1 / 36

Indicators of Family Engagement

Background Information. LaSIG 2Second round of SPDG fundingMain project goals to improve student outcomes by improving the service delivery at the state, district, school, and individual levelsFocused on two issuesProfessional developmentImproving family engagement. Background Information. Rese

cordelia
Download Presentation

Indicators of Family Engagement

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. Indicators of Family Engagement Melanie Lemoine and Monica Ballay Louisiana State Improvement Grant/SPDG

    2. Background Information LaSIG 2 Second round of SPDG funding Main project goals to improve student outcomes by improving the service delivery at the state, district, school, and individual levels Focused on two issues Professional development Improving family engagement

    3. Background Information Research on family engagement Students perform better when positive relationships and partnerships exist between families and schools When family members are leaders in the school, outcomes improve The school improvement process is more effective if it includes all stakeholders including family members

    4. A Significant Concern Schools expressed a desire to improve relationships with families but lacked direction to do so Two needs A simple measure for schools to determine what structures were currently in place A measure of the level at which schools were engaging families

    5. Developing the Scale Strategist group Determine what is important Review the literature Review current assessment tools Capture all voices Consultant Narrow focus Assist in developing the actual scale

    6. Developing the Scale Organized around four dimensions Communication Family Support Decision Making Partnerships

    7. Developing the Scale A total of 25 items The number of Items for each dimension ranged from six to eight Responses to each item on a four point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree

    8. Pilot Tests Two pilot tests Pilot 1 Five schools with approximately 150 respondents Items functioning well Respondent comments resulted in adding two items Pilot 2 Four schools with approximately 150 respondents Six items deleted One item moved to a different subscale Items functioning well

    9. Indicators of Family Engagement Scale General characteristics 21 items reflect perceived levels of family engagement Four subscales Communication Family Support Decision Making Partnerships

    10. Family Engagement Survey for Schools

    14. Indicators of Family Engagement Scale Technical issues Item functionality All item reliabilities were acceptable All coefficients across all scales functioned well Validity Content validity established in development Construct validity confirmed with a principal components factor analysis using varimax rotation All items loaded as expected except for a single exception

    15. Indicators of Family Engagement Scale Technical Issues (Cont’d) Reliability Cronbach alphas for the total scale and subscales were calculated Scores were .86, .81, .86, .83, and .93 for the four subscales and the total score respectively

    16. Indicators of Family Engagement Scale Scoring Subject must respond to at least 75% of the items on the total scale or any subscales Scores are the means of non-missing items for the respective total and subscale items

    17. Indicators of Family Engagement Scale Score interpretation

    18. Survey Administration 14 Districts 120 Schools Online application through Survey Monkey Some sites conducted all 3 Facilitated results discussions with staff School improvement decisions Triangulation of data

    22. Triangulation of Family Engagement Across Stakeholders

    23. Alignment of Surveys: School Survey A variety of methods such as but not limited to phone calls, newsletters, or e-mail are used to communicate with families in my school.

    24. Alignment of Surveys:

    26. Survey Results Correlate survey results and SPS Triangulation of survey results Impact on individual schools

    28. Top 10 Schools with SPS 114 or ?

    29. High School Results from all 3 groups:

    31. Impact on Schools Ah-ha moments Baseline data for schools were established Schools began looking more closely at other family measures Schools created a more effective action plan to engage families when data were displayed numerically School staff wanted more answers to survey results

    32. Use of the Scale Short term plans Provide a self assessment of the level of family engagement by school, family, and/or student Identify the strengths and areas of need in terms of family engagement Provide access to additional resources provided by LaSIG Long term analyses Incorporating the results into school improvement plans Correlation between survey results and student achievement

    33. Discussion Question: What initiatives are currently underway in your state to support family engagement?

    34. Discussion Question: What resources are available to schools and districts to support family engagement?

    35. Discussion Question: What assessment tools are currently in place to measure family engagement at the school, district, and state level? How are they working?

    36. Contact Information Louisiana State University Melanie Lemoine lemoinem@lsu.edu Monica Ballay mballay@lsu.edu www.lasig2.org

More Related