Parental Involvement in Education:
Attitudes and Activities of Spanish-Speakers as Affected by Training
Cynthia Duke Gitelman Brilliant
George Washington University
Abstract
This study compared school-related attitudes and activities of Spanish-speaking parents who participated in the Parent Resource Person Group (experimental group N = 47) with those who did not (control group N = 84). Low response by culturally and linguistically diverse parents to surveys is often misinterpreted as a lack of interest in their children's education. The author maintains that parents' lack familiarity with schools and resources and schools' lack culturally appropriate research methodology and cross-cultural sensitivity. Study subjects received surveys, calls, and postcards in Spanish. A small sample (N = 8) participated in telephone interviews. Findings revealed that the group receiving parent liaison training participated in a wider variety of school-related activities more frequently. Language and cultural issues impact the type and frequency of parental involvement. Non response does not equate with not caring.
All parents care deeply about their children's education and academic progress. Indeed, for culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) parents education ranks as a priority. Darder, Torres, and Guiterrez (1997) state that "education is highly regarded as the social and economic equalizer, and as a prerequisite to improving the social and economic status of Latinos" (p. 68).
Schools cannot work if there is no input from the community in the educative process . . . The problem often is that immigrant minority parents have no sense of how to become involved nor do they have concrete input, how to operationalize their dream. Nor is there sufficient or effective effort made to involve them. The middle class majority remains unmindful of how to overcome reluctance on the part of ethnic or working class parents who must discomfort themselves by entering into unfamiliar group processes wherein they feel lack of equal status. (De Vos & Suarez-Orozco, 1991, pp. 8-9)
According to Epstein (1986) "it is not only the responsibility of the parents to help their children succeed in school, but also the responsibility of the school to make the appropriate connections with LEP parent" (p. 15). Adjustment to a technologically advanced society requires that immigrants have "high motivation and clear rewards. The process of adjustment is contingent on the motivation level and the preparation (social and cultural knowledge) possessed by the family and the institutional responsiveness to the needs of the children and their families" (Delgado-Gaitan & Trueba, 1991, p. 11).
As some school systems attempt to implement family and parental involvement programs, others are expanding existing ones. Specific strategies may include parental visits to the school, use of parents as volunteers, communication from school to home, assistance in home-based strategies (Epstein, Swap, Bright, Hidalgo, & Siu, 1995), and the use of parents as liaisons to other parents (Halford, 1996; Robledo Montecel, 1993; U.S. Dept. of Education, 1997).
In Maryland, some schools have established Parent Resource Person groups, a parent liaison and outreach program for the CLD population. The groups offer participating parents in their native language an enhanced ability to access information from appropriate resources, such as the local school system, Parent Teacher Association (PTA), county agencies, and incentives to participate in school and other education-related activities. Group facilitators work to enhance parents' understanding of the importance and effectiveness of the parental role in their children's education, and parents become empowered and gain skills to advocate effectively for their children's educational future.
This study sought to answer two questions: Does participation in a Parent Resource Person Group increase parent involvement? Is information misleading because the research methods used do not take into consideration the socio-cultural background of participants? The study compared school-related attitudes and activities of Spanish-speaking parents who participated in the Parent Resource Person Group training workshop in MCPS, a large suburban school district, with those parents who did not receive training.
Theoretical Framework
Parents have long been acknowledged as the first teachers of their children (Berger, 1995; National School Boards Association, 1988; Violand-Sanchez, Sutton, & Ware, 1991). An essential component of student success has been attributed to parental involvement in children's school-related activities (Epstein & Dauber, 1991; Henderson & Berla, 1997). Bronfenbrenner holds that cognitive, affective, and social development of children is enhanced by parent participation in school-related activities (Harry, 1992). Research over the past thirty years substantiates the impact that parental involvement has on student achievement (Epstein, 1986, 1990; Henderson & Berla, 1997), and the role that parental involvement plays in the schools is rapidly expanding and is an integral part of the movement for educational reform.
"[Parents], most of whom care deeply about the achievement and future of their children, but are unfamiliar with the system of education in the United States, do not understand how they are expected to relate to it, and do not know how or where to find assistance." (Nicolau & Ramos, 1990, p. 15)
Parents, communities, and schools must forge true partnerships, and work to develop the potential that our nation's children possess as they grow into moral and educated adults. In order to do this, schools must gain the trust of parents (Comer, 1991; Moll et al, 1992).
Bermudez (1994) lists benefits to be gained by involvement of CLD parents: "Benefits for students include (a) improved student academic achievement, (b) increased language achievement, (c) improved overall school behavior and attendance, (d) sustained achievement gains, (e) improved attitudes and interest in science among adolescents, and (f) increased cognitive growth" (p. 7). However, a lower level of parental involvement in the schools has been associated with Latino, African-American, and Asian-American parents, as well as parents of lower socioeconomic status (Ascher, 1988; Eccles & Harold, 1993).
Many factors affect the success of parent involvement initiatives. Literacy in the home language and English, "length of residence in the United States, English language proficiency, availability of support groups and bilingual staff and [the families'] prior experiences" (Violand-Sanchez, Sutton, & Ware, 1991, pp. 7-8) all affect school and family attitudes. While issues of language and literacy serve as a practical limitation, an exhibited lack of understanding of cross-cultural issues among personnel might estrange parents.
The Parent Resource Person Group used in this study assumes bilingual or multilingual parent liaisons who support school staff by serving as a link to the home and acting as a "two-way cultural conduit between teachers and families" (Halford, 1998, p. 35). As these liaisons direct parents to appropriate resources, parents can develop specific parenting skills that can enhance their children's achievement in school. Parents also learn to decipher a new culture of schooling, in which learning approaches may differ fundamentally from those to which they are accustomed (Halford, 1998).
Emerging research on CLD parental involvement is mostly qualitative and deals with small groups of parents (Godina-Silva, 1997; Mora, 1996; Roche, 1997; Turriago, 1995). While a description of parental involvement needs is evolving, surveys and interviews with parent groups, such as the one in this study, should also illuminate more specific needs of education organizations as they redesign and enhance programs for parents. Delgado-Gaitan and Trueba (1991) explain the essential components of such programs:
The concept of empowerment . . . links psychological processes (internalization of knowledge through critical thinking) with the social reality in which the individual functions. . . . The ability of parents and their children to acquire new knowledge about the social reality of the United States, and to do this through text, is truly a significant emancipatory event. The reason is that knowledge has been inaccessible to parents previously because of the double barrier of their illiteracy and their lack of the English language.
Barriers to parent involvement
Spanish-speaking parents face barriers when they attempt to involve themselves in the education of their children in U.S. public schools (Cardenas & Cardenas, 1977; Swap, 1993; White-Clark & Decker, 1996). Many Spanish-speaking parents do not come to traditional school programs such as back-to-school night because of factors that affect all parents: work schedules, transportation, baby-sitting issues, and lack of time (Martila & Kiley, 1995; Swap, 1993; White-Clark, 1996). Barriers specific to CLD parents include: (a) the language barrier and/or the inability to function effectively in English; (b) discomfort levels with an unfamiliar and intimidating education system; and (c) a perception that they are not wanted (Chavkin, 1989). Additionally, parents may have difficulty in helping their children with homework if they do not know the mainstream language, curriculum, and/or expectations of the school system. Parents may also struggle when trying to communicate with school personnel.
Literacy also impacts the ability of these parents in many school-related tasks including homework and home-school communication. Garcia (1995) indicates that "fifty-six percent of Hispanic [immigrants] are functionally illiterate, compared to 46% for Blacks and 16% for Whites" (p. 374). Parents may need training to negotiate the sensitive cultural, linguistic, and educational issues they face in U.S. schools.
To address these issues, along with challenges that educators face when they attempt to increase levels of parent involvement, some schools have implemented an organized effort to involve parents in school. Particularly successful in language minority communities have been programs to train parents as liaisons. One such program is the Parent Resource Person Group. This eight-week program trains parents to be active participants and advocates in their children's education and to share these skills as community liaisons.
This study supported the efficacy of a workshop to facilitate skills including parenting, communicating, volunteering, involvement at home, decision making and advocacy, and community collaboration. The parent involvement model incorporated into this study as it had applicability to CLD parents was developed by Dr. Joyce Epstein and adopted by the National Parent Teacher Association.
Sociocultural background of participants
Spanish-speaking cultures typically demonstrate a strong commitment to family and a strong concern with their children's well being, including success in school. The interplay between home culture and school culture is often not taken into account, whereas acknowledgement and understanding of cultural factors is helpful for both home and school. A myriad of interwoven factors must be considered when dealing with cross-cultural issues. Garcia (1999) clarified the intricate relationship that exists between language, cognition, culture, human development, and teaching and learning; "Socio-cultural theory acknowledges how all of the elements relating to culturally and linguistically diverse communities throughout history and, in current society, influence how schools respond to students because the school is part of society" (Garcia, p. 216)
The dichotomy between parent concern and the low response rate to survey questions of some studies in CLD parent involvement might suggest a research methodology that did not address sufficiently the social, linguistic, or cultural background of participants. For example, were surveys written only in English, or were they translated into other languages? Were they equitably distributed? Were parents literate, did they understand survey techniques, and did parents of all educational levels understand test-taking directions? Just as languages and cultures vary widely, research methods used in the United States can differ from those used in other countries, as can patterns of response. Marin and Marin (1991) illuminated issues that arise when doing research within the Hispanic community.
Since the issues of content and methodology are unmistakably intertwined, research conducted with CLD populations must recognize these confounding factors and aim to control them. An understanding of the culture of the respondents is necessary to ascertain the impact on research and to heighten awareness of response patterns. It was the researcher's aim to create a research design that both examined the issues and considered the impact of culture upon these issues to achieve a model whose results could drive positive change. These concerns led directly into the methodology utilized in the study.
Major questions guiding this study involved evaluating the success of Parent Resource Person Training to determine whether a significant difference exists in (a) The attitude towards school, (b) school-related activities, and (c) opinions between parents who have participated in a workshop and those who have not. Table 1 lists essential research hypotheses. The operational definitions used in the study are available in Appendix A.
Table 1
Essential Research Hypotheses
|
Research Hypothesis 1
|
Research Hypothesis 2
|
Research Hypothesis 3
|
| There is a significant difference in the attitude towards school between Spanish-speaking parents who have participated in a workshop and those who have not. | There is a significant difference in the school-related activities of Spanish-speaking parents who have participated in a workshop and those who have not. | There is a difference in the opinions of Spanish-speaking parents who have participated in a workshop and those who have not. |
Subjects
The sample (see Appendix B) included fluent, Spanish-speaking parents of students who received services from the English to Speakers of Other Languages Program Division (ESOL) in MCPS, a large suburban school district in the Washington, D.C. area. Experimental group members participated in the Parent Resource Person Group and received training in parental involvement strategies; the control group did not. The control sample was random and taken from the ESOL student registration list to include: (a) only parents of Spanish-speaking students; (b) schools with similar demographic composition; (c) schools that had not received ESOL parent training; and (d) schools that did not have an aggressive, in-house program of parental involvement. All parents were sent a survey in Spanish.
Following the receipt of the surveys by the researcher, a small sample of parents was chosen for a telephone interview. This interview sample consisted of four parents from each group whose survey score was high or low for both attitude and activity (two high-raters and two low-raters for control, and the same for experimental).
Procedure
This researcher prioritized sensitivity to cultural and language issues, because they strongly impact research content and methodology. Two specific areas targeted were translations of an English-language survey document and the selection of research methods to yield the largest pool of responses from parents. Of the 119 surveys sent to the experimental group, 47 (33.9%) were received. Of 200 surveys sent to the control group, 84 (42.0%) were received. It can only be conjectured that the lower response rate for the experimental group could be attributed to relocation, non-delivery of mail, or lack of interest. A small sample of survey respondents was chosen for a telephone interview. This interview sample consisted of four parents from each group whose survey score was high or low for both attitude and activity (two high-raters and two low-raters for control, and the same for experimental) and coded for themes including attitude and activity and emerging themes such as community connectedness. A native Spanish speaker trained by the researcher conducted the interviews.
In an attempt to develop a culturally appropriate methodology, the survey instrument was carefully translated, the study provided assistance to encourage response, and a follow-up interview with selected parents enhanced the explanation of survey results. The inclusion of this oral language component was also appropriate for a culture that possesses a strong oral tradition and that may include illiterate participants. According to Swap, a "combination of methods is often useful to reach diverse groups, such as parents who do not speak or read English, have no telephone, or do not have a permanent address" (Swap, 1993, p. 162).
Instruments
The survey adapted from Epstein-Salinas (1993), consisted of three sections totaling 21 items and used a Likert scale of 4. The attitude section had five questions, and the activity section had 16 questions; 13 demographic items also were included. Translation of the instrument followed a rigorous course in an attempt to devise an effective and sensitive instrument. The following describes the sequence that led to the final Spanish version of the survey: First, Dr. Joyce Epstein provided several Spanish language versions of the survey that had been used by other school systems or researchers (Epstein, 1998); and, then, careful review and compilation of these versions and others were prepared and given to a certified translator, who developed the final version. Attention was paid to clarity and readability level for a range of countries and educational backgrounds, and questions were reviewed by representatives of the various regions represented by Spanish speakers in MCPS.
Follow-up telephone interviews were conducted with eight parents to enrich the data and enhance and supplement the survey results. This researcher developed 11 interview questions, including open-ended, close-ended, and semi-structured response items (see Appendix C).
Statistical Methodology
This non-experimental ex post facto study (Campbell & Stanley, 1963) used both quantitative and qualitative research methods and is considered to have elements of a mixed-method study. The survey portion was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Descriptive statistics, including the frequency of numbers and percentages (also mean and standard deviation), were used to report demographic characteristics of respondents. Inferential statistics included the independent t-test and the Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient. A qualitative method of analysis, coding of themes, was used to analyze the respondents' answers to a combination of semi-structured and open-ended interview questions posed during telephone interviews.
While the actual response rate was slightly below the standard acceptable response for the mainstream population, it is the researcher's opinion that it is nevertheless a respectable response for a culturally and linguistically diverse, Spanish-speaking population. Standard response rates, as well as methodological flexibility, need to be established for diverse populations to resolve this issue. An extended research model may better serve the needs of the growing multicultural parent body and assist schools in hearing their voices.
A significant difference was found between the experimental and control groups for four of the five attitude items: (a) "This school is very good"; (b) "The teachers are interested in my child"; (c) "My child is learning as much as he can in school"; and (d) "This is one of the best schools for students and parents" (See Table 2).
No significantly higher attitudes were detected in the experimental group; indeed, in four domains, parents' attitudes in the experimental group were lower than the control group. Trainees may have had raised expectations and, thus, slightly lowered opinions of school after their workshops (Guillen, 1999) or they may have taken the workshop to help resolve existing problems. Or, possibly, the control group may have positive feelings about their schools because of a newcomer's aura of positive attitude (Garcia, 2000). It is also possible that because the survey introduction came from the ESOL department, they may have viewed the questions as relating to that department rather than to schools in general, and parents' satisfying relationships with ESOL teachers could have skewed the results.
Table 2
Comparisons of Attitudes Towards School of Experimental and Control
Group
Note: In the Likert scale used in Table 2, a 1 represents "strongly disagree" and a 4 represents "strongly agree."
For these attitude items, the control group showed higher agreement (higher mean) than the experimental group. The item not statistically significant was, "I feel good about the school." Generally both groups had a high level of satisfaction with the schools; the control group was only slightly higher.
A significant difference (supporting this study's second hypothesis) was found between the experimental and control group for six of 16 activity items with the experimental group having a higher agreement (higher mean) as follows: (a) "I talk with my child's teacher at school"; (b) "I talk to my child's teacher on the phone"; (c) "I go to PTA meetings"; (d) "I go to special events at school"; (e) "I take my child to the library"; and (f) "I tell my child how important school is" (see Table 3).
Table 3
Comparison of School-Related Activities of Experimental and Control
Groups
Table 3 (cont.)
Comparison of School-Related Activities of Experimental and Control
Groups
Note: In the Likert scale in Table 3, 1 represents "never," and 4 represents "many times."
Interview data expanded upon the survey findings. Themes of attitude and activity were coded and analyzed to illuminate the survey. An example from a workshop participant (experimental group) illustrates the link between attitude and activity: "[Now I am] seeing how important it is for parents to be involved in school" and "[I will] take on more responsibilities." This was not revealed in the survey results.
Moreover, the comments in the interviews of the experimental and control groups showed a qualitative difference. Interviewees from the training group shared activities that spanned the range of the Epstein typology more thoroughly than their counterparts in the control. Interview comments of control group parents generally expressed satisfaction with the schools, such as, "they are always there to answer my questions." However, the scope of control group parent activities described in the interviews was more limited than that of the experimental group. Comments from the parents who participated in the training are listed in Appendix D.
The results of this study demonstrate that the Spanish-speaking parents who participated value being involved in their children's education and, given training in skills to navigate an unfamiliar school system, seek to overcome barriers that prevent them from doing so. This study supported the efficacy of a workshop to facilitate skills, including parenting, communicating, volunteering, involvement at home, decision making and advocacy, and community collaboration. Those parents who received training exhibited a significant difference in school-related activities compared to those without training.
Results did indicate that parents who participated in the workshop and received the training participated at a higher rate and in a wider range of activities. Parents attending the workshop identified and defined specific needs, had knowledge of specific strategies, and were ready to assume an advocacy role. Items that were statistically significant included: going to PTA meetings, utilizing the library, and encouraging the children about the importance of school. All of these items were topics included in the workshop curriculum.
Follow-up interviews supported these findings. Comments of the experimental group were focused and demonstrated knowledge of a wide variety of activities and problem-solving strategies for the parents to implement. The extent of their activities and the mention of specific strategies may be attributed to the training received in the workshop. Overall, the remarks of the control group in follow-up interviews were neither as comprehensive nor as specific as those of the experimental group, which may indicate the control group's lack of information about the process of parental involvement. Their responses provide compelling information that parents do care and offer good ideas on practical and affective levels. Schools would do well to listen to the voices of the parents.
The atmosphere of empowerment and mutual respect exhibited in the workshops gave rise to learning "how to reach parents, develop new strategies, evaluation methods, [and] resources that we have and how to use them," as one participant explained it. According to the workshop coordinator, these findings were an indication that parents heeded the workshop message (L. Guillen, 2000); these parents went to school, talked to the teachers, and told their children how important school was.
Parents who were interviewed in this study voiced a commitment to each other, as well. Many parents said they participated in the Hispanic committee at school and called other parents to encourage attendance. Parents expressed a strong sense of community responsibility: "networking within the community," "communicated with other parents," and " being active with the children and the community" were phrases that emerged during the interviews.
The rapidly growing number of CLD students requires schools and educators to find new ways to improve education for these students. Failure to do so will have far-reaching, detrimental effects on our society and our economy—students without a solid educational base will not be equipped to find employment in an increasingly technological work place. Research indicates that parent involvement is key to student success (Epstein & Dauber, 1991; Henderson & Berla, 1997); thus, rather than dismissing CLD parents as uninvolved or uncaring, educators must also find ways to stimulate parent involvement. By respecting these parents and their cultural contributions and showing them that their involvement was welcome, parents could become strong collaborators and facilitators of improvement.
In addition, non-biased and culturally responsive research methodology is essential as schools systems reach out to CLD persons. More research is needed in this critical area, particularly quantitative data that will help further funding for these important programs.
The motivation of CLD parents is validated through Cummins' (1996) observation that "Culturally diverse parents [have a] strong desire to contribute to their child's education . . . [These parents] care passionately" (p. 8). The power of the community, coupled with the individual desire to help their children succeed, indicates the strengths that can be garnered from further pragmatic research on parental involvement. School systems can facilitate parental involvement by providing advocacy training and by reaching out to CLD families. A collaborative partnership between parents and educators can make a difference.
Ascher, C. (1988). Improving the school-home connection for poor and mnority urban students. The Urban Review 20 (2), 109-123.
Baker, C. (1993). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters, Ltd.
Berger, E. H. (1995). Parents as partners in education: Families and schools working together (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bermudez, A. B. (1994). How schools can engage Hispanic communities. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (Eric Document #ED372905.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Cardenas, J. A., & Cardenas, B. (1977). The theory of incompatibilities: A conceptual framework for responding to the educational needs of Mexican American children. San Antonio, TX: Intercultural Development Research Association.
Chavkin, N. F. (1989, Summer). Debunking the myth about minority parents. Educational Horizons, 27 (4), 119-123.
Comer, J. P. (1991). Parent involvement in schools: An ecological approach. The Elementary School Journal, 91 (3), 271-277.
Cummins, J. (1996). Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society. Ontario, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Darder, A., Torres, R., Guiterrez, H. (Eds). (1997). Latinos and education: A critical reader. New York: Routledge.
Delgado-Gaitan, C., & Trueba, H. (Eds.). (1991). Crossing cultural borders: Education for immigrant families in America. London: Falmer Press.
DeVos, G. A., & Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (1991). In C. Delgado-Gaitan & H. Trueba (Eds.), Crossing cultural borders: Education for immigrant families in America. London: Falmer Press.
Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1993, Spring). Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent years. Teachers College Record, 94 (3), 568-587. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Epstein, J. L., Coates, L., Salinas, K. C., Sanders, M. G., & Simon, B. (1997). School, family, community partnerships: Your handbook for action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Epstein, J. L., Swap, S. M., Bright, A., Hidalgo, N. M., & Siu, S. F. (1995). Research on families, schools, and communities: A multicultural perspective. In J. A. Banks & C. A. Banks, (Eds.), Handbook of Multicultural Research (pp. 498-524). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
Epstein, J. L., and Salinas, K. C. (1993). School and family partnerships: Surveys and summaries, questionnaires for teachers and parents in elementary and middle grades. Baltimore, MD: Center on Families, Communities, Schools and Children's Learning.
Epstein, J. L., & Dauber, S. L. (1991). School programs and teacher practices of parent involvement in inner-city elementary and middle schools. The Elementary School Journal, 91 (3), 289-303.
Epstein, J. L. (1990). School and family connections: Theory, research, and implications for integrating sociologies of education and family. In D. Unger & M. Sussman (Eds.), Families in community settings: Interdisciplinary perspectives. New York: Haworth Press.
Epstein, J. L. (1986, June) Parent involvement: Implications for limited-English-proficient parents. C. Smith-Dudgeon (Ed.), Issues of parent involvement and literacy. Proceedings of the Symposium held at Trinity College (pp. 6-16). Washington, DC. (ED 275206)
Flood, J., Lapp, D., Tinajero, J. V., & Nagel, G. (1995, April). I never knew I was needed until you called! Promoting parent involvement in schools. The Reading Teacher, 48 (7), 614-617.
Garcia, E. (1999). Student cultural diversity: Understanding and meeting the challenge. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Garcia, E. E. (1995). Educating Mexican American students: Past treatment and recent developments in theory, research, policy, and practice. In J. A. Banks & C. A. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural research (pp. 373-374). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
Godina-Silva, N. M. (1997). A study of Mexican-American bilingual education teachers' responses to the involvement of Mexican-American linguistic minority parents at Posada Elementary. Dissertation Abstracts International, (UMI Number AAT 9733846).
Halford, J. M. (1996). How Parent Liaisons Connect Families to School. Educational Leadership, 53 (7), 34-36.
Harry, B. (1992). Cultural diversity families, and the special education system: Communication and empowerment. New York: Teachers College Press.
Henderson, A. T., & Berla, N. (1997). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to school achievement. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Education.
Marin, G., & Marin, B. V. (1991). Research with Hispanic populations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Martila & Kiley, Inc. (1995). A study of attitudes among the parents of primary-school children. Washington, DC: Hand in Hand, Institute for Educational Leadership.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992, Spring). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31 (2), 132-141.
Mora, E. H. (1996). Involving Latino parents in the middle-level school: A study of first-generation and second-generation Mexican and Mexican-American parents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Diego.
National School Boards Association. (1988). First teachers: Parental involvement in the public schools.Alexandria, VA: Author.
Nicolau, N., & Ramos, C. L. (1990). Together is better: Building strong relationships (partnerships) between schools and Hispanic parents. New York: Hispanic Policy Development Project, Inc.
Robledo Montecel, M., Gallagher, A., Montemayor, A. M., Villarreal, A., Adame-Reyna, N., & Supik, J. D. (1993). Hispanic families as valued partners: An educator's guide. San Antonio: Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA).
Roche, A. M. (1997). Encounters with schooling: Mien American families in an urban school district. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.
Swap, S. M. (1993). Developing home-school partnerships: From concepts to practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Turriago, L. C. (1995). Puerto Rican parents' perceptions of their involvement in their children's elementary school: A multicultural case study. Boston: University of Massachusetts.
SPSS, Inc. (1997). SPSS 8.0 for Windows. Chicago: SPSS Inc.
United States Department of Education. (1997). Achieving the goals, goal 8. Washington, DC: Author.
Violand-Sanchez, E., Sutton, C. P., & Ware, H. W. 1991. Fostering home-school cooperation: Involving language minority families as partners in education. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
White-Clark, R., & Decker, L. E. (1996). The "hard-to-reach parent:" Old challenges, new insights. Fairfax, VA: National Community Education Association.
Note: *Probe: A probe, or follow-up question, was employed when the first question yielded no response. In addition, after an appropriate interval, it was used in an attempt to trigger a response or clarification in cases when the subject appeared unsure of what the interviewer was asking. The probes helped control the questions in order to obtain specific information.
**YES/NO: In its original form, the questionnaire was laid out schematically, with YES or NO areas serving as a map to guide the interview process. For example, when the subject answered "yes" to a question, the interviewer then continued with questions listed under the YES column. Likewise, visual pattern provided logical sequence and semi-structured technique.
Appendix D: Interview Findings from Workshop Participants
