See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/253661005

Parent Involvement in Early Care and Education Programs: A Review of the

Literature

Technical Report · January 2003

CITATIONS READS

14 1,635

5 authors, including:

Beth Shanks Rous Rena Hallam

University of Kentucky University of Delaware
64 PUBLICATIONS   553 CITATIONS    52 PUBLICATIONS   799 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jaime Grove
University of Kentucky
4 PUBLICATIONS   40 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Professional Development Framework Research Collaborative View project

Kentucky QRIS Pilot Study View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Beth Shanks Rous on 16 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Parent Involvement in Early Care and
Education Programs: A Review of the Literature

July 2003

Beth Rous, Ed.D.

Rena Hallam, Ph.D.
Jaime Grove, M.S.
Susan Robinson, M.S.
Margaret Machara, M.S.
 The following report was supported under a joint grant to The Interdisciplinary Human
Development Institute and the Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence from the W. K.
Kellogg Foundation.

To obtain copies of this report, contact the Interdisciplinary Human Development

Institute, University of Kentucky at: 859-257-4015 or write to:
EC Parent Leadership Initiative, 126 Mineral Industries Bldg.,
Lexington, KY 40506-0051

© 2003 University of Kentucky, Interdisciplinary Human Development Institute

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. OVERVIEW OF INVOLVEMENT ......................................................................................................................4

A. INVOLVEMENT DEFINED .......................................................................................................................................5
B. TYPES AND VARIATIONS OF INVOLVEMENT ..........................................................................................................6
II. EARLY CARE AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS............................................................................................7
A. OVERVIEW OF CONTEXT .......................................................................................................................................7
B. EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAMS VS. PUBLIC SCHOOLS .....................................................................7
III. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES..................................................................................................................11
A. FAMILY SYSTEMS THEORY ................................................................................................................................11
B. FACTORS AFFECTING FAMILY INVOLVEMENT ....................................................................................................12
C. CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS ........................................................................................................................18
D. FAMILY DECISION-MAKING ................................................................................................................................20
V. PARENT INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS .......................................................................................................21
A. OVERVIEW .........................................................................................................................................................21
B. MODEL PROGRAMS ............................................................................................................................................23
First Steps ..........................................................................................................................................................24
Family Resource and Youth Service Centers .....................................................................................................24
Head Start and Early Head Start .......................................................................................................................25
Health Access Nurturing Development Services................................................................................................25
KERA Preschools...............................................................................................................................................26
Parents as Teachers ...........................................................................................................................................26
School Based Decision Making..........................................................................................................................26
C. STRATEGIES ........................................................................................................................................................27
VI. WAYS TO INCREASE PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT/ RECOMMENDED PRACTICES ....................28
A. COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIPS/PARENT EMPOWERMENT ................................................................................28
Skills Needed by Parents and Professionals ......................................................................................................28
Recommendations for Early Care and Education Providers .............................................................................31
Recommendations for Families..........................................................................................................................31
B. GENERAL RECOMMENDED PRACTICES ...............................................................................................................32
Diversity.............................................................................................................................................................32
Communication ..................................................................................................................................................33
Resources ...........................................................................................................................................................35
Responsiveness...................................................................................................................................................36
Educator Support ...............................................................................................................................................37
C. NAYEC/DEC RECOMMENDED PRACTICES ........................................................................................................38
VII. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................40

3
I. Overview of Involvement

Increasing attention has been paid to the early childhood years as the foundation of

children’s academic success. The importance of high quality learning environments, qualified

teachers, and family engagement with early care and education programs have all been identified

as critical factors in enhancing young children’s early learning experiences and their subsequent

educational outcomes (Cost, Quality, and Outcome Study Team, 1995; NICHD, 2000; Peisner-

Feinberg et al., 1999). This report focuses on one critical aspect in supporting high quality

learning experiences for young children – that of family involvement in early care and education

programs.

Family is the primary influence of young children and sets the stage for how they grow

and develop (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). The more parents are involved with their children, the

more positive learning and general life outcomes occur (Baker, Goesling & Letendre, 2002).

Furthermore, children of involved parents typically display higher levels of achievement, more

acceptable behavior and greater motivation in school (Keith, 1999). Students who excel

academically often have parents who are interested in their children’s learning from an early age

and who engage in supportive learning activities, such as rhyming and shared book reading

(Wade & Moore, 1998). It is important that the key role families play in supporting their child’s

learning at home and in early care and education programs be understood, facilitated, and

nurtured across the array of services and programs available to young children and their families.

The following report examines this issue particularly as it relates to the current context of early

care and education in Kentucky.

4
A. Involvement Defined

While many studies have focused on “parent involvement,” the concept remains unclear,

leading to uncertainty for many families and early care and education providers. Thus, there is no

standard definition of parent involvement. Rather, the term is used loosely and is construed in a

number of ways. For instance, Sheldon (2002) loosely defined parent involvement as the

investment of resources in children by parents. While Coleman and Churchill (1997) provide a

more descriptive definition stating that family involvement can include many different

components including a program providing emotional support, providing parents with skills and

knowledge, communicating about the child with the provider. However, their definition is still

quite broad and they admit that it is not inclusive. Furthermore, McBride, Bae and Wright

(2002) use the words family-school partnership, parent involvement, and family involvement

interchangeably to define the process between schools and families that enhances learning for the

children. The interpretation of parent involvement is highly dependent on the individual beliefs

and expectations of each person concerned. Often, the beliefs and expectations between families

and early care and education programs are not shared collectively. This often causes confusion as

to what role each is to play in the care and education of children, which can ultimately lead to

decreased involvement.

With the understanding that parent involvement is highly individualized, a broad

approach to defining parent involvement is more likely to encompass the full extent of beliefs

and expectations presently held by families and providers. To that end, Epstein (2001) suggests

that the relationships and interactions among family members, educators, community, and

students are similar to partnerships. Dunst (1990) presents a family-centered approach, one

where a child’s growth and development is nurtured by the overlapping supports of parents,

5
family, community, and child learning opportunities, as most effective for successful outcomes.

Both Epstein and Dunst present the partnerships between families and providers as an

opportunity for shared responsibility for facilitating the growth and development of children.

B. Types and Variations of Involvement

Following a comprehensive approach of involvement for family and professional

partnerships, Epstein (2001) describes six types of involvement including parenting,

communication, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating with the

community. Each type of involvement comprises various components (see Table 1). This model

recognizes the diverse needs and expectations of a variety of families and educators. Essentially,

what works in the life of one child or family may not work for another. Families and educators

can work together to develop goals and establish the best possible practices that are meaningful

and appropriate for both parties.

Table 1

Components of Epstein’s Six Types of Involvement

Type of Involvement Purpose/Goal

Parenting Help all families establish home environment to
support children as students
Communicating Design effective forms of school-to-home and home-
to-school communications about school programs
and their children’s progress
Volunteering Recruit and organize parent help and support
Learning at Home Provide information and ideas to families about how
to help students at home with homework and other
curriculum-related activities, decisions, and planning
Decision Making Include parents in school decisions, developing
parent leaders and representatives
Collaborating with Community Identify and integrate resources and services from the
community to strengthen school programs, family
practices, and student learning and development

6
II. Early Care and Education Programs

A. Overview of Context

An increasing number of young children are involved in early care and education

programs. The Children’s Defense Fund (2001) reports that 13 million preschoolers participate

in child care each day. This includes 6 million infants and toddlers. The U.S. Census Bureau

(2002) reported that in 1997 63% of children fewer than 5 years of age attended some form of

regular early care and education arrangement an average of 37 hours each week. In Kentucky,

103,000 children access the child care system on a daily basis, including approximately 16,000

children ages 3-4 serviced by Head Start and about 21,000 children serviced by KERA

Preschools (K. Townley, personal communication, July 22, 2003). Many young children who

are considered “at-risk,” as defined by their family income level, receive services through either

federal programs, such as Head Start, or through state supported programs such as the Kentucky

Education Reform Act (KERA) preschool programs in Kentucky. Thus, many Kentucky families

are currently accessing some type of early care and education program. Although these

programs vary in many ways, they all have the potential to provide the foundation for successful

parent-school partnerships for Kentucky families.

B. Early Childhood Education Programs vs. Public Schools

Despite the number of children in early care and education programs, most research

concerning parent involvement is focused on families with children in the school system and for

school-age children in particular It is essential that the foundation for family-school/program

partnerships are nurtured early in a child’s educational experience in an effort to enhance future

family-school partnerships as well as optimize children’s educational success.

Although the school-based research provides insight to parent involvement, several

7
differences exist between early care and education programs and school-based programs, which

can affect the nature of parental involvement. These differences stem from both the ideological

differences that have historically served as the catalyst for the emergence of these programs, as

well as their funding and current structure of operation. Specifically, public school programs are

an entitlement to all children who reside in the U.S. and are seen as the primary vehicle to

support children’s formal education and preparation for society. Although varying philosophies

and approaches can be witnessed throughout the public school system, their funding structure is

essentially similar and secured by a combination of federal and state funding.

Alternatively, early childhood programs emerged from very different circumstances and

for very different reasons, ranging from social welfare programs to support low-income families,

university nursery schools to enhance early learning among young children, to needs-based child

care to support working parents. These programs have not developed under the same umbrella

over time and operate under different philosophies, funding streams, and regulations. Thus, the

early care and education “system” is a loosely assembled group of programs with no cohesive

integration among the types of programs and the services offered. Kentucky has been a leader in

seeking to support collaboration among these agencies. Most recently, the implementation of

KIDS NOW is an attempt at the state-level to provide a statewide mechanism to integrate these

very different types of programs and support state policy changes that will enhance quality

throughout the differing agency types.

The primary program types operated under the umbrella of Kentucky’s early care and

education system are listed in Table 2, which include program descriptions, source of funding,

and eligibility criteria.

8
 Table 2.

Kentucky’s Early Care and Education Programs

Program Description Source of Funding Eligibility

KERA Preschools Developmentally State Funded 4 yr old children
appropriate program from low income
focusing on families
physical,
intellectual, social
and emotional
development
Preschool Special Special education Federally Funded Preschool children
Education Services services for (3-5 years) with
preschool children developmental delay
identified with or disability
developmental
delays and/or
disabilities
First Steps/Early Early intervention Federally Funded Birth to three years
Intervention program for infants with State Funding of age with
and toddlers with developmental delay
disabilities or established
condition
Head Start Developmentally Federally Funded Children from low
appropriate program income families,
for economically at- 10% may be over-
risk 3 and 4 yr. olds income requirement
Early Head Start Comprehensive Federally Funded Children from low-
child and family income families as
development established by the
program for infants federal poverty
and toddlers who guidelines, 10%
are at-risk may be over income
Center Based Child Privately owned Families pay for Open to all children
Care business that enrollment – federal based on center’s
complies with state subsidy money capabilities
regulations for available for
licensure targeted families.
Family Based Child Family run care of a Families pay for Open to all children
Care small number of enrollment – federal based on center’s
children within the subsidy money capabilities
home, complies available for
with state targeted families
regulations

9
 Accountability is another area where differences between schools and early care and

education programs exist. In addition to having specific state guidelines regarding content and

structure of instruction, schools are evaluated on how well students progress. In contrast, early

care and education programs are not bound by regulations requiring assessment of child

achievement. Programs may self-evaluate or submit to guidelines for accreditation from

professional organizations, such as the National Association for the Education of Young

Children (NAEYC) and the National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), but do not

have to do so to remain in operation. More recently, the STARS Quality Rating System has

been implemented as part of the KIDS NOW Initiative. STARS is a voluntary, statewide system

of incentives and rewards available to all licensed child care programs in Kentucky. Based on

program quality indicators, participating programs are awarded “star” ratings and incentives and

supports are provided at the varying levels of quality. However, all of these programs are

voluntary and are not required of any program. All programs providing child care must be

licensed by the state and abide by these regulations. These regulations serve as a level of

minimum quality to ensure children’s health and safety but do not address program performance

in areas such as instructional planning or family partnerships.

The reasons for child participation in early care and education programs often vary from

those of participation in public schools. Children are required to attend public school starting at

a specific age as determined by each state. Attendance in early care and education programs is

voluntary and not required by states. Thus, the reasons for child participation are more

widespread in such programs. For example, some parents place their children in an early care

and education program to provide organizational supervision during working hours, whereas

other parents may not work but desire the enrichment provided by structured programs.

10
 Furthermore, the age of child is a factor in determining how parental involvement occurs.

Families of younger children may need information regarding different behaviors or be able to

contribute in different ways than families of older children. Strom (1985) conducted a survey of

parents with children in kindergarten through twelfth grade to explore changes in areas of

concern. Some topics, such as providing for emotional and physical needs or conflict

management, were consistently a priority for parents. Information regarding sibling relations

was more desired by parents of younger children, while homework assistance and family time

were more areas of concern for parents of older children. Thus, differences are expected in the

method and context of parental involvement based on the age of the child.

III. Theoretical Perspectives

A. Family Systems Theory

Family Systems Theory proposes that families are interconnected units in which each

member exerts a reciprocal influence on the other members (Boss et al., 1993). Thus, each

member of a family is affected by the family system in which they participate (Berger, 2000).

Changes occurring in any part of the family system, such as a parent losing a job or a child

switching classrooms, affect and initiate changes within other members of the family. Thus, early

care and education programs can expect to see changes in children based on what happens within

the family system. Likewise, families can anticipate changes in their child based on what takes

place within the program. Therefore, it is essential that parents are involved with what is

happening with the child while in the program, as well as for the program to stay informed of

what is happening with the family.

11
B. Factors Affecting Family Involvement

There are many factors that influence a family’s ability to both facilitate a child’s growth

and development and participate in parent education programs. Issues of diversity,

communication, meeting preferences, resources, time, knowledge, and personnel affect family

involvement. Issues of diversity can be found throughout the majority of research regarding

parent involvement. In recent research, diversity is most commonly discussed in terms of race,

socioeconomic status (SES), parents’ educational level, and family structure (Desimone, 1999;

Bruckman & Blanton, 2003). While there are disagreements within the current literature about

the degree of influence these factors have on parent involvement, there is consensus that they are

influential.

Race and ethnicity have also been a focus of many studies of family involvement,

specifically Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Latino, and Asian American families. Most often,

findings suggest that parent involvement programs fail to serve minority groups, groups that are

not Caucasian and/or middle class and that programs that are designed around the needs of

Caucasian, middle class parents do not efficiently serve other groups. This leads to feelings of

discomfort and disconnection among parents of minorities, which minimizes their chances of

participation. Crozier (2001) has contended that parent involvement strategies will ultimately

fail until the needs of ethnic minorities are recognized and addressed. Although it is necessary to

recognize the needs of particular groups, it is also important to avoid restricting people to

specific categories. Placing stereotypes on individuals may potentially suppress the uniqueness

of individuals in minority groups (Jordan, Reyes-Blanes, Peek, Peel, & Lane, 1998).

In addition to ethnicity, education and SES are commonly examined as it relates to family

involvement. U.S. Census Bureau (2000a) indicates that 28.6% of adults over the age of 25 have

12
a high school diploma or higher while 15.5% have a bachelor degree or higher. Increasing

parents’ educational levels and knowledge has been shown to lead to an increase in their

children’s knowledge, thereby decreasing the disadvantageous lives that some families lead

(Bauer and Barnett, 2001).

According to Bauer and Barnett (2001), the United States has one of the highest

percentages of children in poverty among developed countries, with many of these children

being raised by single mothers. According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2000b), over 2.5 million

families with related children under age 5 live below the poverty line. The resources available to

families have a large impact on every aspect of life, including participation in parent education

programs. Parents from lower SES backgrounds experience many obstacles, which affect their

ability to participate. Time constraints due to work schedules, need for child care, transportation

and financial difficulties (Eccles & Harold, 1993; Finders & Lewis, 1994; Lamb-Parker et al.,

2001; McBride, Bae & Wright, 2002; Sheldon, 2002) are all hindrances to their ability to be

involved. Parents who come from higher SES backgrounds generally have more flexibility in

their schedules and do not have the additional daily stressors that lower SES parents experience.

Parents with few resources who struggle with such stressors may not have the time to practice

effective parenting (Eccles & Harold, 1993)

Not only can life at home be disadvantageous for some parents, but they can also receive

poor treatment by teachers and professionals. Bruckman and Blanton (2003) found that teachers

who were not supporters of parent involvement typically had negative views about parents with

lower income levels and those with less education. Glanville & Tiller (1991) propose that some

parents, due to their low SES background, lack certain skills that would allow them to participate

and help in their child’s development. Coleman and Churchill (1997) further found that parent

13
with low SES and education levels are just as interested in being involved in parent education

programs as those with higher incomes and greater levels of education, but may not demonstrate

their involvement in the same ways. For example, low income parents prefer helping their

children at home over volunteering at school (Desimone, 1999).

Knowing that diversity exists among the parents participating in early care and education

settings, it can be assumed that various groups of people also have diverse needs in regards to

working with professionals in education programs. Research has shown that race, SES, and level

of education have specific impacts on communication, attendance at meetings, and parent

education preferences, all of which can affect parents’ level of involvement.

Communication preferences encompass a wide range of factors: gestures, facial

expressions, eye contact, dress, time, and space. These factors may partially explain why some

parents do not participate in parent education programs. For instance, DuPraw and Axner (1997)

claim that Americans, Canadians, and the British require the most personal space, whereas Latin

American, Japanese, and Asian people need the least personal space. Their work also suggests

that Caucasian Americans consider raised voices as a sign of conflict, while some African

Americans associate increased volumes with exciting conversation.

Communication challenges also can occur when professionals and parents do not speak

the same language, and when the values, practices, and experiences at home are different than at

school (Coleman & Churchill, 1997). These differences may explain why Feuerstein (2000)

found that upper and middle class teachers are able to communicate more effectively with upper

and middle class parents, and least effectively with groups unlike themselves. Other studies,

while admitting there are racial differences between groups, advise that differences between

racial groups be carefully considered before generalizing certain attributes to all members of one

14
group because all members of one group do not have the same exact characteristics (Orbe, 1995).

Regardless of the degree to which attention should be paid to racial differences, communication

is a significant factor in building relationships between parents and professionals (Martin &

Hagan-Burke, 2002).

In addition to communication, meeting preferences are an important consideration among

diverse groups of individuals. When parents and professionals meet, there should be a balance

between formality and informality. Both the meeting location and the meeting agenda can

contribute to whether a meeting is considered formal or informal. Both information and formal

(e.g., goal-specific) meetings are required for an effective relationship (Hughes & MacNaughton,

2002; Martin & Hagan-Burke, 2002). For instance, informal, casual meetings can take place

through a telephone conversation, an encounter at the store (Jordan et al., 1998; Flett &

Conderman, 2001), or before or after conference sessions (Hughes & MacNaughton, 2002).

Informal meetings are a good time for professionals to build rapport with parents, and provide

excellent opportunities to make personal connections with parents of diverse backgrounds.

It is important for professionals to consider the circumstances of the parent when

evaluating involvement. For example, meetings and telephone calls during the evening hours

may not be appropriate for parents who work at night or on weekends (Hardin & Littlejohn,

1994). Other concerns professionals may face with parents form low SES backgrounds and those

with less education are that they may not have a phone or the transportation to get to the school.

Less educated and acculturated parents may also have difficulty understanding language that is

complicated and full of jargon (Martin & Hagan-Burke, 2002), which may cause intimidation

(Pena, 2000). In addition, when parents do not speak the same language as the professional,

15
conversations by phone may be ineffective because nonverbal cues must be utilized for

understanding (Flett & Conderman, 2001).

Other aspects of family participation in education programs are the types and variations

of involvement. Epstein’s (1995) work is widely used to discuss six types of involvement:

parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating

with community. Desimone (1999) utilized these types of involvement to research differences in

racially and economically diverse groups. Her research found that school-level volunteering was

a better predictor for Caucasian and middle-income student achievement than for Asian, Black,

Hispanic, and low-income students, which is consistent with Wood and Baker (1999) who found

that the latter groups attended school-based activities less, despite high interest. For low income

parents, the most effective parent education programs are those that are not didactic (Marcon,

1999; Wolfe & Hirsch, 2003), but are community-oriented (Wood & Baker, 1999). It seems that

lack of confidence and feelings of discomfort decrease the amount of parent involvement This

explains why minority, less educated and low income parents are typically involved at home, but

have little involvement at school, while Caucasian, middle class, educated parents commonly

invest time in school-related activities (Stevenson & Baker, 1987; Sui-Chu & Willms, 1996;

Wood & Baker, 1999). Educated parents may have more parenting skills that prepare them for

individual participation at school (Rowland & Wampler, 1983), further suggesting that format of

meetings should also be evaluated. Those who are not comfortable in the school setting, such as

disadvantaged groups, often prefer large group discussion instead of individual activities, and

they prefer meeting outside of school (Rowland & Wampler, 1983; Vail, 2001).

Both communication and meeting preferences stem from the fundamental ideas and

thoughts families have about their involvement. For parent education programs to be effective,

16
both parents and professionals must recognize the importance of parent involvement. Parents’

beliefs about their roles as collaborators vary among groups (Desimone, 1999; Sheldon, 2002)

and this must be investigated before programs are implemented. When parent involvement is not

clearly defined, parents are not exactly sure how to be involved. Their confusion and hesitation

is often interpreted as a lack of willingness to participate (Finders & Lewis, 1994; Hills &

Knowles, 1987). Some parents feel that a child’s education is only fostered in the realm of the

school setting (Sheldon, 2002) and that they should not impede on their children’s schooling.

These beliefs are common among Asian (Huang, 1993) and Mexican American parents (Pena,

2000). Other parents, such as low income single mothers benefit from programs based on their

needs and interests (Bruckman & Blanton, 2003; Swick, Da Ros, & Kovach, 2001). These

parents would specifically benefit from programs that focus on skills and knowledge, like

budgeting and nutrition, which they might lack because of their economic background.

Recognizing the needs of culturally and economically diverse parents can be the most valuable

way to build a strong foundation for parent involvement (Finders & Lewis, 1994; Santarelli,

Koegel, Casas & Koegel, 2001).

While there is sufficient research to suggest significant differences between various

racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and educated parents, there also exist commonalities that should

be addressed for all parents in the involvement process. The first aspect of involvement that can

be directed towards different racial, SES, and educated-level groups is defining parent

involvement. Parents and professionals need clarification about the meanings and expectations of

parent involvement. Multiple definitions and explanations have been used in the past when

discussing parent involvement (McBride, Bae, & Wright, 2002); however, recent research (Sui-

Chu & Willms, 1996) is attempting to make the construct clearer and more understandable.

17
Current research (Epstein, 1995; Sui-Chu & Willms, 1996) focuses on both school-based and

home-based involvement components, although Zellman & Waterman (1998) argue that parent

involvement outside the school setting is often ignored. School-based involvement refers to

contact between parent and professional, volunteering, parent-teacher conferences, and “open

house” meetings. It can also refer to the inclusion of parents in decision-making and policy

development (Epstein, 1995; Hughes & MacNaughton, 1999). Home-based involvement

encompasses discussion of school activities at home and the monitoring of children’s activities

outside of school, including homework (Sui-Chu & Willms, 1996). Powell (1998) suggests that

the success of parent involvement strategies will be inadequate until parents understand their

roles, and using these multiple perspectives of parent involvement means parents may be treated

as teachers, collaborators, and decision-makers (Hughes & MacNaughton, 1999).

Communication issues for parents can also be discussed in terms to what is helpful for

minority and majority parents. Literature suggests that collaboration is best fostered when

communication is a two-way system (Reglin, 2002; Fantuzzo, Childs, Hampton, Block,

Coolahan & Debnam, 1997). This type of system allows both parents and professionals to

express their opinions, as well as share their expertise knowledge. Parents and professionals have

strengths that they can bring to the collaboration, and this open communication system provides

excellent opportunity to share, learn, and be aware of the ideas and opinions of one another.

B. Children with Special Needs

Certainly when discussing the variety of children and families served and targeted in

parent-professional partnerships, it is essential to give attention to those children with special

needs. When educators work with any child, it is important to include the child’s parents,

guardians, and families, but it is even more crucial when a child experiences additional

18
challenges and issues. For children with special needs, whether they entail mental, physical or

emotional challenges, a strong partnership formed between professionals and families can make

a significant difference in the growth and learning process of that child. Not only is a partnership

helpful for parents with children with special needs, it is also a legal requirement according to

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Turnbull & Turnbull, 1998). One of the

core components of IDEA is identifying and serving children with disabilities. With their rights

at focus, parents have the right to make decisions, which promotes empowerment for the child

and the family.

Parents are constant providers for their children and have multiple responsibilities to that

child that do not end at the end of the day (Leff & Walizer, 1992). Turnbull and Turnbull (1986)

present specific barriers that may exist in families with children who have special needs,

including psychological, attitudinal, cultural/ideological, and logistical issues. Once these

barriers and issues are recognized, the next step is to find ways to overcome these barriers so that

they do not have negative impacts on the partnership and interaction between families and

professionals. One way to achieve this is for the partnership to be supportive and encouraging to

families.

Dunst, Trivette, Daus, and Cornwell (1988) propose that parents and families of children

with special needs can be most supported when professionals promote empowerment and

competency. Instead of professionals just trying to “fix” the situation, a collaborative approach is

integrated to teach parents to be the best possible advocates for their children. Empowerment can

include access and control over resources, decision-making and problem solving abilities, and

capability to interact with others in order to obtain resources (Dunst, Trivette & Deal, 1988).

Their research also provides ways for professionals to aid in empowerment, which comprise of

19
offering help that is specific to the family’s needs and promoting the family’s immediate success

in mobilizing resources, the use of informal support, cooperation, and the family members’

ability to see themselves as active and responsible agents. Because parents have the most

opportunity for interventions with their child, it is a necessity for both parents and professionals

to acknowledge how effective an empowered parent can be.

C. Family Decision-Making

Everyone, including families, children and professionals, should have a say in how a

program is developed and implemented. Giving parents an equitable opportunity to make

decisions and govern rules leads to empowerment, and when parents feel competent and

influential in their child’s education, they view parental involvement as important (Bruckman &

Blanton, 2003). Exploring further into the roles of parents and professionals, another component

that is valuable to a wide range of parents is empowerment. Research indicates that decision

making opportunities (Carlson, 1991; Maloy & Scribner, 1985) and roles in school governance

(Eccles & Harold, 1993) are ways to promote empowerment and parents’ abilities to make

choices. These opportunities, along with other leadership roles can have positive effects on

parents’ overall competence and attitude (Bruckman & Blanton, 2003). When parents are

assertive and the expectations are clear, parent involvement is much more likely to occur

(Finders & Lewis, 1994). Feeling in control and having choices allows parents to be more

inclined to be involved in parent education programs (Seefeltdt, Denton, Galper & Younoszai,

1998).

Since empowerment is important in building a partnership between parents and

professionals, it is necessary to examine how the process can be constructed. One very crucial

component of empowering parents and families is teaching and encouraging them to make

20
decisions. All families have different goals and needs and because all schools have various ways

of functioning, therefore levels of decision making exist. According to Epstein’s (2001) model,

where decision-making is one type of involvement, these levels of decision making are pointed

out. Families have the choice to be involved in school decisions, governance, and advocacy.

Each of these different decision making opportunities allows families to follow their individual

interests, in conjunction with building a partnership with educators and professionals also

involved in their child’s life.

Epstein (2001) also specifies that the decision making roles can be practiced in school

councils, improvement teams, committees, PTA/PTO, and school-based or independent parent

organizations. The idea of empowering families by increasing their opportunities to make

decisions, such as Epstein’s approach, opens up many possibilities for ways for families to

become involved. Empowerment involves families having all necessary information, being able

to obtain resources by practicing competencies, and taking responsibility for their behaviors

(Dunst, Trivette, Davis, & Cornwell, 1988). As the concept implies, to “empower” is giving

families control and enabling them to succeed in their efforts, specifically regarding involving

themselves in their child’s early development and growth.

V. Parent Involvement Programs

A. Overview

Parent education is most traditionally defined as parents engaging in learning activities to

change their methods of interacting with their children to yield more positive outcomes (Crooke

& Glover, 2001; Kaiser et al, 1999; Mahoney et al., 1999; Powell et al, 1990). Historically these

partnerships emphasize providing information to parents rather than engaging parents in their

child’s education. The vast majority of early childhood education programs are based in public

21
school systems. Typically, both parents and schools have a common goal of achievement for the

children served. Some of these parent involvement programs, however, assume that programs

teach parents acceptable ways of parenting and interacting with their children in the home or

community (Bemak & Cornely, 2002; Reglin, 2002, Sacks, 2001). Collaborative partnerships

would recognize the role, efforts and perceptions of both home and early care and education

program. Mutual communication and relationship building is one approach to developing such

an effective partnership (Good et al., 1997). Relationships can be built upon understanding,

through conversations. Just as children are being prepared for schools, schools can prepare for

children by identifying the needs and contributions of families (Grimley & Bennett, 2000;

Lubeck, 2001, Plunkett, 1997).

Care and education providers may feel overwhelmed or unsure about the best way to

involve parents in their children’s education. Programs designed to create a partnership between

families and education may adopt differing foci. A historical review of parent involvement

programs by Berger (1991) differentiates approaches as being either a Family Impact Model,

helping parents to cope with their deficiencies in developing educational and social competence

in their children, a School Impact Model, learning from parent expertise, or a Community Impact

Model, initiating broader community change. A combination of these types of models can create

equality in information and expertise. Moreover, effective parent engagement programs should

address all of these areas. Collaborative partnerships would help to bring parents and programs

into agreement on common ground in their pursuit of achievement for children. Unity in all

domains of a child’s life is best for the child (Epstein, 2001; Symon, 2001). With parents and

providers working together, children can receive maximum benefit from continuity between

home and school.

22
B. Model Programs

In response to research supporting the benefits of parent involvement in education, many

early care and education programs developed for young children have incorporated strategies to

elicit parent support and empower parents. The following programs are representative of the

types of parent involvement programs operating in the state of Kentucky.

Table 2

Parent Involvement Programs in Kentucky

Program Description Funding Source Eligibility

First Steps Early intervention Federally Funded with Birth to three years of
program for infants State Funding age with
and toddlers with developmental delay
disabilities that or established
involves identifying condition
needed resources,
then obtaining and
coordinating services
for child and family
Family Resource & Provides services in State Funded Grants are based on
Youth Services child care, health students receiving free
Centers (FRYSC) services, and family or reduced meals, but
education to increase every child/family can
children’s success in be served.
school
Head Start and Early Addresses the school Federally Funded Low income families
Head Start readiness needs of with children of ages
children in low- up to 5
income families
Health Access Encourages healthy State and Medicaid First time parents
Nurturing pregnancy and Funded (from the prenatal
Development Services optimal child period to 3 months
(HANDS) development as a after baby is born)
home visitation
program
KERA Preschool Developmentally State Funded 4 yr old children from
appropriate program low income families
focusing on physical,
intellectual, social and
emotional
development

23
Parents as Teachers Supports child Multiple sources Prenatal and extends
(PAT) development and until child is age five.
academic readiness
through parent
education
School-Based A decision making Parents of children in
Decision Making strategy that helps the Kentucky school
(SBDM) parents become system
involved

First Steps

First Steps is a state-wide early intervention program for children from birth to age 3 who

have a developmental delay. This program is coordinated by the Cabinet for Health Services.

Each child and his/her family is provided a Point of Entry Service Coordinator that conducts an

evaluation to see if the child as a delay in communication, mobility, learning, social, emotional,

or adaptive skills. Based on the evaluation, an Individualized Family Service Plan is developed,

needed resources are recognized, and intervention services are obtained for the child and family.

A Primary Service Coordinator assumes the duties of the Initial Service Coordinator and will

remain with the child and family until the child exits the program. Among the services offered by

First Steps are: service coordination, evaluation, Individualized Family Service Plan, health

services, nutrition, occupational therapy, physical therapy, developmental intervention, assistive

technology and communication development (Northern Kentucky Cooperative for Educational

Services, 2002).

Family Resource and Youth Service Centers

Family Resource and Youth Service Centers (FRYSCs) formed in 1990 out of the

Kentucky Education Reform Act to “meet the needs of all children and families who reside in the

community or neighborhood served by the school in which the center is located” Kentucky

Office of Family Resource and Youth Service Centers, 2003). Engaging and empowering

24
families and enhancing students’ abilities to succeed in school meet this goal. Based on income

eligibility of 20% students qualifying for free or reduced meals, schools are funded by grants to

provide various services to help children overcome non-cognitive barriers to learning. Being

based within the schools, every parent and child has the opportunity for services. There are two

divisions of FRYSCs: Family Resource Centers, which serve children through age 12, and Youth

Services Centers, which serve children over age 12. Each of the divisions function to meet

mandated core components.

Head Start and Early Head Start

Head Start is perhaps the best known model of an early care and education program, and

originated in 1965 to “help break the cycle of poverty by providing preschool children of low-

income families with a comprehensive program to meet their emotional, social, health,

nutritional, and psychological needs,” with “the overall goal of increasing the school readiness of

young children in low-income families” (Head Start Bureau, 2003). Head Start programs are in

place across the United States to serve children from birth to age 5, pregnant women, and

families. Head Start is a federally funded organization, but managed by local non-profit

organizations. Major aspects of Head Start centers are the partnership with parents and

implementation of parent education programs.

Health Access Nurturing Development Services

The Health Access Nurturing Development Services (HANDS) program is a voluntary

home visitation program for first time parents who want to learn more about child development,

parenting techniques or resources to care for their child. HANDS exist in 120 counties, serving

10,000 individuals this year. Mothers may get involved in the program prenatally or up until

their child is two years old. The goal of the HANDS program is to encourage healthy

25
pregnancies and optimal child development in safe environments by helping families to become

empowered decision makers. As a qualified home visitor is joined with a parent, HANDS

educates parents about safety and critical child development issues through one-on-one activities.

This program also refers parents to other needed services and does screening for parental

stressors.

KERA Preschools

As a part of the Kentucky Department of Education, the Office of Learning and Program

Development houses the Preschool Program, which concentrates on preparing children to enter

school by offering a variety of programs. Children with disabilities and children who are at risk

based on income are targeted in state funded preschools. The preschool programs encompass a

range of models, but each model maintains the link between activities outside of the school and

activities within the classroom, making school readiness a joint effort.

Parents as Teachers

Parents as Teachers (PAT) is an international organization supporting child development

and academic readiness for children through parent education for all families (Parents as

Teachers National Center, 2003). Parent educators supply support, information, and activities to

parents of all socioeconomic and regional groups during home visits, screenings, group meetings

and networking opportunities using the Born To Learn curriculum. The primary goals of PAT

are to prevent abuse and to enhance parent-child relationships through increasing parental

knowledge and confidence regarding the development of their child socially, physically and

intellectually.

School Based Decision Making

There are 2000 School Based Decision Making (SBDM) groups in Kentucky, taking in

26
800 new parents a year. According to the Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990, a decision

making strategy is required, so SBDM serves “to create conditions at the school level that will

help all students reach proficiency by 2014” (Kentucky Department of Education, 2003). SBDM

is a way to promote local decision making, and families can become involved by being

nominated by their school or PTA. Parents are trained to serve on decision making boards for the

school. Specific trainings address issues such as laws, curriculum, and budget.

C. Strategies

Specific techniques have gained popularity in trying to encourage families to be involved.

Many different techniques can be used to keep parents informed to various degrees. For

instance, newsletters that are either parent or school generated can keep even the busiest parent

up to date on activities. Newsletters keep parents informed about the themes in the classroom so

lessons can be extended at home and they encourage reciprocal communication (Enz, 1995). In

addition, conferences, resource centers, group meetings and home visits are much more personal

and can involve parents more extensively (Birch & Hallock, 1999; Swick, 1992). A variety of

communication and involvement strategies allows families to choose the method of developing a

collaborative partnership that best fits with their preference, capabilities and schedule. Not all

parents may be interested in being involved on the same level, but most parents would prefer to

hear from the school under pleasant conditions rather than only in difficult situations (Hardin &

Littlejohn, 1994). The above mentioned programs exemplify the most common strategies used

to involve parents. Parenting classes and modeling, either in the classroom or home visits, are

aimed at sharing information to create continuity between home and school. Resource sharing is

designed to empower parents to become an equal partner with the school for the success of their

children.

27
VI. Ways to Increase Parental Involvement/ Recommended Practices

A. Collaborative Partnerships/Parent Empowerment

Skills Needed by Parents and Professionals

The first step for both parents and professionals is to recognize the importance of

working together. Because parents are vital players in their children’s education, their lack of

involvement can greatly hinder optimal progress (Berger, 1991). When families are not

involved, children are left to negotiate between the two systems on their own. Collaborative

partnerships not only make this transition easier for children, but families and programs can also

benefit. Through this mutual relationship, families can get the support and encouragement that

they need, while program staff experience more acceptance of changes implemented to solve

potential problem situations (Bagdi, 1997). When the collaboration places the child’s needs at

the central focus (Epstein, 1995), parent involvement has a positive impact on the child’s

academic achievement and behavior (Hoover-Dempsey, Walker, Jones, & Reed, 2002; Marcon,

1999). Achievement for children can be enhanced through the exchanges and feedback that a

collaborative relationship allows. According to Epstein (2001), another benefit of families and

professionals working together, besides students’ increased test scores, is that the parents’

support for teachers improves and their efforts are especially recognized.

The ultimate goal of these collaborative partnerships is to create a relationship between

families and early care and education programs in which each partner sees the strengths, needs

and uniqueness of the other. Collaboration requires a balance of power based on mutual respect,

acceptance and value of strengths (Wehman, 1998). When parents are empowered and have a

voice in their children’s education, strengths of both the family and the program can be utilized

to facilitate success for children.

28
 Once the importance of parent and professional collaboration is recognized, the next step

is to generate ways for parents and professionals to effectively work together. Collaborative

partnerships are most effective when specific goals are identified (Dinnebell, 1999).

Additionally, continual communication and responsiveness to families’ needs must be

established in the beginning to engage parents in the process. Furthermore, teachers need support

and assistance in ways to utilize the family strengths available to them. Once a collaborative

partnership can be developed, the continuity of involvement between early care programs and

home will promote success for children.

For success to be derived from family and professional collaboration, many skills are

necessary. First, communication factors discussed previously need to be taken into

consideration. Because every parent is at a different level of understanding, professionals have to

use terms familiar to the parent and explain concepts that the parents do not understand (Flett &

Conderman, 2001). This takes patience and effort for both parents and professionals.

Professionals have to put in extra effort to make sure parents understand what is needed and

expected; parents have to listen and be willing to learn new skills. Both have to be open to new

ideas and respect the knowledge and strengths that the other brings to the collaborative process

(Pena, 2000).

Finders and Lewis (1994) and Hills and Knowles (1987) suggest for professionals to

build on the life experiences of parents. This includes parents sharing examples of events in their

lives and using these examples to learn new skills. When parents use what they know to acquire

knowledge, their involvement takes on more meaning. Integration must be made between what

parents experience everyday and the suggestions of professionals, so that involvement seems

more applicable and feasible (Thomas, 1996). Parents and professionals also have to be flexible

29
and open-minded because the backgrounds of parents and professionals will often be quite

different. It is important for individuals in the collaborative process to learn and become aware of

the differences that will exist (Santarelli, Koegel, Casas & Koegel, 2001). It is not necessary that

parents or professionals conform to the ways of the other, but if both parties can agree to respect

each other’s differences, rapport can be built for a better working relationship.

Prior experiences of parents can contribute to the nature of their involvement in

children’s care and education. Different parents may also have varying expectations about the

levels of parental and professional responsibility regarding their child’s education. Some

families tend to think that education is more the responsibility of the program and less shared

with parents (McCarthy, 2000; O’Connor, 2001). Often their own educational process or

experiences from prior children can influence a parent’s perspective regarding involvement with

care and educational programs. Due to negative personal experiences, lack of efficacy and low

feelings of responsibility, parents may not be active participants in the education of their children

(Birch & Hallock, 1999).

Taking into account the various experiences of parents and families, positive experiences

with being involved in a supportive early care and learning experiences can undoubtedly give

parents more confidence and a sense of control to better help their children achieve (Dubanoski

& Tanabe, 1980; First & Way, 1995). The more parents and programs are aware of each other’s

efforts to help their children succeed, the more supportive they may be. In instances where

parents and teachers have the opportunity to express needs and learn together in an educational

setting, more collaboration and involvement develops (Fantuzzo et al., 1996). The consequences

of this partnership will be seen in the positive learning experiences and development of children

who are fortunate enough to be at the central focus of family and professional collaboration.

30
Recommendations for Early Care and Education Providers

Programs should utilize the resources available to them in the greater community.

Creating collaboration and continuity of care within the community will decrease the duplication

of services and reduce existing strain on programs. By referring families to services that can not

be provided through the program, educators can maintain relationships while reducing the

barriers to family involvement.

There are many ways that families can be involved in their child’s education. Programs that

present a variety of opportunities for participation increase the chances that parents will feel

involved and motivated to participate. Involvement could be initiating home-learning activities,

joining their child for lunch at school, or getting involved at the policy level and acting as a

model for other families. Programs can encourage participation by providing home visits, needs

assessments, parent-teacher conferences, parent resource centers, and home activity suggestions.

Program initiatives coupled with practical supports such as childcare or transportation

reimbursement opens opportunities up to parents who may not have formerly participated.

Recommendations for Families

Initiatives for family involvement do not have to start with early care and education

programs. Families can be the catalyst for creating collaborative partnerships. Establishing

communication with programs and other families can build relationships that will improve

achievement for children. Just as parents prefer information from programs before problems

arise, programs appreciate information and support from families. Likewise, Families can act as

support for each other. Families can initiate the same activities that early care programs may

provide. Families can get involved with activities to promote their own child’s education at

home, create support between parents, promote the education of other children in need, and

31
activities within the early care program environment. By creating meaningful participation for

themselves, families ensure that they are valuable elements in their children’s educations.

B. General Recommended Practices

Knowing the factors related to parent involvement and the skills needed by parents and

professionals, the primary goal – discussing ways in which parent involvement can be increased

can be attended to.

Diversity

The negative stereotypes that some teachers and professionals have about parents and

vise versa need to first be changed before parent involvement can be increased. The stereotype

that most often exists is that minority (Black, Hispanic, low SES) parents are not interested in

participating in parent education programs (Wood & Baker, 1999). There is often an assumption

that lack of participation is based on disinterest. However, often parents are uninvolved because

of specific obstacles to their ability to be involved. Instead of making assumptions, professionals

have to be aware of the barriers that prevent parents from being involved, and together, parents

and professionals should come up with ways that would work well for everyone involved. Doing

this would decrease negative stereotypes and open up the possibilities for effective practices.

Teachers and parents should be encouraged to build culturally diverse relationships,

which involves gaining knowledge about the views and opinions of multiple groups and can

simply be accomplished through reading literature and conversation. Minority leaders in the

community can also help bridge the gap between parents and professionals. Leaders who are

knowledgeable and confident with the school/professional system can act as a liaison for parents

and professionals so that every person’s voice is heard. Differences between people do not have

to translate into lack of respect. This ability to form culturally diverse relationships will expand

32
the possibilities of both parents and professionals by increasing their capability of relating to

people different than themselves.

In addition, it is more effective for professionals to incorporate a variety of styles in

parent education programs. Many programs are instructive in nature and provide little

opportunity for parents to engage in open discussion. As Wolfe and Hirsch (2003) suggest, it is

the support and sharing components of discussion that are most efficient for minority parents.

“Hands-on” activities and other “icebreakers” are important to include in order to make parents

feel more inclined to participate. Other ways that minority groups can be better served is by

changing where the parent education programs take place. Because many minority parents prefer

to meet outside the school setting (Vail, 2001), parent education programs can be held in

community centers, churches, and at public parks. Just by making this simple change, parents

may come to learn that they are on equal grounds with the professional, whereas in the school

they might feel less confident.

Communication

Addressing issues related to communication is another way parent education programs

can increase parent involvement. One of the first points of communication is advertising for

parent education programs and enlisting parent involvement. Parents will not participate in

parent programs if they are not informed of the programs existence. Levant’s (1987) study

looked at the effectiveness of sending out brochures to agencies in the communities where

families are involved. The study found that it was most effective to follow up with the parents by

phone after they had received the brochures. Parent education programs can certainly take on

this approach by distributing program brochures and pamphlets to places where parents would

most likely be, such as doctors’ offices, libraries, churches, and businesses.

33
 Professionals should also make sure that parents know the importance of being involved

and what they are expected to do. Retaining ambiguous definitions of parent involvement or

leaving the parents’ expectations unclear leads to meaningless and unsuccessful parent education

programs (Coleman, & Churchill, 1997). When parents and professionals do meet, the language

should be jargon-free and concepts should be explained to parents who do not understand them.

This may include providing parents a handout of all concepts that will be discussed. Parents

should also be challenged to prepare themselves for the meeting, before it occurs, by reading and

contacting others to answer questions.

Because parents and professionals are inclined to meet only when there is a problem to be

discussed, it is recommended that parents and professionals meet regularly. This allows parents

and professionals to build a relationship and have the opportunity to discuss the strengths of the

child, rather than just the challenges or negative aspects (Hardin & Littlejohn, 1994). Frequent

interactions also teach children the importance of education and of people working together

(Epstein, 1995). Further, if parents cannot physically come to the school to be involved in one-

on-one meetings, volunteering, and PTA meetings, professionals can encourage a variety of

options for communication, including home visits, letters, and phone conversations.

Professionals must also take into consideration that parents have a variety of schedules. At the

beginning of the program, professionals need to find out the best times to contact parents.

Parents also have to be flexible and willing to respect the schedules of the professional.

Once parents are aware of opportunities to be involved, it is important that professionals

and parents be supportive of each other and this be done by having a system of two-way

communication. Collaborative partnerships would suggest that the relationship is both bi-

directional, meaning an exchange of information between parents and teachers, and transactional,

34
meaning that both parents and professionals would evaluate their behavior based on

communications (Kaiser et. al., 1999; Turnbul, Blue-Banning, Turbiville & Park., 1999 ).

Collaboration consists of the reciprocal exchange of information, problem solving and decision

making (Marshall & Mirenda, 2002).

Resources

A major hindrance in many parents’ ability to participate in parent education programs

are the amount of resources available. Transportation, childcare, and support are a few of the

major factors. Simply getting to the meetings can be a major obstacle for some families. For

instance, some parents may desire to be involved, but lack means of getting to the meetings, or

the extra time that is required. Also, child care can be an obstacle to participation, as many

parents to not have the luxury of child care outside of the program. Dilemmas involving

transportation and childcare are appropriate situations in which to involve the community. The

costs of public forms of transportation can be waived or lowered for parents who are going to

participate in parent education programs. Also, public service groups can be contacted to make

them aware of this need for parents in the community. As far as childcare, similar approaches

can be taken. Churches and service groups may volunteer to watch children while parents are at

meetings. Also, local high school and college students could earn practicum hours in early

childcare for providing day care.

However, as Powell (1998) suggests, providing childcare and transportation will not

completely eliminate all reasons for parents’ lack of involvement. Professionals should also

consider providing parents with social and emotional support. Research shows that parents will

be more likely to be involved in their child’s education if they have social capital and networks

(Sheldon, 2002) and if the parent’s emotional needs are addressed by the program (Brems,

35
Baldwin & Baxter, 1993). Peer groups, counseling services and help-lines are other options. In

addition, a parent’s needs could be fulfilled through certain incentives, such as linking programs

with parent training. This allows parents to be involved in their child’s education and improve in

areas outside of the program, such as job training and parent training.

Responsiveness

Almost all parents are invested in the success of their children, but not all families are

informed and involved at the same level (Epstein, 2001). Families vary in the amount of time,

energy and resources that they can offer their children. Parents may feel overwhelmed with the

daily care of their family and not be able to be involved in their children’s education outside of

the home. Extremely busy parents or parents without alternate childcare options may feel that

they do not have the opportunity to contribute their skills to the school (Bagdi, 1997; Birch &

Hallock, 1999; Redding, 1991). Successful programs offer a variety of purposeful opportunities

for involvement that is welcomed and accepted but not required (Wehman, 1998). In this

manner families will not feel lacking if they are unable to get involved outside of the home.

Since childcare, transportation and work schedules may be obstacles, some responsive programs

may also be able to offer childcare, transportation or reimbursement money to support alternate

arrangements that will enable parents to participate at the level they desire.

When schools and programs are able to listen and respond to the specific needs of

families, they are better able to get involved. The more traditional definition of a parent

involvement program leads to assumptions about family needs without requesting input (Winton,

Sloop & Rodriguez, 1999; Wood & Baker, 1999). Families are far too complex for such

assumptions. Income level or family culture, for instance, may play a role in the type and level

of involvement desired (Powell, Zambrana, & Silva-Palacios, 1990; Symon, 2001).

36
 Age of child also needs to be considered when determining what kind of programs are

most effective (Strom, 1985). Families of younger children may need information regarding

different behavior or be able to contribute in different ways than families of older children.

Asking families about actual needs and offering helpful strategies creates the support that is

essential in successful programs (Berns & Baldwin, 1993; Birch & Hallock, 1999; First & Way,

1995; Swick, 1992). Support may come not just from the professional facilitators, but also from

experiencing commonalities with other group members (Powell & Eisenstadt, 1988; Redding,

1991). Information about successful and responsive parent involvement programs may spread

by word of mouth to harder to reach families and increase their involvement as well (Hoffman,

1991; Markey, 2000; Redding, 1991). Successful programs focus on needs that parents identify

and can refer parents to assistance when needed (Bagdi, 1997).

Educator Support

Teachers’ attitudes and lack of confidence in parents’ ability can inhibit willingness and

confidence regarding assisting their children (Bemak & Cornely, 2002; Keith, 1999; O’Connor,

2001). Professionals may have a hard time trusting parents’ involvement instead of remaining in

the role as the lone expert (Bagdi, 1997). Parents are experts of their own family’s needs and

strengths. This contribution is an important element of a collaborative partnership.

Professionals may feel less sure of their own knowledge when placed in a situation where they

are a partner rather than the only expert (McCollum, 1999). Tailoring a professional’s area of

expertise to the need of the family can be difficult (Derevensky, 1981). Many teachers may feel

overwhelmed with the added responsibility of engaging parents in the learning process. They

may desire parents to be supportive and involved when needed, but want them to stay out of the

way at other times (Lombarra & Lombarra, 1982). A broader institutional system that

37
recognizes and compensates those efforts would certainly help, but some teachers may not know

the best capacity to utilize a parent’s assistance or expertise (Birch & Hallock, 1999).

Younger children are seen as less institutionalized and therefore more shaped by a

community context (Katz, 1994). Educators may see family involvement for younger children as

more crucial. Teachers tend to expect and make more effort to get parents involved in the

younger grades (Pelco & Ries, 1999). With families being the greatest influence in early years,

early care and education programs need the support of families to be effective (Powell &

Diamond, 1995). At times parents’ involvement can still feel like more time and trouble than

teachers can handle considering their other responsibilities. Support and training on how to

engage parents can help teachers see the benefit of this continuity of involvement. Involvement

programs that included educators and parents together for training are most conducive to

relationships building, support and collaboration between the adults (Fantozzo et al., 1996).

C. NAYEC/DEC Recommended Practices

As one of the largest sponsored accreditation systems of early childhood centers and

schools, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) focuses on

guiding individuals and groups to improve the development and education for children ages birth

through third grade. The NAEYC’s guidelines follow the national trend in themes emphasizing

program functions as family support with respect to individual family differences (Powell, 1998).

Three goals are in place for NAEYC to achieve this mission. The first goal is to “Facilitate

improvements in the profession and practice and working conditions in the field of early

childhood education” (National Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC],

1996). To achieve this goal, the NAEYC provides many resources and training opportunities,

including conferences, workshops, and publications. Establishing standards for programs,

38
professionals, and provision also attains the goal. The second goal according to the NAEYC

(1996) is to “Improve public understanding support, and funding for high quality programs in

centers, homes, and schools serving young children and their families.” NAEYC develops and

distributes information, provides various trainings, and operates to change public policies in the

interest of young children and families. Lastly, the third goal is to “Build and maintain a strong,

diverse, and inclusive organization that enables NAEYC to achieve Goals 1 and 2” (NAEYC,

1996). This goal requires multiple strategies, and issues that are addressed are: membership,

affiliate groups, communications, governance, financial base, and staff and facility. To ensure

that the three goals are achieved, the NAEYC has created accreditation criteria to make certain

that early childhood programs meet the needs of children and families. The criteria encompasses

a wide range of components: “interactions among staff and children, curriculum, staff and parent

interactions, administration, staff qualifications and development, staffing patterns, physical

environment, health and safety, nutrition and food service, and program evaluation” (NAEYC,

1996).

Another organization committed to providing quality education for children with special

needs is the Division for Early Childhood (DEC). The group defines “special needs” as those

“who have disabilities, developmental delays, are gifted/talented, or are at risk of future

developmental problems” (Division for Early Childhood, [DEC], 2003). The themes and

recommended practices of NAEYC and DEC are very similar (McLean & Odom, 1993). Goals

for DEC include: “promoting parent-professional collaboration, advocating for policy, planning,

and best practice in prevention and intervention, and supporting those who work with or on

behalf of infants and young children with special needs and their families” (DEC, 2003).

39
VII. Conclusion

In reviewing the literature on parent involvement in early care and education programs, it

is clear that parents and providers need to develop a collaborative relationship with the child’s

needs as the focus. The first step is for parents and professionals to recognize the importance of

parent/professional collaboration and to share this knowledge with other parents and

professionals. Second, parents and professionals have to come together to generate ideas for

ways in which they can work together to promote the well being of the children. This involves

setting specific goals, continued two-way communication, parent and professional support,

empowerment of parents and an awareness of the needs, contributions and barriers for all

involved.

40
 References

Bagdi, A. (1997). Parent-professional partnerships in family focused intervention. Paper

Presented at the National Conference on Family Relations, Arlington, VA. (ERIC

document reproduction service No. ED421209)

Baker, D., Goesling, B., & Letendre, G. (2002). Socioeconomic status, school quality, and

national economic development: A cross-national analysis of the “Heyneman-Loxley

Effect” on mathematics and science achievement. Comparative Education Review, 46(3),

291-313.

Bauer, A., & Barnett, D. (2001). Infants at risk: Marker variables related to the early lives

of children. Journal of Children & Poverty, 7, 121-134.

Bemak, F., & Cornely, L. (2002). The SAFI model as a critical link between marginalized

families and schools: A literature review and strategies for school counselors. Journal

of Counseling and Development, 80(3), 322-332.

Berger, E. (1991). Parent involvement: yesterday and today. The Elementary School

Journal, 91, 209-219.

Berger, E. (2000). Family involvement: Essential for a child’s development. In Berger,

E.H., Parents as Partners in Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Berns, C. & Baldwin, M. (1993). Empirical evaluation of a self psychologically oriented

parent education program. Family Relations, 42, 26-31.

Birch, D. & Hallock, B. (1999). Parent involvement in selected components of the

coordinated school health program. American Journal of Health Studies, 15, 189-198.

Boss, P., Doherty, W., LaRossa, R., Schumm, W., Steinmetz, S. (1993). Sourcebook of

family theories and methods: A contextual approach. New York, New York: Plenum

41
 Press.

Brems, C., Baldwin, M., & Baxter, S. (1993). Empirical evaluation of a self psychologically

oriented parent education program. Family Relations, 42, 26-30.

Bruckman, M., & Blanton, P. (2003). Welfare-to-work single mothers’ perspectives on parent

involvement in Head Start: Implications for parent-teacher collaboration. Early

Childhood Education Journal, 30(3), 145-150.

Carlson, C. (1991). Getting parents involved in their children’s education. Education

Digest, 57(3), 10-13.

Children’s Defense Fund (2001). Child Care Basics. Retrieved July 22, 2003 from

http://www.childrensdefense.org/cc_facts.htm

Coleman, M., & Churchill, S. (1997). Challenges to family involvement. Childhood

Education, 73(3), 144-148.

Cost, Quality, and Outcome Study Team (1995). Cost, quality, and child outcomes in child

care centers, Technical report. Denver, CO: University of Denver.

Croake, J. & Glover, K. (1977). A history and evaluation of parent education. The Family

Coordinator, 26, 151-158.

Crozier, G. (2001). Excluded parents: the deracialisation of parental involvement. Race

Ethnicity and Education, 4(4), 329-341.

Derevensky, J. (1981). Infant intervention and parent education: The necessity for an

interdisciplinary approach. Journal of Education, 163, 275-281.

Desimone, L. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: Do race and

income matter? The Journal of Educational Research, 93, 11-46.

Division of Early Childhood [DEC]. (n.d.). Recommended practices. Retrieved July 21, 2003,

42
 from http://www.dec-sped.org

Dubanoski, R. & Tanabe, G. (1980). Parent education: A classroom program on social

learning principles. Family Relations, 29, 15-20.

Dunst, C., Trivette, C., Davis, M., & Cornwell, J. (1988). Enabling and empowering

families of children with health impairments. Children’s Health Care, 17, 71-81.

Dunst, C., Trivette, C., & Deal, A. (1988). Enabling and empowering families:

principles and guidelines for practice. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

DuPraw, M. & Axner, M. (1997). Working on common cross-cultural communication

challenges. Retrieved April 6, 2003, from http://wwcd.org/action/ampu/crosscult.html

Eccles, J., & Harold, R. (1993). Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent

years. Teachers College Record, 94, 568-588.

Enz, B. (1995). Strategies for promoting parental support for emergent literacy

programs. Reading Teacher, 49, 168-70.

Epstein, J. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we

share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 701-712.

Epstein, J. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and

improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Fantuzzo, J., Childs, S., Stevenson, H., Coolahan, K., Ginsburg, M., Gay, K., Debnam,

D., Watson, C. (1996). The Head Start teaching center: An evaluation of an experiential,

collaborative training model for Head Start teachers and parent volunteers. Early

Childhood Research Quarterly, 11, 79-99.

Fantuzzo, J., Childs, S., Hampton, V., Ginsburg-Block, M., Coolahan, K., & Debnam, D.

(1997). Enhancing the quality of early childhood education: A follow-up evaluation of an

43
 experiential, collaborative training model for Head Start. Early Childhood Research

Quarterly, 12, 425-437.

Feuerstein, A. (2000). School characteristics and parent involvement: Influences on

participation in children’s schools. The Journal of Educational Research, 94, 29-40.

Finders, M., & Lewis, C. (1994). Why some parents don’t come to school. Educational

Leadership, 51, 50-54.

Finders, M. & Lewis, C. (1994). Why some parents don't come to school. Educational

Leadership, 51, 50-54.

First, J. & Way, W. (1995). Parent education outcomes: Insights into transformative

learning. Family Relations, 44, 104-109.

Flett, A., & Conderman, G. (2001). Enhance the involvement of parents from culturally

and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(1), 53-55.

Glanville, C., & Tiller, C. (1991). Implementing and evaluating a parent education

program for minority mothers. Evaluation and Program Planning, 14, 241-245.

Grimley, L., & Bennett, J. (2000). Beginning school ready to learn: An international perspective.

School Psychology International, 21(3), 322-332.

Hardin, D., & Littlejohn, W. (1994). Family-school collaboration: Elements of

effectiveness and program models. Preventing School Failure, 39(1), 4-9.

Head Start Bureau (2003). About Head Start). Retrieved July 22, 2003 from

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/about/index.htm#fact

Hills, M., & Knowles, D. (1987). Providing for personal meaning in parent education

programs. Family Relations, 36, 158-162.

Hoffman, S. (1991). Introduction. The Elementary School Journal, 91, 193-197.

44
Hoover-Dempsey, K., Walker, J., Jones, K., & Reed, R. (2002). Teachers Involving Parents

(TIP): Results of an in-service teacher education program for enhancing parental

involvement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 843-867.

Huang, G. (1993). Beyond culture: Communicating with Asian American children and

families. New York, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED366673)

Hughes, P., & MacNaughton, G. (1999). Who’s the expert: Reconceptualising parent-staff

relations in early education. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 24(4), 27-32.

Hughes, P., & MacNaughton, G. (2002). Preparing early childhood professionals to work

with parents: The challenges of diversity and dissensus. Australian Journal of Early

Childhood, 27(2), 14-20.

Jordan, L., Reyes-Blanes, M., Peek, B., Peel, H., & Lane, H. (1998). Developing teacher-

parent partnerships across cultures: Effective parent conferences. Intervention in School

& Clinic, 33(3), 141-148.

Kaiser, A., Mahoney, G., Girolametto, L., MacDonald, J., Robinson, C., Safford, P., &

Spiker, D. (1999). Rejoinder: Toward a contemporary vision of parent education. Topics

in Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 173-176.

Katz, L. (1994). Perspectives on the quality of early childhood programs practice. Phi

Delta Kappan, 76, 200-206.

Kentucky Department of Education (2003). School Based Decision Making. Retrieved July 22,

2003 from http://www.kde.state.ky.us/cgi-bin/MsmGo.exe?grab_id=106674680&

EXTRA_ARG=&host_id=1&page_id=238&query=School+Based+Decison+Making&hi

word=SCHOOL+BASED+DECISON+MAKING+

45
Kentucky Office of Family Resource and Youth Service Centers (2003). Fact sheet. Retrieved

July 22, 2003 from http://cfc.state.ky.us/frysc/About%20Us.htm

Lamb-Parker, F., Piotrkowski, C., Baker, A. Kessler-Sklar, S., Clark, B., & Peay, L.

(2001). Understanding barriers to parent involvement in Head Start: a research-

community partnership. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16, 35-51.

Leff, P., & Walizer, E. (1992). Building the Healing Partnership: Parents, Professionals,

& Children with Chronic Illnesses and Disabilities. MD: Brookline Books.

Levant, R. (1987). The use of marketing techniques to facilitate acceptance of parent

education programs: A case example. Family Relations, 36, 246-251.

Lombana, J. & Lombana, A. (1982). The home-school partnership: A model for

counselors. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 61, 35-39.

Lubeck, S. (2001). Early childhood education and care in England. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(3), 216

226.

Mahoney, G., Kaiser, A., Girolarnetto, L, MacDonald, J., Robinson, C., Stafford, P., &

Spiker, D. (1999). Parent education in early intervention: A call for a renewed focus.

Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 131-140.

Maloy, R., & Scribner, H. (1985). Parent involvement and the enabling of school reform.

Contemporary Education, 56(3).

Markey, U. (2000). Partnerships. Journal of Positive Behavior Incentives, 2, 188-192.

Marshall, J. & Mirenda, P. (2002). Parent-professional collaboration for positive behavior

support in the home. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17, 216-

228.

Marcon, R. (1999). Positive relationships between parent school involvement and public

46
 school inner-city preschoolers’ development and academic performance. School

Psychology Review, 28, 395-412.

Martin,E., & Hagan-Burke, S. (2002). Establishing a home-school connection:

Strengthening the partnership between families and schools. Preventing School Failure,

46(2), 62-66.

McBride, B., Bae, J., & Wright, M. (2002). An examination of family-school partnership

initiatives in rural prekindergarten programs. Early Education & Development, 13(1),

107-125.

McCarthy, K. (2000). The kids are not all right. Psychology Today, 33(6), 11-14.

McCollum, J. (1999). Parent education: What we mean and what that means. Topics in

Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 147-149.

McLean, M & Odom, L. (1993). Practices for young children with and without

disabilities: A comparison of DEC and NAEYC identified practices. Topics in Early

Childhood Special Education, 13, 274-293.

National Association for Education of Young Children [NAEYC]. (n.d.). A call for excellence

in early childhood education. Retrieved July 21, 2003, from http://www.naeyc.org

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network

(2000). The relation of child care to cognitive and language development. Child

Development, 71(4). 960-980.

Northern Kentucky Cooperative for Educational Services, Northern Kentucky University (2002).

First Steps. Retrieved July 22, 2003 from http://www.nkces.coop.k12.ky.us/

first_steps.htm

O’Connor, P. (2001). Supporting mothers: Issues in a community mothers programme.

47
 Community, Work, and Family, 4(1).

Orbe, M. (1995). African American communication research: Toward a deeper

understanding of interethnic communication. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 61-

79.

Parents as Teachers National Center (2003). What is PAT? Retrieved July 22, 2003 from

http://www.patnc.org/aboutus-whatispat.asp

Peisner-Feinberg, E.S., Burchinal, M.R., Clifford, R. M., Yazejan, N., Culkin, M.L., Zelazo, J.,

Howes, C., Byler, P., Kagan, S.L., & Rustici, J. (1999). The children of the cost, quality,

and outcomes study go to school. Technical Report. University of North Carolina, Frank

Porter Graham Child Development Center.

Pelco, L., & Ries, R. (1999). Teachers’ attitudes and behavior towards family-school

partnerships: What school psychologists need to know. School Psychology

International, 20(3), 265-278.

Pena, D. (2000). Parent involvement: Influencing factors and implications. The Journal

of Educational Research, 94, 42-54.

Powell, D. (1998). Reweaving parents into the fabric of early childhood programs. Young

Children, 53(5), 60-67.

Powell, D., & Diamond, K. (1995). Approaches to parent-teacher relationships in U.S.

early childhood programs during the twentieth century. Journal of Education, 177, 71-94.

Powell, D. & Eisenstadt, J. (1988). Informal and formal conversations in parent education

groups: An observational study. Family Relations, 37, 166-170.

Powell, D., Zambrana, R. & Silva-Palacios, V. (1990). Designing culturally responsive

parent programs: A comparison of low-income Mexican and Mexican-American

48
 mothers’ preferences. Family Relations, 39, 298-304.

Redding. S. (1991). Alliance for achievement: An action plan for educators and parents.

International Journal of Educational Research, 15(2), 147-162.

Redding, S. (1991). Creating a school community through parent involvement.

Educational Digest, 57, 6-10.

Reglin, G. (2002). Project reading and writing (R.A.W.): Home visitations and the school

involvement of high-risk families. Education, 123(1), 153-160.

Rowland, S., & Wampler, K. (1983). Black and white mothers’ preferences for parenting

Programs. Family Relations, 32, 323-330.

Santarelli, G., Koegel, R., Casas, J., & Koegel, L. (2001). Culturally diverse families

participating in behavior therapy parent education programs for children with

developmental disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3(2), 120-123.

Seefeldt, C., Denton, K., Galper, A., & Younoszai, T. (1998). Former Head Start parents’

characteristics, perceptions of school climate, and involvement in their children’s

education. The Elementary School Journal, 98, 339-349.

Sheldon, S. (2002). Parents’ social networks and beliefs as predictors of parent

involvement. The Elementary School Journal, 102, 301-316.

Stevenson, D., & Baker, D. (1987) The family-school relation and the child’s school

performance. Child Development, 58(5) 1348-1358.

Strom, R. (1985). Developing a curriculum for parent education. Family Relations, 34,

161-167.

Sui-Chu, E., & Willms, J. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade

achievement. Sociology of Education, 69, 126-141.

49
Swick, K. (1992). Teacher-parent partnerships. Illinois: ERIC Digest. (Eric Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 408032)

Swick, K., DaRos, D., & Kovach, B. (2001). Empowering parents and families through a

caring inquiry approach. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(1), 65-71.

Symon, J. (2001). Parent education for autism: Issues in providing services at a distance. Journal

of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3(3), 160-175.

Thomas, R. (1996). Reflective dialogue parent education design: Focus on parent

development. Family Relations, 45, 189-200.

Turnbull, A., Blue-Banning, M., Turbiville, V. & Park, J. (1999). From parent education

to partnership education: A call for a transformed focus. Topics in Early Childhood

Special Education, 19, 164-172.

Turnbull, A., & Turnbull, H. (1986). Families, professionals, and exceptionality: A

special partnership. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company.

Turnbull, H., & Turnbull, A. (1998). Free appropriate public education: The law and

children with disabilities. Fifth Edition. Denver, CO: Love.

U.S. Census Bureau (2000a). Profile of selected social characteristics: 2000. Retrieved

August 18, 2003 from http://factfinder.census.gov/bf/_lang=en_vt_name=

DEC_2000_SF3_U_DP2_geo_id=01000US.html

U.S. Census Bureau (2000b). Profile of selected economic characteristics: 2000. Retrieved

August 18, 2003 from http://factfinder.census.gov/bf/_lang=en_vt_name=

DEC_2000_SF3_U_DP3_geo_id=01000US.html

U.S. Census Bureau (2002). Who’s minding the kids? Child care arrangements: Spring 1997.

Retrieved July 22, 2003 from http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p70-86.pdf

50
 Vail, K. (2001). Teaching the parents: Sometimes the best way to help students is to first

help their parents. American School Board Journal, 188(9), 23-25.

Wade, B., & Moore, M. (1998). An early start with books: Literacy and mathematical evidence

from a longitudinal study. Educational Review, 50(2) 135-146.

Wehman, T. (1998). Family-centered early intervention services: Factors contributing to

increased parent involvement and participation. Focus on Autism & Other Developmental

Disabilities, 13(2) 80-86.

Winton, P., Sloop, S. & Rodriguez, P. (1999). Parent education: A term whose time is

past. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 157-160.

Wolfe, R., & Hirsch, B. (2003). Outcome so parent education programs based on

reevaluation counseling. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 12(1), 61-76.

Wood, W., & Baker, J. (1999). Preferences for parent education programs among low

socioeconomic status, culturally diverse parents. Psychology in the Schools, 36(3), 239-

247.

Zellman, G., & Waterman, J. (1998). Understanding the impact of parent school

involvement on children’s educational outcomes. The Journal of Educational Research,

9, 370-380.

51

View publication stats