1 / 11

The EFFECT OF FAMILY INVOLVEMENT in Education ON STUDENTs

The EFFECT OF FAMILY INVOLVEMENT in Education ON STUDENTs. Holly M. Grover Clemson university August 2014. background. Defining family involvement in education: At-home involvement

arlais
Download Presentation

The EFFECT OF FAMILY INVOLVEMENT in Education ON STUDENTs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The EFFECT OF FAMILY INVOLVEMENT in Education ON STUDENTs Holly M. Grover Clemson university August 2014

  2. background • Defining family involvement in education: • At-home involvement • e.g., Family expectations and aspirations, Learning at home, Parenting style, Parent-student communication • At-school involvement • e.g., Parent-school communication, Volunteering, PTA Seeking for similarities across ethnic groups • African American • Hispanic • Asian • Caucasian

  3. EFFECTS ON STUDENT OUTCOMES African American Strong or moderate* Weak* * Moderate effect sizes (ES) defined as at least .5 and weak effect sizes as at least .2 (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Strong correlations (r) and beta coefficients (β or b) defined as at least .40, moderate as at least .30, and weak as at least .20. These effect sizes and correlations are not meant to be compared across studies. All reported relationships are significant at the .05 level or better. **Gray indicates a negative relationship aJeynes, 2003 bHalle et al., 1997 cHong & Ho, 2005 dReynolds & Gill, 1994 eMcNeal, 1999 fDesimone, 1999 gListed by Jeynes (2003) as being from a single study, not from his actual meta-analysish Yan, 1999; Effect when compared to high-achieving Caucasian students, ES= b/sdiKeith et al., 1998

  4. EFFECTS ON STUDENT OUTCOMES HISPANIC * Moderate effect sizes (ES) defined as at least .5 and weak effect sizes as at least .2 (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Strong correlations (r) and beta coefficients (β or b) defined as at least .40, moderate as at least .30, and weak as at least .20. These effect sizes and correlations are not meant to be compared across studies. All reported relationships are significant at the .05 level or better. **Gray indicates a negative relationship a Hong & Ho, 2005 bDesimone, 1999 cJeynes, 2003; Hispanics combined with Asian Americans due to the low number of empirical studies with only Hispanics d Keith & Lichtman, 1994 eSteinberg et al., 1992 f Keith et al., 1998

  5. EFFECTS ON STUDENT OUTCOMES ASIAN * Moderate effect sizes (ES) defined as at least .5 and weak effect sizes as at least .2 (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Strong correlations (r) and beta coefficients (β or b) defined as at least .40, moderate as at least .30, and weak as at least .20. These effect sizes and correlations are not meant to be compared across studies. All reported relationships are significant at the .05 level or better. **Gray indicates a negative relationship a Hong & Ho, 2005 b Mau, 1997, AI=Asian Immigrant, AA= Asian American c Keith et al., 1998 d McNeal, 1999 e Sui-Chu & Willms, 1996 fJeynes, 2003; Hispanics combined with Asian Americans due to the low number of empirical studies with only Hispanics gDesimone, 1999 h Steinberg et al., 1992

  6. EFFECTS ON STUDENT OUTCOMES CAUCASIAN * Moderate effect sizes (ES) defined as at least .5 and weak effect sizes as at least .2 (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Strong correlations (r) and beta coefficients (β or b) defined as at least .40, moderate as at least .30, and weak as at least .20. These effect sizes and correlations are not meant to be compared across studies. All reported relationships are significant at the .05 level or better. **Gray indicates a negative relationship a Hong & Ho, 2005 bMau, 1997 c Keith et al., 1998 d Steinberg et al., 1992 e Desimone, 1999 fMcNeal, 1999

  7. Comparison of Family Involvement Component Relationships FOR MULTIPLE Ethnic Groups Moderate effect sizes (ES) are defined as at least .5 and weak effect sizes as at least .2 (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Strong correlations (r) and beta coefficients (β or b) are defined as at least .40, moderate as at least .30, and weak as at least .20. All reported relationships are significant at the .05 level or better. Gray indicates a negative or undesirable outcome. n/a = not applicable because the study did not analyze Caucasians as a group for that variable a Hong & Ho, 2005 bHalle et al., 1997; Reynolds & Gill, 1994 cMau, 1997; includes one group of Asian Immigrants and one of Asian Americans dKeith et al., 1998 eJeynes, 2003 f Steinberg et al., 1992 gListed by Jeynes (2003) as being from a single study, not meta-analysis h McNeal, 1999 iDesimone, 1999

  8. Involvement at home • Greater impact on students • More universal as several aspects impact students from 3-4 ethnic groups • No aspect of school-based involvement was significant at the .2 level or better for more than two of the four ethnic groups.

  9. Measuring Non-Academic achievement outcomes

  10. Data limitations Small sample sizes for some variables Lack of replication within ethnic groups and across ethnic groups No research on some involvement reported as important to parents

  11. references • Desimone, L. (1999, Sep. - Oct.). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: Do race and income matter? The Journal of Educational Research, 93(1), 11-30. • Halle, T. G., Kurtz-Costes, B., & Mahoney, J. L. (1997). Family influences on school achievement in low-income African American children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 527-537. • Hong, S., & Ho, H.-Z. (2005). Direct and indirect longitudinal effects of parental involvement on student achievement: Second-order latent growth modeling across ethnic groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 32-42. • Jeynes, W. H. (2003, February). A meta-analysis: The effects of parental involvement on minority children's academic achievement. Education and Urban Society, 35(2), 202-218. • Keith, P. B., & Lichtman, M. V. (1994). Does parental involvement influence the academic achievement of Mexican-American eighth graders? Results from the National Education Longitudinal Study. School Psychology Quarterly, 9(4), 256-272. • Keith, T. Z., Keith, P. B., Quirk, K. J., Sperduto, J., Santillo, S., & Killings, S. (1998). Longitudinal effects of parent involvement on high school grades: Similarities and differences across gender and ethnic groups. Journal of School Psychology, 36(3), 335-363. • Mau, W.-C. (1997). Parental influences on the high school students' academic achievement: A comparison of Asian immigrants, Asian Americans, and White Americans. Psychology in the Schools, 34(3), 267-277. • McNeal, R. B. (1999, Sep). Parental involvement as social capital: Differential effectiveness on science achievement, truancy, and dropping out. Social Forces, 78(1), 117-144. • Reynolds, A. J., & Gill, S. (1994, Dec). The role of parental perspectives in the school adjustment of inner-city black children. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23(6), 671-694. • Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63(5), 1266-1281. • Sui-Chu, E., & Willms, J. D. (1996, April). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 69, 126-141. • Yan, W. (1999, Winter). Successful African American students: The role of parental involvement. The Journal of Negro Education, 68(1), 5-22.

More Related