See this page in: English
Support refers to the guidance provided by, the communication between, and the interest shown by adults to promote student progress in school. Student progress is facilitated when adults give frequent verbal support and praise; provide the youth with regular, explicit feedback; talk directly to youth about schoolwork and activities; and teach problem solving and negotiation skills. It is what adults do on an on-going basis to help youth learn and achieve.
Selected research findings
Based on several comprehensive reviews of the literature, family correlates of positive academic achievement for elementary and secondary level students include: (a) parental interest in children's academic and personal growth (Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler & Brissie, 1987; Walberg, 1984), strong parental encouragement of academic pursuits (Clark, 1983), (b) fostering children's interest and skill in reading and math (Hess & Holloway, 1984), (c) orienting a student's attention to learning opportunities (Hess & Holloway, 1984), and (d) recognizing and encouraging the child's special talents (Bloom, 1976; 1985).
Parents and teachers who provide frequent verbal support; praise children's skill performance, progress and efforts; and let children know they care about them and their school performance influence the self-esteem of children and youth; these children tend to perform better in school (Clark, 1990).
Talking with children about schoolwork and school functions was identified by Peng and Lee (1992) as one of the family process variables that showed the strongest relationship with student achievement. Similarly, parents who are involved, in meaningful and ongoing ways (both at school and at home), with their children's schooling, enhance student achievement (Comer, 1984; Henderson & Berla, 1994).
Home support for learning programs and interventions are associated with improved student achievement (Jordan, Snow, & Porche, 2000). Family involvement that is linked to student learning has a greater effect on achievement than general forms of involvement such as volunteering and decision making (Christenson & Sheridan, 2001). Finally, the continuity of family involvement over time seems to have a protective effect on youth as they progress across school years. The more families support their children’s learning and educational progress, both in quantity and over time, the more their children tend to do well in school and further their education after graduation (Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Marcon, 1999; Miedel & Reynolds, 1999; Sanders & Herting, 2000). In these studies, parent involvement was associated positively with grades and test scores; parents with high involvement ratings tended to have children with higher grades and test scores. It is noteworthy that this finding was similar for all family income levels and backgrounds (Henderson & Mapp, 2002).
Keith and colleagues demonstrated that parent involvement makes a difference for the academic achievement of eighth graders. Based on responses from 21,814 students and their parents, researchers showed that students whose parents were involved had higher grades, largely due to greater homework completion. What is particularly significant about this study is the sample size and the finding that parent involvement contributed to the student grades above and beyond social characteristics (Keith et. al., 1993).
In a comprehensive review of home environmental influences on student achievement, Kellaghan, Sloane, Alvarez & Bloom (1993) identified the following characteristics of academic guidance and support as positive and significant correlates of academic achievement: (a) frequent encouragement of children for their schoolwork, (b) parental knowledge of strengths and weaknesses in children's school learning and supportive help when needed (e.g., knowledge so supervision of homework is smoother or supplemental tutoring is provided), and (c) availability of a quiet place for study with appropriate books, references materials, and other learning materials. Knowledge of the child's schooling is a positive correlate of students' school performance (Baker & Stevenson, 1986).
Clark (1983) found that parents of high achieving, low income, secondary level, African-American students displayed a greater sense of responsibility in helping their children gain general knowledge and literacy skills and initiated more contacts with school personnel than did parents of low achieving, low income, secondary level, African-American students. In a subsequent study, Clark (1993) found that parents of high and low achievers engaged in similar behaviors; they both talked to their children about homework, read to their children and monitored completion of classroom assignments. High achievers, however, were more involved in home learning activities and these students spent more time focused on homework supported by their parents. Clark concluded that all parents were enacting some positive behaviors that contributed to student success; however, to be academically successful, students apparently needed parents or other adults to expose them to a wide variety of additional supportive behaviors.
In her observational study of parent-child interaction in teaching situations, Scott-Jones (1987) found that it is not the presence or absence verbal interaction, but the process of interaction that differentiates high- and low-achieving African-American students from low income families. Mothers initiated contact and provided brief didactic material to low-achieving children. They appeared more formal, seemed to lack skills needed to assist the children and expressed more negative expectations for the child. In contrast, high-achieving children initiated more exchange with their mothers and the process of verbal interaction was two-way and interactive; the mothers appeared more comfortable, guided the child's learning and provided more feedback.
Availability of learning resources (e.g., print materials, paper and pencil, play materials) has been found to be associated with literacy (Hess, Holloway, Price, & Dickson, 1982; Morrow, 1983).
Encouraging children's learning and progress in school, including maintaining a supportive learning environment when grades are lower than desired, helping with homework, discussing the value of a good education and possible career options and staying in touch with school staff about the youth's progress, has been identified by several researchers as a positive and significant home correlate of students' academic performance (Amato & Ochiltree, 1986; Baker & Stevenson, 1986; Eagle, 1989; Mitrsomwang & Hawley, 1993; Stevenson & Baker, 1987).
The type of parental support differs as a function of grade level. There is evidence that parents' involvement in home-based reinforcement systems for positive behavior and performance in school, enhances children's self-esteem and grades, especially for preschoolers and elementary students (Sattes, 1985). Ziegler (1987) found that while student achievement was enhanced across grades K-12 with parent participation, the type of participation differed for elementary and secondary level students. For elementary students, parent participation in reading and literacy programs, even for parents with lower literacy skills and varied language backgrounds, enhanced student achievement. For middle and high school students, parents who were aware of what their children were studying in school, communicated regularly with teachers and reinforced schoolwork had children who made greater achievement gains.
Sixth graders’ perceived support from parents predicted their academic goal orientations which is consistent with previous research findings linking positive parenting practices to mastery goal orientations (Hokoda & Fincham, 1995; Wentzel, 1998).
Parental involvement helps students to internalize educational values. When parents show an interest and enthusiasm for what their children are learning, they provide a support system at home that buttresses the child’s academic learning and reinforces the value of schooling. By providing such emotional support, parents establish a foundation for socializing children’s motivation to learn. Parents communicate the importance of education. Students are motivated when they observe their parents take an active interest in school. When parents communicate their values about education and learning, students in middle schools were more motivated and had higher perceived academic competence (Marchant, Paulson, & Rothlisberg, 2001). A home environment that focuses on the value of education and learning and availability of learning resources has been shown to be more valuable for the achievement of low income African American students than a home environment focused on direct assistance with schoolwork (Halle, Kurtz-Costes, & Mahoney, 1997).
Parental assistance with homework does not always influence grades and test scores positively. Using longitudinal data from the Longitudinal Study of American Youth (LSAY), Shumow and Miller (2001) conducted comprehensive interviews with parents of 60 students in middle schools in urban, rural and suburban settings. They found that parents of struggling or average students assisted more at home with schoolwork than parents of successful students; the latter group of parents was involved more at school. Although at-home involvement was related to positive student attitudes about school, a negative relationship between at-home involvement with grades and test scores emerged. Students felt it was important to perform well at school when parents were more involved at home.
There is evidence for coordinated family and school support for enhancing students’ achievement during the transition to middle school. Gutman and Midgley (2000) found that the combinations of parent involvement at home with teacher support for learning or parental involvement and student sense of belonging had a significant positive effect on grade point averages (GPA) for students who had transitioned to middle school. In this study, students reported on three influences: parent involvement (talking to students about school, checking homework, attending school functions, volunteering at school), teacher support (helping students, being supportive rather than critical), and sense of belonging (feeling accepted, respected and included at school). No single influence had an effect on student grades. Students who reported high parent involvement and a high sense of belonging or high parent involvement and high teacher support also had higher average grades than students who reported low support at home and school. Thus, parent involvement alone does not have a substantial effect on grades; students must also feel that they belong and have support for their learning at school.
Using data from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), which consisted of over 24, 000 eighth graders and their parents and teachers, Ho and Willms (1996) found that parental help to plan education programs and discussing school activities at home had a greater effect on the students’ standardized test scores in reading and math than did monitoring out-of-school activities, having contacts with school staff, or volunteering and attending parent-teacher conferences and other school functions.
Parental communication and home support for learning has an effect on students’ postsecondary enrollment and education plans. Using longitudinal data from NELS:88 and the third follow-up in 1994, Trusty (1999) found that if students’ believed their parents communicated with them and supported their learning in eighth grade, they were more likely to have plans to continue their higher education two years post high school graduation. Regardless of income and family background, students’ expectations for further schooling were affected by these variables; students’ reports of parents’ home-based involvement showed the strongest effects. Thus, the more students perceive parental involvement and support, the farther they expect to go in school.
An authoritative parenting style appears to mediate children's academic and social competence through the use of problem solving to discuss schoolwork and every day events, modeling of problem solving and negotiation skills, and facilitating learning through support and expectations for success (Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch & Darling, 1992).
Enhancing learning opportunities at home, specifically related to postsecondary options, has demonstrated positive outcomes for 12th graders irrespective of family backgrounds (race, parental education, income). Students are more likely to enroll in a challenging academic program, earn credits toward graduation and make higher test scores when parents express high expectations, discuss attending college and help students prepare for college (Catsambis, 1998). The most effective types of parent involvement are aimed at advising and guiding teens’ academic decisions for future endeavors rather than supervising students’ behavior (e.g., making contact with the school, excessive monitoring, focusing only on high school graduation).
Teachers who provide regular, explicit, extensive feedback elicit higher achievement (Brophy, 1986). Particularly important is the degree to which students understand what makes their responses right or wrong. McKee & Witt (1990) also identified that performance feedback and follow-up on seatwork were related to achievement. It seems that this feedback and follow-up is more influential than general praise and reward.
General praise like "good work" is unrelated to student achievement gains. Neutral, task-specific praise is related positively to student achievement; the relationship between the frequency of general praise and achievement is usually quite low and sometimes negative (Brophy & Evertson, 1976; Brophy & Good, 1986). Characteristics of effective praise include immediacy, task specificity and maintaining an academic focus.
The most critical aspect of effective feedback is the degree to which it enhances student opportunity to respond. Anderson, Evertson, & Brophy (1979) found that first graders who were high achievers in reading received sustaining rather than terminal feedback from teachers. Sustaining feedback maintains the interaction between teachers and students; teachers rephrase questions or provide cues and prompts.
Feedback based on continuous monitoring of student performance and appropriate instructional modifications for student skill level has been shown to be positively correlated with student achievement for students with and without special learning needs (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1986). Further, parents may facilitate learning by scaffolding new concepts; in doing so, parents are seen as trusted partners (Gonzalez-DeHass, Willems & Holbein, 2005).
Students who understand how to solve problems and how to approach tasks achieve more in schools (Winne, 1985). Students who are directly taught thinking skills and use learning strategies complete more schoolwork and have higher grades (Weinstein & Mayer, 1986).
Parents who provide autonomy support for their children help prepare children for the school environment, which emphasizes independent mastery and self-regulation (Grolnick & Ryan, 1989).
Further, students are made to be more resilient after experiencing success and failure and working through academic struggles (Bempechat, 2000). Parents, therefore, can assist in the use of mistakes as learning tools.
A significant, positive relationship between achievement and the use of specific motivational strategies is consistently demonstrated in the literature (Newby, 1991). Motivational strategies that emphasize personal effort (Dweck, 1975; 1991), setting goals (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1986), maintaining student engagement with the learning task (Ainley, 1993), and teacher presentation of tasks with positive expectations, such as the knowledge or skills that will be gained from task completion (Brophy, 1983), have been shown to enhance student academic performance.
Garbarino (1995) cites the importance of supporting community efforts to increase supervised recreational activities where youth can experience success.
The Search Institute identified the importance of the influence of the family, but also recognized that this influence weakens outside the borders of the individual family. In fact, when care and support of individual families within communities were compared, significant differences between communities helped to explain levels of risky youth behavior. Blyth (1992) contends that families must care about their communities and be involved in making their neighborhoods better places for children.
Friends and elders in the community seem to be especially important for youth who demonstrate resiliency. These youth seek out support, comfort and counsel from community members, including favorite teachers, during difficult times. In a study of youngsters who displayed resilient characteristics in Kauai, the resilient youth could identify at least one teacher who was a critical person in providing support (Werner, 1995).
Focus group comments
- "Just always be there." (Consistent Middle School Student)
- "My parents come to my games and concerts and stuff. Just to know that they are there and they care enough to come." (Consistent High School Student)
- "Being supportive, not all students will be as good as others and you should be supportive of everyone. Recognize everyone's strengths and weaknesses so you know that and support the ones that are not only good or somewhat skilled in the subject, but also the ones that need a little help." (Consistent Middle School Student)
- "Instead of saying I don't understand this part...that's because you weren't listening, they should say, I don't understand this part, let’s sit down and I'll show you." (Inconsistent High School Student)
Home support for learning
- Parents talk with their child about what he/she is learning in school.
- Parents spend time each day learning with their child.
- Parents are responsive to the child's developmental needs and skills.
- Parents provide supportive guidance to their child (e.g., listen to the child's worries and give him/her feedback).
- Parents recognize the child's effort and progress (e.g., give a high five for a 10 point improvement on a math test).
- Parents help to develop and discover new opportunities for the child.
- Parents encourage academic goals for the child.
- Parents provide rewards for homework completion when working with the teacher or other school personnel.
- Parents easily and often find ways to recognize and praise the child.
Support through struggles
- Parents do not punish or demean the child or ignore the situation, should the child receive bad grades (e.g., problem solve with the child and offer him/her assistance in improving his/her understanding of the material or study skills).
- The child is able to receive assistance at home with schoolwork when needed.
- Parents and the child together discuss the problems and concerns of the child.
Parental communication and involvement with the school
- Parents intervene at school when necessary to provide additional support for the child's learning (e.g., call the teacher if the child has a concern about school).
- Parents are involved with the child's school by participating in school events and/or spending time working with the child on school-related topics (e.g., join the PTA, attend a basketball game).
- Parents communicate with the teacher to better understand the child's strengths and weaknesses (e.g., attend parent/teacher conferences).
- Parents work with school personnel to provide consistent messages about expectations for schoolwork, attendance, and discipline (e.g., reinforce classroom/school policies).
- Teachers reward student progress, not just the final product (e.g., send evidence of good or improved work home).
- Teachers contact parents at the first sign of a problem.
- The teacher's presentations are presented clearly and with enthusiasm to engage and interest the student (e.g., teacher is animated and voice is not monotone).
- The student is provided specific, immediate, and frequent feedback about his/her behavior and progress (e.g., recognize improvements, not just perfection).
- The student is provided with the necessary feedback to be able to make accurate changes and encourage the student not to give up (e.g., prevent students from practicing errors, correct mistakes immediately).
- Both praise and feedback given to the student are task specific (e.g., "Sue, your short story did not have any grammar mistakes and used many adjectives that helped me to see the beautiful cottage and smell the salty sea water. I can tell from your revisions that you spent quite a bit of time improving your original story").
- The student is allowed choices in assignments to increase motivation and involvement (e.g., "would you like to work in groups or alone?").
- The teacher helps the student to set goals for achievement and provides the student with regular feedback regarding progress.
- The teacher asks the student to repeat back or explain the assignment to check for understanding.
- The teacher facilitates/monitors student engaged time to ensure students are understanding and completing assignments (e.g., circulate around the room and "eavesdrop" on conversations).
- There is a high degree of teacher-student substantive interaction (e.g., teachers and students spend time engaged in discussion talking about how to solve problems; it is not all lecture).
- The teacher consistently monitors the student's success rate on given task or assignment.
- The teacher uses student errors as an opportunity to reteach skills or concepts (e.g., students are given the opportunity to correct mistakes to earn extra credit).
- The teacher verifies the student understanding and the appropriateness of the task prior to determining that the student has motivational difficulties (e.g., check work in progress to make sure that directions have been followed).
- The teacher uses cues and prompts to assist the student and increase the accuracy and frequency of the student responses.
- The teacher asks questions frequently to verify student understanding and progress.
- The student is taught learning strategies such as study skills and how to memorize (e.g., make flash cards, mnemonics etc.).
- Both the value of learning and completing an assignment are reinforced with the student (e.g., explain how they will use the concept in the future to balance checkbook, write a business letter etc.).
- The teacher meets regularly with individual students to provide feedback and guidance to them.
- The community is responsive to the diverse needs of its members.
- Organizations within in the community collaborate, rather than compete, for the benefit of youth.
- The community has outreach programs such as home health visiting or support for parents and for all of its members.
- Due to the collective efforts of the home, school, and community to recognize what youth need to be successful, the community has implemented programs using community citizens of all ages to develop youth and maintain a focus on asset building.
- Youth receive guidance and recognition from a variety of community organizations (e.g., church, families, youth organizations).
- The community places emphasis on valuing and wanting success for all youth.
- Adults in the community are available to help youth reach personal and group goals.
- Businesses invest in youth-oriented programs.
- The community has an informed social support network other than professionals.
Ainley, D. D. (1993). Styles of engagement with learning: Multidimensional assessment of their relationship with strategy use and school achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85,(3), 395-405.
Amato, P. R., & Ochilltree, G. (1986). Family resources and the development of child competence. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 47-56.
Anderson, L., Evertson, C., & Brophy, J. (1979). An experimental study of effective teaching in first-grade reading groups. Elementary School Journal, 79, 193-223.
Baker, D. P. & Stevenson, D. L. (1986). Mothers’ strategies for children's school achievement: Managing the transition to high school. Sociology of Education, 59, 156-166.
Bempechat, J. (2000). Getting our kids back on track. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and students learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bloom, B. S. (1985). Learning for mastery. In C.W. Fisher & D.C. Berliner (Eds.), Perspectives on Instructional Time (pp. 73-93). New York: Longman.
Blyth, D. (1992). Healthy communities; healthy youth: How communities contribute to positive youth development. Minneapolis, Minnesota: The Search Institute.
Brophy, J. E. (1983). Fostering student learning and motivation in the elementary school classroom. In S. G. Paris, G. M. Olson & H. W. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and Motivation in the Classroom (pp. 283-305). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brophy, J. E. (1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist, 41, 1069-1077.
Brophy, J. E. & Evertson, C. M. (1976). Learning from teaching: A developmental perspective. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. L. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 328-375). New York: MacMillan.
Catsambis, S. (1998). Expanding knowledge of parental involvement in secondary education — Effects on high school academic success. Johns Hopkins University, Report No. 27. Baltimore, Maryland: CRESPAR (Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk).
Christenson, S. L., & Sheridan, S. M. (2001). School and families: Creating essential connections for learning. New York: Guilford Press.
Clark, R. M. (1983). Family life and school achievement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Clark, R. M. (1990, Spring). Why disadvantaged students succeed: What happens outside school is critical. Public Welfare, 17-23
Clark, R. M. (1993). Homework-focused parenting practices that positively affect student achievement. In N. F. Chavkin (Ed.), Families and Schools in a Pluralistic Society, (pp.85-105). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Comer, J. P. (1984). Home-school relationships as they affect the academic success of children. Education and Urban Society, 16(3), 323-337.
Dweck, C. S. (1975). The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 268-276.
Dweck, C. S. (1991). Self-theories and goals: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. In R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.). Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Eagle, E. (1989, March). Socioeconomic status, family structure, and parental involvement: The correlates of achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation in student achievement: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 51, 199-208.
Garbarino, J. (1995). Raising children in a socially toxic environment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gonzalez-DeHass, A. R., Willems, P.P., and Holbein, M. F. (2005). Examining the relationship between parental involvement and student motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 99-123.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children’s self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(2), 143-154.
Gutman, L. M., & Midgley, C. (2000). The role of protective factors in supporting academic achievement of poor African American students during the middle school transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29(2), 223-248.
Halle, T. G., Kurtz-Costes, B., & Mahoney, J. L. (1997). Family influences on school achievement in low-income, African American children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 527-537.
Henderson, A. T., & Berla, N. (Eds.). (1994). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to student achievement. Washington, DC: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, Texas: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Hess, R. D., & Holloway, S. D. (1984). Family and school as educational institutions. In R.D. Parke, R.M. Emde, H.P. McAdoo, & G.P. Sackett (Eds.), Reviewing Child Development Research: Vol. 7: The Family (pp. 179-222). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ho, S., & Willms, D. J. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 69(2), 126-141.
Hokoda, A., & Fincham, F. D. (1995). Origins of children’s helpless and mastery achievement patterns in the family. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 375-385.
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Bassler, O. C., & Brissie, J. S. (1987). Parent involvement: Contributions of teacher efficacy, school socioeconomic status, and other school characteristics. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 417-435.
Johnson, S. L. (1992, Winter). Extra school factors in achievement, attainment and aspiration among junior and senior high school age African American youth. Journal of Negro Education, 61(1), 99-119.
Jordan, G. E., Snow, C. E., & Porche, M. V. (2000). Project EASE: the effect of a family literacy project on kindergarten students’ early literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 524-546.
Keith, T. Z., Troutman, G. C., Trivette, P. S., Keith, P. B., Bickley, P. G., & Singh, K. (1993). Does parent involvement affect eighth-grade achievement? Structural analysis of national data. School Psychology Review, 22(3), 474-496.
Kellaghan, T. Sloane, K., Alvarez, B. & Bloom, B. S. (1993). The home environment & school learning: Promoting parental involvement in the education of children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Marcon, R. A. (1999). Positive relationships between parent school involvement and public school inner-city preschoolers’ development and academic performance. School Psychology Review, 28(3), 395-412.
Marchant, G. J., Paulson, S. E. & Rothlisberg, B. A. (2001). Relations of middle school students’ perceptions of family and school contexts with academic achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 38(6), 505-519.
McKee, W. T., & Witt, J. C. (1990). Effective teaching: A review of instructional, and environmental variables. In T. B. Gutkin, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 821-846). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Miedel, W. T., & Reynolds, A. J. (1999). Parent involvement in early intervention for disadvantaged children: Does it matter? Journal of School Psychology, 37(4), 379-402.
Mitrsomwang, S. & Hawley, W. (1993). Cultural adaptation and the effects of family values and behaviors on the academic achievement and persistence of Indochinese students. Final report for Grant No. R 117E 00045, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Newby, T. (1991). Classroom motivation: Strategies of first-year teachers. Educational Psychology, 83, 195-200.
Peng, S. S., & Lee, R. M. (1992, April). Home variables, parent-child activities, and academic achievement: A study of 1988 eighth graders. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Sanders, M. G., & Herting, J. R. (2000). Gender and the effects of school, family, and church support on the academic achievement of African-American urban adolescents. In M. G. Sanders (Ed.), Schooling Students Placed at Risk: Research, Policy, and Practice in the Education of Poor and Minority Adolescents (141-161). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sattes, B. (1985). Parent involvement: A review of the literature (Report No. 21). Charleston, West Virginia: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.
Scott-Jones, D. (1987). Mother-as-teacher in the families of high- and low-achieving low-income black first-graders. Journal of Negro Education, 56(1), 21-34.
Shumow, L., & Miller, J. D. (2001). Parents’ at-home and at-school academic involvement with young adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 21(1), 68-91.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S.D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement; Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63, 1266-1281.
Stevenson, D. L. & Baker, D. P. (1987). The family-school relation and the child's school performance. Child Development, 58, 1348-1357.
Trusty, J. (1999). Effects of eighth-grade parental involvement on late adolescents’ educational experiences. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 32(4), 224-233.
Walberg, H. J. (1984). Families as partners in educational productivity. Phi Delta Kappan, 65, 397-400.
Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 315-327). New York: Macmillan.
Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology. 90(2), 202-209.
Werner, E. E. (1995). Resilience in Development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4(3), 81-85.
Winne, P. H. (1985). Steps toward promoting cognitive achievements. Educational Leadership, 85(5), 673-693.
Ziegler, S. (1987, October). The effect of parent involvement on children's achievement: The significance of home/school links. Ontario, Canada: Toronto Board of Education.
Reviewed in 2018