Parental Involvement in Homework
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 36(3), 195–209
Copyright © 2001, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Parental Involvement in Homework PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
HOOVER-DEMPSEY
IN HOMEWORK
ET AL.
Kathleen V. Hoover-Dempsey, Angela C. Battiato, Joan M. T. Walker, Richard P. Reed,
Jennifer M. DeJong, and Kathleen P. Jones
Department of Psychology and Human Development
Vanderbilt University
The article reviews research on parental involvement in student homework. It is focused on under-
standing: why parents become involved in their children’s homework; which activities and strate-
gies they employ in the course of involvement; how their homework involvement influences stu-
dent outcomes; and which student outcomes are influenced by parents’ involvement. Findings
suggest that parents involve themselves in student homework because they believe that they
should be involved, believe that their involvement will make a positive difference, and perceive
that their children or children’s teachers want their involvement. Parents’ involvement activities
take many forms, from establishing structures for homework performance to teaching for under-
standing and developing student learning strategies. Operating largely through modeling, rein-
forcement, and instruction, parents’ homework involvement appears to influence student success
insofar as it supports student attributes related to achievement (e.g., attitudes about homework,
perceptions of personal competence, self-regulatory skills). Recommendations for research fo-
cused on the processes and outcomes of parents’ homework involvement are offered, as are sug-
gestions for school practices to enhance the effectiveness of parental involvement in homework.
Parental involvement in education has received much atten- framework to allow the identification of empirically
tion in recent decades as various school-improvement efforts grounded themes and the derivation of warranted sugges-
have sought to enhance student learning. Although careful to tions for research and practice.
suggest that parental involvement is an adjunct to We have drawn on a broad range of primarily recent litera-
well-developed educational programs, many investigators ture across several disciplines (e.g., psychology, sociology,
have reported that parental involvement, including involve- anthropology) as related to varied levels or domains of educa-
ment in student homework, is related to student achievement tional interest (e.g., early childhood, elementary, secondary,
and personal attributes conducive to achievement (e.g., special education). This literature base includes studies incor-
self-regulation, perceptions of academic competence; e.g., porating explicit attention to parents’ homework involve-
Delgado-Gaitan, 1992; Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994; Xu & ment as well as related sources helpful in understanding
Corno, 1998). Although questions have been raised about the parents’ involvement decisions, the content of their involve-
value of parental involvement in homework (e.g., Casanova, ment, and its outcomes. Key characteristics1 of studies fo-
1996; Cooper, 1989; Levin et al., 1997), most school practice cused on some aspect of parental involvement in homework
suggests that elementary and secondary students throughout (summarized in Table 1). As evident, this set of studies is var-
the United States are asked to do homework, and parents are
often asked to become involved in supporting students’ home-
work performance (e.g., Cooper, 1989; Roderique, Polloway, 1
Key characteristics include study purposes, design, participants, and
Cumblad, Epstein, & Bursuck, 1994). homework involvement measures. Purposes are described as the study’s
This review is focused on parents’ motivation for in- general goals, which in many of these studies extended beyond focused ex-
volvement in homework, the content of their involvement, amination of parents’ homework involvement. Design is designated in three
general categories: survey defines studies focused primarily on examining
the mechanisms through which their involvement appears
and describing naturally occurring phenomena; intervention defines studies
to influence student outcomes, and the consequences of focused on the development and testing of efforts intended to change some
their involvement. Its purpose is to integrate research find- element of the homework involvement process; case study defines those
ings across a variety of studies within a theoretically sound studies examining and describing in some detail elements of the homework
involvement process in a very small sample of children, parents, or families.
Participants include basic characteristics (as available in each report) of stu-
dents, parents and teachers examined in the study. Homework measures de-
Requests for reprints should be sent to Kathleen V. Hoover-Dempsey, Depart- scribe those portions of instruments or methods used to derive data on home-
ment of Psychology and Human Development, P.O. Box 512, Vanderbilt Univer- work involvement (measures related to other study variables or purposes are
sity, Nashville, TN 37203. E-mail:kathleen.v.hoover-dempsey@vanderbilt.edu generally not included).TABLE 1
Characteristics Studies Included in the Review
Authors Purpose Primary Research Design, Sample Size, Characteristics Homework Measures
Ames (1993) Examine effectiveness of program to increase Design: intervention; participants: 37 2nd- and 4th-grade Teacher reports of communication prac-
teachers’ school-to-home communications, in- teachers (15 control, 25 experimental), parents, stu- tices; parent responses to question-
cluding those related to parent help with learn- dents in their classrooms; generally diverse SES, eth- naire including time spent with stu-
ing activities at home nicity dent related to schoolwork
Anesko & O’Leary (1982) Examine effectiveness of a program designed to Design: intervention; participants: parents of 13 students Parent responses to questionnaire, inter-
help parents of children identified as “having (x = 8 yrs) noted by parents as having difficulties with view on homework problems, student
difficulties with homework” manage their homework; middle class, suburban (treatment = 6, feelings about homework, observation
homework waitlist = 7) of homework behavior
Anesko, Schoiock, Ramirez, & Levine (1987) Develop measure to assess frequency and inten- Design: survey; participants: parents of 319 2nd- through Parent questionnaire on varied student
sity of children’s homework problems 4th-grade students; predominantly middle class, White problems with homework
Baker & Stevenson (1986) Examine maternal strategies for helping 8th Design: survey; participants: 41 mothers of 8th graders; Parent interviews with items on parent
graders transition to high school as related to varied SES, 74% White, 26% non-White strategies for homework (knowledge,
student achievement help, encouragement)
Balli, Demo, & Wedman (1998) Examine effects of intervention (no prompts, Design: intervention; participants: 74 6th graders, and Parent responses to questionnaire assess-
child prompts, child and family prompts) on families; predominantly middle class, White ing family involvement in math
family involvement in math homework homework, other homework
Baumgartner, Bryan, Donahue, & Nelson (1993) Examine parental views of homework, reports of Design: survey; participants: 509 parents of elementary, Parents’ unstructured comments on
involvement in homework intermediate students in regular, resource, and larger questionnaire focused on home-
self-contained classes; generally middle class, ethni- work, tests, grades
cally diverse, suburban
Brody, Flor, & Gibson (1999) Examine links between selected family, parent Design: survey; participants: 139 single, Parent questionnaire, interviews regard-
characteristics (e.g., resources, efficacy be- head-of-household mothers of children ages 6 through ing family routines, including home-
liefs, parenting) and student academic 9; predominantly low income, African American work routines with child
psychosocial competence
Bryan & Nelson (1994) Examine student perceptions of homework Design: survey; participants: 1,527 students (9–15 years) Student questionnaire items on home-
in regular (1,242), resource (234), special education work frequency, type, working condi-
(51); generally diverse SES, ethnicity tions, parent assistance
Bryan, Nelson, & Mathur (1995) Examine student experiences and feelings about Design: survey; participants: 809 1st- through 3rd-grade Student questionnaire with items on
homework across regular, resource, and spe- students from regular (701), resource (91), special edu- homework, including parental help,
cial education classroom cation (17) classrooms; diverse SES, ethnicity and interactions related to homework
race, suburban
Callahan, Rademacher, & Hildreth (1998) Examine influence of home-based student Design: intervention; participants: 26 6th and 7th graders Parent questionnaire on homework atti-
self-management program to improve home- in program for at-risk youth, parents; predominantly tudes; student, parent ratings of home-
work performance and achievement middle and lower middle class, White work performance, parents’ program
implementation activities
Carrington, Lehrer, & Wittenstrom (1997) Examine effectiveness of homework manage- Design: intervention; participants: 42 2nd- through Parent questionnaire on child homework
ment intervention for students under condi- 8th-grade students with homework problems, parents; problems; description of child’s spe-
tions of parent participation versus no parent predominantly middle class, White cific homework problems
participation
Chavkin & Williams (1993) Examine parents’ involvement attitudes and Design: survey; participants: 2,967 parents of elementary Parent responses to questionnaire items
practices children; 1,779 Anglo, 682 African American, 506 on homework involvement (e.g., mon-
Hispanic itoring, helping)
Chen & Stevenson (1989) Examine and compare (across four component Design: survey; participants: students (primarily 1st and Student, parent, teacher interviews fo-
studies) elementary students’ homework expe- 5th graders), parents, teachers from Japan, China, cused in part on parent help with
riences in the United States, China, and Japan United States (sample sizes: 447 to 1,446); generally homework, beliefs about the impor-
mixed SES, urban tance of homeworkClark (1993) Examine parents’ homework attitudes and prac- Design: survey; participants: parents of 460 3rd graders; Parent responses to questionnaire items
tices as related to variations in student generally diverse SES, primarily Hispanic, African on teacher, student homework prac-
achievement and family demographic vari- American, Asian tices, parent homework activities
ables
Constantino, Cui, & Faltis (1991) Examine parental involvement among Chinese Design: survey; participants: 15 parents of elementary Parent, teacher interviews with items on
immigrant families in the United States students, 10 teachers; Chinese immigrants to the parent, teacher homework activities
United States and responsibilities
Cooper, Lindsay, Nye, & Greathouse (1998) Examine relationships among student, parent, Design: survey; participants: 709 elementary, middle, Student, parent, teacher responses to
teacher attitudes toward homework, amount of high school students, parents; primarily middle class, questionnaire including items on be-
homework, student achievement across grade White; 82 teachers liefs about affective reactions to
levels homework
Dauber & Epstein (1993) Examine parent ideas and desires regarding in- Design: survey; participants: 2,317 parents of elementary, Parent responses to questionnaire items
volvement and extent to which involvement middle school students attending Chapter I schools; on parent homework help, home
patterns differ across elementary, middle predominantly low income, inner city learning activities, teacher practices to
school involve parents at home
DeBaryshe, Buell, & Binder (1996) Examine influence of parental help on student Design: experiment; participants: 20 5- to 6-year-old chil- Examination of student task perfor-
writing task outcomes (two conditions: student dren, mothers; relatively high SES; 17 European mance and videotaped student, parent
completion of task alone, student work on task American, 3 African American behaviors during task
with help of mother)
Delgado-Gaitin (1992) Examine home environment as related to educa- Design: case study; participants: 6 2nd graders and their Parent attitudes, behaviors, ideas as re-
tion issues, parent roles in education, learning families (3 novice readers, 3 advanced readers); work- lated in part to homework/home learn-
outcomes in Mexican American families ing-class, Mexican American families ing, observed over 9 months, field
notes, audiotapes, videotapes
Epstein (1986) Examine parents’ awareness of, experiences with Design: survey; participants: 1,269 parents of 1st, 3rd, 5th Parent questionnaire responses on in-
parent involvement, perspectives on teachers’ graders, teachers (36 “strong” parent involvement, 46 volvement experiences, responses to
parent involvement practices including in- control); mixed SES, 62% White, 36% African Ameri- teacher involvement practices, includ-
volvement in learning activities at home can ing home learning activities
Epstein & Dauber (1991) Examine links among school programs of parent Design: survey; participants: 171 teachers in 5 elemen- Teacher responses to questionnaire with
involvement, teacher attitudes, teacher prac- tary, 3 middle schools serving economically disadvan- items on attitudes, practices related to
tices to involve parents taged families in a large urban area parental involvement in learning ac-
tivities at home
Epstein, Polloway, Foley, & Patton (1993) Examine homework problems experienced by Design: survey; participants: 37 parent, student (7–16 Parent, teacher responses to parallel
students with learning disabilities, behavioral years), teacher triads; students predominantly White checklists of student problems in com-
disabilities, and general education students pleting homework
Fehrman, Keith, & Reimers (1987) Examine direct effects of parental involvement Design: survey; participants: 28,051 12th graders from Student responses to questionnaire with
on grades and indirect effects through time on High School and Beyond Study; varied family SES, items on parent involvement in aca-
homework, TV viewing ethnicity demic life, homework time
Forgatch & Ramsey (1994) Examine effectiveness of a videotape-based in- Design: intervention; participants: 49 junior high students Parent, student responses to parallel
tervention providing information on home with academic problems (25 experimental, 24 control), questionnaires, structured telephone
study practices and strategies to families of parents; generally middle class, rural interviews on homework (time, qual-
students having academic problems ity, parental monitoring)
Ginsburg & Bronstein (1993) Examine family factors related to student moti- Design: survey; participants: 93 5th graders, parents, Parent responses to interview items on
vational orientation and academic performance teachers; generally diverse SES, predominantly White parental checking, supervision, sur-
veillance of homework
Glasgow, Dornbusch, Troyer, Steinberg, & Examine contemporaneous and predictive rela- Design: survey; participants: 2,353 high school students; Student responses to questionnaire in-
Ritter (1997) tions among parenting style, adolescent attri- diverse SES, 62% White, 15% Asian American, 14% cluding items on time spent on home-
butions, educational outcomes Hispanic American, 9% African American work in four academic subjects
(continued)TABLE 1 (Continued)
Authors Purpose Primary Research Design, Sample Size, Characteristics Homework Measures
Grolnick, Ryan, & Deci (1991) Test process model of relations among student Design: survey; participants: 456 3rd- through 6th-grade Student responses to questionnaires in-
perceptions of parents, motivation, and school students, parents; diverse SES, predominantly White, cluding items on motivation for doing
performance urban; 20 teachers homework
Grolnick & Slowiaczek (1994) Examine children’s motivational resources as Design: survey; participants: 302 6th- through 8th-grade Student responses to questionnaires in-
mediator of relationship between parent in- students; predominantly middle class, White; 18 teach- cluding items on motivation for doing
volvement and student school performance ers homework
Hong, Milgram & Perkins (1995) Examine cultural differences in student home- Design: survey; participants: 182 Korean 5th and 6th Student, parent responses to question-
work style, parent awareness of style, links graders and parents; varied SES; 93 American 5th and naires assessing student homework
among parent awareness, student homework 6th graders and parents, predominantly middle and up- style and behavior
achievement, attitudes per middle class
Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler, & Brissie (1992) Examine relationship between parents’ sense of Design: survey; participants: 390 parents of elementary Parent, teacher responses to question-
efficacy for helping child succeed in school students; heterogeneous SES; 50 teachers naires including items on parents’ in-
and student outcomes volvement in homework
Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler, & Burow (1995) Examine parents’ thinking, strategies, actions re- Design: survey; participants: 69 parents of 1st- through Parent responses to interviews including
lated to student homework 5th-grade students; generally diverse SES, 83% White, questions on homework involvement
17% African American
Hutsinger, Jose, & Larson (1998) Examine effects of academic home environment Design: survey; participants: 36 Chinese American, 40 Parent responses to interview including
on student social adjustment and achievement European American 1st and 2nd graders and parents; items on teaching methods used at
generally well-educated families, suburban home for math and reading work
Jayanthi, Sawyer, Nelson, Bursuck, & Examine parental ideas, recommendations about Design: survey; participants: 8 parents, 13 special educa- Parent responses to questions about
Epstein (1995) teachers’ homework communications tion students, and 11 classroom teachers of 5th- homework communications generated
through 12th-grade students with mild disabilities; sub- in parent–teacher focus groups
urban and rural
Kay, Fitzgerald, Paradee, & Mellencamp (1994) Examine parental perspectives on homework Design: survey; participants: 14 4th, 8th graders with dis- Parent, teacher perspectives on home-
abilities, parents, 11 parent liaisons, teachers; rural work involvement (focus groups, in-
terviews, research logs)
Leone & Richards (1989) Examine links among variables related to student Design: survey; participants: 401 5th- through 9th-grade Student experience sampling, questions
experience of homework (time, subjective ex- students; varied SES, urban, suburban on homework thoughts, feelings, con-
perience, companions) and achievement text, companions
Levin et al. (1997) Examine relationship among maternal help with Design: survey; participants: mothers of 92 1st, 3rd grad- Mother, teacher responses to parallel
homework, dynamics of helping, mother–child ers, teachers (4 at each grade level); Israeli, predomi- questionnaires assessing aspects of
affective relationship, and student achieve- nantly middle and upper middle SES, urban maternal help with homework, related
ment variables
McDermott, Goldman, & Varenne (1984) Examine family interactions related to home- Design: case study; participants: 2 students (3rd, 4th Parent interviews, observations focused
work graders) and families; working class, “Irish heritage” on student, family homework context
and interactions
Milne, Myers, Rosenthal, & Ginsberg (1986) Examine influence of maternal status variables Design: survey; participants: 12,429 1st- through Parent interview, questionnaire re-
(employment, single parenthood) and varied 6th-grade students (from Sustaining Effects Study of sponses including items on student
parent, student behaviors on achievement Title I), 2,720 secondary students (High School and homework time, parent homework
Beyond Study); generally diverse SES, African Ameri- help, monitoring
can, White
Muller (1995) Examine how parent involvement intervenes in Design: survey; participants: 13,881 8th graders, parents Student, parent responses to question-
links between maternal employment and stu- drawn from NELS 88 data set; varied SES, ethnicity naires including item on parental
dent math achievement checking of homework
Natriello & McDill (1986) Examine effects of teacher, parent, peer stan- Design: survey; participants: 12,146 high school students; Student responses to questionnaires in-
dards on student homework effort and varied SES, predominantly White cluding parent rules for time on home-
achievement work, actual homework timeOkagaki & Frensch (1998) Examine relationship between parenting and stu- Design: survey; participants: 275 parents of 4th and 5th Parent responses to questionnaires in-
dent school performance in multiple ethnic graders; varied SES, 109 Latino, 75 Asian American, cluding items on parent help with stu-
groups 91 White dent schoolwork, study, reading
Okagaki, Frensch, & Gordon (1995) Examine parental encouragement of school Design: survey; participants: 82 parents of high (33) or Parent responses to questionnaires in-
achievement among Mexican American chil- low (49) achieving 4th, 5th graders; varied SES, Mexi- cluding items on involvement behav-
dren can American, suburban iors related to schoolwork
Paulson (1994) Explore influence of parenting style and parent Design: survey; participants: 247 9th graders, parents; di- Parent, student responses to question-
involvement on student achievement verse SES, predominantly White; urban, suburban, ru- naires with items on parent interest,
ral monitoring of homework
Peng & Wright (1994) Examine links between Asian American, other Design: survey; participants: 1,527 Asian American, Parent, student responses to question-
minority groups’ student achievement and 3,171 Hispanic, 3,009 African American, 299 Native naire items on frequency of parental
qualities of home environments (including ac- American, 16,317 White 8th graders and parents assistance with homework, student
tivities conducive to learning) (NELS 88 data set) time on homework
Pratt, Green, MacVicar, & Bountrogianni (1992) Examine relationship between authoritative Design: observation; participants: Study 1: 13 5th grad- Parent interview including items on
parenting and achievement as mediated by ers, parents; predominantly middle class; Study 2: 24 homework; observation, ratings of
quality of parent teaching strategies (including 5th graders, diverse SES, ethnicity parent behaviors while helping stu-
scaffolding) dent do math homework tasks
Reynolds (1992) Examine correspondence among parent, teacher, Design: survey; participants: 481 7 year olds, parents, Parent, student responses to question-
and student ratings of parent involvement teachers drawn from Longitudinal Study of Children at naires including items on parental in-
Risk; low SES, predominantly African American, ur- volvement in homework, learning ac-
ban tivities at home
Roderique, Polloway, Cumblad, Epstein, & Examine school district homework policies, in- Design: survey; participants: 550 U.S. school districts; ur- District survey responses, including
Bursuck (1994) cluding communications with parents, expec- ban, suburban, rural districts; geographically diverse items on district family homework
tations about parents’ homework roles communications, expectations for par-
ents’ homework roles
Sanders (1998) Examine influence of teacher, family, church Design: survey; participants: 827 8th graders; predomi- Student responses to questionnaire in-
support on school-related attitudes, behaviors, nantly lower income, African American cluding items on parental support and
achievement of urban African American stu- monitoring of homework
dents
Schneider & Lee (1990) Examine influences of sociocultural factors, in- Design: survey; participants: 95 6th and 7th graders (46 Parent, teacher, student responses to in-
terpersonal interactions on academic perfor- East Asian, 49 Anglo), parents; varied SES, urban, terviews including focus on parent
mance among East Asian and Anglo students suburban; teachers, administrators help with schoolwork, home teaching,
homework monitoring
Scott-Jones (1987) Examine role of ’mother-as-teacher’ in student Design: observation; participants: 24 1st graders (8 Parent interview items on educational
achievement in high- and low-achieving, high-achieving, 16 low-achieving), mothers; low in- practices; behaviors with child in nat-
low-income African American families come, African American ural and teaching task situations
Shumow (1998) Examine influence of intervention (generally in- Design: intervention; participants: 35 2nd graders (½ in Parent behaviors during homework, ob-
cluding information about student develop- general intervention; ½ in general intervention + indi- servations on student’s thinking; con-
ment, math homework, conversations with re- vidual conversations), parents, teachers; varied SES, versation transcripts; analyzed for par-
searcher about homework) designed to White ent scaffolding, knowledge of
increase effectiveness of parental help with student’s math development
homework
(continued)
199200
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Authors Purpose Primary Research Design, Sample Size, Characteristics Homework Measures
Steinberg, Elmen, & Mounts (1989) Examine relation among authoritative parenting, Design: survey; participants: 120 students ages 10 Student responses to questionnaire items
student psychosocial maturity, and school through 16; varied SES, predominantly White including parent control over home-
achievement over time work
Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Examine the influence of authoritative parenting, Design: survey; participants: 6,357 9th- through Student responses to questionnaires with
Darling (1992) parent involvement, parent encouragement to 11th-grade students; varied SES, ethnicity items on parents’ homework help, en-
succeed on achievement couragement of schoolwork
Stevenson, Chen, & Uttal (1990) Examine relation between parent and student be- Design: survey; participants: 1,161 1st, 3rd, and 5th grad- Parent, student interview items on atti-
liefs, and attitudes about schooling and ers, mothers; mixed SES, White, Black, Hispanic; 120 tudes about schooling, student ideas,
achievement teachers and reactions to homework
Strukoff, McLaughlin, & Bialozor (1987) Examine effectiveness of intervention (daily re- Design: case study–intervention; participant: one 5th Proportion and accuracy of homework
port to parent on homework completion) to in- grader in special education, her parents, teacher, and assignments completed, parent com-
crease student homework performance same age peers ments on intervention
Sui-Chu & Willms (1996) Examine relations among parents’ home- and Design: survey; participants: 24,599 8th graders, parents, Parent and student responses to ques-
school-based involvement, background vari- teachers (NELS 88 data set) tionnaire items on schoolwork, discus-
ables, student learning problems, achievement sion, homework supervision
Voelkl (1993) Examine home environment characteristics dis- Design: survey; students: 2,847 8th graders drawn from Student responses to questionnaire in-
tinguishing low-achieving African American NELS 88 data set; presumably varied SES, African cluding items on parent–child home-
students holding low versus high academic ex- American work interactions, monitoring, check-
pectations ing of schoolwork
Xu & Corno (1998) Examine dynamics of homework and its contri- Design: case study–observation; participants: six 3rd Parent and student interviews (including
butions to the development of student graders, parents, teachers; “well-educated profes- stimulated recall), observation during
self-responsibility sional” families, diverse cultural backgrounds homework sessions, analyzed for
themes
Zellman & Waterman (1998) Identify variables underlying link between parent Design: survey; participants:193 2nd and 5th graders, Parent and student responses to ques-
involvement and selected student outcomes mothers; varied SES, 35% Latino, 32% White, 17% tions regarding frequency of
African American mother–father help with homework
Note. SES = socioeconomic status; NELS = National Educational Longitudinal Study.PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN HOMEWORK 201
ied along several dimensions. For example, some examined itive difference for the child (e.g., Bandura, 1997; Hoo-
parental involvement in homework as a central study pur- ver-Dempsey & Sandler, 1997). Self-efficacy theory suggests
pose, whereas others included it as a relatively minor portion that parents’ behavioral choices are guided in part by the out-
of a broader investigation. Across this literature, we focused comes they expect to follow their actions; the stronger the per-
on identifying patterns that may illuminate critical features of ceived self-efficacy for a task (e.g., helping with homework),
parental involvement at this most common intersection of the higher the goals they are likely to set and the greater the per-
families’ and school’s interests in the learning of the children sistence they are likely to exhibit in reaching those goals
they share. (Bandura, 1997). Consistent with these suggestions, parents
have reported reasonable confidence in their ability to help
WHY DO PARENTS BECOME INVOLVED with homework; their confidence, in turn, has been associated
IN CHILDREN’S HOMEWORK? with involvement (e.g., Ames, 1993; Balli, Demo, &
Wedman, 1998; Chen & Stevenson, 1989; Cooper, Lindsay,
Parents appear to involve themselves in their children’s Nye, & Greathouse, 1998). Even where parents have recorded
homework for three major reasons: they believe that they doubts about involvement, their misgivings have been related
should be involved, they believe that their involvement will not to doubts about their capability but often to lack of ade-
make a positive difference, and they perceive invitations to quate information (e.g., Kay et al., 1994). In general, parents
involvement (Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1995, 1997). higher in efficacy are more likely to be involved in homework
help (e.g., Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler, & Brissie, 1992) and
Parental Role Construction those who help children with homework are likely to believe
that their help positively influences student outcomes (e.g.,
Parental-role construction for involvement in children’s edu- Chen & Stevenson, 1989; Stevenson et al., 1990).
cation reflects parents’ expectations and beliefs about what
they should do in relation to children’s schooling. Roles are
generally constructed from personal experience and expecta- Parents’ Perceptions of Invitations to
tions as well as the perceptions and expectations of pertinent Involvement
others (e.g., Biddle, 1986). Applied to parents’ involvement in
children’s education, parental-role construction appears to de- Parents also appear to involve themselves in homework be-
fine the range of activities that parents believe important, nec- cause they perceive invitations from their child or child’s
essary, and permissible for their own engagement in teachers suggesting that their homework involvement is
children’s schooling (e.g., Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, wanted and expected (Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1997).
1997). Consistent with role theory, several investigators have Invitations from students may emerge as a function of age
reported parents’ beliefs that involvement in children’s (younger children appear to elicit more involvement than
schooling is a normal requirement and responsibility of older ones: e.g., Dauber & Epstein, 1993; Eccles & Harold,
parenting (e.g., Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler, & Burow, 1995; 1993), performance level (poorer performance may invite
Okagaki, Frensch, & Gordon, 1995; Stevenson, Chen, & more parental help: e.g., Clark, 1993; Dauber & Epstein,
Uttal, 1990). Related work has identified parents’ beliefs 1993; Levin et al., 1997), or characteristic patterns of par-
about the importance of helping with homework, opinions ent–child interaction (e.g., generally positive or frequently
about homework goals and quantity, and interest in knowing antagonistic: e.g., Ames, 1993; DeBaryshe, Buell, & Binder,
more about effective homework helping strategies (e.g., 1996; Eccles & Harold, 1993). Teacher invitations have been
Baker & Stevenson, 1986; Baumgartner, Bryan, Donahue, & positively associated with parents’ involvement decisions
Nelson, 1993; Dodd, 1996; Epstein, Polloway, Foley, & (e.g., Balli et al., 1998; Epstein & Dauber, 1991), and have
Patton, 1993; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 1995; Kay, Fitzgerald, been found more influential than socioeconomic status in mo-
Paradee, & Mellencamp, 1994). Findings that parents often tivating involvement (e.g., Dauber & Epstein, 1993;
continue their involvement in children’s homework despite Walberg, Paschal, & Weinstein, 1985). The power of invita-
concerns about personal limitations or children’s learning dif- tions in eliciting involvement is underscored by the success of
ficulties (e.g., Anesko, Shoiock, Ramirez, & Levine, 1987; several homework-involvement intervention programs re-
Bryan, Nelson, & Mathur, 1995; Chen & Stevenson, 1989; ported in this literature (e.g., Anesko & O’Leary, 1983; Balli
Kay et al., 1994; Levin et al., 1997) underscore the power of et al., 1998; Forgatch & Ramsey, 1994; Pratt, Green,
role construction as a motivator of involvement. MacVicar, & Bountrogianni, 1992; Shumow, 1998).
Parents’ Sense of Efficacy for Helping the WHAT DO PARENTS DO WHEN THEY
Child Succeed in School HELP WITH HOMEWORK?
Parents appear to become involved in their children’s home- Parents as a group engage in a broad range of homework in-
work also because they believe their activities will make a pos- volvement behaviors. The very diversity of these efforts ap-202 HOOVER-DEMPSEY ET AL.
pears related in part to variations in the skills, commitments, cations about homework. These parental activities may be
and family situations that individual parents bring to the quite varied, ranging from simple responses to teachers’ re-
homework process; they also appear to emerge from varied quests (e.g., sign homework papers) to committed engage-
school practices related to homework involvement (e.g., ment in programs designed to increase support of student
Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1995). The diversity may also learning at home. They may involve parent-initiated requests
be due to the fact that investigators have seldom defined for information about homework or the creation of shared
homework involvement in clearly comparable ways; opera- home–school goals for student learning. Across studies, par-
tional definitions have ranged from single items on broad ents’ interactions with schools appear focused on increasing
questionnaires (e.g., “I check my child’s homework”) to parents’ effective homework help.
complex patterns of attending to child understanding and
scaffolding activities based on those observations. Involve-
ment behaviors in the literature are summarized within broad Provide General Oversight of the
descriptive categories in Table 2. Specific studies exemplify- Homework Process
ing typical involvement behaviors within each category are
noted in the table. The categories were derived from rational At the broadest level, investigators have examined general
organization of descriptors employed in the studies reviewed oversight of homework processes as parental monitoring or
and are arrayed from less to more complex forms of involve- surveillance, often assessed by single questionnaire items.
ment. Consistent with Epstein’s (1992) widely cited typology Considered in more specific terms, oversight activities have
of parental involvement, these categories of parents’ home- included varied degrees of “checking” on the child’s home-
work activities fit generally within two involvement types: work processes (e.g., ascertaining the child’s understanding
families’ “basic obligations” in children’s education (e.g., es- of a particular homework requirement, encouraging perfor-
tablishing physical and psychological structures for home- mance) and securing others’ help in the homework process.
work performance, interacting with the school or teacher
about homework) and “involvement in learning activities at
home” (e.g., engaging in homework processes and tasks with Respond to the Student’s Homework
the child, engaging in interactive processes supporting the Performance
child’s understanding of homework).
Parents’ involvement activities may also focus more specifi-
cally on the child’s homework efforts, completion, and accu-
Establish Physical and Psychological racy. Parents may employ specific approaches to reinforcing
Structures for the Child’s Homework desired behavior, including praise, reference to family stan-
Performance dards, and extrinsic rewards. They may focus on enhancing
students’ self-perception of ability and the value of effort.
Homework is often presented as a school requirement for suc- They may also include corrections intended to help the child
cessful child learning, and parents often create school-like conform to the learning or performance goals implicit in
structures to support homework success (e.g., arranging the homework tasks.
environment, establishing schedules for time use). In some
instances, parents control these structures; in others, parents
follow the student’s lead or work in other ways to fit home- Engage in Homework Processes and
work involvement into the “flow” of family life. Variations in Tasks With the Child
these strategies have been linked to patterns of child-rearing
values (e.g., beliefs that the child should conform to external Parents’ active engagement in homework assignments has
authority; beliefs that the parent should support the child’s been examined in several investigations in relatively general
unique needs; e.g., Delgado-Gaitan, 1992; McDermott, terms (e.g., assisting, helping, tutoring, “doing homework
Goldman, & Varenne, 1984; Scott-Jones, 1987). They have with” the child). Researchers have also examined two more
also been linked to broader familial cultural values (e.g., specific parental approaches to involvement: structured, con-
Hong, Milgram, & Perkins, 1995; Hutsinger, Jose, & Larson, vergent (often task centered) efforts to help the child with as-
1998; Okagaki & Frensch, 1998; Schneider & Lee, 1990). signments, and informal, student-responsive (often child cen-
tered) patterns of involvement in homework tasks. Some
investigators have associated these two general approaches
Interact With the School or Teacher About with varied patterns of student outcomes (e.g., more struc-
Homework tured approaches have been associated with poorer student
performance, less-structured approaches with better student
Parents also respond to expectations about their homework performance: Delgado-Gaitan, 1992; McDermott et al.,
involvement by initiating or responding to school communi- 1984; Scott-Jones, 1987). Others have reported that parentsPARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN HOMEWORK 203
tend to use both general approaches to homework involve- in regulating emotional responses to homework and related
ment, apparently responding to specific homework task de- learning tasks.
mands and individual children’s learning preferences (e.g.,
Hoover-Dempsey et al., 1995).
Parents’ Involvement Activities in Sum
Engage in Metastrategies Designed to Parents’ choices of specific activities within this wide range
Create a Fit Between Task Demands and appear grounded in their (a) child-rearing values and assump-
the Child’s Skill Levels tions about learning, (b) understanding of the purposes and
goals of homework, (c) personal knowledge of strategies ap-
Parents’ involvement activities also include the use of strate- propriate for supporting child performance or learning, and (d)
gies designed to create a “fit” between the child’s skill levels responses to specific information, from teachers or children,
and task demands. These strategies may involve efforts to about homework tasks and processes. As possible within the
break homework tasks into manageable parts and may involve context of broader demands of family life, parents appear to
shaping homework demands to child capabilities while sup- engage these categories of involvement activity with an eye
porting the child’s “reach” for understanding. Such scaffold- toward “filling the parental role” in relation to children’s edu-
ing may be based on theoretical assumptions that children cational success. Consistent with assumptions–by parents,
learn through guided interaction within a “space” representing teachers, schools, and often children themselves–that parental
the relationship between what the child knows and is capable involvement will “make a difference” in student learning, par-
(with guidance) of learning next (e.g., Rogoff, 1990). Parental ents’ activities have been linked to a variety of student out-
activities within this space often require understanding of comes. Before examining these outcomes, however, we
homework and knowledge of normative developmental pro- consider briefly the mechanisms likely responsible for paren-
cesses derived through personal knowledge or teacher guid- tal involvement’s influence on student learning.
ance. Parents’ involvement activities in this category have
been examined most often in the context of interventions de-
signed to improve the role of homework in supporting specific HOW DOES PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
learning outcomes (e.g., Pratt et al., 1992; Shumow, 1998). INFLUENCE STUDENT OUTCOMES?
Parental involvement in children’s homework appears to in-
fluence student outcomes because it offers modeling, rein-
Engage in Interactive Processes forcement, and instruction that supports the development of
Supporting the Child’s Understanding of attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors associated with suc-
Homework cessful school performance (Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler,
1995). Parents’ homework involvement activities give chil-
Parents may also employ strategies supporting children’s un- dren multiple opportunities to observe and learn from their
derstanding of homework that engage modeling and demon- parents’ modeling (of attitudes, knowledge, and skills perti-
stration, discussion of problem-solving strategies, and evalu- nent to learning), to receive reinforcement and feedback on
ation of conceptual understanding. These efforts to enhance personal performance and capability, and to engage in in-
understanding of homework tasks may transcend the tasks structional interactions related to homework content and
addressed by any given assignment and focus as well on the learning processes.
development of generalizable problem-solving skills and un-
derstandings pertinent to a broad range of learning tasks.
Modeling
Engage in Metastrategies Designed to Parents often serve as salient models from whom children
Help the Child Learn Processes Conducive learn. Modeling theory (e.g., Bandura, 1997) suggests that
to Achievement children acquire knowledge of skills, processes, concepts and
personal capabilities through observation. In observing par-
Finally, parents’ homework activities may focus on the child’s ents’ involvement behaviors, children learn through pro-
development of learning processes and self-awarenesses con- cesses involving attention, retention, symbolic representation
ducive to achievement in general. Such activities may focus on of observed events, and subsequent production of related be-
helping the child assume developmentally appropriate inde- haviors (Bandura, 1997). Modeling is particularly influential
pendence for managing learning tasks. Parents’ activities in when models are perceived by the child as competent and
this category may also enhance the child’s self-management powerful, possessing skills and abilities that they value, and
skills (e.g., for coping with distractions) and the child’s skills similar to self (conditions often pertaining to parents and chil-204 HOOVER-DEMPSEY ET AL.
dren). Modeling is also particularly influential when the tasks WHICH STUDENT OUTCOMES ARE
at-hand are unfamiliar or not immediately followed by ob- INFLUENCED BY PARENTAL
servable consequences (conditions that apply to much school INVOLVEMENT IN HOMEWORK?
learning). Familiarity as well as shared history of context and
experience often function to make the parent an especially sa- Parents’ homework-involvement practices have been associ-
lient and powerful model for the child (e.g., Bandura, 1997). ated, sometimes causally, with student learning outcomes.
Not surprisingly, student achievement has been the most fre-
quently examined outcome. Perhaps more intriguing, how-
ever, are the varied learning outcomes associated with paren-
Reinforcement
tal involvement that are more proximally related to student
achievement.
Reinforcement as a mechanism through which parents’ in-
volvement influences student outcomes suggests that behav-
ior patterns occur and are maintained because of their
Student Achievement
consequences (e.g., Skinner, 1989). Thus, children learn be-
haviors when they consistently associate them with desired
Examination of parental involvement’s influence on achieve-
consequences. Insofar as the parent’s involvement activities
ment has yielded mixed findings. Some have reported posi-
include use of positive and valued consequences in response to
tive links (e.g., Callahan, Rademacher, & Hildreth, 1998;
the child’s homework behaviors, reinforcement influences
Fehrman, Keith, & Reimers, 1987; Reynolds, 1992); others
learning because it increases the likelihood that the child will
have found negative relationships (e.g., Muller, 1995;
demonstrate similar skills, attitudes, and behaviors again. Par-
Natriello & McDill, 1986; Voelkl, 1993). The findings may
ents are particularly well suited for helping children learn
be mixed in part because multiple motivations appear to un-
through reinforcement, in part because teachers (because they
derlie parents’ decisions about involving themselves in their
work with groups of students) may find it difficult to adminis-
children’s homework. For example, parents and students may
ter contingencies of reinforcement with sufficient frequency
find involvement enjoyable when the student is successful,
or consistency (Skinner, 1989). Parents are well suited also be-
and involvement may allow the parent to see the student’s
cause they often have direct knowledge of reinforcement con-
learning. On the other hand, parents may experience demands
tingencies effective for the individual child and are often able
for involvement in homework (from self, the child, or
to respond to behavior directly and immediately.
teacher) when the child’s school performance lags behind ex-
pectations.
Ultimately, however, a solitary emphasis on student
Parental Instruction achievement is unfortunate. Parents’ homework involvement
behaviors are more logically related to proximal student out-
Parents’ involvement activities also appear to influence stu- comes (e.g., attitudes about homework, perceptions of per-
dent outcomes through instructional interactions that range sonal competence) than to student performance on summary
from simple queries to processes intended to develop strate- assessments of achievement. The power of these proximal
gic understanding and problem-solving capacity. Especially variables rests in the reality that student achievement ulti-
insofar as they reflect what theorists have identified as guided mately depends not only on parents’ behaviors, but on vari-
or collaborative learning (e.g., Rogoff, 1990), parents’ in- ables that are often (and increasingly, across the course of
structional activities appear salient to students’ learning of at- development) outside of parents’ control (e.g., classroom in-
titudes, skills, and knowledge associated with school success. struction, student decisions to use skills, knowledge and re-
In collaborative learning, parents share information and lated strategies in learning tasks). Thus, the most critical
structure task-related processes in ways that enable the child outcomes associated with parental involvement in homework
to learn effectively and assume appropriate personal respon- may be found in the attitudes, ideas, and behaviors enacted by
sibility for learning. Such instructional activities may include students in the course of school learning (see also Grolnick &
directing child attention to task components, simplifying the Slowiaczek, 1994; Steinberg, Elmen, & Mounts, 1989).
task as needed, explaining new information, relating informa-
tion to similar contexts, or responding to questions. Even
when parents have less than comprehensive knowledge of Student Attributes Associated With
content or pedagogical strategy, they sometimes have advan- Achievement
tages over teachers in instructional roles; for example, they
tend to respond to their children’s unique learning prefer- Positive attitudes about homework and school
ences and styles (e.g., Hoover-Dempsey et al., 1995; Miller & learning. Positive parental attitudes toward homework
Davis, 1992) and may thus offer help particularly appropriate have been related to students’ development of positive atti-
to child abilities and understanding. tudes about homework and school learning (e.g., Ames,PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN HOMEWORK 205
1993; Cooper et al., 1998; Hong et al., 1995; Sanders, 1998). tributes such as goal-setting, planning, and persistence (e.g.,
Parental involvement appears to support positive student atti- Brody et al., 1999; Pratt et al., 1992; Shumow, 1998).
tudes toward learning in part because it is associated with more
positive student mood (Leone & Richards, 1989) and greater
student enjoyment of homework tasks (Shumow, 1998). More Student homework behaviors. Parental involve-
positive student attitudes toward homework, in turn, are related ment also appears to benefit students’ homework behaviors
to student decisions about time and effort to be spent on home- and performance through its links with student time on home-
work, sense of personal responsibility for learning, and persis- work (e.g., Fehrman et al., 1987; Leone & Richards, 1989).
tence in task completion (e.g., Cooper et al., 1998; Corno, Whether precipitated by parental rules and standards for
1996; Fehrman et al., 1987; Hong et al., 1995). homework behavior (e.g., Natriello & McDill, 1986; Voelkl,
1993) or parent-supported positive mood and interest (e.g.,
Leone & Richards, 1989), more student time on homework
often allows for more parental assistance, more student per-
Perceptions of personal competence, ability, and
sistence, and better understanding than may be attained in
academic self-concept. Parents’ attitudes and ideas
shorter time periods. Parental involvement has been related as
about child abilities and competence conveyed during home-
well to more student attention to homework, increased likeli-
work involvement also influence student variables subse-
hood of homework completion, and better homework perfor-
quently associated with school performance. These student
mance (e.g., Balli et al., 1998; Callahan et al., 1998; Forgatch
variables include perceptions of personal competence,
& Ramsey, 1994; Hutsinger et al, 1998). Parental involve-
self-concept of ability, and academic self-concept (e.g.,
ment in homework has also been linked to more positive stu-
Ames, 1993; Frome & Eccles, 1998; Shumow, 1998), attribu-
dent behavior at school (Sanders, 1998), perhaps because in-
tions about the causes of successful academic performance
volvement conveys high expectations about the importance
(e.g., Glasgow, Dornbusch, Troyer, Steinberg, & Ritter,
of schooling and school effort. Better school behavior is logi-
1997), and sense of mastery as well as tendency to trust one’s
cally linked to greater in-class attention to learning tasks, fur-
own judgements (e.g., Ginsburg & Bronstein, 1993). Such ef-
ther supporting the likelihood of homework success.
fects may occur because parental involvement activities offer
Parental involvement in student homework is thus associ-
a forum within which parents express high expectations, en-
ated with several student attitudes, skills, and behaviors im-
couragement, reinforcement, and explicit “instruction” about
portant to school learning and achievement. Many of the
the learning outcomes associated with effort (e.g., Sanders,
studies offer correlational evidence, which of course suggests
1998). When combined with observation and understanding
that student skills, attitudes, and behaviors may influence par-
of the child’s developmental level and accomplishments
ents’ involvement decisions and behaviors. Nonetheless, the
(e.g., Pratt et al., 1992; Shumow, 1998), parental involvement
analyses offered by some investigators suggest clearly that
is likely to support students’ sense of competence and ability,
parental involvement behaviors influence and lead to student
which is in turn related to positive student learning outcomes
learning and success (e.g., Steinberg et al., 1989; Steinberg,
(e.g., Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994).
Lamborn, Dornbusch, & Darling, 1992).
Student knowledge of task demands and Toward Integrating Involvement Activities,
performance strategies. When parents have adequate Mechanisms of Influence, and Outcomes
knowledge of homework tasks and related work strategies,
their involvement has been found to support positive student Children learn from the processes of parental modeling, rein-
perceptions of task difficulty and manageability (e.g., Frome forcement, and instruction across many homework involve-
& Eccles, 1998). Reasonably informed parental help may ment behaviors. For example, in interacting with the teacher
also function to increase student understanding of the task, es- about homework, parents model the acceptability of asking
pecially as parents offer instrumental help and model questions; in successful parent–teacher interactions, parents
task-appropriate skills (e.g., Okagaki et al., 1995). Parental also increase consistency of task and expectation across the
involvement has also been linked to effective student work child’s learning settings and receive information helpful in
habits (e.g., Cooper et al., 1998; McDermott et al., 1984; Xu “fitting” homework requests to the child’s learning character-
& Corno, 1998), and the development of self-regulation, both istics. In establishing physical and psychological structures,
of which are critical to effective student assumption of re- parents model the creation of contexts for effective work. To
sponsibility for learning outcomes (e.g., Brody, Flor, & Gib- the extent that structuring activities are reasonably consistent
son, 1999; Zimmerman, 1986). Parents’ contributions to with the child’s developmental capabilities and the demands
self-regulation appear related to their involvement efforts of the learning tasks, parents’ oversight and structuring offer
across the grades, their effectiveness in offering developmen- information and reinforcement of task-related attitudes, ef-
tally appropriate assistance, and their support for skills and at- forts, and learning.You can also read
