VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 23 POSTED ON: 1/15/2012
EXAMINING PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT Sarajevo, March 2009 Involvement in national consultation - EU Types of involvement EU Pre-transition model National government Regional/local Regional/local government government School School School School governing governing governing governing body body body body School principal Teachers Students Parents Previous study (phase 1) Principals‟ perception: Parents‟ engagement in school life is contributing to: Educationalattainment of pupils School atmosphere Parents‟ involvement in school governance Limited efforts on school side Limited effectiveness of parents engagement in meaningful ways due to: Lack of parents‟ interest Lack of parents‟ time Lack of parents‟ communication skills Complication 1. Two cultures, misunderstandings Epstein‟s theory of parent involvement Connecting family-like school school-like family family, school and community through: parenting, communicatio n, volunteering, learning at home, decision- making, collaboration with the community Sheridan and Kratochwill‟s model of family-school partnership Goals of Partnership orientation Traditional orientation family-school Clear commitment to work together in Emphasizing the school role in promoting partnership: order to promote child‟s learning performance/achievement Frequent communication that is Communication initiated primarily by the a. creating bidirectional school, infrequent and problem-centred meaningful Appreciating the cultural differences and roles for recognizing the importance of its “One size fits all” – cultural difference is a family contribution to creating positive learning challenge that needs to be overcome climate members Appreciation of the significance of different Differences are seen as barriers perspectives b. promoting continuity Roles are clear, mutual, and supportive Separate roles distance participants c. enhancing Goals for students are mutually determined Goals determined by school, sometimes and shared shared with parents competencies of all Plans are co-constructed, with agreed Educational plans devised and delivered upon roles for all participants by teachers participants. Sheridan and Kratochwill‟s model of family-school partnership flexible, responsive, and proactive maintaining differences in services positive perspectives relationship as a seen as priority strengths commitment to shared cultural responsibilities competence collaborative, family- emphasis on interdependent, and balanced school outcomes and goal attainment relationships partnership Complication 2. Mutually exclusive expectations Parent-teacher roles/expectations KEY FINDINGS Teachers perceive their roles as very distinct from parents: Teachers are expected to organize the learning and to inform the Parents develop “role constructions; family parents on the child‟s academic progress; resources should be treated as forms of parents are responsible for child‟s social and capital: human, social, and cultural capital emotional development; parents prefer formal ”(Diamond & Gomez, 2004). ways of communicating with teachers, („concrete and superficial relation with the teachers“) (Poulou & Matsagouras, 2007). Revised model of parental involvement The attitudes parents have towards school process suggest that there is a need for are very important; teachers expect more differentiating between home- and school- from parents than parents are aware based involvements (Green, Walker, Hoover- (Deslandes & Rousseau, 2007) Dempsey & Sandler, 2007) Complication 4. Parents differ Who gets involved and why: predictors of parental involvement THE ABSENTEE • Education: low/medium THE SUPPORTER • Characteristics: does not T • Education: low/medium consider him/herself suited to Y • Characteristics: satisfied and make a contribution, may only P involved, prepared to help with participate when asked explicitly, practical matters, willing to work, moderately dissatisfied, E an excellent helping hand, uninvolved. School has no S pleasant partner, active, priority, leaves choice of school available on demand, has up to chance, unapproachable O sufficient time • Key words: loner, quitter, no F • Key words: helpful, nice, solid, contact with other parents, no friendly, creative, sympathetic, friendship relations with the P joint thinker, harmonious, school, uncommunicative, A supportive, enlightening, willing wrestles with cultural gap to serve, naïve, well-adjusted • Suited for: school support R E • Suited for: lending a helping network, can serve as a bridge hand, parent committees to other absentee parents or N • Not suited for: school board group of parents T S without training • Not suited for: school board or parent committees without training (Smit, Driessen, Sluiter & Sleegers, 2007) Who gets involved and why: predictors of parental involvement THE CAREER-MAKER THE POLITICIAN • Education: medium/high • Education: medium/high • Characteristics: places T • Characteristics: desire to responsibility for child Y help make decisions, exert raising, child care, and P influence, and be involved; education on the school; E satisfied as long as parent one-stop-shopping can participate in meetings; approach; satisfied as long S critical consumer; as school takes on all tasks; extroverted; pays attention to critical with regard to choice O „democratic‟ quality of the of school; „school is for the F choice of school parents‟ P • Key words: critical, • Key words: aloof, A precise, optimistic, desire to businesslike, all take no R inspire, persuasive give E • Suited for: school board • Suited for: school board, N • Not suited for: actual provided this fits his/her T conduct of helping-hand career prospects S services • Not suited for: time consuming helping-hand 2007) (Smit, Driessen, Sluiter & Sleegers, services Who gets involved and why: predictors of parental involvement THE SUPER PARENT THE TORMENTOR • Education: high • Education: high • Characteristics: feels • Characteristics: feel offended responsible for child raising and T and misunderstood as a result of education together with the Y school is willing to invest in the P the school‟s attitude and own educational experiences; school relation; thinks critically E denounces errors on the part of along with the school; S the school as a critical consumer, contributes good ideas; is is an unguided missile for the prepared to utilize own networks; school team; is only satisfied is satisfied when the school does O its best for own child and other F when the school cringes and takes responsibility for students suboptimal functioning • Key words: loyal, ambitious, P innovative, communicative, A • Key words:: know-it-all, cold, insensitive, aggressive, inspiring, walking encyclopedia, R conflictual, fighter, theatrical, grows E impatient • Suited for: thinking about N • Suited for: school board problems, finding solutions, T handling crises, acquisition of • Not suited for: helping-hand funds, school board (chair) S activities, parent committees • Not suited for: supportive (Smit, Driessen, Sluiter & Sleegers, 2007) school network Who gets involved and why: predictors of parental involvement RELEVANT FINDINGS Perceiving themselves as more efficient and seeing their role closer to teachers promotes parental Factors influencing parent involvement: parent involvement; parents involvement depends on efficacy regarding education, difficulty in making parents perceptions of their beliefs and thoughts ends meet and neighbourhood disorders about themselves as parents – they need to believe (Waanders, Mendez & Downer, 2007). „they are able to make a difference“ (Georgiou, 2007). Belonging to different groups and associations subject a person to a set of expectations which There‟s a significant lack of sense of policy control results in these expectations getting „recursive“, and the interest in community-based activities on influencing the nature, patterns and intensity of the local level, which may also explain why people parent involvement; there are 3 main sources of living in similar life and societal conditions may have parental involvement: psychological motivators not be too interested in participating in the decision- promoting involvement, perceived invitations to making process and policy issues regarding involvement, parent‟s perceptions about life context schooling (Markward et al., 2006). elements that enable involvement (Hoover- Dempsey, 2007). Who gets involved and why: exclusion patterns KEY FINDINGS Minority and immigrant families might be under the Teachers from special schools see the parents risk of “becoming marginalized while being held within a deficit model; parents‟ problems are seen responsible for getting „involved‟; although the as being the obstacles for both children‟s progress parental involvement issues have arisen on a large and cooperation with the school; parents wave of discussions about the school cooperating with the teachers are identified as democratization, it actually failed in recognizing the caring, while - caring parents do not question the potentially harmful implications for vulnerable quality of teachers‟ work (Boutskou, 2007). groups (Theodorou, 2007). Agreement between school employees, students and their parents that the parental involvement and presence in schools needs to be more significant although it is not prioritized the same way; parents lack information and school assistance on how to support learning of their children; parent-teacher relations are burdened by dissatisfaction, frustrations and “readiness to quit and disengage”; the expectations of the other side are very high (Polovina, 2007). Complication 5. Teachers matter but… Teacher‟s practices of parental involvement KEY FINDINGS Three underlying factors characterizing the Strategies for boosting parent participation strategies teachers use for facilitating parent are formed around a few key points: involvement at the classroom level: •development of a vision of parental • informing the parents on student participation, performance and problems, •expansion of the visibility and • providing the information and approachability of the school team via the recommendations on increasing the creation of contact moments, involvement in academics, •attention to the concerns of parents, •providing the connections with health and •connection to what parents find interesting, community institutions; •an eye for the quality of the communication between school and parents, the more often the teachers simply reach for •stimulation of creativity and initiative, parents, the more often parents from all •giving parents time to learn something from socioeconomic groups tend to put some the school team (Smit, Driessen, Sluiter and effort in engaging in the school life Sleegers, 2007) (Seitsinger, Felner, Brand & Burns, 2008). Complication 6. Trust conflict Parents‟ trust RELEVANT FINDINGS Parents‟ trust varies by factors that affect the opportunities for parents to make discernments about the Partnerships need to be adapted to trustworthiness of the school; differences in organizational fit: specific conditions of family, characteristics of school lead to demographics, student variation in parent-school trust; most of developmental needs, school the inter-school variability can be structures, community resources explained by the parents‟ sense of (Benson, 1999). influence; systematic steps taken by the school in order to enhance the parent influence result in more trust (Adams, Forsyth & Mitchell, 2009) Between cooperation and conflict: teacher and parent perceptions of parental involvement The origin of unsatisfactory teacher-parent communication is perceived to lie within the school who should initiate the collaboration being more responsive to parental and children‟s needs (Lawson, 2003) What can we expect?
Pages to are hidden for
"Examining parental involvement"Please download to view full document