Current Issues in Education Edman201 Com

Current Issues
in Education
Edman201
Compilation of Reports of the Students
in Master of Education major
in Educational Management
in C.Y. 2015-2016
at New Era University
May, 2016
Palacpac, Julius John L.

Zara, Elizabeth R.
Fetalvero, Jean F.
de Dios, Carmelita M.
Cabudil, Arlyn C.
Ortega, Corazon M.
Rendon, Michelle P.
Table of Contents:
Current Issues in Education about the Development of Students 2
Current Issues in Education about the Development of School
Library and Staffing 33
Current Issues in Education about the Development of School,
Family, & Community Connections 41
Current Issues in Education about the Development of Physical
Facilities 67
Current Issues in Education about the Development of Curriculum 83
Current Issues in Education about the Development of Faculty 106
Current Issues in Education about the Development of Parents 120
Page 1
“Current Issues in
Education about
the Development of
Students”
Julius John L. Palacpac

Edman201
Page 2
T able of Conte nt s:
Current Issue # 1 (Th e Proble m of Rur al Education in
the Philippines) 4
Current Issue #2 (Five factors about students issue) 10
Current Issue #3 (10 Critical Issues Facing Education) 13
Current Issue #4 (Top Issues Facing Higher Education In 2014) 19
Current Issue #5 (Students lack interest or motivation) 27
Page 3
Current Issue #1 (The Problem of Rural Education in
the Philippines)
Posted in March 2, 2010 by Josh Weinstein (A light-hearted journal of
microfinance and development economics)
In this journal, I have discussed the relationship between education, poverty
alleviation, and economic development. The link is critical and the three are self-
reinforcing. Education creates greater opportunities for the youth, who go on to
work decent jobs in cities like Bacolod, Manila, and Cebu. The
children remit money back to the parents, who spend on home improvements
and the tuition fees for the younger siblings. College-educated individuals are
much less likely to end up impoverished (about 1 in 44). Trade schools also
Page 4
create opportunities, with only one in 10 people with post-secondary degrees
living below the poverty line. Unfortunately, the ratios drop precipitously after
that. One in three high school graduates and half of elementary school grads are
impoverished. Here are the sobering education statistics:
The long-term outlook for poverty reduction doesn‘t look good either,
unfortunately. We all know that there is a very strong link between education (or
lack of education) and poverty—two-thirds of our poor families have household
heads whose highest educational attainment is at most Grade 6. Well, the
education statistics (all from the NSCB ) tell a very sad tale: elementary school
net participation rates (NPR)—the proportion of the number of enrollees 7-12
years old to population 7-12 years old—have plummeted from 95 percent in
school year (SY) 1997-98 to 74 percent in 2005-2006, as have high school
NPRs.
Cohort survival rates (CSR) have also dropped: Out of every 100 children who
enter Grade 1, only 63 will reach Grade 6, down from 69 children in 1997-1998.
In high school, CSR have dropped even more: from 71 to 55. This means, of
course, that school dropout rates have increased. This is one of the reasons why,
in 2005-2006, for the first time in 35 years, total enrollment decreased in both
elementary and high school: although private school enrollment increased, public
school enrollment went down more.
The correlation is not difficult to see, but fixing the problem presents a challenge
for several reasons. According to some observers, the Department of Education
Culture and Sports (DECS) in the Philippines is one of the most corrupt
Page 5
government entities in the country. It has a budget equal to 12% of spending, but
is riddled with graft from procurement (buying textbooks and other supplies),
grease money, and bribes for just about any sort of movement within the
bureaucracy. The impact on the education system is detrimental:
Embezzlement, nepotism, influence peddling, fraud and other types of corruption
also flourish. Corruption has become so institutionalized that payoffs have
become the lubricant that makes the education bureaucracy run smoothly. The
result: an entire generation of Filipino students robbed of their right to a good
education.
This corruption leads to poor allocation of resources. Teachers are underpaid
and treated poorly. In 2005, the Philippine government spent just $138 per
student, compared to $852 in Thailand, another developing country in Southeast
Asia. But graft and corruption are not the only issues. Poverty is a vicious cycle
that leads traps generations of families.
Lunchtime at ―The Environment-Friendly School‖
Page 6
About 80% of the Filipino poor live in the rural areas of the country. These are
towns located deep in the mountains and the rice fields. The population density
in the rural parts of the country is low, and there is a corresponding deficiency in
schools and classrooms. Public school is free, but families still cannot afford to
send their children for a complicated network of reasons. In this editorial for the
Pinoy Press, one author delineates the key issue:
With around 65 million Filipinos or about 80 percent of the population trying to
survive on P96 ($2) or less per day, how can a family afford the school uniforms,
the transportation to and from school, the expenses for school supplies and
projects, the miscellaneous expenses, and the food for the studying sibling?
More than this, with the worsening unemployment problem and poverty situation,
each member of the family is being expected to contribute to the family income.
Most, if not all, out-of-school children are on the streets begging, selling
cigarettes, candies, garlands, and assorted foodstuffs or things, or doing odd
jobs.
Beyond the selling goods on the street, children in farming families are expected
to work in the fields during harvest time. In agriculture-based communities where
Page 7
farming is the primary livelihood, having children around to help with the work
means more income for the family. In a recent trip to Valladolid, someone told
me that children are paid 15 pesos for a day‘s work in the blistering heat. They
are pulled from school for two or three months at a time and are irreparably
disadvantaged compared with their classmates. So, they may have to repeat the
grade, only to be pulled out of school again next year.
Transportation is another big problem. Kids walk 2-3 kilometers or more to and
from school every day. They have to cross rivers and climb hills with their
bookbags. The ones that can afford it take a tricycle, but that is a luxury.
Schools are sometimes too far for the most remote communities to practically
access. So the families can‘t afford to pay and the children are pulled from
school.
The walk to school.
It seems like an intractable problem. Corruption in the education bureaucracy
and a lack of resources make delivering a high-quality education to all Filipinos a
Page 8
challenge. Microfinance is one way to help. With the assistance of microcredit
loans, women can pay for the education of their children – to purchase uniforms,
textbooks, lunches, and rides to school. Also, by creating another source of
income other than farming, the children do not have to come help the family work
the fields. When I talk to NWTF clients about their dreams, they unfailingly say
they hope for their children to ―finish their studies.‖ History has shown that it is an
achievable goal. But real systemic change needs to come from above. As long
as corruption and bureaucracy paralyzes the system, the goal of delivering a
decent education to children – which pays dividends to the country in the long
run – will remain out of reach.
For the rural poor, non-profits exist to help in the mission of education. While
looking up pictures for this post, I came across a Filipino organization called the
Gamot Cogon (―Grass Roots‖) Institute:
The Gamot Cogon Institute (a non-stock, non-profit organization) is an Iloilo-
based cultural institution working to transform society through human
development approaches including education and training. GCI also prototypes
or demonstrates alternative approaches to education, agriculture, health, and full
human development.
Very cool stuff.
Posted in Development Economics, Microfinance Issues, The Philippines |
Tagged education, education in the Philippines, microfinance and
education, Microfinance Issues, poverty, rural education
Page 9
Current Issue #2 (Five factors about students issue)
Attitudes & Motivation
 Students come late to class.
 Students don't demonstrate critical thinking.
 Students lack interest or motivation.
 Students performed poorly on an exam.
 Students don‘t seek help when needed.
 Students behave rudely in class.
 Students don‘t participate in discussion.
 Students can't apply what they‘ve learned.
 Students don't come to lecture.
 Students don‘t keep up with the reading.
 Students respond to course content and classroom dynamics in emotional
and unproductive ways.
 Students in studio-oriented programs aren‘t motivated in non-studio
courses.
Page
10
Prerequisite Knowledge & Preparedness
 Students‘ background knowledge & skills vary widely.
 Students lack interest or motivation.
 Students don't know how to do research.
 Group projects aren‘t working.
 Students can't write.
 Students don‘t keep up with reading.
Critical Thinking & Applying Knowledge
 Students‘ background knowledge & skills vary widely.
 Students don't know how to do research.
 Students can't write.
Page
11
Group Skills & Dynamics
Classroom Behavior & Etiquette
 One student monopolizes class.
 Students come late to class.
 Students behave rudely in class.
 Students cheat on assignments and exams.
 Students respond to course content and classroom dynamics in emotional
and unproductive ways.
Grading & Assessment
 Students complain the exams are too hard.
 Students complain about grades.
 Students performed poorly on an exam.
 Students cheat on assignments and exams.
Page
12
Current Issue #3 (10 Critical Issues Facing Education)
by Peter DeWitt on January 23, 2014 8:49 AM
During my leadership training at the College of Saint Rose I took a class with Jim
Butterworth (my mentor) called Critical Issues. Jim was a voracious reader, an
assistant commissioner for the New York State Education Department, former
superintendent, and an amazing professor. All of those combined with a 2 ½ hour
class led to some of the best educational discussions I've ever had.
Every week we were required to read chapters from various books (i.e. Fullan,
Senge, Hargreaves, Reeves and Greenleaf), and numerous stories from
Education Week's print copy. It opened up our world from the classroom we were
teaching in, or the school we were leading. The class brought together building
leaders, teachers, school psychologists and social workers from urban, suburban
and rural settings who were all trying to finish their degree in leadership.
I took the class 10 years ago, but never forgot about the importance of
discussing issues, even if they were difficult and the people in the room held
differing opinions. As educators we should always be able to debate our
profession. The problem we have, as does anything that involves politics, is that
we cannot seem to move forward together. There are state and national leaders
so consumed with being right that they cannot, and will not, budge.
Page
13
Hopefully, all of that will change this year. After the past few years of increased
accountability, budget cuts, arguments and infighting, 2014 will be a different
year for all of us...and I hope for the positive. In education there are some very
large issues that we have to contend with, and they are not all about
accountability and mandates.
Top 10 Critical Issues
Critical issues are those issues that are important to education. They are the
barriers that get in the way, or the important elements that we need to focus on in
order to move forward and offer better opportunities to our students.
Common Core State Standards - 46 states may have adopted the standards
but around a dozen states are backing out or considering backing out of using
them. Regardless of how people feel about the Common Core they have led to
many hot debates about education, and will continue to do so in 2014.
Student Learning - Student learning is everything from different pathways to
graduation, encouraging student voice in student learning, and encouraging them
have a place at the table for larger conversations about their education (Lisa
Page
14
Nielsen's Innovative Educator blog that focuses on student voice). So often we
focus on teaching, but it's learning that matters most.
Technology - Even after all of these years technology is still a hot button issues.
Some people love it and use it flawlessly every day, while others hate it and don't
see why they need to be forced to use it at all. In addition what makes it
complicated is that some schools seem to have endless resources, while other
schools have to use what wealthier schools disregarded as old. Whether its
MOOC's, iPads, gaming or BYOD, technology will still be a critical issue to
discuss in 2014.
Social Media - Twitter has exploded over the past few years. More and more
educators are joining and finding members to their Professional Learning
Network (PLN). What's even better is that they are sharing resources to use in
their classrooms, buildings and districts, and they are also using it to connect for
professional development (i.e. Twitter chats, EdCamps, etc.). Social media will
be, and should be, part of a huge discussion in 2014.
Page
15
Politics - Politicians have long mentioned education in their speeches but the
past two years it seemed to have happened more than ever. Many politicians
seem to focus on how schools are failing, and their only solution is
standardization, accountability and high stakes testing. Many governors, like
Andrew Cuomo, are running for re-election this year and education will no doubt
make or break their campaigns. How many politicians, like Cuomo and Christie,
have spoken about teachers is deplorable and this is the year when teachers
continue to take control over that conversation.
High Stakes Testing (a test with important consequences for the test taker.
Passing has important benefits, such as a high school diploma, a scholarship, or
a license to practice a profession. Failing has important disadvantages, such as
being forced to take remedial classes until the test can be passed, not being
allowed to drive a car, or not being able to find employment. The use and misuse
of high-stakes tests are a controversial topic in public education, especially in the
United States where they have become especially popular in recent years, used
not only to assess students but in attempts to increase teacher accountability.)
- Not sure if you have heard of this before but schools across the country have to
give high stakes tests to students. Some start it in kindergarten, while others
begin in 3rd grade. In most states they are tied to teacher/administrator evaluation
and that will no doubt continue to be a big debate this year. There need to be
Page
16
different methods used to assess student learning, and none of it should be "high
stakes."
School Leadership - If you go on Twitter, you will find hundreds of school
leaders who consider themselves "Lead Learners." This is very important
because they see the important part they play in the lives of their students,
teachers and staff. In addition, school leaders understand that they can have a
positive or negative impact on their school climate, and too many still have a
negative impact.
Pre-service Teaching Programs - How can we get the best teachers into our
classrooms when so many politicians and policymakers cry that schools are
failing? Under those circumstances, who would want to go into the profession?
Additionally, pre-service programs need to improve because many of the
graduates do not seem prepared for the profession. The real question for 2014 is
how can K-12 schools work with these programs to build a community of learners
who are prepared for the profession? A little less accountability tied to testing
would go a long way to improve this issue.
Page
17
School Climate - A few days ago Secretary Duncan and Attorney General Eric
Holder announced new guidelines to stop the school to prison pipeline and
improve school climate. This critical issue is not just about bullying, but about
creating an inclusive school climate where all students can achieve their
maximum potential.
Poverty - We know around 22% of our students are living in poverty. We also
know that many children who live in poverty come to kindergarten hearing
1/8th of the language (vocabulary) that their wealthier peers experienced. Many
of the schools that try to educate these students lack the proper resources, and
the communities where children in poverty live often lack the same
resources that wealthier towns have. Poverty is an issue that is one of the most
critical issues of our time, in and out of schools.
Page
18
Current Issue #4 (Top Issues Facing Higher Education In 2014)
John Ebersole (Executive Staff)
Title: President, Excelsior College
Education: LPD, Northeastern University
Master of Public Administration,
John F. Kennedy University
Master of Business Administration,
John F. Kennedy University
EdS, The George Washington
University
Distinguished Graduate, U.S. Naval
War College
Certificate of Management of
Learning & Education, Harvard
University
Certificate in Pacific Basin Studies,
University of Southern California
Fellowships: Sandler Fellowship in Education,
Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University
Page
19
John F. Ebersole is president of Excelsior College in Albany, New York, one of
the oldest accredited, private, nonprofit distance education institutions in the
country. His personal experience as a post-traditional student has informed his
approach to adult education throughout his more than 30 year career in higher
education.
He has held teaching and management positions at John F. Kennedy University
and Boston University as well as management positions at the University of
California–Berkeley and Colorado State University. He has developed such
programs as the CSUN Network for Learning and Boston University's BU Global
as well as Boston University's award-winning online program.
Ebersole chairs the American Association of Community Colleges Corporate
Council and has been named to the ACE Presidential Innovation Lab. He also
serves as chair of the Lighthouse Academies, a nonprofit charter school provider,
and as a member of the board of directors of the Commission on Independent
Colleges and Universities (New York). He previously served as chair of the
American Council on Education's Commission on Lifelong Learning and is a Hall
of Fame inductee of both the United States Distance Learning Association and
the International Association of Continuing Higher Education.
A former president of the University Professional and Continuing Education
Association (UPCEA), Ebersole is co-author (with William Patrick) of
Page
20
"Courageous Learning: Finding A New Path Through Higher Education" (Hudson
Whitman Press/Excelsior College Press, 2011). The book was recently turned
into "Courageous Learning: The Documentary" (Ellucian).
A retired Coast Guard commander and Vietnam veteran, Ebersole began his
college education while in the military. In addition to being a distinguished
graduate of the Naval War College, he earned a doctorate in law and policy from
Northeastern University, an EdS from The George Washington University, and
master's degrees in both business and public administration from John F.
Kennedy University. He has served as a senior fellow at Harvard University's
Kennedy School of Government, where he conducted research into innovation in
higher education.
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
The last several years have seen much white water in higher education. The
currents of change have propelled the sector toward, or onto, one rock after
another. This year offers no prospect for relief. The top issues of 2014 will
undoubtedly include the following:
Page
21
The Forbes eBook on Paying for College
Getting into college is hard enough. Paying for it shouldn’t be. Find out how to
save thousands on higher education
 Cost continues to top the list of concerns for the President, Congress and,
most importantly, the public. Much of the cost increase over the past five
years can be attributed to reduced state tax support for public institutions
which has forced an offset through increases in tuition and fees. The highest
increases have been at public colleges and universities where 75% of
students are enrolled. President Obama will be drawing further attention to
this issue with a White House Conference on the subject planned for
January.
 Renewal of the Higher Education Act by Congress got started last year.
However, the in-depth work of shaping and testing new policies and
regulations will pick up steam in 2014. At this point, accreditation reform
appears to be one of the few issues parties agree is needed although
consensus on its purpose is lacking.
 Workforce development is taking on greater importance as employers are
once again hiring but they are still having difficulty finding applicants with
needed skills. This is creating dialogue around America‘s ―skills gap‖ and the
need for higher education to do a better job of preparing future workers.
Page
22
Meanwhile, business and industry remain largely on the sidelines in terms of
efforts to increase employee degree completion.
 Competency-based education (CBE) is receiving attention from the media
as more schools dip a toe into these new waters. There is much to be done
here. Few understand exactly what is meant by ―competency‖, know how to
measure it, or comprehend what can actually be done with a degree attained
through such a process (employers may like it, but what about grad
schools). Even the appropriateness of the term ―competency-based
education‖ is questioned by some as such programs are focused on the
assessment of one‘s ability to apply learning alreadyacquired rather than the
attainment of new learning. Should this be ―competency-based credentialing‖
(CBC)?
 Accreditation has become the ―piñata‖ of both the political and policy
communities. Few of those who are critical of it understand the present
system, a big part of the problem. However, before any meaningful reform
can be undertaken, there needs to be agreement as to whether the present
system is ―too difficult‖ or ―too lax‖ and whether the desired end state is a
regulatory enforcement body or one of quality assurance.
Page
23
 Assessment has become a major concern for higher education.
Increasingly, regulators and accreditors are moving away from input models
and instead are asking, ―What is the country receiving in return for the
billions being spent on higher education and how do we know if it is
effective?‖ Learning outcome-assessment has become the basis for
determining institutional effectiveness. However, the availability of valid,
widely accepted tools and methods needed to determine learning and skill
acquisition are proving hard to come by.
 Quality assurance in non-institutional learning is one of several awkward
terms attached to granting equivalency to similar learning within an
academic institution. There is growing consensus that a need exists for
standards and greater transparency in the process for determining the credit
worthiness of learning achieved outside the academy. This is an aspect of
higher education long dominated by theAmerican Council on Education. As
more institutions are starting to make such determinations independent of
one another, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) has
created a commission to consider what is needed. All want some assurance
of quality but no two assessors are using the same yardstick.
Page
24
 There is a need to recognize the (not-all-that-) new majority in student
bodies. While higher education has not seen a dramatic shift in student
demographics, the media nor the policy community appear to fully recognize
that today‘s typical student is no longer an 18 to 24 year old studying full-
time on a campus. In fact, there is data which shows that fewer than 20% of
the roughly 20 million now enrolled fit this traditional description. The rest are
―post-traditional‖ students who are older, working part-time, and often
commuting, either by car or, increasingly, the Internet. Yet, policies and
programs still make assumptions based on the needs of a shrinking minority.
 A leadership crisis is looming. It is debatable whether the need to prepare
new leaders in higher education is coming or has already arrived.
Demographic data show an increasingly ―seasoned‖ group at the top of our
colleges and universities. According to an American Council on Education
report (―The American College President, 2012‖), ―Two decades ago the
average age of college and university presidents was 52. Today, it is 61.‖
Only the community college sector seems to recognize this as a problem
and it is taking action. Community college leadership programs are springing
up in schools of education across the country. And while some may question
whether these are the right places to be training future leaders in areas such
as the use of technology, innovation, advocacy and entrepreneurial thinking,
there is little else filling the void.
Page
25
 The economy is gaining strength and employment is once again rising.
While this is generally good news, it also gives fuel to those who maintain
that a college education isn‘t necessary to employment. Cost-value
comparisons that question the investment in a degree at today‘s prices
(always the ―published‖ tuition for an elite private institution) are increasing in
frequency. Student recruiting is likely to become more difficult as a result of
improved economic activity and because of the political perspective that
marketing is not an acceptable use of funds generated under Title IV.
You may observe a notable omission from this list: MOOCs. Increasing
awareness of their limitations for certain audiences combined with a feeling of
―enough already‖ will make these yesterday‘s news in 2014.
Uncertain seas are still ahead.
Page
26
Current Issue #5 (Students lack interest or motivation)
Students do not believe that their efforts will improve their performance.
If students do not believe that their efforts are likely to improve their performance,
they will not be motivated to work hard. Motivation can be affected, for instance,
if a course that has a reputation for being inordinately difficult. Students may also
have had discouraging experiences in similar courses or on early assignments in
a course that convince them they cannot do the work. Additionally, students have
beliefs about intelligence and learning that can affect their motivation. If they
believe learning is generally fast and easy (and should not be slow or arduous),
they may lose motivation when they encounter challenges. Similarly, if they
believe intelligence is a fixed quantity (something you do or do not have, but not
something you acquire over time), they may not see the point of extra effort.
Finally, if students attribute their success to their innate talents rather than effort,
they may not be motivated to work. This can happen whether they believe they
possess the necessary abilities (―I‘m a good writer; I don‘t need to start my paper
early‖) or lack them (―I‘m just no good at math. What‘s the point of trying?‖)
Page
27
Strategies:
1.) Identify an appropriate level of challenge.
2.) Create multiple opportunities for practice and feedback.
3.) Teach effective study strategies.
4.) Give students opportunities to reflect on their study strategies.
5.) Help students set realistic expectations.
Identify an appropriate level of challenge.
To motivate students, we need to set standards that are challenging but
attainable with reasonable effort. To identify an appropriate level of difficulty, it is
important to know what prior knowledge and experiences your students bring to
the course so you know where to begin and how fast to proceed. Administering
diagnostic or early assessments can help you to determine the right level of
challenge for your students. It can also be helpful to talk to instructors who have
taught your course successfully in the past and to look at their syllabi for clues
about the appropriate level of difficulty.
Page
28
Create multiple opportunities for practice and feedback.
Students‘ motivation will increase if they see that their efforts are helping them
make progress towards a goal. Hence, it is important to provide opportunities for
students to (1) practice using skills and knowledge in a low-stakes environment,
(2) receive timely, constructive feedback, and (3) incorporate that feedback into
subsequent work. The opportunity to receive feedback and use it to improve
subsequent performance can build students‘ confidence and work against
unproductive beliefs about learning and intelligence —for example, if a student
believes he is not good at math but then finds himself improving with practice, he
may rethink his beliefs about his own capabilities and even the nature of learning.
It is important to note that offering more opportunities for students to practice
does not have to create an unduegrading burden for faculty, especially if the
performance criteria are clearly spelled out and the feedback is very targeted.
Teach effective study strategies.
If students work hard with little result, it can quickly undermine their motivation.
Instructors should consider giving students tips on how to study and work
effectively, for example how to read articles (e.g., skim headings, review sources
and tables, identify the author‘s argument) and solve problems in their discipline
(e.g., formulate the problem, identify constraints, generate possible solutions).
Advice about studying is particularly helpful for first-year students who may lack
Page
29
study skills and strategies appropriate for college-level work. But it is also helpful
for students who are new to a discipline and may not employ approaches to
reading, writing, and solving problems that are disciplinarily appropriate. By
explicitly teaching productive study habits, instructors can help students achieve
a greater payoff for their efforts, which enhances motivation as well as learning.
Give students opportunities to reflect on their study strategies.
One way to enhance motivation is to ask students to reflect on how their study
strategies impacted their performance on previous tasks. For example, an
instructor might ask students to complete a ―wrapper‖ following an exam, with
questions such as ―What did you do to prepare for this exam or assignment?
What skills do you need to work on? How would you prepare differently if you
were doing it again?‖ Similarly, an instructor may ask students to reflect on how
they approached a writing assignment (e.g., ―How long in advance did you
begin? How many times did you revise before submitting the final version?‖).
Questions such as these cue students to strategies they may not have thought to
employ. It can also help students see the value of effort, while increasing their
sense of control over outcomes. Finally, the opportunity to reflect can help
students identify specific strategies that leverage their strengths and overcome
their weaknesses.
Page
30
Help students set realistic expectations.
If students have unrealistic expectations of the time it will take them to perform a
task or master a skill, they may get discouraged when it takes longer or requires
more effort. Consequently, it is helpful to address native beliefs directly and help
students set more realistic expectations. For instance, you might want to
disabuse students of the notion that good papers are written in one sitting and
discuss the need to start writing early and leave time for planning and revision.
You might also divide an assignment into stages (e.g., planning, research,
writing, revision) and give students an estimate of the time they should plan to
spend on each stage. Alternately, you might tell students about your own
frustrations as a student or researcher and describe how you overcame various
obstacles. Seeing that intelligent, accomplished people sometimes struggle to
gain mastery—and that learning does not happen without effort—can prompt
students to revise their own expectations about learning and to persevere when
they encounter difficulty.
References:
DeWitt, P. (January 23, 2014). 10 Critical issues facing education. Retreived
November 21, 2015 from
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/finding_common_ground/2014/01/10_criti
cal_issues_facing_education.html?intc=main-mpsmvs
Page
31
DeWitt, P. (January 23, 2014). 10 Critical issues facing education. Retreived
November 21, 2015 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-stakes_testing
Ebersole, J. (2014). Top issues facing higher education in 2014. Retreived
November 21, 2015 from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnebersole/2014/01/13/top-issues-facing-
higher-education-in-2014/#2715e4857a0b430dcec91024
Five factors about students issue (n.d.). Retreived November 21, 2015 from
http://www.cmu.edu/teaching/solveproblem/step1-problem/
Students lack interest or motivation (n.d.). Retreived November, 2015 from
http://www.cmu.edu/teaching/solveproblem/strat-
lackmotivation/lackmotivation-06.html
W einstein, J. ( March 2, 20 10). Th e pro ble m o f rural ed ucation in
the Philippines. Retreived November 21, 2015 from
https://joshweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/the-problem-of-
education-in-the-philippines/
Page
32
Education about
the Development of
School Library and
Staffing”
Elizabeth R. Zara
Edman201
Page
33
School library manifesto 35
The goal of school libraries 35
Frameworks for school libraries 36
Staffing school libraries 37
School library collections 38
Instructional programs of school libraries 38
School library evaluation 39
Maintaining support for the school library 40
Page
34
School Library Manifesto
School libraries around the world share a common purpose, expressed in
the 1999 IFLA/UNESCO School Library Manifesto: The school library in teaching
and learning for all. School library personnel uphold the values of the United
Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1959), the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), the United Nations Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous People (2007), and of the Core Values of IFLA. School
libraries are envisioned in the Manifesto as a force for the enhancement and
improvement of teaching and learning throughout the school community—for
educators as well as for students.
The goal of school libraries
The goal of all school libraries is to develop information literate students
who are responsible and ethical participants in society. Information literate
students are competent self-directed learners who are aware of their information
needs and actively engage in the world of ideas. They display confidence in their
ability to solve problems and know how to locate relevant and reliable
information. They are able to manage technology tools to access information and
to communicate what they have learned. They are able to operate comfortably in
situations where there are multiple answers or no answers. They hold high
standards for their work and create quality products. Information literate students
Page
35
are flexible, able to adapt to change, and able to function both individually and in
groups.
Frameworks for school libraries
School libraries exist within a framework of local, regional, and national
authority to provide equity of opportunity for learning and for developing the
abilities needed to participate in the knowledge society. In order to maintain and
continuously respond to an evolving educational and cultural environment, school
libraries need to be supported by legislation and sustained funding. School
libraries also exist within an ethical framework that considers the rights and
responsibilities of students and other members of the learning community.
Everyone who works in school libraries, including volunteers, have a
responsibility to observe high ethical standards in their dealings with each other
and with all members of the school community. They endeavour to put the rights
of library users before their own comfort and convenience and to avoid being
biased by their personal attitudes and beliefs in providing library service. They
deal with all children, youth, and adults on an equal basis regardless of their
abilities and background, maintaining their right to privacy and their right to know.
Page
36
Staffing school libraries
Because the role of school libraries is to facilitate teaching and learning,
the services and activities of school libraries need to be under the direction of
professional staff with the same level of education and preparation as classroom
teachers. Where school librarians are expected to take a leadership role in the
school, they need to have the same level of education and preparation as other
leaders in the school, such as school administrators and learning specialists. The
operational aspects of school libraries are best handled by trained clerical and
technical support staff in order to ensure that school librarians 8 have the time
needed for the professional roles of instruction, management, collaboration, and
leadership. Staffing patterns for school libraries vary depending on the local
context, influenced by legislation, economic development, and educational
infrastructure. However, more than 50 years of international research indicates
that school librarians require formal education in school librarianship and
classroom teaching in order to develop the professional expertise required for the
complex roles of instruction, reading and literacy development, school library
management, collaboration with teaching staff, and engagement with the
educational community.
Page
37
School library collections
School librarians work with administrators and teachers to develop policies
that guide the creation and maintenance of the library‘s collection of educational
materials. The collection management policy must be based upon the curriculum
and the particular needs and interests of the school community and reflects the
diversity of society outside the school. The policy makes it clear that collection
building is a collaborative endeavour and that teachers, as subject experts with
valuable knowledge about the needs of their students, have an important role to
play in helping to build library collections. Also vital is ensuring that school
libraries acquire resources that have been created both locally and internationally
and that reflect the national, ethnic, cultural, linguistic, indigenous, and other
unique population identities of members of the school community.
Instructional programs of school libraries
School librarians should focus on the core pedagogical activities of:
• literacy and reading promotion;
• media and information literacy (e.g., information literacy, information
skills, information competences, information fluency, media literacy,
transliteracy);
• inquiry-based learning (e.g., problem-based learning, critical thinking);
• technology integration; • professional development for teachers; and
Page
38
• appreciation of literature and culture. School librarians recognize the
importance of having a systematic framework for the teaching of media
and information skills, and they contribute to the enhancement of students‘
skills through collaborative work with teachers.
School library evaluation
Evaluation is a critical aspect of an ongoing cycle of continuous
improvement. Evaluation helps to align the library‘s programs and services with
the goals of the school. Evaluation demonstrates to students and teachers, to
library staff, and to the wider educational community the benefits derived from
school library programs and services. Evaluation gives the evidence needed to
improve programs and services and also helps both library staff and library users
understand and value those programs and services. Successful evaluation leads
to renewal of programs and services, as well as development of new programs
and services.
Page
39
Maintaining support for the school library
Evaluation also is essential to guide initiatives related to public relations
and advocacy. Because the role of school libraries in teaching and learning is not
always well understood, supportive relationships need to be built with the school
library‘s stakeholder groups and supporters to ensure that library funding and
other kinds of support are maintained.
Reference:
Barbara, Schultz-Jones (June 2015). Chair Dianne Oberg, Secretary. IFLA
Section of School Libraries.
Page
40
Education about
the Development of
School, Family, &
Community
Connections”
Jean F. Fetalvero
Edman201
Page
41
Current Issue # 1 ( Clarifying the Concept of Family and Community
Connections with Schools) 43
Current Issue #2 (Measuring the Outcomes of Family andCommunity
Connections with Schools) 53
Current Issue #3 (Advancing the Research Base for Family and
Community Connections with Schools) 61
Current Issue #4 (Critical Areas for Research in Family and
Community Connections with Schools) 65
Page
42
Current Issue #1 (Clarifying the Concept of Family and
Community Connections with Schools)
The field of family and community connections with schools does not
haveconsistent agreement on what is meant by the terms ―connections,‖
―parentinvolvement,‖ and ―community involvement.‖ There is also many
differentkinds of activities that fall under the field‘s umbrella. In addition, the
variousstakeholders that are involved in these connections (school, family, and
community) may hold conflicting perceptions of their roles and the roles of
otherstakeholders. The need to clarify these definitions of family and
communityconnections comes not from a call for a universally acceptable, all-
encompassingdefinition of the terms, but from a need to be clear in our language
so thatresearchers and practitioners can more effectively implement and
measure theimpact of these connections. This lack of clarity and agreement
about what and who is included in the concept of family and community
connections with schools creates a challenge for those who seek models that are
practicable and yield measurable results. When achieved, however, the rewards
will be many, for effective connections can improve student achievement in
school, support student success in life, and nurture the development of healthy
schools, families, and communities.
Page
43
Ways Families Connect with Schools
Homework help, including school-developed homework that
encouragesparent-child interaction as well as more general strategies that
schools andfamilies use to support effective homework. Also included is school-
developedtraining for parents in strategies, tools, and resources to support
learningin specific school subjects (Clark, 1993; Cooper, Lindsay, & Nye,
2000;Epstein & VanVoorhis, 2001; Izzo, Weissberg, Kasprow, & Fendrich, 1999).
Supportive home environment, including the supervision and structure
thatparents give children outside of school to support their education, such
aslimiting television viewing time and providing structured time for homeworkand
learning (Shumow, 2001; Xu, 2001).
• Home-school communication and interactions, including direct
parentteachercontacts and relationships as well as more general
communicationbetween school and home regarding school events and school
policies(Chrispeels & Rivero, 2000; Miedel & Reynolds, 1999; Quigley, 2000).
Page
44
• Parent participation in activities at school, such as parent-teacher
organizations(PTOs), meetings, school advisory or site-based decision-making
teams,and volunteering in classrooms or with class activities (Epstein &
Dauber,1995; Izzo et al., 1999; Mapp, 1999).
• Home practices that support literacy development, such as parents readingwith
children or providing books and writing materials (Faires, Nichols &Rickelman,
2000; Starkey & Klein, 2000; Melzi, Paratore, & Krol-Sinclair,2000).
• Parent tutoring on specific subjects as part of school-sponsored
programs(Invernizzi, Rosemary, Richards & Richards, 1997; Powell-Smith,
Stoner,Shinn & Good, 2000).
• Parent support for the child, including emotional and academic support, andthe
expression of parent aspirations and expectations regarding a child‘s
currentschool performance as well as future college or career success
(Lopez,2001; Trusty, 1999; Yonezawa, 2000).
Page
45
• Parent-directed activities that connect students to out-of-school opportunitiesfor
learning and development, such as museum and library visits, privatetutoring,
and other enrichment opportunities (Cairney, 2000; Gutman &McLoyd, 2000;
Tapia, 2000).
• Parent-child discussions and interactions about school-related issues
andactivities, including parental advice and guidance on academic decisions
andcourse placements (Catsambis, 1998; Yonezawa, 2000).
• Parents serving as role models for why school is important and sharing
theirown experiences that reinforce the value of education (Sanders, 1998).
• Parent involvement in school reform efforts, including advocating forchange,
using standards and test scores as tools for holding schools accountablefor
student achievement, participating in the development of improvementplans, and
taking part in opportunities created by reforms, such asgovernance councils
(Desimone, Finn-Stevenson, & Henrich, 2000; Dodd &Konzal, 1999).
Page
46
Although all of these activities may fall under the heading of ―family
involvement,‖there is evidence that different types of involvement may have little
orno correlation to each other (Keith & Keith, 1993). For example, while a
parentmay maintain consistent contact with a child‘s teacher through telephone
callsand written notes, he or she may not participate actively in volunteer
activitiesat the school campus.
Several authors have developed frameworks for understanding the
varioustypes and components of parent-school connections (Chrispeels, 1992,
1996, ascited in Chrispeels & Rivero, 2000; Eccles & Harold, 1996; Epstein,
1995;Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994, as cited in Kohl, Lengua, & McMahon,
2000;Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1997). Joyce Epstein‘s framework of six types
offamily involvement (1995) is frequently cited in research and has been
adoptedby many practitioners, most notably the National Parent Teacher
Association(National PTA, 1998). Epstein‘s framework outlines six dimensions of
parentschool partnerships:
Type 1 Parenting – Assisting families with parenting skills and setting home
conditions to support children as students, as well as assisting schools to
understand families
Page
47
Type 2 Communicating – Conducting effective communications from school-to-
home and from home-to-school about school programs and student progress
Type 3 Volunteering – Organizing volunteers and audiences to support the
school and students. Providing volunteer opportunities in various locations and at
various times
Type 4 Learning at Home – Involving families with their children on homework
and other curriculum-related activities and decisions
Type 5 Decision Making – Including families as participants in school decisions
and developing parent leaders and representatives
Type 6 Collaborating with the Community – Coordinating resources
andservices from the community for families, students, and the school, and
providing services to the community Cataloging these kinds of activities is a
useful step, but more work is needed to capture the variety of forms that family-
school connections can take and create a common language in the field. The
varieties of definitions make it difficult to compare studies and models of parent
involvement to one another. They also make analysis of the findings of multiple
studies a challenge. For practitioners, this lack of clarity may lead to difficulty in
Page
48
making judgments about what kinds of activities to implement, how to implement
them, and what results to expect from them.
Ways Communities Connect with Schools
Similarly, many different kinds of activities fall under the heading of
―community connections with schools.‖ One researcher may define a
schoolcommunityconnection as a formal partnership between the school and
anotherlocal organization. Another may highlight learning opportunities for
studentsthat take them out of the classroom and into the community for real-life
experiences such as job internships and community research projects.
Community connections might involve individual community members as
educational partners, as well as community organizations such as businesses,
nonprofits, and government agencies. Still other researchers may look at the role
of the school in the larger community—as a community center or a community
institution that can play a role in community development efforts. There is even
variation in the very way the term ―community‖ is defined. Cahill (1996) suggests
that community can be defined using geographical, philosophical,
political,sociological, or economic terms. The following are some of the types of
community connections with schools that were discussed in the literature
reviewed:
Page
49
• Connections that integrate or locate health and human services at school sites
and use school facilities and resources for the benefit of the entire community.
These kinds of connections are generally called ―full service‖ or ―community‖
schools (Abrams & Gibbs, 2000; Dryfoos, 1998a, 1998b, 2000; Lawson, 1999;
Shaul, 2000).
• School-to-work initiatives that link career training and real-life experienceswith
academic content (Hughes et al., 2001; Reynolds, Walberg & Weissberg,
1999). After-school programs that provide remedial or enrichment learning
activities for students while maximizing the use of school resources and fulfilling
parents‘ need for childcare (Miller, 2001).
• Community-driven school reform efforts that simultaneously seek to improve
local schools, build the social networks that exist in the community, build the
capacity of local community members to take action and solve problems at the
local level, and create ―new standards and expectations for life in the community‖
(Rockefeller Foundation, 1997, as cited in Jehl, Blank, & McCloud, 2001, p. 4).
• School-business partnerships in which businesses provide schools with
resources, business expertise, and volunteers (Otterbourg, 1998; Sanders, 2000;
Shirley, 1997).
Page
50
• Connections with community organizations, such as local health and
humanservices providers and community-based youth development
organizations, to provide services or enrichment opportunities for students at or
near the schools (Center for Mental Health in Schools, 1999b; McMahon, Ward,
Pruett, Davidson, & Griffith, 2000).
• School-university partnerships where universities, usually colleges of
education,provide expertise, resources, and professional development to schools
while schools participate in research studies or other professional collaboration
projects (Restine, 1996; Zetlin & MacLeod, 1995).
• Direct support from individual community members (church members,
neighbors, and other adults) to students, to provide learning opportunities,
expectations for educational achievement, and support for overall student well-
being (Cordiero & Kolek, 1996; Honig, Kahne, & McLaughlin, 2001; Yancey &
Saporito, 1997).
• Connections with educational organizations, such as museums, libraries,
andcultural groups, to provide out-of-school opportunities for informal
teachingand learning (Faucette, 2000).
Page
51
• Community service or service learning programs that link academic contentwith
activities that allow students to contribute to the well-being of the
community(Schine, 1996; Wang, Oates, & Weishew, 1995).
• Tutoring and academic support in specific school subjects by
communitybasedvolunteers (Invernizzi et al., 1997).
• Deliberative dialogue programs that bring together community members
toexplore issues affecting schools. These dialogue sessions provide a
mechanismfor two-way information sharing between the school and
community(McDonnell & Weatherford, 2000).
• Community participation in school decision-making through formal
mechanismssuch as school governance councils (Lewis & Henderson, 1997;
Mapp,1999; Sarason & Lorentz, 1998).
Page
52
Current Issue #2 (Measuring the Outcomes of Family and
Parent and community connections have been measured inconsistently
acrossstudies and research has not yet captured the full picture of these
connectionsand their results (Kohl et al., 2000). There is also a need to be
precise in howwe are currently measuring outcomes, in order to avoid faulty
generalizationsand conclusions and to clarify the sometimes conflicting evidence
about the impact of connections. In order to advance, the field must continue to
explorenew methods for capturing the processes and outcomes of these complex
interactions between schools, families, and communities. We must also capture
the different outcomes of the connections for various stakeholders in order to
gain a full picture of the impact of the connections. Some of the outcomes are
described below. The purpose of these summaries is to illustrate the multifaceted
nature of outcomes to be captured through research and evaluation
measurements.
Page
53
Outcomes for Students
The outcomes described below demonstrate the range of results for
studentsthat may be measured and monitored in studies of school, family, and
communityconnections.
• Academic achievement Family and community connections with schools have
shown evidence of an effect on student academic achievement (for example, Fan
& Chen, 1999; Ho Sui-Chu & Willms, 1996; Luchuck, 1998; Keith & Keith, 1993).
Recent studies by Shaver and Walls (1998); Faires et al. (2000); Quigley (2000);
Chavkin, Gonzalez, and Rader (2000); and Izzo et al. (1999) all found specific
positive impacts on reading and mathematics. Others, such as Bloome, Katz,
Solsken, Willett, and Wilson-Keenan (2000) and Epstein, Simon, and Salinas
(1997) have found effects on other subjects, such as language arts, literacy, art,
science, and social studies.
• Other achievement in school Research has demonstrated that family
andcommunity connections have also impacted attendance, aspirations for
postsecondary education, enrollment in challenging high school curriculum,
andsuccessful transitions from special education to regular classes. In
addition,research has documented that connections have reduced retention
Page
54
anddropout rates among students (Trusty, 1999; Miedel & Reynolds,
1999;Yonezawa, 2000).
• Social functioning Students‘ social functioning can be impacted by family and
community connections in such areas as student behavior, motivation, social
competence, intrinsic motivation, positive student-teacher and peer relationships,
language, self-help, meaningful youth and adult connection/relationships, and
strong peer and adult role models (Palenchar, Vondra & Wilson, 2001; Sanders,
1998).
• Addressing barriers to learning Barriers to learning such as health and mental
health problems can be alleviated as a result of family and community
connections with schools (Center for Mental Health in Schools, 1999a; Newman,
1995; Wynn et al., 2000). Through connections, students and their families often
have access to physical health services, social services, and basic subsistence
services that they might not otherwise be able to access (Wynn et al.).
• Creating networks of support Years of research (for example, Anderson, 1978;
Bronfenbrenner, 1986; Sorin, 1990; Garbarino, 1992, all cited in Honig et al.,
2001) have shown that social networks within and between neighborhoods can
provide a web of support to parents and other adults that leads to greater
learning opportunities for youth and children. Researchers investigating
resilience in children (Bernard, 1990; Sampson, 1991; Werner, 1992; Blyth &
Page
55
Leffert, 1995, all cited in Honig et al.) have found that socially coherent
communities and stable neighborhoods seem to be strongly correlated with
positive development and learning outcomes for youth. In the resiliency research
and in Kretzmann and McKnight‘s (1993) work on assets and strength of
neighborhood ties, it has been found that neighborhoods can extend the
classroom and that peer groups function as powerful influences on youth
development and academic engagement.
• Creating new learning opportunities Several authors suggest that
connectionsbetween schools and communities can provide new opportunities for
students to learn in a variety of settings, such as church congregations,
community organizations, and afterschool programs (Dryfoos, 2000; Honig et al.,
2001; Sanders, 1998; Wynn et al., 2000). These connections can provide new
role models and teachers to students and provide opportunities for buildingskills
and leadership qualities that can support success in a variety of settings,
including school. Additionally, school-community connections can lead to greater
access to work-based learning and other career development opportunities
(Hughes et al., 2001).
Outcomes for Schools
Page
56
In addition to supporting the success of individual students, family and
communityconnections with schools show impact on schools as organizations
and on personnel working in schools. The following is a summary of some of the
outcomes found in the literature reviewed. They demonstrate the range of
schoolresults that may be measured and monitored in studies of school, family,
andcommunity connections.
• School reform efforts School reform efforts across the country have
beeninfluenced by parent and community involvement (Shirley, 1997;
Desimoneet al., 2000; Zetlin & MacLeod, 1995). In their 1997 book, Lewis &
Henderson suggest that parents have played three key roles in reform efforts: as
reform advocates, as full partners in reform efforts, and as participants in the
reform. Harkavy (1998) suggests that universities have a key role to play in
school reform as major institutions within the local neighborhood or community.
He suggests that they can serve as both a powerful resource and as a catalyst
for change, but must adapt themselves to the needs of the local community in
order to be effective.
• School climate A study of the CoZi model of school reform (a combinationof
James Comer‘s development schools and Edward Zigler‘s Schools of the21st
Century) also found that there were effects on the school as a result offamily and
Page
57
community involvement in the reform effort, such as better school climate, and
more open school culture (Desimone et al., 2000).
• Access to resources Studies of partnerships between schools and
professionalinstitutions, such as businesses, universities and foundations, have
found great benefits to schools in the form of increased access to resources and
knowledge (Merchant, 1996). Wynn et al. (2000) found that these resources,
including both small ones, such as telephone lines, copying machines or space,
and more substantive ones, like computers, are highly valued by schools. In the
majority of the connections studied by Wynn et al., schools also received human
resources in the form of teachers, trainers for teachers, and management
assistance.
Outcomes for Families and Communities
In addition to supporting students and schools, family and community
connectionswith schools can impact families and the community at large. Reports
of improved outcomes for the family unit and the community as a whole are
numerous. The following is a summary of some of the outcomes found in the
literature reviewed. They demonstrate the range of family and community results
Page
58
that may be measured and monitored in studies of school, family, andcommunity
connections.
• Changes in skills, knowledge, and beliefs. Several studies documented thatfamily
attitudes toward education and their understanding of schools improved as a
result of involvement (Bauch, 2000; Sanders, Epstein & Connors-Tadros, 1999).
One study found that parenting styles can shift in positive ways as a result of
their involvement with schools when they are given specific opportunities to make
changes (Chrispeels & Rivero, 2000).
• Acquisition of resources Community organizations can acquire newresources
as a result of their relationship with the school, such as use ofschool facilities. As
previously noted, Wynn et al. (2000) found that all connectionsinvolve the
exchange of resources among organizations, including physical resources such
as space, equipment, and supplies; program resources, such as curriculum and
training; and human resources, such as individuals from one organization
working in another. Evaluations of community school programs also showed that
families receive greater support and services as a result of school-based
programs (Dryfoos, 2000).
Page
59
• Increased civic capacity and community development Schools can serveas
places where the public can come together and be involved in
decisionmakingthat impacts their community (Lewis, 1999). The roles that family
and community members play in school reform and other collaborative efforts
can have implications for the larger community, as reform participants build skills
and capacity that can be transferred to address other community needs (Shirley,
1997). Also, Lewis and Henderson (1998) found that when neighborhood family
and community members are engaged in school reform efforts, the following
outcomes can often be documented: the partnership becomes a means of
rebuilding civic infrastructure, the quality of life in the neighborhood improves,
and the nature of local power and politics changes. Community-based education
reformers have also reported that their work creates a sense of place, develops
enduring relationships,empowers people, erases boundaries between schools
and communities, and builds an engaged community around schools (Lewis &
Henderson).
Page
60
Current Issue #3 (Advancing the Research Base for Family and
Research about the process and effects of family and community
connectionswith schools is evolving and does not yet provide clear directions for
practitioners.
As discussed in Issues 1 and 2, there are unclear and overlapping definitionsof
the concept, its dimensions, and its measurements. The body of empiricalwork
on family and community connections with schools should be strengthened in
several respects to generate a solid research base for this field. Most critical is
the development of more cohesive theoretical models and frameworks that can
be used to develop and test hypotheses that can inform theory. The use of a
variety of research methods and designs, appropriate for the types of questions
that need to be explored, is also critical.
Page
61
Current State of the Research
The body of research in family and community connections with schools is
described as being at an early stage of development. Researchers are still
tryingto understand the overall patterns of these connections. Three specific
characteristics that point to this early development are: the lack of linkages
between research and theory, the limitations of methodology, and the disconnection
between qualitative and quantitative research.
An early developmental stage In their review of the literature on parent
involvement in homework, Hoover- Dempsey, Battiato, Walker, Reed, DeJong &
Jones (2001) explain that the current body of research consists primarily of
descriptive accounts of what parents do when they are involved, what teachers
or schools do to invite parent involvement, and what student outcomes are
related to parent involvement. Others (Montemayor & Romero, 2000; Van
Voorhis, 2000) point out that most parent involvement studies to date have been
looking for family patterns and fixed characteristics, such as parent education,
socioeconomic level, and relationships at home. Early studies have also often
utilized only one measure to explain the construct, such as attendance at school
events (Van Voorhis). Thesestudies represent an effort to collect baseline
information to understand current practice and its outcomes in family and
community connections with schools.
Page
62
Montemayor and Romero (2000) warn that focusing on family patterns
hasnarrowed results to those characteristics that ―good families‖ have that help
children succeed academically. Schools then shape their programs around
theseresults, such as by offering classes to teach ―not so good parents‖ how to
readto their children and help them with homework, in the ways that ―good
parents‖do. From these studies researchers have portrayed families through
deficitmodel lenses: some families are broken and need to be fixed. Usually, this
patternmerely serves to reinforce racial, ethnic, and class biases (Montemayor
&Romero).
Lack of theories and conceptual frameworks
The body of research in this field that has be en developed over the last
threedecades has not been well connected to theory. One reason for this,
exploredin previous sections, is the lack of clear definitions and good ways of
measuringoutcomes. In addition, there have been few attempts to pull the
researchtogether into theoretical models and conceptual frameworks. In our
review, we found no theoretical models for community connections with schools.
Some models have been developed that focus solely on parent involvement or
that integrate family and community connections with schools. Kohl et al. (2000)
have examined the strengths and weaknesses of several of these current models
in the literature: Grolnick and Slowiaczek‘s (1994, as cited in Kohl et al.) three
Page
63
dimensions of parent involvement, Eccles and Harold‘s (1996) five dimensions of
parent-initiated involvement, and Epstein‘s (1995) six types of school-family-
community partnerships (as described in section 1 of this document). Hoover-
Dempsey and Sandler (1997) and Chrispeels (1992, as citedin Chrispeels &
Rivero, 2000) have also presented models for parent involvement.
However, Epstein‘s model is the only one that has undergone extensive
review by the research community. Epstein‘s model is based on a social
organizationperspective of overlapping influence, emphasizing that children are
bestsupported when families and schools have shared goals and work
collaboratively.
This model includes the community as an important arena of child and
adolescentlearning. It views school, family, and community relations as
dynamic,in that their overlapping spheres can be pushed together or pulled apart
byimportant forces: background and practices of families, schools and
communities;developmental characteristics of students; historical and policy
contexts; and time (Epstein & Sanders, 2000; Simon, 2000). Families, schools,
and communitiesare jointly responsible for and influential in children‘s
development.
Page
64
Current Issue #4 (Critical Areas for Research in Family and
Our review of the literature revealed a number of critical research areas that
surfaced repeatedly. Within each of the critical areas listed here, both promising
directions and research needs are discussed.
These areas are:
• Forging connections with families from culturally diverse backgrounds
• Connecting families with schools in homework help
• Connecting school, family, and community for effective school reform
• Connecting school, family, and community through developmental approaches
and integrated service delivery
• Connecting school, family, and community to support student transitions
throughout the education system
• Developing process-based approaches to make connections
• Preparing educators and other school personnel to make connectionsbetween
schools, families, and communities
Page
65
Our charge as a field is to come together to address the issues highlighted in
this document– to clarify the concept and outcomes of family and community
connections with schools and to improve the quantity and quality of the research
base available. In so doing, we will better understand these connections and
create the knowledge needed to realize the potential of family, school, and
community connections for student learning and students‘ lives.
Page
66
Education about
the Development of
Physical Facilities”
Carmelita M. de Dios
Edman201
Page
67
Current Issue # 1 ( Lack of materials, facilities still hound K to 12
implementation) 69
Current Issue # 2 (DepEd: Many public schools lack
space for more classrooms) 73
Page
68
Current Issue #1 (Lack of materials, facilities still hound K to
12 implementation)
Page
69
They had to buy workbooks for their Filipino subject as there were no
learning materials issued by the Department of Education delivered to their
school.
- The workbooks for LakanDula High School in Tondo, Manila, arrived during the
3rd and 4th quarters. Before these arrived, teachers had to photocopy materials
and distribute these to their students.
- Utilizing ―Kayumanggi,‖ a textbook used in the previous curriculum, in their
classes due to the absence of reference materials from DepEd.
Page
70
DepEd admits delay in delivery of materials
DepEd earlier said all the shortages in resources such as classrooms,
teacher items, textbooks and chairs will be addressed by the end of 2013.
Teachers’ sacrifice
The teachers have to shoulder the shortcomings of the government, which
has yet to recognize their sacrifice as they have not responded to their appeal for
salary increase.
She said the good thing with the program is teachers are given a free
hand to implement out-of-the-box strategies to convey the lessons to their
students.
Contreras said because of the zero fail or dropout policy under the K to 12
program, teachers need to work doubly hard to give problematic students a
remedial program.
He said to help the teachers follow the K to 12 program, they are given a
five-day in-service training on how to implement it.
He said the training is the easier part of the program and implementation
is the harder part especially with the lack of materials.
Page
71
Concerns on senior high school
DepEd has yet to respond to queries regarding the salary of teachers who
will teach in senior high school.
Senior High School is a two-year specialized upper secondary education
aimed at preparing the graduates for higher education, entrepreneurship; further
middle skills development, or joining the workforce immediately after high school.
Those who will take the Academic track can choose Business,
Accountancy, Management (BAM); Humanities, Education, Social Sciences
(HESS); and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
Contreras and Paunan both agree that K to 12 is a good program as it
provides direction for the students but its end will not be realized if the concerns
will not be addressed soon.
―Kung walakangkwarto, kung walakang teachers, kung wala kang
reference materials, paanomomai-implement nangmaayosangprograma?‖ said
Contreras.
Page
72
Current Issue #2(DepEd: Many public schools lack space for
more classrooms)
Scene 1:
Scene 2 & 3

Page
73
More than 700 crowded public schools need creative solutions to address
classroom congestion as they lack land and space for new classrooms.
The Department of Education is thus mulling over the introduction of
alternative modes of bringing education to students in these areas, from
transporting students to less congested schools and offering ―blended learning,‖
where students spend learning time online.
Page
74
―There are congested schools that are forced to have double shifts or
triple shifts with no buildable land. But I don‘t think the proper response there is
to build classrooms,‖ said Luistro at an education conference organized by
Philippine Business for Education (PBEd).
The options include blended learning, where students hold classes online
and only need to appear in school at selected times.
Another option is to provide students with learning modules that they could
work on outside school and meet in class twice a week, Luistro said.
The current classroom shortage stands at 50,921. Some 15,000 are
programmed to be built this year while DepEd is pursuing partnerships with the
private sector and local governments to build even more classrooms.
Page
75
Classroom Environments: Does Space Make a Difference?
What does your environment look like? Is it cozy? Is it uncomfortable? What
do you think of the lighting? The colors? Have you ever really stopped to absorb
your surroundings?
1. They affect the overall mood and productivity
2. It is the personalization of learning
State of Physical Facilities of Higher Education Institutions in Nigeria
Abdullahi Isa, Wan Zahari Wan Yusoff Ph.D
The purpose of this paper is to explore the state of physical facilities of
higher education institutions in Nigeria base on the global best practices
Facilities are materials designed to serve specific purposes. In the school
system, there are multiplicity of facilities, which facilitate teaching and learning.
They are used;
 1) To illustrate concepts
 (2) Provide opportunity for firsthand experience
 (3) For experimentation and demonstration
 (4) For scientific investigation and discovery
 (5) To provide diversity of thoughts
Page
76
 (6) For observation and inquiry
 (7) For development of scientific attitudes and skills
 (8) To protect the individual and also provide comfort Source
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES
 1. poor funding;
 2. lack of infrastructures,
 3. lack of frequent curriculum review,
 4. inadequate staff training and welfare,
 5. students overpopulation,
 6. frequent strikes by both the academic and supporting staff and so on.
 7. It is very unfortunate that necessary facilities such as sufficient power
supply, enough and decent lecture halls, basic chemicals and equipment
in laboratories and properly equipped libraries are lacking
Page
77
 The physical facilities comprises of buildings, land, compound,
equipment‘s, tools, space and so on, while the nonphysical facilities
include consultancy, catering, security, supply, relocation and event and
both are required to be planned, design, documented, resourced, provided
or delivered and monitored
Facilities are organizations‘ resources just like human, technology, finance
and time. Facilities play a facilitating role by providing all the necessary support
to organization so that it can successfully carry out its business smoothly;
properly managed facilities can make certain contribution to organization
success.
Page
78
These strategic roles and contributions include improving quality working life.
Facilities are instrument of productivity as such this closer integration of facilities
brings important opportunities to provide a competitive advantage.
Facilities must not be only available but must be adequate and in good
condition in order to encourage students achievement in higher education
especially in developing country like Nigeria quality manpower supply and well
trained graduate who can compete in the international market.
There is need to pay more attention to the state of existing facilities in tertiary
institution.
Page
79
Page
80
Page
81
References:
 International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 5,
Issue 4, April 2015 1 ISSN 2250-3153
 http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/168505/deped-many-public-schools-lack-
space-for-more-classrooms#ixzz3x761GvOu
 http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/363734/news/specialreports/lack-
of-materials-facilities-still-hound-k-to-12
implementation#sthash.8zaSZ6wh.dpuf
Page
82
Education about
the Development of
Curriculum”
Arlyn C. Cabudil
Edman201
Page
83
Table of Content:
Current Issue #1 (The challenges of basic education:
dealing with K-12) 85
Current Issue #2 (Reforms in the Philippine Education
system: The K to 12 Program) 90
Current Issue #3 (K-12: The unresolved issues) 99
Page
84
Current Issue #1 (The challenges of basic education: dealing
with K-12)
CONJUGATIONS By Lila Ramos Shahani (philstar.com) | Updated June 15,
2015 –
Philstar.com file photo
Despite five petitions having been filed at the Supreme Court to prevent the
implementation of K-12, the Department of Education (DepEd) is certain that the
new curriculum—which covers Kindergarten, six years of Primary Education, four
years of Junior High School, and two years of Senior High School—will enhance
Page
85
the quality of education in the Philippines, and they are equally confident that
they are prepared for the pioneering batch of Senior High School students in
June 2016.
Official Gazette of the Philippines
So what exactly is the nature of the K-12 curriculum and how does it differ from
the previous 10-year basic education curriculum?
Aside from the additional two years of Senior High School (SHS), the K-12
program totally restructures the basic education system in the country, aiming to
provide some solutions to the widespread unemployment of the youth. As Isagani
Cruz put it, ―The whole point of the entire K to 12 reform is to answer the needs
of about 30 million young people (those below 24 years of age) who have not
finished Fourth Year High School. Of the out-of-school youth of employable age,
more than six million are unemployed, primarily because they do not have the
skills that employers want.‖
Page
86
The two years of SHS consists of two parts: Track Subjects—covering the
development of skills for immediate employment or entrepreneurship, and Core
Subjects—to ensure college readiness of K-12 graduates. It also facilitates four
career tracks for students to choose from: Academic, Technical-Vocational-
Livelihood, Sports, and Art & Design.
The four different career tracks provide flexibility. Depending on the goals of the
student, as well as the community and industry requirements in a particular
region, the Track Subject Curriculum enhances the value and relevance of the
high school diploma. Equally important, the Core Subject Curriculum, remaining
invariable for all schools, provides an opportunity for everyone to be equally well-
prepared for a college education academically.
By integrating the awarding of TESDA National Certificates at the high school
level, K-12 students—now of employable age upon graduation—would already
qualify for decent entry-level jobs. This also increases the financial capabilities of
high school graduates who desire to pursue advancement through higher
education.
Moreover, the SHS curriculum also addresses the redundancy of college-level
general education programs, which presently cover material that should have
already been mastered at the pre-university level. This can result in higher
education institutions being more focused on the specifics of various degrees,
rather that consuming so much of the first two years remedying the inadequate
competencies of the old 10-year program.
Page
87
The K-12 curriculum is the present world standard and would be too difficult, if
not impossible, to compress into only 10 years. Globally, the Philippines remains
far behind, the only Asian country—and one of only three countries in the world—
providing only 10 years of basic education.
Inevitably, there are also downside implications resulting from this shift in the
education system.
With the introduction of K-12, there will be an increase in student population,
translating into a requirement for 20,000 to 28,000 additional classrooms for each
additional year-level; 40,000 to 56,000 classrooms for the two years of SHS.
another pressing issue is the retrenchment of teaching and non-teaching college
personnel. An estimated 25,000 are being held at bay.
DepEd, however, says that it has closed the gap of 66,800 classroom shortage in
2010 and has built 86,478 classrooms between 2010 to 2014. This year, an
additional 27,499 classrooms are on line to be constructed to cover the SHS
implementation in 2016.
DepEd has announced that it will be hiring 39,000 additional teachers in 2016 to
meet the personnel requirements of the program. This demand for SHS teachers
is proposed as mitigation for the faculty lay-offs in higher education institutions.
This is an important point, since many junior faculty look to their teaching careers
for funding to pursue higher academic degrees. Thus, the roughly 50 percent cut
Page
88
in pay that comes from the move from college to SHS teaching is particularly bad
news.
Page
89
Current Issue #2 (Reforms in the Philippine Education system:
The K to 12 Program)
by Cyril John Barlongo - May 26, 2015
In Photo: Students of the Bagong Tanyag Elementary School in Bicutan, Taguig,
shows their Abakada book. In each class, three school hours per session is only
being accommodated for they are lacking in classrooms. The question is what a
student can learn from a three-hour class. The Philippine educational system is
faced with a slew of problems, including lack of classrooms, dilapidated school
buildings and shortage of teachers.
QUALITY education is viewed as any country‘s pillar of success.
Restructuring the Philippines‘s basic educational system through the K to 12
Program is a tough but strategic move by the government to ensure that it
Page
90
produces competent graduates who can serve as the backbone for a highly
skilled and employable work force.
In Photo: Grade 1 pupils from Pasay City Elementary School at Leveriza Street in
Pasay City take time to write on their paper during the opening of classes in
Metro Manila area and other provinces.
Introduced in 2011 by the Department of Education (DepEd), headed by
Secretary Armin Luistro, FSJ, the K to 12 Program made kindergarten a
prerequisite to basic education. It lengthened basic schooling to include a two-
year senior high school and offered technical and vocational courses to students
not planning to go to college, thus giving them more chances of getting employed
in blue-collar work.
Page
91
The program replaced the 10-year basic education curriculum, which consisted
of six years in grade school and four years in high school that concentrated on
the English language and Filipino, the sciences, arithmetic and mathematics, and
the social sciences.
It also incorporated these basic lessons to include basic science and technology,
engineering, mathematics, accountancy, business and management, humanities
and social sciences, and general academic courses such as technical-vocational-
livelihood, arts and design, and sports.
The implementation of the program has aroused fear among 13,600 teachers
and 11,400 nonteaching staff in higher education institutions (HEIs) that they
would end up losing their jobs due to the lack of college enrollees.
Petitions have been submitted to the Supreme Court to suspend the program
because politicians and groups find the new system as insufficient preparation for
life after school.
Lack of infrastructure is also one of the issues confronting the DepEd prior to and
during the initial implementation of the program. Needed for the new curriculum
are 30,000 new classrooms; 30,000 new teachers; and 6,000 nonteaching staff.
Like most government endeavors, public education cannot succeed without the
support of the private sector. With the help of companies and business groups,
programs by the government are important in building a strong future for the
country that would enhance our competitiveness in the global community and
Page
92
would advance the competencies of Filipino graduates to stand at par with global
practices and be equipped with relevant skills and knowledge in their chosen
professions. Different programs will give the youth a steady and confident footing
in pursuing a career that will empower them to become able and productive
participants in the shared task of nation-building.
Toward this end, business organizations have been supporting the K to 12
Program on its continued and proper reform implementation. Consistent support
has been provided by the Makati Business Club, Philippine Business for
Education (PBEd), Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Management
Association of the Philippines, the Information Technology and Business Process
Association of the Philippines, Employers Confederation of the Philippines,
American Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines, German-Philippine
Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the Australia-New Zealand Chamber of
Commerce of the Philippines.
Studies have repeatedly shown that ―more schooling leads to a higher income,
averaging a 10-percent increase for every additional year in school.‖
The League of Cities of the Philippines has also expressed its full and
unwavering support for the flagship education reform of the Aquino
administration, led by Quezon City Mayor Herbert Bautista.
Page
93
Quality education is the best that the country can offer, a call that leads to quality
employment for a better quality of life. Hence, lawmakers should still be in the
lookout for potential advancements in the current status of our education system.
As of January 2015, the Philippine Statistics Authority Labor Force Survey
showed a 6.6-percent unemployment rate from 7.5 percent the previous year.
Meanwhile, the survey also showed employment grew to 93.4 percent up from
92.5 percent the preceding year.
If industries, members of academe and society as a whole can work concertedly
toward empowering the students with global-standard competencies, the
country‘s employment rate will improve further.
Despite the massive number of graduates the country‘s institutions of higher
learning produce annually, not all possess the life skills needed to enter and
become productive members of the work force.
Workers in the services sector dominated the largest proportion by 54.6 percent,
comprised of those engaged in wholesale and retail trade, or in the repair of
motor vehicles as the largest percentage. Meanwhile, workers in the agriculture
and industry sector comprised the second and the smallest group with 29.5
percent and 15.9 percent, respectively. Laborers and unskilled workers have
remained in the largest group, accounting for 31 percent.
Page
94
Due to financial reasons, many high-school graduates today cannot proceed to
college, which contributes to the aggregate of about 15 million out-of-school
youth, according to PBEd.
The nonprofit organization proposes a voucher system to the DepEd and
Commission for Higher Education (CHED) to give out-of-school youth a chance
to pursue tertiary education.
According to PBEd, the Unified Financial Assistance System for Higher and
Technical Education (UniFAST) and the Tertiary Education Transition Fund
(TETF) will facilitate the funding for the program if Congress will pass the two
bills into law.
The UniFAST bill will harmonize government scholarships, grants-in-aid and loan
programs, while the TETF bill, in turn, will establish a development and welfare
fund, PBEd says.
The UniFAST bill has been approved on third and final reading in the House of
Representatives and on second reading at the Senate.
The community where the students live is a key factor in collective assistance
and encouragement. With the help of volunteers through the DepEd‘s Brigada
Eskuwela program, the public and private sectors unite to provide services and
resources through the repair and ensuring the safety and cleanliness of
classrooms and schools for the opening of public schools this June.
Page
95
The program brings together teachers, parents, community members and
stakeholders every third week of May in an effort to maximize civil participation
and utilize local resources to prepare public schools for the opening of classes.
During the long week event, volunteers take time doing minor repairs, painting
and cleaning of school campuses.
The program has become the DepEd‘s model of genuine public and private
partnership to curb challenges that Philippine education is facing and serves as
one of its front-line initiatives.
The Gulayan sa Paaralan Program of the DepEd, which began in 2007, also
helps to address child malnutrition among elementary students. The crops
harvested from school gardens, which were also planted by the students, are
used to sustain the school‘s feeding programs. Children lacking proper nutrients
have lesser energy, physically and mentally, hence are unable to fully participate
in class.
Because of significant inflation in the country and improvement of facilities,
private institutions have raised their tuition in 313 private colleges and
universities for the coming school year, slightly higher than the 287 HEIs allowed
by the CHED last year, for an increase in tuition and other fees.
The CHED said that of the 313 schools, only 283 HEIs were allowed to increase
tuition, 212 would increase other fees, and 182 out of 313 schools were allowed
to increase both tuition and other school fees.
Page
96
Despite the higher number compared to that of last year, the increases were
lower from an average of P35.66 per unit to P29.86. Other school fees were also
lowered to P135.60 from P141.55 last year.
Due to Supertyphoon Yolanda that devastated a wide swath of land in Eastern
Visayas in 2013, the CHED did not approve any application from the schools
affected to increase tuition and other school fees.
As no applications were submitted to CHED, no increases were imposed in the
provinces of Batanes, Cagayan, Isabela, Nueva Vizcaya and Quirino in Region 2;
Albay, Camarines Norte, Camarines Sur, Catanduanes, Masbate and Sorsogon
in Region 5; Bohol, Cebu, Negros Oriental and Siquijor in Region 7; Camiguin,
Misamis Oriental, Lanao del Norte, Bukidnon and Misamis Occidental in Region
10.
For a program to go through, right appropriation is essential to deliver a smooth
program implementation. Mandated by the Philippine Constitution, the
government must allocate the highest proportion of its budgetary needs to
education. As part of the Aquino administration vow, of the P2.606-trilliion
national budget, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) allocated
P367.1 billion for the DepEd, the highest among the government agencies. The
2015 budget increased by 18.6 percent from last year.
Among the DepEd‘s programs are Abot-Alam Program, Alternative Delivery
Mode Projector e-IMPACT, Basic Education Madrasah Program,
Page
97
Computerization Program, Redesigned Technical-Vocational High School
Program and Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private
Education.
Modernizing the higher public education system is an integral part of making
school facilities a conducive environment for students to learn. Hence, to improve
the country‘s state universities and colleges (SUCs), a total of P44.4 billion was
allocated to the SUCs, 16.8 percent higher from last year.
The P2.5-billion allocation is designed to aid 40,453 Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino
Program beneficiaries.
To aid students who want to earn a college degree, the DBM allotted P7.9 billion
for scholarship grants and financial assistance. Under this allocation, the CHED‘s
Students Financial Assistance Program was appropriated a total of P763 million
that will help 54,208 students nationwide.
Page
98
Current Issue #3 (K-12: The unresolved issues)
By Paolo Taruc, CNN Philippines
Updated 15:56 PM PHT Fri, April 17, 2015
(File photo) Students watch on through a classroom window as teachers from the
San Fernando Central School practice a traditional dance for a school
demonstration in Tacloban, Leyte.
(CNN Philippines) — It's been nearly three years since the government began
implementing its K-12 educational reform program — but the policy continues to
have its share of detractors.
Last March, a coalition of teachers and staff of higher educational institutions
around the Philippines petitioned the Supreme Court to suspend the K-12 law.
Page
99
The program adds two years of senior high school to the country's basic
education system which allow senior high school students to specialize in one of
three tracks: academic, technical-vocational-livelihood, and sports and arts.
In a statement, the Suspend K12 Coalition said that the K-12 program does not
take into account the labor rights of teaching and nonteaching staff who will be
displaced by the program.
"Unless full protection of labor is ensured and the attack on security of tenure is
ensured and the attack on security of tenure and other rights is avoided, the K-12
Law becomes a justice and peace issue."
As head of the coalition, Professor Rene Tagle of the University of Santo Tomas
told CNN Philippines that the group agrees with the objectives of the program.
Nevertheless, he said that the law should be suspended because the
government is not yet prepared to implement it, especially with regard to labor.
"It [the law] only mentioned the word labor once...The law is incomplete in far as
to address [the issue of] labor displacement."
However, Jesus Mateo, assistant secretary of planning and development of the
Department of Education, told CNN Philippines that the government has set in
place programs to accommodate displaced workers.
Mateo points to estimates showing that about 13,000 teaching staff will lose their
jobs over a five-year period, including nearly 11,000 nonteaching staff.
Page
100
However he says that the government will set aside funding over the next several
years to support a transition fund and several other programs. About P20 billion
in funding has been slated for 2016, as well as P26.7 billion for 2017.
Before K-12, the government said that the Philippines was the last country in
Asia and one of only three countries worldwide with a 10-year pre-university
cycle. Mateo says that "It is meant to ensure that we develop as a country and be
competitive in the global market."
Editor's Note: Assistant secretary Mateo and Professor Tadle will debate the K-
12 program on CNN Philippine's Agenda, hosted by Malou Tiquia, next Monday,
April 20 at 9:30 p.m.
Official Gazette of the Philippines
Page
101
But, besides student and teacher concerns, there is a third factor: the additional
cost to parents for food and transportation expenses to send their children for two
more years of high school.
Worsening parental expenses, well over half—5800 out of 7,976—of the nation‘s
public high schools are set to implement SHS.As a result, DepEd is in talks with
2,000 private education institutions to accommodate incoming seniors that would
not be able to attend public SHS schools. The current plan is for DepEd to
subsidize the cost of private tuition—but this is one of the most controversial
issues around RA 10533‘s implementation. Many parents—and others—
complain that the proposed subsidizes are too low and will constitute their child‘s
high school diploma being held hostage to costs they might find impossible to
meet. Still others object to giving a taxpayer financed windfall to private schools.
All these complaints are valid. Until recently, our school system has suffered
much neglect in many areas, including a chronic shortage of classrooms.
Likewise, the almost criminally low pay our public schoolteachers receive is
scandalous. There is a very serious loss of junior college teachers as well—many
of whom are pursuing higher degrees that will benefit the nation. That they
should be forced into lower paying jobs even as they struggle to advance needs
to be dealt with—it is an all-too-typical example of how neoliberal pressures such
as privatization can gut the aspirations of a developing country and force it into
the ―race to the bottom‖ that has become a linchpin of globalization.
Page
102
Among teachers, there are deep-seated anxieties about the new duties expected
of them. DepEd has been conducting numerous teacher trainings to address
these concerns, but there is a sense that things remain confused and unsettled.
Most likely, uneasiness and suspicion among teachers will linger until the new
system is in place and they have a chance to actually work through it and make
the needed adjustments. In addition, there still remains the problem of language:
what to do with Filipino, how to sustain its place in the curriculum, and what will
the changes mean for teaching the language in colleges and universities? For
that matter, has the English curriculum been chosen in haste, as some critics
allege? What of the adequacy and quality of some of our textbooks and
instructional materials? Can schools coordinate better to strengthen job
placement for their students?
Likewise, tuition costs for parents whose children have no public SHS available
should not hold those students hostage to the financial capabilities of the
parents. That is not what we mean when we talk about ―public education‖ as a
constitutional right. And, sadly, anytime large sums of government money are
being passed out, we come face to face with the ubiquitous problems of potential
corruption.
Page
103
Parents wait for their children outside the gates of President Corazon Aquino
Elementary School in Quezon City at the opening of classes, June 2, 2014.
AP/Bullit Marquez
All that said, I still tend toward proceeding with K-12. The K-10 approach is as
problematic as—indeed, is part of—the continued neglect our public educational
system has suffered since the Marcos years. It is time and past time to begin
making amends.
Page
104
We should not ignore the serious challenges of shifting to a K-12 program. At the
same time, we should seize upon its very real potential to improve the lives of
everyone. K-12 is obviously a work in progress that will go through many
changes as it is implemented. Top-down planning will invariably be reshaped and
modified by bottom-up concerns and existing practices of teaching and
learning.What remains imperative is that we provide our youth with all the skills
they need, especially education, to prepare them to live meaningful and
productive lives. This means, among other things, preparing for the constantly
changing demands of the workplace. But they should also be able to question
those changes and craft alternatives for a better world. There are many problems
to be fixed in education and we should pursue these solutions with zeal. To do so
means dealing with the many challenges of K-12 rather than simply putting them
on hold.
Page
105
Education about
the Development of
Faculty”
Corazon M. Ortega
Edman201
Page
106
Current Issue #1 (The Challenge Going Forward) 108
- The Changing Professoriate 109
- Expanding Faculty Roles 109
- Finding Balance 110
- Needs of New Faculty 110
- Non-tenure-track and Part-time Faculty 111
- The Changing Nature of the Student Body 111
- Increasing Multiculturalism and Diversity 112
- The Challenges of the Underprepared Student 113
- The Changing Nature of Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship 115
- Emphasizing Learner-Centered Teaching 115
- Integrating Technology into Teaching and Learning 116
- Expanding Definitions of Scholarship 117
- Emphasizing Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes 117
- Building Interdisciplinary Collaborations 118
Page
107
Current Issue #1 (The Challenge Going Forward)
By: Mary Deane Sorcinelli
What will be the future challenges facing these faculty members and their
institutions? What will be the issues around which faculty are likely to need
support over the next few years? What future directions will be important for
campuses to consider when they make decisions about faculty development?
These questions are significant, especially in light of the changing context of
faculty roles and responsibilities.
What, then, are the issues that faculty development programs, services,
and resources will likely need to address in the next five or ten years?
Faculty developers in our study identified a constellation of issues that
coalesced around three primary challenges and forces of change:
 The changing professoriate
 The changing nature of the student body
 The changing nature of teaching, learning, and scholarship
Page
108
The Changing Professoriate
Professors today are facing a growing array of changing roles and
responsibilities that will require them to engage in ongoing professional growth.
Faculty developers in our study described faculty members as being in the midst
of transformational changes to their traditional roles and tasks, and identified
several fundamental challenges facing faculty and their campuses.
Expanding Faculty Roles
Faculty developers at liberal arts colleges and research and comprehensive
universities identified expanding faculty roles as one of the most important issues
facing faculty on their campuses. The set of tasks expected of faculty is
intensifying under increasing pressure to keep up with new directions in teaching
and research. Thus, for example, new faculty members may need to develop
skills in grant-writing or in designing and offering online courses. Seasoned
faculty members may need to keep up with emerging specialties in their fields as
well as to engage in more interdisciplinary work. All faculty will continuously need
to learn new skills in the face of an increasingly technological workplace.
Providing opportunities for faculty to consider new ways to organize their courses
and learning materials and work collaboratively across disciplinary fields will be
essential.
Page
109
Finding Balance
Closely related to the challenge of managing new and expanding faculty
roles is the challenge of achieving balance in work and life. In our research,
faculty developers identified balancing and finding time for multiple work
responsibilities as a significant issue of concern for faculty at all career stages.
New faculty, especially, find it a daunting challenge to simultaneously achieve
distinction as a scholar, teacher, and campus citizen. Faculty members also are
concerned about how to achieve balance as they handle personal as well as
professional commitments. Not surprisingly, concerns about balancing work and
family are especially intense among women faculty who often face the press of
biological clocks for childbearing at the same time as they are trying to start their
careers and, in many instances, earn tenure. Faculty development services
would be well served to include programming and coaching for managing time
and work–family issues as well as the more traditional emphasis on teaching and
learning.
Needs of New Faculty
Significant numbers of experienced faculty will retire in the coming
decade, and our study identified new faculty development as a critically important
area to address. Faculty developers reported a number of ―roadblocks‖ to the
professional success and well-being of new faculty: getting oriented to the
institution, excelling at teaching and research, navigating the tenure track,
Page
110
developing professional networks, and creating work–life balance. More
opportunities to participate in new faculty orientations, mentoring programs,
individual teaching consultation, ―learning communities‖ and writing groups can
only enhance newcomers‘ skills and satisfactions.
Non-tenure-track and Part-time Faculty
Addressing the needs of part-time and adjunct faculty was identified as a
critically needed new direction for faculty development. Many institutions are
hiring more non-tenure track or part-time faculty to achieve fiscal savings,
respond to changing student interests, or help students connect their academic
studies to the workplace. As the faculty ranks become more diverse in terms of
appointment types, faculty development should ensure that each faculty member,
regardless of appointment type, feels supported. Initiatives might include
orientations or seminars for part-time faculty in which departmental colleagues
address common teaching issues (e.g., preparing a syllabus, understanding who
their students are, testing and grading guidelines) and department policies and
practices.
Page
111
The Changing Nature of the Student Body
With each year, the student body has become larger and more diverse
across several variables—educational background, gender, race and ethnicity,
class, age, and preparation. This growing diversity of students is an admired
aspect of American higher education; at the same time, it places considerable
demands on faculty members. Faculty developers in our study highlighted two
key challenges: the challenge presented by increased multiculturalism and
diversity and the challenge presented by underprepared students.
Increasing Multiculturalism and Diversity
\An emphasis on increasing diversity requires an expanded focus on how
we can foster learning environments in which diversity becomes one of the
resources that stimulates learning—and on how to support faculty with students
who learn most effectively in different ways. Faculty developers identified the
issue of multiculturalism as it relates to teaching and learning as one of the most
important issues that needs to be addressed through faculty development
services, but there was great disparity between perceptions of the need to
address these issues and the extent of relevant faculty development services
being offered (Sorcinelli et. al 2006).
Traditionally, campuses have tended to focus diversity efforts in student
affairs, suggesting that diversity concerns are a student development rather than
a faculty development issue. Faculty members themselves may be reticent about
addressing issues of diversity in and outside of the classroom because of a lack
Page
112
of training. For faculty members to be able to meet the learning needs of a
diverse student body, they will need to stay abreast not only of new
developments in their fields, but also of the characteristics of their students, the
various strategies for teaching to multiple learning styles, and the possibilities for
facilitating learning offered by technology.
Faculty development programs can promote teaching methods and
strategies that increase students‘ capacities for problem-solving, teamwork, and
collaboration —skills required in a rapidly changing and increasingly global world.
Further, they can provide guidance for engaging all students, particularly in the
classroom, about the sensitive issues surrounding gender, religion, race, and
ethnicity. Investing in such programs offers a means of ensuring that we cultivate
teachers and students who value diverse ideas, beliefs, and worldviews, and
promote more inclusive student learning. In these contexts, faculty development
programs can help build faculty capacity both for meeting the needs of students
and incorporating new disciplinary content about issues of diversity across the
curriculum.
The Challenges of the Underprepared Student
The Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) reports
that about half of students entering our colleges and universities are
academically underprepared—lacking basic skills in at least one of the three
fundamental areas of reading, writing, or mathematics (2002). AAC&U‘s Greater
Expectations report also notes that students lacking academic preparedness also
Page
113
fail to do well in college for a variety of other reasons, such as lack of self-
confidence, appropriate study behaviors, and skill in navigating an institution‘s
bureaucracy. Our study‘s respondents similarly identified the underprepared
student as one of the most important educational problems facing faculty and
faculty development.
As a faculty member embarks on a course and the underprepared student
engages in the coursework, there is often a substantial mismatch between
student and faculty expectations for academic work, especially in terms of time
devoted to study outside of class. As well, faculty may be unprepared to
recalibrate the course or teaching of it for students who may need additional
support in college-level reading, writing, and computational work.
For these reasons, the responsibility for underprepared students often falls to
academic staff in a student learning center and may be seen as a burden to
individual faculty. Here faculty development programs can remind teachers to
emphasize their expectations for students, help familiarize new instructors with
student resources offered by the college or university (e.g., basic skills courses,
tutoring, supplemental instruction), and highlight the range of effective strategies
available for teaching and facilitating the learning of all students.
Page
114
The Changing Nature of Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship
The changing environment for teaching, learning, and scholarship was
identified as the third pressing challenge for faculty and institutions, a challenge
resonant with implications for faculty development.
Emphasizing Learner-Centered Teaching
The need to engage in student-centered teaching was identified as one of
the top three challenges confronting faculty members and the most important
issue to address through faculty development services and activities.
For many faculty members who are accustomed to lecturing while students
listen, learner-centered teaching may require new and unfamiliar teaching skills
and raise fears about lack of coverage of content or less control over assessment
activities. Learner-centered teaching, however, allows students to do more of the
learning tasks, such as organizing content or summarizing discussions, and
encourages them to learn more from and with each other. Teachers, on the other
hand, can do more of the design work and provide more frequent feedback to
students (Weimer 2000).
Page
115
Integrating Technology into Teaching and Learning
Participants in our study from liberal arts, research, and comprehensive
institutions named the integration of technology into traditional teaching and
learning settings as one of the top three challenges facing their faculty
colleagues. Respondents expressed a strong desire that institutions focus on
ways to use technology to help students to acquire content knowledge, develop
problem-solving skills, participate in learning communities, and use digital
information sources.
When considering technology in teaching and learning, one immediate
issue faculty member‘s face is what tools—PowerPoint, e-mail, the Internet,
course management system —might best serve their student-learning goals. But
the successful integration of technology is more complex, entailing the careful
consideration of course content, the capabilities of various technology tools,
student access to and comfort with technology, and the instructor‘s view of his or
her role in the teaching and learning process (Zhu and Kaplan 2006). Faculty
development programs can offer the kinds of support and training required to
thoughtfully integrate technology into the classroom.
Page
116
Emphasizing Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment is an ongoing process aimed at understanding and improving
student learning. It involves deciding what students should be learning, making
expectations for learning explicit, systematically gathering and analyzing student
assignments to determine what students actually are learning, and using the
resulting evidence to decide what to do to improve learning. In our findings,
assessing student learning outcomes was perceived as one of the top three
challenges facing faculty and their institutions, and important to address through
faculty development.
Expanding Definitions of Scholarship
In his seminal work Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the
Professoriate (1990), Boyer argued that it was time to move beyond the
―teaching versus research‖ debate and to redefine and broaden the concept of
scholarship to include four distinct but interrelated dimensions: the scholarship of
discovery, the scholarship of teaching, the scholarship of integration, and the
scholarship of application. In our study, developers from all types of institutions
agreed that expanding the definition of scholarship to include the scholarship of
teaching is an important issue to address through faculty development services.
Page
117
Building Interdisciplinary Collaborations
―Building interdisciplinary connections and communities of practice‖ was
indicated as an important new direction to address through faculty development.
Interdisciplinary collaboration may involve a variety of types of connections, such
as working on a research or teaching project from a multidisciplinary perspective
or incorporating service learning into academic experiences.
Interdisciplinary work is often the result of individual faculty members deciding to
engage in team teaching across departments or to pursue new areas in the
course of their research. Faculty development programs, then, can support
interdisciplinary connections by encouraging team-teaching, the development of
interdisciplinary courses, and the development of learning communities for
students. They can also host campus-wide cross-disciplinary learning
communities around teaching and scholarship.
Conclusion
As we enter the twenty-first century, faculty developers have identified
three areas that are driving change and shaping the future of faculty
development. The impact of the changing professoriate is a major influence. How
do we develop and sustain the vitality of our entire faculty—newcomers,
midcareer, senior, and part-timers—as faculty roles change? A second factor is
the increasingly diverse student body. How can we invest in faculty development
as a means of ensuring that we cultivate more inclusive student learning
environments and provide our best educational practices to all students,
Page
118
including those traditionally underserved by higher education? The third shaping
influence is the impact of a changing paradigm for teaching, learning, and
scholarly pursuits. Faculty development will require a larger investment of
imagination and resources in order to strategically plan for and address new
developments (e.g., teaching for student-centered learning, retention, learning
technologies, assessment) while not losing sight of our core values and priorities.
References
Angelo, T., and Cross, K. P. 1993. Classroom assessment techniques: A
handbook for college teachers (2nd Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Association of American Colleges and Universities. 2002. Greater expectations:
A new vision for learning as a nation goes to college. Washington, DC:
Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Boyer, E. L. 1990. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the
professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching.
Sorcinelli, M. D., A. E. Austin, P. L. Eddy, and A. L. Beach. 2006. Creating the
future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the
present. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Weimer, M. 2002. Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Zhu, E., and Kaplan, M. 2006. Technology and teaching. In W. J. McKeachie
(Ed.), Teaching tips: Strategies, research and theory for college and university
teachers (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
Page
119
“Current Issues on
Parental
Involvement"
Michelle Pangilinan Rendon
EDMAN 201
Page
120
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS:
Overview of the Issues
II. THE BENEFITS OF PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
III. BUILDING EFFECTIVE FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS:
Challenges,
Strategies, and
Outcomes
IV. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
PARENTAL ISSUE/S ON:
1. Importance of Families to Children‘s Success in School
2. Involvement and Family Background
3. School-Home Links for Underserved Families
4. The Power of Parental Involvement in the Home
5. Parental Involvement Levels
6. Types of Involvement
7. The Challenge in Designing Effective Interventions
8. Parental Essence
9. Parental Framework
10. Predictors of Parental Involvement
11. School and Teacher Practices
12. Components of Successful School-Family Partnerships
Page
121
13. Parenting
14. Communicating
15. Volunteering
16. Learning at Home
17. Decision-making
18. Collaborating with the Community
19. Forming the Action Team
20. Observations about the Partnership-Building Process
21. Training Teachers
22. Financing School-Family Collaboration
23. Evaluating School-Family Partnerships
24. Tapping Resources
REFERENCES:
(See pages 49-50)
Page
122
I. FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS: Overview of the Issues
No one is more important than parents in sending the signal that reading and
education matter and that school work is not a form of drudgery but a ticket to a
better life . . . By giving their word to read to their children, to assist on
homework, to engage the process of learning, parents can set an example for
their children that is powerful and positive.
The claims are powerful and unequivocal: ―When schools work together with
families to support learning, children tend to succeed not just in school, but
throughout life‖. "The shared interests and investments of schools, families, and
communities create the conditions of caring that work to ‗over determine‘ the
likelihood of student success". ―Family practices of involvement are as or more
important than family background variables in determining whether and how
students‘ progress and succeed in school".
The cultivation of strong family-school linkages is increasingly and widely viewed
as an essential component of strategies to improve students‘ educational
outcomes. The Goals 2000: Educate America Act, federal legislation enacted in
1994, boldly predicts that "By the year 2000, every school will promote
partnerships that will increase parental involvement and participation in the
social, emotional, and academic growth of children." Nevertheless, the notion
that families play a crucial role in their children‘s development and school
success in both the home and school environments elicits a host of questions, all
Page
123
of which carry significant implications for the type of family-school linkages a
particular school district or individual school might choose to pursue.
This paper will be guided by the following salient questions: What is the nature of
the evidence linking parental involvement to student achievement? How powerful
a predictor of school success is parental involvement? Can it overcome
impediments to school success associated with certain characteristics of family
background? Which types of parental involvement are most effective in
increasing student achievement? How comprehensive must parent involvement
efforts be? What is known about the precise processes that link parental
involvement to student outcomes?
Once one has accepted the value of parental involvement for children‘s school
success, questions abound as to the steps involved in designing, implementing,
and evaluating effective school family partnerships. These issues include: What
are the barriers to parental involvement? What roles should schools play in
facilitating parental involvement in their children‘s academic pursuits? Which
school and teacher practices have been the most effective in influencing the level
and quality of parental involvement? What steps are necessary to build effective
partnerships? How does one evaluate effective parental involvement?
The topic of family-school linkages has been widely, although not exhaustively,
researched. Experience accumulated over the past few decades reveals much
about the value and characteristics of successful family-school partnerships.
Indeed, enough groundwork has been laid to inform and guide the efforts of
Page
124
enterprising school administrations eager to help families conduct the type of
activities that will benefit their children. Nevertheless, the body of research on
this topic has not yet evolved to the point where all of the questions posed above
can be answered satisfactorily. Although experts in the field agree about the
importance of linkages between families and schools, researchers emphasize the
need for more rigorous study to help educators predict the precise outcomes of
implementing particular strategies for involving families in their children‘s
education. In particular, considerably more information is needed on parent
involvement at the middle and high school levels. To a great extent, the family-
school partnerships of the future hold the answers. They alone can inform and
improve practice. In the interim, educators, parents and community leaders can
cling to several truths:
1. Parent involvement plays an important role in improving students' success
in school.
2. Parents often want to be more involved in their children's education but
are uncertain how to do so.
3. Teachers want to involve parents in schools but need guidance and
support in promoting this union.
4. Community organizations and groups, many of which are already engaged
in helping children and their families outside schools, often have weak
links with schools.
Page
125
What schools do to foster parent involvement is critical in determining whether,
which, and how parents will participate in their children's schooling, and
ultimately how students will benefit. Despite the need for more and better
research, there is much that is known about what schools can do to build the
partnerships necessary to ensure that students reach their potential.
II. THE BENEFITS OF PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
A. What the Research Shows
1. Families are Important for Children’s Success in School. The premise that
strong family school linkages improve children‘s educational outcomes has
acquired almost axiomatic status. Research studies abound documenting the
association between parents‘ involvement in their children‘s schooling and a host
of benefits accruing not only to students themselves, but to their schools and
parents as well. Among the documented findings are strong positive correlations
between parental involvement in children‘s schooling and improved student
attitudes, achievement, and attendance. Various studies report higher grades
and test scores, more homework completed, fewer placements in special
education programs, higher graduation rates, more positive attitudes and
behavior, and increased enrollment in post-secondary education for students of
parents who were involved to varying degrees in their education. Among the
benefits accruing to schools from successful parental involvement activities are
better reputations in the community, improved teacher morale, higher parental
ratings of teacher performance, and increased support from families. Involved
Page
126
parents reap benefits as well, including increased confidence in their abilities to
parent, help their children learn at home, and communicate effectively with
schools. For some parents, involvement in their children‘s education prompts
them to pursue further education themselves. Studies reveal that teachers not
only hold involved parents in higher regard than uninvolved parents, but they also
have higher expectations for their children.
2. Parental Involvement and Family Background. Significantly, the practice of
parental involvement has also been shown to help offset other possible
impediments to children‘s success in school. Studies demonstrate that a child‘s
educational outcomes are not solely a function of cultural background or such
socio-economic status (SES) factors as family income and parental levels of
education. While researchers acknowledge a strong direct relationship between
SES and academic achievement, they also claim that motivated families,
regardless of their SES, can and do help their children improve school
performance through several types of involvement. Research documenting the
effects of parental involvement at home and in school concludes that differences
in the achievement levels of working class and middle class children is more
effectively explained by the nature of child-parent and parent-school
interactions than by characteristics of SES (Ziegler, 1987). A review by
Henderson and Berla of sixty-six studies, reports, and reviews on the subject of
parental involvement concludes that the most accurate predictor of students'
achievement in school is not income or social status, but the extent to which
families are able to: create a home environment that supports learning;
Page
127
communicate high (and reasonable) expectations for their children‘s
achievement; and become involved in their children‘s schools. Programs
designed to foster linkages between families and schools have been shown to
help compensate for limited family resources and effectively alter the traditional
relationship between SES and school performance. 3. School-Home Links for
Underserved Families. It is worthy of note that although parents from low-SES
backgrounds can improve their children‘s educational outcomes through their
involvement at home and in schools, these outcomes do not reach the levels
achieved by students with similarly involved parents from high-SES backgrounds.
Researchers attribute this phenomenon to the fact that there exists a
disconnection between the home cultures and school cultures of low-SES
students. In these instances, what is occurring in the home and in the school are
not mutually reinforcing. While certain classes and cultures reinforce the values
taught in schools, others do not. Other studies suggest that parents from certain
backgrounds have greater difficulty relating to schools and teachers or hold
deeply ingrained beliefs that activities conducted in schools and in the home
should not overlap. Researchers are quick to point out that what parents from
these groups require is not a re-orientation of values or parenting classes to
compensate for deficiencies but rather partnership relationships with educators to
foster understanding and help bridge differences.
Page
128
B. The Power of Parental Involvement in the Home
A substantial body of evidence confirms the power of the home environment—
where children spend a significant portion of their waking hours—in affecting
children‘s educational outcomes. In fact, family practices in the home that
stimulate and support learning have a more significant impact on student
achievement than such other factors as family structure (e.g. single parent
families) or socio-economic status. An education-friendly home environment
affects not only children‘s achievement levels but their interest in learning and
future educational plans as well. Researchers point to a number of supportive
home processes that range from strong family values and routines to active
involvement by parents in schoolwork. The most frequently cited processes
include stable family routines, parental support and encouragement about
schoolwork, discussion of ideas and events, high parental aspirations and
standards for children‘s achievement, quiet places to study, emphasis on family
literacy, monitoring of after-school activities, tapping of community resources as
needed, communicating or modeling of positive behaviors, and knowledge of
school experiences.
There is ample evidence from the field confirming the value of each of the above
family practices. Clark‘s study of low-income, African-American families and their
high school children finds that parents of high achievers monitored their
children's home-study behaviors more rigorously and had higher expectations for
their children's education. High achievers also had greater access in the home to
such supplemental learning aids as dictionaries (Clark, 1993). A study of 1,400
Page
129
Southeast Asia refugee families revealed that family values and home
environments that support learning facilitate academic success. Several
researchers observe that the availability of reading material in the home is
directly associated with children‘s achievement in reading comprehension. The
U.S. Department of Education reports that academic achievement drops sharply
for children who watch more than ten hours of television each week (U.S.
Department of Education, 1987). In another study, Clark finds that high achievers
from all backgrounds spend roughly twenty hours per week engaged in
constructive after-school learning activities (Clark, 1990). Several studies link
frequent, open discussions between parents and their older children to academic
success (Barton & Coley, 1992; U.S. Department of Education, 1994).
While the vast majority of studies of the home environment focus on parental
involvement and educational outcomes for preschool and elementary children,
several researchers emphasize the importance of such family practices as
monitoring of homework, television watching, and extracurricular activities for
middle and high-school level students. Some researchers stress that, at the
secondary level, it is what parents do at home with respect to homework and
television monitoring that appear to have the greatest impact on student
outcomes (NCREL, 1995). Scholars also point to the value of parental guidance
in ensuring that their secondary students pursue challenging courses and receive
some form of career counseling.
Page
130
C. The Level of Parental Involvement
Although the research does not establish which family processes are more
beneficial than others in improving student achievement, it does indicate that the
more practices adhered to, the better off students will be. One examination of the
experiences of Indochinese families found that children whose families had
strong values about education and acted upon those values by helping their
children learn at home or contacting their schools did better than children whose
families had strong values but did not act upon them. Henderson and Berla point
to a number of studies indicating that the more comprehensive (covering a wider
range of activities) and intense (over longer period or with greater frequency)
parental involvement, the greater the impact on student outcomes. The
researchers conclude that when parents are involved not just at home, but in
school as well, their children achieve more.
The list of supportive family practices extends well beyond what families can do
in the home. Becher concludes that the children of families who are in regular
contact with schools regarding issues of progress, homework, school events,
etc., become higher achievers. Armor and others, in a study of twenty low-
income elementary schools, showed that the more comprehensive the schools‘
efforts to involve African-American parents and the community in all aspects of
the schools (where parental involvement ranged from requesting parents to
become involved to providing special projects for parents to providing space for
parents in the schools equipped with services useful to the community), the
better sixth graders did in reading.2 Eagle's study of high school students and
Page
131
beyond showed that twenty-seven percent of students whose parents were
highly involved during high school (defined as frequency of communication with
teachers, monitoring of schoolwork, and planning for post-high school activities)
attained bachelors‘ degrees. Only seventeen percent of students with moderately
involved parents and eight percent of students with uninvolved parents achieved
similar levels (Eagle, 1989). Gillum‘s study of three Michigan school districts,
which implemented parent participation programs with varying levels of
involvement, revealed that the district with the most comprehensive program of
involvement achieved the greatest gains in reading test scores.3 Irvine‘s study of
a pre-kindergarten program revealed that the more parent involvement hours, the
better children performed on cognitive development tests.
With respect to the duration of parental involvement, the research shows a
precipitous decline in the parental involvement once children reach middle and
high schools. A variety of reasons are posited for this decrease, including: the
more complicated structure of schools at these levels, the fact that students work
with many different teachers, the distance between schools and homes, and
parents' perceptions that their children need more autonomy. Although the
studies of parental involvement are markedly fewer at this level, they do,
nevertheless, reinforce the value of parental involvement at this stage in
children's educational careers. Rumberger and colleagues show that high school
dropout rates are higher for children whose families are less involved in their
education. A nationwide study of high students and educators points to parental
Page
132
involvement as the critical factor determining students' aspirations and
achievement.
D. The Type of Parental Involvement
Generally speaking, only a few studies show certain types of parental
involvement activities to be more strongly associated with improving student
outcomes than others. The overall research in this field does not yet strongly
endorse one strategy over another. The results of several studies lead
Henderson and Berla to conclude that the more parent involvement programs
resemble true partnerships—where family involvement is not limited to certain
activities but rather integral to all aspects of school life, including decision-
making—the more successful these programs are in raising student outcomes.
Perhaps the best examples of the true partnership programs are Henry Levin's
accelerated schools program and James Comer‘s School Development Program
(SDP) which, in addition to a number of other school improvements, includes
parents in social events, education classes, volunteer programs, and decision-
making subcommittees and teams (Comer & Haynes, 1992). Studies of SDP
programs, which now operate in over 375 school districts across the country,
reveal student improvement in reading and math skills, behavior, and self-
concept. Like many other studies of parental involvement, however, studies of
SDP programs do not control for the effects of other school improvements that
may be occurring simultaneously with parental involvement strategies.
Page
133
Various types of parental involvement will be specifically discussed in the
following section.
III. BUILDING EFFECTIVE FAMILY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS:
Challenges, Strategies, and Outcomes
A. The Challenge in Designing Effective Interventions
Given that most of children‘s development and socialization occur within two
primary contexts— families and schools—it seems intuitive that linking these two
spheres of influence so that they are mutually reinforcing and jointly supportive of
children‘s progress would yield many positive results for children. Dr. Joyce
Epstein, a leading researcher in the field of parent involvement and presently the
director of the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships, makes
this point in her theory of ―overlapping spheres of influence.‖ Epstein posits that
the most effective families and schools share responsibilities for the children in
their care, and, as a consequence, a portion of their work must be conducted
collaboratively (1987). Having established that families are indeed important for
student success in school, researchers like Epstein focus their energies on the
programs that schools can design and pursue to help families undertake the kind
of activities that will most benefit their children. The challenge, however, in
designing such interventions lies primarily in the fact that causal links between
certain parental involvement behaviors and specific educational outcomes have
yet to be borne out by the research.6 Moreover, the research does not define
parental involvement or the outcomes it produces in any uniform way. Quite
Page
134
simply, there are many types of parental involvement. The studies cited above all
define parental involvement differently. These same studies also measure
educational outcomes in a variety of ways. Benefits accruing to students as a
result of parental involvement can range from students' self-perceptions to their
interests, motivations, achievement-related choices and performance. Finally,
since parental involvement is a correlate of children‘s educational outcomes,
researchers express concern that it may disguise other, deeper issues about
family structure and processes, which might call for an entirely different set of
interventions.
B. Defining Parental Involvement
1. The Six Types Framework. Defining parental involvement has been the
subject of many national symposia and conferences. Epstein‘s framework of six
major types of parental involvement is among the most useful tools developed by
the field thus far for defining parental involvement practices and linking them with
certain types of outcomes. This widely accepted framework is proffered as a
guide to help educators develop comprehensive family-school partnerships. The
six types of parental involvement include: 1) parenting (helping families with
child rearing and parenting skills); 2) communicating (developing effective
home-school communication); 3) volunteering (creating ways that families can
become involved in activities at the school); 4) learning at home (supporting
learning activities in the home that reinforce school curricula); 5) decision-
making (including families as decision-makers through school-site councils,
committees, etc.) and 6) collaborating with the community (matching
Page
135
community services with family needs and serving the community) (Epstein,
1995). Each type of involvement encompasses a variety of practices to be
undertaken by teachers, parents, and students and is theoretically linked with a
variety of distinct outcomes for students, teachers, and parents as well.
Executing each type also carries with it unique challenges. (See Tables 1-3 at
the end of this document.)
Educators, along with parents, are encouraged to select those practices likely to
produce the types of outcomes that coincide most closely with their needs, goals,
and capacities. Epstein emphasizes that not all parental involvement leads to
improved student achievement, ―the selected results [produced by each of the six
types] should help correct the misperception that any practice that involves
families will raise children‘s achievement test scores‖ (Epstein, 1995, p.707). She
further notes that while certain practices are likely to influence students‘ test
scores, others are designed to produce outcomes related to attitudes or
behaviors. Epstein notes that many of the possible secondary or indirect effects
of a particular parental involvement practice are not yet understood (Epstein,
1996). For example, parental involvement in type three (Volunteering) or type five
(Decision-making) activities may result first in parents' feeling more connected
with their children's schools, which may, in turn, lead to other types of
involvement that will eventually produce outcomes related to student
achievement. There is little evidence, for example, suggesting that placing
parents on advisory councils alone improves their children's grades. However, as
noted earlier, programs that create a true partnership by involving parents in both
Page
136
decision-making and learning support roles are associated with greater gains in
student achievement than programs restricting parents solely to learning support.
2. The Predictors of Parental Involvement. Parent involvement can and should
take different forms in order to increase the number of parents who are deeply
involved in their children's education. Programs that offer a wide variety of
opportunities for involvement increase the chances of tapping different parent
skills and accommodating varied parent schedules. Researchers repeatedly
emphasize, however, that the care with which strategies are planned and
implemented is more significant than the specific form the involvement takes.
The better parent involvement programs are designed, the greater the number of
parents who become involved in multiple ways that benefit their children. Well-
planned strategies designed to involve a variety of parents must be responsive to
the various factors that influence parents' decisions to become involved. There
exists no shortage of research on the predictors of parental involvement, which
range from characteristics of the parents, children, and communities to the
quality of the school climate. Parents with less formal education, parents of
adolescents, single parents, and fathers tend to be among the least involved.
Time and transportation constraints, cultural and language barriers, and parents'
perceptions and beliefs about themselves, their children, and their role in their
children's education all influence the level of parental involvement. Many parents
experience feelings of uncertainty or even inadequacy about their ability to help
their children because of their own poor educational skills. Others harbor
negative recollections of their own school days. Finally, those from certain
Page
137
cultural backgrounds may not understand schools' expectations of their children
or how they can become involved.
Studies also point to neighborhood characteristics that may impede parental
involvement. They suggest that many families living in high-risk, low-income
neighborhoods tend to be preoccupied with survival strategies that either focus
inward on the family or do not permit them to pursue the types of parenting
strategies that might involve greater school involvement.
Finally, and most significantly, studies have focused on school and teacher
characteristics and practices that influence parental involvement. A school
climate that does not make families feel welcomed, respected, needed, and
valued risks alienating parents. Larger, more bureaucratic school environments,
typical of those normally encountered at the middle and high school levels, tend
to discourage parental involvement. Additionally, educators' perceptions of, and
attitudes toward, parents may facilitate or impede their involvement. Some
educators are skeptical of parental involvement, which they fear signals an
incursion into their domain. They are especially reluctant to have parents assume
decision-making roles. Studies have even shown that educators have actively
discouraged parental involvement in middle and high schools. Some school staff
want parent participation limited to certain functions and specific occasions.
Teachers who view parents as deficient or reluctant participants in their children's
education rather than potential supporters of the educational process damage
parent involvement. More often than not, however, teachers who are
Page
138
uncomfortable with parent involvement have not received sufficient training and
support in working with parents.
C. School and Teacher Practices Matter Most
Researchers point to a growing body of evidence demonstrating that the quality
of links between teachers and families and between communities and schools
influences children's academic success. Dauber and Epstein in their study of
over two thousand inner city elementary and middle school parents conclude that
the best predictor of parental involvement is what the school does to promote it.
"The data are clear that the schools' practices to inform and involve parents are
more important than parent education, family size, marital status, and even
grade-level in determining whether inner-city parents stay involved with their
children through middle school" (Dauber & Epstein, 1993). Epstein stresses that
single parents, parents living in poor communities, and parents of adolescents
will not be among the least involved if schools implement appropriate practices to
engage them. Even the most difficult-to reachparents can be reached through the
appropriate school and teacher practices (Epstein, 1995).
To a great extent, the responsibility for generating effective parent involvement
lies with schools. While parents clearly must make time for involvement in their
children's education, schools must provide the opportunities for parents to
become involved in children's schooling. School districts and schools alike must
establish clear policies on parental involvement. They must design and
implement strategies that seek to engage parents on a continuing basis in their
Page
139
children's schooling. They must consider special efforts to engage low-income
families and others who are reluctant to approach schools on their own.
D. Essential Components of Successful School-Family Partnerships
Although programs will necessarily vary from school to school, successful
parental involvement strategies do share a number of common characteristics.
Davies' cites three central themes that run through the most effective strategies:
providing success for all children, serving the whole child, and sharing
responsibility for children's development among schools, parents, and
communities (Davies, 1991). Most strategies focus foremost on the nature of
communication between parents and teachers and the school climate,
specifically the way in which parents are treated at school. For full partnerships to
work, relationships must be characterized by mutual trust and respect and parties
must engage in an on-going exchange of information, agree on goals and
strategies, understands one another's expectations, and share rights and
responsibilities (U.S. Department of Education, 1994).
Epstein lists the commonalities of successful programs as: an understanding of
the "overlapping spheres of influence" that schools, families and communities
have on students' development; a commitment to a variety of types of
involvement so that opportunities for collaboration are maximized; and the
creation of an action team responsible for coordinating each school's parental
involvement strategy (Epstein, 1995). In her extensive work on school-family
community partnerships, Epstein outlines schools' responsibilities with respect to
Page
140
each of the six types of involvement established in her framework (Epstein &
Connors, 1992). A few sample practices are mentioned for each type of
involvement. There are, however, many more practices corresponding to each
type of involvement.
1. Type One: Parenting. Schools must help families create home environments
that support learning by providing them with information about such issues as
children's health, nutrition, discipline, adolescents' needs, parenting approaches,
etc. At the same time, schools must seek to understand and incorporate aspects
of their students' family life into what is taught in the classroom. Schools are
challenged to ensure that all families who need this type of information receive it
in appropriate ways.
Outcomes associated with Type One activities include improvements in students'
behavior, school attendance, time management skills, and awareness of the
importance of school. Parent outcomes encompass improved confidence in, and
understanding of, parenting practices, awareness of the challenges in parenting,
and a sense of support from schools and others.
Teacher-related outcomes include foremost a better understanding of, and
respect for, their students' families (Epstein, 1995).
Examples of Type One practices include the establishment of parent resource
centers, parent rooms, or parent clubs either on or off school premises. Centers
often make books, videos, classes, special workshops, and other learning
materials available to parents. Community organizations can be especially
Page
141
helpful in working with schools to provide parents with needed information. (See
Type Six: Collaborating with the Community, below.) Other examples of Type
One practices include parent education, which may be conducted through home
visits (especially for the difficult-to-reach) or through workshops.
Families acquire important information about their children's development
through parent education programs. Effective programs are guided by a firm
belief that parents are capable oflearning new techniques for working with their
children. Topics addressedinclude parenting skills, strategies for helping children
learn at home, and ways to becomeinvolved at school. One database of
promising practices in improving parental involvementidentifies twenty-seven
successful programs. Of these, nineteen focus on educating parents(NCREL,
1995). Becher, in her review of parent education literature, concludes that
parenteducation programs, particularly those focused on helping low-income
parents to work with theirchildren, improve children's behavior, language skills,
and test performance. They also improveparents' teaching skills, the ways
parents interact with their children, and parents' ability to createa stimulating
home environment. Furthermore, parent surveys indicate thatparents would
become more engaged in helping their children with home learning activities
ifthey received training in how to do this most effectively. (Epstein, 1987 in U.S.
Department ofEducation, 1994).
Elements of effective training programs include: a) clear goals and monitoring
processes, b) flexibility in designing activities to fit specific parent-child dynamics,
c) strong emphasis on equipping parents to teach their children, d) concrete
Page
142
tasks for parents, e) home visits, especially at the preschool level, and f) long-
term training, no shorter than 18 months (Becher,1984).
Experts caution, however, that the value of training programs designed to involve
parents in their children's education is greatly diminished without genuine links to
schools. Schools must have structures, programs, and staff to work with trained
parents.
2. Type Two: Communicating. The more frequent and positive the messages
parents receive from teachers, the more involved they are likely to become in
their children's education (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). Some schools
have taken special steps to ensure that parents are brought to the schools early
in the academic year, before students develop problems, so that their first
communication with them can be positive in nature. Schools must employ a
variety of techniques for communicating with parents about their children's
progress, decisions affecting their children, and school programs in general.
These include parent-teacher conferences, open houses, phone contact, report
cards, newsletters, curriculum nights, parent centers, etc. Some schools sign
contracts with parents in which expectations for students, teachers, and parents
are clearly delineated.
Page
143
Outcomes associated with Type Two activities include students' improved
awareness of their own academic progress, more informed decisions about
courses, and an understanding of school policies related to their conduct.
Parents are likely to grow in their understanding of school programs and policies.
They will develop familiarity in interacting with teachers and a greater capacity for
monitoring their children's progress and responding to their problems. Teachers
are expected to develop diverse mechanisms for communicating with parents
and an ability to tap the parent network to elicit family views on children's
progress (Epstein, 1995).
A number of innovative Type Two practices capitalize on such technology as
voice-mail systems that enable teachers to leave messages for parents
describing classroom activities and daily homework assignments. Use of these
systems in Indiana showed that parent-teacher contact increased by eight-
hundred percent. Audio tapes and video tapes can be used as alternatives to
written communication. The National Parent Information Network, a national
electronic information service for parents, also offers a range of materials to
support parents' efforts to understand their children's schooling. Finally, the
Indianapolis public schools operate the Parents in Touch program, which
employs parent-teacher conferences and other frequent communications with
parents. In some cases, it issues contracts signed by parents, teachers, and
students indicating their shared commitments to students' progress.
Communication practices are designed to accommodate parents' demanding
schedules.
Page
144
Schools implementing Type Two activities are challenged to reach a variety of
families with appropriate, intelligible information. Doing this effectively may
require rethinking family stereotypes. Educators at the middle school and high
school levels are especially challenged to ensure that appropriate information is
exchanged about the socio emotional development of adolescents, as well as
their academic and future occupational or educational plans.
3. Type Three: Volunteering. Schools enhance their connection to families by
encouraging them to volunteer in school activities and attend school events.
Families who volunteer grow more familiar and comfortable with their children's
schools and teachers. Volunteering efforts that tap parental talents enrich school
programs and, particularly in upper grades, facilitate individualized learning. The
use of a volunteer coordinator is advised especially at secondary school levels,
where coordination of volunteer talents and time with teacher and student needs
becomes increasingly complex. Schools are challenged to define the term
"volunteer" broadly enough to accommodate a wide range of parental talents and
schedules. They are also challenged to encourage older students to volunteer in
their community as part of the learning process.
Type Three activities are designed to enhance students' skills in communicating
with adults; provide them with exposure to a wide variety of adult skills,
occupations, etc. and help them develop their own skills with the support of
volunteer tutors and mentors. Parents are likely to develop a greater appreciation
for the work of teachers, develop their own skills, and grow increasingly
comfortable in working with their children and interacting with others at school.
Page
145
Finally, teachers will be able to pay more attention to individual students as a
result of volunteer help. They are also likely to become more open to involving
parents in varied ways and develop an appreciation for the parental talent base
(Epstein, 1995).
Type Three practices include the establishment of parent centers, where
parents can gather to help one another and assist the school, receive assistance,
or exchange information. Some parent centers further entice parent involvement
by offering them such services as GED or language courses or the use of such
equipment as sewing machines or computers. Other activities might include
using the center as a place for a small library, clothing exchange, referral service
to social service agencies, or special events designed, for example, to involve
more fathers in their children's education. "The tone and content of school
conversations about parents and their communities change when parents are
physically present in the building" (Davies, 1991, p.378).
Literature on designing a successful parent center in an urban school
emphasizes the need for parents to assume the lead in planning and staffing
their center and its activities. School staff are encouraged to use the center
frequently as a place to interact with parents. Some experts recommend that a
parent center assume responsibility for much of the school's dealings with
parents. Finally, the center must enlist all parents in both teaching and learning
activities. All parents must feel welcomed and valued (Davies, 1991; Yates,
1993).
Page
146
4. Type Four: Learning at Home. Most parental participation in children's
education occurs in the home. Schools must capitalize upon what parents are
already doing by helping them to assist and interact with their children on home
learning activities that reinforce what is being taught in school. Schools should
aim to increase parents' understanding of the curriculum and the skills their
children need to develop at each stage in their schooling. Schools must also
inform parents about their systems of tracking students and other practices so
that parents can help make decisions that are in their children's best interests.
Type Four activities can help bridge any cultural or class disconnect between
home and school environments.
Successful parent involvement programs must recognize the parent-child
relationship as distinct from the teacher-child relationship. What works at school
will not always work at home. Parents should be relied upon as supporters and
monitors of the learning process so that their children can become effective
independent learners. Schools should encourage open discussions among all
partners about the school curriculum and homework. Parent surveys show that
more parents talk with their children about schoolwork and help their children
develop skills when homework is designed to involve families (Epstein &
Sanders, 1998; Epstein, 1992).
Schools are thus challenged to design a menu of interactive work that taps
parents' support skills and involves them in the learning processes. Schools must
also work with parents to ensure that upper-level students set academic goals,
prepare for career transitions, and make appropriate course selections.
Page
147
Outcomes associated with Type Four activities include improved student test
scores and other skills linked to homework. Students are also more likely to view
themselves as learners and to see their parents as teachers. Type Four activities
are also associated with more homework completed and better attitudes toward
schoolwork. Parents may begin to perceive their children more as learners and
develop confidence in their own abilities to teach and support the educational
process. They are also more likely to engage in discussions of schoolwork with
their children. Type Four practices can help teachers develop better homework
assignments. Among other things, teachers are expected to develop greater
satisfaction with family involvement as they witness the support all types of
families are able to provide students (Epstein, 1995).
Examples of Type Four involvement include Teachers Involve Parents in
Schoolwork (TIPS).
This program, developed by the Center on School, Family, and Community
Partnerships and employed in Baltimore area schools, works with teachers to
involve parents in interactive homework assignments. The assignments require
students to talk with someone at home about the things they are learning in
school. TIPS activities include formats for student-family interaction in math,
science/health, and language arts. Surveys of parents who participated in TIPS
homework activities reveal that parents became more aware of their children's
learning processes. Teachers report that students complete TIPS homework
more frequently than other assignments (Epstein, 1992).
Page
148
Family Math and Family Science Programs, in use throughout the country,
offer parents and children in workshops designed to stimulate them to undertake
joint learning activities at home.
Studies of these programs reveal that more parents become involved in learning
activities with their children and children enjoy sciences more (U.S. Department
of Education, 1994).
One ambitious project, The Buddy System Project in Indiana extends learning
beyond the classroom by seeking to place computers in the home of every
Indiana child in grades 4-12. TheBridge Project, a national experiment with
homework hotlines, used a hotline to give parents tips on helping their children
with schoolwork or discussing the day's lessons. Half of the parents who used
the system report being more involved in their children's schooling and that their
children did more homework.
Yet another option for supporting home learning are summer learning packets
that provide students with opportunities to practice skills and continue learning
during the summer with parental support. Evaluations of this activity demonstrate
that some students who complete the assignments experience improved
performance when school resumes in the fall. One study of parental involvement
claims that low-income children fall behind their wealthier peers specifically
during the summer months. Parental involvement strategies that equip the
formers' parents to work with them outside of the school year may help to
compensate for this shortfall.
Page
149
5. Type Five: Decision-making. Involving parents in governance, decision-
making, and advocacy roles is yet another strategy for fortifying links between
schools and parents. As mentioned earlier, parental participation in decision-
making, when it is part of a comprehensive program involving parents in learning
support activities as well, is associated with improved student outcomes. Parent
and community involvement in decision-making also helps make schools more
accountable to the community. Parental participation in school decision-making
can be strengthened by including parents in school site councils, parent-teacher
associations, and other committees. For example, Chicago‘s public schools each
have an independent council with parent representatives. California school
councils are also required to have parent representatives.
Outcomes from Type Five activities include the benefits of policies that are
enacted on behalf of students. Students are also likely to become aware of family
representation in school decisions.
Parents are expected to develop opportunities for input, feelings of ownership, an
understanding of policies, and a sense of connection with other families.
Teachers will likely become increasingly aware of the role of parents'
perspectives in policy development (Epstein, 1995).
Experts stress the need for parents, who truly have their children's best interests
at heart, to become advocates for their children.13 Schools are challenged to tap
parent leaders from diverse backgrounds and to ensure that those serving in
decision-making capacities truly represent all parents.
Page
150
One powerful way in which parents are assuming a leading role in their children's
education has been through the establishment of local education foundations
(LEFs). These foundations, funded through the generosity of local businesses
and individuals, cite connecting schools to communities as one of their primary
purposes. Distinct from parent involvement in booster clubs, in which parents
help raise money to support their own children's schools, local education
foundations are 501(c)(3) organizations, run by boards of local citizens and
educators, committed to improving education for all students.
Current estimates of the total number of LEFs across the country is
approximately 2,500. Most LEFs in California were conceived in the early 1980s
in response to budget shortfalls precipitated by property tax caps. In California,
some 400 LEFs are members of the California Consortium of Education
Foundations (CCEF). This organization serves as a voice for these
organizations, facilitates networking, and provides training in forming LEFs.
According to CCEF‘s Executive Director, LEFs are a vehicle for communities to
have input into how money is used at schools, although LEFs and schools
generally collaborate closely to determine the best use of funds.
Generally, LEFs raise modest amounts of money for such purposes as mini-
grants to teachers for innovative projects, curricular reform, extracurricular
activities, and scholarships. Some larger LEFs have actually funded teaching
positions or raised teacher salaries (although most districts prohibit the use of
LEF money this purpose.) One study estimated the amount raised by the
average foundation at 0.3 percent of the school district budget. The most
Page
151
successful generate only about $100 per student, rendering concerns that LEFs
will replace the need for local tax revenues or circumvent statewide equity
requirements unfounded (Mertz & Frankel, 1997).
Indeed, while affluent communities may raise LEF money with greater ease,
communities of all types have created LEFs.
Overall, the relationships between LEFs and the school districts in which they
operate vary.
Some schools provide LEFs with office space and help from support staff.
Although school administrators may be board members, many hold only ex-
officio status. Most LEFs rely heavily on volunteer staff and incur little overhead.
Some serve many school districts, others serve a single district or a single school
(De Luna, 1998). Their ability to involve community members in their activities is
essential to their survival. How funds are raised and how LEFs operate is greatly
influenced by the communities that create them.
6. Type Six: Collaborating with the Community. Schools and families must
draw regularly upon community resources to support their efforts to educate
children. In fact, community representatives and resources may be tapped for
each of the other five types of involvement: communicating with families,
volunteering, supporting learning, and participating in school committees. For
example, the participation of prominent community leaders is almost essential in
creating an effective LEF. Student outcomes are greatest when families, schools,
and community organizations and leaders work together. Children are provided
Page
152
with more opportunities for learning and for linking school knowledge with real
world opportunities. They associate with individuals, other than their parents and
teachers, who reinforce the importance of learning. Clark's research indicates
that the difference between high and low achieving youngsters may be explained
by how and with whom they spend time outside school (Clark, 1990).
Outcomes associated with Type Six activities include increased skills and talents
for those students participating in productive extra-curricular programs. Students
may also develop a better understanding of the real world and career options.
Parent-related outcomes include an awareness of local resources they can tap to
support their children and families. They will also be more likely to interact with
other families in the community. Teachers are expected to develop an
understanding of resources available to enrich the curriculum. They should also
develop a capacity for working with and tapping a variety of community partners
(Epstein, 1995).
Community-based organizations, religious organizations, other government
agencies and philanthropically-minded individuals can and do reinforce students'
learning through after-school programs, summer learning programs, and a
variety of family support services. They help make communities safe from drugs
and violent crime, encourage people to mentor youth, and provide a range of
educational and training opportunities for both parents and youth. Studies have
long shown the benefits of such programs as Head Start and the Even Start
Literacy programs.
Page
153
Parents as Teachers, which makes a parent-educator available to parents in the
home, has been associated with children's language and school success. (U.S.
Department of Education, 1994).
The National Urban League operates a national initiative, Partners for Reform of
Science and Math, to involve parents in advocating for local school reforms and
creating improved home environments. Dorothy Rich's Mega Skills Program has
trained thousands of parents across the country in ways to facilitate their
children's development. Groups like the PTA, the Junior League, the Foster
Grandparents Program, and the Senior Community Service Employment
Program all support children's educational outcomes through mentoring
programs and other activities. Organizations, like New Beginnings in San Diego,
bring social services to students and families through on-campus satellite offices.
Still other groups, like the Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund, encourage
parents to assume advocacy and decision-making roles in their children's
schools.
One interesting example of collaborating with the community is a practice called
a community walk—a critical step in overcoming home-school barriers. This
practice has been designed withtwo primary purposes in mind: a) to increase
educators' understanding of the community inwhich students live, and b) to
provide families, communities, and teachers with a chance tointeract with one
another on the others‘ "turf." One such walk conducted in El Paso by a
localmiddle and high school covered thirty blocks. Participants visited housing
projects, communitycenters, and social service agencies. Teachers reported the
Page
154
event helped them gain confidence intheir relations with parents. Both schools
reported more success in getting parents to attendschool events, while parents
report they understand the school better for having met the teachersthrough the
walk (McCollum, 1997).
The challenges for schools in working with community-based organizations
include issues related to communication and turf. Neighborhood organizations
must understand the needs of schools, parents, and students and be flexible in
assuming the roles required to meet those needs.
Community participants, families, and schools must be open to each other‘s'
viewpoints, agree upon goals and strategies, and share decision-making
responsibilities and rights.
E. Using the Framework
1. Forming the Action Team. Epstein and her colleagues assume that
partnership activities will correspond to the rubrics established in the six types
framework, but that specific practices conducted by each school will vary
depending upon the specific needs, interests, talents, and grade levels of
students and the families they are designed to serve (Sanders, 1997). While
Epstein's framework assumes that schools and families will seek to form full
partnerships in which parents participate in all aspects of school life, other less-
ambitious philosophies of collaboration might envision more limited roles for
parents and would not necessarily include all of the types of involvement.
Page
155
There are several critical steps in the implementation of the above framework.
The following recommendations are based on the experiences of schools that
have implemented parental and community involvement strategies with the
support and guidance of The Center on School, Family, and Community
Partnerships. Through its National Network of Partnership Schools, the Center
currently works with eight hundred schools and over one hundred districts to
improve partnership programs. (See Tapping Resources). Under this framework,
a school's primary vehicle for building partnerships is the Action Team for
School, Family, and Community Partnerships. This 6 to 12 person team,
which can be a subcommittee or an arm of an existing school council, should
include parents, teachers, administrators, upper-level students, and community
representatives. The team's primary charge is to identify what types of
involvement are needed to meet specified school goals. Together, team
members assess existing practices of involvement to determine which ones are
effective and which ones should be expanded, modified, or added to the school's
inventory of practices.
Several tools have been developed to help teams ask the appropriate questions
about existing efforts. Telephone surveys, questionnaires, and panels represent
a few strategies for obtaining the needed information.
The action team also clarifies what each of the involved parties expects from the
partnership. It assesses its menu of practices according to which families are
presently being reached and which are not yet involved. This often includes
incorporating special strategies for reaching difficult parents. 15 Finally, the
Page
156
action team links practices of involvement with specific goals by examining the
indicators of success for students and determining which practices are most
closely associated with which types of goals.
Once school goals have been clearly identified and agreed upon, schools
develop a three-year plan that guides the action team's work with respect to each
type of involvement. The plan establishes a coherent package of activities to
meet the needs of the entire school community, all grade levels, difficult-to-reach
families, etc. Separate subcommittees are charged with developing strategies for
each type of involvement. A more detailed one-year work plan is developed to
guide the first year's efforts. Action team members decide what will be
accomplished in year one in each area of involvement, who will be responsible
for developing and implementing each type of involvement, and how efforts will
be financed and evaluated.
Educators, students, parents, and community leaders who are not on the action
team are called upon throughout the year to support the implementation of
specific types of involvement. Plans are updated annually to ensure that the
action team continue to build productive partnerships.
Page
157
2. Observations about the Partnership-Building Process. Firstly, progress is
incremental.
Partnership building is a long-term process. For example, The Center on School,
Family, and Community Partnerships‘ experience has shown that it takes three to
five years to create and maintain a strong program of partnership. Not all types of
involvement activities will be implemented at once. Many will require time before
they produce concrete outcomes (Epstein & Connors, 1992). Becher's study of
parent involvement programs reveals that the most effective programs aim for
optimum (most efficient) rather than maximum involvement.
Secondly, partnerships should be connected to and support on-going
curricular improvements.
Partnerships that strive to boost student achievement may be supported with
public funds designated for curricular and instructional reform (Epstein &
Connors, 1992). For example, partnerships may be structured around supporting
a school's or district's focus on literacy.
Researchers found that formal parent-school involvement was the single factor
most closely associated with the development of all literacy skills (Snow et al.,
1991). Parental involvement efforts that support curricular reforms focused on
literacy are deemed critical for elementary school students, especially through
the third grade.16 Experts have shown that the development of reading skills is
more dependent on home learning activities than the development of math or
science skills (U.S. Department of Education, 1994; Epstein, 1991).
Page
158
Thirdly, the action team approach is, in effect, an active form of training
teachers, administrators, and parents to become "partnership experts" for
their schools. They learnfirsthand about the process of working collaboratively
(Epstein & Connors, 1992). The fact thatmany educators have received little or
no training in working with families complicates the workof partnership
development. In fact, the reluctance of many teachers to engage in
parentalinvolvement has been attributed to their lack of training in how to work
best with parents(Epstein & Sanders, 1998). Adequate staff training—in-service
and pre-service—are needed toequip teachers for their roles as partners.
3. Training Teachers. Most educators, principals and teachers alike, are not
prepared to lead successful partnership efforts. Research by the Harvard Family
Research Project shows that teacher training programs at the university level
presently lag far behind primary and secondary schools in efforts to promote
family involvement. There is "a serious discrepancy between pre service
preparation and the types of family involvement activities that teachers were
increasingly expected to perform in schools" (Bradley, 1997).
Given that a considerable portion of the burden for actualizing effective
partnerships lies with administrators and teachers, training can make a big
difference. It can help teachers change dated perspectives about parental
involvement and modern family life and teach strategies for communicating with
parents, understanding families and students from diverse cultural backgrounds,
overcoming barriers to parental involvement, and helping parents to support their
children at home. The most effective parent involvement programs value
Page
159
teachers for the skills they already possess and offer them ongoing support in
implementing programs, assistance in resolving conflicts with parents, and
outlets for expressing their concerns. Successful programs also encourage
teachers to pursue involvement practices that coincide closely with school goals.
4. Financing School-Family Collaboration. The Center on School, Family, and
Community Partnerships suggests several funding sources that may be tapped
to fund the efforts of an action team. These include such federal, state, and local
programs as those established under Titles I, II, VII, and Goals 2000, all of which
support family-school collaboration efforts. Funds from these sources may be
used to hire state and district-level coordinators to support schools' efforts.
They may also be used to pay for staff development activities related to
actualizing partnerships.
Allowable expenses might include hiring lead teachers at each school or
establishing demonstration programs. School discretionary funds and special
fundraising efforts have also been used to support the work of action teams. In
addition to financial support, action teams require strong support from district
leaders and principals to conduct their meetings and activities.
Page
160
F. Evaluating School-Family Partnerships
Schools must have effective methods for assessing their partnership programs
so that goals and objectives can be refined, programs modified accordingly, and
the value of partnerships in achieving certain goals made apparent to all
stakeholders. Experts recommend employing a combination of techniques for
evaluating family-school connections. Time and budget constraints will
necessarily dictate which techniques may be implemented. Evaluation options
might include (Pryor, 1996):
1. informal observation of the way in which parents and teachers interact,
2. identification of existing data relevant to program goals that can serve as a
baseline (e.g., numbers of parents serving as volunteers, attending
events, frequency of outreach functions to parents, grades, test scores,
etc.),
3. identification of new data to be collected to measure future progress, (data
processing and analysis efforts may be supported by community leaders,
university faculty, and school social workers),
4. focus groups with parents, teachers, or students to determine how each
group feels about the state of school-family connections,
5. mailed surveys to homes (the San Diego County Office of Education has
developed a useful survey for this purpose, as have other national
organizations),
6. in-school surveys of teacher and students (well-developed questionnaires
also exist for this purpose),
Page
161
7. telephone surveys (may limit survey value if all families do not have
phones), and
8. radio call-in shows.
Epstein stresses that when evaluating school-family partnerships, it is not
sufficient to study family-school contacts alone: e.g. numbers of parents involved.
The results of the effort to reach out must be measured as well —e.g. how well
goals have been met. However, these results should not be limited to grades and
performance on achievement tests. There are a variety of desirable outcomes
produced by parent involvement that relate to student motivation and other
personal qualities that are critical to student success as well. These might well
include the development of productive extracurricular activities, for example.
Data must be interpreted carefully, since certain correlations between parent
involvement and specific outcomes may be misleading.18 In addition to
determining whether the goals for student achievement and parental participation
have been reached, programs should seek to assess such things as the quality
of management, the flow of information, and accountability issues.
Since the burden of effective evaluation can be substantial for schools and
researchers alike, a number of collaborative approaches have evolved in which
researchers and educators work together to study actions taken to improve
schools. Collaboration has occurred between researchers and education policy
leaders, as well as between researchers and school teams. With respect to the
latter grouping, Parent-Teacher Action Research Teams involve teachers and
Page
162
parents in the design and conduct of research on specific practices used in their
programs. Paid facilitators assist with this work, which has been pioneered by the
Institute for Responsive Education in its Schools Reaching Out Project (Davies,
1991).
Epstein's action teams involve team members themselves in assessing and
sharing progress.
Every year, action teams assess their progress as part of their efforts to develop
one-year plans for the following year. This exercise involves evaluating both the
processes and various practices they are employing to develop partnerships. The
Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships has developed a list of
key questions to facilitate this process. The Center also provides schools and
districts with opportunities to participate in voluntary projects that focus on
evaluation issues. The results of these projects, which have focused on the
experiences of many schools in evaluating outcomes related to attendance, math
achievement, and behavior, are available to schools participating in the Center's
National Network of Partnership Schools.
Page
163
G. Tapping Resources
Educators and parents have at their disposal a range of resources designed to
facilitate the journey toward full partnerships. Growing research affirming the
importance of parental involvement has fueled the development of a variety of
initiatives and organizations focused on studying and supporting various facets of
parental involvement. The attached resource list includes many groups in the
field. The work of a number of these groups is worthy of special mention.
The Center on School, Family, and Community Partnership's National Network of
Partnership 2000 Schools presently links state, district, and other leaders
responsible for helping schools implement partnerships. In exchange for meeting
certain requirements for participation, Partnership 2000 schools are supported in
their efforts to apply the framework of six types of involvement to their own
schools and communities. They are supported regularly by facilitators, training
workshops, newsletters, and e-mail and web-site assistance. Partnership schools
benefit from a strong research base and institutionalized knowledge of "best
practices." They play a role in building the body of research on family-school
links.
The National Coalition for Parent Involvement (NCPIE) counts many of the
education, community, and public service organizations focused on parent
involvement among its membership. Dedicated to developing and strengthening
school-based partnerships, NCPIE represents its organizations at the national
level on parental involvement issues and provides its members and the general
Page
164
public with information about publications, training, and other services available
to promote community involvement in education.
The Center for Law and Education has long advocated for federal policy to
strengthen parent involvement through Title I20, school-to-work and other
programs. Through its program, Community Action for Public Schools (CAPS), it
has formed a national network of people working to improve schools and develop
stronger parental involvement policies. Among its publications are Parents are
Powerful (1997), Learning from Others: Good Programs andSuccessful
Campaigns (1996), and Taking Stock: The Inventory of Family, Community
andSchool Support for Student Achievement (1993).
The Institute for Responsive Education operates the Schools Reaching Out
Program. This program, focused on expanding the concept of parent involvement
beyond the traditional fundraising and volunteer roles reserved for parents in the
past, works with a network of elementary and middle schools across the country.
It espouses a three-part strategy for schools moving toward partnerships:
1) The creation of parent centers,
2) The establishment of a home visitor program, and
3) The use of action-research teams.
Page
165
Chicago-based National Parent Information Network, in collaboration with the
ERIC/Center for Urban Education, makes articles and studies on parental
involvement issues available via the Internet. The National PTA has developed
national standards for parental involvement. The Parent Institute for Quality
Education publishes newsletters, videos, and booklets on involvement directed
toward parents and educators.
The Partnership for Family Involvement in Education, initiated in 1994 by
Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley, brings together employers, educators,
families, and community organizations across the nation to improve schools. It
facilitates sharing of "best practices," strengthening efforts to help children learn,
keeping its members informed about the latest information and activities
nationwide, and recognizing outstanding efforts at the state, local, and national
levels.
Three other organizations merit mention. The National Center for Family Literacy
is presently implementing a $2.7 million program to develop a family literacy
program for U.S. elementary schools. The ASPIRA Association has developed a
workshop series focused on parent training in the home and school-based
involvement and leadership. Finally, Communities in Schools supports efforts to
connect community services with schools.
Page
166
IV. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Policymakers, researchers, educators, students, families, and community leaders
are equally challenged to make education a genuine community enterprise. State
and district policies must continue to encourage the development of school-
family-community partnerships as an essential component of larger school
improvement efforts. Some states have already earmarked funds specifically for
partnership initiatives. Researchers and practitioners must continue to equip
schools with a range of tested practices for involving parents and improving
student outcomes. At the school level, experience has shown that the best efforts
are comprehensive, seeking to involve all families in a variety of roles. They are
well-planned, elucidating clear goals and expectations and incorporating the
views of all stakeholders. They empower all players through training, time, and
support. They value parents for the perspective's they bring with respect to their
children's needs and for their own special skills. Finally, they are long-lasting,
reflecting a long-term investment in building the structures and cultivating the
practices that will help children reach their full potential. Ideally, parents must
begin their involvement when their children are in pre-school and continue to be
involved throughout middle and high school. More research is needed regarding
the best ways for families to support their children at each grade level.
There is powerful evidence linking parental involvement to school success. There
is also limited but growing evidence about the effects of specific parental
involvement programs and practices.
Page
167
Parents are already making significant contributions to their children's
development. However, they lack the supports they once enjoyed of extended
family and close-knit communities. It is incumbent upon schools and communities
to play a role in helping parents to expand upon what they are already doing.
Despite the evidence about the value of parental involvement, far too many
parents continue to lack sufficient information about their children's schools.
Many educators fail to understand their students' families and many communities
are not closely linked with their local schools. The cost in terms of student
outcomes not achieved is incalculable.
The authors did not find a similar improvement for Mexican-American students.
They attribute this to the language barrier which prevented schools from
understanding fully the needs of the Hispanic community.
The type of parental involvement activities ranged from conducting general
information sessions and community information programs for parents and the
community in District A to an intensive in-service training program for parents
and educators on their children‘s education, cooperation with the school, and
strategies for reinforcing the program at home in District C. District C
demonstrated the highest gains in achievement on standardized tests.
Parental involvement was defined as monitoring and helping with homework;
attending school conferences and functions; and providing a supportive learning
environment at home.
Page
168
Parental involvement was defined by teachers according to whether parents
seemed apathetic to school policies, interested in children's progress, or asked
for appointments with teachers. Student achievement was measured by math
achievement and college plans.
One critical assessment of over 200 research studies in the field of parental
involvement finds that much of the research suffers from one or more of the
following flaws: use of non-experimental design, lack of isolation of parent
involvement effects, inconsistent definitions of parent involvement, and
nonobjective measures of parent involvement. Although many of these criticisms
may be justified, overcoming them will not be easy given funding limitations and
the complexity of parent involvement.
An October 1997 U.S. Department of Education study surveyed 17,000 children
in grades K-12 and found that children do better academically when their fathers
are actively involved in schools. Involvement included attending parent-teacher
conferences, volunteering at the school, attending general school meetings, or
attending a school event. Highly involved fathers participated in three or more
activities. The research does not establish whether fathers were involved
because their children were doing well or whether children did well because their
fathers were involved.
It is worthy of note that, in addition to appropriate school-level practices,
supportive policies and actions at the state, county, and district levels can also
foster parental involvement. Researchers and practitioners point to written
Page
169
policies by the boards of education, boards' recruitment strategies, the
sponsoring conferences and workshops, the awarding of incentive grants,
recognition of outstanding efforts, and the provision of information to parents as
useful ways to increase the chances for effective parental involvement.
Specific strategies for reaching hard-to-involve parents include recruiting staff or
volunteers from diverse backgrounds, implementing programs to enhance skills
of parents who had negative school experiences, developing special strategies
for providing information to non-English speakers. See White-Clark & Decker,
1993.
REFERENCES:
1. Aronson, J. Z. (1996). How schools can recruit hard-to-reach parents.
Educational Leadership, 53 (7), 58-60.
2. Ashwell, E. & Caropreso, F. (1989). Business leadership: The third wave
of educational reform. Report of the Conference.
3. Bobango, J. C. (1994). Promoting parent involvement: Because educators‘
can‘t do it all. Schools in the Middle, 3 (4), 26-28.
4. Christensen, S. L. & Cleary, M. (1990). Consultation and the parent-
education partnership: A perspective. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 1, 219-241.
5. Columbo, G. (1995). Parental involvement: A key to successful schools.
NASSP Bulletin, 79 (567), 71-75.
Page
170
6. Davies, D., Burch, P. & Johnson, V. (1992). Policies to increase family-
community involvement. Equity and Choice, 8 (3), 48-51.
7. Epstein, J. L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the
children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (9), 701-12.
8. Green, N. (1992, June). Can teacher professionalism, parent control, co-
exist? Catalyst, 13-14.
9. Hardin, D. M. & Littlejohn, W. (1994). Family-school collaboration:
Elements of effectiveness and program models. Preventing School
Failure, 39 (1), 4-8.
10. Jackson, B. L. & Cooper, B.S. (1992). Involving parents in improving
urban schools. NASSP Bulletin, 76 (543), 30-38.
11. Jeffers, G. & Hutchinson,C. (1995). Breaking barriers. American School
Board Journal, 182 (7) 41-42.
12. Johnson, V. (1994). Parenting centers send a clear message: Come be a
partner in educating your children. Equity and Choice, 10 (4), 42-44.
13. Lightfoot, S. L. (1978). Worlds apart: Relationships between families and
schools. New York: Basic Books.
14. Loucks, H. (1992). Increasing parent/family involvement: Ten ideas that
work. NASSP Bulletin, 76 (543), 19-23.
15. Pardini, P. (1995). Legislating parental involvement. School Administrator,
52 (2), 28-30, 32-33.
16. Robinson, E. L. & Fine, M. J. (1994). Developing collaborative home-
school relationships. Preventing School Failure, 39 (1), 9-15.
Page
171
17. Rosenthal, D. M. & Sawyers, J.Y. (1996). Building successful home/school
partnerships: Strategies for parent support and involvement. Childhood
Education, 72 (4), 194-200.
18. Thompson, S. (1993). Two streams, one river: Parent involvement and
teacher empowerment. Equity and Choice, 10 (1), 17-20.
Page
172

Current Issues in Education Edman201 Com

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Current Issues in Education Edman201 Com

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Current Issues

Palacpac, Julius John L.

Current Issues in Education about the Development of Students 2

Current Issues in Education about the Development of School

Library and Staffing 33

Current Issues in Education about the Development of School,

Family, & Community Connections 41

Current Issues in Education about the Development of Physical

Current Issues in Education about the Development of Curriculum 83

Current Issues in Education about the Development of Faculty 106

Current Issues in Education about the Development of Parents 120

Julius John L. Palacpac

Current Issue # 1 (Th e Proble m of Rur al Education in

Current Issue #2 (Five factors about students issue) 10

Current Issue #3 (10 Critical Issues Facing Education) 13

Current Issue #4 (Top Issues Facing Higher Education In 2014) 19

Current Issue #5 (Students lack interest or motivation) 27

Posted in March 2, 2010 by Josh Weinstein (A light-hearted journal of

microfinance and development economics)

In this journal, I have discussed the relationship between education, poverty

reinforcing. Education creates greater opportunities for the youth, who go on to

impoverished. Here are the sobering education statistics:

lack of education) and poverty—two-thirds of our poor families have household

heads whose highest educational attainment is at most Grade 6. Well, the

net participation rates (NPR)—the proportion of the number of enrollees 7-12

years old to population 7-12 years old—have plummeted from 95 percent in

school year (SY) 1997-98 to 74 percent in 2005-2006, as have high school

school enrollment went down more.

for several reasons. According to some observers, the Department of Education

bureaucracy. The impact on the education system is detrimental:

Embezzlement, nepotism, influence peddling, fraud and other types of corruption

also flourish. Corruption has become so institutionalized that payoffs have

result: an entire generation of Filipino students robbed of their right to a good

This corruption leads to poor allocation of resources. Teachers are underpaid

student, compared to $852 in Thailand, another developing country in Southeast

that leads traps generations of families.

Lunchtime at ―The Environment-Friendly School‖

Pinoy Press, one author delineates the key issue:

With around 65 million Filipinos or about 80 percent of the population trying to

cigarettes, candies, garlands, and assorted foodstuffs or things, or doing odd

to work in the fields during harvest time. In agriculture-based communities where

grade, only to be pulled out of school again next year.

The walk to school.

It seems like an intractable problem. Corruption in the education bureaucracy

and a lack of resources make delivering a high-quality education to all Filipinos a

textbooks, lunches, and rides to school. Also, by creating another source of

as corruption and bureaucracy paralyzes the system, the goal of delivering a

run – will remain out of reach.

Gamot Cogon (―Grass Roots‖) Institute:

The Gamot Cogon Institute (a non-stock, non-profit organization) is an Iloilo-

based cultural institution working to transform society through human

development approaches including education and training. GCI also prototypes

or demonstrates alternative approaches to education, agriculture, health, and full

Very cool stuff.

Posted in Development Economics, Microfinance Issues, The Philippines |

Tagged education, education in the Philippines, microfinance and

education, Microfinance Issues, poverty, rural education

Attitudes & Motivation

 Students come late to class.

 Students don't demonstrate critical thinking.

 Students lack interest or motivation.

 Students performed poorly on an exam.

 Students don‘t seek help when needed.

 Students behave rudely in class.