Conceptualizations of Family Engagement in Connecticut

• In Event: 51.067 - Institutional Perspectives on Education Policy: New Directions in Theory and Research

Abstract

The passage of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act initiated waves of reform associated with parents and community organizations in addition to teachers and testing. As an ingredient of accountability policy, family engagement emerged in state guidelines, school improvement plans, and grant applications (Cavanagh, 2012). It is clear that current reforms place weight on family involvement and community relationships, yet questions remain about the policies, practices, norms, and conceptualizations influencing family engagement (FE) across different district contexts.

There is a growing body of literature around the importance of FE (Epstein, Simon, & Salinas, 1997; Jordan, et al., 2002; Rutherford et al, 2007) and how schools and districts can better include parents (Epstein, 2002; Harris & Goodall, 2007). However, there is a dearth of literature explicitly linking policy and organizational factors with the nature of FE. There is no scholarship analyzing the deep-seated conceptualizations infusing current FE reforms.

Neo-institutional theory attends to the overarching relationship between the environment and organizational activity and treats logics as forces influencing change (Scott, 2001). Logics are conceptualizations that structure practices in a specific organizational field (Russell, 2011; Scott, 2001). For example, the language in official documents, flyers, curriculum materials, and newsletters reflects and reinforces dominant logics regarding FE, encouraging particular actions while discouraging others.

This qualitative study uses concepts from neo-institutional theory to analyze the logics of FE in Connecticut. This paper responds to the following research questions:
1) What are the logics of family engagement in Connecticut state policy documents?
2) What are the logics of FE in district policy documents?
a) To what degree are there similarities or differences in the logics of FE reflected in underperforming and high performing districts?

To answer questions about the logics of FE, we conducted a document analysis of documents from the state of Connecticut and a sample of four districts (two underperforming and two higher performing). The documents included: formal policies, statements, and plans; training materials; handouts; curricula; newsletters; website posts; and newspaper archives (Creswell, 1998). Drawing on Prior’s work (2008), we treated documents as actors while considering what the document accomplished, how it came about, who it is for, and how it might be interpreted and used by various individuals. These documents provided excerpts that, after analysis, permitted us to surface logics from recurrent words/phrases.

Preliminary findings indicate that policy pressures in higher and lower performing districts steer conceptualizations of “good” and appropriate FE. In higher performing districts, the logic of families as supplementers providing extra resources to schools as organizations was prevalent, while, in underperforming districts, the logic of families as boosters of attendance and achievement for individual students dominated.

Developing an understanding of the logics of FE, as advanced by the state and taken up within districts and schools, lays a foundation for future work considering how these logics clash or align in varying contexts. Finally, our findings have implications for educators and community members striving to form equitable and supportive home-school relationships.

Authors

• Daron E Cyr, University of Connecticut - Storrs

• Sarah L. Woulfin, University of Connecticut