Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 1
RUNNING HEAD: FAMILY INVOLVEMENT AND CULTURAL SENSITIVITY
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity: A School’s Response to a Changing Demographic
Christine E. Orlowski
Vanderbilt University
April 21, 2010
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 2
Abstract
While encouraging parents who are not native English speakers to support their
children’s learning can be challenging for schools, there are strategies schools can implement to
increase involvement for all parent groups. The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine
parental involvement at a public elementary school with a high Latino population from
perspectives of the school staff members and parents. Specifically, the aim of the study was to
determine group beliefs about parent involvement and to discover if group beliefs were similar.
Seven staff members were interviewed and 37 parents of Kindergarten to fourth grade students
responded to surveys about parent involvement efforts and related beliefs. Results suggested that
themes such as understanding families, accommodating families’ needs, making opportunities
available for parents, and encouraging involvement were important to staff members.
Additionally, school and parents indicated similar perceptions of the school being a welcoming
place and low reports of child and teacher invitations to involvement. Results are discussed in
terms of implications for school practice and suggestions for further work.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 3
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity: A School’s Response
To a Changing Demographic
Parental involvement is increasingly recognized as a way to improve students’ academic,
social, and behavioral school outcomes. Numerous studies have demonstrated the benefits of
parental involvement in improving student achievement (e.g., Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Fan &
Chen, 2001; Jeynes, 2003, 2005, 2007). The No Child Left Behind Act (2001) mandates that
schools receiving Title I funds involve parents in meaningful ways. Parental involvement is
especially important for students from low-income, minority, or immigrant backgrounds,
because it can engage schools and families together in supporting students’ learning and helping
students overcome other factors that might negatively affect their learning (Dearing, McCartney,
Weiss, Kreider, & Simpkins, 2004; Lee & Bowen, 2006). Many factors affect a parent’s ability
or willingness to be involved, including: personal motivators; invitations to involvement from
the school, teachers, and child; and the school’s responsiveness to family life context (HooverDempsey & Sandler, 1997, 2005; Hoover-Dempsey, Whitaker, & Ice, 2010).
Parental involvement comes in many forms, such as volunteering at school, helping with
homework, or the more subtle forms of encouraging family values of hard work and achievement
(Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 2005; Walker, Ice, Hoover-Dempsey, & Sandler, under review).
Epstein (1997) suggests six different ways that families, schools, and communities can
cooperate: parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and
collaborating with the community. Her research indicates that schools can broaden their ideas of
what constitutes meaningful family involvement. Different forms of parent (or to be more
inclusive, family) involvement can be recognized and celebrated for the value they bring to a
child’s learning.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 4
Cultural sensitivity and cultural competence are vital social competencies for schools to
have when working with an increasingly diverse demographic. Cultural sensitivity means
understanding that differences between cultures exist and that one culture is not better than
another. Cultural competency goes further than sensitivity, allowing practitioners (e.g., teachers,
doctors, nurses, social workers) to work with cross-cultural populations effectively. It involves
both understanding and appreciating diverse groups of people and being able to put this
understanding into action through words, actions, and policies (Cross, Bazron, Dennis, & Isaacs,
1989). This concept of cultural competence can guide practitioners on how to help parents from
diverse cultures be more effectively involved in their children’s education. For instance, if
schools are unaware of how parents are involved, they cannot coordinate their efforts to help
students learn or be aware of what additional knowledge to give to parents so they might help
their children. Research suggests that it may be especially critical to involve the families of
students who are low-income, immigrant, or who are not native English speakers, as they may be
at risk for lower academic achievement (Trumbull, Rothstein-Fisch, & Hernandez, 2003; Moles,
1993; Murry et al., 2004). Especially in schools where the staff is not from the same cultural
background as the students, it is vital that staff learn how to effectively work with the students
and their families. Staff can learn to recognize the varied social and personal factors that
influence parents’ decisions about involvement in their children’s education.
Expectations about parent involvement in the child’s education are one factor that
influences how parents are involved in their child’s education. Researchers who study Latino
families, particularly those whose primary language is Spanish, have examined how parents’
cultural background influences their expectations for the schools (Delgado-Gaitan, 1992;
Scribner, Young, & Pedroza, 1999). They found that parents have expectations that may be
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 5
different from the school’s expectations about how parents should be involved in their child’s
education. For example, some Latino parents hold the belief that education should be left to the
teachers, and that parents’ involvement may be insulting to teachers’ authority (Reese, 2002;
Reese, Balzano, Gallimore, & Goldenberg, 1995). In addition, many Latino parents often see the
parents’ role in education as being distinct from a teaching role. They believe that parents should
teach children morals and values (educar), and may not think of themselves as playing a role in
teaching school subjects (enseñar) (Rodriguez-Brown, 2010).
Trumbull et al. (2003) have challenged educators to more fully understand the culture of
Latino parents when trying to encourage parent involvement. They suggest that until this
happens, parent involvement rates of Latino students will not be at school desired levels. They
found that when teachers of Latino students were educated about individualistic and collectivistic
cultures, their understanding of parents’ values increased, as well as their own ability to take the
perspective of their students’ parents. In an individualistic culture, such as the United States’,
autonomy, personal achievement, and independence from the family are considered admirable
values. In a collectivistic culture, however, sharing and interdependence are valued, and the
family is viewed as more of a single unit instead of being separate members. By increasingly
taking the perspective of the parents, educators were willing to change their schedules to
accommodate parents, trying new methods to involve parents such as in small group settings, or
form personal relationships with parents. Due to these and other changes, parents participated
more in their children’s schooling. If schools are willing to work to understand parents’
perspectives and respond by accommodating to their needs, they give parents the opportunity to
be more involved.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 6
When educators make efforts to become competent in the cultures of the students they
teach, they also become more able to operate from a strengths-based perspective through which
they view cultural differences as strengths instead of deficiencies. Clare (2005) suggested that
schools view the Latino family structure, culture, and language as assets while also recognizing
the specific variables that might hold families back from being involved. For instance, schools
can see allegiance or loyalty to the family as a strength while also realizing that the parents’
commitment to provide for the family can create a burdensome workload that can inhibit
involvement. When the school-family relationship is built on mutual trust and understanding, the
school is better prepared to meet the needs of the parents, and will be better able to encourage
involvement. Thus, schools should endeavor to establish trusting, positive relationships with
parents because this is the first step in creating effective family-school support for students’
learning success. This increased understanding often allows them to create a foundation of trust
between schools and families, which is essential to the development of successful community
partnerships (Rappaport, Alegria, Mulvaney-Day, & Boyle, 2008).
Increased understanding of other cultures involves recognizing that conceptions of parent
involvement may not be identical to common American conceptualizations. In addition to
understanding broad cultural variables underlying parent involvement, it is helpful to understand
a parent’s personal motivation for involvement. One model that helps explain the process and
mechanisms of parental involvement for parents from a wide variety of cultures is the HooverDempsey and Sandler (1995, 2005) model of parent involvement (see Figure 1). Given that the
purpose of the present study was, in part, to examine how and why parents are involved, the most
relevant parts of the model for the study proposed in this paper are those that explain a) what
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 7
motivates a parent to be involved and b) the different forms of involvement in which a parent
might engage.
Level 1 of the model suggests that personal motivators (e.g., role construction, efficacy
for helping children learn), invitations to involvement from the school, teacher, and student, and
the school’s responsiveness to parents’ life context (“life context” includes factors such as
parents’ time and energy, knowledge and skills, and family culture) all play a role in parents’
decisions about becoming involved in their children’s learning. Level 1.5 notes common forms
of involvement in most U.S. schools: parents’ expression of family values, goals, or expectations
for schooling, being involved at home (e.g., helping with homework or asking about the school
day), communicating with the school (e.g., stopping to talk to the teacher when picking up the
child or sending notes to the teacher with the child), and being involved at the school (e.g.,
volunteering or attending teacher-parent conferences).
Walker, Ice, Hoover-Dempsey, and Sandler (in press) used the model to examine what
motivated Latino parents to be involved and how involved parents were at the school. They
surveyed 147 Latino parents and found that motivational beliefs and invitations from the child
predicted home-based involvement, and invitations from the child and teacher as well as
perceived time and energy predicted school-based involvement. Parents believed that it was their
role to be involved in the child’s education and that they were capable of making a difference
through their involvement. Additionally, they found that Latino parents reported higher levels of
school-based involvement than Anglo-American parents. They also reported lower levels of selfefficacy for helping their child succeed in school as well as lower reported levels of skills and
knowledge. It appeared that these Latino parents chose not to allow any perceived deficits to
keep them from doing what they could to help their children succeed in U.S. schools. The model
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 8
is a useful way to assess how and why parents across cultures are involved, which is why I used
the Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler model in studying the Latino population in this paper.
Denessen, Bakker, and Giervald (2007) conducted a very relevant study in the
Netherlands that compared four multi-ethnic elementary schools’ policies and practices
regarding immigrant students and parent involvement. The researchers found in part that these
schools expressed the belief that parent-school contact was a good thing, but they did not have
clear parental involvement goals or plans. The researchers questioned the schools about whether
parental involvement practices were viewed as a one-way process (where schools offer
involvement options to parents and expect parents to cooperate with them), or whether the
schools took the parents’ needs and culture into account when looking for ways to partner with
parents. Their examination of the four schools revealed that language barriers were often only
one of the cultural barriers faced by immigrant families. They suggested that teachers and
principals need to understand these barriers and others when looking for ways to reach out to
parents. Additionally, they found that schools often become frustrated when parents do not
respond to invitations to involvement, and can be tempted to give up. They concluded that
teacher training should be implemented to help teachers prepare for working with immigrant
students and parents, and that schools share their experiences with each other in order to improve
their parental involvement programs.
With immigrant students representing one out of every five U.S. students and most of
them coming from Latin America and Asia (Conchas, 2001), investigation into Latino parent
involvement is becoming more relevant. A common theme across several studies is that Latino
parents have valuable contributions to make to the discussion about their children and school.
Orozco (2008), for example, gathered data from a Latino call-in radio station to find out what
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 9
parents were thinking about and what topics were important to them regarding parenting. She
suggested that a common stereotype about low-income immigrant parents is that they do not care
about their children’s education. Contrary to the stereotype, she found that the parents calling the
radio station expressed considerable concern about their children and were determined to find
ways to help them succeed in this new country. The lesson for educators, she suggested, was to
use a strengths-based approach when working with immigrant students and families because
parents described a lot of strengths and inner resources at their disposal for helping their
children. Educators need to honor the culture of immigrants and also treat involvement as a twoway process, where the parent can contribute meaningfully to the discussion about involvement.
Often, Latino families may not feel comfortable being involved in their child’s schooling
because of the cultural divide or differences in expectations between parents and school.
Chrispeels and Rivero (2001) recognized that this was a barrier to involvement and used the
Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler framework (Hoover-Dempsey, Whitaker, & Ice, 2010) to guide
their understanding about Latino parents’ motivators to involvement and what might currently
keep them from being involved. The researchers studied the effects of a parent education class
created by the Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE) for immigrant parents designed to
help address misunderstandings between parents and schools. Their study examined a class given
at a school in a rapidly growing small city in California that served a large Latino immigrant
population where the parents’ and the teachers’ perceptions of appropriate parental involvement
in the schools were not matching up. The results indicated that after attending the classes, the
parents learned that it was acceptable and even good for them to make contact with the school
and to be an advocate for their child. Additionally, although the parents’ attendance at advisory
council meetings and volunteering events did not increase, they did become more involved in
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 10
their own child’s education and were willing to take an active role in helping their child succeed
in school. The study suggested that when parents are educated about what sorts of activities are
helpful and beneficial for their child, they are very willing to make the effort to be actively
involved in their child’s education.
The United States is becoming increasingly diversified, with the Hispanic population in
particular becoming a larger proportion of the overall population in many school districts.
Schools must learn how to cope with a changing population and decide how they will need to
change methods that worked with previous populations but may no longer be as successful with
a new demographic. Given that parent involvement is an important part of children’s educational
success, the question becomes: what can schools do to reach out to parents who may not be
familiar with the American school system or comfortable with its values to encourage their
involvement?
Purposes
The purpose of this study was to examine parental involvement at a school with a high
Latino population from perspectives of the school staff and parents. Specifically, the aim of the
study was to determine group beliefs about parent involvement and to discover if group beliefs
were similar. Research indicates that educating the teachers about other cultures and working to
understand and meet the needs of the school’s population is vital to creating successful familyschool partnerships. Through interviews with school staff members, this study examined a) the
ways in which this school makes efforts to understand and accommodate to the particular needs
of the parents, and b) what kind of message the school conveys about the importance of parent
involvement.
Research Questions
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 11
1. What are the views of school staff members regarding the importance of parent
involvement, and what how do they encourage parents to be involved?
2. What are parents’ views of the ways they are involved, their beliefs about their ability
to effectively contribute to their child’s education, and their perceptions of the school’s efforts to
extend involvement invitations?
3. Is there an alignment between the efforts that the school makes to promote parent
involvement and parents’ perceptions of these efforts?
Method
Participants
School Personnel. In order to recruit participants, a proposal about the study was
submitted to a large public school district in a mid-size city in the South, and the researcher was
assigned to a school that would be appropriate given the topic of interest. This school is an
elementary school that has a high population of Hispanic students (60%); 10% are international
students from non-Hispanic nationalities, and 30% are non-Hispanic students originally from the
United States (e.g., African-American, European-American). In order to understand parent
involvement at this school from the perspective of the school personnel, four teachers and three
support staff members were interviewed. The principal recruited the teachers who would be
willing to take part in the study because she was much more familiar with the staff than the
researcher. Two were ELL teachers and two were regular subject teachers, and they taught
Kindergarten, 2nd grade, 3rd grade, and 4th grade. The principal, translator, and Title I coordinator
were interviewed because they had high amounts of contact with parents and were actively
involved in the school’s parent involvement efforts. Only the translator was fluent in both
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 12
English and Spanish, but two teachers reported knowing enough Spanish to make small
conversation or “get by” when engaged in face-to-face interactions.
Parents. To gather information from the parents, packets (which included a letter of
explanation, a survey, and optional invitation to be interviewed about parent involvement) were
sent home with the students of the teachers who were interviewed. The principal recommended
recruiting both English and Spanish speaking parents in order to have a higher number of
responses and to be able to compare the responses of these two groups. Packets were sent home
in English or Spanish according to the teacher’s indication of parents’ preferred language. The
principal recommended that, due to the low literacy level of the Spanish speaking parents, a short
letter should be sent home (in place of the survey) to the parents requesting their name and phone
number in order to contact them and arrange to do the survey verbally with them, followed by an
optional short interview. When this method yielded few results, the letter was sent home again
with the Spanish survey included, which was more successful. For English speaking parents, the
survey packet was sent home to parents with a letter explaining the study that also asked for
permission to contact them regarding the optional follow-up interview. In order to increase
response rate, the researcher recruited participants at a “spaghetti supper” event for families and
at field day, both of which had high numbers of parents in attendance. Letters were sent home to
73 families from the four classrooms. Thirty-seven surveys were returned and collected from
classroom teachers and the family events (22 English and 15 Spanish surveys; 16 of survey
respondents indicated that they were Latino/Hispanic). Although four parents indicated their
agreement to be interviewed by returning the form included in the survey, efforts to arrange a
time and a date for interviewing were unsuccessful. In lieu of this method, the researcher asked
two community liaisons with connections in the Spanish-speaking community to ask a parent to
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 13
be interviewed about their experiences at schools. One interview was conducted with each
liaison and a parent, one at the school of study, and one at a local community center with a
parent similarly situated to the parents in the study. Both interviews were done with a translator,
the researcher, and the parent all present.
Measures
In this study, the two groups of participants (school personnel and parents) were engaged
in different types of data gathering methods. School personnel completed an interview with the
researcher about parent involvement at the school, particularly in relation to Spanish-speaking
parents. Interview questions often referred to this group of parents. Parents of students in the
classes of the teachers who were interviewed were given surveys to fill out and return, and were
given the option of having an interview with the researcher so she could learn more deeply about
their parent involvement beliefs. The qualitative results of the school personnel and the
quantitative results of the parents were then compared to answer Research Question 3 and learn
how well the views of the two groups aligned.
Research Question 1: What are the views of school staff members regarding the
importance of parent involvement, and how do they encourage parents to be involved?
The interview for school personnel, which was semi-structured, was designed to
understand what parent involvement is like at the school, what teachers and school staff think
about the importance of parent involvement, and how they understand their own roles in
encouraging parent involvement. Questions were developed based on foundational readings from
relevant literature as the researcher determined what topics would be most important for
understanding the school’s approach to parent involvement. The questions were then brought to
experienced research lab members for suggestions and editing to ensure that questions were
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 14
sufficiently comprehensive and clear. Interview questions for the principal included such items
as, “What is parent involvement at this school like?”, “What are specific activities that the school
engages in to reach out to parents?”, and “How do parents respond to the school’s activities and
accommodations to support their involvement?” Sample interview questions for the Title I
coordinator and the school translator included such items as, “What is parent involvement like
at this school?”, “How often do Spanish-speaking parents come in to school?” and “When
parents come in, do you see that as an important form of parent involvement?” Interview
questions for teachers included such items as, “How do you think parental involvement affects
your students’ success?”, “How do you modify your efforts to involve parents who don’t speak
English as their primary language?”, and “How are your students’ parents involved in school?”
For a complete list of interview questions asked of all school personnel, see Appendix A.
Interviews were held at the school in the teacher’s classroom or the office of the support
staff member, with the exception of the translator. The translator’s interview was held in the
entryway of the school because she needed to be available for Spanish-speaking families as they
came in, and she could see them from this position. Interviews lasted between 15 and 35
minutes. Interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed by the researcher. In a few instances
where the interview was inaudible and there were not enough contextual clues to confidently
determine what the speaker had said, the researcher indicated with brackets that a section could
not be understood.
A coding scheme to analyze the interviews was created through a combination of a) predetermined themes based on the research questions and b) preliminary reading and coding of the
interviews. Items were added to the coding scheme as deemed necessary in moving through
further interviews. The coding scheme was revised repeatedly as more information was revealed
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 15
through deeper readings of the interviews, and categories were arranged logically as they
pertained to the research questions. When the coding scheme was finalized, all interviews were
re-checked and re-coded as necessary.
Interviews were broken into codable statements by two researchers working
independently. Results were compared and codable statements were agreed upon by consensus.
Once interviews had all codable statements circled, two trained researchers independently
assigned each statement a code from the coding scheme and then compared code assignments.
When there was disagreement on what coding category a statement belonged to, the two
researchers explained their reasonings and came to an agreement on which category the
statement most clearly belonged to. If agreement could not be reached, the question was brought
to a research team well-versed in the topic of parent involvement, and final decisions were made
by consensus. The final coding scheme contained six broad categories, which were subdivided
into 17 categories, which were subdivided further into a total of 30 categories that a codable
statement could be placed into. (See Appendix B for complete coding scheme).
Reliabilities on the coding of interviews ranged from .63 to.84 (x=.75). If an interview
had a reliability below .63, then the two trained coders independently recoded statements on
which there had been disagreement and met again to compare codes. Any remaining
disagreements were coded by consensus. After this procedure, sufficiently high reliability was
obtained. Following full and complete coding on all interviews, the total number of coded
statements in each category was determined for each interview. The researcher then derived for
each interview the proportion of the interviewee’s total statements included in each coding
scheme category. These numbers were then entered into the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences, and correlations between categories were examined.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 16
Research Question 2: What are parents’ views of the ways they are involved, their beliefs
about their ability to effectively contribute to their child’s education, and their perceptions
of the school’s efforts to extend involvement invitations?
The survey given to parents illustrated how they view the importance of involvement,
what sorts of barriers they might feel inhibit their involvement, and how they perceive the
school’s efforts to help them be involved. The 37-item questionnaire completed by both Spanish
and English speaking parents (administered in the language they were most comfortable with)
included scales used in parent involvement studies by Walker, Wilkins, Dallaire, Sandler and
Hoover-Dempsey, 2005, and Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, 2005. The scales were adapted from
work by Epstein and Salinas (1993) and by Hoover-Dempsey, Walker, Jones & Reed (2002).
Spanish interviews had been translated from English and used in a prior study.
Parent Choice of Involvement Activities. The 10-item Parent Choice of Involvement
Activities scale is divided into two scales, Child-Specific Involvement and School-General
Involvement. Overall, it assesses parents’ choice of involvement activities in children’s
education. Alpha reliability for the two scales as reported in Walker et al. (2005) and HooverDempsey & Sandler (2005) was .85 for Child-Specific Involvement scale and .82 for the SchoolGeneral scale. Alpha reliability for this study was .756 for Child-Specific Involvement and .804
for School-General Involvement. Sample questions include “Someone in this family supervises
this child’s homework” and “Someone in this family attends special events at school.” Items are
scored on a 6-point scale ranging from “never” to “daily.”
Parent Perceptions of General Invitations to Involvement from the School. The 7item scale for General Invitations to Involvement had an alpha reliability of .83 as reported by
Walker et al. (2005; Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 2005). Alpha reliability for this study was .84.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 17
Sample questions include “Parent activities are scheduled at this school so I can attend” and “I
feel welcome at this school.” Items are scored on a 6-point scale ranging from “disagree very
strongly” to “agree very strongly.”
Parental Perceptions of Specific Teacher or School Invitations to Involvement. The
5-item scale for Specific School Invitations to Involvement had an alpha reliability of .81 as
reported by Walker et al. (2005; see also Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 2005). Alpha reliability
for this study was .851. Sample questions include “My child’s teacher asked or expected me to
help my child with homework” and “My child’s teacher asked me to talk with my child about the
school day.” Items are scored on a 6-point scale ranging from “never” to “daily.”
Parents’ Perceptions of Specific Invitations to Involvement from the Child. The 5point scale for Specific Child Invitations had an alpha reliability of .81 as reported by Walker et
al. (2005; see also Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler, 2005). Alpha reliability for this study was
.813. Sample questions include “My child asked me to help explain something about his or her
homework” and “My child talked with me about the school day.” Items are scored on a 6-point
scale ranging from “never” to “daily.”
Parents’ Perception of Knowledge and Skills. The 5-item scale was adopted from the
scale reported in Walker et al. (2005) and assesses parents’ beliefs about personal knowledge and
skills for involvement in the child’s education. Sample questions include “I know about
volunteering opportunities at my child’s school” and “I know how to explain things to my child
about his or her homework.” The scale employs a six-point Likert-type scale ranging from
disagree very strongly (1) to agree very strongly (6). Alpha reliability reported by Walker et al.
(2005; see also Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 2005) was .83. Alpha reliability in this study was
.749.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 18
Parents’ Perception of Personal Time and Energy. The 5-item scale was adopted from
the scale reported in Walker et al. (2005). To create the scale, researchers identified six common
involvement behaviors and asked parents to indicate how much time and energy they perceive
they have for engaging in each. The scale includes such items as “I have enough time and energy
to help my child with homework” and “I have enough time and energy to attend special events at
school.” The scale employs a six-point Likert-type response scale ranging from disagree very
strongly (1) to agree very strongly (6). Alpha reliability reported by Walker et al. (2005; see also
Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler) was .84. Alpha reliability in this study was .836.
Analysis of survey data. Survey data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences (SPSS). Means and standard deviations for the parent survey constructs and
inter-item correlations were determined. The variable of language (English or Spanish) was used
to compare results between the two parent groups.
Parent Interviews. The interview with parents had the purpose of gathering deeper
insights into the parents’ perspectives on the importance of being involved, how comfortable
they were being involved in the school, and how the school responded to the needs of parents in
their efforts to help them be involved. Sample questions included “Do you feel comfortable
coming to the school to talk to teachers or another person at this school?” and “What does the
school do to help meet your needs?” The complete list of interview questions can be found in
Appendix B. Interview data from parents was used to supplement the results of the survey data
and explain certain ideas further.
Research Question 3: Is there an alignment between the efforts that the school makes to
promote parent involvement and parents’ perceptions of these efforts?
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 19
To answer Research Question 3, the results from the school personnel interviews were
examined in light of the information from the parents’ surveys. For instance, do the teachers and
support staff understand how parents perceive their ability to help their child? Do they make
special efforts to help parents become involved? How do parents perceive these efforts? I
answered this question logically and conceptually by comparing the themes and ideas that
emerged from each group of participants’ results and looking for similarities and differences
between the two groups.
Results
Results for school personnel were examined by comparing the proportions of coded
statements in each coding scheme category and then looking for the most commonly mentioned
themes. The five themes receiving the most mention (which were salient across all school
personnel interviews) are examined here. Other notable themes in the interview were used to
examine ideas about how the school promotes involvement or generate new ideas about how to
increase involvement from parents at this school. Results for parents were identified through
analysis of survey data across survey constructs. Parent interviews further illuminate themes that
emerged from the survey results. Results for the third research question—comparison of school
and parent perspectives—were determined by summarizing results from school personnel and
from parents, and then comparing themes that emerged from both groups.
Research Question 1: What are the views of school staff members regarding the
importance of parent involvement, and how do they encourage parents to be involved?
Based on the range of ideas expressed in school personnel interviews, 30 distinct
categories emerged; these were organized into broader themes (see Appendix B for a full list of
codes used in analyzing the interviews). Some of the 30 discrete categories were only mentioned
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 20
by one school staff member, whereas others were present in all interviews. (See Table 1 for a
complete listing of the number of statements in each category).
Based on the number of statements in each category, the strongest theme to emerge from
the interviews was “School member shows understanding of or empathy toward family
members’ perspectives on involvement decisions,” which represented, on average, 21.6% (range:
12-33%) of their statements. Many staff members perceived language differences to be a barrier
(e.g., “since a lot of [parents] don’t speak English, they don’t know how to help.” Some reported
that not knowing English made some parents feel intimidated about even coming to the school:
“They want to be here, but it’s just the language barrier that keeps them away… they feel really
shy.” One teacher overflowed with sympathy for the parents’ situations: “They’re trying to
survive. They’re trying to feed their kids. They’re trying to not get sent back to Mexico.” While
understanding the parents’ situations realistically is necessary, some staff seemed perhaps to be
mired in sympathy (e.g., “they’re busy trying to live…their mind is not on whether the kid is
going to school and getting an education”). This might inhibit them in being able to act on a
belief that even when faced with challenges, parents are still capable of being vital contributors
to their children’s education. In fact, understanding of parents’ circumstances was correlated
with “School member reports parent involvement is low” (r = .80, p = .032), indicating that
school members may get caught in the mindset that involvement will be too difficult for parents
to do, thus perhaps accept that many parents’ involvement levels.
The next most commonly mentioned theme was “School accommodates to factors that
may hold parents back from being involved at school,” represented in an average of 10.4%
(range: 2.4%-19.2%) of school members’ statements. School accommodations included making
the translator available, sending materials home in Spanish, scheduling conferences for early
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 21
morning or in the evening, and trying to make parents feel more comfortable and less intimidated
in the school environment. In fact, the principal even planned to buy software to help the
teachers learn Spanish, so that they would be able to “…greet the parent, make just general
conversation. To make them feel a part.” Accommodations were correlated with “Parent is
involved as a response to the school’s invitations” (r = .867, p = .012) and “Parent is involved as
a response to accommodations” (r = .818, p = .025). Thus, staff members generally perceived
that the invitations and accommodations they made were working for parents and helped them to
be involved.
The third strongest theme was “School makes events or opportunities for involvement at
the school available for parents” (mean=8.6%, range: 1.3%-15.9%). These opportunities
included parent-teacher conferences, school carnivals, movie nights, educational speakers, a
spaghetti supper, math or reading nights, and times for parents to come in and learn about
statewide standardized testing. Staff members varied in their reports about how well-attended
these events were. All staff members said that almost every parent came to conferences. For
other events, however, some commented that the parents were “very concerned with their
children as a whole, but they just can’t come…a lot of them don’t come,” while others noticed
parents attending (e.g., “If we have anything, they’re all here. You don’t ever have to worry
about having people not show up.”). On the whole, the three support staff members reported
higher levels of involvement and responses to school opportunities for involvement than did the
four teachers.
The fourth strongest theme was “General observations about school or district
responsibilities for inviting or promoting involvement” (mean=5.9%, range: 3.7%-11.5%). This
diverse category included ideas about what the school sees as its role in promoting involvement,
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 22
as well as staff members’ ideas about what they wish they could provide but generally cannot,
due to reality constraints. For instance, the school uses the phone “call-out” system to
communicate information, so using the phone system is the school’s responsibility in
disseminating information to parents. Providing translators was considered part of the school’s
responsibility, although staff members also acknowledged that they were not able to provide
translators for every language or have translators available at all times. Staff members also
suggested that it was a school and district responsibility to keep recruit and keep quality staff
members who worked well together. For example, several saw the translator as essential to the
involvement of Spanish-speaking parents (e.g., “I think the key is the translator… it’s the
relationship. And that’s why we asked for her to be assigned to us next year.”). In that instance,
the school members recognized something that was working well, and indicated it was their
responsibility to make sure it continued to happen.
The fifth strongest theme was “School or school member encourages parent
involvement” (mean 5.6%, range: 3.5%-7.7%). Encouraging statements included references to
the general school atmosphere being inviting (a construct also measured in the parents’ surveys
through “Parent perceptions of general school invitations to involvement.”). As opposed to the
more specific opportunities for involvement, this theme encompasses broader or more general
involvement invitations. For example, letters sent home to parents giving them contact
information and availability of staff fell into the category, as did general invitations given to
parents about ways to be involved, or anything that gave information to parents to empower them
to be involved by helping them know what is going on at school. Staff members frequently
referenced the importance of helping parents to feel a part of the school by letting them know
that they belonged and their involvement was welcomed. For example, one said “I want them to
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 23
come [here] because I want them to feel a part of this school.” Another, a support staff member,
wanted to say to parents, “You can have suggestions, you can come help, you can do whatever:”
she wanted to let parents know that many kinds of involvement were welcome at the school.
School staff members expressed the belief that parents did not always see themselves in an active
involvement role because they were just happy that their child could come to school in the
United States, but school members were trying to convey the message that parents could indeed
play an active role in this school.
Research Question 2: What are parents’ views of the ways they are involved, their beliefs
about their ability to effectively contribute to their child’s education, and their perceptions
of the school’s efforts to extend involvement invitations?
Full demographic information on the 37 parents who returned the survey is included in
Table 2. Thirty-seven parents completed the survey; 15 returned the Spanish questionnaire and
22 returned the English questionnaire. Of English-speaking parents, seven were Black, 12 were
White, and one was Hispanic. Twenty-three people were female and 12 were male; two did not
respond. Ten parents were not employed, 23 reported being employed, and four did not respond.
Most parents had a high school diploma or GED (17), but some had less than a high school
education (six), and others had some form of higher education (13). In the survey, parents
responded to questions regarding their perceptions about: general invitations to involvement
from the school, time and energy, knowledge and skills, specific invitations to involvement from
the teacher or school, specific invitations to involvement from the child, child-specific
involvement activities, and school-general involvement activities. Their results are summarized
in Table 3. Results are given for English and Spanish surveys separately and combined.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 24
Survey responses indicate that both Spanish and English speaking parents considered
themselves to have sufficient time, energy, knowledge, and skills necessary for involvement, and
on average, considered the school to be welcoming to parent involvement (x = 5.32 / 6.0, s.d. =
.70). Teacher and Child Invitations both recorded relatively high standard deviations (1.52 and
1.36 respectively, for English and Spanish combined), indicating that the parents’ responses may
have varied across teacher habits and child habits of inviting parent involvement. Parents across
the two groups indicated a high level of involvement at home with their child (5.30, standard
deviation of .82, for English and Spanish combined). In the two interviews with fathers, they
reported (through a translator) about their family’s involvement activities: “[Their mom] does a
lot of reading. [The family] also watch[es] TV. They’ve learned a lot of English from
television… They practice English together.” Another father reported that he “helps [the
children] read. Sometimes he’ll read a Spanish book but they ask him to read it in English
because it’ll help both of them.” Reading and practicing English were especially important
involvement activities for families whose first language was not English.
Parents who returned the Spanish survey reported significantly more general invitations
to involvement from the school (p = .023). These parents also reported more specific invitations
to involvement from the child (p = .077) and higher levels of involvement activities at school (p
= .051). It is possible that these results are due to the school’s efforts to specifically involve
Spanish-speaking parents. Interview data support the idea that Spanish-speaking parents are
involved, as the translator noted that the interviewed father came to school “every time they have
[involvement events] at school. He’s here every year, making sure the kids get their education…
[Both parents] make the time [to come to school].” This father reported the teacher’s
accommodations were helpful: when children’s teachers sent out notices three weeks ahead of
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 25
time, it allowed him to request time off from work. The translator also indicated that there was a
strong sense of community at the school among the parents who were present, working together
and being with the children. They felt very comfortable with each other and enjoyed each other’s
company. It seems possible that the parents who frequently come to the school for activities have
been able to establish relationships with each other, which further encourages their involvement.
Survey responses indicated that involvement at school (x = 2.73, SD = 1.34) was much
lower than involvement at home (x = 5.30, SD = .82), which is similar to results from Walker et
al. (in press). The results of regression analyses indicated that Parent Choice of Involvement
Activities at School was predicted by parent perceptions of the child’s invitations to
involvement, teacher invitations to involvement, time and energy, and general school invitations
(adjusted r2 = .575, F[4, 36] = 7.76, p < .001) (see Table 4 for further correlations). Together, the
variables predicted over half of the variance, but the only variable that was significant by itself
was child invitations to involvement (at p < .05). This is consistent with results from other
studies (Green, Walker, Hoover-Dempsey, & Sandler, 2007). Parent Choice of Involvement
Activities at Home was predicted by child invitations, teacher invitations, time and energy, and
knowledge and skills (adjusted r2 = .31, F[4, 36] = 3.33, p < .05). Although none of these
variables alone were significant in predicting school-based involvement, together, they
constituted almost a third of the variance, indicating that it is the combination of these factors
that helps cause parents to be involved. Parents not only need to feel capable of being involved
given the internal resources that they have, but they also need to hear from their child, their
child’s teacher, and the school as a whole that their involvement is necessary and desired. This
suggests that the actions of the teacher in terms of invitations to involvement in fact have the
power to influence how much a parent chooses to be involved.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 26
Research Question 3: Is there an alignment between the efforts that the school makes to
promote parent involvement and parents’ perceptions of these efforts?
Interviews with school staff members indicated that although it was often difficult to
have parents involved at this school, the school was making a concentrated effort to increase the
level of parent participation. This effort was strongly led by the school principal, who, in her first
year of leadership, was already making a marked difference in the school’s focus on parent
involvement as reported by staff members. Staff often referenced the challenges that parents
faced in both their ability to come to the school and in their ability to work effectively with their
children, often because of issues related to language, time, work hours, transportation, or lack of
education. School staff also talked about the ways that they try to work around these challenges
and to promote interaction with these parents in support of involvement with their children. They
mentioned opportunities made available for parents (e.g., movie nights, family reading nights,
math nights, spaghetti suppers) and ways that the school was working to accommodate to
parents’ special needs (e.g., having a translator, sending home written materials in Spanish, not
requiring English to be spoken at events). Accommodating to parents’ needs, having nonthreatening opportunities for involvement, and encouraging parents’ presence at school all
contribute to a school’s general invitations to involvement, of which parents reported relatively
high levels.
Many staff comments were positive, noting that parent involvement was high or
improving; several noted too that in many cases, it was still very difficult to have high levels of
parent involvement. School members also talked about some of their plans to improve
involvement levels or reach out more effectively to parents. These plans included using parents’
informal networks to bring in more Spanish-speaking parents who are comfortable helping at
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 27
school, bringing in community resources (e.g., bringing public librarians to the school to educate
parents on using the resources), and starting small classes for parents to promote involvement in
a more intimate setting. These plans seemed to underscore a general sense of optimism that
school efforts would ultimately result in higher involvement levels. Many school members’
statements indicated sensitivity about and desire to work with the needs of parents, and an
awareness that the parents prefer to be in settings with other parents similar to them.
Parents’ responses to survey questions regarding invitations to involvement from teachers
and children recorded the lowest mean scores (teachers: x = 3.49, s.d. = 1.516; children: x =
3.86, s.d. = 1.36). School personnel responses told a similar story. Few school staff remarked
that parents were involved as a result of teacher or child invitations. However, these can be some
of the most powerful predictors to involvement (Green et al., 2007). The same idea held true in
this study, as Perceptions of Time and Energy, Teacher Invitations, and Child Invitations were
all significantly correlated with reported levels of involvement, Knowledge and Skills were
additionally correlated with involvement at home, and General School Invitations to Involvement
were additionally correlated with involvement at the school.
Survey results from the parents indicated that they were in general confident about the
time, energy, knowledge, and skills (their life context variables) that they had to contribute to
their children’s educational success. However, school staff members often commented that
parents did not have enough time to come to school or the skills to help their child at home (these
comments were coded as understanding in the coding scheme). This discrepancy between school
members’ and parents’ perceptions of parents’ life context variables is important because if
school members do not believe that parents have enough time to come to school, it gives them
less of a reason to invite parents to come to school because they would not believe parents would
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 28
be able to follow through. Likewise, teachers would also be less likely to encourage their
students to ask their parents for help (e.g., assigning homework where the parent has to help the
child) if they do not believe the parent has the knowledge to help the child. As other results
indicated, teacher and child invitations both help predict parent involvement at school and at
home, so teachers may be missing out on an opportunity to increase involvement due to their
beliefs about parents’ abilities to be involved in their child’s education.
Discussion
Parent involvement is being increasingly viewed as a vital part of a student’s success, and
many schools are trying to understand effective ways of encouraging parents to be involved in
actively supporting their children’s schooling. Particularly for children who might be at higher
risk of not being educationally successful (e.g., those from low-income, non-native English
speaking, or ethnic minority backgrounds), parent involvement could be a key component of the
educational success (Trumbull et al., 2003; Moles, 1993; Murry et al., 2004). Because of this,
this study is important because it yields insight into different aspects of the involvement process
at a school that serves many families from low-income backgrounds where family members may
have limited English proficiency.
One useful finding from this explorative study was that the most powerful predictors of
parents’ involvement at home and school were Perceptions of Teacher Invitations, Child
Invitations, Time and Energy, Knowledge and Skills, and General School Invitations. It is
important for schools to recognize that these variables are influential on how much and what
kinds of involvement parents engage in. School members can support family members in the
strengths that they perceive they have in terms of the resources they can offer their children.
School members can also leverage the resources they have by actively inviting parents to be
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 29
involved or by asking children to ask their parents to be involved. Teachers can be conscious of
the way that they extend opportunities to parents and make sure that parents understand they are
welcome and encouraged to be involved. Teachers also have the power to increase child
invitations to involvement by encouraging children to ask their parents for help or input on
homework assignments, or by encouraging children to ask their parents to attend special events.
Accommodations to parents’ life context variables or cultural expectations for
involvement can help encourage parents to be involved. Schools can accommodate to factors
such as parents’ time by arranging involvement events and opportunities at varying times during
the day, or accommodate to knowledge and skills by blending parent instruction (such as
providing English classes or reading classes, as this school hopes to do) with an involvement
opportunity. Schools can accommodate to expectations that Latino parents may hold about their
children’s education by realizing that parents may think of the school as the principle educator
for knowledge and academic skills, while the parent teaches the child morals and values. School
staff can educate parents about ways that parents can support their children’s education
communicate to parents that the school members want them to play an active role in the school.
It is important that school members view parents as being capable, valuable contributors
to their children’s education, and that they not get caught in a mindset of skepticism about what
parents are able to do. Every parent, regardless of their literacy level or mode of transportation,
can help instill beliefs about the value of education in their child, or encourage their child to do
their homework, or model commitment to the family in hopes of having a better, more
prosperous future for the children. School support staff and teachers can look for the strengths
that all families bring to the table and build off of these assets.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 30
Even though there are some parents who, regardless of school efforts, do not seem to be
interested in being involved, the school can continue to be hopeful that something will some day
change. In the words on one staff member, “you want to make things available for those
families…we hope that maybe at some point parents will respond… we give them opportunities,
we send them notes.” School members may compensate for parents by giving the students extra
encouragement, but they also keep the involvement communication line open by letting parents
know that they are still welcome to be involved.
This particular school emphasized the need to bring parents on board and ensure parents’
understanding that they are welcome at the school. One important part of doing this is building
relationships with parents so that they understand that staff members really do care about them
and want them to be involved. “It’s all about communicating with your parents,” emphasizes one
support staff member. “The families realize that ‘oh, they really want the best for my family,’
because you’re taking an extra step.” Just as parents were more willing to come to the school
when a translator that they knew was there, other parents were involved because they liked the
teachers and had built a relationship with them. Teachers must be willing to reach across cultural
and even language differences in order to engage parents in supporting children’s education. This
idea is strongly supported in other literature (e.g., Trumbull et al., 2008; Christenson, Reschly,
Appleton, Berman, Spanjers, & Varro, 2008). Relationships help keep people engaged and create
a personal reason for why someone should come to school or follow through on expectations.
Especially when working with a Latino population, where relationships have great cultural
importance, forming personal bonds between parents and teachers is essential in promoting their
involvement.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 31
One teacher offered an alternative perspective about the importance of parent
involvement, expressing that her job was to teach children in the school, and she did not want to
bother parents when she knew that they were dealing with enough. She said parents “know I’m
here,” and they know “my phone is open; you can call me at any time. I’m here after school; you
can come up and talk to me at any time.” However, she did not actively recruit involvement from
parents, and considered the teaching and parenting realms to be independent of each other. Most
staff, however, expressed the belief that children needed to have the support of their parents in
order to be most successful, and wanted parents to be very involved in their child’s education.
This study was about the involvement of parents at a school with a high Latino
population, with a particular emphasis on those parents who may have limited English language
proficiency. Due to this focus, most responses from the school members focused on the Latino
population. However, it is important to recommend that the involvement of other ethnic groups
should not fall by the wayside in efforts to recruit Latino parental involvement. Reported levels
of involvement at school were lower for English-speaking parents than for Spanish-speaking
parents, indicating that English-speaking parents could also benefit from extra encouragement to
involvement.
Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
Because the parents who chose to complete and return the survey were more likely than
non-respondents to be involved, it is possible that their relatively positive reports of involvement
as well as having the skills and abilities to be involved are not representative of the school’s full
parent population. The parents who are most likely to respond to the surveys and agree to take
part in the interview are parents who are more involved in their child’s education. It is difficult to
collect data from parents who feel truly uncomfortable being involved about what is inhibiting
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 32
them from involvement when running a voluntary response study. Small sample size is another
limitation, as only four classrooms of students were given surveys to give to their parents out of a
school of 315 students. Response rate may have been decreased due to literacy levels, lacking the
time or motivation to complete a multiple-page survey, or possibly intimidation about
responding to anyone who seems like an authority figure, particularly if some parents were
undocumented. A third potential limitation is that the school staff members may have biased
their responses in the interview toward being very supportive of parent involvement due to the
research topic presented and the expectations of Title I funded schools to involve parents in
meaningful ways (No Child Left Behind Act, 2001). They might over-emphasize their views on
the importance of parent involvement or what they do to help parents be involved.
In order to further knowledge in this field, more studies with broader reach can be
performed about parent involvement and the Latino population. Although this school is similar to
many schools that have experienced a growing Latino or English Language Learner (ELL)
student population, schools can differ dramatically in how they respond to these changes. A
comparison study between different schools would provide a fascinating perspective into
effective ways to reach the Spanish-speaking community about parent involvement. Likewise, it
would be informative to study a school with a high ELL population that has clearly been
successful at promoting parent involvement to learn what practices they have in place that other
schools could try as well. A comparison study within a school that examines correlations
between teacher perspectives on involvement, involvement levels of parents, and student
achievement would be very informative for learning about what teachers can do to impact parent
involvement in their individual classrooms. This exploratory study shed light on what parent
involvement at a school with a high Latino population looks like from the perspective of school
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 33
staff members and parents, and calls for more research to be done so that schools may learn more
specifically how to promote involvement with a group of parents that may be hesitant about
being involved at school.
Implications
Many parents who immigrate to the United States come with the hope of providing a
better education for their children, valuing education because it is a way for their child to achieve
economic mobility (Delgado-Gaitan, 1992). Although there are social and cultural challenges
that schools will face in trying to recruit parents to be more involved with the school, it is
reassuring to know that these parents are often very invested into their child’s education,
considering the lengths to which they have gone to bring their families to the United States.
Schools need to find ways to connect with parents and communicate involvement hopes and
expectations to them. There are many efforts that schools can make to increase the level of
involvement that they experience with parents. The first step is to understand parents’ situations
realistically and be aware of the barriers that they may encounter that prevent them from being as
involved as school members might hope. However, staff must be sure to move past this
understanding into action. If understanding a parent’s situation is not followed by
accommodation or increased efforts to promote involvement, then it does neither the school nor
the parent any good. Especially when working with a population that is culturally different from
most school staff members, the school must ensure that staff members are aware of
communication styles, role expectations, and family structure of other cultures. Teachers must be
educated so that they understand and know how to respond to families from different
backgrounds from themselves.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 34
Specific suggestions for increasing involvement levels include flexibility with
scheduling, recognizing that parents may work traditional or non-traditional hours, and that it
may be difficult for them to request time off of work or not financially feasible to miss precious
work hours. Teachers and other staff can also take advantage of any opportunity to talk with
parents, such as when parents come in to school to pick up or drop off children. One teacher
mentioned this specifically, saying she tried to “snag a parent” when needed during those times.
One theme that emerged from interviews was the use of informal linkages of parents; that is,
using parents’ relationships with each other to encourage involvement at school. School staff can
use a parent who is highly involved to bring in other parents through the pre-existing
relationships that the parent may have, or use a bilingual parent as a liaison between school and
parents. Formal community resources, such as community agencies (particularly those that cater
to the Latino population), the library, or translators, can also be utilized to help meet for parents’
needs. School staff can also actively work to increase cultural understanding by learning about
the population they work with through personal education or more formalized school-wide staff
training. They can also realize the discrepancies between teachers’ expectations and parents’
knowledge about these expectations, due to cultural differences, and make their expectations for
parents clear (for instance, explaining that when teachers say that they want parents to teach their
children, it is because they believe parents are important in the child’s education, not because the
teacher is trying to slack off in her role). Finally, staff members can recognize the vast amount of
strengths and abilities that parents have, and express their respect for all that parents do for their
children. Education of teachers allows them to find new perspectives about the hurdles that
parents may have had to leap over and the commitment that they have shown to their family.
Personal relationships help to facilitate the expression of these beliefs between school members
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 35
and parents, as well as encourage parents to be involved. For further suggestions and ideas,
Trumbull et al.’s (2003) study explores the ways that teachers can bridge the cultural gap in
order to promote the involvement of their students’ parents.
Although promoting parent involvement of low-income, culturally different, or nonEnglish-speaking populations can be a daunting task, persistence and optimism are essential
qualities for school members to have as they work with parents. A committed leader sets the tone
for the entire school, and this particularly school was fortunate to have a leader who understood
the importance of involving families. Parents notice when schools go the extra mile to try and
involve them, and this commitment is evident in the accommodations that schools make for
parents, and expressed in the personal relationships that staff members form with parents.
Although change may not happen overnight or even in the course of one school year, the school
can recognize and rejoice in the small victories and press on for more changes. In the words of
the school principal, the most important thing is “to get people of all languages, no matter what,
to value education. And that improves everything.” School staff can communicate this message
to parents and join with them in efforts to support students’ education in hopes of a brighter
future for their children.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 36
References
Christenson, S.L., Reschly, A.L., Appleton, J.J., Berman, S., Spanjers, D., & Varro, P. (2008). Best
practices in fostering student engagement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds). Best Practices in
School Psychology (5th Ed). National Association of School Psychologists.
Clare, M. (2005). Toma el tiempo: The wisdom of migrant families in consultation. Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 16, 95-111.
Conchas, G.Q. (2001). Structuring failure and success: Understanding the variability in Latino students’
engagement. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 475-504.
Cross T., Bazron, B., Dennis, K., & Isaacs, M. (1989). Towards a Culturally Competent System of Care,
Volume I. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Child Development Center, CASSP
Technical Assistance Center.
Dearing, E., McCartney, K., Weiss, H.B., Kreider, H., & Simpkins, S. (2004). The promotive effects of
family educational involvement for low-income children's literacy. Journal of School
Psychology, 42, 445-460.
Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1992). School matter in the Mexican-American home: Socializing children to
education. American Education Research Journal, 29, 495-513.
Epstein, J. (1997). Six Types of School-Family-Community Involvement, Harvard Education
Letter 13, 49-50.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 37
Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental Involvement and Students’ Academic Achievement: A
Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 1-22.
Green, C. L., Walker, J. M. T., Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (2007).
Parents’ motivations for involvement in children’s education: An empirical test of a
theoretical model of parental involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 532544.
Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K.L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and
community connections on student achievement. Austin, Texas: Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory.
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. (1995). Parental involvement in children’s education:
Why does it make a difference? Teachers College Record, 97(2), 310-331.
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s
education? Review of Educational Research, 67, 3-42.
Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., & Sandler, H.M. (2005). Final Performance Report for OERI Grant #
R305T010673: The Social Context of Parental Involvement: A Path to Enhanced Achievement.
Presented to Project Monitor, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education,
March 22, 2005.
Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Whitaker, M.C., & Ice, C.L. (in press). Motivation and commitment to familyschool partnerships. Invited chapter in Christenson, S.L., & Reschly, A.L. (Eds.), Handbook on
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 38
school-family partnerships for promoting student competence. New York: Routledge/Taylor and
Francis Group.
Jeynes, W.H. (2003). The effects of black and Hispanic twelfth graders living in intact
families and being religious on their academic achievement. Urban Education, 38, 35-57.
Jeynes, W.H. (2005). The effects of parental involvement on the academic achievement
of African American youth. The Journal of Negro Education, 74, 260-275.
Jeynes, W.H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban
secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42, 82-110.
Lee, J.S. & Bowen, M.K. (2006). Parent involvement, cultural capital, and the
achievement gap among elementary school children. American Educational Research
Journal, 43, 193-218.
Moles, O.C. (1993). Collaboration between schools and disadvantaged parents: obstacles and openings.
In N.F. Chavkin (Ed.), Families and schools in a pluralistic society (pp.21-49). Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Murry, V.M., Kotchick, B.A., Wallace, S., Ketchen, B., Eddings, K., Heller, L., & Collier, B. (2004).
Race, culture and ethnicity: Implications for a community intervention. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 13(1), 81-99.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 39
Orozco, G.L. (2008). Understanding the culture of low-income immigrant Latino parents: Key to
involvement. School Community Journal, 18, 21-38.
Rappaport, N., Alegria, M., Mulvaney-Day, N., & Boyle, B. (2008). Staying at the table: Building
sustainable community-research partnerships. Journal of Community Psychology 36, 693-701.
Reese, L. (2002). Parental strategies in contrasting cultural settings: Families in Mexico and “El Norte”.
Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 33(1), 30-59.
Reese, L., Balzano, S., Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (1995) The concept of educación: Latino family
values and American schooling. International Journal of Educational Research, 23, 57-81.
Rodriguez-Brown, F.V. (2010). Latino culture and schooling: Reflections on family literacy with a
culturally and linguistically different community. In K. Dunsmore and D. Fisher (Eds.), Bringing
Literacy Home, 203-225, Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Scales, P.C., Foster, K.C., Mannes, M., Horst, M.A., Pinto, K.C., & Rutherford, A. (2005). SchoolBusiness Partnerships, Developmental Assets, and Positive Outcomes Among Urban High School
Students: A Mixed-Methods Study. Urban Education, 40, 144-189
Scribner, J. D., Young, M. D., & Pedroza, A. (1999). Building collaborative relationships with parents. In
Reyes, P., Scribner, J. D., & Scribner, A. P. (Eds.), Lessons from high performing Hispanic
schools: Creating learning communities. Williston, VT: Teachers College Press.
Search Institute (2009). 40 developmental assets. Retrieved from www.search-institute.org.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 40
Trumbull, E., Rothstein-Fisch, C., & Hernandez, E. (2003). Parent involvement in schooling—according
to whose values? School Community Journal, 13, 45-72.
United States Department of Education (2005). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Parental involvement:
Title I, Part A, 31-32.
Walker, J.M.T., Ice, C.L., Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., & Sandler, H.M. (under review). Latino parents'
motivations for their involvement in children's education.
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 1
Table 1
School Personnel Interview Responses, by Coding Category
Theme
Category/Research question #1:
What are school staff members’ views, attitudes, and beliefs
about parental involvement?
1.1 Member’s attitudes about/views of parents, affective
attitudes toward parents
1.1.1. Positive (e.g., “I love talking with parents;” “they’re
really good people”)
1.1.2. Negative (e.g., “Parents frustrate me;” “they really just
don’t care”)
1.2 Member’s attitudes about/views of parental involvement
1.1.3. Positive
1.2.1.1 It’s important for children’s success (e.g.,
“Parents really make a difference,” “we think parental
involvement is really important;” “kids do so much better
when their parents are involved”)
1.2.1.2 It’s important for meeting district/state/federal
requirements (e.g., “Title 1 requires it”)
1.2.1.3 Positive attitude in general regarding parent
involvement (e.g., “I’m so excited to see parents come
in,” “It’s great that we had to buy more chairs” “It’s an
important time when they come into the school” “we’re
hopeful that parents will respond at some point”)
1.1.4. Negative
1.2.2.1 It’s difficult to do or get (e.g., “It’s really hard;”
“we try but sometimes we don’t see any results”)
1.2.2.2 It’s not really that important (e.g., “If the students
are motivated to do well, they’re going to do well
regardless of their parents”)
1.2.2.3. General negativity or complaints regarding
parent involvement (e.g., “It’s annoying to try and recruit
parent volunteers,” “some parents just don’t want to be
involved, and you can’t do anything about that”)
1.3 Member’s attitudes, observations, or views about school,
district or family responsibilities for children’s
educational success and learning
1.3.1 School responsibilities
Number of
Statements
per Category
(N)
Proportion
of Total
Codable
Statements
33
.04
6
.008
30
.04
2
.004
16
.02
18
.02
4
.01
2
.004
1.3.1.1 Teacher responsibilities
29
.04
1.3.1.2 Administrator (e.g., principal) responsibilities
13
.02
1.3.1.3 Support staff (e.g., translator, Title I coordinator)
responsibilities
33
.04
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 2
Theme
1.3.1.4 General observations about school responsibilities
for inviting/promoting involvement (e.g., “school staff
need to communicate with each other about what the
parents say to us,” “it’s the school’s job to invite parents
to be involved” “we use our call-out system to get
information across to parents”)
1.3.2 Family/parent responsibilities (“the parents have to take
ownership of their own involvement,” “the school can’t
do everything; there’s only so much we can do”)
1.4 Member’s observations about/views on varied facts,
ideas, or beliefs that are related to or may influence
parental involvement
1.4.1 School member’s perceptions of the level of parent
involvement
1.4.1.1 PI is low or decreasing in this school
1.4.1.2 PI is already good or high or increasing in this
school
1.4.2 School member describes importance of personal
relationship or gives personal relationship as a reason
for why parents are involved (e.g., “they trust me, so
they tell me things,” “they know and like their teachers
so they come in”)
1.4.3 School member’s perceptions of reasons why parents are
involved
1.4.3.1 Parent self-initiates involvement in school (e.g.,
“parents come in to ask questions,” “parents want to be
at the school”)
1.4.3.2 Parent is responding to teacher or school
invitations (e.g., “parents come in when I ask them to,”
“they like to come to the spaghetti supper”)
1.4.3.3 Parent is responding to child invitations or
requests (e.g., “the children really like it when their
parents come in,” “the parent wants to help so the child
will do better”)
1.4.3.4 Parent is responding to school accommodations
(general or specific)
1.4.4 School member offers simple description of PI activities
in which parent engages (not a response to invitations):
(e.g., parents help their kids with homework, parents go
on field trips)
1.4.5 School member shows understanding of or empathy
towards family members’ perspectives on involvement
decisions including factors such as time, energy,
knowledge, skills, or family culture (e.g., “they work all
day and are tired at night,” “they’re shy because they
Number of
coded
statements
per category
(N)
Proportion of
total codable
statements
47
.06
10
.01
11
30
.02
.04
27
.03
15
.02
3
.004
1
.001
16
.02
14
.02
163
.22
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 3
don’t know the language” “they’re just glad their kids
can go to school, so they don’t think about other forms
of involvement”)
Theme
Category/ Research Question #2:
What does the school member suggest as plans for parental
involvement or describe as actions intended to support
parental involvement?
2.1
School member describes plans or intentions to take
steps to increase or promote parent involvement (e.g.,
“next year things are going to be better with parent
involvement,” “I plan to seek feedback from the parents
to see how I’m doing,” “this is a way that we are going
to try to involve uninvolved parents”)
2.2
School member describes actions the school is taking
to promote parent involvement
2.2.1 School or school member encourages parental
involvement (e.g., “we really want them to feel
welcome,” “we want them to feel a part of the
school,” “we tell them that they are an important
part of their child’s education”)
2.2.2 School makes events or other opportunities at
the school available for parents (e.g., “we had
the school carnival last week,” “parents can
come on field trips,” “we had conferences/ backto-school night”)
2.2.3 School offers specific suggestions for parental
help at home (e.g., “teachers send home lists of
ways that parents can help their children at
home,” “teachers are giving parents websites to
help children learn at home,” “we suggest
parents can read or speak English at home with
their kids”)
2.2.4 School accommodates to factors that may hold
parents back from being involved at school (for
time, energy, knowledge, or skills: e.g., “we
have conferences early in the morning to late at
night,” “we let them know there is a translator
available in the school,” or anything that
references a school response to feedback
received from parents)
2.2.5 School taps into community resources to help
promote parent involvement
2.2.5.1 School uses informal resources (e.g.,
“we want bilingual parents to help other
Number of
Statements
per Category
(N)
Proportion
of Total
Codable
Statements
27
.0322
43
.0557
68
.0864
12
.0138
81
.1044
4
.0041
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 4
parents feel comfortable at this school”)
2.2.5.2 School uses formal resources (e.g., “we
teach them about using the library,” “we
cooperate with community agencies in
the area to meet family needs”)
2.2.6 School seeks/ has sought feedback about the
parental involvement program in the school (e.g., “we
sent out a survey to parents,” “we have a suggestion
box”)
10
.0105
17
.0197
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 5
Table 2
Parent Demographic Information
Variable
Gender:
Female
Male
No response
Race:
Black/African-American
Hispanic
White
Other
Job:
Not employed
Employed
No response
Work Hours:
0-5
6-20
21-40
40+
No response
Education:
Less than high school
High school/ GED
Some college/vocational
Bachelor’s or Master’s
No response
Number of Children
1
2
3
4
5
6 or more
No response
Number (N=37); Percentage
23
12
2
64
33
5
7
16
12
2
19
43
32
5
10
23
4
27
62
11
10
4
12
6
5
27
11
32
16
14
6
17
7
6
1
16
46
19
16
3
7
8
8
8
3
2
1
19
22
22
22
8
5
3
*Due to rounding, percentage totals may not equal 100
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 6
Table 3
Results from Parent Surveys
Variable
General Invitations to
Involvement from
School
Time and Energy
Knowledge and Skills
Specific Teacher
Invitations
Specific Child
Invitations
Child-Specific
Involvement Activities
School-General
Involvement Activities
English parents’
surveys, N = 22
(range: 1 - 6)
x, s.d.
5.11, .76
Spanish parents’
surveys, N = 15
English & Spanish
combined, N = 37
x, s.d.
5.63, .44
x, (s.d.), t
5.32, (.70), -2.39**
4.92, .82
5.17, .84
3.14, 1.32
5.03, 1.34
4.78, .96
3.90, 1.75
4.95, (.93), -2.50
5.01, (.90), 1.30
3.44, (1.52), -1.37
3.51, 1.25
4.33, 1.41
3.86, (1.36), -1.83*
5.48, .46
5.04, 1.14
5.30, (.82), 1.57
2.40, .97
3.36, 1.73
2.73, (1.34), -2.03*
**Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed)
*Correlation is significant at the .10 level (2-tailed)
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 7
Table 4
Correlations between Parent Survey Constructs
Variable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2. Specific Teacher Invitations
.47**
.38**
-
-
-
-
-
3. Specific Child Invitations
.47**
.65**
-
-
-
-
-
4. Time & Energy
.51**
0.21
.45*
-
-
-
-
5. Knowledge & Skills
.62**
0.21
0.24
.69**
-
-
-
6. Home-Based Involvement
0.28
.36*
.45**
.64**
.54**
-
-
7. School-Based Involvement
.53**
.41*
.78**
.63**
0.25
0.30
-
Mean
5.32
3.44
3.86
4.95
5.01
5.30
2.73
SD
0.70
1.52
1.36
0.93
0.90
0.82
1.34
Range
1-6
1-6
1-6
1-6
1-6
1-6
1-6
Perceptions of Invitations to Involvement
1. General School Invitations
Perceptions of Life Context Variables
Self-Reported Involvement
** p < .01, * p <.05
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 8
Figure 1
The Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler Model of Parental Involvement
Level 5
Student Achievement
Level 4
Student Attributes Conducive to Achievement
Academic SelfEfficacy
Intrinsic Motivation to
Learn
Self-Regulatory
Strategy Use
Social Self-Efficacy
Teachers
Level 3
Mediated by Child Perception of Parent Mechanisms
Encouragement
Modeling
Reinforcement
Instruction
Level 2
Parent Mechanisms of Involvement
Encouragement
Modeling
Reinforcement
Instruction
Parent Involvement Forms
Values, goals,
etc.
Home
Involvement
School
Communication
School
Involvement
Level 1
Personal Motivation
Parental
Role
Construction
Parental
Efficacy
Invitations
General
Specific
School
School
Invitations Invitations
Adapted from Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1995; 2005.
Life Context
Specific
Child
Invitations
Knowledge
and Skills
Time
Family
and
Culture
Energy
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 9
Appendix A
Principal Interview Questions
1. Is PI is an important focus at this school? What are your goals regarding parental
involvement?
a. Could you describe specific activities that the school engages in to reach out to
parents?
2. Do you and the teachers modify your activities when you approach/work with parents
who are less familiar with English or the American school system?
a. Do you have extra personnel/ resources/ time to put into PI for parents whose first
language is not English/ immigrant families?
b. What specific activities do you do to promote PI among ELL*/ immigrant
parents? What resources (i.e., translators, materials available in other languages)
do you have for this group of parents?
c. What does the school or district do to help teachers prepare for working with
ELL/ immigrant families? [can put money, information, in-service opportunities,
etc. into programs to strengthen school efforts]
3. How do ELL/ immigrant parents respond to your activities and teachers’ activities to
support their involvement?
a. What kind of feedback do they give you?
b. Are you able to use that feedback to modify your programs? How do you do that?
*ELL parents and families refer to parents whose primary language is not English, who speak a
language other than English in the home, or whose students are classified as English Language
Learners.
Translator and Title I Coordinator Interview Questions
1. Describe your role in the school.
2. Describe your role in the school’s parental involvement efforts.
 Do you think your efforts are important and effective?
 Are there things the school could do to be more supportive of your efforts? What
are they?
3. How often do ELL/ immigrant parents come in to school?
 What is usually the purpose of their visit(s)?
 What kinds of concerns do they have?
 Generally, who do they talk to at school? Are there translation services available
if needed?
 Do they ever come in just to observe a classroom?
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 10
4. Do you or does someone else from the school go out into the community to meet families
(immigrant and non-immigrant)?
 What kinds of things do you do when you go and meet them?
 What are you hoping to accomplish through these visits in the community?
 In general, do you think these visits are important and effective in supporting the
family’s role in supporting their children’s education?
5. Do you see other people in the school reaching out to immigrant parents? What kinds of
things do they do?
Teacher Interview Questions
1. What subject do you teach, and for which grades?
2. Approximately what proportion of these students speaks Spanish as their first language?
3. As a teacher, do you see parental involvement as being important in your students’
success?
4. Are your students’ parents involved in their education? What sorts of things do you see
these parents doing to be involved?
5. What specific things do you do to encourage parents to be involved?
6. How do you modify your activities for parents who do not speak English as their primary
language?
7. Do these modifications help parents to be involved?
8. Do you continually try to adapt your efforts to help parents be involved based on the
kinds of responses that you receive from them?
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 11
Appendix B
Coding Scheme for School Member Interviews
Category/Research question #1:
What are school staff members’ views, attitudes, and beliefs about parental involvement?
1.1 Member’s attitudes about/views of parents, affective attitudes toward parents
1.1.1 Positive (e.g., “I love talking with parents;” “they’re really good people”)
1.1.2 Negative (e.g., “Parents frustrate me;” “they really just don’t care”)
1.2 Member’s attitudes about/views of parental involvement
1.2.1 Positive
1.2.1.1 It’s important for children’s success (e.g., “Parents really make a difference,” “we
think parental involvement is really important;” “kids do so much better when their
parents are involved”)
1.2.1.2 It’s important for meeting district/state/federal requirements (e.g., “Title 1 requires
it”)
1.2.1.3 Positive attitude in general regarding parent involvement (e.g., “I’m so excited to see
parents come in,” “It’s great that we had to buy more chairs” “It’s an important time
when they come into the school” “we’re hopeful that parents will respond at some
point”)
1.2.2 Negative
1.2.2.1 It’s difficult to do or get (e.g., “It’s really hard;” “we try but sometimes we don’t see
any results”)
1.2.2.2 It’s not really that important (e.g., “If the students are motivated to do well, they’re
going to do well regardless of their parents”)
1.2.2.3 1.2.2.3. General negativity or complaints regarding parent involvement (e.g., “It’s
annoying to try and recruit parent volunteers,” “some parents just don’t want to be
involved, and you can’t do anything about that”)
1.3 Member’s attitudes, observations, or views about school, district or family responsibilities
for children’s educational success and learning
1.3.1 School responsibilities
1.3.1.1 Teacher responsibilities
1.3.1.2 Administrator (e.g., principal) responsibilities
1.3.1.3 Support staff (e.g., translator, Title I coordinator) responsibilities
1.3.1.4 General observations about school responsibilities for inviting/promoting
involvement (e.g., “school staff need to communicate with each other about what the
parents say to us,” “it’s the school’s job to invite parents to be involved” “we use our
call-out system to get information across to parents”)
1.3.2 Family/parent responsibilities (“the parents have to take ownership of their own
involvement,” “the school can’t do everything; there’s only so much we can do”)
1.4 Member’s observations about/views on varied facts, ideas, or beliefs that are related to or
may influence parental involvement
1.4.1 School member’s perceptions of the level of parent involvement
1.4.1.1 PI is poor or decreasing in this school
1.4.1.2 PI is already good or high or increasing in this school
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 12
1.4.2
School member describes importance of personal relationship or gives personal
relationship as a reason for why parents are involved (e.g., “they trust me, so they tell me
things,” “they know and like their teachers so they come in”)
1.4.3 School member’s perceptions of reasons why parents are involved
1.4.3.1 Parent self-initiates involvement in school (e.g., “parents come in to ask questions,”
“parents want to be at the school”)
1.4.3.2 Parent is responding to teacher or school invitations (e.g., “parents come in when I
ask them to,” “they like to come to the spaghetti supper”)
1.4.3.3 Parent is responding to child invitations or requests (e.g., “the children really like it
when their parents come in,” “the parent wants to help so the child will do better”)
1.4.3.4 Parent is responding to school accommodations (general or specific)
1.4.4 School member offers simple description of PI activities in which parent engages (not a
response to invitations) (e.g., parents help their children with homework, parents go on
field trips)
1.4.5 School member shows understanding of or empathy towards family members’
perspectives on involvement decisions including factors such as time, energy, knowledge,
skills, or family culture (e.g., “they work all day and are tired at night,” “they’re shy
because they don’t know the language” “they’re just glad their kids can go to school, so
they don’t think about other forms of involvement”)
Category/ Research Question #2:
What does the school member suggest as plans for parental involvement or describe as actions
intended to support parental involvement?
2.1 School member describes plans or intentions to take steps to increase or promote parent
involvement (e.g., “next year things are going to be better with parent involvement,” “I plan to
seek feedback from the parents to see how I’m doing,” “this is a way that we are going to try to
involve uninvolved parents”)
2.2 School member describes actions the school is taking to promote parent involvement
2.2.1 School or school member encourages parental involvement (e.g., “we really want them to
feel welcome,” “we want them to feel a part of the school,” “we tell them that they are an
important part of their child’s education”)
2.2.2 School makes events or other opportunities at the school available for parents (e.g., “we
had the school carnival last week,” “parents can come on field trips,” “we had
conferences/ back-to-school night”)
2.2.3 School offers specific suggestions for parental help at home (e.g., “teachers send home
lists of ways that parents can help their children at home,” “teachers are giving parents
websites to help children learn at home,” “we suggest parents can read or speak English
at home with their kids”)
2.2.4 School accommodates to factors that may hold parents back from being involved at
school (for time, energy, knowledge, or skills: e.g., “we have conferences early in the
morning to late at night,” “we let them know there is a translator available in the school,”
or anything that references a school response to feedback received from parents)
2.2.5 School taps into community resources to help promote parent involvement
2.2.5.1 School uses informal resources (e.g., “we want bilingual parents to help other
parents feel comfortable at this school”)
2.2.5.2 School uses formal resources (e.g., “we teach them about using the library,” “we
cooperate with community agencies in the area to meet family needs”)
2.2.6 School seeks/ has sought feedback about the parental involvement program in the
school (e.g., “we sent out a survey to parents,” “we have a suggestion box”)
Family Involvement and Cultural Sensitivity 13
Appendix C
Parent Interview Questions
1. What do you think your role is in your child’s education? Do you think you make (or can
make) an important difference in your child’s success in school learning?
2. What things do you do at home to help your child do well in school?
3. How often have you been to school this year? For what purpose?
a. Do you think your visit(s) to the school are important? Why?
b. Do you feel comfortable coming to school to talk to teachers (or Ms/Mr __) or
another adult at the school? Why or why not?
c. What do people at the school do to make you feel welcome?
d. Are there other things the school or people at the school could do to make your visits
more comfortable, and more productive, and more positive?
e. If you don’t feel very welcome, why not?
f. What could people at the school do or change to help you feel more welcome?
4. Do you feel the school understands your needs?
a. What does the school/people at the school do to help you meet these needs?
b. Do the teachers and others at the school understand your child’s needs?
c. What would you tell them, if you had the opportunity?
5. Does someone at the school talk with you to get your opinion on how they can help you help
your child?
6. In general, do you think the people at the school believe that you are an important part of
your child’s education and his/her school success?