In this clip, Ken Leithwood discusses the “Family Path” and emphasizes that 50% of the student achievement that we, as educators, are responsible for takes place outside of our walls and within the walls of the home. Inviting parents into a school is not a high-leverage parent engagement strategy. The biggest impact will come with how we can influence learning for students at home by working with and supporting the parents with strategies.
Thanks for posting this, Aaron. I do have a concern that the messages here might undermine teachers and teaching though, and also school life in general. Our kids do spend a lot of time in school and parents do need assurance that the instruction in school is helping their kids learn, and that the environment is created there for learning to unfold. Finding ways to partner in reciprocal support needs a lot of dialogue to build trust and establish common visions for learning. As we have been discussing in some of the twitter chats, we have to be very conscientious how we go about influencing and suggesting what parents should do at home, and how that message is sent.
Realizing that instruction in school may have limitations of impact and effectiveness is okay to accept and talk about. Addressing it might have multiple paths to consider.
I am also wondering about the message regarding “inviting parents into schools” may not be a “high-leverage” stategy. I guess it depends on what goals we are looking at in terms of supporting children and what makes school a school in any particular school community.
Hope others will offer their thoughts and impressions here.
Hi, Sheila. Thanks for commenting. I definitely agree with you that school is a vital place where teaching and learning is at the core of daily life. This video clip is one of a series of many (http://resources.curriculum.org/LSA/may2010secondary.shtml)as part of the “Leading Student Achievement Project”.
What Leithwood suggests is that the more traditional focus on instruction, organization, and curriculum only counts for about 50% of student achievement. The other 50% would rest in the realm of the “Family Path” – engaging parents in interactive ways and providing them with some tips, tricks, and strategies to work with their children at home. Schools can help parents understand the expectations of school and how to support their children, they can help to remove the mystery of education by making the language and ideas more user friendly and more easily understood, and they can help to provide the support through which to help children with their “social capital” (sense of togetherness, citizenship, trust, responsibility, helpfulness) in which schools and families honour and expand on each other in partnership. Leithwood suggests that the biggest impact here is not so much inviting parents into the school (in the ways we traditionally have) but providing them with strategies and ideas to take back with them to the home to help continue the learning and work with kids beyond the walls of the school. Within the walls of the school, the other more instructional and organizational aspects of education can take place along the Rational, Emotional, and Organizational Paths – although these too are not isolated and benefit from parent engagement as well. This is not to say that it isn’t important for families to be invited to the school, because it is, just as long as it is not the only form of involvement for parents and that it is not just for one-way school to parent information nights. Instead, schools could issue invitations for parent participation that are personal and specific rather than general (i.e. to learn reading strategies to support active reading at home). The emphasis for Leithwood’s commentary is student learning and achievement. So, in this way, the work between schools and parents would focus on aspects that can influence learning (not necessarily strictly curricular as emotional and social well-being is paramount to a child’s ability to learn). The other paths Leithwood discusses are:
The Rational Path is rooted in the knowledge and skills of school staffs about curriculum, teaching and learning. The idea behind the Emotional Path is that emotions direct cognition: they structure perception, direct attention, give preferential access to certain memories and bias judgment in ways that help individuals respond productively to their environments. Structures, culture, policies, and standard operation procedures are the types of variables to be influenced on the Organizational Path.
(Diagram is on my blog here – http://bloggucation.learninghood.ca/2012/01/21/parent-engagement-vs-involvement-and-why-it-is-necessary/)
Leithwood discusses that, as educators, we have put a lot of attention into the top three variables (especially instruction) but have not given a focused attention to the Family Path, which is where real differences in student achievement can be made. Check out page 11 in this document (How the “Leading Student Achievement” Project Improves Student Learning: An Evolving Theory of Action) where some ideas for engaging parents along the “Family Path” are outline (http://www.scribd.com/doc/55363396/Leading-Student-Improvement-Project)
You are so right that “we have to be very conscientious how we go about influencing and suggesting what parents should do at home, and how that message is sent.” This is not, however, about suggesting what parents should do at home. It is definitely about moving away from the a time when school’s set the agenda. It is about asking parents what they need and providing them with opportunities to address them. This is definitely about reciprocal and supportive relationships with student learning at the forefront. We have some neat things happening at some of our schools which I hope to share in the near future.
Hopefully some of our principal colleagues on the Twitter chats will add as well.
Your comments show a deep understanding of the issue. Inviting the Parent(s) into the classroom does not have to be in the physical sense. Any interaction &/or communication between teacher/classroom/school that leads to a better knowledge or understanding of what is happening can only advance the joint participation of the parent with the child in the learning. Although we wish this cooperation occurred naturally between the 3 participants, it can not be forced upon them.
We are no longer in the era of education being a static partnership between teacher and parent, but rather an era that is actively and fluidly coproducing educational experiences and opportunities that enhance the quality of a child’s learning. With this language, it is not about how parents should raise their children but strategies and techniques to help make their parenting and children successful. There is such value in utilizing communication and dialogue between teacher, parent, and student. Teachers and schools can help nurture a trusting environment driven to “build the capacity of parents in their homes to work with kids there.” Building of intellectual capital of children in their homes increases students ability to problem solve, think critically, communicate, be innovative and creative, and work collaboratively. If we are to incorporate this aspect into the educational process, our students and children will be a generation of lifelong learners and active members of society.