Engaging the disengaged parent within education

Studies within education have consistently found that parental engagement within education positively impacts upon the educational success of young people: this is referred to as “good parenting” (Desforges and Abouchaar, 2003; Goodall, 2016; Goodall, 2017; Goodall and Vorhaus, 2011; Harris and Goodall, 2010). After critically engaging with these studies, it could be inferred that they assume a bias against parents that do not, for whatever reason, value the field of education: it positions this parenting as “bad”. As Bourdieu (1977) attributes parental involvement in education to parents of the middle class, it could be seen that this positioning of “bad parents” replicates some sociological studies which found the distancing and “disgust” of working class individuals (Lawler, 2005).  

Despite whether it is believed that labelling some parents as good or bad should be done, it has been found that the field of education can transform a child’s life (Teach First, 2017). If parental engagement contributes towards the educational success of a child, it is important that this is encouraged for disadvantaged pupils. Therefore, to raise the educational attainment of disengaged and underachieving pupils, educators must firstly engage the disengaged parent. To engage the disengaged parent, schools must strike a balance between encouraging parents to attend training session to support their child’s educational progress and treating them as a colleague: the expert on their child. Literature suggests that this balance should be achieved through engaging parents in a sensitive and personalised manner (Goodall, 2016; Smith, 2016).

There are two strategies, within the literature, that have been proven to engage parents in a sensitive and personalised manner: one that I cannot implement but another which I could adapt. The first one is Save the Children’s FAST programme in which parents and children were brought together for a meal within school (Harris and Goodall, 2010). This non-invasive approach gets the parent into the school to socialise with their child. It could make the parent feel more comfortable within the school environment and encourage them to speak about their child’s studies. Of course, as a classroom teacher, I could not implement this method. However, I found it an interesting social strategy to break down the barriers of parental disengagement. The second strategy comes from Goodall’s (2016) blog post on teachertoolkit.co.uk. This post encourages teachers to shift from reporting to parents at parents’ evening to fostering a partnership to support learning. Treating parents with respect, recognising and acknowledging their efforts to come to the parents evening are encouraged to foster this working relationship (Goodall, 2016). Furthermore, Goodall (2016) suggests giving parents a list of questions to ask teachers to supplement their cultural capital, as some parents may not know how to engage with the teacher. Similarly, Goodall (2016) suggests that teachers should ask the parents how they can facilitate learning for their children. Through treating the parent as the expert, the parent will feel more comfortable and at ease with engaging with teachers (Smith, 2016).

Following this research, I plan to approach parental engagement in a different way than I did last academic year. By moving from reporting to engaging parents to support learning and providing parents with resources they may need to do so. This is especially important within my subject, Computing; often parents will approach me and state that they “know nothing about technology” and that it is their children who are the experts. If parents feel intellectually inferior to their child, how can they possibly help support learning? Therefore, I plan to give a list of resources that may help to these parents and move away from subject specifics at parents evening. As Goodall, in a recent lecture, stated: it does not matter that parents do not know the answer, what matters is they know how to find the answer. I intend to provide parents with the means to find that answer.

References:

Bourdieu (1977) Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

Desforges and Abouchaar (2003) The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievements and adjustment: a literature review.

Goodall and Vorhaus (2011) Review of best practice in parental engagement. Department of Education.

Goodall, J (2016) Reporting to Support. Online: https://www.teachertoolkit.co.uk/2016/08/10/parental-support/

Goodall, J (2017) From project to process. a report of the pilot of a toolkit for parental engagement. 

Harris and Goodall (2010) Helping families support children’s success at school. Save the Children.

Lawler (2005) Disgusted subjects: the making of middle-class identities. The Sociological Review, 53(3), 429-446.

Smith (2016) Swing Time. London: Penguin.

Teach First (2017) Income defines how well children do at school. Online: https://www.teachfirst.org.uk/our-mission/the-issue.

The insider/outsider continuum when researching education

There are two ways of addressing the insider/outsider debate: as a continuum and as a dichotomy. It has been argued that whilst conducting research the researcher can find themselves at some point along a continuum of insiderness (Mercer, 2007). On one side is the complete insider: the person who understands the inner workings of what they are researching. On the polar opposite side there is the outsider: the researcher completely new to the field with no knowledge of the topic. However, can one truly be an outsider? Although I would describe myself as an outsider to French art, I still have an opinion or a vague idea of what I think about the topic. Similarly, can anyone be a true insider? Although one may think they know everything about the topic they are researching, they do not know what they do not know (Krunger and Dunning, 1999). Following this logic, I must agree with Mercer (2007) in that the researcher is located along a continuum of insider and outsiderness rather than the dichotomy representing the researcher as either an insider or outsider with no in between. Below is a visual representation I have created to show the continuum vs the dichotomy.

Continuum:

Dichotomy:

Mercer (2007, p.2) writes that the insider/outsider debate is under researched yet important to an "ever increasing number of educational researchers". Indeed, when I decided to enter the teaching profession, I thought the experience would be beneficial for my future career ambitions as an educational researcher; the idea of being more of an insider appealed to me. I had decided that being a secondary STEM teacher allowed me to be in the midst of education; this would help me better understand the institution as well as its current issues. On the continuum, I wanted to be located more on the insider side than I currently was. 

Of course, there are many critiques of researching one's own educational institution, Simmel (1950) argues that the insider can be easily influenced and "blinded" by the familiarity of the setting. In contrast, advocates for insider research actually argue the opposite: the insider is able to comprehend the setting through their expert knowledge of status, culture and power relations (Merton, 1972). Looking back to when I was an undergraduate I can see why we were told to research an institution that we were a part of. Obviously ease of access played a part, but thinking back it could be possible this was due to understanding the culture and group which would help first time researchers. For instance, Mercer (2007) writes that an advantage of insiderness is flexibility; during my undergraduate degree I interviewed two of my undergraduate housemates at around 11pm after watching Made in Chelsea. The insider also negates the disadvantage of the outsider as Parades (1977) and Zinn (1979) found that these researchers are likely to be presented with a distorted image; hello every school when the famous outsider Ofsted comes for a visit.

However, one of the disadvantages of being an insider is that colleagues’ "willingness to talk to you and what they say to you is influenced by who they think you are" (Drever, 1995). During my PGCE year, my then school mentor sent an email around the school asking if any colleagues would allow me to observe them. It could be seen that their idea of who I was and what I would observe influenced their decision to allow me into their classroom. It could be that those who agreed saw me as an inexperienced trainee teacher and they held epistemological power. This highlights the type of power relationship between the researcher and the researched which Mercer (2007) describes as a dimension of the insider/outsider continuum. Whilst observing colleagues I was located at differing parts of the continuum: I am an insider to the school policies and familiar pupils but an outsider to unknown pupils, possibly the subject I am observing and the teacher’s techniques (Olson, 1977; Mercer, 2007; Deutsch, 1981).  It will be interesting to see how these relationships change when I ask to observe colleagues for my masters. Will those who do not hold the qualification feel epistemologically challenged? Will those who hold a masters degree feel more powerful, allow me in their classroom and treat me as an insider?

References:

Deutsch, C. P. (1981) The behavioral scientist: insider and outsider, Journal of Social Issues, 37(2), 172–191.

Drever, E. (1995) Using semi-structured interviews in small-scale research (Edinburgh, The Scottish Council for Research in Education).

Kruger, Justin; Dunning, David (1999). "Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments.". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. American Psychological Association. 77 (6): 1121–1134

Mercer, J. (2007) The Challenges of Insider-Research in Educational Institutions: wielding a double-edged sword and resolving delicate dilemmas, Oxford Review of Education, 33(1), 1-17.

Merton, R. (1972) Insiders and outsiders; a chapter in the sociology of knowledge, American Journal of Sociology, 78 (July), 9–47.

Olson, D. H. (1977) Insiders’ and outsiders’ views of relationships: research studies, in: G. Levinger & H. L. Rausch (Eds) Close relationships: perspectives on the meaning of intimacy (Amhurst, University of Massachusettes Press).

Parades, A. (1977) On ethnographic work among minority groups: a folklorist’s perspective, New Scholar, 6, 1–53.

Simmel, G. (1950) The sociology of Georg Simmel (New York, Free Press).

Zinn, M. B. (1979) Field research in minority communities: ethical methodological and political observations by an insider, Social Problems, 27(2), 209–219