AEL 38 (1) 29

leadership and management

IntroductionAll students deserve one year’s progress for one year’s work, no matter where they start (Hattie, 2015, p.3). One in five will start school behind in learning in Austra-lia this year and the major cause of this is their socioeconomic background (Cair-ney, 2016 as cited in Joyner, 2016). Of-ten times when we think of personalised learning we think only of this group of students who are below average. Howev-er, this is not the only gap in Australian schooling (Hattie, 2015a). This article will explore the position that personalised learning is for all students. Further the

Personalised learning for all – are parents the missing key

to closing the gaps?Mrs Cathy Quinn, Educational Consultant, Parental Engagement

article will pose that to have true person-alised learning for all students, parents’ input needs to be valued and facilitated.

Who needs personalised learning?One milestone in life that is not differen-tiated is getting a driver’s licence. Licence eligibility is considered a rite of passage and although driving requires the “in-teraction of multiple cognitive abilities” (Anderson, Rizzo & Skaar, 2007, p7), the expectation is that all eligible appli-cants, regardless of academic capability, can pass the written and practical tests and be licenced to drive. Candidates ap-

proach this milestone with different levels of readiness, yet the benchmark is never lowered and most attain a licence. If this is a model for equitable testing, it is not the benchmark that needs to be differentiat-ed but rather the pathways, support and opportunities of achieving it (Hattie, 2015a).

For students from low socioeconom-ic backgrounds then, differentiating the benchmark with lower expectations and eas-ier work is not the answer (Parrett & Budge, 2012). To think of all students from poor backgrounds as a homogenous group that always performs at the tail end is mislead-

AEL 38 (1)30

leadership and management

ing (Hattie, 2015b). Further to think there is just one tail and one gap between low and high socioeconomic groups is also mislead-ing. In a review of the NAPLAN results for reading in 2010 (Year 3–9 students), Hattie (2015b) points out that there is an achieve-ment gap between the highest performing Aboriginal students and the non-aboriginal students at this level. The same gap exists between the average performing students of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal back-ground and the low-achieving Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students.

What is the achievement gap?This analysis of NAPLAN results suggests

there are in fact three gaps.Pressure on governments to “close

the gap” usually results in government programs targeting the low-achieving gap (MCEETYA, 2008). Hattie (2015b) suggests that paying attention to the gap at the top for Aboriginal students could lead to greater benefits, as these students are likely to become leaders in their com-munities. So there is a problem with Ab-original students and with students at the bottom and middle but there is also a problem with schools cruising at the top (Hattie, 2014 as cited in Magee, 2014).

The focus on the below average stu-dent has allowed the more able to coast

(Hattie, 2015a; Magee, 2014); that is they have high achievement yet limited prog-ress and are failing to achieve learning growth. One of the major causes of coast-ing is the lack of extension opportunities for students to engage in deep learning that accelerates progress (Hattie, 2015). While there are many identified gaps in growth and achievement for students in Australia (Hattie, 2015b), the focus in this article is the need to realise a year’s prog-ress for a year’s input for all students in Australian schools (Hattie, 2015b).

What role can parents play in closing the gaps?Thus, personalised learning is needed for all and the focus should be on getting all students to improve. Teachers are the key to making this happen in schools and high yield strategies (those that are evi-denced-based) are the method for teach-ers to achieve above a .4 effect, identified as the average expected effect size for one year of progress in school (Hattie, 2015). Parents also have an effect on their child’s achievement. Different research studies place the effect of parental engagement between 0.43 (Nye, Turner & Schwartz, 2006) and 0.74 (Jeynes, 2005).

Diagram 1 suggests that when the effect size of teachers is complemented with the effect size of engaged parents, the resulting effect size is above .8 or two years’ achieve-ment in one. This would suggest that when parents and teachers work together the achievement of all students is greater.

In the context of this article, Diagram 1 indicates that for students who come from low socioeconomic backgrounds and who have already started behind their higher socioeconomic classmates, this is good news. Since the life chances of students are correlated with the results they re-ceive at school (Caldwell & Spinks, 2013), it is essential to “accelerate the rate of achievement for these low-performing stu-dents so that three years’ worth of learning is achieved in any two-year period” (Cald-well & Spinks, 2013, p. 135). My research suggests that a possible way of reaching this target is if parents and teachers work together.

What role then can parents play?In this article I focus on my research find-ings about how parents can engage in col-laborative relationships with teachers and school leaders to increase the achieve-ment and wellbeing of their students.

Diagram 1: The combined effect of teachers and parents on student achievement.

AEL 38 (1) 31

1 Parents are the constantThe first reason parents need to be engaged is self-evident as they are the constant in their child’s life. Each year the child usually starts a new class with a new teacher who invariably does not know them.

Every principal, teacher, student and parent knows that not all teachers are as capable as others (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012), just as not all parents are as capa-ble (Carr-Gregg, 2013; Goodall, 2013). Parenting is a lifelong commitment that begins before the school years and lasts long after.

2 Parents can make a differenceThe second reason that parents need to be engaged in their child’s learning is that they can make a difference (Harris & Goodall, 2008). International evidence shows engaged parents can improve learning by the equivalent of six months of school attendance (Emerson, Fear, Fox, & Sanders, 2012). Students whose parents regularly read and talk to them scored on average 25 points or six months of a school year higher in the Program for In-ternational Student Assessment (PISA) (Emerson, et al., 2012).

If we accept that parents can make a difference, then how?What is effective parental engagement?

Parental participation can be seen as a continuum from involvement to engage-ment to empowerment (Auerbach, 2010; Giles, 2006). Diagram 2 identifies the stages of this continuum.

Parental involvement, the first stage in Diagram 2, constitutes traditional school-based activities for parents (Harris & Goodall, 2008) and although these ac-tivities do assist in building relationships, they are unlikely to make any real differ-ence to student learning outcomes (Harris, Goodall, & Andrew-Power, 2009). Mov-ing down the continuum, parental en-gagement focuses on the learning of the child, particularly in the home (Harris, Goodall, & Andrew-Power, 2009; Hen-derson, Mapp, Johnson, & Davies, 2009) and involves a partnership with teachers in the education of the child. Parents have knowledge about their children that no one else has (Pushor, 2011).

When this knowledge is put together with the expert curriculum and peda-gogical knowledge of the teacher for the benefit of the child’s learning (Pushor, 2011), a personalised learning pathway can be created. Parents can be empow-

ered to improve their own resources when engagement in their child’s learn-ing and learning the language of schools is achieved, the third stage on the con-tinuum (Clinton, Hattie & Dixon, 2007). A “synergy” of all three types of parental participation simultaneously results in a deeper level of ownership for parents (Giles, 2006, p. 279).

What are effective parental engagement strategies?Janet Goodall’s (2013) six-point model is a concise global review of research about the common elements of parental en-gagement that have an effect on student achievement and wellbeing. In Australia, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Government has progressed the discus-sion of parental engagement through the work of the Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth, particularly the work of Emerson, Fear, Fox, & Sanders (2012) and Fox & Olsen (2014). Following is my adaption of these.

1 Authoritative parenting This underpins all six strategies (Goodall, 2013). Families are critical to the work of educating young people and the style of parenting they choose affects their child’s development. An authoritative parenting style is a good balance between love and warmth, and setting boundaries. “At home good parenting” (Desforges & Abouch-aar, 2003) has a substantial influence on children’s achievement compared to oth-er factors and is a good predictor of the intellectual and social and emotional out-comes that a child will experience (Emer-son, et al., 2012).

2 Know the value of educationParental engagement has an indirect ef-fect on “influencing children’s orientation towards learning” (Fox & Olsen, 2014, p.17), particularly their motivation and engagement to learn. Parental engage-ment is effective when parents model the behaviors of successful lifelong learners to their children (Emerson, et al., 2012; Per-kins, 2014). The aim is that they develop the beliefs, attitudes, skills and routines required to become an autonomous learn-er with a sense of self-efficacy and aca-demic competence and hence become an autonomous adult (Fox & Olsen, 2014).

3 Have high expectations and aspirationsThe major area where the home makes a difference is in setting expectations while expressing encouragement (Clinton & Hat-tie, 2013; Jeynes, 2005). Parental engage-ment in learning, particularly for low so-cioeconomic background children (Parrett & Budge, 2012), is effective when parents hold high expectations for their children, communicate a belief in their potential to achieve and discuss their child’s education-al and career aspirations (Clinton & Hattie, 2013; Goodall, 2013; Perkins, 2014).

4 Family-led learning in the homeResearch suggests that the greatest effect that parents can have is in making home an extension of schooling that consistent-ly promotes children’s academic achieve-ment (Desforges & Abouchaar, 2003; Harris & Goodall, 2008; Henderson & Mapp, 2002). “Academic socialisation” is an important aspect of family-led learn-ing which goes further than setting the

leadership and management

Diagram 2: Continuum of parental participation.

AEL 38 (1)32

environment for learning in the home and influences social and emotional learning (Fox & Olsen, 2014). It involves linking school work with current events, discuss-ing learning strategies with the child and making connections between their cur-rent effort and achievement of their fu-ture goals of employment or further study (Emerson, et al., 2012).

5 Become engaged and stay en-gaged throughout their schoolingEarly interaction can have long-term ef-fects, as “vocabulary at 3 years of age has been found to be predictive of language skills at 10 years of age” (Hart & Risley, 2003 as cited in Goodall, 2013, p. 140). Parental engagement – regular talk about school and the value of learning (Clinton & Hattie, 2013) throughout schooling, particularly at transition points (Goodall, 2013) – is essential.

6 Family-school communicationWhile the home learning environment remains critical to a child’s education, dialogue between parents and school is crucial to the child’s success. Schooling is relationship based and requires quality two-way communication and meaningful dialogue between home and school (El-liott, 2003; Harris, et al., 2009). Schools that successfully engage parents in learn-ing tend to communicate with them open-ly, clearly and frequently and offer a wide range of reciprocal learning opportunities for parents and school staff (Elliott, 2003).

These six strategies form my conceptu-al model of effective parental engagement which takes on a different shape in differ-ent schools. If parental engagement is not an add-on, but rather a value-add, it will align to a school’s strategic direction and enhance the framework for teaching and learning (Caldwell and Spinks, 2013). Be-low is a case study of how this model has been developed in one primary school.

What is an effective framework for parental engagement?The first pre-requisite for adopting the six strategies is the adoption of new ways of thinking by all school stakeholders to minimise historical and cultural barriers to personalised learning for all students (Henderson & Mapp, 2014). In this ini-tial case-study primary school, the prin-cipal decided to cover two strategies at a time during the afternoon staff meeting for the teachers and evening meetings for

parents. Already in 2016, the staff of this school had spent the pupil free days inter-preting what these six strategies meant for each year level and what behaviours they could incorporate into daily routines to engage parents.

Approximately 30 parents completed the scheduled three evenings of profes-sional learning. Preliminary survey results indicate that there has been an increase in:• The understanding of the six strategies• The focus of both teachers and parents

on their use.The next stage is to further develop

contexts for parental engagement with parent and teacher leaders.

What is an effective framework for parental empowerment?Currently the case-study school is explor-ing a framework for parental empower-ment. This will involve distributing leader-ship (Harris, 2014) to parent and teacher leaders by looking through the lens of in-creasing professional capital (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012). Put simply, the next stage will explore parent leaders working collaboratively with teacher leaders to in-vestigate the potential achievement and wellbeing of students through increasing parent professional capital (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012). Further, it will explore whether parents are empowered by build-ing human capital (skills and capabilities) and decisional capital (ability to make in-formed decisions) through increased ac-cess to social capital by working in collab-oration with teachers. It is anticipated that this stage will build the leadership capaci-ty of both teachers and parents. For some parents, the exit point of this learning is a certificate of attainment; for some teach-ers, post-graduate progression.

ConclusionIf we accept that every student, regard-less of their socioeconomic status or cur-rent progress at above, below or average achievement of the benchmark deserves a year’s progress for a year’s input (Hattie, 2015) then we must investigate further the place for parental engagement in per-sonalised learning. My ongoing research into parental engagement, as described in the case-study referenced in this arti-cle, would seem to indicate that if teach-ers and parents work together using high yield strategies in the classroom and effec-tive parental engagement strategies in the home, the effect size on student achieve-

ment can be greater than the expected av-erage for the year. When frameworks that facilitate parent-teacher collaboration in schools are enacted through respect for the knowledge, expertise and roles each contributes, the opportunity for person-alised learning for all can become a reality.

ReferencesAnderson, SW, Rizzo, M, Skaar, N, Stierman L, Cavaco S, Dawson J, Damasio H 2007, ‘Amne-sia and driving’, Journal of Clinical and Experi-mental Neuropsychology, vol. 29, pp. 1–12.Auerbach, S 2010, ‘Beyond coffee with the Principal: Toward leadership for authentic school-family partnerships’, Journal of School Leadership, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 730–59, available at www.gale.cengage.com/AcademicOneFile/.Carr-Gregg, M 2014, Strictly Parenting every-thing you need to know about raising school-aged kids, Penguin, Melbourne, Australia.Caldwell, BJ, Spinks, JM 2013, The self trans-forming school, Routledge, London, UK.Clinton, J, Hattie, J 2013, ‘New Zealand stu-dents’ perceptions of parental involvement in learning and schooling’, Asia Pacific Journal of Education, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 324–37. (doi:10.1080/02188791.2013.786679).Clinton, J, Hattie, J, Dixon, R 2007, Evaluation of the Flaxmere Project when families learn the language of school, available at http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/school-ing/10001, accessed January 2016.Desforges, C, Abouchaar, A 2003, ‘The impact of parental involvement, parental support and fam-ily education on pupil achievements and adjust-ment: A literature review. Research Report 433’, Dept. for Education and Skills, London, available at http://bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/files_uploaded/uploaded_resources/18617/desforges.pdfEmerson, L, Fear, J, Fox, S, Sanders, E 2012, Parental engagement in learning and school-ing: Lessons from research, Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY), available at http://www.aracy.org.au/publi-cations-resources/command/download_file/id/7/filename/Parental_engagement_in_learning_and_schooling_Lessons_from_re-search_BUREAU_ARACY_August_2012.Elliott, R 2005, ‘Engaging families: building strong communication’, Research in Practice Se-ries, vol. 12, no. 2, available at www.earlychild-hoodaustralia.org.au, accessed January 2016.Fox, S, Olsen, A 2014, Defining Pa-rental Engagement, available at http://www.det.act.gov. au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/687476/52828-DET-Defining-Paren-tal-Engagement-A4-Report_ AccPDF_01.pdf, accessed January 2016.Giles, C 2006, ‘Transformational Leadership in challenging urban elementary schools: A role for parent involvement?’, Leadership and Policy

leadership and management

AEL 38 (1) 33

in Schools, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 257–82. (doi:10.1080/15700760600805865).Goodall, J 2013, ‘Parental engagement to support children’s learning: a six-point model’, School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisa-tion, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 133–50. (doi:10.1080/13632434.2012.724668).Hargreaves, A, Fullan, M 2012, Professional capital transforming teach-ing in every school, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.Harris, A 2014, Distributed leadership matters perspectives, practicalities and potential, Hawker Brownlow, Victoria, Australia.Harris, A, Goodall, J 2008, ‘Do Parents Know They Matter? Engaging All Parents in Learning’, Educational Research, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 277–89, available at http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/29194/.Harris, A, Goodall, J, Andrew-Power, K 2009, Do Parents Know They Matter?: Raising Achievement through Parental Engagement, Continuum International Publishing, London, UK.Hattie, J 2015a, What Works Best in Education: The Politics of Collabora-tive Expertise, Pearson, London.Hattie, J 2015b, What Doesn’t Work in Education: The Politics of Distrac-tion, Pearson, London.Henderson, A, Mapp, K 2002, A new wave of evidence. The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL), available at http://www.sedl.org/connections/resources/evidence.pdfHenderson, AT, Mapp, KL, Johnson, VR, Davies, D 2009, Beyond the bake sale: The essential guide to family-school partnerships, New Press, New York, NY. Joyner, T 2016, One in five Australian children starting school ‘developmen-tally vulnerable’, Sydney Moring Herald, available at http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/one-in-five-australian-children-starting-school-de-velopmentally-vulnerable-20160115-gm6vm8.html#ixzz3zqeBJsAd

leadership and managementJeynes, W 2005, ‘A meta-analysis of the relation of parental involvement to urban elementary school student academic achievement’, Urban Edu-cation, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 237–69. (doi:10.1177/0042085905274540).Magee, J 2014, Gowing for growth, Centre for Public Education, avail-able at http://www.cnpe.org.au/eduweek-december-13/, accessed Janu-ary 2016.Nye, C, Turner, H, Schwartz, J 2006, ‘Approaches to parent involvement for improving the academic performance of elementary school age chil-dren’, Campbell Systematic Reviews, vol. 2006, p. 4. [Oslo: The Campbell Collaboration].Parrett, WH, Budge, KM 2012, Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools, ASCD, Alexandria, VA.Perkins, K 2014, ‘Parents and teachers: working together to foster chil-dren’s learning’, The Research Digest, available at http://www.qct.edu.auPushor, D 2011, ‘Looking out looking in’, Educational Leadership, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 65–68.

Cathy Quinn has devoted the past 10 years in researching the latest strategies on parental engagement and in particular meeting the Australian Professional Standard for Principals – ‘Engaging and Working with the Community’. In her teaching career spanning 28 years, she was a Principal of a Middle school for ten years, and with forward thinking staff, implemented a personalised learning program for all students. As a parent of three children, the last one finishing school this year, she is passionate about redefining the relationships between parents and schools. She would welcome feedback on personal experiences and can be contacted at cathy@parentalengagementforschools.com.au.

About the author

AutoMarque assesses the quality of your questions, the reliability of your assessments and rates your teaching, when you conduct

pre-test/post-test analysis.This enables schools to improve the rate of

student learning to double that of the national average.

To receive a free demonstration disc, go to www.automarque.biz or

Phone Customer Service on (03) 6234 5175

“You can’t improve what you don’t measure.”

GuaranteeingQuality Teaching

AutoMarque does your marking for you using your school photocopier

Here is the evidence of progress in each strand of learning and the ‘effect size’ of the teaching