Meeting the needs of students and parents.

Abstract

This paper describes the evolution, activity, and student outcomes of a three year project which focused on parental involvement to address student needs of middle grade students in a school district in Kent County Delaware. Along with these reports, some recommendations are offered for future projects to consider. The remarkable success of the students who participated in this project lead the project administrators to hope that similar projects might be developed nationwide.

**********

Through a three year programmatic evolution, a project was developed to assist middle grades students in the Caesar Rodney School District in Kent County Delaware. The underlying rationale, the evolution, and the final results of this project are presented in this report. It is hoped, since this project was successful, variations of it will be replicated nationally and a greater number of students served.

Program History and Background

Background Literature Mentoring is commonly promoted as an effective tool in the realm of education for both students and their parents (Kram, 1985; Mitstifer, Wenberg and Schatz, 1994; O'Neill, Wagner and Gomez, 1996; Phillips-Jones,1982; Weigel and Martin, 1996). Mentoring which is intended to support parents can take place in many different locales (Olds, Henderson, Tatelbaum, & Chamberlin, 1988; Ware, Osofsky, Eberhart-Wright, & Leichman, 1987). Parental involvement in their children's education has been promoted by educators and the federal government for decades (Merenda, 1989; Rutherford, Anderson and Billing, 1997) and has proven extremely effective (Berger, 1991; Finn, 1993; Lueder, 1989; Masten, 1994; Nuckolls, 1991; Peng and Lee, 1992; Pipher in Scherer, 1996 and 1998; Rosow, 1991; Vandegrift and Greene, 1992). Historically successful programs promoting parental involvement include: the Parents as Teachers Program (developed in Missouri); Head Start; HOPE (Home-Oriented Preschool Education); the National Network of Partnership-2000 Schools at Johns Hopkins University; the Arizona At-Risk Pilot Project, at the Morrison Institute for Public Policy; and the Tennessee Learning Is Homegrown/MegaSkills Program.

Program Formulation In an overly simplistic description, the projects created collaborative efforts between university faculty (mathematics, language arts, family and consumer sciences, and counseling), K-12 public school educators (mathematics, language arts, and science), university student tutors, and school and district administrators to support parent and their children in the learning of mathematics and language arts and in student preparation for the Delaware Student Testing Program (DSTP) standardized testing. The primary product created by this project were Saturday and Afternoon Prep Academies, in which participating students, and parents would attend for tutorial assistance in academic subjects (mathematics, reading, writing, and science). These tutorial sessions were staffed by university and middle grade faculty and students from the university. Through the collaboration of the middle grade teachers and the university faculty, the content of the tutorial assistance was individualized for each student according to his or her respective needs.

Year 1

In 1998, two professors at Delaware State University began to develop a program incorporating a unique paradigm to assist middle school students with academic needs. Because of the large number of middle school students at risk of failing mathematics and language arts and potentially scoring poorly on the Delaware Student Testing Program (DSTP), it was believed that the students needed additional support structures in order to strengthen their academic skills. It was also believed that a significant component for the most effective and efficient means of assisting these students would be to simultaneously assist their respective parents with the same subject matter. Thus, students could receive continual academic support provided by parents at home. This program would enlist university faculty and students to respectively teach mathematics, language arts, and parenting and coping skills to parents and middle grade students. Integrated into this program was a concern for developing mentoring relationships between university student tutors and middle grade students. Simultaneous to this program, the Principal of Fifer Middle School in Caesar Rodney School District in Kent County Delaware was in the throws of developing a program to assist academically at-risk students at her school. When she contacted Delaware State University regarding instructional support for her funded project, serendipity struck and a trio of like-minded educators was formed.

Through collaboration among the university faculty and the principal, a small pilot program (Parent Involvement Mentoring Program), funded by school district monies, was initiated for the 1998-1999 school year for a dozen middle school students and their parents. Two faculty and six student tutors from the university were utilized to provide mathematics and parenting/family coping skills instruction to the participating parents and students in the same classroom. The project was provided from 9-12 on Saturday mornings in a classroom provided by the university. Each week approximately 2 hours were dedicated to mathematics instruction and one hour to parenting/family coping skills. Over the course of months, the participating students and parents significantly improved their mathematical skills, gained confidence in their mathematical abilities, and collaborated together in their mathematical pursuits. Building relationships between the parents and students was an outcome which greatly affected the success of the project. The success of the program was well publicized and formed the foundation for the next few years.

Year 2--Part 1--November 6, 1999 through March 25, 2000

After the 1998-1999 academic year, another project was developed. It significantly expanded the previous project and included 6th students and their respective parents from the two middle schools in the district, four university faculty (mathematics education, reading/writing, family and consumer science, and student counseling), and twelve student tutors from the university. Through a Saturday Academy (9:00am-12) held at Postlethwit Middle School (Postelthwait and Fifer Middle Schools Comprehensive School Reform, Title I School Improvement, and Student Mentoring Grants), funded by state and federal monies, approximately 25 students from both middle schools were served through a total of 696 student/parent-class-hours of instruction provided by the project. Participating students were selected on the basis of academic need and being at risk of failing mathematics, language arts, or both. Students who did not fulfill this criterion could not participate in the services. Additionally, for students to participate within this program, one or more of their respective parents or guardians were required to participate within the parental component of the program.

Again, both students and their parents were instructed in mathematics and language arts, albeit in separate rooms. In addition to the mathematics and language arts instruction, parents were provided insights into student learning and attitudes and techniques to best assist their children at home, by university mathematics and language arts educators and family and consumer science faculty. Students were provided their instruction by regular middle grade faculty assisted by university student tutors. Additionally, parents were instructed in parenting and familial skills and students were provided with counseling services as needed. The students received an equal amount of mathematics and language arts instruction.

A significant component within the program's goals was the development of computer aided home-based study sites. The program disseminated approximately 12 Personal Computers into various homes and civic outreach organizations to facilitate the study of mathematics and language arts and the accessibility of computer assisted tutoring for both students participating within the project and others who simply live in the vicinity of the home-based site. These 12 PCs were added to 5 more which were placed in home-based study sites through the 1998-1999 academic year through a previous program. The PCs were offered to families who demonstrated adequate participation within the Saturday Academy program. The agreement was made between the participating middle schools and site facilitators (parent in homes or facility managers at community outreach organizations) that, in order for the family or civic organization to be qualified to receive one or more of these PCs, supervised availability of PC use would be made possible to any neighborhood student requesting use for academic instruction or assistance. The PCs were loaded with Microsoft Office (for word processing and spreadsheet applications) and specific tutoring and instructional software for the learning or mathematics and language arts. The dissemination of personal computers into the community had the dual potential of offering students continual academic support in their own neighborhoods while simultaneously enhancing a school's community outreach. This outreach enhanced communication and rapport among schools, teachers, parents, and students.

Outcomes The successfulness of the program garnered acclaim from the Governor of Delaware, as every student who participated earned promotion to the next grade. This was particularly significant in that only students who were in danger of failing were allowed into the program. It is believed that one of the primary reasons for the extraordinary success of this program is that a culture of collaboration was created between students and parents which extended beyond the Saturday Academy and into the home. Numerous reports surfaced of parents and students spending hours together at home working on homework. This was a significant departure from previous scenarios in which parents felt inadequate to assist with homework and avoided assisting their children. With this success in hand, plans were begun for the third year of the project. The success of the program was realized by the Delaware State Department of Education, the Caesar Rodney school district, and the faculty administrators, students and parents associated with the two middle schools served. This success led to a two month extension of the project to coincide with the completion of the academic year.

In addition to student outcomes, mention must be made of parent outcomes. While the parents were not objectively assessed prior to, and at the end of, the program, significant gains were witnessed by the instructors of the parents. These gains came through both content knowledge and confidence with the instructional topics. Initially, while a few of the parents mentioned a lack of confidence assisting their children with language arts homework, they all continually expressed both their discomfort with mathematics itself and their severe lack of confidence in assisting their children with their mathematics homework. At the end of the program, all the participating parents mentioned that they both felt more confident and capable of assisting their children with their homework and that since the beginning of the program they regularly spent time every week assisting their children with their homework. Additionally, parents seemed to develop a greater rapport and open communication with the schools and their children's teachers. To this extent, in respect to the parental involvement and the participating students receiving academic assistance in their homes, the program was deemed successful.

Insights Gained The requirement of parent participation for student acceptance into the program proved to overly limit the outreach of the program. Many parents and students were unwilling to participate, presumably due to the requisite parent involvement within class instruction. Notably, when the requirement for parental participation was removed in the grant extension, average participation grew significantly. Therefore, while the participating parents reported that they were pleased with the instruction which they received and that the joint participation with their children affected one of the programmatic goals of empowering the parents to assist their children with their daily homework, the commitment on the part of parents to accompany their children for instructional assistance on Saturday mornings was too great to attract more parents.

This program taught the project administrators that requisite parent participation must be limited in scope and duration, or made entirely voluntary. Many more parents would have been willing to drop off their students for academic assistance and tutoring, especially when this assistance led directly to better grades, improved possibility of passing, the avoidance of summer school, and true assistance with academic studies. The parents who wish for tutorial assistance for their children but did not with to participate themselves, felt inhibited toward the school systems from which they felt disenfranchised.

Year 2--Part 2--Program Extension: April 1, 2000 through June 3, 2000

For financial efficiency with additional funding, the grant extension dropped the necessary parent involvement and converted the Saturday Academy into a drop-off program. This program was held on Saturday mornings. The program opened its enrolment to all 6th, 7th, and 8th graders at Postlethwait and Fifer Middle Schools who were potentially failing one or more of the following courses: mathematics, language arts, social studies, or science. The deletion of requisite parental involvement affected the program in multiple ways. First, many more students began to participate in the program. Almost immediately, approximately 75 students began to participate. Second, parents who previously enjoyed their component of the project, were disappointed that they were no longer being served. Nevertheless, they understood the need to most efficiently utilize the funds to extend student services. The project extension served 6th, 7th, and 8th graders from Postlethwait and Fifer Middle Schools through 1059 student-class-hours of tutorial instruction. Seventy six percent of the participating students attended 50% or more of the classes to be considered fully participatory in the program.

Outcomes The student outcomes from this program were exemplary. Of the students who fully participated, 90% earned Cs or better in both topics and 98% earned Cs or better in at least one course. In fact, 100% of all students who earned a grade from the program and for whom their report card grades were adjusted by averaging the student participating grade with their other grades (which had minimal mathematical impact on the overall grade), were either promoted to the next grade or made eligible for summer school. (Students who failed more than one academic subject were not eligible for summer school; instead, they were retained in their grade.) Notably, while unpredictable with any certainty, most of the students would not have been eligible for summer school, let alone promotion. Of the students who fully participated in the program, 68% of the students were promoted with no need for summer school. While it is not in the purview of either this project or this evaluation to assess district cost savings based upon the number of students who were promoted or became qualified for summer school, the savings must be extensive and should be considered a positive outcome for this program. One positive, yet unanticipated result of the project was that the students who participated in this program began to significantly improve in school attendance and behavior within their regular classrooms. This may have been due to the increased parental involvement and awareness. Teachers' comments on the report cards of participating students consistently depicted that behavioral problems subsided as the scholastic year progressed.

Year 3

The 2000-2001 academic year again provided an opportunity to expand the program and serve more students. Teacher, administrators, and parents all recognized the benefits associated with the services provided. However, they all desired that even more services be provided directly to the students. It was decided that the two middle schools would collaborate by creating complementary programs. On Tuesday and Thursday afternoons (Fifer Middle School Afternoon Academy), 3:00pm-5:00pm, tutorial services were provided at one middle school and on Saturday mornings (Postlethwait Middle School Saturday Academy), tutorial services were provided at the other. Students from either school were able to attend tutorial sessions at either, or preferably both, middle schools. Thus students were provided as much as 7 hours of free tutoring per week in mathematics and language arts as needed. Some students also opted for additional assistance in various science subjects. Project funds allowed the participation of one university faculty member to oversee the programs and twelve university student tutors. Students eligible for support services through the Saturday or Afternoon Academies were determined to be academically at risk on at least one of the following criteria: (A) DSTP and Stanford Achievement Test Ninth Edition (SAT9) scores from the previous academic year which would indicate that successfully passing of future state testing would be problematic and may hinder a student's opportunity to graduate to another class or out of secondary school altogether. (B) Low class grades in mathematics, reading, and/or writing which would indicate that the student may not be promoted to the next grade. Through the Afternoon Academy at Fifer Middle School and the Saturday Academy at Postlethwait Middle School, more than 160 students were served. Unfortunately, the program suffered under significant budgetary constraints as the district was severely limited in its offer of support. Thus, the parental involvement component of the project had to be eliminated for this year. Nevertheless, from the culture created in the previous two years, parent participation and involvement remained high.

"Full Participation" in the Saturday Academy was defined as attendance to at least 50% of the scheduled meetings and full participation in the Afternoon Academy was defined as attendance to at least 40% of the scheduled meetings. Since students were to be at risk of failing either mathematics or language arts in order to be eligible for services within this program, students who participated in the program were deemed "improved" if they progressed to passing grades in mathematics and language arts. Participating students who did not earn a passing grade in mathematics and language arts were assessed as "no change." Students who attended fewer than 50% or 40% respectively of the meetings earned a designation of "not applicable." The success of the program was unimpeachable as the success rate for previously at risk students was nearly perfect. Notably, the successes demonstrated in the following sections were not the result of grade inflation by offering extra credit to participating students; they were singularly the results of students having additional tutorial assistance and motivation to complete homework assignments. Particularly interesting within this year's programs were the numerous ancillary comments made by the participating students' regular classroom teachers regarding the increased skills and success of the students within their academic studies.

Postlethwait Saturday Academy: February 17, 2001-May 19, 2001

During the program, students were dropped off at Postlethwait Middle School on Saturday Mornings from 9:00am to 12:00pm. Five tutors from Delaware State University and three teachers from Postlethwait Middle School provided tutorial assistance to the students. The Saturday Academies ran each weekend during the program's duration except for those dates which were designated as holidays. Although the program had been designed to provide tutorial assistance for up to 60 middle school students, a total of 38 students participated with approximately 50% of the students participating fully (at or above 50% of the scheduled weekend meetings). This resulted in the expenditure of 525 student-hours of tutorial assistance for all 38 students and 372 student-hours of tutorial assistance for those students who participated fully in the program. The student outcomes from this program were exemplary. All but one student who fully participated within the Saturday Academy received passing grades in both Mathematics and Language Arts, and the one student in question only failed in mathematics. Almost every student who participated raised their lowest marking period grade (usually from the first or second marking period) in each subject by one or more letter grades for their last marking period and final average. Most participating students earned Cs or better in at least one course. Notably, while unpredictable with any certainty, prior to the intervention offered by the Saturday Academy, most of the students would not have been eligible for promotion to the next grade. However, due to the success of the project, all students who fully participated within the Saturday Academy were promoted to the next grade.

Fifer Afternoon Academy: February 20, 2001-May 17, 2001

During the program, students participated in tutorial sessions held after school on Tuesday and Thursday afternoons from 3:00pm to 5:00pm. Seven tutors from Delaware State University and two teachers from Postlethwait Middle School provided tutorial assistance to the students. The Afternoon Academies ran each assigned afternoon during the program's duration except for those dates which were designated as holidays or snow days. Although the program had been designed to provide tutorial assistance for up to only 80 middle school students, a total of 116 students participated with approximately 25% participating fully (at or above 40% of the scheduled weekday meetings). Of the 1077 student-hours of tutoring which were utilized by all students within the program, 318 student-hours were utilized by the students who fully participated in the program. The student outcomes from this program were good. Of the students who participated fully, 3 failed mathematics only, 1 failed language arts only, and 1 student failed both subjects. Most students who participated raised their lowest marking period grade in each subject by one or more letter grades for their last marking period and final average. Most participating students earned Cs or better in at least one course. Prior to the intervention offered by the Afternoon Academy, most of the students would not have been eligible for promotion to the next grade. Only one student who fully participated within the Afternoon Academy received sufficiently low grades to either fail to be promoted to the next grade or to be mandated to Summer School.

Comments, Recommendations, and Open Questions

Project administrators noticed significant differences between the Afternoon and Saturday Academies regarding student behavior. Because the Afternoon Academy was offered immediately after school and on the school premises, students did not seem to have fully perceived the value of the program. The students perceived the program merely as an extension of the school day rather than a real opportunity to gain skills which would assist them to succeed academically. However, student participants in the Saturday Academy recognized the program as "special." Saturday Academy students were more attentive because the Saturday program was recognized as significantly different from weekly schooling. Student behavior and attitude differed significantly between the two programs. Students at the Saturday Academy were more serious in their studies and their behavior was exemplary. Students within the Afternoon Academy were more animated and often lacked focus. This may be due to the energized environment during the time immediately after school recess. Nevertheless, instructional and tutorial resources within the Afternoon Academy were often redirected toward student discipline and keeping students on task.

The Afternoon Academy was developed following the belief that an after school program would simplify transportation concerns for parents of participating students; thereby, a greater number of students would participate in the program. "While the diminishing of transportation concerns may have motivated more student semi-participation within the Afternoon Academy over the Saturday Academy, this consideration did not seem to significantly affect the number of students who fully participated within each program. Therefore, additional evaluation and thought must be directed toward future programs and the preference of after-school versus weekend programs. While developing the projects, it was additionally believed that the after-school program would meet the scheduling needs of most students and families. This did not take into account affective issues and student desire to participate. It seems that more students participated in the Afternoon Academy through the insistence of their parents. One is prone to wonder if the convenience offered through the after-school program worked in opposition to the program's goals. Possibly, parents enlisted their children into the program for the sake of familial convenience and scheduling rather than truly for academic assistance. Clearly, some parents recognized the Afternoon Academies as an opportunity for extended scholastic childcare.

Parents were naturally more involved in the Saturday Academy. The burden placed upon the parents to transport the students to and from the Saturday sessions seemed to keep them more interested in their children's success. It can be argued that, when parents are more involved, their children are held to higher standards of accountability. Since the Saturday Academies required parents to buy into the projects through both transporting their children to and from the project and by inconveniencing their Saturday mornings with this endeavor, almost universally, both the parents and their respective children who attended demonstrated the proper motivation toward the project and a desire to learn. These experiences have led to the recommendation that similar types of programs make concerted efforts to appear different from the regular school day and be recognized as special by student participants. This can be accomplished through paying attention to the instructional environment, the curricula utilized in the program, the instructors employed within the sessions, and the time in which the services are offered. Additionally, it is recommended that the motivation of both parents and students be assessed prior to students being accepted into the program. Without careful assessment of both students and parents, many students who utilize the services are disinterested in truly participating in the project.

Conclusion

In summary, the previously defined projects produced impressive student results. Student grades improved, homework was consistently completed, negative predispositions toward mathematics were averted, and student behavior during the regular class day improved markedly. Thus, this type of project merits replication. However, concerns yet remain. The program can be improved by addressing some of the concerns mentioned in the previous section. It is the hope of administrators of this project that similar projects which address both the needs of students and their respective parents be introduced nationwide.

References

Berger, E. H. (1991). Parent as Partners in Education: The School and Home Working Together. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Co.

Finn, J. D. (1993). School Engagement and Students at Risk. Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics.

Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at Work: Developmental Relationships in Organizational Life. New York: University Press of America

Lueder, D.C. (1989). Tennessee parents were invited to participate and they did.

Educational Leadership, 47(2), 15-17.

Masten, A. (1994). Resilience in Individual Development: Successful Adaptation Despite Risk and Adversity. "In Educational Resilience in Inner-city America, edited by M. C. Wang and E.W. Gordon. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erilbaum.

Merenda, D.W. (1989) Partnerships in Education: An Old Tradition Renamed. Educational Leadership, 47(2), 4-7.

Mitstifer, D. I., Wenberg, B. G., And Schatz, P. E. (1994). Mentoring: The Human Touch. Kappa Omicron Nu Honor Society East Lansing: Michigan.

Nuckolls, M. E. (1991). Expanding students' potential through family literacy. Educational Leadership, 49(1), 45-46.

Olds, D. L.., Henderson, C. R., Tatelbaum, R., & Chamberlin, R. (1988). Improving the life-course development of socially disadvantaged mothers: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. American Journal of Public Health, 78, 1436-1445.

O'Neil, D. K., Wagner, R., and Gomez L. M. (1996). Online Mentors: Experimenting in Science Class. Educational Leadership, 54(3), 39-42.

Peng, S. S., and Lee, R. M. (1992). Home Variables, Parent-child Activities, and Academic Achievement. A Study of 1988 Eighth Graders. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, San Francisco.

Phillips-Jones, L. (1992). Mentors and Proteges. New York: Arbor House.

Rosow, L. V. (1991). How schools perpetuate illiteracy. Educational Leadership, 49(1), 41-44.

Rutherford, B. B., Anderson, B., and Billig, S. (1997). Parent and Community Involvement in Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Scherer, M. (1998). The shelter of each other: A conversation with Mary Pipher. Education Leadership, 55(8), 6-11.

Scherer, M. (1996). On our changing family values: A conversation with David Elkind. Educational Leadership, 53(7), 4-9

Vandegrift, J. U., and Greene, A. L. (1992). Rethinking parent invovlement. Education Leadership, 50(1), 57-59.

Ware, L. M., Osofsky, J. D., Ebert-Wright, A., & Leichtman, M. L. (1987). Challenges of home visitor interventions with adolescent mothers and their infants. Infant Mental Health Journal, 8, 418-428.

Weigel, D. J., and Martin, S. S. (1996). Tailoring Parent Education Programs around the knowledge and needs of novice and experienced parents. Journals of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 14(1), 15-24.

Michael J. Bosse, Morgan State University, MD

Michael J. Bosse teaches in the Doctoral Program in Mathematics and Science Education.