There may not be as many articles and posts about parent involvement in education as there were a few years ago, but I still notice a number of posts on the topic circulating on social media. The various terms are used and referred to: Involvement, engagement, empowerment, etc. There seems to be a consistent question though. I was reminded of that recently after reading an article about parent involvement plans in Scotland which included the statement,
One of our challenges is a lack of common understanding around what ‘involved in learning’ actually means in and around schools.”
I have written before (for example, this post) about defining and understanding the meaning of parent engagement (in schools, learning, education). I think it is important to remember: When the different terms are used by one person, another person may understand them in a completely different way. Maybe a further question would help clarify references and appeals for parent engagement: Involved in/to do what?… Empowered in/to do what?… Involved in learning how? If parents are to learn how children learn, is there enough agreement on that amongst educators (let alone parents)? Would a fuller discussion and analysis help all decide if and how the goals can be supported?
Feedback and thoughts appreciated.
SheilaSpeaking 
Feb 26, 2016 @ 11:35:40
Great further questions. I don’t know if you follow US Common Core math debate, but there have been a lot of articles recently suggesting parents should be “involved” to support Common Core homework, but not teach standard algorithms at home etc. I think parents might be less frustrated or confused if things were clarified (you said parental involvement is important but my efforts at involvement are being rebuffed). However, if the clarification is “be involved (or empowered) to support the decisions we’ve already made, but we’re otherwise not interested in your thoughts or experiences”, I can see why schools might not want to be quite that clear.
Feb 26, 2016 @ 15:42:56
Thanks for the feedback and adding, Karen. I have seen some of the Common Core related posts. From what I have noticed, it has come across as quite “this is what parents are to do…”. Ah, yes, the “unsaid” and unclear stuff of parent involvement. Good point – might be a reason for that.
Feb 26, 2016 @ 16:40:36
Sometimes semantics get in the way of listening and learning. I used to think there was little difference but now I think we should strive for engagement over involvement because it is deeper and more meaningful. But first, we have to learn when, why and how to communicate. I wrote about this recently (http://withequalstep.com/index.php/blog-team-follow-us/reciprocity). And it’s come up over and over again in conversations I’ve had this week.
Great questions, Sheila! As always.
Feb 26, 2016 @ 17:55:55
Thanks for adding your post and comment, Nancy. I kept thinking about “reciprocity” too.
Feb 26, 2016 @ 17:23:37
Good points. My experience with “engagement” or “involvement” is limited but that’s partly because whenever I tried to get involved in a way that was not simple cheerleading (or accepting what parents are “expected to do”), it was not welcome. It never occurred to me that confusion re: terms might be serving a purpose, but I think Karen might be on to something… My question would be who determines what the goals of engagement/involvement are? If supporting the status quo is the main goal (or supporting student “achievement,” which is how I’ve seen it phrased), then a lot of parents might not be interested.
Feb 26, 2016 @ 17:59:59
Thanks for your honesty about your experiences. I have wondered at times if the terms changed when things started to look like something that wasn’t wanted ….or to distance from that.. hmm
Mar 01, 2016 @ 06:37:05
The congruence /disconnect between “ What parents want “ and “What formal schooling promises to deliver” has been the subject of many reports ie 2013 national survey, What Parents Want: Education Preferences and Trade-Offs by the Thomas Fordham Institute,
The new labels for market segmentation may help us reframe the dialogue in a language that enables the development of shared meaning AND hopefully results in differentiated engagement /delivery strategies to personalise the learning experience OR inform niche marketing to those parents with the luxury of “Choice “
Pragmatists (36 percent of K–12 parents) assign high value to schools that, “offer vocational classes or job-related programs.”
Jeffersonians (24 percent) prefer a school that “emphasizes instruction in citizenship, democracy, and leadership,”
Test-Score Hawks (23 percent) look for a school that “has high test scores.”
Multiculturalists (22 percent) laud the student goal: “learns how to work with people from diverse backgrounds.”
Expressionists (15 percent) want a school that “emphasizes arts and music instruction.”
Strivers (12 percent) assign importance to their child being “accepted at a top-tier college.”
Since my under graduate experiences 30 years ago, I have sustained a deep and abiding interest in the age/stage theories of human development , the generation of beliefs and their conscious and unconscious influence on our behaviour .
My interest lies in emphasising “ What is the SAME “ about our human frailties rather than emphasising DIFFERENCE of values culture ,finances etc etc
I wonder what would happen if we mapped the above labels to the developmental values framework below ,,binned spin and invested in building trust through differentiated dialogue ??
This is a personal exercise in refractive practice
The Selfish Part of me Me (24 %?)
Look after Number ONE in a hostile world. Control dependent followers who become rebels or victims. Dictators Rule !!!
Then
As a teacher I needed parents to help me deliver the mandated curriculum and make my job easier
Now
As a grand parent now I want my grandkids to be lifelong learners NOT great test takers
The Social part of Me (60 %?)
I am my job . I am my friendships. I lead by competence orderliness and efficiency. I lead by getting people to like me. The organisation rewards loyalty and obedience and “not making waves”.
Then
As a bureaucrat I needed to change my story to “fit “ the current political ideology
Now
As a parent of kids aged between 40 and 35 ,I value their individuality and their commitment to family .
The Independent part of Me (15% ?)
I set my own boundaries to deal with external demands I can support challenge and confront the group. The organisation is a high performing, self managed team.
Then
In an organisational culture of compliance ,”policy based evidence “ took precedence over “evidence based policy”
Now
Open source tools are a delight to network the networks
My Selfless self (1%?)
I take action in partnership with other like minded people to serve the “Common Good”. We no longer need to pretend that we can be all things to all people
These principles come from the (The National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation, 2010)(
Principle 1: Relate to People’s Lives By Crafting Your Message Carefully
Principle 2: Use Active Outreach Strategies that are Engaging and Interactive
Principle 3: Enlist Trusted Spokespeople and Ambassadors
Principle 4: Touch People Multiple Times through Multiple Mediums
Principle 5: Communicate Why Participation Matters
Principle 6: Track Who is Coming and Adjust Your Strategy as Needed
Principle 7: Assume that Half of the People Who Intend to Participate Will Not Participate
Principle 8: Take your outreach to social media – especially social networks(Goldman, 2010)
A similar list could be extracted from the business literature on user based design ,rapid prototyping , marketing through social network analysis etc etc
As the 2013 report suggests “The auto industry has this figured out. The education industry still has a lot to learn.”
Mar 01, 2016 @ 09:33:53
Thanks for your thoughts and relating this to these frameworks and principles, Bill. I will look more into that study — it sounds familiar though. Interesting re: Goldman list. I wonder if “differentiated dialogue” (as you described) is done by some more easily and respectfully, especially if understanding increases as they get to know their community/parents.
Apr 01, 2016 @ 10:42:51
Perhaps acknowledging that what “Parent Engagement” means may be different for each community might be a good place to start? I agree with Nancy that distinguishing involvement and engagement matters. Maybe it is also helpful to let parents know that all levels of engagement/involvement matter. Maybe the needs in each community are what should guide what involvement, engagement, or empowerment mean. I often think that communication (effective or the lack off) is at the source of either success or failure; in this case, what administrators or parents do based on what they believe engagement means.
Whenever I see a new policy come up it seems to me that ‘how’ gets lost. Plans, policies and procedures, often seems too abstract and disconnected from concrete actions or how we get there. Perhaps they are not, and then maybe all we need is better communication. What if each and every school was to start the very first meeting of the school year with… “What does parent engagement mean for our community? What are the needs of our community?” This would of course require a real two-way communication with transparency and acknowledging what is being done, what works and what doesn’t. It might be helpful for administrators to share the many different directions they are pulled in, so that the community understands what needs to be done, what can be improved and what are the boundaries.
I’ve had both experiences @StepfordTO mentions as well. It seems sometimes administrators wish to have a “rubber stamping” SC that will stay out of their hair and will help when/how they are told to. On the other hand, some administrators will harness the talents and expertise in their community and that benefits everyone building a productive relationship based on trust and respect. As long as everyone understands that questioning is not about attacking but about critical thinking and finding solutions together, why not rely more on the parents? As students we hear throughout our life the importance of networking, parents are large communities that can provide a large base of knowledge and expertise!
The other aspect that I have been thinking about lately is, when parents keep hearing about being engaged in our kids education, but don’t know what to do or what that means, they we may fall on the trap of Helicopter parenting:
http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/helpful-helicopter-parenting-infographic
This is really detrimental to our kids, the schools, our relationships with each other and society as a whole. May be well intended and out of love, but perhaps misguided by the pressure to be involved.
We need to have conversations on what parent engagement means, at each community without either parents or administrators feeling threatened or pressured; non-judgmental conversations on whether that means something as simple as providing a proper space for homework at home, sharing with school staff the parents expertise in social media, budgeting or policy making, etc. There should be room for all sorts of engagement, but unless we have real conversations at local levels on what engagement means and getting to know the parent community, we are missing out on many opportunities.