Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Importance and implications of the parent school partnership Tunde Kovacs-Cerović 1 Parental involvement in the life of school matters Becici, 2010.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Importance and implications of the parent school partnership Tunde Kovacs-Cerović 1 Parental involvement in the life of school matters Becici, 2010."— Presentation transcript:

1 Importance and implications of the parent school partnership Tunde Kovacs-Cerović 1 Parental involvement in the life of school matters Becici, 2010

2 Content of presentation Preliminary remarks Role of parents: from micro to macro picture The Study Some results Conclusions and implications 2

3 Preliminary remarks What is education about? OECD, Social outcomes of learning, 2007 Parents interest – societys interest Parent - school synergy Personal benefits Social benefits FinancialIncome Wealth Productivity +Tax revenues -Social transfers - Healthcare costs Non-financialHealth Satisfaction Well-being Social cohesion Trust Functional democracy Political stability 3

4 Preliminary remarks Two-way asymmetrical relationship In number In influence on child Source of funding In education level In organizational structure In power 4

5 Preliminary remarks Fundamental mistake of attribution consequences of own behavior –Good: competencies, intention –Bad: chance consequences of others behavior –Good: chance –Bad: intention, lack of competencies Parents? Teachers? 5

6 Teachers and parents perceptions: Gray area between cooperation and conflict Parents Teachers 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 childrens needs (Lawson, 2003) 6

7 Gray area/cont. Creating synergy between parents and societys interest in education essential, but not easy Gray area from policy perspective: Variety of levels of parent participation Variety of models Variety of interests & lobbying, possible power-games Trend or basic accountability mechanism? Can research help? 7

8 Gray area/cont. Gray area from research perspective: –Conceptual inconsistencies: Variety of dimensions Interaction and mutual influence Mediating variables –Methodological inconsistencies: Sensitivity to contextual factors Variety of methodologies What can research tell to policy- maker? 8

9 Combine policy and research perspective Overview of levels & dimensions of participation Models of participation 9

10 EVROPA i MI 10

11 PreparationHomework MotivationSupport biology Communication with teacher - meetings 11

12 Parents need of information on time spent in school Place of intimate social experience: –Learning –Deep understanding –Creativity –Respect –Values Development and learning outcomes depend on the quality of IA between parent and teacher 12

13 Communication with school, directly or through parent representatives – source of school effectiveness and accountability School- community actions Volunteering Getting information Decision making 13 Social construction

14 EquityEquity Quality Efficiency Education policy development Parents role in systems accountability – communication with policymakers? 14 policy

15 ? 15

16 Model of family-school partnership (Sheridan and Kratochwill) Partnership orientationTraditional orientation Clear commitment to work together in order to promote childs performance/achievement Emphasizing the school role in promoting learning Frequent communication that is bidirectional Communication initiated just by the school, infrequent and problem-centred Appreciating the cultural differences and recognizing the importance of it contribution to creating the positive learning climate One size fits all – cultural difference is a challenge that needs to be overcome Appreciation of the significance of different perspectives Differences are seen as barriers Roles are clear, mutual, and supportiveSeparate roles distance participants Goals for students are mutually determined and shared Goals determined by school, sometimes shared with parents Plans are co-constructed, with agreed upon roles for all participants Educational plans devised and delivered by teachers 16

17 Partnership process ( Hoover-Dempsey) ion InitiateAccept Act upon See benefit Construct partnership Enhance compete nce 17

18 From both policy and research perspective: All 3 levels important Several distinct dimensions relevant Partnership orientation and partnership process exciting 18

19 EVROPA i MI 19

20 The study 10 countries Albania B&H Bulgaria Croatia Kosovo Macedonia Montnegro Moldova Romania Serbia Two perspectives Principals perspectiveParents perspective Two methodologi es Qualitative – focus groupsQuantitative - survey Four angles Mainstream parents Excluded groups parents Parent representati ves - MSP Parent representati ves - EGP 20

21 Sample Mainstre am Exclud ed Parent repr Excl parent rep Total Principals Principals of all schools where from the sample was drawn Schools 311 Parents of children 7-15 urban rural total

22 Parents Questionnaire Based on: 1.Literature review: 1.Epstiens (1987) six dimensions of parental involvement 2.Green, Walker, Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler (2007) model of the parental involvement process. 2.Results of focus group discussions in the 10 SEE countries 3.Results of 2008 cross national study of school principals Consisting of 3 parts: 1.Q for mainstream parents (used for all samples) 2.Q for excluded parents (additional part) 3.Q for parent representatives (additional part) 22

23 Questionnaire Background variables Child characteristics (age, gender, achievement etc) Family context (wealth, employment, etc) Mother characteristics (education, aspirations) Dimensions of participation school meetings informat ion from school Supportin g learning at home volunte ering in school decis. making school- commun ity coop Mediating variables motivation for participation in school life perception of school openness percepti on of prs beliefs about school-parents partnership Outcome variables satisfaction re child well-being, progress in school satisfaction re communication with school satisfaction with influence 23

24 EVROPA i MI 24

25 Results On individual/parent level On school level On national/regional level Descriptive Regression analysis SEM 25

26 1. How does basic support for successful education look like in SEE? More households have a computer than a working table per child 26

27 Big mainstream – Roma differences 1. How does basic support for successful education look like in SEE? More than 60% have less than 50 books in household 27

28 1. How does basic support for successful education look like in SEE? Big mainstream – Roma differences Mostly secondary education of mother 28

29 1. How does basic support for successful education look like in SEE? Big mainstream – Roma differences Mostly tertiary education aspirations for child 29

30 2. How does education look like in SEE? About 25% report on difficulties 30

31 2. How does education look like in SEE? Big mainstream – Roma differences Low percentage of low achievers 31

32 2. How does education look like in SEE? Children love/like school 32

33 2. How does education look like in SEE? Achievement, liking school and difficulties of child correlates with: AchievementLiking schoolDifficulties Education aspirations of family Wealth index Number of books in household Education level of mother

34 3. How does parent-school cooperation happen? Schools do not invite parents (%) never To meetings - class individual To volunteer - infrastructure extracurricular curricular additional (library, lunch)

35 3. How does parent-school cooperation happen? Schools do not invite parents/cont (%) never To give opinion on - financial management extreacurricular activities organization of school event health safety issues school management shifts, merger education issues violence In Roma sample never is around 90% 35

36 3. How does parent-school cooperation happen? Systematic difference between parents and principals perception 36

37 3. How does parent-school cooperation happen? Even if rarely invited, parents eagerly accept, see benefit of, feel capable for, and feel duty to participate 37

38 3. How does parent-school cooperation happen? Problem attributed more to parents than schools. Parents are not assessed as not interested, not have time or dont know how to communicate 38

39 3. How does parent-school cooperation happen? Problem attributed more to parents than schools. Parents are perceived as motivated and competent to participate 39

40 4. Outcomes of parent-school cooperation ? Parents are least satisfied with their possibility of influence 40

41 5. Connections? Correlations between individual level variables significant but low Significant differences between mainstream and Roma sample Significant differences between countries 41

42 EVROPA i MI 42

43 Conclusions Gray areas – what have we learnt? Trends are expected, but their pervasiveness is striking –Discrepancy between the mainstream and the excluded sample –Discrepancy between parents and principals perception –Lack of opportunities for cooperation and partnership –Opportunities even less present for those who need it most Several striking mismatches call for further detailed analysis 43

44 Mismatch 1 –Parents mostly accept every invitation –Feel competent to contribute –Feel duty to participate –Assess participation as beneficial for child Lack of invitation in all 6 dimensions (17 of the 18 items presented) Parents are least satisfied with the possibility of their influence School openness Parents eagerness Partnership? 44

45 Mismatch 2 Parents and principals agree that it is not true that parents: –…are not interested –…dont have time –…dont know how to communicate with school Problem more attributed to parents than to schools Attribution of problem Parents motivation & skills Source of problem? 45

46 Conclusions/cont. Individual parent level mediating variables do not predict outcomes strong enough - it seems that individual parental motivation, attitude, belief does not matter much Mediating variables at school level? Country level analysis? 46

47 Policy implications Micro level Meso level Macro leveli Lacking parent-school partnership endangers parenthood and leaves teachers isolated from deep understanding Without cooperation school gets constructed in unbalanced way Lack of parent involvement – lack of accountability 47

48 EVROPA i MI Thank you for your attention 48


Download ppt "Importance and implications of the parent school partnership Tunde Kovacs-Cerović 1 Parental involvement in the life of school matters Becici, 2010."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google