The influence of parental involvement practices on

student self-regulationJoan M. T. Walker

Long Island University

and

Christa L. Green, Kathleen V. Hoover-Dempsey & Howard M. Sandler

Vanderbilt University

This research was supported by OERI Grant # R305T010673, “The Social Context of Parental Involvement: A Path to Enhanced Achievement”

Parental involvement Student learning and development

• Across cultures, parenting practices are vehicles for child socialization– Families have similar goals (Cole, 1996; Maccoby, 1992;

Rogoff, 1990): • Providing shelter, food, a safe environment • Teaching skills, attitudes, values needed for productive adult

life.

• Within context of education, parenting practices are important resources for children’s school success (Grolnick & Ryan, 1989; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001)

Parental involvement in homework

• Provides a useful context in which to observe parental influence on child learning– Common valued activity generalizable across

U.S. families– Narrow-band activity accessible to empirical

examination

How are parents involved in homework?

• Simultaneous efforts to help the child arrange the environment, manage time; monitoring of attention, motivation, and emotional responses to homework (Xu & Corno, 1998)

• Two categories of involvement practices (Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001):– General efforts to create a supportive context

• Establishing structures, providing oversight; reinforcing and encouraging

– Cognitive involvement in homework tasks• Explicit teaching, creating a ‘fit’ between homework tasks and

student skill level; helping child understand how skills relate to achievement

• 4 major mechanisms (Martinez-Pons, 1996)– Modeling, Encouragement, Facilitation, and Rewarding

What child outcomes do parent involvement practices influence?

Autonomy support (encouragement of independent problem-solving);

Structure (clear, consistent guidelines and expectations).

Mother-child relationship quality and involvement routines

Emotional and cognitive support

Self-regulation, school grades and achievement (Grolnick & Ryan, 1989).

Children’s beliefs that they were responsible for their success or failure (Grolnick & Ryan, 1989).

Self-regulation (e.g., planning before acting, working toward goals; Brody, Flor & Gibson, 1999)

Persistence at difficult learning tasks; Fewer ability attributions (Hokoda & Fincham, 1995)

Self-monitoring and metacognitive talk (Stright et al., 2001)

How does the relation between parent involvement and child self-regulation

operate?• Social Learning (Bandura, 1986): Internalization of

external activity– Children bring an external product (parent behavior) into the

internal plane (child behavior)• Sociocultural (Rogoff, 1990): Appropriation from shared

activity– Shared activities are transformed and used by individuals

according to their understanding and involvement

• Interaction with skilled adults assists children in internalizing important skills and understandings:– Adaptation to new situations, structuring of problem-solving

efforts, and assumption of responsibility for problem-solving.

Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler (1995, 2005) Model of Parental Influence on Student

Outcomes

Modeling

Encouragement

Reinforcement

Instruction

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Modeling

Encouragement

Reinforcement

Instruction

Strategy use Academic self-efficacy

Social self-efficacy

Intrinsic motivation

Student Self-Regulation

Child perceptions of

parent mechanisms

Mediator

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Modeling

Encouragement

Reinforcement

Instruction

Our research questionsAcross 2 studies we asked:

1. Are parental involvement mechanisms perceived differently by parents and children?• Examined parents’ self-reported practices and

children’s perceptions of those practices

2. Do involvement mechanisms appear to influence child self-regulation directly or indirectly?• Tested for mediation of parent involvement influence

via child’s perceptions of the parent’s practices

Expectations1. Are parental involvement mechanisms

perceived differently by parents and children? – Mechanisms will be perceived by parents and

children as independent but inter-related constructs– Parent self-reports and student perceptions will be

positively related at modest levels

2. Do involvement mechanisms appear to influence child self-regulation directly or indirectly?– Influence of mechanisms will be mediated by child

perceptions of the parent’s practices

Conditions for mediation

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Student perceptions of involvement

mechanism

Student self-regulation

Parental Involvement Mechanism

Study 1: Participants and Procedures

• 6 elementary and 2 middle schools in public Metropolitan school system in mid-South of U.S.

• 421 dyads: one parent for each 4th-6th grade student (response rate = 33%)– 50% of students and 76% of parents were female– Majority of parents had some college, worked full-

time; average income $30K/year– 38% African-American, 37% White, 15% Hispanic,

6% Asian– 89% completed questionnaires in English; 11%

completed parallel Spanish questionnaires.

Parent MechanismsQuestionnaire assessing use of involvement mechanisms (based on Martinez-Pons, 1996; 28 items rated on a 6-point scale (1 = not at all true, 6 = completely true; = .93)

Modeling, 5 items ( = .80)

“We show this child that we like to learn new things.” Encouragement, 5 items ( = .83)

“We encourage this child to keep trying when things get difficult.”

Reinforcement, 5 items ( = .89)

“We show this child we like it when s/he explains what s/he thinks to the teacher.”

Instruction, 13 items ( = .87)

“We teach this child how to check his or her work.”

Student perceptionsQuestionnaire assessing student perceptions of the parent’s use of involvement mechanisms; 47 items rated on a 4-point scale (1 = not at all true for me, 4 = very true for me; = .92)

Preceded by stem, “The person in my family who usually helps me with my homework…”

Modeling, 14 items ( = .70)“…likes to learn new things.”

Encouragement, 5 items ( = .69)“…encourages me to keep trying when I don’t feel like doing my schoolwork.”

Reinforcement, 13 items ( = .87)“…shows me s/he likes it when I explain what I think to the teacher.”

Instruction, 15 items ( = .81)“…teaches me how to check my homework as I go along.”

Student self-regulationSelf-report questionnaire; 19 items rated on a 4-point scale (1 = not at all true for me, 4 = very true for me; = .84)

Intrinsic motivation to learn (4 items, = .67; Stipek & Gralinski, 1996)

“I want to learn new things.”Strategy use (7 items, = .64; Stipek & Gralinski, 1996)

“I go back over things I don’t understand.”Academic self-efficacy (4 items, = .65; Roeser et al., 1996)

“I can do even the hardest homework if I try.” Social self-efficacy for relating to teachers (4 items,

= .65; Ryan & Patrick, 2001)

“I find it easy to go and talk with my teachers.”

Results1. Are parental involvement mechanisms

perceived differently by parents and children?

Factor analyses with promax rotationParents: 4 clear factors emerged • some overlap between instruction and reinforcement Children: No clear factors

Correlations between parent reports and children’s perceptions of the parent’s behavior:Modeling, r = .14, p < .01Encouragement, r = .16, p < .01Reinforcement, r = .16, p < .01Instruction, r = .16, p < .01

Correlations among mechanisms

.70**.72**.61** Instruction --.75**.70** Reinforcement  --.67** Modeling

Encouragement

Modeling

Reinforcement

.74** .71**.76**Instruction

-- .61**.82**Reinforcement  --.59**Modeling

Encouragement

Modeling

Reinforcement

Parent self-reported use of mechanisms

Child perceptions of parent mechanisms

Do involvement mechanisms influence self-regulation directly or indirectly?

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Student perceptions of involvement mechanisms

= .21; t = 4.48, p < .000

= .59; t = 14.99, p < .000

Student self-regulation

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Student perceptions of involvement mechanisms = .20; t = 4.23, p < .000 = .58, t = 14.56, p < .000

= .08; t = 1.98, p < .05

Study 1: Conclusions1. Parents and children appear to experience the

parent’s involvement as a complex, co-occurring set of mechanisms

• Parent and child reports are not interchangeable

2. Influence of parent involvement mechanisms appears to be mediated by children’s perceptions of the parent’s practices

Study 2: Participants and Procedures

• 5 elementary and 4 middle schools in public Metropolitan school system in mid-South of U.S.

• 358 dyads: one parent for each 4th-6th grade student (response rate = 22%)– Females: 48% of students and 83% of parents– Majority of parents had some college, 21% had a bachelor’s

degree; 37% worked full-time, 43% worked part-time; average income $30-40K/year

– 28% African-American, 57% White, 7% Hispanic, 4% Asian– 89% completed questionnaires in English; 11% completed

parallel Spanish questionnaires.

Study 2: Measures

• Scales modified based on Study 1 results– Balanced number of items per subscale; made

items more parallel

Parent use of involvement mechanisms ( = .97)Student perceptions of mechanisms ( = .95)Student self-regulation ( = .86)

Study 2: Results1. Are involvement mechanisms perceived

differently by parents and children?

Factor analyses with promax rotationParents: 4 clear factors emergedChildren: no discernable patterns emerged

Correlations between parent reports and children’s perceptions of the parent’s behavior:

Modeling, r = .22, p < .01Reinforcement, r = .16, p < .01Instruction, r = .17, p < .01Encouragement, r = .14, p < .01

Correlations among mechanisms

.55**.44**.50** Instruction --.57**.59** Reinforcement  --.54** Modeling Modeling .47** --  

Reinforcement .68** .52** --

Instruction .72** .56** .75**

Encouragement

Modeling

Reinforcement

Parent self-reported use of mechanisms

Child perceptions of parent mechanisms

Encouragement

Modeling

Reinforcement

.55**.44**.50** Instruction --.57**.59** Reinforcement  --.54** Modeling

Parent self-reported use of mechanisms

.75** .56**.72**Instruction

-- .52**.68**Reinforcement  --.47**Modeling

Encouragement

Modeling

Reinforcement

Child perceptions of parent mechanisms

Study 2: Mediation

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Student perceptions of involvement mechanisms = .12, t = 2.26, p < .05

= -.01, t = .30, p = .76

= .69, t = 17.54, p < .000

Student self-regulation

Parental Involvement Mechanisms

Student perceptions of involvement mechanisms

= .19, t = 3.65, p < .05

= .69, t = 17.84, p < .000

Conclusions and implications• Parent and child perceptions of involvement mechanisms

are substantially different.– Investigations of parental influence on child development and

learning should include child perceptions of parents’ practices (Steinberg et al., 1989).

• Parental involvement appears to be influential via children’s attention, perceptions and processes.– Suggests that child self-regulation develops through a process of

co-construction• Child invitations to involvement

– More investigations of children’s experiences during parental involvement activities (e.g., Xu, 2006)

Next steps• Developmental trends in children’s ability to attend

to, perceive, or process the parent’s actions– Child and family characteristics as moderators?

• Triangulation of methods– Parent and child interviews– Naturalistic observation of parent-child interactions– Structured observation plus prompted recall

• Multiple indicators of child performance– Teacher ratings, child achievement data