This segment addresses parental involvement in education - it is initially how it has new material. Further along there is data of how it was treated back them.

Why do I start another document?

I decided to take into account more recent literacy documents, and I’ve selected only newish research findings - provided in the years 2020 to 2025.

The idea was to get some sense of how parental in education involvement in education may have changed. The later document had older documents. This original material is still available in the later section of the document.

I decided to take into account more recent documents, and I’ve selected only new research provided in the years 2020 to 2025.

My idea was to get some sense in how the contact of parents in education may have changed since my older document which suggested there was minimal activity of parents in classroom activities.

So here starts some of the up-to-date information.

Parental involvement and education outcomes of their children (2024)

ABSTRACT

“This study investigates the impact of parental involvement on the education outcomes of their children, specifically focusing on the completion of high school. It extends the existing literature by considering the characteristics of both children and parents, and by examining non-school-related parental involvement in a child’s everyday life. The analysis utilizes a publicly available database, the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, with a sample of American respondents born between 1983 and 1984 who lived with both birth parents during their early teenage years. The study employs simple logistic regression and subclassification on propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects. The results indicate that higher parental involvement is associated with an increased probability of high school graduation, while stricter parental behaviour is found to decrease the expected likelihood of completing high school.

Introduction

Spending time together is essential for a family’s well-being, especially given the fast pace of the current era. Parents Advice Centre, Parenting NI, believes that parental involvement builds children’s self-esteem, strengthens family bonds, establishes children’s positive behaviour, encourages communication, and, most importantly for this study, it can also affect children’s academic performance.Footnote¹

Even though Feinstein (Citation1999) claim that parental involvement is more powerful than parental education, many studies (e.g. Campaña et al. (Citation2017), Dotti Sani and Treas (Citation2016), England and Srivastava (Citation2013), Kalil et al. (Citation2012), Guryan et al. (Citation2008), and Sayer et al. (Citation2004)) show that the level of parental education is correlated with the amount of time spent with children and argue that more educated parents spend more time with their children.

For example, Guryan et al. (Citation2008) found that mothers with a college education or higher spend more than 4 hours per week with their children than mothers with lower education. These results are surprising, as the opportunity cost of time is much higher for more educated parents (i.e. higher waged parents, according to the authors) than for less educated parents. They also examine whether the observed relationship between parental education and time spent with children in the US holds in 13 other countries (e.g. Norway, UK, Netherlands, Canada, Chile, South Africa, Palestine.

As stated by Zaff et al. (Citation2017), nearly one in five students do not complete high school on time, if ever. Completing high school subconsciously teaches students how to positively contribute to the economy as well as to civic life. Belfield and Levin (Citation2007) claim that high school graduation is a doorway to economic self-sufficiency and civic engagement. Without a high school diploma, people are more likely to earn a lower income and be arrested, which leads to higher costs for the US.

Discussion

The effect of parental education on children’s behaviour can be observed on innate (e.g. IQ) as well as on acquired characteristics. Guryan et al. (Citation2008) and Kalil et al. (Citation2012) suggest that more educated parents spend more time with their children than less educated parents. Moreover, the study by Neidell (Citation2000) finds that children with parents who spend more time with them have greater human capital in terms of cognitive and noncognitive outcomes. From this finding, it follows that children of more educated parents should have greater human capital as their parents spend more time with them. This advantage may thus result in different education outcomes. The innate and acquired characteristics are controlled by the matching approach, when one can observe the pure effect of parental involvement. Assuming that the vector of covariates explains the choice of parental involvement, the matching approach will help identify the treatment effect. According to the results of the matching method, non-school-related parental involvement affects the child’s education outcome. Nevertheless, the results might be limited since the sample is restricted to Americans born in 1983 and 1984.

Buchanan et al. (Citation1992) claim that the degree of monitoring has an impact on children’s academic achievement. The results support this claim. In general, the existing literature (see Section I) investigates the impact of parental involvement on children’s education outcomes in terms of school, i.e. having discussions about school, helping with homework, reading with children, and parental involvement at school, such as parents’ volunteering, workshop attendance, school plays, sport events, being involved in the PTA, etc. For example Affuso et al. (Citation2017) studied the effect of school-related parental monitoring on academic achievement of their children. They found that school-related parental monitoring indirectly positively affects children’s academic achievement.

To compare, the results from this study also indicate positive effect of parental monitoring on children’s academic achievement. Specifically, non-school-related parental monitoring (see Section II for the definition of the monitoring variable).

Variables might be caused not only by the limitations of the data. Namely, there is a chance that more problematic children have more limits. This ‘problematicity’ is hidden in the error term, but it might affect the probability of graduation from high school, and at the same time, it might affect the limit setting variable. It may be a source of endogeneity. Therefore, I suggest including the variables of children’s criminal behaviour for further research, if possible.

To summarize, the results build on existing evidence of the importance of parental monitoring of children. While previous research has focused on school-related parental involvement, the results of this study show that non-school-related parental involvement is as important as school-related one. Concerning limit setting, the existing literature focus only on media related limits, whereas this study focus also on different kinds of limits as more limits are associated with more limit breaking and lower education attainment. The findings suggest that parents should set the limits with caution. The more limits do not automatically result in better education level. These results should be considered when talking about parent-child relationship. As discussed in Section I, one should be aware of the difference between quality and quantity of parental involvement (Moroni et al. Citation2015) as well as of the difference between parent-child and parent-school involvement (McNeal Citation2014.”

Kantova, K. (2024). Parental involvement and education outcomes of their children. Applied Economics, 56(48), 5683–5698. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2024.2314569

_________________________________________________

Parental Involvement Barriers (2025)

Abstract

“Parental involvement and student self-regulation are widely recognized as critical factors influencing academic success. However, quantitative research examining the relationship between these two variables remains limited. This study investigated the association between parental involvement and students’ self-regulation skills, as well as barriers to parental engagement in education.

Introduction

Caregivers have a considerable impact on their children’s learning and development (Alvarez-Valdivia et al., 2013; Kong & Yasmin, 2022; Park & Kim, 2023). Most research has shown that parental involvement is associated with academic results, positive behaviors and social skills of children (Caridade et al., 2021; Lechuga-Peña & Brisson, 2018). Whilst the lack of parental involvement and poor self-regulation among students have been identified as important factors affecting high failure and dropout rates, mainly in schools located in the lowest socioeconomic strata (Geduld, 2024).

Students’ Self-Regulation in Primary Education

Students’ self-regulation can be defined as the ability of learners to regulate their attention, emotions, and behavior in order to respond optimally to external and internal demands of the environment. It is a complex and multifaceted construct that includes cognitive, emotional and behavioral aspects (Žerak et al., 2024). Students’ self-regulation is crucial for primary education, enabling students to take initiative, persevere, and adaptively regulate their learning processes (Oates, 2019).

The development of self-regulation in children has the benefit of strengthening responsibility, providing greater self-confidence, training discipline, understanding what actions are appropriate for each moment, and generating attitudes for resolving problems (González, 2020). Furthermore, autonomous and self-regulated learning capabilities are essential for students’ academic performance (Amani et al., 2020).

Parental Involvement in School

Parental involvement includes direct school participation, home-based academic support, and social engagement (Jeynes, 2010). Parental involvement also can take various forms, including behavioral, intellectual/cognitive, and personal dimensions (Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994; Solís & Aguilar, 2017). The behavioral dimension refers to the manifestation of involvement through their behavior when going to school and participating in its activities. The intellectual/cognitive dimension involves exposing the child to cognitive stimulation activities and materials. Whilst the personal dimension refers to the child’s affective experience that the caregiver cares about school and that he or she has interactions with him or her around school.

Moreover, parent involvement in school can be increased through efforts to improve parenting skills. A school readiness intervention focused on children’s self-regulation skills as well as parenting and parental involvement in school has positive effects on children’s self-regulation. Furthermore, the intervention can significantly reduce caregivers’ ineffective parenting prior to school entry and positively influence parental involvement (Pears et al., 2015).

Nevertheless, research has identified that the frequency of parental assistance with homework may negatively correlate with academic achievement. Specifically, assistance perceived as supportive has positive predictive effects, while assistance perceived as intrusive has negative effects (Moroni et al., 2015). Moreover, it is crucial to acknowledge that the positive relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic performance is contingent upon the quality of the parenting style (Amani et al., 2020).

Influence of Parenting on Students’ Self-Regulation

During the childhood process, caregivers play a very important role in helping the development of their children’s socio-emotional skills. These exert an influence on the development of autonomy and self-regulation, generating self-esteem and independence in them. All of this helps create an environment where children feel self-confident and develop socialization skills at school. By developing these skills, students are able to maintain established social relationships and have self-confidence (González, 2020).

The family plays a fundamental role in the cognitive and emotional development of children. The way in which they develop, express themselves and behave in early childhood depends on how caregivers do it and how children observe it within the family nucleus (Razeto, 2016). It is important to acknowledge that families have experienced numerous changes in recent decades, leading to caregivers having increasingly limited time and placing less priority on involvement in their children’s school activities (Razeto, 2016).

Self-regulation develops as caregivers regulate, through their guidance or modeling, the processes that the child is building. Self-regulation in childhood is necessary to adapt to the demands of the environment in which any infant interacts, since it allows them to have control of their emotional reactions and helps them begin to achieve personal goals, that is, it favors effective decision-making, decisions based on reflection and not on emotional impulse (Ortega & García, 2021; Whitebread & Basilio, 2012). Parent-child closeness, as well as the caregivers’ expression of close and affectionate emotions that are directly intended for their children, allow them to feel more emotionally secure and express themselves positively (Losada et al., 2020).

Conclusions

The results of this research underscore the critical role of parental involvement in their children's education, suggesting that it may significantly influence the development of self-regulation skills in children. Consequently, it is essential for schools and caregivers to collaborate in fostering and promoting parental engagement in educational activities, thereby contributing to the holistic development of children.

Self-regulation is a fundamental skill for academic success and the social-emotional development of children. Children with strong self-regulation skills can control their emotions and behaviors, adapt to various situations, and effectively face everyday challenges. Additionally, these children tend to achieve greater academic success due to their enhanced ability to focus on tasks and learn efficiently.

To further support parental involvement, educational institutions should design programs aimed at addressing barriers to engagement (Gedfie et al., 2021). Despite caregivers not reporting significant school-related barriers in this study, the literature suggests that fostering a welcoming and supportive school environment remains crucial. These programs should focus on improving the skills and attitudes of teachers and administrators in order to address non-school barriers and facilitate opportunities for caregivers to be involved. Future research should explore strategies to overcome time constraints related to parental work commitments, thereby facilitating increased parental involvement.

In summary, the findings highlight the need for concerted efforts by educational institutions and caregivers to enhance parental involvement in school, which in turn fosters better self-regulation and overall development in children. Schools can achieve this by providing opportunities for teacher professional development and innovative and technological alternatives to communicate with caregivers. This collaborative approach can empower students to become self-directed learners, preparing them for academic success and lifelong learning.”

Calderon-Villarreal, A., Garcia-Hernandez, A., Olvera-Gonzalez, R., & Elizondo-Garcia, J. (2025). Parental Involvement Barriers and Their Influence on Student Self-25). Education and Urban Society, 57(4), 327-346. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245251314489

Parental Involvement on Children's Educational Achievement (2024)

“Parental involvement is vital in developing individual empowerment and improving the community through education. The scoping review investigates the various kinds and intensities of parental involvement and how they affect children's learning results in various situations. It looks for trends, oversights, and inconsistencies in this collection of research, providing a comprehensive understanding of how various parental involvement strategies impact children's academic progress and language learning.

Parental involvement is crucial in enhancing literacy achievement among primary school children, serving as one of the key support mechanisms (Kasakula, 2022). In the initial learning setting, the family environment plays a significant role in children's development, especially as they begin to interact with individuals outside their family unit (Sudartinah, 2022). According to Rosnelli and Ristiana (2023), literacy involves the ability to understand, process, and utilize information for various purposes. It is integral to a student's life within the community, school, and home, contributing to the development of noble character and enabling individuals to navigate societal challenges effectively (Admin, 2020).

Various forms of parental involvement in education play a critical role in fostering academic achievement and language development. Academic  Support  and  Learning  Activities  entail  direct  academic  assistance, communication,  and  participation  in  learning  activities,  such  as  homework  support,  project  completion, educational discussions, and emotional and motivational encouragement (Çobanoğlu & Kumlu, 2020; Amin et al., 2021; Zhang et  al., 2020; Mpekethu et al., 2020; Bubić et al., 2020;  Kiliç, 2022; Hardiyanto et al., 2022).

Language and Skill Development includes engaging in English learning, reading literacy, and reading activities at home, which are essential for literacy and language acquisition (Sumanti & Muljani, 2021; Osabinyi & Ouko, 2023; Christophe, 2022; Kasakula, 2022). Parental Involvement at Home encompasses academic support, expectation setting, and active participation in the learning process, emphasizing the home environment's significance in educational outcomes (Leander & Fabella, 2020; Lindberg & Güven, 2021; Wang et al., 2022; Shukia & Marobo, 2023; Chai et al., 2022). Parental Involvement at School, including attending school meetings and assisting with academic tasks, highlights the importance of parental presence within educational institutions (Leander & Fabella, 2020; Chai et al., 2022). Decision-making involves parents in critical educational decisions, underscoring their role in shaping educational pathways and outcomes (Algani & Mammana, 2023).

The acknowledged benefits of parental involvement in education excluding the complexity of its impact on academic achievement across varied cultural, social, and educational contexts remain insufficiently understood.

Studies by authors like Çobanoğlu and Kumlu (2020), Algani and Mammana (2023), and Leander and Fabella (2020) stress the significance of parental engagement across different educational aspects. Yet, findings and methodologies among these studies vary, with research focusing on parental expectations and beliefs (Lindberg & Güven, 2021; Bubić et al., 2020), the role of socioeconomic status in parental engagement (Zhang et al., 2020; Shukia & Marobo, 2023), and the challenges faced by parents from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds (Mpekethu et al., 2020; Osabinyi & Ouko, 2023). These diverse findings indicate a complex relationship between academic success, socioeconomic factors, and the context of parental involvement.

Thus, this scoping review was prompted by the need for a thorough comprehension and integration of the body of research that has already been done on the subject. It looks at the many kinds and levels of parental involvement. It evaluates how it affects children's performance in various situations, particularly emphasizing children's language development. This review looks at how involvement from parents affects language development, which is important for academic performance and for children's ability to interact, comprehend, and communicate with their schoolwork and the outside world.  This review offers a comprehensive understanding of how various parental involvement approaches improve or decrease children's academic achievement, particularly their International Journal on Studies in Education (IJonSE) 557 acquisition and mastery of language abilities, by highlighting trends, gaps, and contradictions in the literature.

This added focus on language learning underscores the multifaceted nature of parental involvement and highlights

its potential to support children's linguistic development alongside other academic achievements.

Identifying the Research Questions

The pursuit of understanding and improving children's educational achievements has been a significant focus in educational research. Despite considerable efforts to engage children more effectively and boost their learning capacities, the desired results often remain elusive. This gap in outcomes has led to the formulation of a crucial research inquiry for this scoping review, serving as the cornerstone for the study: "What empirical insights can be drawn from the current body of literature about the impact of parental involvement on children's educational achievements?" This question seeks to unravel the complexities and nuances of parental involvement in education, aiming to provide a clearer understanding of its impact and potential strategies for enhancement. Table 1 shows details of the fundamental research questions developed in accordance with the research goals set within the Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework.”

Sivabalan, Yammuna & Seong Pek, Lim & Thinamalar, Na & Khusni, Hafizah & Mee Mee, Rita & Ismail, Md Rosli. (2024). Parental Involvement on Children's Educational Achievement: A Scoping Review. International Journal on Studies in Education. 6. 555-574. 10.46328/ijonse.242.

Parental Involvement during Pandemic Times: Challenges and Opportunities (2021)

“Abstract: COVID-19, many countries implemented emergency plans, such as lockdown and school closures. This new situation has significantly affected families, namely, the involvement required to support children’s learning at home. The current study aimed to analyze Portuguese parents’ perceptions of their home-based parental involvement in their children’s learning during the lockdown and school closures in 2020 due to COVID-19. An online survey, using a closed-ended questionnaire, was employed. Variables included parents’ sociodemographic and COVID-19 related characteristics; students’ sociodemographic characteristics; distance learning context; parental involvement; and students’ autonomy. Data were collected from a sample of 21,333 parents with children from elementary school to secondary education, and statistical data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26.

Findings revealed that Portuguese parents supported their children during the pandemic mainly through the monitoring of attention in classes and task realization. However, several variables appear to significantly determine parental involvement time, which is higher when students attend public schools, when they are less autonomous and younger, when parents’ level of education is lower, when the child is a boy (except in secondary education where gender is not relevant), and when the online school time is higher. Findings highlight the need for a significant investment of time from parents, particularly of primary school children, making it difficult to cohere work or telework with school activities. Implications for policies, schools, families are discussed in order to promote children’s learning and success.

Keywords: 

parental involvement; children’s learning; COVID-19; online learning

The purpose of this paper is to report Portuguese parents’ perceptions of their home-based parental involvement in their children’s learning and school life during the lockdown and school closures (March to July 2020). The results reported in this paper are part of a broader study where other objectives were also considered (e.g., understanding the perception of parents regarding teachers or the school mission and understanding the main tools that were being used in home-based learning).

Several barriers to distance and home-learning have been identified from parents’ perspectives [24,25,26,27], such as personal barriers, technical barriers, logistical barriers, and financial barriers. Personal barriers included low technical expertise to support their children in accessing online learning and the materials/tools used in this environment. Technical barriers were mainly related to the lack of adequate internet access or technology to follow learning activities properly.

Logistical barriers were related to the perception that online learning did not meet pupils’ individual needs/learning rhythm, and parents also found that it was not an effective substitute for face-to-face learning process. As for financial barriers, these are highly related to the logistical ones (not being able to afford better technological tools and internet access).

“Spinelli and colleagues [28] showed that more stressed parents were less involved in their children’s learning activities during the pandemic. Dong and colleagues [25] reported that the majority of parents felt the need to be present with their children during online learning activities at least once per day.

Even though hurdles did exist, parental involvement in children’s learning may also have increased during lockdown home learning [29]. The literature highlighted how parents of children of all ages, from primary to secondary pupils, felt closer to their children’s learning by acknowledging a more in-depth insight into their learning and that created opportunity to contribute more to their learning [30]. Additionally, most parents, mainly of younger pupils, found that the home-learning situation improved parent-teacher relationships, augmenting parents’ appreciation for teachers and this perception was shared by the teachers [30].”

Ribeiro, L. M., Cunha, R. S., Silva, M. C. A. e., Carvalho, M., & Vital, M. L. (2021). Parental Involvement during Pandemic Times: Challenges and Opportunities. Education Sciences, 11(6), 302. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060302

____________________________________________________

© 2025 British Educational Research Association

Parental expectations of children’s higher education participation in Australia (2025)

Abstract

“The role of parental expectations in determining children's higher education participation is important in understanding both participation and potential policy responses. Using a nationally representative longitudinal survey of Australian households, providing repeat observations on expectations for individual children, this study extends the literature in several respects. First, it examines the adaptation of parental expectations over a 4-year time frame. Second, it looks at how parental expectations for school children are associated with actual higher education outcomes in the future. Third, the longitudinal aspect of the dataset permits more robust analyses of factors that shape parental expectations.

The findings indicate that parental expectations of their children's attendance at university are generally stable across time. Perceptions of children's academic achievement at school are shown to be the key influence in shaping parents' expectations, and behavioural issues at school adversely affect expectations. Australian parents from non-English-speaking backgrounds were more likely to form positive expectations of university participation by their children, consistent with studies from other countries. A more nuanced picture of the formation of expectations for sole-parent mothers is also presented. Positive effects of parental education and children's enrolment in a private school on parents' expectations, over and above any effect on school achievement, highlight these socioeconomic factors as potential causal channels for the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic outcomes.

Key insights

What is the main issue that the paper addresses?

This paper examines the role of parental expectations in determining children's higher education participation. It uses longitudinal data from Australia to examine key determinants of parental expectations and the extent to which expectations change over time and affect eventual higher education participation.

What are the main insights that the paper provides?

The main insight is that Australian parents' expectations of their children's attendance at university are generally stable across time. The key influence on expectations is parental perceptions of children's academic achievement, moderated by factors with positive (e.g. non-English-speaking background) or negative (e.g. school behavioural issues) effects.

INTRODUCTION

Parental expectations are critical to higher education participation, given parents' close observation and knowledge of their children's abilities, as well as their home, school and communal environments. Consequently, parental views of their children's future educational achievement correlate strongly with eventual educational outcomes (Pinquart & Ebeling, 2020; Yamamoto & Holloway, 2010). In part, this is due to the way parental perceptions of these factors combine to determine both their attitudes and opinions—and actions—in relation to the educational trajectories of their children.

Parental expectation can be viewed separately from parental aspiration. Smyth (2020), drawing on Gottfredson's (1981) distinction between idealistic and realistic conceptions of occupational aspiration, and more recent work in higher education (see Khattab & Modood, 2018), observes that:

Educational aspirations can be seen as idealistic, that is, as reflecting what a young person (or their parent) would really like without taking account of potential barriers or constraints… In contrast, educational expectations can be seen as “realistic”, being grounded in what can reasonably be expected in a given context. (Smyth, 2020, p. 174)

Thus, the parental expectation of higher education participation by their children can be thought of as the extent to which factors affecting aspiration interact with perceptions of a child's academic ability and other factors to determine perceptions about the likelihood of entry. These expectations are important in both reflecting and shaping outcomes for children; they are also important variables for our understanding of the intergenerational transmission of advantage and disadvantage, and as a potential policy target in addressing inequality via strategies to ‘raise aspirations’ as a means to improve outcomes for disadvantaged groups (Archer et al., 2014; Gore et al., 2015; Khattab, 2015; Prodonovich et al., 2014).

DISCUSSION

Our results indicate that Australian parents are generally astute judges regarding the likelihood of their children attending university. Only 4–5% of children whose parents indicated they would not go to university ended up attending, while around 75% of those assessed as Yes, definitely going to university, did attend university by age 20. Given that many parents are willing to state their expectations with confidence (42.5% indicate either No or Yes, definitely), and those assessments are reasonably accurate for children from age 13 onwards, but also highly stable over a 4-year window, it appears that assessments for younger children are also likely to be reasonably strong predictors of actual outcomes, although perhaps not as strong as many would have expected.

The strongest factor shaping parents' expectations is their own assessment of how well the child is performing at school, consistent with findings based on the HILDA Wave 12 data only (Koshy et al., 2019) and a range of international studies. After controlling for other factors, we find the association between school achievement and parental expectations to be highly consistent across all sub-samples analysed: children from couple households; boys and girls sub-samples; and children from sole-parent families. A sizeable, negative effect of school reports of behavioural problems on parents' expectations is also observed across all sub-groups. To our knowledge this has not been previously tested in Australian studies.

Many well-known associations between student background and access to higher education are already apparent in parental expectations when children are at school, even after controlling for student achievement. These include the higher probability of university enrolment for girls, children without disability, in two-parent families, who attended private schools, live in the major cities and whose parents are migrants (particularly from a non-English-speaking background) and have higher levels of education. While each of these is consistent with parental expectations having a causal impact on university attendance, they may simply reflect parents' realistic understanding of how those factors affect higher education access in Australia.

We confirm the existence of a strong gender effect identified in previous Australian studies (Koshy et al., 2019; Yu & Daraganova, 2014) and the international literature (see e.g. Wiseman & Zhao, 2020). While boys' and girls' school achievements have similar effects on their parents' expectations relating to university, for a given level of achievement, expectations for boys are much more sensitive to other factors such as disability status, geographical remoteness and parental educational attainment.

This analysis follows previous studies in identifying barriers to university expectation and participation in regional areas. Koshy et al. (2019) suggest that higher expectations for girls in Australia may be due to a more limited range of VET pathways for girls outside of university relative to boys, coupled with a gendered societal expectation of higher education being more acceptable for young women (in the Australian context of VET and higher education decision-making, see e.g. Koshy et al., 2020). This may also account for the greater sensitivity of expectations for boys in response to some variables. Factors which mitigate against progression to university, such as costs associated with regionality or lower parental education, will have a greater impact on parents' expectations where they perceive alternative pathways to be available.

We find a number of correlates (e.g. income) with socioeconomic status to have limited or no effect after children's school performance is controlled for. However, substantial effects do remain for parental education and school sector, highlighting these as potential channels for intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic advantage in Australia. Parental expectations are most optimistic for children attending non-Catholic private schools, followed by Catholic schools and, lastly, government schools. This mirrors the ordering of those sectors in terms of the socioeconomic background of their student populations (Li & Dockery, 2015; OECD, 2012), so the effect is likely to be bi-causal, as indicated in the literature on school effects.

Parents who are migrants from non-English-speaking backgrounds were found to have markedly higher expectations for their children's education than would be expected given their other characteristics. It is also the case that a number of such ethnic groups in Australia, notably those born in Asia, have substantially higher university enrolment rates than the general Australian population (Lamb et al., 2015), consistent with studies across a range of countries finding a concordance between parental expectations and educational outcomes for such groups (Childs et al., 2017). A potential explanation for this phenomenon in the Australian context is that Australia's selective migration system attracts migrants who place a high emphasis on education. However, this explanation requires some mechanism by which parents are able to enforce or pass on those preferences to their children, as suggested by Modood (2004) and expanded on by Shah et al. (2010), who posit the idea of ‘ethnic capital’ where a triad of factors—familial adult–child relationships, transmission of aspirations, and attitudes and norms enforcement—facilitate entry into higher education in the face of limited cultural, social and economic capital within immigrant families.

Finally, the analysis provides novel insights into the influence of sole-parent status. Higher education expectations in this group tended to be lower, with negative expectations being particularly prevalent. Around 20% of sole parents did not expect their child to go to university, compared with only 12% of couple parents. Focusing on the sample of mothers, we show that sole-parent effects can be attributed to differences in the characteristics of sole-parent and couple households, and not the effect of having only one parent per se.

Evidence for the absence of a substantial direct sole-parent effect is the finding that expectations of single mothers are no lower than those of partnered mothers whose partners are not university educated. However, we confirm Koshy et al.'s (2019) proposition that single mothers' expectations for entrance to university decline as their children progress through school, while partnered mothers' expectations are invariant with children's age. Moreover, a preliminary analysis indicates that even sole parents who do expect their children to enter university turn out to be wrong in that assessment more often than is the case for partnered parents. This suggests that the challenges facing sole-parent families, including increased work commitments and the additional challenges in navigating the secondary education system, further disadvantage children from sole-parent families.

CONCLUSION

This paper contributes to the growing literature on the factors shaping parental expectations in relation to higher education participation. In demonstrating the robust correlation between parental expectations and actual outcomes for Australian children, it underscores the importance of resolving these questions in the Australian context. Given the evidence of a very strong effect of children's current school performance on parents' expectations of future higher education participation, we concur with arguments by Marks (2020) and Cardak and Ryan (2009) for a focus of equity policy on raising school achievement. However, our results do indicate that parental socioeconomic background plays a role in shaping expectations over and above children's school performance, notably with respect to parental education and children's attendance at a private school.

We do not yet have sufficient data to disentangle the relationships between parental expectations, school achievement and entry to higher education. A priority for future research should be investigation into the reciprocal relationship between parental expectations and student performance in Australia, in turn relating these to outcomes: do changes in student performance precede parental expectations, or vice versa? There also appears to be value in analyses of mismatch between expectations and outcomes.

Our initial analysis suggests that, if anything, factors associated with lower access to higher education are correlated with parents over-estimating the likelihood of their child entering university. This is not consistent with lower parental expectations acting as a mediator of those barriers to higher education. Such lines of enquiry will become more feasible as future waves of HILDA data become available. A further avenue, likely to require qualitative or mixed-methods approaches, is closer scrutiny of the differences in behaviours and parenting styles between parents with high and low expectations. It is possible that the effects of parental perception of academic performance manifest in other positive ways, such as encouragement of their children to realise their potential or the allocation of more resources into their children's education, both important avenues for the promotion of early academic achievement, as confirmed in a recent meta-analysis by Tan et al. (2019).

The measure of school achievement available in this study is a very blunt instrument, with over 90% of children assessed as ‘average’, ‘above average’ or ‘excellent’. With both this and the expectations measure provided by the same responding parent, there is also likely to be respondent bias (positivity or negativity) contributing to the correspondence between the two measures. Data on objective school performance would help refine estimates of the relationship between expectations and achievement.

While parental expectation for progression to higher education is a strong leading indicator of university enrolment, it is important that a focus on this factor does not limit perceptions of what constitutes a successful outcome in education. In the Australian context, Karmel and Lim (2013) note that parental and household background necessarily affects values, which in turn affects educational preferences. Parents with trade qualifications may prefer that their child pursues a VET career path, one that should not necessarily be characterised as shaped by disadvantage. Future data will enable exploration of a more holistic set of post-school outcomes and their relationship to school performance and parental expectations.”

Alfred M. Dockery, Paul Koshy, Ian W. Li (2020). Parental expectations of children’s higher education participation in Australia. British Educational Research Journal. Volume 48, Issue 4 p. 617-639.https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3786

____________________________________________________

Strengthening parent engagement to improve student outcomes (2024)

“The key messages in this Spotlight reveal that:

• Teachers and school or centre leaders who build effective and collaborative partnerships with parents can significantly shape the education and wellbeing outcomes of their learners.
• Schools and other education and care settings can support teachers in their engagement with parents by implementing procedures and guidelines for collaborating and communicating effectively with parents.
• Teachers and school leaders can assist parents with developing actions and attitudes that progressively become more centred on their children’s learning. In-school activities may represent the first steps towards getting parents engaged with learning.
• Consistent and genuine communication with parents, particularly small moments of connection, can help to build mutually beneficial partnerships between parents and teachers.
• The challenge for schools and children’s education and care settings is to improve parental engagement by prioritising ongoing, contextualised support interventions and programs that address the distinct needs of their diverse parental community.

The term ‘parent’ is used throughout this Spotlight to refer to any family member, caregiver or guardian who acts as a parent to a child, acknowledging the diverse family structures and caregiving arrangements that exist. The terms ‘parent’, ‘parental’ and ‘family’ are used interchangeably.

Introduction

An important part of the teacher and school leader role is engaging with parents. In turn, parents play a key role in the education of their children (Figure 1). Decades of research has shown that when parents engage in their child’s learning, both at home and at school, student achievement and wellbeing are increased (Hattie, 2023; Kim, 2022; Sengonul, 2022; T. E. Smith et al., 2020). Schools that prioritise parental engagement can form a positive, collaborative culture that values input from both parents and teachers, and ultimately benefits students.

For the most part, it appears that in Australia parents and teachers are relatively content with the level of parent-teacher engagement in schools. A 2023 Queensland-based survey, completed by over 96,000 parents and over 50,000 school staff, found that the vast majority of parents felt supported by the school to help their child with their learning (89%), were able to talk to their child’s teachers about their concerns (93%), and that their opinions were taken seriously (81%) (Department of Education Qld, 2023). Teacher respondents also overwhelmingly believed that parental engagement was supported in their school, with 92% noting that parents were encouraged to be active partners in educating their child (Department of Education Qld, 2023).

Engaging with parents is, however, at times a cause of stress for teachers and leaders. In terms of the time demands, in 2022 most teachers (88%) reported spending 0-4 hours engaging with parents per week, with 9% spending 5-9 hours per week on parental engagement tasks (AITSL, 2023). Senior leaders in schools and early childhood education settings report spending more time engaging with parents, with 59% of leaders reporting that 5 or more hours per week were spent on parental engagement tasks in 2022 (AITSL, 2023). A 2023 nationwide principal survey found that school leaders report “parent-related issues” as a cause of substantial stress, though several other issues were reported as more stressful (Dicke et al., 2023).

This Spotlight summarises research on the impact of different types of engagement, and points to resources to assist teachers and leaders to constructively engage with parents. The Spotlight focuses on school-based engagement as well as how school-based engagement can enable parents to engage with students’ learning at home. Accordingly, “engagement” is discussed in terms of teachers and leaders engaging with parents and building teacher-parent relationships, as well as parental engagement with their child’s learning.

Figure 1. The parental engagement triangle (adapted from Barker & Harris, 2020, p. 12) shows the shared responsibility between families and schools in order to best support student education.

When teachers and school leaders engage with parents to provide a positive, collaborative environment, this can help parents engage with their child’s learning, and help teachers better understand the needs of their students. Parental engagement in learning means parents undertake an active, meaningful, and sustained sharing of their child’s education.

Such engagement can provide additional months of academic progress over the course of a year (EFL, 2023; Hattie, 2023). The impact on learning can be even greater for children with low prior achievement (EFL, 2021; Jordan et al., 2000). To maximise the positive impacts of parental engagement, schools need to consider how best to tailor parent-school communications to encourage positive dialogue about learning. Maintaining this tailored communication strategy as children get older may also encourage parents to continue engaging with the school.

In addition to academic progress, parental engagement positively affects children’s classroom behaviour, school attendance, completion and socioemotional development (ARACY, 2016; Axford et al., 2019; Department for Education SA, 2021; Jennings & Bosch, 2011). Teachers and school leaders support parental engagement through strategies that connect learning with home, and by building partnerships with parents to enhance their educational roles and impact.

Effective parental engagement is responsive and adaptable to the family’s specific needs and contexts, and teachers may need to undertake different engagement strategies over time depending on parent response. Whole-school approaches to parental engagement can be highly effective at encouraging involvement, however less intensive strategies, such as sending personalised communications, encouraging shared book reading, and providing parents with resources and support for parent-child conversations about learning, are also beneficial (EFL, 2019).

Involving parents and families is an important and valuable endeavor in and of itself, because of the ways in which it can help parents and families build a sense of belonging to their school community, which in turn can demonstrate to a student that their family values and supports their education. 

Plan for appropriate and contextually relevant opportunities for parents/carers to be involved in their children's learning.

Evaluate and revise reporting and accountability mechanisms in the school to meet the needs of students, parents/carers and colleagues.

Parent-teacher conferencing

For effective parent-teacher conferences, preparation is necessary, as is consultation and consistency (e.g., Department of Education VIC, 2020). It is standard practice to ensure that parent-teacher conferences are held at least once per semester, and that the processes and protocols of the conferences are developed in consultation with the school community. Teachers and school leaders can encourage parental engagement in this reporting and consultation process by ensuring that clear communication is consistent, so that parents are aware of the dates and times of the conferences, and providing opportunities for families to schedule their conferences remotely. School leaders can support teachers in their facilitation of parent-teacher conferences by developing and adhering to guidance and follow-up processes.

Student-led conferences offer an alternative to the traditional parent-teacher conference, and these encourage students to take charge of their own progress reporting by leading their parents through a portfolio of their work over the course of the study period. Unfortunately, there is a lack of recent research into student-led conferences, particularly in Australia. However, the available research does indicate promising parental engagement opportunities. For example, single-school case studies in the US and Australia have found that parents responded very favourably to their child explaining coursework, academic and social achievements, and behaviour (Goodman, 2008; McCarthy, 2015). Attendance at student-led conferences was also found to be higher than for traditional parent-teacher conferences (Goodman, 2008; McCarthy, 2015). Student-led conferences are valuable for parents to gain an understanding of their child’s effort, study skills, goals, and behaviour. They are also valuable and rewarding for teachers to see students take charge of their learning, and hear what the students believe they need to work on (McCarthy, 2015).

Supporting parental engagement at home

Some parents may not be seen often at the school for a wide range of reasons. However, this does not mean that they cannot effectively engage with student learning at home. In terms of student achievement, parent engagement in learning at home typically has a larger direct impact than attending school functions (Boonk et al., 2018; Cosso et al., 2022; Jeynes, 2007, 2012; X. Ma et al., 2016). Teachers can help facilitate at-home engagement, and many of the at-school strategies discussed in this Spotlight will have flow on effects to at-home engagement. For instance, if parents discuss and observe what their child is learning at school, what their strengths and learning needs are, and possible strategies for improving progress or demonstrating links between curriculum content and family life or world events, conversations that reinforce learning are more likely to occur at home.

Indeed, parental engagement can be represented on a continuum, where parents move from primarily having in-school involvement to also include actions and attitudes that progressively become more centred on learning (Goodall, 2017) (Figure 4). The continuum recognises that ‘traditional involvement’, such as volunteering at their child’s school, or attending assemblies and other events, may represent the first steps towards parental engagement with learning. Making families feel welcome by inviting their input into their child’s learning can be a good first step in deepening their engagement.

There are three continuum levels, where the first level serves to strengthen family-school partnerships through traditional in-school activities (Goodall, 2017). The second level progresses to family-led schooling, where activities such as instruction and assessment are still overseen by teachers and school leaders (Goodall, 2017). Finally, the third level represents parental actions and attitudes that focus on children's learning in the home and community, shifting the emphasis from being school-centric to being centred on sustained family-led learning (Goodall, 2017).

Recent research suggests that high levels of parenting self-efficacy have been associated with positive child development and parent-child relationships (Matthews et al., 2022), and may positively influence parent-teacher and student-teacher relationships (T. Ma et al., 2024). Higher levels of parenting self-efficacy have been associated with lower levels of externalising problems at school or at home and increased social skills, from preschool age through to adolescence (Glatz et al., 2024; Glatz & Buchanan, 2015; Seabra-Santos et al., 2016). Higher parenting self-efficacy also relates to more positive, confident, and satisfying parent-teacher relationships (Matthews et al., 2022; Minke et al., 2014).

Schools are able to support parents in building their parenting self-efficacy in a number of ways, however research recommends that these interventions be low-intensity, be run by school psychologists, and are carefully framed so that parents feel empowered by them (T. Ma et al., 2024). Opportunities for parents to build their parenting self-efficacy can include take-home resource packages, and low-intensity programs with low demand for attendance (T. Ma et al., 2024). In addition, ensuring these resources and programs are positioned as being universally beneficial to parents with all levels of parenting self-efficacy may encourage the creation of a neutral, destigmatised learning environment for parents (T. Ma et al., 2024). Schools can assist in this destigmatisation work by carefully considering the way this support is framed in parent communications (T. Ma et al., 2024).

Conclusion

A collaborative relationship between parents, teachers and educators is vital to student progress and success, and can be promoted through teacher-supported guidance on how parents can support their child’s specific academic needs. By creating an open dialogue of communication through consistent and structured reporting, parent-teacher conferencing, and maintaining accessible platforms for sharing learning resources and school information, teachers can provide parents with the tools needed to support and participate in their child’s education.

When schools actively and successfully engage parents in learning activities, a powerful partnership is created, strengthening support systems essential for positive educational outcomes. An additional emphasis should be placed on engaging parents from vulnerable communities, and recognising the diverse engagement needs of these families. By prioritising programs and interventions designed to tackle the specific challenges faced by these groups, schools can strive for equitable and meaningful parental engagement, ensuring that every child receives the support needed for their educational success and wellbeing.

Schools can support teachers to work collaboratively and effectively with parents. The challenge for schools is prioritising and investing in ongoing programs that cultivate cumulative improvement in parental engagement. Schools should adopt contextualised approaches that promote inclusivity and effectively address the distinct needs of their diverse parental communities. Importantly, schools need to consider inclusive strategies that engage all parents to prevent the widening of achievement gaps. Targeted investment in parental engagement programs not only enhances students’ educational outcomes but also contributes to the overall wellbeing and cohesion of the wider school community.”

AITSL (2024). Strengthening parent engagement to improve student outcomes. Australian Institute for Teaching and School LeadershipLimited

https://indigenousculturalresponsiveness.aitsl.edu.au/home/login

__________________________________________________

Parental involvement in elementary schools and children’s academic achievement (2024)

Abstract: “Many educational initiatives emphasize parental involvement as a strategy to reduce socioeconomic achievement gaps in schools and enhance students' educational attainment. Despite extensive research, findings on the relationship between parental involvement and children’s academic achievement remain inconsistent. This study uses longitudinal data (N = 2887) from Finland, a country with strong emphasis on equal educational opportunities, to examine the development of parental involvement and relationships between parental involvement and children’s achievement during elementary school years. Specifically, the research focuses on three primary objectives: analyzing changes in parental involvement over time, assessing its relationship with academic outcomes, and exploring variations in its relationship across different educational groups.

Results

indicated that parental involvement generally decreases, as children grow older. While parental involvement was related to both GPA and reading comprehension when assessed separately, only the relationship with GPA remained significant in a combined model. Our findings indicate an overlap between the examined outcome variables but they also suggest a potential teacher-bias effect in grading influenced by parental involvement.

Therefore, our findings suggest that the impact of parental involvement on achievement might be more about how teachers perceive and evaluate students rather than a direct effect on academic performance. Additionally, although parental involvement varied with socioeconomic status (SES), with higher levels observed among more educated mothers, its association with educational outcomes was relatively uniform across all groups but slightly stronger and statistically significant among middle educational groups. Therefore, our findings challenge the assumption that increasing parental involvement could effectively equalize socioeconomic differences in educational performance.

Discussion

Many educational initiatives and programs have sought to promote collaboration between schools and homes and to encourage parental involvement (e.g., Berger, 1991; Desimone, 1999). Parental involvement has been seen as a means of reducing socioeconomic achievement gaps in schools and has been shown to positively affect students' educational attainment (e.g., Fan & Chen, 2001; Kim, 2022). In this study, we examined the relationship between parental involvement and children's performance in the Finnish context. Despite a vast number of studies focusing on the effects of parental involvement, the majority of previous studies have been carried out in Anglo-Saxon countries with cross-sectional data.

A major strength of our study was, therefore, the longitudinal data collected from the Finnish context, which made it possible to explore three main objectives. The longitudinal data set enabled us to investigate change in parental involvement across time, which was the first research question of our study. Furthermore, the longitudinal design allowed us to explore the relationships between parental involvement and achievement outcomes in greater depth than cross-sectional studies, addressing our second research question.

In addition, our data allowed us to examine the relationship between parental involvement and two distinct achievement outcomes: GPA and reading comprehension skills. Since the data was collected in a context where teachers are highly autonomous in their grading practices (e.g. grading is not based on national standardized tests, e.g., Pitkänen, 2023), we had a unique opportunity to investigate teacher-bias in the effects of involvement. We could examine whether parental involvement is associated with students’ achievement or primarily influences how teachers perceive and evaluate them. Thirdly, our data set gave us a chance to explore differences in parental involvement across different educational groups. Regarding this, our aims were twofold. First, we were interested in the differences between educational groups in involvement magnitude. Secondly, we wanted to know whether the relationship between involvement and achievement differed between different educational groups.

Our findings showed that parents became less involved in their children's schooling over time. This finding aligns with what we could expect based on prior studies (e.g., Crosnoe, 2001; Park & Holloway, 2017), and logically, it makes sense. Parents may see that their participation in their children's schooling is more crucial during the first school years. When the child grows, participation may take different forms and the home–school type of participation (which was the focus of this research) may become less relevant. However, it is possible that other aspects of involvement replace this (Catsambis & Garland, 1997), with the overall level of involvement remaining constant. While we could not address this with our data, this is an area for future research.

Also regarding our second research question, our study confirmed the findings of prior studies (e.g., Wilder, 2014; Kim, 2022) and showed a positive relationship between parental involvement and achievement outcomes. Parental involvement predicted both the child’s reading comprehension skills and GPA when the outcomes were measured separately. However, in a combined final model, the association of involvement was significant only in relation to the child’s GPA. Closely resembling the findings of our study are the results of Shumow and Miller’s (2001) study, according to which parental involvement was associated positively with adolescents’ academic grades but not with their achievement test scores. Several meta-analyses (e.g., Fan & Chen, 2001) have concluded that the relationship between parental involvement and students’ achievement may differ depending on the outcome variables that have been used, but few studies have investigated multiple outcome variables simultaneously.

Therefore, the findings of our study may offer some interesting insights related to this. Our findings indicate an overlap between the examined outcome variables but they may also suggest that parental involvement may not have a substantial direct impact on children’s achievement but rather that it influences how teachers perceive and evaluate the performance of the child. In other words, teachers might reward children with actively participating parents with higher grades. This finding is highly interesting as it suggests that parental involvement may play a role in the reproduction of capitals through education, potentially benefiting middle-class children (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; 

Putting together the main findings of our study, we argue that seeing involvement as one of the most efficient tools for parents to influence their children’s educational outcomes (see Li et al., 2022) is an exaggeration. Even though parental involvement was a statistically significant predictor of children’s achievement outcomes, overall its effect was quite weak. Therefore, the findings of our study align with those from critical studies (e.g., Domina, 2005; White et al., 1992) that challenge the wide-ranging positive effects of parental involvement, questioning the prevailing notion that such involvement is a panacea for eliminating social disparities in schools and enhancing children’s learning outcomes. Furthermore, echoing the sentiments of Grolnick and Pomerantz (2022), our results underscore the need for more in-depth analyses and critical reflection both by researchers and policymakers to identify which forms of involvement truly are beneficial. As Mapp et al. (2008) emphasize, it is essential to consider what types of efforts and outreach strategies might foster more meaningful parental engagement and promote students' academic achievement. Understanding the specific approaches that effectively engage parents from various backgrounds could help to maximize the positive impact of parental involvement in diverse educational contexts.

Additionally, our results challenge the assumption that increasing parental involvement would effectively equalize socioeconomic differences in educational performance, as the effect of involvement was relatively similar across educational groups. However, our results provided evidence for the potential teacher bias effect, suggesting that parental involvement may influence how teachers perceive and evaluate children’s academic performance rather than directly impacting achievement. Given that these biases could contribute to educational inequalities and affect students' long-term educational trajectories, our findings highlight the urgent need for further research to investigate the role of parental involvement in shaping teacher perceptions and grading practices.”

Satu Koivuhovi, Elina Kilpi-Jakonen, Jani Erola, Mari-Pauliina Vainikainen. (2025). Parental involvement in elementary schools and children’s academic achievement: A longitudinal analysis across educational groups in Finland. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, Volume 95, 101007, ISSN 0276-5624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2024.101007

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562424001203)

The average impact of the Parental engagement approaches is about an additional four months' progress over the course of a year. There are also higher impacts.

https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/parental-engagement

The effect of parental involvement on students’ academic achievement (2020)

Abstract: “This study aims to examine the effect of parental involvement on students’ academic achievement at pre-school, elementary and secondary levels by using the meta-analysis method with respect to home-based and school-based parental involvement strategies. Data consisted of 55 independent research studies in English published between 2010 and 2019, and accessed through ERIC, Academic Search Complete, Science Direct, Wiley Online Library, and PsycNet databases.

Findings revealed that the effect of parental involvement on academic achievement was positive but small. Parental expectations had the biggest effect on academic achievement and parental control had a negative and small effect. The mean effect of parental involvement on students’ academic achievement does not differ significantly according to moderator variables of education level, measurement type or measurement area but differs by developmental level of the country. The results are discussed using available related meta-analysis studies in the literature. Keywords: parental involvement, academic achievement, developing countries, education level, meta-analysis. Introduction erdumrenn, Hu & Yuan, 2016). Therefore, parental involvement is seen as quite significant in students’ learning and academic achievement.

The relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement has long been an area of research across the world (Boonk, Gijselaers, Ritzen & Brand-Gruwel, 2018; Epstein, 1991; Roy and Giraldo-García, 2018). Empirical research studies and meta-analysis studies have put forth a strong relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement, mostly indicating a positive role. Despite the research support and common view among people regarding the positive effect of parental involvement on academic achievement, there is confusion on the definition of parental involvement, as well as its activities, types and outcomes (Shute, Hansen, Underwood & Razzouk, 2011).

Although most people consider parental involvement a remedy for school education, there are some inconsistencies in the findings regarding the effect of parental involvement on academic achievement (Fan & Chen, 2001). The literature contains studies that indicated a positive relationship (Dotterer & Wehrspann, 2016; Durand, 2011; Gordon & Cui, 2012; Gubbins & Otero, 2016; Manolitsis, Georgiou & There is not a consensus on the definition of parental involvement and there are also different types and dimensions of parental involvement.

The difference in defining parental involvement may have contributed to the inconsistent results in the literature. Due to inconsistencies in the findings regarding the relationship between academic achievement and parental involvement, a need for metanalysis studies has risen (Fan & Chen, 2001). Though there are some meta-analysis studies in the literature (Fan & Chen, 2001; Jeynes, 2005; Hill & Tyson, 2009; Ma, Shen, Krenn, Hu & Yuan, 2016), there is a need for more such studies, including more recent studies.

The literature on parental involvement is complex and contradictory (Shute et al, 2011). This is in part because parental involvement includes multiple behaviours (Roy & Giraldo-García, 2018). Grolnick and Slowiaczek (1994, p. 238) define parental involvement as “the dedication of the resources by the parent to the child”. LaRocque, Kleiman and Darling (2011) describe it as investment in the education of children. It is also defined as parents’ engagement in activities which foster learning and performance of their children (Fantuzzo et al, 2000 as cited in Ma et al, 2016).

In the same vein, the current study considers parental involvement as parents’ efforts to contribute to their children’s academic and social/emotional development. Rather than the definition of the concept, what matters is what behaviours are considered as parental involvement. Parental involvement is defined in relation to a number of different parental behaviours including parental aspirations for their children’s academic performance, parents’ communication with children, parents’ participation in activities in school, parents’ communication with teachers, parental rules and so on (Fan & Chen, 2001). Epstein (2010) lists types of involvement as parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and collaborating with the community. Shute et al (2011) list home-related parental involvement types as parenting style, discussing school activities, checking homework, aspirations and expectations, reading at home, supervision and home rules, while school-related aspects include contacting school personnel, attending parent teacher organisations and volunteering at school. On the other hand, academic achievement can be defined as “learned proficiency in basic skills and content knowledge” (McCoy, Twymen, Ketterlin-Geller & Tindal, 2005, p. 8).

Actually, academic achievement in a course or lesson is not only related with those experiences in that course or lesson. It is cumulative of the present and prior school, family and community experiences (Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain, 2005). However, as it is impossible to measure such a cumulative effect, it is the measurement of a single lesson or general assessment such as general point averages (GPA) which are used. Therefore, while some studies use a measure of a single achievement test, some use the grade of a lesson and some use GPA. No matter which unit is measured, academic achievement is eventually one of the main aims of the educational experiences. In the current study, academic achievement measures were grouped as standard and non-standard tests.

The findings in the current study and the findings of the other related meta-analysis studies (Fan & Chen, 2001; Hill & Tyson, 2009; Jeynes, 2005; Jeynes, 2017; Kim & Hill, 2015; Ma et al, 2015; Senechal & Young, 2008) and also a meta-synthesis study on this relationship (Wilder, 2014) consistently indicate the positive relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement. This result supports the significance attached to parental involvement in the literature with respect to children’s academic achievement.

As suggested by Henderson and Berla (1994), parents’ involvement increases students’ achievement, and that is why parents should try to provide an environment at home encouraging learning, communicate reasonable but high expectations regarding their children’s future and get involved in students’ education at home, school and community. In addition, parental involvement should be promoted by educational policies and practices (Ma et al, 2015).

However, the results of this meta-analysis study, which includes studies from several geographical regions at preschool, elementary and secondary levels, reveal a smaller effect size when compared to other metaanalysis studies. Another finding in this study suggests that the effect sizes tend to decrease in the more recent publications. This is a finding worth dwelling on. The effect of parental involvement on students’ academic achievement may be diminishing due to some factors such as changing family structures, enhancement in technologies, new educational settings and expectations. More recent analyses are needed to discuss this finding.

Regarding the effect of parental involvement types, it is revealed in the current study that school-based parental involvement has a positive and weak effect on students’ academic achievement. School-based involvement has a greater effect on academic achievement than home-based involvement in this study.”

Erdem, C., & Kaya, M. (2020). A meta-analysis of the effect of parental involvement on students’ academic achievement. Journal of Learning for Development, 7(3), 367-383. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1280652.pdf

A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Different Types of Parental Involvement Programs for Urban Students.? (2012)

“This meta-analysis of 51 studies examines the relationship between various kinds of parental involvement programs and the academic achievement of pre-kindergarten-12th-grade school children. Analyses determined the effect sizes for various parental involvement programs overall and subcategories of involvement. Results indicate a significant relationship between parental involvement programs overall and academic achievement, both for younger (preelementary and elementary school) and older (secondary school) students as well as for four types of parental involvement programs. Parental involvement programs, as a whole, were associated with higher academic achievement by .3 of a standard deviation unit.”

“This meta-analysis from Urban Education examines the relationship between school-based parental involvement programs and the academic achievement of pre-k to 12th-grade children. Findings of the study indicate that overall there is a significant relationship between parental involvement programs and academic outcomes, but that further research is needed to examine why some types of programs have a greater impact on educational achievement than others.”

The types of parental involvement programs examined are:

• Shared reading programs, which show the strongest relationship with improvement in educational outcomes (effect size = .51, p< .01).
• Emphasized partnership programs, which involve parents and teachers working together as equal partners to help improve students' academic or behavioral outcomes. This type of program has the second largest effect size on educational outcomes (ES=.35, p< .05).
• Communication between parents and teachers has an effect size of .28 (p< .05).
• Checking homework produced the smallest effect size of the four programs (ES=.27, p< .05).

An article in the next issue of Better: Evidence-based Education examines how parents can work together with teachers to help children perform better in school. A program called "First Step to Success" focuses on children who have difficulty adjusting to routine school demands, such as following directions, doing one's work, and getting along with peers. Teachers and parents work together to teach the child these skills. Research results show that the First Step program improves social and school success skills and reduces problem behavior.”

Jeynes, W. (2012). A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Different Types of Parental Involvement Programs for Urban Students. Urban Education, 47(4), 706-742. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912445643

And now it’s time to move over to my older material: 

Aiding parents to teach reading at home: The RMIT Clinic approach.

“The effects of parent involvement in their children’s educational progress have been mixed. There are many types of parent involvement with different effects. For programs that go beyond simple parent encouragement or progress monitoring of student progress, the issue arises as to whether taking on a tutoring role is feasible.

The RMIT Psychology Clinic was established more than 30 years ago to provide practical experience in psychology for post-graduate students and to offer a community service. The Clinic offers a range of psychology services to children and adults, and the charge is $60 per session, a fee to cover the University’s cost for space, electricity, reception staff, tests etc. The educational psychology division of the service is by far the most patronised, with more than half of all referrals for children and adolescents struggling to make adequate progress in school, particularly in literacy. The Clinic provides assessment, program recommendation, a written report, and training to parents who wish to supplement the literacy instruction supplied by their child’s school. Referrals are often suggested by teachers, school psychologists and speech pathologists, paediatricians and by word of mouth from other clients.

Whereas, some clients are solely interested in a thorough psychological assessment and report, the main focus of the Clinic is on intervention and evaluation. Paralleling the Psychology Division’s philosophy that empiricism should drive practice, the Clinic model takes as its theme for assessment and intervention, practices that have sound theoretical and empirical support, with the added requirement that they be feasible in the real world. Masters and doctoral clinicians are provided with a scaffold that guides them in their clinical work from initial interview to follow-up. At the assigning of the clinicians’ first educational referral, they are provided with a video of a similar case - from initial interview through to the follow-up stage, along with a document that describes the rationale for each step in the process. Additionally, they are taught the principles of effective instruction in the educational psychology component of their course, and the procedural details are covered in a case conference component.

Supervisors initially provide direct service to the client in the Clinic with minimal responsibility assigned to the clinician apart from the initial telephone contact, and a small role in taking notes and taking the client’s developmental history. After clinicians have completed a case with a supervisor, their level of responsibility is increased. They have supervision sessions to plan the next case and practise client-clinician interactions (e.g., demonstrating a teaching procedure to a parent) as simulations in the supervision sessions prior to the interviews. All their subsequent solo sessions with clients are video-recorded, and supervisors provide feedback to clinicians based on the viewing of the tapes.

The programs employed by the Clinic enable parents, or others, who do not have a background in reading instruction to successfully teach the student. This is possible because the programs are carefully designed and scripted, such that everything that needs to be done or said by the home tutor is prescribed in the teacher’s book.

The programs are loaned to the parents without charge, although a consumable book (if required) is charged at its cost (usually about $18). Adults with a literacy difficulty may also avail themselves of the service if they have a friend/partner who is able to act as tutor. The purpose of the Clinic is not to provide teaching directly to the student, a strategy for which it is unequipped, but to enable effective instruction to occur within the home, supported by Clinic staff throughout the period of the program.

Though referrals can be suggested by anyone, they are only accepted following a parent request for assistance. There is often a waiting list that may extend for some months. The typical Clinic sequence for an educational intervention begins with an initial phone call from the clinician to ensure that the client wishes to proceed. Among other tasks are to provide an explanation of the Clinic’s role and limitations, for example, that it doesn’t have the resources to offer direct teaching to their child.

The clinician stresses that the Clinic’s involvement is to provide direction and support whilst the parent does the instructional work. Related to this issue is the need to discern the expectations of the parent/client for their child arising from the referral. Even though the parent will have been sent a brochure outlining the Clinic approach, there have been situations in which the client’s expectations were that the Clinic provides the “fix” without the parents own involvement. Sometimes these misunderstandings have only surfaced during the session that provides feedback of the assessment results and planning the intervention. In such cases the intervention has not proceeded and much time has been wasted by both parent and clinician.

Also in the initial phone call, the clinician requests all relevant reports to be brought to the initial interview. These comprise recent school reports, along with other psychological, educational, paediatric, audiological, vision, and educational consultancy reports.

The initial interview has several objectives. The obvious task is to obtain information relevant to the client’s circumstances. Additionally, it is an opportunity for the clinician to establish credibility with the client through answering any questions they may have. Further, it represents a time to instil a sense of hope that, if the parents follow the prescribed regimen, their child will make the progress that they seek. The child (if under 14 or so) need not attend this session, as parents often feel freer to discuss the situation in their absence.

The information sought includes relevant background information, such as, developmental and educational history - pregnancy, any neonatal issues, toileting, walking, speech & language, illnesses, ear infections, hospitalisations, and the presence of reading problems in the wider family. It includes how well the child is socialised within the home and at school, and relationships with family members and peers. Discussion ensues about the various reports brought by the parents, in particular, the recent school reports.

An important issue is the attempt to gauge whether the parent is likely to be able to implement a program with their child. There may be several reasons why an intervention can be unlikely to achieve success. The child may not display sufficient respect to the parent(s) to enable a teacher-student relationship to function. The parents may not have sufficient depth of commitment to take on the role for the requisite intensity and period. There may be too many competing family priorities for the intervention to be regularly scheduled. It is possible that the parents do not have the literacy skills to manage the text-based program, or may struggle themselves with a sounds-based approach to reading. Though it is usually parents who take the role, the Clinic has provided training to adult carers, various volunteers, such as from Rotary clubs, school volunteers, and senior citizen organisations. Also trained have been older siblings, tertiary counsellors, and interested classroom teachers and aides.

Other topics usually addressed include explaining the function of the Clinic as both teaching facility and community resource, and the role of the student clinicians. This is followed by information about the sequence of sessions addressing assessment, report writing, parent training, regular parent contact and support, and follow-up evaluation of success. Again, the limitations of the Clinic’s direct influence are stressed. Clinicians are urged to ensure they make clear the parent’s intervention responsibility is at least five times/week implementation of the program. The rationale for this expectation is couched in terms of the child’s rate of learning having been below average up to now, and the need for his learning rate to exceed the average if the child is to make headway against his age peers. This achievement necessarily entails an efficient, focussed program taught intensively and over a sufficient period. See Figure 1 for a visualisation of this point.”

Agreement is sought about feasible outcomes for the student over the agreed intervention period, and what period of time would necessary for a given outcome in terms of grade or age level attainment.  For example, it is suggested to parents that participation in the Corrective Reading Decoding program will evince these approximate grade levels. Level A moves from early first to early second grade; B1 from early second to end of second grade; Level B2 from early third to end of third grade; Level C1 from early fourth to end of fourth grade; C2 from early fifth to end of fifth grade. These are estimations based upon practitioner discussion on the Direct Instruction Listserve rather than on the publishers suggested levels.

Session two usually involves an intellectual assessment. This is not strictly necessary, and is waived if one has been performed in the past 18 months, or if the parent is uninterested in such information. The major function is to rule out intellectual disability (a category that in Australia entitles a student to additional educational assistance). It is also an opportunity for the student clinicians to develop their assessment skills. Regardless of whether the intellectual assessment is performed, it is explained to parents that even if a child’s intellectual ability is below-average, this condition does not limit his potential achievements but does limit the approaches by which he can be effectively taught.

In session three there is an assessment of reading and other educational skills. This typically involves phonological skills, listening comprehension, reading comprehension, oral reading fluency, decoding and word recognition efficiency, writing, spelling and arithmetic. It also includes placement tests for any of the likely interventions, particularly decoding, comprehension and spelling.

A report is then prepared, couched in terms that are not overly technical. It is a report intended primarily for parents to offer some description and explanation of their child’s educational attainments with respect to those of his age/grade peers. This is important to parents, as their child’s school reports rarely contain such specific information, usually offering vague descriptors as “John is consolidating his skills in transacting with print”. Additionally, the report can be useful for parents to take to their school in attempts to obtain additional assistance for their child. The assessments may have indicated a specific area of difficulty that is addressable by a discrete intervention, rather than a global one. Most commonly, of course, this primary focus involves reading rate and accuracy.  Finally, the report enables a discussion about the relative contributions of individually-based vs instructionally-based influences on the student’s struggles with literacy. This leads to more detailed information about the most appropriate program.

The report is usually sent to parents to enable time for them to digest its contents, and to discuss them with their partner, and with any other supportive friends or professionals. This approach has been employed as parents occasionally are distressed about the details when they are presented all at once in an interview - to the degree that they are unable to derive benefit from the remainder of that session. Session four involves discussion of the written report, answering any queries about the assessment or the proposed intervention. Children do not usually attend this session unless they are of secondary school age, a time when their cooperation in an intervention must be actively sought rather than simply presumed. Additionally, they are in a better position to understand proceedings.

Assuming an intervention is feasible, sessions five and six involve the loan of the program and the training in its use. The child attends these sessions. Later sessions involve the clinician monitoring the progress initially weekly by phone. Subsequent meetings occur for mid and post-program testing, and when new programs are selected for further training and monitoring, for example, spelling or more advanced levels of reading.

The approach to training usually involves a model-lead-test sequence. First, the clinician provides information about the program, including the modifications to enable a group program to be delivered through 1:1 tutoring. Second, the clinician demonstrates the program with the student, while the parent watches. Each exercise is taught including the provision of specified error corrections and the repeat until firm instruction is emphasised. The parent then practises reteaching part of each exercise to their child, with feedback from the clinician. In this manner, the whole of Lesson 1 is taught in the session. In the case of Corrective Reading, there is also practice of the timed reading, a task that doesn’t occur in the first lesson. The parent is provided with a sheet of the main points to remember, and directed to their copy of the Teachers Guide for a second line of enquiry when questions arise. They are also invited to ring their clinician over any other troublesome issues.

At least one complete session (1 to 1.5 hours) is devoted to this sequence. Another session (one week later) is scheduled before the parent is asked to commence the 5 times per week program implementation at home. During the following week, the parent (or preferably parents) practise the various tasks in the first couple of lessons - either on each other, or with a sibling of the student. It is thought that practising on the target student before some level of competence is attained may entrench errors and also represent an unsatisfactory first learning experience for the child. Parents are advised that they may not feel entirely comfortable for 20 lessons, but that their fluency with the program should increase as their familiarity with the scripts improves. This process of demonstration-practice-feedback continues until the clinician is satisfied that the parent is able to adequately present the program. Clinicians employ the Tutor Monitoring Form (Figure 2) to gauge whether a parent is firm on the skills required. The level of training appears to be a threat to effectiveness, given the extended time and practice necessary for the training of teachers in classrooms. However, the Corrective Reading program when presented one-to-one has fewer crucial presentation skills, such as managing signalling and choral responding. The experience in the Clinic is that most parents are able to present the program with sufficient integrity to elicit progress. There is a fail-safe method that enables early identification of problems in program presentation, and this is discussed further below.

It should be noted that the process of a parent being prepared to contact the Clinic is in itself a filtering process. It implies that the parent is motivated, and usually, that they are prepared to take upon themselves the responsibility for program implementation. The author, in a previous role as a peripatetic school psychologist, found much less success when the impetus for intervention arose from the school rather than from within the family. Both parent cooperation and acceptance of responsibility were less likely to eventuate than under the current Clinic model.

The training of two parents is recommended. It is advantageous because it reduces the load on one parent, reduces the problems of student reluctance, and allows for supportive collaboration - all of which enhance program fidelity and endurance. During the training sessions attention to the Teachers Guide is constantly drawn when parents have questions about the rationale for various procedures. Additionally, discussion of the most important initial issues revolves around a document - the Corrective Reading program: Parent Information sheet (Figure 3) – that highlights the most common concerns parents express.

Apart from initial training of the parents, the Clinic model involves monitoring of their skills, on-going support, and a variety of pre- and post-test evaluation strategies. The success of the program is heavily dependent upon treatment fidelity, thus the necessity for continued monitoring and support. In particular, the requirement of finding the time and energy to maintain a punishing schedule of 5 lessons (of 30-50 minutes) per week often can be difficult for parents to maintain over at least 13 weeks (the length of one level of the Corrective Reading program) or up to 20 weeks for the Teach Your Child To Read In 100 Easy Lessons program. This overseeing role enables the rapid response to a student’s failure to progress. The regular contact also has an important secondary effect of enhancing the willpower necessary to achieve success. When parents know that they will receive a call in the next week or fortnight, there is increased motivation to persist. Our experience has been that without this continued Clinic role, programs may be discontinued prematurely or altered to the extent that success is jeopardized.

Follow-up phone calls are (typically) weekly for the first 6 weeks, fading to fortnightly until the program is completed. The amount of support parents require varies from case to case. Data from the Corrective Reading Program Progress Sheet (Figure 4) is collected at the time of each contact to ensure that daily rate and accuracy targets are being met. The progress sheet fulfils several roles:

1. As a guide for feedback between clinician and parent on progress and problems. 

2. As a subtle spur to maintain lesson frequency - the clinician’s interest in this aspect helps parents appreciate the importance of frequency, as it is always discussed in sessions. 

3. As a means of increasing the amount of free-reading achieved by the student. Research has demonstrated the importance of increasing the struggling student's volume of reading. It provides additional opportunity to practise the skills taught in the program, and to learn new words - there are far more opportunities to increase vocabulary through reading than through conversation or television.

4. As a means of ensuring that progress is rapid and continuous. If issues arise that threaten the integrity of the program, they will quickly become apparent in the data sheets, and action can be promptly instituted.

There have been circumstances when it has been more fruitful for two parents to swap children for the purposes of implementing the program. This option is rare for reasons of geography, but may be considered when parents are unable to present the program to their child without being punitive, when they are quite patient with a child other than their own.

A number of parents have found it useful to plan an incentive program to address any current or potential problem of student resistance. There are a number of options: One can use the motivational points system incorporated in the Corrective Reading program, and develop an associated reward menu suited to the needs of the child and family financial constraints. Alternatively, an individual incentive program can be designed in conjunction with the clinician, it being as simple or as complex as the situation requires.

One modification that has been particularly successful with impulsive or distractible students involves the use of a visual progress indicator. This can involve a thermometer-like chart with a movable indicator that can be slid up or down to represent how well the student is concentrating at any given time. When the indicator reaches the top a reinforcer is delivered. This is usually an edible, such as M & M, raisin, or nut. The rationale behind the visual progress indicator is to more closely tie immediate behaviour to its consequences for students who are not well managed by more distal schedules. The proximity to reinforcement varies moment-by-moment as the indicator is slid up a little for appropriate behaviour or down a little for inappropriate behaviour. This tends to increase the salience of the consequence for such students, and offers an external scaffold to support their own attempts at increasing their concentration on the task.

Most of the referrals to the Clinic occur for students in Year 3 and above, and who prove to have significant decoding and fluency difficulties. The program found most apt for these struggling readers is the Corrective Reading program: Decoding Strand and placement testing determines the appropriate level.

The placement test is designed to ensure that the student is neither over-challenged by the level of difficulty of the program, nor already competent at that level. The test is administered individually and takes about five to ten minutes. Detailed instructions are provided for administration and scoring.

The possible outcomes of such assessments are that the child’s current decoding skill level is below those of the lowest level of the program (Level A) and would be best addressed with a beginning reading program, such as Teach Your Child To Read In 100 Easy Lessons. It may be that the child is appropriate for placement in one of the four program levels, or that the child has already mastered the decoding skills taught at each level, and any reading deficits are probably not in the area of decoding.

Decisions about which programs and in which sequence are based upon the results of the assessment. A typical report to parents is provided below and the rationale for the choice of programs becomes clearer.

Confidential Psycho-Educational Assessment

Client’s Name: Adam

Date of Birth: 10^th November, 1990

Chronological Age: 12 years, 10 months

School: X. Primary Scool

Grade: 6

Dates of Examination: 29^th August and 4^th September, 2004

Tests Administered:

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Third Edition (WISC-III)

Wide Range Achievement Test – 3 (WRAT-3)

      Word Reading subtest

      Spelling subtest

Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests – Revised

      Word Attack subtest

Spadafore Diagnostic Reading Test

      Silent Reading Comprehension subtest

      Listening Comprehension subtest

Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP)

      Elision Subtest

      Blending Words

      Memory for Digits

      Rapid Digit Naming

      Nonword Repetition

      Rapid Letter Naming

Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE)

Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)

Examiners’ Names and Qualifications:

Kerry Hempenstall [Ph.D., B.Sc., Dip.Ed., Dip.Soc.Studies, Dip.Ed.Psych., MAPS].

Nicholas B. [B.App.Sc. (Hons)].

Referral Information:

parental in education was referred to the Clinic by his father for intellectual and educational assessment to establish his strengths and weaknesses, in particular in the literacy area.

Background Information:

Due to time considerations, a detailed discussion of background information was omitted. However considerable written information was received from Mr D. prior to the assessment appointment, and key aspects were discussed.

Behavioural Observations:

Adam presented as quiet and reserved. Because a lot of the conversation and questions were directed toward Adam’s father, Adam did not have a lot of opportunity to interact with the examiners. However, during the assessment (over two sessions), Adam was generally attentive and concentrated on each of the tasks. Adam attempted most of the tasks with effort; however, as they increased in complexity, he was inclined to claim an inability to find the answer - sometimes prematurely.

Assessment:

General Intellectual Assessment

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-III) was used to determine Adam’s current level of intellectual functioning. The WISC-III contains 11 individual tests that measure a variety of skills and abilities thought to be important in overall intellectual functioning. The 11 individual tests are divided into two groups. Half of the subtests (five) form the Verbal Scale (Information, Similarities, Arithmetic, Vocabulary and Comprehension), and the other five form the Performance Scale (Picture Completion, Coding, Picture Arrangement, Block Design and Object Assembly). The Verbal Scale is highly structured, dependent on Adam’s accumulated experiences, and usually requires him to respond with what he already knows. The Performance Scale is less structured and is more dependent on Adam’s immediate problem solving ability and requires him to meet new situations, and to apply past experiences and previously acquired skills to a new set of demands.

The Verbal and Performance Scale scores are combined to provide the Full Scale score or IQ. The WISC-III Full Scale score is one way to view Adam’s overall thinking and reasoning skills.

Adam obtained a Full Scale IQ of 116 + 6 on the WISC-III. Adam’s overall performance is classified in the High Average range of intellectual functioning. His general cognitive ability is ranked at the 86^th percentile indicating that he performed equal to or better than 86% of his same age peers.

There was, however, a statistically significant 25 IQ point difference between Adam’s Verbal and Performance scores in favour of the Performance scale. The results suggest that Adam’s non-verbal abilities are significantly better developed than his verbal abilities.

Whilst research suggests that IQ scores are usually stable, it is difficult to be certain that these results are a true reflection of Adam’s current level of intellectual functioning.  Furthermore, while IQ scores are reasonably predictive of educational achievement, they may not be as effective in the prediction of non-test behaviour and non-academic intellectual ability.  IQ is not a pure measure of innate capacity, but rather reflects experience in addition to potential and education in addition to aptitude.  Interestingly, IQ is not as strong a predictor of reading success as is often believed - phonemic awareness is however a very strong predictor.

Reading Assessment:

Research has shown that the skills most strongly associated with early reading success involve phonological processing. When these skills are taught early in a child's career, the prognosis can be changed for at-risk beginning readers. Three major phonological processes have been identified:

Phonological Awareness

Phonological awareness skills refer to the oral skills that enable individuals to recognise that spoken words consist of individual sounds. This ability to being able to break words into sounds is the basis for decoding strategies that are necessary for the early stages of reading.

Two subtests from the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTTOP) were administered to assess phonological awareness: Elision and Blending Words. Elision is a phoneme deletion task in which the participant is required to repeat a word with one phoneme omitted (e.g. Say time - now say time without the “m”). Adam’s performance on this test was at the 5^th percentile. The second test administered was Blending Words, which is a phoneme blending task. The examiner reads words aloud to the subject with a pause between each phoneme, and the subject is required to identify the word. Adam’s performance on this test was at the 16^th percentile. Overall, these two results indicate that Adam’s phonological awareness is at the 5^th percentile, indicating that his skills are equal to or better than 5% of peers his age. This represents a severe deficit in an important component of beginning reading.

Phonological recoding in lexical access

A number of researchers have noted the predictive power of naming-speed tasks, using pictures, numbers, and letters. Both naming speed and sight word reading rely on rapid, automatic symbol retrieval. It has been shown that slow naming speed is specific to reading disability, and not evident in those with generalised reading problems. Efficient retrieval of phonological information and execution of sequences of operations are required when readers attempt to decode unfamiliar words. A lack of fluency in reading is a likely consequence of problems in this area.

Two subtests from the CTTOP were administered in order to assess Adam’s phonological recoding skills: Rapid Digit Naming and Rapid Letter Naming. Rapid Digit Naming requires the subject to read numerals from a list as quickly as possible. Adam achieved a score at the 9^th percentile. Rapid Letter Naming requires the subject to read letters from a list as quickly as possible. Adam achieved a score at the 25^th percentile. Together these results indicate that Adam’s naming speed for numbers and letters is better than or equal to 21% of children his age. This represents a mild deficit in this aspect of reading.

Phonological recoding in working memory

The beginner reader has to be able to decode a series of graphemes, and temporarily order them to allow the complex skill of blending to occur. This skill is an important determinant of early reading success. It is relevant to the ability to decode novel long words, and a deficit is likely to impair both listening and reading comprehension of complex sentences.

Two subtests from the CTTOP were administered to assess blending capacities: Memory for Digits and Nonword Repetition. Memory for Digits requires the participant to repeat a group of digits that have been read aloud. This needs to be done in the same order as they were read out. Adam performed at the 9^th percentile. Nonword Repetition was the second test used and involves non-words read aloud to the participant, and having the participant repeat them verbatim. As the participant progresses the non-words become longer, and is therefore a test of phonological memory. Adam also achieved a score at the 9^th percentile. Combined, these results indicate that Adam’s working memory capacity is as the 5^th percentile. Therefore, Adam is performing equal to or better than 5% of peers his age. This represents a severe deficit in another important component of beginning reading.

What do these CTOPP scores mean?

Low scores on tests of phonological processing are usually considered indicative of problems with the quality of word representation in the lexicon. The representations of written word are acquired through phonemic mappings to letters but are dependent also on some degree of awareness that words are constructed of meaningless speech segments that can be effectively manipulated to assist reading. When representations of words are unstable (or stable but incorrect), matching a stimulus word with the correct phonemically stored counterpart will be slow and error prone, as the individual is required to reject all the competing phonemically similar but semantically impossible responses.

In other words, if these phonological representations are imprecise then tasks such as phonological recoding in lexical access (as measured by Naming Speed) and phonological recoding in working memory (as measured by Digit Span and Non-word Repetition) may also present problems for such individuals, and there is ample evidence that one or both do so. For example, if the phonological representation of “dog” is unreliable, then the association between the name of the animal and its meaning will be vague. A picture of a dog may quickly evoke its meaning but the phonologically assembled label is slowed because other similar labels (e.g., god, dock, bog) may need to be rejected. Scrolling through a range of possibilities requires more time than accessing a clear uniquely described form. The problem for reading is that this may disrupt the comprehension process, and slow the reading speed to the extent that it becomes a non-preferred activity.

Recent research findings have noted that those with a double deficit (those readers performing at a low level in more than one phonological skill area) are doubly disadvantaged with respect to their reading development, and are likely to require more intensive and extended instruction than those with a single area of deficit.

Decoding of Non-Words

The decoding of non-words is considered the most appropriate measure of phonological recoding. It provides an indication of the capacity to transfer the oral skill of phonological awareness to the task of decoding print. The Word Attack subtest of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test measures an individual’s ability to apply phonetic and structural analysis to the pronunciation of written nonsense words. This task eliminates the use of purely visual word recognition or contextual strategies. The ability to do this is important in the development of skilled reading. Adam’s performance on this test was consistent with the performance of an average 7.6 year old (a Grade 2.2 level), clearly well below average.

The Wide Range Achievement Test – Revision Three (WRAT3) was also administered in order to access Adam’s ability to read words that are presented in isolation. In these circumstances, the individual may either decode the words or recognise them as whole words. Adam was able to correctly read a range of words (e.g., ‘in’, ‘cat’, ‘book’). However, as the words became longer and more complicated (e.g., ‘collapse’, ‘contagious’), Adam produced a greater number of errors. Adam’s performance placed him at the 8^th percentile, which means he can read equal to or better than 8% of his same age peers, which corresponds to Grade 3 level.

Fluency

The Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) was used to assess Adam’s speed and accuracy in reading, known as reading fluency.  Children are successful with decoding when the process used to identify words is fast and nearly effortless or automatic.  Thus, the ability to recognize words with little attention required to the word’s appearance allows a student to exert more effort in understanding what has been read.  The ability to read words by sight automatically is a key to skilled reading and highly associated with reading success.

The TOWRE is a measure of word-reading fluency.  It provides an efficient means of monitoring the growth of two kinds of word reading skills that are critical in the development of overall reading ability: the ability to accurately recognize familiar words as whole units or “sight words” and the ability to “sound out” words quickly.  The first of two subtests, Sight Word Efficiency (SWE) was used to assess the number of real printed words that can be accurately identified within 45 seconds.  Adam’s scored in the 2^nd percentile for the SWE subtest. This puts him at severe disadvantage in understanding what he reads, because his recognition is slow and error-prone.

The second of the two subtests, Phonetic Decoding Efficiency (PDE), was used to measure the number of pronounceable printed nonwords that Adam could decode within 45 seconds. He performed in the 2^nd percentile for the PDE subtest.

To assess Adam’s fluency with text rather than with lists, the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) was used. His reading rate of 30 words read correctly in a minute was indicative of a high risk of difficulties at a Grade 6 level. This can be compared with the average age peer who is expected to attain about 150 words correct per minute with text of a grade 6 level.

Spelling

Good spelling skills are closely related to an early history of a solid phonemic awareness and an understanding that letters correspond to sounds. The more attention that is paid to regular letter groupings (sounds) found in words, the more strongly these groupings are cemented in our memories, thereby improving spelling. To test Adam’s spelling ability, the WRAT3 spelling measure was used. Adam’s performance in this test was that expected of a Grade 2 student, which is equal to or better than approximately 2% of children his age, indicative of a seriously delayed skill.

Comprehension

Comprehension is another important component of reading ability. Comprehension is the ability to understand the meanings of individual words and sentences, whether spoken or written. Reading comprehension involves understanding written text, and listening comprehension involves understanding spoken language. The Silent Reading and Listening Comprehension subtests of the Spadafore Diagnostic Reading Test were used to assess Adam’s comprehension skills.

The Silent Reading Comprehension subtest requires the participant to read a passage and then answer oral questions related to the passage. Adam’s reading comprehension was assessed at a Grade 2 level. This indicates that Adam struggled to recall details in the passages he read. This may be due either to problems in remembering the main points, or to a difficulty in the mechanical process of reading that impedes his ability to understand the author’s intent.

A comparison with the Listening Comprehension subtest can help answer the question of origin. This subtest requires the child to listen to a short passage read by the examiner, and then answer oral questions directly related to the story. It tests the child’s ability to identify the main ideas of a story, remember the story sequence, and understand cause and effect. It is identical to the Silent Reading Comprehension except that it removes the requirement for the student to “get the words off the page”. Adam’s Listening Comprehension was at a level expected of a child in Grade 6. This indicates that he does not have difficulties obtaining meaning from what he hears, and is able to remember the details. Thus, his deficits in reading comprehension are not evident in listening comprehension. This discrepancy also eliminates the possibility of working memory difficulties accounting for his low reading comprehension score – as memory is equally challenged in each subtest.

Summary

Assessment has demonstrated that Adam has severe deficits in two of the major precursors for reading achievement - phonological awareness and phonological recoding in working memory, and also a moderate deficit in naming speed. These deficits are consistent with the observed attainment levels in his spelling and decoding. Adam's reading comprehension is limited by his ability to decode words. The large discrepancy between listening comprehension and reading comprehension adds weight to the view that Adam's literacy difficulty is a modular deficit, rather than one derived from an overall language or intellectual difficulty. This discrepancy is now employed by many as a working definition of dyslexia, particularly when the deficit is phonological. Additionally, the discrepancy between Adam's intellectual level (within the normal range) and his literacy attainments (markedly delayed) meets the traditional definition of reading disability or dyslexia. The family history of bright siblings with reading difficulty suggests an inherited component. However, the instructional environment has not been sufficiently intensive to compensate for Adam’s phonological deficit. It is unfortunate that suitably targeted assistance was not provided earlier when altering Adam’s academic future would have been significantly easier.

Recommendations:

The Corrective Reading Program: Decoding placement test revealed that Level B1 would be the most appropriate level for Adam to commence, as this reflects his current reading attainment. The program’s emphasis on skilled use of the decoding strategies when reading text will assist his reading development significantly. Level B1 typically elevates decoding skill from early Grade 2 to beginning of Grade 3, and fluency from a 60 words per minute to 90 words per minute at that text difficulty level. If he is to make significant gains, the intensity of assistance will need to be maximized. It should be recognized that he will need to complete Level C in addition to Level B1 and Level B2 if he is to have any chance of managing secondary school textbooks. This constitutes a combined total of 265 lessons, a total at five lessons per week will take more than a year. By the conclusion, he should be capable of reading text at beyond a Grade 5 level and at a fluency of 130 words per minute.

As Adam progresses through this program, other skills such as spelling could be similarly addressed using appropriate programs available from the Clinic. Adam should also be encouraged to participate in recreational reading, employing books that are related to his interests, but at a level at which he is able read with relative ease.

Recommendations for the secondary school

Adam will require intensive, systematic and individualised teaching if he is to improve his reading, spelling and written skills. The programs available at the RMIT Clinic are designed to be taught at school in sessions of about 50 minutes per day. Even with such high quality instruction, progress will be slow, and Adam will probably need such literacy instruction through high school and beyond.

Adam will need substantial accommodations to help him meet the reading and writing demands of the secondary curriculum. An accommodation is a school change that allows students to utilise their learning strengths, precluding or diminishing the limiting effects of their disability. For example, Adam will require alternative arrangements to access written material in text books, alternatives to note taking, to written composition, and to ways of taking exams. Accommodations may also include extra time to complete tasks, having instructions repeated or reworded, and receiving instructions both orally and in writing. He may also require modification to curriculum content in some content subjects.

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Hempenstall, Nicholas B., RMIT Clinic

Clinic program evaluation

Evaluation of the Clinic intervention may take several forms. First, was the program a success? Did the anticipated changes eventuate? These changes may be judged through in-program mastery tests; program behavioural-objectives analysis; pre- and post-test criterion-referenced and standardized assessment; video- and audio-taped reading behaviour.

Second, was the chosen program appropriate to the objectives negotiated with the family? That is, assuming the program itself was successful, is the outcome what the family expected? Are they satisfied with the outcome?

Third, was the program appropriately implemented? Was treatment fidelity obtained? Without it one cannot be sure that any success was due to the program itself. If there were alterations to the program, are you able to assess their impact? You may gain information useful in future interventions.

Fourth, were social-validity expectations met? If there have been noticeable changes, do they also occur outside the home or Clinic situations? In particular, can it be shown that reading has improved at school? Is there a genuine, easily recognizable change in the reading ability and attitude of the child as a consequence of the intervention? See Figure 5.

Further notes on the listening comprehension - reading comprehension discrepancy.

Comparing the results of listening comprehension to reading comprehension allows the identification of those children who have a major problem only at the level of print. They will perform well on the listening comprehension tasks, using their impressive general language skills to answer questions about a story read to them. On the reading comprehension task however, they will do relatively poorly as their under-developed decoding skills prevent them bringing into play their well-developed general language skills. When required to decode a passage unassisted, they struggle, as do their garden-variety peers. On the other hand, the garden-variety students would be expected to perform similarly on both tasks. Their reading problems are general rather than specific, and they may not have any particular reading subskill restricting their development. Their decoding skill is commensurate with their other language skills, such that if they know the meaning of a word (or phrase, or sentence), they can comprehend it whether it is presented orally or in print. The consequence for the high LC (listening comprehension)-low RC (reading comprehension) child should be intensive assistance at the decoding level. For the low LC-Low RC child, intensive assistance at both the decoding and comprehension levels is indicated.

Other possible outcomes are high LC-high RC, a result predictable from an all-round good reader; and low LC-high RC, a rare result, possibly from a student with acute attentional, hearing, or short-term memory problems. In this case, the permanence of text would allow the student to use his intact language comprehension skills, whereas the ephemeral nature of the spoken story precludes such access. Hyperlexic students (a rare sub-group with excellent word recognition, but poor reading comprehension) would not be detected by this discrepancy analysis, because their listening comprehension parallels their reading comprehension.

This LC-RC discrepancy represents an alternative definition of the group known as dyslexic; however, as with the IQ discrepancy-defined dyslexic, an issue is how great a discrepancy should be considered significant. Some (including the Clinic) have considered two years to be very significant given the extent of commonality of the tasks; although this is clearly an arbitrary figure, its significance being higher the younger the age of the child. As the term dyslexia is unlikely to disappear (at least in the short term), and parents almost always ask questions about it, the Clinic policy is to make use of the listening comprehension-reading comprehension discrepancy in discussions with parents. This is its major value since the techniques employed include systematic phonics whether the difficulty is described as dyslexic or garden-variety. The dyslexic classification does, however sensitize clinicians to the possibility that dyslexic students may be more treatment-resistant than garden-variety students, and some may also require additional direct phonemic awareness instruction if progress does not occur during the intervention with a powerful code-emphasis program, such as Corrective Reading: Decoding.

Occasionally, a student struggles with the fluency aspect of the Corrective Reading: Decoding program. In this case the family returns to the Clinic and a lesson is presented by the parent, with feedback from the clinician. In the event that there are clear issues in the manner in which the program is being implemented then modelling and feedback are provided until presentation improves. If no presentation faults are apparent, a repeated reading regimen is instituted until the student is able to meet the timed reading criteria. See Figure 6.

The model described in this paper has been developing over the past 15 years. It has its limitations obviously, but has demonstrated that parents can be an effective resource in both beginning and remedial intervention. Their potential effectiveness extends beyond reading to their child, hearing their child read, and providing the occasional clue to a word’s identity. The careful design of the Direct Instruction programs and their scripted mode of presentation combine to enable outcomes unavailable were all parents to rely on the education system to fully provide for their children.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Corrective Reading Program Tutor Monitoring Form. Kerry Hempenstall (adapted from Nathan Crow)

Total: Add the numbers in the middle column to obtain the maximum available score (M). Add the numbers in the last column to obtain the total score achieved (A). Divide M by A and multiply by 100 to establish the Tutor Mastery Score (PMS). The aim is to achieve a Mastery Score above 90% (SRA, 2001).

Reference: SRA/McGraw-Hill (2001, May). Corrective Reading: Decoding and Comprehension Trainer’s Guide. USA: SRA/McGraw-Hill South East Region.

Figure 3

Parent Information sheet:

• Read the instructions about how the program is designed and how to present the program
• Read Lesson 1 several times until you are reasonably confident about presenting it smoothly
• Present Lesson 1 several times to your partner during the week, trying to present it smoothly
• Do not present Lesson 1 to your child during this week
• List any questions you have for the next session
• Remember the importance of: sticking to the scripts every lesson
• Discuss the points system and whether it’s required in this situation - usually only necessary if the child is reluctant
• Note which segments are unnecessary in 1:1 format, because they were designed to facilitate group instruction
• Remember importance of doing “endings build-up” correctly. That is, use a format that is erasable - whiteboard, blackboard, overhead transparency overlaid on a paper page (not ink on a page - the erasure of part of a word is important to direct attention to the similarities between different words
• Remember to practise the Correction Procedures
• Remember the need to instantly correct all errors, not waiting for your child to self-correct
• Note the requirement to return to the first word in a line, column or sentence following an error. Remember to “repeat until firm”
• Remember that discomfort is normal for the new presenters (even teachers need 20 lessons to feel comfortable)
• Decide whether signals are necessary - usually based upon whether a child is inclined to respond too slowly
• Remember the importance of reasonably rapid pacing of lessons
• Remember the rationale for the focus on sound combinations, especially in the middle of words - explain how they are the last skills to develop
• Remember the “Reading Checkouts” and particularly the timed checkout.
• Fill in the Corrective Reading Program RMIT sheet that enables you to maintain records of progress for discussion with clinician during the program
• Don’t forget the mid and end-of-program Mastery Tests.

Figure 4

The following contains sections of the sheets that are used to collect data, reported weekly/fortnightly  by phone from parents, to ensure that student progress is being maintained.

Corrective Reading program: Level A (Lessons 1-35)

Free           Lesson       Date     Lesson   Errors in             Comments (e.g. difficulties, common

Reading   Number                 Time         reading         reading errors, breakthroughs)

Corrective Reading program: Level B1 (Lessons 36-60)

Free        Lesson      Date     Lesson           Errors                    Words              Comments (e.g. difficulties,

Reading Number                  How      First           Timed          read                reading breakthroughs)

Time                          Long?      Reading     Reading    in 1 min

Corrective Reading program: B2 (Lessons 1-35)

Free           Lesson       Date      Lesson           Errors                    Words              Comments (e.g. difficulties,

Reading     Number                   How       First          Timed        read                   reading breakthroughs)

Time                            Long?    Reading     Reading      in 1 min    

Corrective Reading Program: Level C (Lessons 1-30)

Free          Lesson      Date    Lesson  Errors in     Words            Comments (e.g. difficulties,

Reading    Number                How       Timed       read             reading breakthroughs)

Time                          Long?      Reading     in 2 min

Parent Questionnaire

Your child has been participating in a special reading program, and we would like to find out how useful it has been. We are particularly interested to learn whether you have noticed any changes in your child's reading. We would appreciate your help in filling out this form, and returning it to us as soon as is convenient.

Please underline the words that best describe your child's current reading.

In terms of the amount of reading done at home, my child is now reading much more than      a little more than       the same as       less than        before the program's introduction.

If you have noticed an increase, what type(s) of reading materials does your child favour?

In terms of the skill of reading done at home, my child is now reading much better than       better than       the same as       worse than     before the program's introduction.

If you have noticed a skill improvement, is it in   speed,   accuracy,   smoothness,   preparedness to read out loud   understanding of what is read?

(You may underline any number of these words.)

In terms of the enjoyment of reading done at home, my child now seems to find reading     much more enjoyable than       more enjoyable than        the same as        less enjoyable than        before the program's introduction.

Do you have any other comments that you think might be helpful to future planning? Please write them below.

When a student regularly misses fluency targets in the Corrective Reading program: Repeated reading

Kerry Hempenstall

“...repeated reading and other procedures that have students reading passages orally multiple times while receiving guidance or feedback from peers, parents, or teachers are effective in improving a variety of reading skills...These procedures help improve students’ reading ability, at least through grade 5, and they help improve the reading of students with learning problems much later than this. ...(And they) tended to improve word recognition, fluency (speed and accuracy of oral reading), and comprehension with most groups” (National Reading Panel, 2000, pp. 3-20; 3-28).

Repeated reading is a method of improving reading rate and accuracy. When students read very slowly, their understanding of what they read is greatly impaired. Though speed is partly dependent on the development of decoding skills, it can nevertheless be improved with practice devoted to timed reading, and reading rate certainly needs particular attention when it is very slow. For example, an average Year 2 student is expected to be able to read grade level text at about 80-100 wpm with 95% accuracy.

Repeated reading also helps children to further understand the phrasing of the text. Additionally, repeated reading leads to increased comprehension of the selected text as a result of multiple exposures to it. This increased comprehension also transfers to new text when the stories are at a similar reading level and assuming accuracy and speed have also increased. Being asked to read the same passage several times is not a punishment strategy or a sign of lack of progress - but a strategy that helps students. It is important that this be explained to students commencing the program.

Repeated Reading Program Rules      

Instructions: Conduct the Corrective Reading program lesson as per usual. If the student has not read the required number of words per minute and/or has surpassed the permissible number of errors for the lesson, implement repeated reading, following the rules specified below:

Format for phone contacts while monitoring the program

Case Supervisor: Dr. Kerry Hempenstall

Telephone call date:    

Telephone call time and duration:

Notes

How is the Corrective Reading Program (Decoding Level A) progressing?

Michael reports that the program has commenced and that all is progressing well after the first week. Michael believes that Louise is finding the lessons relatively easy and that this is providing her with lots of success and motivation to persist with lessons.

How many lessons has L completed?

Louise has completed 12 lessons of the Corrective Reading Program (Decoding Level A) within the first week.  The family has managed to complete between one and three lessons each day. Michael reports that they have encouraged Louise to undertake as many lessons as possible during the first week because she has been on school holidays and has had ‘extra time’. 

Who has been implementing lessons with Louise?

Michael has administered all 12 lessons with Louise.  Lesley felt that she needed to practise the skill of continuous blending prior to administering lessons with Louise. Michael feels more confident than Lesley in his ability to articulate different letter sounds and to blend letters together.  Lesley may begin administering some lessons with Louise at a later stage.  However, at this point, Michael will continue administering all lessons with Louise, and thus telephone check-ups will occur between Michael and the clinician.

Data: (Please note: Michael has not recorded ‘Free Reading Time’)

S/C = Self-corrected

Have there been any problems encountered so far?

Michael reports that the only problems encountered thus far have concerned the pronunciation of some letter sounds.  Michael feels that because the program is American, some letter sounds are pronounced slightly differently as to how they would be pronounced in Australia.  For example, the word ‘must’ sounds more like ‘mast’ when pronounced according to the cues in the book.  Lesley and Michael have managed to overcome this problem by discussing the different letter pronunciations in America compared to Australia. Michael states that Louise has made some errors in each lesson, but that he is self-correcting on a lot of these errors.  Michael believes Louise is enjoying the program at the moment and is motivated to improve her reading skills.

Any queries regarding the program?

Michael did not have any questions at this stage of consultation.  However, the clinician and Michael discussed the need to deliver mastery tests after the completion of lessons 20, 45 and 65.  Michael believes that Louise will have completed 20 lessons by the end of next week.

Next client contact scheduled for…..

The clinician to telephone Michael on Tuesday 3^rd October for another check-up/ consultation.  Michael has requested that he be contacted on his work telephone number (xxxxxx) sometime in the late afternoon.  During this telephone conversation the clinician, and he will determine when Louise will be presented with her first Mastery test (to occur after the completion of Lesson 20).  Michael will check that he has all of the materials available to deliver this mastery test.  If he does not, the clinician will photocopy the Mastery Test Examiner’s Manual and Mastery Test Booklet and post it to Michael. 

Dr. Kerry Hempenstall

Provisional Psychologist            Case Supervisor

The effects of parent involvement in their children’s educational progress have been mixed. There are many types of parent involvement with different effects. A recent meta-analysis

For programs that go beyond parent encouragement or progress monitoring of student progress, the issue arises as to whether taking on a tutoring role is feasible.

Hempenstall, K. (2005, Fall). Aiding parents to teach reading at home: The RMIT Clinic approach. Direct Instruction News, 5(3), 11-26.

https://www.nifdi.org/docman/dr-kerry-hempenstall-s-referenced-documents/310-aiding-parents-to-teach-reading-at-home/file.html

The End!