where an administration decides what happens and the community likes it or lumps it.
not that you have the right to push your individual values/opinions on others
This is a community that actively encouraged racial integration in the 60s thanks to the determination of a few brave activists who pushed their agenda, convinced people the experiment would work, and eventually got a large number of residents behind them, at a time when white flight from the neighbouring city was in full swing. The community continues to foster diversity today, and that means pressing the schools, especially on matters where diversity and inclusiveness are concerned.
It is a community that has diversity of income and socio economic background as well as race, language and ethnicity. The school simply has to be receptive to input, pressure and even outright protest, and the community, which has a huge stake in the success of the school, most certainly has the right to that input.
A few years ago the issue of detentions for students due to tardiness to class was brought up, and the school invested in a swipe card system where all students in the hallways after passing period had to swipe. Detentions evened out a bit but it was also demonstrated that in general the detentions were not being meted out to any one group disproportionately to the number of tardies. The question of detentions was eventually revisited as a result of the hoo haah -- one issue looked at was scheduling, and whether it was physically possible for students to make it from PE on the first floor to for instance, Latin, on the fourth floor and at the opposite end of the building in the five minute passing period. PE instructional time was shortened slightly to allow students more time to change clothes and gather bags from the gym lockers. Another issue was whether detentions were effective as a deterrent. There is a slightly tweaked code of discipline now in place than the one that operated when DD1 was a high schooler. And also there is ongoing sensitivity training for the school security personnel.
Undergrad courses in the US are not (for the first few years anyway) as academic as those in the UK. Students persuing something like my subject (Econ) would find that the first two years at least are almost comparable to A level, even at Ivy League schools. This is what results in things like "pre med" and "pre law" sets of courses at colleges. Where as in the UK our students would start at 18.
Undergrad courses that I have seen my oldest three DCs go through are every bit as challenging as those I took. My oldest DD is an Econ grad of an Ivy and DS graduated from a leading state university with a science major. DD2 is a junior in a leading RC university; all had gen ed or core requirements that would have stretched university students in the UK. '...almost comparable to A level, even at Ivy League schools' is a big stretch.
Pre med and pre law are only mickey mouse concentrations in mickey mouse universities, which abound unfortunately. In a selective university they provide a solid academic foundation for future law or medical studies or in fact any other avenue a graduate should wish to follow. Medicine and law school courses are structured differently in the US from the UK. There is something to be said for a system that allows students to decide to devote their lives to a profession a few years after the ripe old age of 18.