Study

last updated:February 2006

What kind of parental involvement helps the most?  
The researchers found that the term ‘parental involvement’ encompasses a number of quite different forms of activity – some which take place at home and some at school.  Activities that parents involve themselves in at home include:

• talking with their children
• enhancing their child’s self-esteem
• modelling social and educational aspirations and values
• monitoring out of school activities (supervising homework etc).

Activities parents participate in at school include:

• attending events, such as open days and school fairs
• working in the school in support of teachers (for example, helping with activities in the classroom, on trips and with sports activities)
•  assisting in the governance of the school
• meeting with teachers to discuss their children’s progress etc.

The review found that, of all these activities, the most important for enhancing pupil achievement, are the conversations and discussions parents have with their children at home.

This finding is consistent with the work of the Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky. He pointed out the importance of talking, particularly the dialogue that occurs when an adult assists a child to solve problems in his/her ‘zone of proximal development’ (defined as the difference between what people achieve by themselves and what they can achieve with the assistance from a more skilled person). Vygotsky believed that learning occurred in this zone and that social learning leads to cognitive development. Practitioners may like to read about his theory and see examples of adult-child interactions that help children learn, in our RfT ‘Social interaction as a means of constructing learning’.

What difference does parental involvement at home make to pupil achievement?   
The reviewers found many studies which showed that parental involvement at home has a large and positive effect on pupil achievement. Strikingly, at primary level, the impact of such parental involvement on pupil achievement is much bigger than the impact schools have, but by KS4, the impact on achievement is less than the school. By this stage, the impact of parental involvement is more in terms of influencing staying on rates and pupils’ educational aspirations than in terms of achievement.

The table below (from Sacker et al) shows the difference in effect size of the impact of parents and schools on pupil achievement.  (N.B. Effect sizes of 0.3 or less are generally considered to be small.)

The reviewers also found that the effect of parental involvement at home – in particular the discussions and conversations parents have with their children – was stronger than that of either socio-economic status or parents’ level of education. Whilst learning related provision in the home was generally higher in higher social class homes, there are parents low on SES and qualifications who also provide a learning home environment.

Practitioners may like to reflect on a case study (no. 1)  that shows the power of the home as a learning environment. It also reveals that the kind of conversations children engage in with adults at home are quite different to the kinds of conversations children engage in with adults at school.

Why is parents’ involvement at home so important?
The reviewers found that the broad answer to why parents’ involvement at home is so important seemed to depend on the age of the child. For younger children, ‘at home’ parenting provides the child with a context to gain school-related skills (such as reading and counting) along with opportunities to develop qualities of motivation and self-worth.  For older pupils, the parenting role is more about motivating their child and modelling aspirations than helping with specific skills.  We outline the findings of two of the studies included in the review to illustrate these different effects.

Early years
‘The Effective Provision of Pre School Education (EPPE) Project’ (Sylva et al) tracked the attainment and development of around 3,000 children between the ages of 3 and 7 years. The researchers found that parents who engaged in learning activities with their children at home (such as, reading to them, singing songs and nursery rhymes, and playing with letters and numbers) helped reduce the risk of special educational needs (SEN).  Practitioners can find out about the EPPE findings in more detail in our earlier RoMs, Researching effective pedagogy in the early years  and Effective provision of pre-school education.

Adolescents
Several studies showed that parental involvement had less influence on the achievement of older pupils, but parental involvement was important nevertheless. For example, Catsambis found that parental involvement was not associated with academic progress with 14-18 year olds. However, their involvement increased the likelihood of their child continuing with their education and choosing challenging course options. High levels of parental expectation, consistent encouragement and actions that aimed to enhance learning opportunities in the home were all positively associated with students’ high aspirations and college enrolments.

Practitioners may like to read a case study that reports how some teachers set about enhancing parents’ involvement with primary and secondary aged children at home, and the activities they used as talking points, such as taking photos and collecting artefacts.

Practitioners may also like to read a case study we featured in our earlier RfT about the EPPE pre-school project, which describes an activity designed for pre-school children and their parents to talk about at home.

Why do some parents get more involved in their child’s learning than others?
The research literature showed large variations in the extent to which parents were involved in their child’s learning. For example, a survey of parents of children aged 5-16 (Williams et al) found 29% of parents felt very involved (more in primary than secondary schools, and more mothers than fathers), whilst 35% felt strongly they would like to be more involved. On this and the following page, we look at findings from several studies included in the review that explored factors that affect  levels of parental involvement, whilst the case study section gives examples of strategies designed to tackle some of the problems.

Socio-economic status
An American study (Sui-Chu and Willms) which collected questionnaire data from around 24,600 students aged 14 years from 1,500 schools found that the higher the social class, the more likely the parents were involved in the children’s education. The parents:

• discussed school activities with their children
• monitored children’s out of school activities
• contacted school staff
• volunteered for school activities and attended school functions.

Level of education
Kohl et al found the more educated the parent, the greater their involvement in their child’s education.  Having a more limited educational experience meant that some parents lacked the relevant skills to get involved. Practitioners may like to read a case study of a school that set out to enhance parents’ knowledge of how they could support their children with mathematics homework to give them the confidence to play a greater part in their child’s education.

Parents’ view of their role
Williams et al found that 2% of parents felt the responsibility for education belonged wholly to the school, whilst 58% believed they had at least equal responsibility.  The remaining 40% were presumably somewhere in between. The reviewers reached the inevitable conclusion that the parents’ view of who is responsible for their child’s education shapes their view about what they feel is important or necessary for them to do. Practitioners may like to read a case study of a school that helped parents to see the active part they could play in their child’s learning at home.

How do pupils affect the level of their parents’ involvement?   
The review found that the children themselves also have the potential to promote or discourage parental involvement in their learning. On this page we explore how children can affect the level of their parents’ involvement and give a case study example of a strategy designed to encourage children to involve their parents.

A study of 872 Canadian students aged 14-15 years (Deslandes and Cloutier) for example, found that students were generally positive about asking their parents to help them with their schoolwork:

• 60% would ask their parents to listen to them read something they had written
• 86% would invite parents to assist with ideas for a project
• 66% would work with parents to improve their grades.

Another study (Edwards and Alldred) of 70 children aged 10 and 14 years, showed how although some children promote parent involvement, others   discourage it.
Promoting parental involvement

Children who actively promoted parental involvement might, for example, spontaneously tell their parents about the school day or ask for help with schoolwork. Their motives seemed to be to do with wanting their parents’ company rather than wanting to advance their achievement.  Children who were passive about promoting parental involvement ‘went along’ with parental activity – for example, they ‘did not mind’ parents offering to help and they responded when asked about the school day.
Discouraging parental involvement

Children who discouraged, evaded or obstructed parental involvement often did so because they felt their parents were ‘too busy’ or ‘not the type’.  They might block home-school connections by, for example, dumping school notes or newsletters or censuring discussions of ‘bad days at school’.  Sometimes pupils felt they did not need parental involvement because, for example, they saw it as their own responsibility to do their homework.

Whether children promoted or discouraged parental involvement largely depended upon their gender, their age and their social class:

• girls supported parental involvement more actively than boys
• secondary school students were less comfortable with parental involvement than primary aged pupils
• middle class children were more inclined to go along with the idea of parental involvement than working class children, who were either more likely to initiate involvement (mainly girls) or block it (mainly boys).

Practitioners may like to read a case study that shows how setting ‘interactive’ homework (tasks that had a clear role for parents) increased the amount of time parents spent supporting their child’s learning.

What strategies have helped vulnerable children and their parents?   
Children from families suffering from material deprivation or whose parents suffer from ill health or depression etc are particularly at risk. The reviewers reported on family and community education programmes specifically designed to provide guidance and help for such families.  Although many of these programmes tend to take place away from school settings, there is plenty of scope for input from teachers and schools, particularly now that schools and other agencies are expected to work more closely together under the Every Child Matters agenda. One example the reviewers gave was of a Family Literacy scheme which comprised:

• joint parent/child sessions on supporting reading skills
• early literacy teaching for young children
• accredited basic skills instruction for parents.

The programme was targeted at parents who were illiterate or semi illiterate and designed to engage the parents and their children aged 3-6 years jointly in learning at home. The children were given intensive teaching whilst the parents worked on their own literacy and learned how to help their children.

The programme was evaluated through statistical analysis as well as perception data. By the end of the programme, parents and children had made statistically significant advances in achievement in reading and writing:

• at the start of the programme, 67% of the children had low levels of achievement that would cause them to struggle at school.  This proportion fell to 35% by the end of the programme and the gains were sustained nine months later
• there were also significant boosts to parental achievement, to their confidence and to their confidence in helping their child, and these gains were sustained two years later.

Furthermore, teachers rated the classroom behaviour of the Family Literacy children as better than the behaviour of their peers and the children received more support from their families. They also considered the children as equal to their peers in other academic and motivational respects.

We described another effective family education programme, ‘The Peers Early Education Partnership’ (PEEP) in the case study section of our RoM about the Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project.

What other strategies have been tried?   
Some programmes have focused on other issues, such as improving children’s behaviour and family attitudes towards school. For example, the reviewers reported examples of parenting programmes. In one such programme, single mothers on low incomes or state benefits who had been referred by social services attended a 90-minute session every week for six weeks. Social workers trained the mothers how to use behavioural techniques, and the mothers practiced the techniques through role-play. After the course, the children’s behaviour problems were reduced. So too was parental depression. Furthermore, improved child behaviour was still evident six months later.

Other programmes have encompassed everyone involved in the child’s schooling, including headteachers, school staff, children and parents. In one such programme, home/school links workers (HSLW) aimed to help parents whose own experience of schooling may have made them negative and unconfident when dealing with their children’s schools. Their responsibilities included:

• establishing contact and building relationships with families
• working with families to improve attendance
• helping parents to support their children’s learning.

The project reported a number of achievements, including:

• better communication between families and schools
• more parents coming forward to seek help and support
• improvement in parents' understanding of school issues
• better understanding on the part of teachers of family situations.

Whilst there is no evidence that these kinds of programmes have a direct impact on pupil achievement, they may help parents feel more comfortable about approaching school and more willing to play a part in their children's education.

How might we use research about parental involvement to inform attempts to close the social class achievement gap?
The studies in the review consistently showed that parental involvement has a large and positive effect on children’s achievement and engagement.  Consequently, the reviewers argued, if the involvement of lower SES parents in their children’ s learning at home could be enhanced, very significant advances in school achievement might reasonably be expected. The reviewers concluded that schools could enhance parental involvement, but they recognised that the challenge is multidimensional. The studies showed there are many different barriers to parental involvement. Therefore an initiative to enhance parental involvement would need to tackle the problems faced by some parents, including:

• the effects of extreme poverty
• the effects of substance abuse and domestic violence
• the effects of depression
• lack of confidence in, or knowledge about, how to support their child’s learning
• the impact of inappropriate values and beliefs
• the impact of the difficult child.

Some parents will need help with all these issues, whilst others will need selective support. The reviewers commented on how so far, initiatives have attempted to deal with each of these challenges separately –  that there seems to have been no initiative that has attempted to manage all the issues simultaneously and they suggested the way forward might be an approach which includes strategies to deal with all the identified issues.  This may be a less daunting prospect than it might have been until very recently, when the introduction of the Every Child Matters agenda  created an environment in which schools are expected to collaborate with other professionals involved in children’s development, such as social workers and health professionals.

How was the review conducted?   
The authors of this interpretative review searched databases (such as Education-Line and the British Education Index) and websites (including the DfES, LEA websites and the Electronic Journals service) using seven key terms, for relevant studies published between 1990 and 2003.  They also collected material recommended by experts in the field from the UK, USA, Australia, New Zealand and Scandinavia.

The reviewers identified two types of research:

• studies that examined the impact of naturally occurring parental involvement on children’s educational outcomes
• studies that evaluated interventions designed to enhance levels of parental involvement.

The reviewers outlined some of the strengths and weaknesses of the studies they reported upon, but did not indicate what criteria they used for including or excluding studies (as systematic reviews do).

Naturally occurring parental involvement
The reviewers considered that recent research on naturally occurring parental involvement was sound because the studies:

• involved large samples of parents, children and schools
• made objective measures of involvement and impact
• used statistical techniques to test assumptions about the relationship of causes and effects between the process of involvement and their educational impact.

The studies were consistent about the processes involved and the scale of the impact.
Intervention programmes

The research on interventions programmes by contrast, was technically much weaker because:

• samples were typically very small
• evaluations were often subjective, after the event and usually did not refer to comparison groups.

Because this was an interpretative review and because the reviewers themselves noted technical weaknesses in the intervention programme data, it was not possible for them to draw conclusions about the causes and effects of the intervention programmes, although they argued that this did not necessarily indicate that they were ineffective.

What are the implications of this study?
This review investigated how parents influence children’s achievement at school.  It found that the single most important factor is their involvement at home and specifically, the conversations they have with their children.

Teachers may like to consider the following implications:

• Could you do more to promote conversations between children and their parents at home, through, for example, asking children to collect artefacts or take photos at home to bring into school or setting interactive homework activities specifically designed to involve parents? (Case studies 2 and 5 could provide useful starting points).
• Could you do more to build on the conversations that take place at home between parents and their children? Would it be helpful to share ideas with your colleagues for ways of doing this?  (Case study 1, which highlights the difference between adult-child conversations at home and school, could provide a useful starting point).
• Could you do more to monitor whether the strategies you use to increase parental involvement at home contribute to increased pupil learning, and share with parents evidence of the impact of their efforts?  

School leaders may like to consider the following implications:

• Could you do more to raise your colleagues’ awareness of the importance of parental involvement at home throughout their children’s schooling and give them the opportunity to share ideas about ways they might promote conversations between parents and their children?
• The review highlighted how some parents don’t see it as their role to get involved, whilst others don’t know how to support their child’s learning at home. Could your school provide opportunities, such as workshops and discussion groups for parents and carers to see how children learn particular subjects at school, to help them see ways they can help their children at home and the importance of doing so?  (the third case study could provide a useful starting point).
• The reviewers recognised that the challenge of enhancing parental involvement in vulnerable children’s learning is likely to be multidimensional.  Could you do more to engage with other agencies, such as the educational welfare service, children’s social services, youth offending teams and voluntary organisations, such as Childline, Kidscape and NSPCC, or become more actively involved in initiatives in your area designed to tackle the severe problems faced by some families?

Filling in the gaps   
Gaps that are uncovered in a piece of research have a useful role in making sure that future research builds cumulatively on what is known. But research also needs to inform practice, so practitioners’ interpretation of the gaps and follow-up questions are crucial.  We think three kinds of studies would usefully supplement the findings of the review:

• studies that evaluate the effectiveness of multi-agency approaches designed to increase parental involvement by targeting many of the problems faced by some parents
• robust studies designed to evaluate the impact of individual parental involvement initiatives on pupil achievement
• case studies of school initiatives designed to promote parents’ involvement in their child’s learning that are part of the whole school focus on enhancing learning, at both primary and secondary level.

What is your experience?
Do you have any evidence about initiatives aimed at enhancing parental involvement at home? Do you have action research or enquiry based development programmes running that explore, for example the effects of setting interactive homework or training parents how to support their children, on pupil achievement?  We would be interested to hear about examples of effective activities, which we could perhaps feature in our case study section.

Your feedback
Have you found this study to be useful? Have you used any aspect of this research in your own classroom teaching practice? We would like to hear your feedback on this study. To share your views with us email: research@gtce.org.uk

References
We list below the full reference details for the individual studies from the review, which we have included in our RfT summary.

Catsambis, S. (2001) 'Expanding knowledge of parental involvement in children’s secondary education: connections with high schools seniors’ academic success', Social Psychology of Education, 5, pp.149-177

Deslandes, R., & Cloutier (2002) 'Adolescents perceptions of parental involvement in schooling'.  School Psychology International, 23 (2) pp. 220-232

Kohl, G.O. et al (2000) 'Parent involvement in school: conceptualizing multiple dimensions and their relations with family and demographic risk factors', Journal of School Psychology, 38 (6), pp.501-523

Sacker et al (2002) 'Social inequality in educational inequality in educational achievement and psychological adjustment throughout childhood: magnitude and mechanisms', Social Science and Medicine, 55, pp.863-880

Sui-Chu, E.H. and Willms, J.D. (1996) 'Effects of parental involvement on eight-grade achievements', Sociology of Education, 69 (2), 126-141

Sylva K. et al (1999) 'Characteristics of the EPPE Project sample at entry to the study',The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: technical paper 2; London: University of London, Institute of Education

Williams, B. et al (2002) Parental involvement in education (RR332) London: DfES