Group
Research Project Fall 2004
Mandatory Parent Involvement
Pearlyvene Boston
Gonsalo Garay
David Riddick
Professor Hayashi
LEGAL SCHL ADMIN / ELPS 663
11/23/2004
Statement
of the Issue
"When schools work together with
families to support learning,
children tend to succeed not just in
school, but throughout life"
- Anne T. Henderson and Nancy Berla,
The Family Is Critical to Student
Achievement
Research shows that family
involvement, not income or social status, is the most accurate predictor of
student achievement in school. Solid
research indicates when schools work with parents, student grades and test
scores improve, attendance increases, and high school graduation and college
attendance rates improve.
Mandatory
Parent Involvement is the Future
It is a matter of time before
local school districts establish a process whereby each parent or guardian of a
pupil is obligated to enter into a school-parent compact that will commit the
parent or guardian to develop a partnership with their school to help their
child achieve the Nation’s high standards.
Importance
of Parental Involvement
·
Parents
and guardians are the first and most enduring teachers of a child. Parents play a crucial role in the
development of a child in the formative years.
·
Schools
across the nation and in California have found that parent compacts increase
successful parent involvement in the education of their children.
·
The Federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires
every school district that receives Title 1 funds to adopt a written parent
involvement policy. This policy is
required to be developed jointly with, approved by, and distributed to parents
of participating children and the local community.
·
California’s
Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education has recommended that schools
establish and maintain explicit compacts for active meaningful partnerships
that make parents and parent groups full partners in the education of their
children.
·
In
any school accountability system, parent involvement is a critical element.
Research
on Parental Involvement
Three decades of research have
shown that parental participation in schooling improves student learning. Such
participation of parents and families is critical not only in the very
beginning of the educational process, but throughout a child's entire academic
career.
National
Trends of Parental Involvement
Parental
involvement in school is measured by attendance at a general meeting, a meeting
with a teacher, or a school event, and by volunteering or serving on a
committee. In 1999, 78 percent of students in kindergarten through twelfth
grade had parents who attended a general meeting, 73 percent had parents who
attended a scheduled meeting with a teacher, and 65 percent had parents who
attended a school event. Only 37 percent of students had parents who
volunteered in school or served on a committee. Ninety-two percent of students
had parents who participated in at least one of these activities. These levels
of participation in 1999 were about the same as they were in 1996.
Parental
Involvement by Grade
Parents
are most likely to attend school meetings and events or to volunteer in their
child's school when their children are in primary school. Their participation rates
are lower when their children are in middle school, and lowest when their
children are in high school. For example, in 1999, 88 percent of elementary
school students had parents who attended a meeting with their teachers, while
70 percent of middle school students and 51 percent of high school students had
parents who had done so. While 48 percent of elementary school students had
parents who volunteered in school or served on a committee, only 29 and 26
percent of middle and high school students, respectively, had parents who had
done so.
Parental
Involvement by Race and Ethnicity
Differences
by race and Hispanic origin were small or non-existent in the percentage of
students whose parents attended meetings, whether they were general meetings or
scheduled meetings with teachers. However, Hispanic and non-Hispanic black
students were less likely to have parents who attended school events or who
volunteered their time than were non-Hispanic white students. Fifty-one percent
of Hispanic students and 54 percent of non-Hispanic black students had parents
who attended school events, while 72 percent of non-Hispanic white students had
parents who had done so. About one-fourth of non-Hispanic black and Hispanic
students had parents who volunteered their time, compared with 43 percent of
non-Hispanic white students.
Parental
Involvement by Educational Background and Income
Parents
with higher levels of education and income are more likely to be involved in
their children's school. In 1999, 97 percent of students whose parents had a
Bachelor's degree or above had parents who were involved in their school,
compared with 76 percent of students whose parents had less than a high school
education. Likewise, 96 percent of students living in households with incomes over
$50,000 had parents who were involved in their school, compared with 84 percent
of students living in households with incomes of $10,000 or less.
Recommendation for a
New Policy
The purpose of our proposed
policy is to establish a mandatory parent involvement policy for
parents/guardians of children in grades K-5.
At the beginning of each year, parents/guardians are to sign a
school-parent compact that will commit the parent or guardian to assist and cooperate
with the educational process of his or her child.
For purposes of this section, a
“compact” means a written commitment by a parent or guardian to share
responsibility for pupil learning. The
manner in which the school and parents or guardians of pupils shall help pupils
to achieve academic and other standards of the school include, but not limited
to, the following:
·
Make
sure their child is ready to learn when he or she arrives at school.
·
Monitor
attendance and amount of television viewing.
·
Provide
regular time, place, and supervision for homework completion.
·
Volunteering,
participating, or observing in son’s/daughter’s classroom and/or school.
·
Attend
school-parent meetings.
·
Familiarizing
themselves with state and district academic standards for each grade and
subject area.
·
Communicating
with teachers.
·
Supporting
other positive parent responsibilities related to successful pupil learning at
school.
There is no dispute that
parental involvement is critical to child development and vitally important to
child learning. Public education is a
governmental enterprise and has a fundamental role to the greater population in
educating and preparing its youth for the complex world that awaits them. There is a delicate balance between the
state’s interest in ensuring that students receive a rigorous education and the
parental rights of parents to raise their children. Because education is a public and a private good, courts have
overwhelmingly upheld the state’s interest in preparing children for citizenship
and cultivating a skilled workforce.
Laws Applying to
Mandatory Parental Involvement
State
and Federal legislators have recognized education is a public and a private
good. Legislators, educators, and
policy makers have concluded parental involvement is a critical element to
student learning and becoming citizens in the Republic. Courts have upheld the state has a vital
interest and a responsibility to educate society for the good of the greater
population.
Overall,
courts have ruled in favor of the state versus parent objections in cases
ranging from compulsory attendance, determining appropriate public discourse,
and mandatory school uniform policies.
The
schools, as instruments of the state, are responsible for educating the youth
for citizenship and maintaining the democratic political system. Nothing in the Constitution prohibits the
states from insisting parents enter into a mandatory school-parent compact.
Federal
Legislation
·
2002 - According to the No Child
Left Behind Act signed into law by President Bush January 8, 2002, every school
district in America that receives Title 1 funds and every school that receives
Title 1 dollars is to develop jointly with parents a school-parent compact that
outlines how parents, school staff, and students will share responsibility for
ensuring improved student achievement. The compact must also outline how
schools and parents will work together to help Title I students achieve the
high content and performance standards set by the state for all students.
·
Title
1 states the compact must do a number of things:
1. Describe the school's responsibility to provide
high quality curriculum and instruction in a supportive and effective
environment, which will enable students to meet the state standards.
2. Describe how parents will be responsible for
supporting their child's learning. Examples given in the law are monitoring
whether children have finished their homework and how much television children
watch.
3. Address the importance of communication between
teachers and parents. Schools will be required to provide at least:
o
Parent-teacher
conferences in elementary schools, at least once a year, when parents and
teachers will discuss the compact as it relates to an individual child's
achievement.
o
Frequent reports to
parents on their children's progress
o
Reasonable access
to staff and to classrooms to observe activities
The
No Child Left Behind Act does not mandate parents to sign or take part in
school-parent compacts. However, the
language in the Act allows for a local district to develop a mandatory parent
involvement policy, describing how parents will be responsible for supporting
their child’s needs.
The
California Education Code acknowledges the importance of parental involvement
in student achievement. Similar to the
federal No Child Left Behind Act, the Education code does not mandate parent
involvement. On the other hand, the
code allows local districts and schools to develop their own school-parent
compacts. The code does not state if
this policy should be mandatory or voluntarily agreed upon. The only mandate is for the local districts
and schools to create a policy with parents.
Section
5110 states that parental
involvement has been shown to improve student achievement and efforts must be
made to collaborate with parents and guardians.
51100. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) It is essential to our democratic form of government that parents and guardians of schoolage children attending public schools and other citizens participate in improving public education institutions. Specifically, involving parents and guardians of pupils in the education process is fundamental to a healthy system of public education. (b) Research has shown conclusively that early and sustainedfamily involvement at home and at school in the education of children results both in improved pupil achievement and in schools that are successful at educating all children, while enabling them to achieve high levels of performance. (c) All participants in the education process benefit when schools genuinely welcome, encourage, and guide families into establishing equal partnerships with schools to support pupil learning. (d) Family and school collaborative efforts are most effective when they involve parents and guardians in a variety of roles at all grade levels, from preschool through high school. Section 51101 states parents have the right to be involved in the education of their children. Each governing board of a school district must develop with parents a policy that outlines the manner in which parents/guardians, school staff, and pupils share in the responsibility of a pupil’s intellectual, physical, emotional, and social development.
51101. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (d), the parents and guardians of pupils enrolled in public schools have the right and should have the opportunity, as mutually supportive and respectful partners in the education of their children within the public schools, to be informed by the school, and to participate in the education of their children, as follows: (3) To volunteer their time and resources for the improvement of school facilities and school programs under the supervision of district employees, including, but not limited to, providing assistance in the classroom with the approval, and under the direct supervision, of the teacher. Although volunteer parents may assist with instruction, primary instructional responsibility shall remain with the teacher. (b) In addition to the rights described in subdivision (a), parents and guardians of pupils, including those parents and guardians whose primary language is not English, shall have the opportunity to work together in a mutually supportive and respectful partnership with schools, and to help their children succeed in school. Each governing board of a school district shall develop jointly with parents and guardians, and shall adopt, a policy that outlines the manner in which parents or guardians of pupils, school staff, and pupils may share the responsibility for continuing the intellectual, physical, emotional, and social development and well-being of pupils at each schoolsite. The policy shall include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following: (1) The means by which the school and parents or guardians of pupils may help pupils to achieve academic and other standards of the school. (2) A description of the school's responsibility to provide a high quality curriculum and instructional program in a supportive and effective learning environment that enables all pupils to meet the academic expectations of the school. (3) The manner in which the parents and guardians of pupils may support the learning environment of their children, including, but not limited to, the following: (A) Monitoring attendance of their children. (B) Ensuring that homework is completed and turned in on a timely basis. (C) Participation of the children in extracurricular activities. (D) Monitoring and regulating the television viewed by their children. (E) Working with their children at home in learning activities that extend learning in the classroom. (F) Volunteering in their children's classrooms, or for other activities at the school. (G) Participating, as appropriate, in decisions relating to the education of their own child or the total school program. (c) All schools that participate in the High Priority Schools Grant Program established pursuant to Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 52055.600) of Chapter 6.1 of Part 28 and that maintain kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 5, inclusive, shall jointly develop with parents or guardians for all children enrolled at that school site, a school-parent compact pursuant to Section 6319 of Title 20 of the United States Code. (d) This section does not authorize a school to inform a parent or guardian, as provided in this section, or to permit participation by a parent or guardian in the education of a child, if it conflicts with a valid restraining order, protective order, or order for custody or visitation issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.
This Bill signified the importance legislators
found on increasing parent involvement by allocating $20,000,000 from the State
General Fund to the Superintendent of Public Instruction to implement the
teacher home visitation program. The
following are requirements participating schools shall do in order to qualify
for the designated funds:
State
and Federal Courts have overwhelming ruled in favor of the state against cases
facing parental objection. These case
range from compulsory attendance, determining appropriate public discourse, and
mandatory school uniform policies.
Public education is a private and a public good, which supercedes
parental objections. The educational deprivation of a child not only impacts
the child and his/her family, but society as a whole.
Supreme
Court of the United States, 1925
Pierce
v. Society of Sisters
established compulsory attendance in the United States. Prior to the Compulsory Education Act of
1922 parents may have felt they had the liberty as parents to decide if their
children would attend school The
Compulsory Education Act of 1922 tried to require parents or guardians to send
children between the ages of eight and sixteen to public school in the district
where the children resided. Under this
Act private schooling and home schooling would have been outlawed. The Act tried to make the education of
children the sole responsibility of the state forcing students to accept
instruction from public teachers only.
The
unanimous Court held that the Compulsory Education Act of 1922 was against
parental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The law did not include, but excluded parental involvement. From 1922, the Supreme Court began to
recognize the importance of parental involvement in preparing children for our
democratic society.
The
child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct
his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and
prepare him for additional obligations.
This
decision laid the foundation for schools and school districts to develop
parental involvement policies. A
mandatory school-parent compact would fall under the phrase “high duty, to
recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.
Supreme
Court of the United States, 1986
478
U.S. 675
Fraser’s father sued Bethel School District arguing that
the school did not have the right to penalize his son for an offensive speech
delivered at a school assembly.
Fraser’s contention was that his son had the right of free speech under
the First Amendment. Fraser sighted the
Tinker Doctrine and claimed his son has the right of political freedom of
expression, and the school does not have the legal right to mandate Fraser’s
speech.
Supreme
Court reversed the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and ruled the First
Amendment does not keep schools from deciding what speech and behavior is
acceptable. The Court ruled public
schools have a duty to instill moral values and encourage public civility.
Inescapably,
like parents, they are role models. The
schools, as instruments of the state, may determine that the essential lessons
of civil, mature conduct cannot be conveyed in a school that tolerates lewd,
indecent, or offensive speech...
Fraser gave school officials latitude and more control
in determining what type of behavior will be permitted by students. In addition, Fraser identified an
important connection that exists between parents and teachers. Families and educators have the
responsibility to foster and educate youth for the purpose of maintaining a
democratic political system.
United
States v. O’Brien,
The
U.S. Supreme Court’s 1968 decision on draft-card burning, is often used to determine
whether a school dress code is constitutional.
Parents who oppose Uniform Policies claim these mandatory laws violate
their parental rights to teach their children to be non-conformists,
free-thinkers, and a respect for individuality. Courts have often applied the O’Brien Test as a rational basis to
decide if the parents fundamental liberties have been violated. The O’Brien Test may also be used to
scrutinize the violation of parental rights in a mandatory school-parent
compact.
Under
the O’Brien test a uniform policy is constitutional if it:
Mandatory
parent involvement meets this criterion.
A mandatory school-parent compact is authorized under state law,
advances an important government interest, and only incidentally restricts free
expression in a minimal fashion. Courts
have generally sided with the state’s interest in furthering legitimate
educational goals.
Analysis of Legal Arguments for Both Sides of
Mandatory
Parental Involvement
It
is merely a matter of time before a school district mandates a signature on a
school-parent compact and a parent sues over their fundamental right to be as
involved in their child’s education as they see fit. A parent may argue this school-parent compact violates their
civil liberties. The court has
recognized that parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care,
custody, and control of their children.
However, Courts have overwhelmingly noted this is not an absolute right
and must be weighed against the state’s responsibility to educate students for
citizenship in a democratic society.
When
it comes to mandatory parent involvement, there are mixed feelings
involved. There are the parents who are
dedicated and willing to commit to whatever it takes to ensure their child’s
future success and there are those who swear they are doing their best, that’s
all they can do, and no one should be able to look down on them or demand
more. They say that they have to work
all day and earn a living, and there is no way they can be involved all the
time and make ends meet. They also say
that one cannot legislate their regulations and behaviors, their rights are
protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. Schools may be able to regulate student speech during a school
assembly as in Bethel v. Fraser.
However, one may argue they have nether the jurisdiction nor the duty to
mandate parental responsibilities. As
citizens in our Republic, do we have the right of choice? In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme
Court ruled that abortion is a private
matter. Citizens have control over
their bodies. The state has no right to
force mandatory policies, parental
involvement is a private matter. Do
parents have the right to raise their children without the state’s imposed
policies?
The
Washington Supreme Court held a parental consent form to be against public policy
in Wagenblast v. Odessa School District No.l 105-157—166j, 758 P.2d 968
(Wash. 1988). This case did not
involve mandatory parent involvement, however it did involve a school-parent
compact. The School District required
students and their parents to sign a release of all potential future claims and
suits as a condition to student participation in certain school-related
activities such as interscholastic athletics.
The Court ruled this compact was against public policy because it was
the intentional waiving of a suit to recover damages for subsequent negligent
supervision. The district policy forced
the parents to sign a compact that violated public policy. Currently, there is no public policy or law
mandating parental involvement.
Consider
the O’Brien test from U.S. v. O’Brien (1968). Parents could argue state law does not authorize mandatory
parental involvement. This policy would
stretch the law, and violate parental rights and liberties. Parents could challenge if it indeed does
advance an important government interest.
Research done on parental involvement is based on willing parents to
help their child. There is inconclusive
research on the effects of student learning when parents are forced to be
involved. Similar to the National Draft
of citizens in the military, drafted parents may not achieve the states
intended purpose of maintaining a democratic political system.
On
the other hand, in the Supreme Court case of 1925, Pierce v. Society of
Sisters, the Court acknowledged the role parents have in empowering our
young citizens to learn. However, it is
the government that requires parents to make sure their children all get an
education, whether the parents want it or not.
When education is inadequate, then the nation, the state, the school
must assert in the case for our children and provide opportunities for those
children to learn. Mandating parent involvement is one of those
opportunities. It also emphasizes the
need to involve society in the education system. To improve our society, we need to bring about quality education
for all. Mandating parents to be
involved in their school will impact society because it will change the
cultural script we have for education.
We
have considered that parents or guardians may find it difficult to be involved
in the school due to work obligation.
This is a public concern. The
public will need to work together to encourage and make it profitable for the
work place to release parents with pay to volunteer at their schools. This will take many hours of lobbying for
appropriate funds. Under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), an employer must
accommodate the religious beliefs of an employee or an applicant unless it
imposes an “undue hardship” on the conduct of the employer’s business.
Many employers use paid-time off plans (or PTO plans) to accommodate employees’
religious observances. This policy may call for an amendment to this act
to include volunteering at a child’s school.
Another resolution is to allow parents to supplement their civil
obligation of serving on a jury with volunteering at their child’s school.
The schools, as instruments of the state, are responsible for educating the youth for citizenship and maintaining the democratic political system. Because studies have shown that students do better when parents are involved in schools, then a well-educated populace will most likely bring about a strong economy, global security and democracy. This is the ultimate goal of public education.
Public Policy Regarding
Parent Involvement
“The evidence is now beyond
dispute.
When parents are involved in their
children’s education…
children do better in school.”
-Henderson & Berla
On the
national level, the recent No Child Left Behind Act includes sections that
outline parent participation. The
Secretary of Education along with the Department of Education have developed
pamphlets and guides that support schools in establishing productive parent involvement
programs. The recent national elections
and debates saw both candidates repeatedly refer to the importance of active
parent participation.
On the state
level, California has added sections to its Education Code that discuss the
role of parent involvement in schools.
Two parent conferences per year are now mandated by the state. Parent contracts and compacts are the norm
in most schools. Some states, like
Arkansas, are now requiring that each school must establish a parental
involvement program. Furthermore, the
state has outlined standards for these programs.
On the local
level, districts are following in the footsteps of the state and nation. The L.A.U.S.D. has implemented policies that
describe the levels of parent involvement.
Districts encourage parent associations at the school site. Parents are no longer viewed as outsiders,
but as integral players in the educational process. Learn School Communities have been established and have maximized
the role of parents in all areas of the school, including school governance.
One of the
most complete and extensive surveys of research on parental involvement in
schools is a series of publications conducted by Anne Henderson and Nancy
Berla: The Evidence Grows (1981); The Evidence Continues to Grow (1987);
and A New Generation of Evidence: The
Family is Critical to Student Achievement (1995). With more than 85 studies in the research project, these
publications detail and support the conclusion that parental involvement in the
educational process has profound benefits for student achievement, school wide
success, and the community in general.
Some of the findings include:
·
When parents are involved, students achieve more,
regardless of socio-economic status, ethnic-racial background, or the parent’s
educational level
·
The more extensive the parent involvement, the higher the
student achievement
·
Students whose parents are involved have higher graduation
rates and greater enrollment rates in post-secondary institutions
·
Different types of parent involvement produce different
gains. To have long lasting gains for
students, parent involvement activities must be well planned, inclusive, and
comprehensive
·
Educators hold higher expectations of students whose
parents collaborate with the teacher
·
Student behaviors, such as alcohol use, violence, and
antisocial behavior decrease as parent involvement increases
·
The benefits involving parents are not confined to the
early years; there are significant gains at all ages and grade levels
·
The most accurate predictor of a student’s achievement in school
is not income or social status, but the extent to which that student’s family
is able to (1) create a home environment that encourages learning; (2)
communicates high, yet reasonable, expectations for their children’s
achievement and future careers; and (3) become involved in their children’s
education at school and in the community
·
Children from diverse cultural backgrounds tend to do
better when parents and professionals collaborate to bridge the gap between the
culture at home and the learning institution
Understanding
the fundamental connection between student achievement and active parent
involvement in the educational process, there has been numerous laws, codes,
and policies established by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),
Department of Education, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
Head Start Program, National Parent-Teacher Association, and a multitude of
other organizations. The national
standards for parent/family involvement programs are similar to most other
educational organizations and are as followed:
1) Communicating-
communication between home and school is regular, two-way, and meaningful
2) Parenting-
parenting skills are promoted and supported
3) Student
Learning- parents play an integral role in assisting student learning
4) Volunteering-
parents are welcome in the school, and their support and assistance are sought
5) School
Decision Making and Advocacy- parents are full partners in the decisions that
affect children and families
6) Collaborating
with Community- community resources are used to strengthen schools, families,
and student learning
In addition, the ESEA provides
a specific statutory definition. The
statute defines parental involvement as the participation of parents in
regular, two-way, and meaningful communication involving student academic
learning and other school activities, including ensuring—
·
That parents play an integral role in assisting their
child’s learning;
·
That parents are encouraged to be actively involved in
their child’s education at school;
·
That parents are full partners in their child’s education
and are included, as appropriate, in decision-making and on advisory committees
to assist in the education of their child; and
·
That other activities are carried out, such as those
described in section 1118 of the ESEA (Parental Involvement). [Section 9101(32), ESEA.]
Public policy on parent
involvement is a clear issue; it is necessary and fundamental in the
educational process. Parents are
mandated to participate in their child’s education. There is an array of options how parents may become
involved. It is left up to the school
and district to determine how the involvement will take place.
“It takes a
village to educate a child.”
- wise
African saying
An Analysis of the Impact on the School
and all its Audiences
Research
and general consensus regarding parental involvement in schools is clear and
compelling. Active participation of
parents in school leads to increased student achievement and school wide
success. Communities benefit from
active parent involvement, particularly those of low socio-economic
status. The question is no longer if
parents should be participating, but how they should participate?
Studies
have shown, when parents are involved in their children’s education at home
they do better in school. When they are involved at school, their children go
farther in school and the schools they go to are enhanced. Requiring parents to be involved at their
children’s school is an important step in building a community of learners and
improving our schools. This resolution
to school improvement will also impact the classroom teacher in urban schools
were parents are less likely to volunteer.
According
to Patricial Albjerb Graham, research professor of the history of education and
former dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, states working
conditions in city schools serving low-income children are likely to be rigid
and unpleasant. In our opinion, this
does not foster enthusiasm among teachers nor fosters academic learning. Mandating parents to be involved in their
schools in many capacities such as keeping the yard clean, maintaining a
community garden, planning after school activities or helping teachers with
organization needs may foster a pleasant working environment reducing the work
stress for teachers. According to Joyce
Kaser, Senior Program Associate with WestEd,
“Shared visions enable people to be bound by a common aspiration. There
is reason to believe that shared visions evolve in part because of a strong
underlying need for people to be connected in achieving some common goal.” Another public consideration is that of
parents and teachers working together, especially in urban schools to improve
the academic achievement and reduce the gap between educational opportunities
of the rich and the poor. We see this
as an opportunity to support our teachers in the classroom.
Sec.
6311 of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 states that each state shall
support the collection and dissemination to local educational agencies and
schools of effective parental involvement.
We would encourage our state’s parents to join our school’s committee
and help develop an effective model for parental involvement. We would also share with our parents that
parent involvement under No Child Left Behind always has been the centerpiece
of Title I.
Shaver
and Walls conducted an experimental study in the Journal of Research and
Development in Education. The
authors surveyed parental involvement on the reading and math achievement of
335 Title I students in second through eighth grades, and their parents. The students who participated in the study
all were receiving remedial help in reading and math. Information about their achievement levels was based on pre- and
post-tests on the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS/4) in reading and
math. The district developed a series
of three-hour parent workshops that involved information, training, and discussions. Each Title I teacher was required to attend
at least four of these sessions during the school year to promote five types of
involvement - 1) parenting; 2) parent-teacher communication; 3) parental
involvement at school; 4) parental involvement at home; and 5) program
decision-making. The researchers found
that students whose parents regularly attended school-based parent workshops
made greater gains in reading and math than students with less-involved
parents.
Moreover,
Mattingley, Prislin, McKenzie, and Rodriguez in The Case of Parental
Involvement Programs, analyzed 41 studies that evaluated K-12 parental
involvement programs in order to assess claims that such programs are an
effective means of improving student learning.
The authors found that the majority of existing evidence regarding the
links between parental involvement and student achievement comes from
correlation studies rather than rigorous, systematic evaluations of the impact
programs have on student learning (p.550).
Of the 41 studies, the authors found only four them used the most
rigorous research design. Two of these
studies found significantly improved performance on standardized achievement
tests among children whose parents participated in the intervention program;
two found no significant effects. All
four of the studies addressed minority and/or low-income populations. Each focused on training parents or older
siblings to help tutor students or to help with homework. The two programs also extended the duration
of parent training over a longer period than the two showing no significant
effect. The authors also noted that the
majority of intervention programs they reviewed focused on changing parent
behavior – especially in the areas of parenting and supporting home learning –
rather than on changing teacher practices or school structures.
Parents
become empowered by developing confidence in helping their children at home and
many of them further their own education.
Teacher morale improves because they work with families and expect more
from them. Also they feel a stronger
connection to and support from the community.
Schools get better because when parents are involved at home and at
school, they are full partners and the performance of all children in the
school tends to improve. Finally, the
communities grow stronger because families feel more invested in the school
system and the school system becomes more responsive to parent and community
needs.
Individuals,
parents, educational officials, and the state are at a point where one cannot
help but realize that we are at the crossroads of making a positive educational
impact. We can continue down the same
narrow alley we have been traveling or we can make sure that schools, parents,
and children are all committed to the educational success of our Republic.
By
approving a policy of mandatory parent involvement, we are saying that we want
to invest in our children’s future and we want to make a difference in the
youth of our democracy.
Bibliography
The
ABC’s of Parent Involvement in Education: Preparing Your Child for a
Lifetime of Success.
(1999) Parenting Coalition International, Inc.
Washington, D.C.
Berla,
N., Garlington, J., & Henderson, A.T., (1993) Taking Stock:
The Inventory of Family,
Community and School Support for Student Achievement. Washington, D.C.: National Committee for
Citizens in Education.
Bitsko, S., Phipps, D.,
Roehrs, & A., Barnheiser, (1996) Developmental
Disabilities
Council.
Parent Involvement: Strategies for Success, Marge. Ohio
California - AB 33 (SOTO):
Parent/Teacher Involvement Programs Chapter 99-734:
Effective
January 1, 2000
California Education Codes
51120-51124
California Education
Codes 11500-11506
California State Board
of Education. Parent Involvement in
the Education
of
Their Children. September 1994. www.cde.ca.gov/be/ms/po/policy89-01-sept1994.asp
Calkins,
L., (1997) Raising Lifelong Learners: A Parent’s Guide.
Reading, MA: Perseus Books,
Comer, J.P., (2000)
Building Successful Partnerships: A Guide for Developing Parent and
Family
Involvement
Programs. Bloomington, IN:
National Education Service.
Cooperman, S., (1996) How
Schools Really Work: Practical Advice for Parents from an Insider.
Peru,
IL: Catfeet Press.
Faber, A., Mazlish, E.,
(1996) How to Talk so Kids Can Learn: At Home and in School.
New
York,
NY: Simon & Schuster.
Helping Every Student
Succeed: Schools and Communities Working Together. (2002)
Study
Circles Resource Center. Topsfield Foundation, Inc.
Henderson, A.T., &
Berla, N. (1997). A New Generation of Evidence: The Family is Critical
to
Student
Achievement. Washington,
D.C.: Center for Law and Education.
Henderson, A.T., &
Berla, N. (1987). The Evidence Continues to Grow, Washington,
D.C.:
Center
for Law and Education.
Henderson,
A.T., & Berla, N. (1981). The Evidence Grows, Washington,
D.C.: Center for Law and Education.
Henderson, A.T., & Mapp,
K.L., (2002). A New Wave of Evidence: The Impact of School,
Family,
and Community Connections on Student Achievement. National Center for Family & Community
Connections with Schools, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Henderson,
A.,T., (2002) No Child Left Behind: What’s in it for Parents.
Parent Leadership
Associates.
LaMorte, Michael W.
(2005) School Law: Cases and Concepts, 8th Edition, Boston,
MA: Allyn and
Bacon
Inc.
Manning,
C. & McMillen, (1999) Stress: Living and Working in a Changing World. Duluth, MN.
Whole Person Associates, Inc.,
Mattingley, D.J,
Prislin, R., McKenzie, T.L., Rodriquez, J.L., and Kayzar, B. (2002) Evaluating
Evaluations: The Case Of Parental involvement Programs. Review
of Educational Research.
Moles,
O.C., (1996) Reaching All Families: Creating Family-Friendly
Schools. Washington,
D.C.: Office of Educational Research and
Improvement.
No Child Left Behind Act
of 2001 – P.L. 107-110 (HR1), 20 U.S.C. 6301
Sec. 6318 [1119]. Parental Involvement
No
Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide. “(2003) U.S. Department of Education. Washington,
D.C.: Education Publications Center, (This
report is also available on the Dept. of Education‘s website at: www.nclb.gov/next/)
Rationale:
Why Parent Involvement? (1990)
Developed by the West Virginia Association of
School Administrators and Appalachia Educational
Laboratory. Charleston, WV: U.S. Dept. of Education,
Shaver, A.V., and Walls,
R.T. (1998) Effect Of Title I Parental involvement On Student Reading
And Mathematics Achievement. Journal of Research and Development in Education.
Strong
Families, Strong Schools: Building Community Partnerships for
Learning. A Research
Base for Family Involvement in Learning From the U.S.
Department of Education.(1994) Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.