lecture notes parents involvement in learner educaation.pdf

1

Chapter One: Introduction

The district under study was a large urban school district. It was located in a state

with 73 school districts serving nearly four-million students and was one of the largest

districts in the state. There were 1,194 Title I eligible schools in the state and 62 Title I

elementary schools in the district under study. The district under study served a diverse

population of students from 209 countries speaking 168 different languages and dialects

(citation withheld to maintain anonymity).

The district under study provided parent and family engagement (PFE) support to

maintain anonymity).

Title I elementary schools in the district under study received PFE support by

employing Parent Engagement Liaisons (PEL). Each Title I elementary school was

allotted funding for this position. District personnel described the PEL’s duties in part as:

To perform school-based duties associated with program coordination of parent

engagement activities. Duties will be associated with conducting home visits,

delivering parent workshops, gathering and presenting detailed data pertaining to

parent engagement activities, attending and communicating with parent/school

leadership councils, establishing communication with all parents, and creating

2

engagement opportunities for all parents. (citation withheld to maintain

anonymity)

In the five Title I schools within my study, student racial demographics were

majority-minority. According to Pollard (1999), minority racial and ethnic groups usually

refer to African Americans, American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Asians and Pacific

Islanders, and Hispanics. In the 2021-2022 school year, each of the five participating

schools within the study had a student population of 89% to 95% of a combination of the

four minority groups identified above. The schools’ student enrollment ranged from

School district personnel allotted each elementary school a Parent Engagement Liaison

(PEL) to support the facilitation of these efforts (citation withheld to maintain

anonymity). Each Title I school must facilitate a variety of activities to engage parents

and families. The purpose of my program evaluation was to measure the perceived

impact of the PFE program to inform improvement cycles. According to Patton (2002),

“Program evaluation is the systematic collection of information about the activities,

characteristics, and outcomes of programs to make judgments about the program,

improve program effectiveness, or inform decisions about future programming” (p. 10).

3

In conversation with school principals, I became aware of the differences in

program implementation at various elementary schools. Some principals placed priority

on activities that engaged parents in student academic and behavioral information.

Activities such as parent conferences, workshops, and academic nights occured regularly

for that purpose. Other principals engaged their families more in showcasing student

talents in the arts and sports. It occurred to me that some principals were experiencing

different results with student assessment data and parent participation at events. I

considered that this might be in part because of the way they engaged parents and

reading achievement of fourth-grade students in Title I elementary schools in the district

under study. Additionally, I wanted to learn how the district’s program was implemented

at various schools, what types of PFE were most effective, and what other areas were

affected by PFE. Answering these questions helped me to measure the impact of the PFE

department’s program and recommend improvements by creating a plan for change in the

district under study.

I used a mixed-methods research design using both qualitative and quantitative

data collection. Evaluations using this combination of methods are common (Patton,

2002). To collect qualitative data, I conducted interviews with administrators, teachers,

4

and PELs and collected quantitative data through extant data from the State Standards

Assessment (SSA). The interviews allowed me to collect information directly from

stakeholders. According to Patton (2002), qualitative methods such as interviews “yield

direct quotations from people about their experiences, opinions, feelings, and knowledge”

(p. 4). Additionally, Patton (2008) asserts that to be responsive to evaluation questions

and the characteristics of stakeholder needs, evaluators need to know and use a variety of

methods.

Rationale

engagement programs on the academic achievement of students at Title I elementary

schools in the district under study to determine which programs stakeholders thought had

the most impact on student achievement. In the state under study, student achievement is

content mastery on the statewide standardized assessment (citation withheld to maintain

anonymity). Additionally, I wanted to evaluate the implementation of the PFE program

across various schools in the district under study.

A critical issue for this program evaluation was the inconsistencies in the

implementation of the district’s PFE program. Title I elementary schools were

experiencing different levels of academic success. In addition, PELs performed different

5

duties and abided by different expectations depending on their administrator. The

district’s PFE department aimed to focus these efforts through guidance and support.

“For schools and districts across the U.S., family engagement is rapidly shifting

(Mapp et al., 2013, p. 5). According to Mapp et al. (2013), there are over 50 years of

research on the topic of parent and family engagement and its impact on overall student

achievement. This topic is important to educators and all educational stakeholders

because it directly applies to student outcomes.

directly related to improved student learning. There is research that shows impact of

effective PFE on student achievement. Students achieve more when parents participate in

their education (Hughes & Kwok, 2007).

Research Questions

To determine the effects of parent and family engagement on student achievement

in the district under study, I formulated a primary research question and two sub-

questions to guide my study. My primary research question was: How is the school

district’s parent and family engagement program being implemented at selected Title I

schools?

6

My sub-questions were:

Conclusion

I completed this program evaluation by collecting qualitative data and reviewing

extant data and relevant research on the topic. I aimed to determine the implementation of

the district’s parent and family engagement program at Title I elementary schools. I used

my findings to make recommendations for program improvement.

7

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature

Parent and family engagement in public school settings remains a relevant topic in

the analysis of student achievement. While some researchers focus on the types of parent

and family engagement, others explore the need for such involvement in schools with

significant minority and immigrant student enrollment. Of high importance is the need

for such engagement in historically underserved student populations where there are

often barriers between the home and school (Horsford & Holmes-Sutton, 2012). Children

in Title I-funded schools and who lack family support at home are often the subject of

parent and family engagement in schools.

When searching the literature, I used scholarly database searches using key words

and phrases such as: parent and family engagement and Title I funding. In addition to

database searches, I used printed text by leading parent and family engagement

researcher Dr. Karen Mapp and others. The researched literature spanned from 1999 to

2023.

8

Title I Funding

Title I is part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) and

provides financial assistance to schools with high numbers of low-income students

(ESSA Legislation, Title I of 1965, Pub. L. 89-10 § H.R. 2362, 1965). This civil rights

law provided funding, including grants to districts servicing low-income students and

scholarships for low-income students. The law also made provisions on a federal level for

text- and library books. The federal government granted state educational agencies funds

to improve the quality of education in elementary and middle schools. Title I funds layer

achievement of the economically disadvantaged, and Part C focuses on the education of

migratory children. The specific indicators for schools to receive funds are determined on

a federal level and are applied consistently across all states. Title I, Part A funds can only

be received by local educational agencies (LEA) if their services receive state and local

funds (citation withheld to maintain anonymity). According to the department of

education of the state under study, a school is considered eligible to receive Title I

funding if the percentage of children from low-income families is at least as high as the

percentage of children from low-income families in the LEA as a whole or if it has a 35

percent poverty rate.” (citation withheld to maintain anonymity).

9

According to Gordon and Reber (2023), the amount of funds per formula child

received by districts varies widely based on the four Title I grant formulas. The term

formula child refers to a child living in a household with income below the poverty line.

This also includes children whose families participate in Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families (TANF), children living in state-operated institutions, foster children,

and those who are in schools under the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The four Title I grant

for each district is the number of formula children divided by the number of 5- to 17-

percentage of formula children. About half of school districts are eligible for this

grant. Eligibility for this grant requires more than 6,500 or 15% formula children.

number and percentage of formula children. This grant allows for more funding

per formula child when districts have a large number or higher percentage of

formula children. Eligibility for this grant requires a minimum of 10 formula

children and at least 5% formula children within the district.

16

Many researchers have identified barriers to effective parent and family

engagement. Hornby and Blackwell (2018) identified four types of barriers. Parent and

family factors such as their own negative experiences with school and personal barriers

have affected parents’ ability to engage with the school. Parent-teacher factors such as

time, reluctance to collaborate, and miscommunication between students and parents are

barriers to parent and family engagement. Societal factors such as work schedules and

mental health issues are also barriers. Hornby and Blackwell (2018) cited school

operating hours and lack of confidence in interacting with school staff as practical

class. They also reported parents’ beliefs about their role in their child’s education can

serve as a barrier, or motivator, to their involvement.

Horsford and Holmes-Sutton (2012) found that a barrier to effective parent and

family engagement is the perceptions of some educators. They reported that the

perception is historically underserved populations such as Black, Latino, immigrant, and

low-income families do not value education. Additionally, these groups often lack trust in

public institutions. This causes a barrier to the home-school connection necessary for

parent and family engagement. In their study of Latino family engagement, McWayne

17

and Melzi (2014) found some barriers to school participation, such as monetary resources

and educational attainment for low-income families.

In addition to the barriers reported above, Mapp and Kuttner (2013) reported that

a “lack of sustained, accessible, and effective opportunities to build capacity among local

education agency (LEA) staff and families” is a barrier to effective parent and family

engagement. In their publication of the Dual Capacity-Building Framework for Family-

School Partnerships, Mapp and Kuttner argue that developing adult capacity is vital to

ensuring sustainable parent-school partnerships.

Although the purpose of some of the literature varied, the overarching themes were the

same or similar. Most of the literature on the topic echoed a version of the idea that

“powerful partnerships are the foundation of successful family engagement in your

classroom and your school” (Mapp et al., 2017, p. 37).

Through my study, I sought to determine the effects of parent and family

engagement on student achievement in Title I elementary schools. I wanted to know the

implementation of the district’s parent and family engagement program at various

elementary schools. I conducted interviews with principals, teachers, and Parent

18

Engagement Liaisons. I used the literature to help guide the development of my interview

questions and develop strategies from my findings.

19

There is a need to build the capacity of parents and families to improve their own

“capacities, skills, and human capital…leading to better outcomes for children” (Sabol et

al., 2018, p.3). The context of this inquiry is a large urban American public school district

representing over 150 countries and languages. Parent Engagement Liaisons (PEL) are

placed in Title I elementary schools to support the coordination of the district-directed

Parent and Family Engagement (PFE) program. The goal of my evaluation was to study

how implementing specific parent and family engagement activities at Title I schools

I implemented a mixed-methods design by collecting data from student testing

20

According to Patton (2008), the combination of qualitative and quantitative data

implemented at selected Title I schools?

student achievement data?

21

Participants

There were three stakeholder groups from the district under study in this program

evaluation: Parent Engagement Liaisons (PEL) who service and support Title I

elementary schools, school administrators of Title I elementary schools where there is a

PEL, and teachers who teach fourth grade at a Title I elementary school where there is a

PEL. There were 12 participants from five schools who engaged in interviews to

determine what, if any, effect their implementation of parent and family engagement

activities has had on the academic achievement of their fourth-grade students on the 2022

the academic achievement of their fourth-grade students. Participation in this study was

voluntary and did not have an impact on participants’ employment.

Data Gathering Techniques

Quantitative Data

I analyzed fourth-grade student reading achievement data from the fourth-grade

State Standards Assessment (SSA) in 2021 and 2022. I collected the data from the

Department of Education of the state under study to determine if there were any

improvements or declines as a result of effective parent and family engagement. These

data are public records, and I accessed them through the DOE website.

22

Qualitative Data

I conducted 30-minute interviews with Parent Engagement Liaisons (PEL),

administrators, and teachers. They answered seven open-ended questions about parent

and family engagement during a face-to-face or virtual semi-structured interview. I

conducted one face-to-face interview in a private office with the door closed, and 11

virtual interviews in a private room with the door closed.

Data Analysis Techniques

To analyze the data, I looked for common themes across question types by

students’ academic performance. I used these data points when reviewing the State

Standards Assessment (SSA) results to determine the progress, if any, on the 2022 4th-

grade English Language Arts assessment compared to the previous year’s 4th-grade

According to Patton (2008), mixed-methods evaluation using qualitative and

quantitative methods can contribute in meaningful ways to understanding a program.

Patton also asserts that one type of data in a mixed-method evaluation is often valued

over the other (p.435). In my program evaluation, the qualitative data from stakeholder

23

interviews was the focus as that is how my questions about implementation will be

answered.

Ethical Considerations

There were no anticipated risks to participants in this program evaluation beyond

that of everyday life. Participants taking part in this study may benefit by having a better

understanding of which parent and family engagement events are the most effective

towards increasing student academic success.

I received approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) and applied for

did not receive consent, I ended communication.

Limitations

A limitation of this study was the small sample size. The district under study

received principal approval from six Title I elementary schools to participate in my study.

I requested interviews from an administrator, a Parent Engagement Liaison (PEL), and

two fourth-grade teachers from each school. Ultimately, I interviewed participants from

five schools, including five administrators, five teachers, and two PELs.

24

Conclusion

I completed this program evaluation by conducting interviews with

administrators, teachers, and Parent Engagement Liaisons (PEL) and reviewing extant

data. I analyzed the qualitative data to determine the stakeholders’ perceptions on the

impact of parent and family engagement (PFE) on student achievement and to determine

the implementation of the district’s PFE program at schools. I reported the findings of my

study in Chapter 4.

25

The results of my research provided an overall picture of the perceptions of three

stakeholder groups on the effects of parent and family engagement (PFE) on student

achievement in Title I elementary schools. This study included five Title I elementary

Engagement Liaison interviews on school-wide achievement in all areas, while I focused

teacher interviews on the achievement of fourth-grade students in English Language Arts.

Administrators in this study were the principal or an assistant principal at the respective

formulated these semi-structured questions to determine the administrators’ level of

experience, their definition of PFE, the number of events they hosted per year and how

they determined the types of events, the responsibilities of their Parent Engagement

Liaisons (PEL), expectations for their teachers regarding parent and family engagement,

the effects of PFE on student academic performance, and which programs/activities were

most impactful on student achievement.

The participants represented a range of school administration experiences. The

five administrators had between five and twenty-two years of experience at various

levels, including elementary and middle school. Three of the five (60%) of the