Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Parent Teacher Partnerships
Parent Teacher Partnerships
Abstract Its a dance, a dance between teacher and student and parent and
child and parent and teacher and so on. Knowing when to respond
Noting the importance of the parent-
and when to let go and let them find out on their own is a dance, a
teacher relationship to maintaining
good home-school partnerships, this
subtle communication of letting each other know what our needs
paper discusses the research on par- are and how we can help each other. Interview, teacher (Henry,
ent-teacher partnerships, including fac- 1996, p. 182)
tors that affect the development of ef-
fective relationships: (1) the degree of While the value of the home/school partnership is universally accepted, it
match between teachers and parents is not always easy to promote or maintain.1 As we have moved from
cultures and values, (2) societal forces small communities with intimate connections to a very diverse mobile
at work on family and school, and (3) culture, the increasing complexity of relationships, roles, and functions
how teachers and parents view their has often complicated the collaborations. This paper focuses on teachers
roles. The paper then presents a theo- responsibilities in the parent-teacher partnership, and although the
retical framework that teachers can use
partnership needs to be a two-way dynamic to work, teachers are really
to enhance parent-teacher partnerships.
This framework is based on Bronfen- the glue that holds the home/school partnerships together (Patrikakou &
brenners ecological systems perspec- Weissberg, 1999, p. 36).
tive, Getzels social systems perspec-
tive, Katzs and Hoover and Dempseys The paper is organized into two parts. In the first part is a review of the
work on the role of parents, and literature related to parent-teacher partnerships. In the second part, I
Epsteins typology of parental involve- propose a theoretical framework through which teachers can enhance
ment. parent-teacher partnerships.
Parent-Teacher Relationships
107
108 Carol R. Keyes
As teachers think about their work with parents and present challenges to developing effective partner-
families, they often have mixed feelings. There are ships (Burke, 1999; Langdon & Novak, 1998; Henry,
good feelings of shared efforts and mutually valued 1996).
achievement with some parents; while with others,
there is a sense of frustration, helplessness, or even Teachers own backgrounds are a key factor in how
anger over conflicting perceptions and understand- they relate to parents (Sturm, 1997; Solity, 1995). A
ings. The degree of success that teachers have in classroom teachers experience highlights the influ-
developing a partnership with parents depends heavily ence of background and the challenges to re-creating
on the fit between parental cares and concerns and a bridge. Participating in a teacher group discussion
those of the teacher. Unlike many other kinds of of intercultural communication, a teacher wrote (as if
relationships in peoples lives, the parent-teacher realizing it for the first time):
pairing occurs by assignment rather than choice. The
common interest is the schooling of a child. What all Culture means more than holidays and food; it
good parent-teacher relationships have in common is includes all of the subtle patterns of communica-
the absence of conflict. Optimally this absence of tion, verbal and nonverbal, that people use every
conflict is due to a presence of mutual trust and day. I noticed how easily I valued cultural diver-
respect; less optimally, it is due to the absence of caring. sity in the abstract or in the form of occasional
holidays yet how readily I rejected cultural
differences when they appeared in the form of
Factors That Affect the Development parents different approaches to child rearing.
of Effective Relationships (Sturm, 1997, p. 34)
There are a number of factors that affect a teachers She went on to write about the groups reflection:
ability to develop a smooth parent-teacher partner-
ship. Some of these factors pose problems, and the We realized that unexamined values, beliefs, and
challenge is how to develop an effective working patterns of interaction learned when we were
relationship in spite of the problems that may be children exert a powerful influence on our
present. The factors include (1) the degree of match communication and care giving routines. Our
between teachers and parents cultures and values, sincere intentions didnt prevent us from
(2) societal forces at work on family and school, and rejecting parents diverse values when they
(3) how teachers and parents view their roles. challenged our own cherished beliefs. We were
often unable to set aside our own cultural values
long enough to listen to parents. (Sturm, 1997, p.
The Degree of Match between Teachers and 35)
Parents Cultures and Values
From the parents perspective, some of the factors
In todays mobile world, it is less likely that parents that influence a degree of openness include (1)
and teachers will hold beliefs and values that are cultural beliefs related to the authoritative position of
closely matched compared to previous generations. In teachers that prevent parents from expressing their
earlier times, teachers lived in the communities with concerns, (2) a lack of education that may cause
families, and there was a natural bridge between parents to be intimidated in interactions with teachers,
family and school (Hymes, 1974). Now parents and (3) language differences that may result in parents
teachers share the community less frequently; feeling uncomfortable if no one speaks their language,
teachers do not have the same sense of belonging to and (4) different socioeconomic levels that may result
the community that they did when they lived in the in child-rearing practices and values that conflict with
same town. Teachers often come from a socioeco- those of the teachers (Keyes, 1995; Greenberg, 1989).
nomic class, race, or ethnic group that is different
from the children they teach. Differences in these If there is a consistent match between teacher and
realms are associated with different interactional family cultures and values, the probabilities are
styles and language systems, as well as values, and greater for developing effective professional skills in
Parent-Teacher Partnerships 109
working with parents over time. In contrast, the floors to scrub, hair that must be washed, and
greater the discontinuities, the more effort that is often have tired feet and aching backs
. You
needed to promote a partnership (Lightfoot, 1978). have to avoid the error of seeing life only from
the schools side as if homes simply flowed along
smoothly with no problems of their own. The
Societal Forces at Work on Families closer you move to parents the more realistic
and Schools your expectations become
. Each family has
their private story of how it lives its present days.
The breadth of changes in society is well docu- (Hymes, 1974, pp. 5, 17)
mented. Among these changes are the increasing
reliance on technology, the changing nature of work, a Twenty-nine years later, the responsibilities and time
more diverse population, and a more service-oriented demands are still present:
society. For the purpose of this paper, the concern is
how such forces affect schools and families. As we But whether parents can perform effectively in
their child-rearing roles within the family depends
think about building bridges to support parent-teacher
on role demand, stresses, and supports emanat-
partnerships, it is critical to keep these forces in mind.
ing from other settings. As we shall see, parents
evaluations of their own capacity to function, as
In addition to what was at one time the traditional
well as their view of their child, are related to
two-parent family, we now have two-parent working such external factors as flexibility of job sched-
families, single-parent families, adoptive families, and ules, adequacy of child care arrangements, the
remarried or blended families, to cite just a few of the presence of friends or neighbors who can help
new family constellations. Family roles have also out in large and small emergencies, the quality of
become more flexible and fluid. Mothers may func- health, social services, and neighborhood safety.
tion in what was once the traditional role of fathers, (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 7)
fathers may function as homemakers, and children
may perform some parental functions for siblings. Both parents and teachers experience job stress. For
Thus, the school does not necessarily have access to parents, the number of hours they work, the amount
a consistent adult to speak for the family. Sometimes of job autonomy and job demands, and relationships
its one parent; other times its a different parent from with supervisors affect their other relationships. For
a blended family; and at still other times, it may be a teachers, the job stress also is affected by the number
sister, brother, or auntmaking effective communica- of hours worked, schedules, amount of autonomy, role
tion a real challenge. ambiguity, physical demands of the job, and clarity of
the program (Galinsky, 1988). Teaching is physically
As far back as 1950, it was understood that parents and emotionally exhausting, and reaching out to
and teachers had multiple responsibilities and pressing parents is sometimes viewed as one more burden-
time demands: some task. So, in fact, both parties to the relationship
are buffeted by strains and tensions in their worlds.
As we work with parents, it is especially impor-
tant that we not forget the complexities of family
life. When we see a tired youngster coming to How Teachers and Parents View Their Roles
school, we may want to shake the parents and
make them read a good article about childrens More than half a century ago, Willard Waller
need for sleep. It is easy to forgetor maybe we (1932) observed that parents and teachers are
never knewthat at home three children sleep in natural enemies. The basis of his argument was
one bed while mother and father sleep in the that parents and teachers maintain qualitatively
same room with them. We put pressure on different relationships with the same child,
parents to come to school meetings as if these especially in regard to affective bonds and
were the only true important events of the day. spheres of responsibility and as a consequence
But parents, even very good parents who care want different things for the child. (Powell, 1989,
deeply for their children, have shopping to do, p. 20)
110 Carol R. Keyes
In the past 50 years, however, there have been public some of the parameters of the role enactment
changes in how schools and families have viewed patterns. The second challenge is to figure out how to
each other. Because of a developing awareness of use those parameters as a bridge to effective parent-
the importance of the bridge between home and teacher partnerships. Therefore, it is essential to look
school, schools have reached out to families and at some of the forces that influence how the roles are
families have pressed to be heard in schools. enacted.
Figure 1. Distinctions between parenting and teaching in their central tendencies on seven role dimensions (Katz,
1984).
Parent-Teacher Partnerships 111
and giving parents teaching roles. This view is most challenge for the relationship (Keyes, 1979; Lortie,
prevalent in early childhood programs. The school- 1975). For many apparently uninvolved parents, their
focused role reflects teachers who believe in an school experience was not positive, and they may
effective separation of roles and functions between now feel inadequate in the school setting (Brown,
home and school. This view is more typical in el- 1989).
ementary schools and intensifies the older the child
gets. The partnership-focus perspective, where family From the teachers perspectives, some feel unappre-
and school work cooperatively, is a more recent ciated by parents. They say that parents dont come
construct, evolving as the literature began to point to to conferences or meetings, dont read the material
the significant benefits that accrue to children, they send home, and wont volunteer for school
parents, and teachers as a result of the partnership. activities. Some teachers feel that parents seem to
As with parents, how the teachers interact will vary lack interest in whats going on with their children.
based upon the beliefs the teachers hold. Others describe parents as adversarial or apathetic,
always a challenge (Galinsky, 1990; Hulsebosch &
Logan, 1998; Langdon & Novak, 1998; Greenberg,
Teachers and Parents Efficacy Beliefs 1989). In both teachers and parents cases, we do
not know whether their lack of a sense of efficacy
In addition to how they construct their own under- occurs because they have an adversarial point of
standing of role, teachers and parents sense of view or they lack skills, or because there is a cultural
efficacy also influences what type of interactions they division.
are likely to have (Reed, Jones, Walker, & Hoover-
Dempsey, 2000). Research has shown us that
teachers and parents with high efficacy levels are Teachers and Parents Expectations
more likely to succeed in parent-teacher relationships
(Garcia, 2000; Greenwood & Hickman, 1991). On the Different expectations on the part of both teachers
one hand, teachers and parents who have had and parents may also affect the parent-teacher
successful interactions with each other, observed or partnership. Often teachers and parents place
heard about others successes, and/or felt that efforts different emphases on factors central to developing
were worthwhile are more likely to have that personal confidence in their relationship. For example, parents
sense of efficacy (Garcia, 2000; Hoover-Dempsey & may emphasize teachers knowledge and skills. They
Sandler, 1995, 1997). On the other hand, teachers and want teachers to know and care about teaching,
parents may have leftover anxieties (Taylor, 1968, about their children, and about communicating with
p. 272) from earlier experiences with schools that them. Teachers have more confidence in parents who
influence how effective they are likely to feel. have similar ideas about teaching issues, and child-
Rebuilding the bridge for effective parent-teacher rearing practices, and who freely share important
relationships may require different supports for those things about their children (Powell, 1998; Rich, 1998).
individuals.
Teachers and Parents Personal Attributes
From the parents perspective, most have little choice
in choosing a school. Many feel powerless to influ- Closely related to roles and efficacy are personal
ence schools and are threatened by the authority of attributes. According to the research, several charac-
the school. Some feel that running the schools should teristics appear to positively influence parent-teacher
be left up to the experts (Greenwood & Hickman, partnerships. The relationships are enhanced when
1991; Greenberg, 1989). Some resist or are reluctant teachers personal attributes include warmth, open-
to participate because they worry about their familys ness, sensitivity, flexibility, reliability, and accessibility
privacy. Others find the school climate or school (Swick, 1992; Comer & Haynes, 1991). The partner-
bureaucracy hard to deal with (Henry, 1996; Comer ships are positively influenced when parents personal
& Haynes, 1991). The lack of clarity about what to attributes include warmth, sensitivity, nurturance, the
expect at meetings and conferences also poses a ability to listen, consistency, a positive self-image,
112 Carol R. Keyes
personal confidence, and effective interpersonal skills technology, workplace characteristics, and changing
(Swick, 1992). While neither teachers nor parents family structures; and (3) influences on teachers and
may have all these positive personal attributes, parents enactment of their roles including how they
teachers, who are armed with this knowledge, may be construct their roles, their sense of efficacy, their
more effective at bridging. expectations and personal attributes, and their com-
munication styles.
Teacher and Parent Communication
Moving Toward a Theoretical
One of the categories of parent involvement identified Framework
by Epstein (1995) is communication. This communi-
cation includes teacher invitations, first meetings with
In this portion of the paper, I have created a theoreti-
parents, conferences, and adapting communication to
cal model that attempts to unite much of the literature
meet the diverse needs of parents. Two aspects of
reviewed above. I will use two different frameworks
communication, first meetings and teacher invitations,
in presenting this model. The first is the ecological
have significance because they influence how roles
systems perspective, and the second comes from the
will be enacted as partnerships develop. First meet-
social system perspective.
ings with parents, often the first personal connection
that is made, set the tone for the subsequent relation-
ship, making it critical to be aware of issues of Ecological Systems Perspective
cultural styles in conversation, space, and eye con-
tact. Research suggests that the teachers invitations The ecology of human development involves the
to parents are also a critical factor in promoting more scientific study of the progressive, mutual accommo-
extensive parent involvement. dation between an active growing human being and
the changing properties of the immediate settings in
which the developing person lives, as this process is
Literature Review Summary affected by relations between these settings and by
the larger contexts in which the settings are embed-
The research described above tells us that effective ded (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 21). The ecological
parent-teacher relations are founded on (1) the environment, according to this theory, consists of a set
understanding of the unique elements of the parents of nested structures, each inside the next, like a set of
and teachers roles and how they complement each Russian dolls. At the innermost level is the immediate
other and (2) subsequent modifications of their roles setting containing the developing person. This
growing out of negotiations that reflect the unique microsystem concerns relations between the person
needs of both parent and teacher. In effective and his or her immediate environment. The next
partnerships, parents and teachers educate each other circle, the mesosystem, represents the relation
during open two-way communication. Each point of between the settings in which the developing person
view enlightens the other. Mutually responsive participates (e.g., work and home, home and school).
relationships seem more likely to flourish if such The third level, the exosystem, refers to one or more
programs focus more on the interconnectedness of settings that affect the person but do not contain the
parents and teachers through their mutual commit- person (e.g., workplace or church). The final level,
ment to children and on exploring ways to enhance the macrosystem, refers to values, laws, and customs
and celebrate this connectedness (Sumsion, 1999). of the culture that influence all the lower orders (see
Figure 2). Within this theoretical structure, there is
If these effective partnerships are to develop, the interconnectedness both within and between the
literature also tells us to be cognizant of the factors settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 8).
described earlier and recognize (1) the diversity in
teachers and parents cultures and values including In Figure 3, I present the first part of my model by
their backgrounds, race, ethnic group, socioeconomic integrating the research on parent-teacher roles into
class, and educational level; (2) forces such as the Bronfenbrenner model. The box to the left
Parent-Teacher Partnerships 113
the parent, a social system perspective helps us to relationship. Looking at Figure 5, the top row of social
understand the dynamic quality of the interaction system sets out the influences of the institution, role,
between the participants and their impact on each and expectations. The teachers role is specific,
other. Figure 5 shows Getzels social system model. detached, rational, intentional, impartial, and focusing
on the whole group, while the parents role is diffuse,
Looking at Figure 5, the elements of the system attached, irrational, spontaneous, partial, and individual
include an institution with its roles and expectations, (Katz, 1984). The bottom row sets out the influences
the normative dimension; and individuals with their of the individual personality and dispositions. Here the
personalities and dispositions, the personal dimension. focus is the teachers or parents construction of role,
Behavior is a result of the interplay between the role sense of efficacy, expectations, personal attributes,
and expectations and the personalities of the individu- and communication skills. A parent may be parent
als involved.2 Real individuals occupy roles, and each focused, school focused, and/or partnership focused
individual stamps a role with a unique style. (Reed, Jones, Walker, & Hoover-Dempsey, 2000);
Social
observed Social
behavior
of adults System
System
The teacher and parent meet together as adults, about and the teacher may be parent focused, school
their common interest the child, each bringing their focused, and/or partnership focused (Garcia, 2000;
life experience and all the forces that affect them to a Swick, 1992; Greenwood & Hickman, 1991). Institu-
social system (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The social tion is not referred to, although the institution and its
system provides the framework for the interaction. In characteristics play a role, particularly in what kinds
the partnership, defined as the social system in this of parent involvement (Epstein, 1995) will be pro-
case, the factors described above influence the moted.3 This interpretation of Getzels model high-
Social
observed Social
behavior
of adults System
System
lights the dynamic and complex nature of the parent- teachers can view events from more than their own
teacher partnership and the importance of considering perspective. Working within the framework may help
the interplay among all the elements. teachers consider their attitudes about the value of
parent-teacher partnership, look at its construct, and
The Role of Communication in the monitor their responses to individual situations.
Theoretical Framework
Incorporating the Theoretical Frame-
Epsteins typology includes six major aspects of work into Teacher Education
parent involvement. In Figure 7, I have created a
graphic to show the significance of communication in We know that teachers collaborative relations with
relation to the other five categories. As noted earlier, parents and work in a family context do not come
two aspects of communication, first meetings with about naturally or easily (Powell, 1998, p. 66). From
parents and teachers invitations, play a crucial role in the very first teaching assignment, many teachers find
influencing how parent-teacher partnerships will themselves struggling in working with families. Some
develop. As discussed above, communication skills have ethical concerns; others just lack knowledge,
are part of the personal dimension of the social skills, and strategies (Powell, 1989). Professionals
system. However, a separate figure has been created have repeatedly challenged the field to provide both
to accentuate the importance of that communication teacher and administrator training in working with
to bridging, leading to initial effective parent-teacher parents (Powell, 1998; Epstein, 1989). In the past few
partnerships as well as promoting more extensive years, teacher education programs have responded by
parent involvement as characterized by Epsteins developing a range of activities to accomplish that
typology (Epstein, 1995). preparation (de Acosta, 1996; French, 1996; Koerner
& Hulsebosch, 1996; Morris et al., 1996; Silverman,
&RPPXQLFDWLRQ
&ROODERUDWLQJZLWK
3DUHQWLQJ WKHFRPPXQLW\
In Figure 8, I present the full model. My hope is that Welty, & Lyons, 1996). This theoretical framework, a
teachers will use the model as a way of thinking and systemic model that considers complexity, dynamics,
visualizing (1) their approach to the parent-teacher and interrelationships (Senge, 1990), would also make
partnership and (2) their reflection about interactions an important contribution towards preparing teachers
that have taken place. The process does not dampen to work more effectively with the diverse parents they
spontaneity but rather provides distance, so that now encounter in schools.
116 Carol R. Keyes
Social
observed Social
behavior
of adults System
System
&RPPXQLFDWLRQ
&ROODERUDWLQJZLWK
3DUHQWLQJ WKHFRPPXQLW\
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human develop- Greenberg, P. (1989). Ideas that work with young children.
ment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Parents as partners in young childrens development and
education. A new American fad: Why does it matter? Young
Brown, P. C. (1989). Involving parents in the education of Children, 44(4), 61-75. (ERIC Journal No. EJ391015)
their children. ERIC Digest. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearing-
house on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. Greenwood, G. E., & Hickman, C. W. (1991). Research and
(ERIC Document No. ED308988) practice in parent involvement: Implications for teacher
education. Elementary School Journal, 91(3), 280-288.
Burke, R. (1999). Diverse family structures: Implications for (ERIC Journal No. EJ429060)
p-3 teachers. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher
Education, 20(3), 245-251. Henry, M. E. (1996). Parent-school collaboration. Feminist
organizational structures and school leadership. Albany:
Cibulka, J. G., & Kritek, W. J. (Eds.). (1996). Coordination State University of New York. (ERIC Document No.
among schools, families, and communities. Albany: State ED395388)
118 Carol R. Keyes
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1995). Parental tion for the Education of Young Children No. 3). Washing-
involvement in childrens education: Why does it make a ton, DC: National Association for the Education of Young
difference? Teachers College Record, 97(2), 310-331. (ERIC Children. (ERIC Document No. ED309872)
Journal No. EJ523879)
Powell, D. R. (1998). Reweaving parents into the fabric of
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why do early childhood programs. Young Children, 53(5), 60-67.
parents become involved in their childrens education? (ERIC Journal No. EJ570801)
Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3-42. (ERIC
Journal No. EJ548327) Reed, R. P., Jones, K., Walker, J. M., & Hoover-Dempsey, K.
V. (2000). Parents motivation for involvement in childrens
Hulsebosch, P., & Logan, L. (1998). Breaking it up or education: Testing a theoretical model. Paper presented at
breaking it down: Inner-city parents as co-constructors of the symposium Parent Involvement: The Perspectives of
school improvement. Educational Horizons, 77(1), 30-36. Multiple Stakeholders at the annual meeting of the
(ERIC Journal No. EJ571436) American Educational Research Association, New Orleans,
LA.
Hymes, J. L. (1974). Effective home school relations.
Whittier, CA: SCAEYC. Rich, D. (1998). What parents want from teachers. Educa-
tional Leadership, 55(8), 37-39. (ERIC Journal No.
Katz, L. G. (1984). Contemporary perspectives on the roles EJ565125)
of mothers and teachers. In More talks with teachers (pp.
1-26). Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. The art and
and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document No. practice of the learning organization. New York:
ED250099) Doubleday/Currency.
Keyes, C. (1979). Families and schools: An ecological Sergiovanni, T. J. (1996). Leadership for the schoolhouse.
study. Unpublished manuscript. How is it different? Why is it important? San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass. (ERIC Document No. ED390153)
Keyes, C. (1995). Creating transitions that support
children and families: Beginning the conversation in Solity, J. (1995). Psychology, teachers and the early years.
Westchester. White Plains, NY: Westchester Education International Journal of Early Years Education, 3(1), 5-23.
Coalition. (ERIC Journal No. EJ505513)
Kieff, J., & Wellhousen, K. (2000). Planning family involve- Silverman, R., Welty, W. M., & Lyons, S. (1996). Case
ment in early childhood programs. Young Children, 55(3), studies for teacher problem solving (2nd ed.). New York:
18-25. McGraw-Hill.
Koerner, J., & Hulsebosch, P. (1996). Preparing teachers to Sturm, C. (1997). Creating parent-teacher dialogue: Intercul-
work with children of gay and lesbian parents. Journal of tural communication in child care. Young Children, 52(5),
Teacher Education, 47(5), 347-354. 34-38. (ERIC Journal No. EJ547956)
Langdon, H. W., & Novak, J. M. (1998). Multicultures. Sumsion, J. (1999). A neophyte early childhood teachers
Educational Horizons, 77(1), 15-17. developing relationships with parents: An ecological
perspective. Early Childhood Research & Practice
Lightfoot, S. L. (1978). Worlds apart: Relationships
[Online], 1(1). Available: http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v1n1/
between families and schools. New York: Basic Books.
sumsion.html [2000, November 1].
Lortie, D. (1975). School teacher. Chicago: University of
Swick, K. J. (1992). Teacher-parent partnerships. ERIC
Chicago Press.
Digest. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary
Morris, V. G., Taylor, S. I., Knight, J., & Wasson, R. (1996). and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document No.
Preparing teachers to reach out to families and communi- ED351149)
ties. Action in Teacher Education, 18(1), 10-22. (ERIC
Taylor, K. W. (1968). Parents and children learn together.
Journal No. EJ531668)
New York: Teachers College Press.
Patrikakou, E. N., & Weissberg, R. P. (1999). The seven Ps
Thorkildsen, R., & Scott Stein, M. R. (1998). Is parent
of school-family partnership. Education Week, 18(21), 34, 36.
involvement related to student achievements? Exploring
Powell, D. R. (1989). Families and early childhood the evidence. Phi Delta Kappa Research Bulletin, 22.
programs. (Research monographs of the National Associa-