Home visits: Identifying key questions and strategies for Education Specialists

1. Home visits: Identifying key questions and strategies for Education Specialists Hawaii International Conference on Education Honolulu, Hawaii * January 5, 2008 * DeLacy Ganley * Anita Quintanar * Jeanne Fryer *

2. Research touts the value of *parental involvement *Given the diverse home lives of our students, “parental involvement” discussions should probably be re-framed in terms of “family involvement.” In most cases, though, the literature doesn’t yet accommodate this terminology switch.

3. Summary of research on parental involvement • When parents are actively involved in their children’s education the children have more positive attitudes toward school, exhibit healthy learning behaviors, and, in turn, do better academically (Allen & Tracy, 2004; Aronson, 1996; Baker, Kessler-Sklar, Piorkowski, & Parker, 1996; Davis, 1991; Jonson, 1999; Meyer & Mann, 2006; Putnam, 2000; Reglin, 2002; Thompson, 2007; US Department of Education, 2001, 2005; Ziegler, 2000). • Family involvement seems to be particularly correlated to positive educational trajectories for poor and non-white students (Allen & Tracy, 2004; Baker, Kessler-Sklar, Piorkowski, & Parker, 1996; Clark,1983; Jonson, 1999; Meyer & Mann, 2006; Sharp, Ispa, Thornbug, & Lane, 2003;Thompson, 2007). As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

4. Specifically, involvement is positively correlated with • Higher academic achievement (Becher, 1984; Benson, Medrich, & Buckley, 1980; Haynes, Comer & Hamilton-Lee, 1989; Henderson, 1987; Putnam, 2000) • A student’s sense of well being (Cochran, 1987; Putnam, 2000) • School attendance (Haynes et al., 1989; Putnam, 2000) • Students’ and parents’ perceptions of classroom and school climate (Haynes et al., 1989; Putnam, 2000) • Positive student attitudes and behavior (Becher, 1984; Henderson, Marburger & Ooms, 1986; Leler, 1983) As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

5. Specifically, involvement is positively correlated with (continued) • Student readiness to do homework(Rich, 1988) • Increased student time spent with parents (Putnam, 2000; Rich, 1988) • Better student grades (Henderson et al., 1986; Putnam, 2000) • Higher educational aspirations among students and parents (McDill, Rigsby & Meyers, 1969; Putnam, 2000) • Parent satisfaction with teachers (Epstein, 1984; Putnam, 2000; Rich, 1988) As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

6. Categorizing involvement: Gordon (1977) Gordon (1977) identified six types of involvement: • Teacher of own child (Parent as teacher) • Classroom volunteer • Paid paraprofessional • Learner • Decision maker • Audience As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

7. Categorizing involvement: Cervone & O’Leary (1982) Cervone and O’Leary (1982) proposed five types of involvement: • Reporting progress • Special events • Parent education • Parents teaching • Educational decision makers As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

8. Categorizing involvement: Hester (1989) Hester (1989) suggests five types • Communication with parents • Parents as teachers • Parents as supporters of activities • Parents as learners • Parents as advocates As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

9. Categorizing involvement: Henderson et al., (1986) Henderson, Marburger, & Ooms (1986) neatly summarize the literature on involvement: • Those parent activities aimed primarily at strengthening the overall school program and only indirectly toward helping the parent’s own child 2. Those parent activities that involve assisting one’s own child. As discussed in Greenwood & Hickman (1991, p. 281)

10. How we think about family involvement “Arrow of influence” Through the exchange, is the teacher trying to influence the family? Is the teacher trying to be influenced by the family and the exchange? OR

11. “Traditional” family involvement paradigm Arrow of influence Teacher Family In this model, the goal is for the teacher to influence the family. Utilizing Paulo Freire’s language of “banking,” the teacher’s role is to “give” and the family’s role is to “receive” (Freire, 2003).

12. Examples of this traditional paradigm • Becker & Epstein (1982) talk about “parent as tutors” and the need for teachers to provide families with training so that they are more effective at engaging children in learning activities while at home. • Goal: For teachers to help families make home life more like school life. • St. Pierre & Layzer (1999) talk about educators doing home visits as a way of providing social services to families. • Assumption: Children will thrive when the family learns different skill sets, that there is a deficient that needs addressing.

13. This is not the model we promote.

14. Alternative family involvement paradigm Arrow of influence Teacher Family OR Arrow of influence Teacher Family In these models, the teacher is influenced and impacted by the exchange, the teacher learns from the family.

15. Alternative family involvement paradigm With this model, teachers assume they (and their teaching) will benefit from getting to know their students’ non-school lives and families • that getting to know the student as an individual will help the teacher design interesting, engaging, and meaningful lessons; • that families have insights into and information about their children that might be important for them to know (Valdés, 1996); • that two-way communication between the teacher and family is beneficial to the student and learning process.

16. Shifting view of home visits Old View: Vehicle for teaching parents how to do school-type activities at home -VS- New view: Learning experiences for educators as well as informal opportunity to get to know students and their families (Worthy & Hoffman, 2001)

17. Benefits of home visits(teacher’s perspective) • Teacher effectively demonstrates “visible care;” • Teacher gives the message that the students’ home culture has value; • Teacher acquires useful “instructional insights;” • Teacher gains a greater context; • Positive teacher/family relationship that often results in greater parental involvement, support, and communication; • Teacher often discovers a student’s hidden assets.

18. Benefit of home visits: “Visible Care” • Home visits give the message that you care, that you want to connect. This was the primary benefit cited in the literature.

19. A principal speaks to “visible care” Home visits send “a very dramatic message of care and concern for the future opportunities and successes of those students whom I visit…Just imagine the positive message you would be sending…the students and families you visit will individually know that you are very concerned about their welfare, and they therefore will place tremendous trust in what you say and do. They will readily believe in your vision for the future of their children. When parents have seen or heard that you visited any student’s home --or attempted to do so-- they tend to have a very supportive attitude toward you even during potentially disagreeable moments, such as when calling to discuss the child’s behavior” (Sternberg, 2006, p. 37).

20. An elementary teacher speaks to “visible care” “The primary reason I make home visits is to show my students that I care about them. Upon being hired, our superintendent spoke to…newly hired teachers and challenged us to adopt as our motto: ‘What happens to you [my student], matters to me [your teacher].’ I have this motto hanging on the wall of my classroom, but I feel like I walk my talk when I make home visits”(Lisa Bloom qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, p. 1/517).

21. Another elementary teacher speaks to “visible care” “I genuinely feel happy when I leave a home. I feel I have made a sincere effort to try and understand the parents’ aspirations for their child and to show that I truly care for their child’s future” (Allyn Kurin qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 2/517).

22. Benefit of home visits: Respect for home culture • Home visits provide the message that the teacher sees value in the student’s home culture. This is closely related to (but different from) “visible care.” It has to do with viewing the non-school experiences of the child as being valuable and embracing an “asset” paradigm.

23. Benefit of home visits: Respect for home culture • Delpit (2006) suggests that educators need to embrace a positive bicultural attitude, one that doesn’t privilege school culture (the culture of power) while degrading the home culture as secondary or inferior. • Well done home visits are a great way for teachers to demonstrate their belief that the home culture is one of value and importance.

24. Benefit of home visits: Respect for home culture • “Schools are not the only institutions in society in which teaching and learning occur. The family is a critical institution in this regard, and parents are teachers of their children” (Greenwood & Hickman, 1991).

25. Benefit of home visits: Respect for home culture • “I ask what their [the family’s] hopes are for their child and if there are things that I should know to be a better teacher to their child. I ask [about] extracurricular activities and family activities in which their child participates…I get to know the goals the parents have” (Allyn Kurin qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 2/517).

26. Benefit of home visits: Useful “instructional insights” • Home visits provide the teacher “data” that can help the teacher improve lesson planning, engagement, relevance.

27. An elementary teacher speaks to “instructional insights” Through a home visit, “I get to learn about a child’s interest by seeing the choice of toys, books, pets, [and] room decorations and by listening to the parents. When I know a child’s interest, I can better engage the child in the classroom” (Judith Levine qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 3/518).

28. Another elementary teacher speaks to “instructional insights” “Second-language learners need to do a lot of talking. Home and family are good subjects to talk about. I had one student (whom I had previously visited at her apartment) tell me about her family’s plans to move into a bigger house. Following the move, she practically begged me to come over and see her new house. On the day of my visit, her uncle was there painting a mural on her bedroom wall. This shared experience gave us even more to talk and write about”(Lisa Bloom qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 2/517).

29. Benefit of home visits:Context • Home visits “make a huge difference in how well I know and understand my students, their families, and their problems” (Sternberg, 2006, p. 36). And the family’s strengths, too! You’re not doing the home visit to find out what is “wrong.”

30. Benefit of home visits: Additional family involvement • As a result of the relationship developed through the visit, families often are more willing to participate in school activities and to support the classroom.

31. An elementary teacher speaks to additional family involvement “Parents are a wonderful resource. They have skills, knowledge, and talents that can be incorporated into our curriculum. Through home visits, I find out in what capacity they may want to participate. Sometimes parents volunteer to go on field trips, work in the classroom, make presentations, or help develop lessons” (Allyn Kurin qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 2/517).

32. Benefits of home visits:Discovery of hidden assets While on the visit, the teachers often see “hidden” assets and skills • “I have often found that a child who is very shy or quiet in class is very sociable and friendly at home. Sometimes, I do not even know how well a child can interact until [a home visit], and I have often been surprised by a sense of humor or another personality trait that has not yet come out at school” (Judith Levine qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 3/517).

33. Frequency of home visits: Rare • Becker & Epstein (1982) found that less than 25% of the nearly 4000 elementary teachers they surveyed made any home visits during the school year and only 2% had visited more than a handful of children’s homes (p. 100). • Clearly more common at the elementary level. Very, very rare at the high school level.

34. Why teachers don’t do visits Even though teachers typically cite home visits as an effective tool in bridging the home-school gap, most don’t actually do any visits. Cited reasons: • Concerns over safety; • Visits aren’t a required part of the job; • Concerns about parental reaction to having a teacher visit the home; • Lack of training on how to conduct a visit; • Hard to fit into an already busy schedule (Taveras, 1998).

35. We concur: Educators need to better prepare teachers to engage families • Becker & Epstein (1982) argue that teachers have not been educated “in the management of parent involvement” (p. 89).

36. We concur: Attitude is everything There is some evidence to suggest that just promoting contact between parents and teachers is not sufficient. • Becker & Epstein (1982) indicate that unguided teacher/family contact often lead to “the reinforcement [sic] of common stereotypes of parents -- ‘pushy’ upper-middle class parents, ‘helpful’ middle-class parents, and ‘incapable’ lower-class parents” (p. 97).

37. Logistics & Preparation

38. Logistics:Who typically gets visited? Those students who are at-risk • Sternberg (2006), a principal, visits two types of children: those who are at-risk academically and those who are regularly a disciplinary problem. • Judith Levine, a primary teacher in San Carlos, CA, says she first sees children who are “having trouble adjusting to school routines, seem very shy, or have other needs that I feel I might understand better” (qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 517).

39. Logistics:Who should get visited All kids • Not just elementary students • Not just kids at-risk Home visits shouldn’t only be a response to a problem. They are a means to build valuable relationships and to gain important insights.

40. Logistics:Check district policies • Before starting the visits, teachers should talk with their principals about their goal to do home visits

41. Logistics:Make an “appointment” • Call the parents to set up the visit • Explain purpose of the visit (i.e., “to learn about your child so I can be a better teacher for him/her”) • Set a specific time and date Don’t be late!

42. Logistics:Language differences • If you and the family don’t speak the same language consider getting a translator • Ask a co-worker or school liaison to join you • Ask the student to join you

43. Logistics:Think about your projected image • Dress neatly and professionally (but not flashy). • Avoid using a lot of education lingo and fancy terminology.

44. Logistics: To map or not? • Sternberg (2006, p. 37) talks about the time-saving value of mapping out the locations of students’ homes in relationship to each other • By dedicating four hours a day in a two week period, this principal visited 97 different homes in August (before school started). • Our suggestion: Don’t be afraid to “get lost” and explore the area. Get to know the neighborhood.

45. Logistics: When to visit? • Some purport the benefits of visiting homes before the start of school (Sternberg, 2006; Worthy & Hoffman, 2001). • Our suggestion: Ideally the teacher does the visits before the school year starts or at the beginning of the year. Doing them early sets a good tone. Doing them later in the year, though, is also fine.

46. Logistics: Why not just meet at school? • The family is comfortable for an extended period in their own home; it is their environment. • There is a power differential. At the home, the power lays with the family. The teacher is acknowledging the power and insights of the family and, in turn, is “humbling” him/herself. • Teacher gleans insights about student’s non-school life that can be utilized to build engagement, relevance.

47. Logistics: Creating a reason to visit • An elementary school teacher in Hesperia, CA, says that she looks for opportunities that feel “natural and non-threatening:” • Deliver forgotten homework • Bring a Popsicle for a sick/injured student (Lisa Bloom qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001, p. 516-518.) • Our suggestion: Explaining how you would like to get to know the family and to get insights into the student’s interests so that you can be a better teacher for the student.

48. Logistics: Nervous about going alone? • A primary teacher in Virginia, suggests that teachers who are interested but nervous about going alone should team up with another teacher, student nurse, the parent liaison, or school social worker (Allyn Kurin qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001) • Our suggestion: • Let someone know that you’re doing the visits and give them the address(es) • Consider asking a friend to drop you off and wait outside in the car.

49. Logistics: What to bring • List of community resources (shared only if requested) • An elementary teacher in Virginia brings with her a list of resources available to families in the county (I.e., workshops, parenting classes, food programs, health care clinics) as well as the names of school personnel (i.e., counselors, social workers, bilingual parent liaisons, ESL teachers, reading specialists, etc.). She only shares this information if the conversation goes this way and the family requests it (Allyn Kurin qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001).

50. Logistics: What to bring continued • A primary teacher in California reports bringing a tote bag containing a simple board game, some craft materials (i.e., pipe cleaners), a few picture books, stickers. The child can play with these alone or with the adults. (Judith Levine qtd in Worthy & Hoffman, 2001).