Assessing the Impact of Parent InvolvementPrograms: Research from Outside the World of
Program Evaluation
Eric DearingDepartment of Psychology
My Collaborators
Holly KreiderEllen Mayer
Heather WeissHarvard Family Research Project
Harvard Graduate School of Education
Kathleen McCartneyHarvard Graduate School of Education
Sandra SimpkinsDepartment of Family and Human Development
Arizona State University
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
Four Empirical Themes with Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Involvement is co-constructed.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
Four Empirical Themes with Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Involvement is co-constructed.
2. Involvement is a dynamic process that can vary withinfamilies.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
Four Empirical Themes with Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Involvement is co-constructed.
2. Involvement is a dynamic process that can vary withinfamilies.
3. Involvement often has indirect effects on children’sachievement.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
Four Empirical Themes with Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Involvement is co-constructed.
2. Involvement is a dynamic process that can vary withinfamilies.
3. Involvement often has indirect effects on children’sachievement.
4. Involvement effects can vary across children.
The School Transitions Study
A follow-up investigation of 390 low-income childrenand their families who participated in theComprehensive Child Development Program
Families were 37% African American, 36%European American, and 24% Latino American
Children were followed from kindergarten throughthe fifth grade
Our Operational Definition of Involvement
Home (e.g., reading to/with the child)
School (e.g., attending PTA/PTO meetings)
Home-school communication (e.g., parent-teacher conferences)
Unconventional (e.g., parent-to-parentcommunication)
Involvement is Co-constructed
ContextsOutside the
HomeThe Family
ContextsOutside the
HomeThe Family
FamilyInvolvementin Education
Involvement is Co-constructed
Involvement is Co-constructed
SchoolContext
The Family
FamilyInvolvementin Education
Involvement is Co-constructed
SchoolContext
Supports andServices
Staff and CommunityInvestment
Child and FamilyStrengths
FamilyInvolvement
LiteracyAchievement
The Statistical Importance of Including Context
FamilyProgram
A
FamilyInvolvement
A
B
SchoolContext
FamilyProgram
FamilyInvolvement
The Statistical Importance of Including Context
A
B
C
Involvement is a Dynamic Process
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
1 2 3 4 5 6
School Grade
Fam
ily I
nvo
lvem
ent
K 1 2 3 4 5
Changes in Family Involvement in the School Transitions Studyby Maternal Age
Teenager
20 or Older
Involvement is a Dynamic Process
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
1 2 3 4 5 6
School Grade
Fam
ily I
nvo
lvem
ent
K 1 2 3 4 5
Changes in Family Involvement in the School Transitions Studyby Maternal Age
Teenager
20 or Older
Involvement is a Dynamic Process
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
1 2 3 4 5 6
School Grade
Fam
ily I
nvo
lvem
ent
K 1 2 3 4 5
Changes in Family Involvement in the School Transitions Studyby Maternal Age
Teenager
20 or Older
Involvement as a Dynamic Process
Between-family differences in average level of involvementacross the study were positively associated with between-child differences in average level of literacy performanceacross the study.
In the School Transitions Study:
Involvement as a Dynamic Process
Between-family differences in average level of involvementacross the study were positively associated with between-child differences in average level of literacy performanceacross the study.
Above and beyond these between-family differences,however, increased involvement within families wasassociated with increased literacy performance for children.
In the School Transitions Study:
Involvement as a Dynamic Process
Between-family differences in average level of involvementacross the study were positively associated with between-child differences in average level of literacy performanceacross the study.
Above and beyond these between-family differences,however, increased involvement within families wasassociated with increased literacy performance for children.
In fact, the within-family effect size for involvement wasnearly twice as large as the between-family effect size.
In the School Transitions Study:
The Indirect Effects of Involvement on Children’s Achievement
The Indirect Effects of Involvement on Children’s Achievement
FamilyInvolvement
Feelings aboutLiteracy
LiteracyAchievement
The Indirect Effects of Involvement on Children’s Achievement
FamilyInvolvement
LiteracyAchievement
The Indirect Effects of Involvement on Children’s Achievement
FamilyInvolvement
ChildSelf-efficacy
ChildAchievement
e.g., Hoover-Dempsey & Sadler, 1995; Eccles & Harold, 1993; Bandura et al., 1996
ParentEfficacy
The Indirect Effects of Involvement on Children’s Achievement
http://www.unc.edu/~preacher/sobel/sobel.htm
http://www.public.asu.edu/~davidpm/ripl/mediate.htm
http://users.rcn.com/dakenny/mediate.htm
Involvement Effects Vary Across Children
The Moderating Effect of Maternal Education in the School Transitions Study
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
Low High
Family Educational Involvement
Ave
rage
Pro
port
ion
Cor
rect
on
Woo
dcoc
k-Jo
hnso
n
Lite
racy
(L
ette
r-W
ord)
< High School High School
Moderate
Involvement Effects Vary Across Children
Some moderators that have been demonstrated empirically in thefamily involvement literature:
1. family education (e.g., Dearing et al., 2004).
2. parent-child relationship (e.g., Simpkins et al., 2004).
3. ethnicity (e.g., Hill & Craft, 2003).
4. child age (e.g., Fan & Chen, 2001).
The search for moderators should begin with child, family, orcommunity characteristics that may:
1. strengthen or weaken program effects.
2. modify the meaning of constructs of interest.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
The Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Assessment of contexts that help determine familyinvolvement can improve the precision of estimated programeffects.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
The Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Assessment of contexts that help determine familyinvolvement can improve the precision of estimated programeffects.
2. Longitudinal assessments of within-family variations in familyinvolvement can improve the ecologically validity ofinvolvement indicators.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
The Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Assessment of contexts that help determine familyinvolvement can improve the precision of estimated programeffects.
2. Longitudinal assessments of within-family variations in familyinvolvement can improve the ecologically validity ofinvolvement indicators.
3. Assessing intermediate mechanisms relaying program effectsto children can help capture program effectiveness.
Research from Outside the World ofProgram Evaluation
The Implications for Evaluation Work:
1. Assessment of contexts that help determine familyinvolvement can improve the precision of estimated programeffects.
2. Longitudinal assessments of within-family variations in familyinvolvement can improve the ecologically validity ofinvolvement indicators.
3. Assessing intermediate mechanisms relaying program effectsto children can help capture program effectiveness.
4. Estimating variations in involvement effects can help clarify forwhom involvement matters most.