home and school factors impacting parental involvement in ... · home and school factors impacting...

Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 24: 209–228, 2010Copyright © Association for Childhood Education InternationalISSN: 0256-8543 print / 2150-2641 onlineDOI: 10.1080/02568543.2010.487401

Home and School Factors Impacting Parental Involvementin a Title I Elementary School

Virginia B. BartelCollege of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina

Before and after the interventions of summer classes for parents and an interactive homework pro-gram, parents of children in an inner-city southeastern U.S. elementary school were interviewed andteachers surveyed to determine home and school factors that impacted parental involvement in theirchildren’s education. Beliefs about roles and perceptions of life contexts consistently indicated thatthese mostly high-school-educated, African American parents in a Title I school were involved inthe education of their elementary school-age children, at home and school. Self-reported teacherbehaviors included an increase in helping parents to establish home environments more conduciveto support children, more regular communication, more involvement of parents in decision-making,and more involvement in the community. Results about factors influencing involvement at homewere basically the same for these Title I parents as factors more often associated with higher socio-economic status parents. School practices indicated that teachers need to better understand the livesthat Title I parents live, as well as how to help parents improve their efforts to support children’seducation, at home and school.

Keywords: parental involvement, parent and teacher perceptions, Title I student achievement

Researchers show that children learn more when their parents are directly involved in theireducation. Hoover-Dempsey and colleagues (2005) reported:

Whether construed as home-based behaviors (e.g., helping with homework), school-based activities(e.g., attending school events), or parent-teacher communication (e.g., talking with the teacher abouthomework), parental involvement has been positively linked to indicators of student achievement,including teacher ratings of student competence, student grades, and achievement test scores. (p. 105)

Motivation for involvement has been of much interest, particularly perceptions about social net-works (Sheldon, 2002), life contexts (Walker, Wilkins, Dallaire, Sandler, & Hoover-Dempsey,2005), and efficacy (Hoover-Dempsey & Sadler, 1995, 1997; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005). Infact, parental perceptions of their roles and their beliefs that their involvement matters have beenshown to predict actual parental engagement (Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler, & Brissie, 1992; Reed,Jones, Walker, & Hoover-Dempsey, 2000; Sheldon, 2002). Whether socioeconomic status (SES)is a significant predictor of involvement is unclear (Jeeter-Twilley, Legum, & Norton, 2007);

Submitted February 16, 2009; accepted September 3, 2009.Address correspondence to Virginia B. Bartel, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC 29424. E-mail: BartelV@

cofc.edu

210 BARTEL

however, Brown and Beckett (2007) found that levels of involvement do depend on SES in thesupport model of involvement in which the dominant role of parents is “in support” of teachers.Moles (1993) did not find involvement dependent on minority status; however, Lareau’s work(1987, 1989) eloquently portrayed how the roles that parents play differ according to working-class or middle-class status. Students from middle-class families with more formal educationreceived advantages over working-class families. Delgado-Gaitan (1991) supported the idea thatethnically or linguistically diverse parents participated less, compared to majority group parents,because their needs were largely ignored; lack of specific cultural knowledge impeded someparents’ involvement.

The importance of space and cultural capital was stressed in parents’ experiences with schoolconventions (Barton, Drake, Perez, St. Louis, & George, 2004; Lareau & Horvat, 1999). Forexample, not following expected protocols, such as diplomacy with front office staff, can turninexperienced parents away. Other factors that can negatively influence involvement include par-ents not understanding their roles, not knowing how to help, or letting their own negative schoolexperiences interfere (Walker et al., 2005). Deterrents also include less than family-friendly envi-ronments or minimal and/or meaningless methods to involve parents (Epstein, Sanders, Simon,Salinas, & Van Voorhis, 2002). Often, in fact, efforts to involve parents are more frequentlysuperficial than examples of true power sharing. And other efforts, in some ways almost seemfarcical, such as Title I and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) regulations that require that theirallotted monies only to be used when parents are in attendance.

Yet Title I parental involvement requirements are significant in their intent. Funds for theselow-income schools can provide for parent education and adult education classes that are muchneeded for many parents. And programs such as Head Start mandate parental involvement.The fact remains, however, that obtaining and maintaining meaningful parental involvement inschools is not always easy. And, even though some schools and districts have actually increasedparent or community involvement, most efforts are not linked to school reform efforts to increasestudent achievement and close gaps in student performance (Davies, 2002). This is a case studyof a Title I elementary school that met with some success using a grant to study and increaseparental involvement.

BACKGROUND

The picture painted by achievement test scores and surveys of satisfaction with home-school rela-tions indicated the need for much improvement at this pre-K through sixth grade, predominantlyAfrican American, high-poverty elementary public school, herein fictitiously called Riceton, inCharleston, South Carolina. On the South Carolina State Report Card in 2005, 70.4% of theRiceton parents surveyed and 38.1% of the teachers were dissatisfied with home-school rela-tions. As shown in Table 1, the state’s achievement test scores in 2006 (Palmetto AchievementChallenge Test, or PACT) indicated that more than 40% of students in Grades 4 through 6 werebelow basic standards in at least three, if not all, of the four content areas tested (language arts,social studies, science, and math). The PTA president at Riceton, at the time of this study, wel-comed assistance, saying it was “difficult to get many parents involved in meaningful ways;many have needs of their own” (personal communication, October 11, 2006). A survey of teach-ers’ needs, conducted in 2006 by the Riceton-School of Education Partnership at the College of

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT 211

TABLE 1Percent of Riceton Students Below Basic (Not Meeting Standard) on Palmetto Achievement

Challenge Test in 2006

Content Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6

Language arts 5.3 42.9 27.8 51.4Math 0 62.9 51.2 44.4Science 13.2 77.1 68.2 75.6Social studies 2.6 65.9 50 70.7

Charleston, listed parental involvement as lacking and detrimental to students’ performance. ThePartnership, formalized in 2003, had as one of its goals an increase in family and communityinvolvement. Progress toward meeting any goals had been severely constrained, however, by alack of resources. As cochairperson of this Partnership, I was motivated to seek funding whenmonies became available from the Center for Partnerships to Improve Education, housed in theSchool of Education.

The proposal was accepted for the study to be conducted at Riceton. Its purposes were (1)to ascertain home and school factors that impact involvement of parents/guardians in their chil-dren’s education, (2) to examine how parents’ attitudes over time impacted their participation intheir children’s education, and (3) to use that data to attempt to improve parent involvement prac-tices through two interventions, summer camp and interactive homework. Fifty thousand dollarswas allocated for this 15-month-long project.

METHOD

Home factors impacting parental involvement were measured through parent/guardiansemistructured interviews, with questions based on the work of Walker et al. (2005) thataddressed motivational factors (i.e., feelings about school, self-efficacy issues for helping chil-dren succeed, roles they perceive they play in student motivation, and life contexts). In eachone-on-one interview, the interviewer recorded the parent’s answers. Answers from all inter-views were then cross-tabulated. Data gathered from the first interviews were used as baselinedata to determine parental perceptions about involvement in their children’s education. Data gath-ered from the second interviews a year later examined how parents’ attitudes changed over thecourse of the year when the school made a concerted effort to improve family involvement. Theprincipal investigator/author, and some of her graduate students, conducted the interviews.

School factors that impact parent involvement were measured through pre- and postsurveyscompleted by the Riceton teaching staff (teachers and paraprofessionals), who rated the fre-quency and effectiveness of school practices related to parental involvement. This survey wasbased on an instrument from Epstein et al. (2002, pp. 330–335). Data gathered from the first sur-vey in May 2007 were used as baseline data to determine school practices that impact parentalinvolvement. Data gathered from the second survey administered a year later (May 2008) wereused to determine how school practices changed over the course of the year in which theschool made a concerted effort to improve practices to involve parents. Data analysis on all

212 BARTEL

scales—in the parent interviews and teaching staff surveys—involved standard cross-tabulations,or a frequency analysis among subgroups.

The two interventions were classes offered for parents who completed a minimum of 3 hoursof classes a week for 6 weeks (for a minimum of 18 hours total) during the summer of 2007,and an interactive homework program for parents and children, twice a month, during the fallof 2007.

Participants

For the initial interviews, all parents in the school were sent a letter by way of their children inMay 2007, inviting them to participate in an interview about their involvement in their children’seducation. Ninety-two responded affirmatively, but 74 were actually interviewed due to inabilityto contact parents because of wrong phone numbers or no-shows. The number interviewed com-prised one third (33%) of the school-wide parent population. Parents had, on average, achieved12.8 grade levels of education and were working a 32-hour work week. In terms of the school’sdemographics, 93.62% of the school’s 333 children in the 2006–2007 school year, all but twoof whom are African American, received free/reduced-price lunch; one third lived in nearbypublic housing; and approximately one third of the children spent 11 hours a day at school, start-ing with breakfast at 7:30 a.m. and continuing through the after-school program. Two incentiveswere offered to parents: (1) a $20 gift card at Target or Wal-Mart and (2) summer camp fortheir children if they participated in the required 3 hours of classes a week during the 6 weeksof camp.

At a faculty meeting in May 2007, the teaching staff was invited (orally by the principalinvestigator and with a letter) to complete surveys. Twenty-six of the 35 did so in the springof 2007; this constituted three fourths (75%) of the teaching staff. The staff included classroomteachers, paraprofessionals, administrative staff, special area and resource teachers. Ninety-sevenpercent of the certified teachers held master’s degrees.

Only 11% of the parents (26) participated and 65% (26) of the teaching staff (which itself hadincreased) participated in the “post” interviews and surveys, which occurred in May 2008. It wasconjectured that the number of parents decreased for two reasons: (1) there was no gift card toact as an incentive as there had been at the outset and (2) summer camp for children of thoseparticipating was not available.

Interventions To Increase Involvement in Parent Classes With Summer Camp for TheirChildren

Parents who participated in the interviews were given the opportunity to have their elementaryschool-age children attend a 6-week, all-day camp at the school, if they attended 3 hours ofclasses a week with the options of taking parenting classes, computer classes, exercise classes(yoga or belly dancing), and cooking classes. Class offerings were based on the family literacymodel with an added community education component. Although 60 of the parents interviewed(and their combined 87 children) started the program, only 40 parents completed it (and their30 combined children). The reduced number was primarily due to the fact that the family was


dropped from the program if the parent didn’t attend the classes. Some children also dropped outdue to illness or visiting relatives.

Staff for the day camp program for the children was made up of college-age men and womenwho either had been staff in the school’s after-school program during the school year, or teachereducation graduate and undergraduate students from the College of Charleston. The parent com-ponent was staffed by the author/principal investigator, who also supervised the day programand taught the parent cooking class (only because the person hired dropped out). It was hopedthat the classes for parents would serve to enhance their education as well as groom/entice someparent leaders for the school for the upcoming year. The goal was to ask several to serve on aParent Advisory Committee and one to serve on the Riceton-School of Education PartnershipSteering Committee.

Interactive Homework Between Parents and Children

The second intervention implemented was called Interactive Homework, an idea based on a pro-gram from the National Network of Partnership Schools at Johns Hopkins University called TIPS(Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork). At Riceton, a university staff member developed thehomework, instead of the teachers as in the TIPS model; however, she did use suggestions madeby Riceton’s classroom teachers. The homework was based on the South Carolina curriculumstandards but was supposed to be fun and engaging for parents. It was offered to all teacherson a voluntary basis; 18 of the 20 teachers participated. Three different activities for parentsand student to do together were sent home during the fall 2007 semester; students returned theirhomework folders with parent or sibling signatures.

RESULTS

Parent Interviews

Parents were asked questions related to their beliefs about their roles in their children’s education;their perceptions of their self-efficacy; invitations for involvement from the school, teacher, andchildren, as well as their perceived life contexts; and involvement in home- and school-basedactivities. Highlights of the results are shared in the following. No result is provided unless therewas a 10% or larger change from the time of the preinterview (May 2007) to post (May 2008).See Appendix A for complete results.

Parental role construction. There were two increases of 15% in the number of parentswho believe it is their responsibility to volunteer at school (77%–92%) and make sure the schoolhas what it needs (73%–88%), but a 15% decrease in the number of parents who said they talkwith other parents from the school (88%–73%).

Self-efficacy. Of the seven items in this category, there were increases in six; however, theonly one with a 10% increase was the item related to whether parents perceive that they makea significant difference in their child’s academic performance (a 10% increase of 85%–95%).

214 BARTEL

There was a 7% decrease in the number who felt they knew how to “get through to their child”(from 73%–66%).

Perceived invitations for involvement from child or teacher. In this category, there weretwo increases of more than 10% from the pre- and posttesting on two items: Parents who said thattheir child asked them to supervise homework (a 19% increase from 42%–61%), and those whoasked them to help out at school (a 14% increase from 27%–41%). There were also decreasesin the number of parents being asked by their child’s teacher to help with homework (a 15%decrease from 81%–66%) and those who attended a special event at school (a decrease of 16%from 46%–30%). Twelve percent fewer (62%–50%) parents in the postinterview said that theywere contacted by the teacher (by e-mail, phone call, etc.).

Life contexts. There were no changes of more than 10% from the pre- to postinterviewsin terms of perceptions of available time and energy. There was one change in the category ofknowledge and skills. Fewer parents perceived that they had the skills to help out at school (adecrease of 10% from 92–82%).

Involvement in home-based and school-based activities. Home-based activitiesincluded supervising homework, practicing such skills as spelling with their children, and read-ing with their children. School-based activities included helping out at school, attending PTAmeetings, and volunteering to go on field trips. In the home-based activities, there was one itemwith a 10% or more change in the number of parents’ perceiving that someone in the family:reads with the child/children (an 11% increase from 69%–80%). In the school-based activities,fewer parents perceived that they would volunteer to go on field trips (an 11% decrease from38%–27%).

Teaching staff surveys. Teachers responded to a series of questions rating the frequencywith which certain actions occurred; activities were organized into six topic areas: parenting,communication, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and collaborating with thecommunity. As with the parent interview results, those items on which there was a 10% or moreincrease or decrease in the number of teachers’ responses from the May 2007 to the May 2008surveys are reported below. See Appendix B for complete results. The survey was based onone found in Epstein et al. (2002). Teachers responded to these items related to how often orfrequently their school performed relative to that item.

Parenting. The percentage of teachers who said their school frequently or often helpedfamilies establish home environments conducive to support children increased overall in all sevenitems from the pre- to the postsurvey. The largest increases were on the following items:

• Conducts workshops for parents or providing information on child development (a 34%increase from 23%–57%)

• Asks families for information about goals for their children (a 16% increase from27%–43%)

• Provides families with information or training on developing home conditions or environ-ments that support learning (an increase of 25% from 36%–61%).


Communication. This is generally defined by Epstein et al. (2002) as “designing effec-tive forms of school-to home communications about school programs and children’s progress(p. 333). Of the 14 items in this category, there were increases of 16% or better on the followingthree items:

• Trains teachers, staff, and principal of the value and utility of contributions of parents andways to build ties between school and home (a 16% increase from 45%–61%)

• Produces a regular school newsletter with up-to-date information (a 28% increase from55%–83%)

• Develops school’s plan and program for family and community involvement (an increaseof 20% from 50%–70%).

The one decrease was in the area of reviewing print and nonprint communiqués for readability,clarity, and so on (a 20% decrease from 68%–48%).

Volunteering. This category has to do with getting parents’ help and support and organizingthem. There were four items showing a change of 12% or more:

• Provides a parent/family room (increase of 12% from 27%–39%)• Reduces barriers to participation through providing transportation, child care, flexible

schedules, and so on (12% increase from 23%–35%)• Trains volunteers to use their time productively (20% increase from 23%–43%)• Annually surveys interest, talents, and availability of volunteers (a 20% decrease from

50%–30%).

Learning at home. In this category, related to helping parents know better how to help theirchildren at home, there were three items indicating a change of 10% or more:

• Provides information to families on how to monitor and discuss schoolwork (a decrease of16% from 59%–43%)

• Makes parents aware of the importance of reading at home, and asks parents to listen totheir child read aloud (a decrease of 16% from 86%–70%)

• Assists families in helping students set academic goals (an increase of 20% from32%–52%).

Decision-making. The most improvement was found in the category of including parentsin decisions and developing parent leaders. Seven of the 10 items registered a 10% increaseor more:

• Active in the PTA (a 19% increase from 77%–96%)• Includes parents on school’s advisory council (a 23% increase from 73%–96%)• Has parents represented on district level advisory council (a 24% increase from 41%–65%)• Involves parents in an organized, ongoing, and timely manner (a 29% increase from

45%–74%)• Develops formal networks to link all families with their parent representatives (a 12%

increase from 23%–35%)

216 BARTEL

• Deals with conflict openly and respectfully (a 10% increase from 68%–78%)• Asks involved parents to make contact with parents who are less involved (a 12% increase

from 36%–48%).

Collaborating with community. In this category, teachers rated identification and integra-tion of resources from the community to strengthen their school’s programs and practices. Achange of 16% or higher was found for three of seven items:

• Provides a resource directory for parents and students (a 16% increase from 32%–48%)• Involves families in locating and using community resources (a 34% increase from

27%–61%)• Offers after-school programs for students with support from community businesses,

agencies, and volunteers (a 22% decrease from 100%–78%).

Interactive Homework

By the end of this 3-month project, 285 students from every grade level, in the 18 classroomswhose teachers volunteered to participate, were involved in this project. The project was volun-tary for students and their parents. For the 18 teachers who had participating students, the averageparticipation rate was 67%. Student participation was greatest in the pre-K through primarygrades, with 77% participation. Parent participation across all grades was 50%, but participa-tion increased steadily from the time the project started until its completion. In fact, as Figure 1portrays, participation of students and teachers also increased from the beginning to the end ofthe project (October through December 2007).

100%100%

75%

55%

77%

47%

57%58%

94%

67%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%Activity 1 Activity 2

(n = 18) (n = 285) (n = 285)

Classrooms

Activity 3 Activity 1 Activity 2

Students

Activity 3 Activity 1 Activity 2

Parents

Activity 3

Per

cent

Par

ticip

atin

g in

Eac

h of

the

3 In

tera

ctiv

e H

omew

ork

Act

iviti

es

FIGURE 1 Participation in Interactive Homework activities.


Student Outcomes

Although direct correlations cannot be made between parental involvement and achievementscores, the variety of results from the pre- and postinterview data with parents, the pre- andpostsurvey information from teachers about home and school factors affecting involvement, andthe spring to spring reading and math scores indicate that efforts made by the school staff andsummer school staff were successful. Analysis of reading and math progress was done using theMeasures of Academic Progress (MAP) for Primary Grades test, taken in the spring of 2007 andthe spring of 2008. The MAP assessments, developed by the Northwest Evaluation Association(NWEA), are state-aligned, computerized adaptive assessments that provide accurate, usefulinformation about student achievement and growth.

For the third-through sixth-graders overall who took the test in math, the Rausch unIT (RIT)score, a number that indicates a student’s instructional level, improved from 196 to 204. Themedian gain was 9. Eighty-three percent made gains, with 47% meeting their target growth. TheRIT scores in reading improved by 5 points, from 195 to 200. The median gain was 5 points.Seventy-five percent of the students made gains, with 46% meeting their target growth. SeeTable 2.

Although these results need to be compared to other years’ rate of improvement, they indi-cate an increase in median gains and a 75% to 83% improvement in scores by all the testtakers.

TABLE 2Student Outcomes: MAP Score Analysis Growth From Spring 2007 to Spring 2008

CurrentGrade Level

Spring 2007Mean RIT

Score

Spring 2008Mean RIT

Score

OverallMedian

Gain Springto Spring

LowestGain Spring

to Spring

HighestGain Spring

to Spring

% of StudentsMaking Any

Gains

% of StudentsMeeting

TheirGrowthTarget

Reading3 186 194 9 −13 34 83 464 193 197 5 −17 20 77 375 197 202 4 −7 21 68 376 206 210 5 −12 15 71 48

Grade 3–6 195 200 5 −17 34 75 46

Mathematics3 184 196 13 5 27 94 464 197 202 6 −17 19 77 375 200 207 8 −9 19 81 376 205 213 10 −7 21 79 48

Grades 3–6 196 204 9 −17 27 83 47

Note. MAP = Measures of Academic Progress; RIT = Rausch unIT. Analysis uses a matched data file (Spring 2008& Spring 2007 scores of the school’s 2007–08 students, grades 3–6). Students not tested both years are excluded.

218 BARTEL

DISCUSSION

The process of determining home and school factors that impeded parental involvement atRiceton, and then using that data to plan and implement initiatives/interventions to addresssome of the targeted needs, resulted in some surprising outcomes when compared to existingliterature as well as in benefits for unintended audiences. However, due to the indirect effectsof parental involvement as well as the nature of parenting itself in a Title I school, the changesreported cannot be directly attributed to the parent classes and interactive homework interven-tions. That said, the results taken as a whole are useful, particularly for use by the school toimprove practices related to involving parents in their children’s education at home and school,as well as to ponder other implications in the larger context of parental involvement. The percep-tions of parents herein as a part of a lower socioeconomic group (Title I status) are valuablebecause less is known about this population than about the middle- and higher-income par-ents more often studied. They also serve to inform assumptions often made about lower-incomeparents.

Role Perceptions

The vast majority of Riceton parents in the current study agreed that it is their responsibility toassume many roles in their children’s education, such as talking with their children about theschool day, helping with homework, staying informed, and communicating regularly with theirchildren’s teachers. They were less likely to believe a role/activity is their responsibility if it isone that doesn’t relate directly to their child, such as making sure the school has what it needs,making the school better, and talking with other parents from the school. Contrary to what maybe suspected, the parents, most of whom had only a high school education, generally felt a strongsense of confidence in their abilities, especially in knowing how to help their children learn andin making a significant difference in their school performance. They were less certain about theirability to get through to their children, which also corresponded to their lack of confidence inhelping with particular subject matter.

Life Contexts and Home- and School-Based Activities

Riceton parents felt strongly that they know how to communicate effectively with their childrenabout the school day and often have the time and energy to do so. They believed that they havethe time, energy, knowledge, and skills to communicate effectively with their children’s teachersand effective ways of contacting the teacher. The majority believed they had the time and energyto help with homework, but fewer said they knew enough about the subjects of the homework tobe helpful. They reported having the skills to help out at school but were less likely to have thetime and energy to do so. They were also less likely to have the time and energy to engage involunteering and special events.

Because most parents of Riceton children reported working 40 hours a week, it would be inter-esting to determine how closely their perceptions of involvement match the reality. But from whatI gleaned from the 80+ hours I spent with Riceton parents one on one or in small-group classes


(I taught the cooking class and some of the parenting class), I was constantly overwhelmed bywhat these parents did for their children with the little time and resources they had. It was obviousthat the contexts of their lives (e.g., the number of hours they worked) dramatically affected whatthey were able to do in terms of school-based activities. Yet, at home, talking with their childrenabout the school day, and having someone in their family read with their child, were deemedimportant in the preinterviews and increased in the postinterviews a year later. The fact that 95%of those interviewed in the “post” interviews perceived that they support decisions made by theteacher is evidence that either their attitudes and views of Riceton changed, and/or the teachersworked to improve their parent-teacher practices as well.

Over the course of the study, Riceton teachers appeared to have gained an increased under-standing of some factors that affect parents’ involvement. Teachers had an opportunity forstructured parental involvement with the home-based instructional activities (interactive home-work). The survey results indicated an increased awareness of how teacher education facultyand students could help them become better teachers and help their children with specific skills.However, the teachers didn’t tend to invite their students’ parents to participate or attend specialevents more often, or even to supervise homework more frequently.

Behaviors that increased, according to their self-reports, were more often helping to estab-lishing home environments more conducive to support children, more regular communicationwith parents, increased involvement of parents in decision-making, and more involvement in thecommunity. Areas of greatest improvement were the increase in those who provided informationto parents on child development; training volunteers; maintaining regular communication, suchas a newsletter; and involving parents regularly in decision-making.

The Interactive Homework Project with children and parents had the potential to engage par-ents in their children’s homework, thus allowing them to be more actively involved withoutcoming to school. Many wrote comments on the homework expressing their appreciation forknowing more about what their children were learning. The parents with whom I spoke infor-mally after this project concluded volunteered that they had appreciated that kind of involvement.However, the amount of time and expense to create and copy the activities for the childrenand parents was an impediment, as was the fact that teachers were not more involved in thedevelopment of the homework.

Because the hiring of the parent educator was an unintended outcome (because of what theschool principal noted from summer camp relationships between staff and students), resultsrelated to him were not specifically studied. However, from observing his efforts throughout theyear, it was clear that his effect was extremely positive. More and more parents became involvedin many home- and school-based activities to help their children and the school. It is possiblethat perceptions of school practices and actual practices changed as much as they did due to thetime, energy, and welcoming demeanor the parent educator tirelessly expended.

Teacher education students who acted as staff accrued benefits as well. They learned firsthandabout the needs of a low-performing and a low-SES population; they were able to practice theirown skills in teaching and working with families; and, most important, they became more com-fortable in an urban setting and with their own practice. The care and concern they bestowed onthe children and their mothers in the summer program, and the hands-on projects and walkingfield trips they took with the children and mothers, enabled them to establish rich relationshipsbuilt on a growing trust. Riceton students indirectly benefited from better practices at a school

220 BARTEL

working to become more parent friendly and perhaps more directly from their parents’ involve-ment and encouragement in the educational setting. Information from the pre- and post-MAPtesting was encouraging, but needs to be compared to other years to better determine the degreeof our success.

Other unintended, but much appreciated, benefits emerged from this effort. The addition of aGeneral Equivalency Diploma (GED) program and computer classes for parents and the creationof a parent advisory group followed the success of the summer educational program for parents.As mentioned, a parent educator was hired, and the principal plans to initiate additional trainingfor teachers about the parents’ lives and needs. The principal also is now personally and pro-fessionally committed to improving school-family-community partnerships; she is involved in adoctoral program, where she is basing her dissertation work on the topic of parental involvement.

Riceton-School of Education Partnership members and Riceton staff and parents had oppor-tunities throughout the year to express their views of the partnership and its activities. Severalindicated that there was increased understanding among teachers and parents regarding theirroles and its importance, as well increased comfort and communication between some parentsand teachers.

CONCLUSION

Home and school factors that affected parental involvement at Riceton were similar to thosefound in the work of Walker et al. (2005), Hoover-Dempsey et al. (2005), and Epstein et al.(2002). Parents’ beliefs about their roles vis-à-vis their children’s education and their percep-tions about their time and energy, knowledge, and skills obviously affect their involvement. Andchildren whose teachers reach out to their parents reap the benefits. It is understandable that theconcerted effort at Riceton to increase parents’ and teachers’ awareness about the importance oftheir involvement made a positive difference.

What is important is that the home factor results were basically the same for these Title Iparents as those more often discussed in the literature for parents with more social capital, par-ticularly because higher SES parents can afford more learning materials. School practices andsummer camp at Riceton showed that teachers and teacher education programs need to betterunderstand the lives that Title I parents live, as well as how to help parents improve their effortsfor their children’s education, at home and school. Likewise, school structures need to changeto better accommodate parents. Teachers and school administrators can institute more effectiveparental involvement strategies; however, time, resources, and the knowledge and understandingrequired to change school culture and to develop different paths for access take effort and dili-gence. Even smaller steps, though, could potentially have a huge impact, such as administratorsmaking teachers more aware that their encouragement of parents’ involvement has been shownto predict engagement of all parents (Simon, 2001; VanVoorhis, 2001).

Because “the achievement gap is really a gap in learning opportunities” (Rothman, 2007,p. 21), it is imperative that cities, schools, and school districts work to provide sufficient oppor-tunities for all parents to know what they need to help their children learn at home and in school,and to give higher priority to making sure they have the resources to do so.


REFERENCES

Barton, A., Drake, C., Perez, J., St. Louis, K., & George, M. (2004). Ecologies of parental engagement in urban education.Educational Researcher, 33(4), 3–12.

Brown, L., & Beckett, K. (2007). Parent involvement in an alternative school for students at risk for educational failure.Education and Urban Society, 39(4), 498–523.

Davies, D. (2002). The 10th school revisited: Are school/family/community partnerships on the reform agenda now?Phi Delta Kappan, 83(5), 388–392.

Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1991). Involving parents in the schools: A process of empowerment. American Journal of Education,100(1), 20–46.

Epstein, J., Sanders, M., Simon, B., Salinas, N., & Van Voorhis, F. (2002). School, family, and community partnerships(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Hoover-Dempsey, K., Bassler, O., & Brissie, J. (1992). Explorations in parent-school relations. Journal of EducationalResearch, 85, 287–294.

Hoover-Dempsey, K., & Sadler, J. (1995). Parental involvement in children’s education: Why does it make a difference?Teachers College Record, 97, 310–331.

Hoover-Dempsey, K., & Sadler, J. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Review ofEducational Research, 67, 3–42.

Hoover-Dempsey, K., Walker, J., Sandler, H., Whetsel, D., Green, C., Wilkins, A., & Closson, K. (2005). Why do parentsbecome involved? Research findings and implications. Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 105–130.

Jeeter-Twilley, R., Legum, H., & Norton, F. (2007, April). Parental and community involvement in schools: Doessocio-economic status matter?Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting,New York.

Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociologyof Education, 60, 73–85.

Lareau, A. (1989). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. London: FalmerPress.

Lareau, A., & Horvat, E. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion: Race, class, and cultural capital in family-school relationships. Sociology of Education, 72(1), 37–53.

Moles, O. (1993). Collaboration between schools and disadvantaged parents: Obstacles and openings. In N. F. Chavkin(Ed.), Families and schools in a pluralistic society (pp. 21–49). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Reed, R., Jones, K., Walker, J., & Hoover-Dempsey, S. (2000, April). Parents’ motivation for involvement in children’seducation: Testing a theoretical model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, New Orleans.

Rothman, R. (2007). The real achievement gap. In R. Rothman (Ed.), City schools: How districts and communities cancreate smart education systems (pp. 9–22). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Sheldon, S. (2002). Parents’ social networks and beliefs as predictors of parent involvement. Elementary School Journal,102(4), 301–316.

Simon, B. (2001). Family involvement in high school: Predictors and effect. NASSP Bulletin, 85(627), 8–19.VanVoorhis, F. (2001). Interactive science homework: An experiment in home and school connections. NASSP Bulletin,

85, 20–22.Walker, J. M., Wilkins, A. S., Dallaire, J. P., Sandler, H. M., & Hoover-Dempsey, K. V. (2005). Parental involvement:

Model revisions through scale development. Elementary School Journal, 106, 85–104.

222 BARTEL

APPENDIX A

Parent Questionnaire1

The majority of the questionnaire consisted of two item types: (1) agreement items, which askedparents to rate how much they agree or disagree with a statement and (2) frequency items, whichasked parents to rate how frequently an activity or event occurred during the current school year.Both types of items used a 6-point scale:

Rating Agreement Items Frequency Items

1 Disagree very much/disagree strongly Never2 Disagree Once or twice3 Disagree just a little Four or five times4 Agree just a little Once a week5 Agree A few times a week6 Agree a lot/agree strongly Every day

For agreement items, the percentage of parents selecting “Agree” or “Agree a lot/strongly” ispresented below; for frequency items, the percentage selecting “a few times a week” or “everyday” is presented.

Parental Role Construction: Role Activity Beliefs

I believe it is my responsibility to . . . % Pre % Post

1. Volunteer at the school. 77 922. Communicate with my child’s teacher regularly. 92 973. Help my child with homework. 96 974. Make sure the school has what it needs. 73 885. Support decisions made by the teacher. 81 956. Stay on top of things at school. 96 997. Explain tough assignments to my child. 100 968. Talk with other parents from the school. 88 739. Make the school better. 85 88

10. Talk with my child about the school day. 100 100

Parental Role Construction: Valence Toward School

Parents’ own experiences as a student often influence their perceptions of school and their com-fort level engaging with the school. Parents were asked to select the statement that best describestheir own school experiences as a student.

% Pre % Post

My school Liked 88 77My teachers Were nice 73 64My teachers Cared about me 85 86My school experience Good 81 82I felt like my overall I belonged 77 85Experience Success 92 80


Parents’ Self-Efficacy

% Pre % Post

1. I know how to help my child do well in school. 88 892. I know if I’m getting through to my child.a 73 663. I know how to help my child make good grades.a 85 894. I feel successful about my efforts to help my child learn. 92 885. I have more influence on my child’s grades than other children do.a 85 886. I know how to help my child learn.a 88 937. I make a significant difference in my child’s school performance. 85 95

a. Direction of statement reversed from questionnaire for simplicity in reporting.

Perceptions of General Invitations for Involvement From the School

% Pre % Post

1. Teachers are interested and cooperative when they discuss mychild.

92 97

2. I feel welcome at Riceton. 100 973. Parent activities are scheduled so that I can attend. 81 774. Riceton lets me know about meetings and special school events. 96 895. Riceton staff contacts me promptly about any problems involving

my child.92 96

6. The teachers at Riceton keep me informed about my child’sprogress in school.

96 96

Parents’ Perceptions of Invitations for Involvement From Child/Teacher

Percent Reporting High Frequency

My child . . . % Pre % Post

1. Asked me to explain something about homework. 54 582. Asked me to supervise homework. 42 613. Talked with me about the school day. 81 934. Asked me to attend a special event at school. 58 515. Asked me to help out at the school. 27 416. Asked me to talk with their teacher. 35 30

My child’s teacher . . . % Pre % Post

1. Asked me or expected me to help my child with homework. 81 662. Asked me or expected me to supervise homework. 69 643. Asked me to talk with my child about the school day. 54 554. Asked me to attend a special event at school. 46 305. Asked me to help out at the school. 23 24

My child’s teacher contacted me (for example, sent a note, phoned, e-mailed). 62 50

224 BARTEL

Parents’ Perceived Life Context

Time and Energy

I have enough time and energy to . . . % Pre % Post

1. Communicate effectively with my child about the school day. 92 912. Help out at my child’s school. 50 453. Communicate effectively with my child’s teacher. 92 964. Attend special events at school. 73 665. Help my child with homework. 96 966. Supervise my child’s homework. 88 91

Knowledge and Skills

% Pre % Post

1. I know about volunteering opportunities at my child’s school. 81 822. I know about special events at my child’s school. 92 883. I know effective ways to contact my child’s teacher. 96 964. I know how to communicate effectively with my child about the school day. 96 995. I know how to explain things to my child about his or her homework. 88 916. I know enough about the subjects of my child’s homework to help him or her. 81 887. I know how to communicate effectively with my child’s teacher. 92 998. I know how to supervise my child’s homework. 92 959. I have the skills to help out at my child’s school. 92 82

Parents’ Involvement in Home-Based Activities

Someone in this family . . . % Pre % Post

1. Talks with this child about the school day. 92 952. Supervises this child’s homework. 88 933. Helps this child study for tests. 85 784. Practices spelling, math, or other skills with this child. 88 855. Reads with this child. 69 80

Parents’ Involvement in School-Based Activities

Someone in this family . . . % Pre % Post

1. Helps out at this child’s school. 31 342. Attends special events at school. 50 453. Volunteers to go on class field trips. 38 274. Attends PTA meetings. 35 305. Goes to the school’s open house. 38 28

1. Adapted from Hoover-Dempsey, K., Walker, J., Sandler, H., Whetsel, D., Green, C., Wilkins, A.,& Closson, K. (2005). Why do parents become involved? Research findings and implications. TheElementary School Journal, 106 (2), 105–30.


APPENDIX B

Teaching Staff Survey2

Teachers and staff used a 5-point scale to indicate their opinion of how frequently eachtype of activity occurs. For each item, respondents could choose from the following:1 – never (does not happen at my school); 2 – rarely; 3 – sometimes; 4 – often; 5 – frequently.The percentage of teachers and staff selecting often or frequently is presented below for eachitem.

I. Parenting – Help all families establish home environments to support children as students.

Percent reporting that their school often or frequently . . . % Pre % Post

1. Conducts workshops or provides information for parents on childdevelopment.

23 57

2. Provides information, training, and assistance to all families who want it orwho need it, not just to the few who can attend workshops or meetings atthe school.

41 52

3. Produces information for families that is clear, usable, and linked tochildren’s success in school.

59 70

4. Asks families for information about children’s goals, strengths, and talents. 27 435. Sponsors home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help

families understand schools and to help schools to understand families.18 30

6. Provides families with information or training on developing homeconditions or environments that support learning.

36 61

7. Respects the different cultures represented in our student population. 77 87

II. Communications – Design effective forms of school-to-home and home-to-school communi-cations about school programs and children’s progress.


1. Reviews the readability, clarity, form, and frequency of all memos,notices, and other print and nonprint communications.

68 48

2. Develops communication for parents who do not speak English well, donot read well, or need large type.

27 30

3. Provides written communication in the language of the parents andtranslators as needed.

41 39

4. Establishes clear, two-way channels for communications from home toschool and from school to home.

68 74

5. Conducts a formal conference with every parent at least once a year. 91 83

226 BARTEL

6. Conducts an annual survey for families to share information and concernsabout student needs and reactions to school programs, and theirsatisfaction with their involvement in school.

59 52

7. Conducts an orientation for new parents. 36 398. Sends home folders of student work weekly or monthly for parent review

and comment.73 83

9. Provides clear information about the curriculum, assessments, andachievement levels and report cards.

73 74

10. Contacts families of students having academic or behavior problems. 91 8711. Develops school’s plan and program of family and community

involvement with input from educators, parents, and others.50 70

12. Trains teachers, staff and principals on the value and utility ofcontributions of parents and ways to build ties between school and home.

45 61

13. Builds policies that encourage all teachers to communicate frequentlywith parents about their curriculum plans, expectations for homework,and how parents can help.

77 83

14. Produces a regular school newsletter with up-to-date information aboutthe school, special events, organizations, meetings, and parenting tips.

55 83

III. Volunteering – Recruit and organize parent help and support.


1. Conducts an annual survey to identify interests, talents, and availability ofparent volunteers, in order to match their skills/talents with school andclassroom needs.

50 30

2. Provides a parent/family room for volunteers and family members to work,meet, and access resources about parenting, child care, tutoring, and otherthings that affect their children.

27 39

3. Creates flexible volunteering and school events schedules, enabling parentswho work to participate.

68 65

4. Schedules school events at different times during the day and evening sothat all families can attend at some point throughout the year.

50 52

5. Reduces barriers to parent participation by providing transportation, childcare, flexible schedules, and addresses the needs of English languagelearners.

23 35

6. Trains volunteers so they use their time productively. 23 437. Recognizes volunteers for their time and efforts. 82 838. Encourages families and the community to be involved with the school in a

variety of ways (assisting in classroom, giving talks, monitoring halls,leading activities, etc.).

73 74


IV. Learning at Home – Provide information and ideas to families about how to help students athome with homework and other curriculum-related activities, decisions, and planning.


1. Provides information to families on how to monitor and discuss schoolworkat home.

59 43

2. Provides information to families on required skills in all subjects. 36 393. Provides ongoing and specific information to parents on how to assist

students with skills that they need to improve.50 43

4. Makes parents aware of the importance of reading at home, and asksparents to listen to their child read, or to read aloud with their child.

86 70

5. Assists families in helping students set academic goals, select courses, andprograms.

32 52

6. Schedules regular, interactive homework that requires students todemonstrate and discuss what they are learning with a family member.

41 43

V. Decision-Making – Include parents in school decisions, developing parent leaders andrepresentatives.


1. Has active PTA, PTO, or other parent organization. 77 962. Includes parent representatives on the school’s advisory council,

improvement team, or other committees.73 96

3. Has parents represented on district-level advisory council and committees. 41 654. Involves parents in an organized, ongoing, and timely way in the

planning, review, and improvement of programs.45 74

5. Involves parents in revising the school/district curricula. 32 356. Includes parent leaders from all racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and other

groups in the school.55 48

7. Develops formal networks to link all families with their parentrepresentatives.

23 35

8. Includes students (along with parents) in decision-making groups. 27 309. Deals with conflict openly and respectfully. 68 78

10. Asks involved parents to make contact with parents who are lessinvolved to solicit their ideas, and report back to them.

36 48

228 BARTEL

VI. Collaborating With Community – Identify and integrate resources and services from the com-munity to strengthen school programs, family practices, and student learning and development.


1. Provides a resource directory for parents and students with information oncommunity services, programs, and agencies.

32 48

2. Involves families in locating and utilizing community resources. 27 613. Works with local businesses, industries, libraries, parks, museums, and

other organizations on programs to enhance student skills and learning.68 74

4. Provides “one-stop shopping” for family services through partnership ofschool, counseling, health, recreation, job training, and other agencies.

23 30

5. Opens building for use by the community after school hours. 41 486. Offers after-school programs for students with support from community

businesses, agencies, and volunteers.100 78

7. Solves turf problems of responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations, therebyencouraging collaborative activities.

50 43

2. Questions based on work of Epstein, J., Sanders, M., Simon, B., Salinas, N., & Van Voorhis, F.(2002). (2nd Ed.) School, Family, and Community Partnerships. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Corwin Press,Inc., pp. 130–135.

Copyright of Journal of Research in Childhood Education is the property of Routledge and its content may not

be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

home and school factors impacting parental involvement in ... · home and school factors impacting...

Documents