DOCUMENT RESUME UD 035 881 ED 480 993 James, Donna Walker; Partee, Glenda AUTHOR No More Islands: Family Involvement in 27 School and Youth TITLE Programs. American Youth Policy Forum, Washington, DC. INSTITUTION McKnight Foundation, Minneapolis, MN. SPONS AGENCY ISBN-887031-79-0 ISBN 2003-00-00 PUB DATE 161p.; With assistance from Sonia Jurich. For related NOTE studies, see ED 409 462, ED 431 927, and ED 473 901. American Youth Policy Forum, 1836 Jefferson Place, N.W., AVAILABLE FROM Tel: 202-775-9732; Fax: 202- Washington, DC 20036-2505 ($10) . 775-9733; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.aypf.org. Evaluative (142) Reports PUB TYPE EDRS Price MF01/PC07 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE Academic Achievement; Adolescents; Disadvantaged Youth; DESCRIPTORS Elementary Secondary Education; *Family Involvement; *Parent Child Relationship; *Parent Role; Professional Development; Program Development; Program Evaluation; *Youth Programs ABSTRACT This report asserts that given the importance of families to a variety of positive youth outcomes and the emphasis placed on family involvement in federal law, young people should not be treated as "islands" by school and youth programs, separate from the context of their families. The report is the result of an analysis of over 100 evaluations of school and youth programs published in a series of compendia on effective programs. The 27 evaluations that described family involvement in youth programs used four broad categories of approaches to family involvement: communicating with families and reinforcing program goals; designating staff to coordinate with families and professional development; designing and implementing family member-related services and activities; and expanding family member roles and relationships. The report describes barriers to successful family involvement experienced by school and youth program staff and identifies several myths that should be discarded to improve program quality by involving family members. Summaries of program evaluations are included. Three appendices offer AYPF compendia methodology, limitations, and organizations with additional information on family involvement. (Contains 46 bibliographic references.) (SM) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. s htli I III *Lk*-11_ * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Eaueatfonal Ressafen and frnormemenf EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 014his document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. I IL. Points of view or opinions stated in this ko41.1 g document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. I PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY s. A.. krc \lothA qblit50(011 . TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 1 3ESTCOPYAVAILABLE AMERICAN YOUTH POLICY FORUM The American Youth Policy Forum (AYPF) is a nonprofit professional development organization based in Washington, DC. Our mission is to bridge policy, practice and research by providing nonpartisan learning opportunities for professionals working on youth policy issues at the national, state and local levels. Our goal is to enable policymakers and their aides to be more effective in their professional duties and of greater serviceto Congress, the Executive Branch, state legislatures, governors and national organizationsin the development, enactment, and implementation of sound policies affecting our nation's young people. We believe that knowing more about youth issuesboth intellectually and experientiallywill help these busy professionals to formulate better policies and perform their jobs more effectively. AYPF does not lobby or take positions on pending legislation. Rather, we work to develop better communication, greater understanding and enhanced trust among these professionals, and to create a climate that will result in constructive action for the benefit of the nation's young people and their families and communities. Each year, AYPF conducts 35 to 45 learning events (forums, discussion groups and field trips) and develops policy reports disseminated nationally. For more information about these activities and other publications, visit our website at www.aypf.orq. AYPF events and policy reports are made possible by the support of a consortium of philanthropic foundations: Carnegie Corporation of New York, Ford Foundation, Ford Motor Company Fund, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, General Electric Fund, William T. Grant Foundation, George Gund Foundation, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Knowledge Works Foundation, McKnight Foundation, Charles S. Mott Foundation, Surdna Foundation, and others. The views reflected in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funders. Additional copies of this report may be ordered for $10.00 prepaid, including postage and handling in the contiguous United States. Order from: American Youth Policy Forum 1836 Jefferson Place, NW, Washington, DC 20036-2505 Phone: 202-775-9731: Fax: 202-775-9733 E-Mail: aypfeavotorq: Web Site: www.aypf.orq This publication is copyrighted, but may be quoted without permission providing the source is identified as: American Youth Policy Forum. No More Islands: Family Involvement in 27 School and Youth Programs. Washington. DC, 2003. ISBN: #887031-79-0. Reproduction of any portion of this report for commercial sale is prohibited. I THIS REPORT WAS SUPPORTED BY THE MCKNIGHT FOUNDATION 1 ORE ISLANDS: NO Family Involvement in 27 School and Youth Programs American Youth Policy Forum Consultant, Institute for Education and This report is supported by the McKnight Social Policy, New York University; and Foundation. AYPF acknowledges several Richard Mendel, journalist. Oliver Moles, people for assisting in the creation of this Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. publication. This report was written by Department of Education shared Donna Walker James and Glenda Partee. information on federal strategies to improve Significant assistance was provided by family involvement. Colleagues at the Sonia Jurich, previously a consultant to American Youth Policy ForumBetsy AYPF and now a Research Associate at Brand, Samuel Halperin, Ming Trammel, RMC, Inc. and a consultant to the Inter- Nancy Martin and Tracy Schmidtalso American Development Bank. Among those reviewed, edited and provided helpful kind enough to review portions of this report advice on the report. Diana McLaughlin were: Martin Blank, Director for School, assisted in editing this report. Rafael Family Connections and staff director for the Chargel designed the cover and formatted Coalition for Community Schools, Institute the report. The views reflected in this for Educational Leadership; Joy Dryfoos, publication are those of AYPF alone. author; Anne T. Henderson, Senior Contents Executive Summary v Preface 1 Section I 3 Introduction 5 Analysis 16 Outcomes of Family Involvement 31 Observations, Myths and Looking into the Future 33 40 Recommendations Section II: Evaluation Summaries 43 ABACUS: New York City 45 47 Abecedarian Program Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) 51 Alaska Onward to Excellence & Alaska Rural Systemic Initiative 55 Beacons: New York City 60 Boys and Girls Clubs of America 63 Calvert 67 Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools 71 Child-Parent Center 74 Community Schools: New York City 78 Equity 2000 81 jEspatiol Aumentativo!: Houston, lX 85 4 - H: Kansas City, MO 88 Girls, Inc. 91 Head Start and African American Children 94 97 Head Start and Latino Children High School Puente 100 High Schools That Work 104 High/Scope Perry Preschool 108 Home Visitation By Nurses 111 I Have A Dream 116 KIPP Academies 119 Multisystemic Therapy 123 Project GRAD 127 Project PRISM: New York City 131 Sacramento START 134 Success for All 137 Success for All/Exito para Todos 140 Union City School District: New Jersey 142 Appendix I: AYPF Compendia Methodology 145 Appendix II: Limitations 146 Appendix III: Organizations with Additional Information on Family Involvement 147 Bibliography 150 6 American Youth Policy Forum EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Chapel Hill-Carrboro City SchoolsNC In No More Islands: Family Involvement in 27 Child-Parent CenterChicago, IL School and Youth Programs, the American Youth Community Schoolsnationwide Policy Forum (AYPF) asserts that young people Equity 2000CA, MD, RI, TN and TX should not be treated as "islands" by school and youth ;Espaifol Aumentativo!Houston, TX programs, separate from the context of their families 4-Hnationwide and neighborhoods. AYPF fmds that too often youth Girls, Inc.nationwide are treated as separate entities by education and Head Startnationwide youth-serving practitioners, while program strategies High School PuenteCA devised to serve their clients often read like a litany of High Schools That Workin 36 states family-based solutions. In its compendia of High Scope/Perry PreschoolYpsilanti, MI summaries of evaluations of effective youth The Home Visitation by Nurses project programs, AYPF identifies many of these effective, Elmira, NY and Memphis, TN family-like, strategies: include caring adults, create I Have a Dreamnationwide small close-knit environments, articulate high KIPP AcademiesHouston, TX and Bronx, NY expectations and provide long-term support. Multisystemic TherapySC, TN and MO Project GRADCA, GA, NJ, OH and TN No More Iskulds uses an established body of Project PRISM (Pre-Engineering Instruction/ research, over 100 summaries of evaluations Science and Mathematics)New York, NY published by AYPF over a six-year period, to Sacramento STARTSacramento, CA demonstrate the amount and type of family Success for Allnationwide involvement used in school and youth programs The Union CityNew JerseySchool District across the nation. To be summarized in the AYPF compendia, each evaluation had to meet a set of No More Islands combed the evaluation summaries, criteria including showing positive youth outcomes on original evaluations, and survey results related to each such measures as academic achievement, of these programs for information regarding the type employment, earnings and reductions in risky and efficacy of parent involvement strategies used. behavior. While there is extensive research indicating This analysis yielded four broad categories of the efficacy of family involvement and detailing family approaches used by the programs: involvement strategies, the pool of school and youth programs in the compendia are not widely known for Communicating with Families and their family involvement approaches. It is precisely Reinforcing Program Goalsincludes this lack of attention that convinced AYPF to examine methods programs use to express goals and further the family involvement approaches used by objectives, recruit families to a common goal, these research-proven programs: ensure family member concurrence with program ABACUS(Academic Bilingual and Career goals and objectives, establish expectations for Upgrading System)New York, NY levels of participation, and maintain close Abecedarian ProgramChapel Hill, NC relationships. Mechanisms for communications often include special resources to help educate Advancement Vuz Individual Determination (AVID)nationwide and expand knowledge about a particular Alaska Onward to Excellence (AOTE) & program emphasis or strategy. Alaska Rural Systemic Initiative (ARKSI) Staffmg and Professional Development A K Beaconsnationwide refers to a range of individuals with exclusive Boys and Girls Clubs of Americanationwide responsibility for some aspect of family relations. CalvertBaltimore, MD They may be program staff, such as home-school 7 American Youth Policy Forum vi Several of these programs conducted assessment of teachers/liaisons, home-visitors, caseworkers, both needs and assets of family members to and/or community school coordinators, who determine which services could be provided and how function as partners to school principals in running families could be involved as resources. Several of full-service community schools. Also includes the programs also gave family members specific roles professional development strategies, primarily approaches to establish relationships with diverse and responsibilities and invited family members to participate in determining the types of services to be families. received both by their children and by the families. Designing and Implementing Family Member-Related Services and Activities No More Islands describes some of the barriers to describes activities programs offer to support and successful family involvement experienced by school improve the skills of families and strategies used and youth program staff. Additionally, the report identifies several myths that should be discarded to to implement those activities, including home visits/home-based services provided away from improve program quality by involving family members: the program site, and assessments used to Myth #1: "Youth Should Be the Sole Focus determine the most effective ways to design and of Intervention." implement programs based on the resources and needs of students and families. Many youth programs are described as working Family Member Roles and Relationships only with young people and not with their families or communities. This likely reflects both program includes family roles in advisory capacities, philosophy and the training of teachers and youth program operations, and advocacy; also broader community roles (in which families play a part) in workers that focuses almost exclusively on the providing stable leadership for particular reforms young person, without a complementary focus on the home or adult family members. and program sustainability, and helping to extend program capacity, visibility and resources. Myth #2: "There is No Need to Involve the Families of Adolescents." Many of the programs in the AYPF compendia are known for their use of the increasingly popular "youth There is a perception by some teachers and development" approach to youth services which program staff members that it is not worthwhile focuses positive attention on youthdwelling on their assets rather than deficits and viewing the whole involving families of adolescents, because of young person as a resource to programs. It was thus conjectures that families are less important in the lives of adolescents and because adolescents do surprising that more of these programs did not employ a similar approach regarding the family members of not want their families around them and their friends. Research, however, documents the young people. Most of the 100 compendia programs reviewed did not discuss families at all (73%). Too enduring importance of families throughout the often, a reluctance to truly embrace families and the development of the young person. resources they bring to the child's formal and informal Myth #3: "The Success of Family learning environment stems from a sense that families Involvement Can Only Be Gauged Through may represent "problems" either to the initiative or to the Physical Presence of Family Members the child. To the extent that family members may at Schools or Youth Programs." have limited education, different cultural and parenting styles, or lack knowledge of a program's goals, families can be perceived as threatening entities, There is a perception that to be involved with a introducing further challenges to the program or school or a youth program, the family member must be physically present at the school, the institution. youth center or at meetings. Many school and The 27 programs discussed in No More Islands have youth programs seem to determine their effectiveness with family involvement by the overcome some of the hesitation to involving families. American Youth Policy Forum vii Fatherhood Initiative can be helpful in providing number of individuals in attendance at school or information on why fathers are so important to program functions and not by the quality of the family participation. Teachers and program staff children and how fathers can be included in must understand that successful youth outcomes family involvement activities. may be as contingent on the family member's involvement with the young person as the Finally, citing both educational research on family family member's involvement with the program. collaboration and family collaboration mandated by federal law, No More Islands challenges all school Rather than giving up on family involvement, teachers and program staff need to find out more and youth programs to more fully, meaningfully and collaboratively involve families. Policymakers are about families, their availability and other duties also asked to increase research on the extent, type and seek to develop flexible and creative and efficacy of family involvement. Several approaches for capturing their involvement. recommendations also derive from strategies used by Myth #4: "Parent Tracking' is Okay." the programs. Specifically, No More Islands recommends the following: A perception too often exists that it is alright for To increase positive youth outcomes, policymakers schools and programs that serve large numbers should: of low-income children and youth and, by extension, their low-income parents, to adopt problem-based approaches because these Advocate for family involvement in those programs that do not currently involve families. children and families "likely have problems that need to be fixed." Often, practitioners decide on Enhance the collaborative and asset- family involvement activities and develop a family curriculum "track" without a needs assessment. acknowledging nature of family involvement Conversely, there is a myth that parents at higher where it already exists. socioeconomic levels do not need family-related Encourage schools and youth programs to activities because they "have it all figured out." conduct assessments of family assets and needs Myth #5: "Families Have Nothing to and work collaboratively with families to address Offer." those needs most related to the achievement of young people and most desired by families. Some school and youth program staff feel that Fund research on the relationship between family given the host of problems that some family involvement and youth outcomes: in particular, members may experience, they do not have the study the effectiveness of (1) collaborative time, energy or expertise to contribute to school functions. Many schools are more interested in involvement and (2) initiatives such as teaching "parenting" skills than in learning the Community Schools and Beacons with multiple insights that parents can contribute about their means of engaging families and multiple potential outcomes. children. Myth #6: "Involving Families Means Encourage families to increase their advocacy for Involving Mothers." meaningful and collaborative involvement in schools and youth programs, particularly when their children are in their adolescent years. The definition of family in this report is broader than just biological parents and can include Encourage family and community member guardians, grandparents, aunts, uncles, foster involvement in district-, city- or state-wide parents, or others who play significant roles in the advocacy and in creating groundswells for lives of children and youth in a particular program. Special efforts should also be made to broader reforms. involve fathers. Organizations like the National 9 American Youth Policy Forum Support the use of technology to improve Conduct a well-designed and carefully communications between family members and implemented needs assessment to tailor programs teachers, school administrators, other parents. to family needs and eliminate the risk of diverting funds to unnecessary and duplicative services or To increase positive youth outcomes, school and basing services on assumptions or stereotypical youth program practitioners should: views of what families may need. If warranted to reach program goals, e.g. Establish clear and consistent messages for academic achievement goals, and if the budget families that they are welcome in schools and allows, provide a range of services to family youth programs and about their responsibilities members that may increase the supports regarding their child's education. Work with available to children and youth, ensure healthier families to establish appropriate tools and home and family environments, and increase curricula to enhance family involvement opportunities for co-learning experiences among strategies. children and families. Maintain open, two-way communications Assess the purpose and value of home visits. If between schools/youth programs designed to undertaken, home visits should have the goal of establish and maintain positive relations. developing a partnership with families and of seeking mutually beneficial outcomes for the Diversify communication strategies, including the child/youth and the family. Unless undertaken time and place of meetings and the means of with respect and sensitivity, visits used for communication (meetings, e-mail, home visits), evaluative purposes can be seen by families as assessing the relative benefits of the various intrusive and demeaning, particularly if some forms of communication. families are visited and others are not. Involve families closely with important phases of Be respectful of appropriate family roles and their child's education, from daily updates, to work with families to make family and staff roles monthly report cards, to one-on-one conferences complementary and reinforcing, rather than at critical transition points, like entering high adversarial. school. Ensure that family involvement in decision Make family-liaison work a dedicated staff making is genuine and meaningful, and that family responsibility, not an add-on, over and above other assets are recognized and put to use to maximize central responsibilities. Also, ensure all staff benefits to the youth and the program. It is members are knowledgeable about ways of important that a true partnership exists and that enhancing family and community involvement, family members not become "acculturated" to and using their assets to enhance program goals. protecting the school or program's interest rather than the participants' interests when conflicts Collaboratively assess the variety of assets that arise. family members can offer to their children and to schools and youth programs to benefit all children involved. Share power with family members by allowing them to participate in program assessment, design, implementation, and even leadership positions.