This document summarizes a study that investigated methods for capturing low-income elementary school families' engagement. It reviewed 33 qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies on family engagement. The qualitative studies primarily used interviews and case studies to understand parents' perspectives and practices. Quantitative studies examined the impact of engagement on achievement using parent surveys. Mixed-methods incorporated interviews and surveys. Common theoretical frameworks included Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory and Epstein's overlapping spheres of influence. The study recommends validating engagement definitions, testing measure reliability with subgroups, using qualitative research to enhance measures, and accounting for socioeconomic influences on engagement.

1. Introduction
• Family engagement - the various roles families play in
a child’s education both inside and outside of school -
can favorably influence student school engagement
and achievement (e.g., Kraft & Dougherty, 2013; SEDL, 2013)
• The field has been charged to “bolster the quality of
the evidence base in the family involvement field by
injecting rigorous methods into their evaluation”
(Westmoreland et al., 2009, p. 2)
• Current instruments measure strategies (e.g., volunteering
in school, helping with homework, or participating in PTA) that may
not be contextually sensitive or appropriate -
specifically for low-income families (Bower & Griffin, 2011;
Epstein & Dauber, 1991)
• Structural, cultural, socio-economic, historical, and
political barriers contribute to the complexity of
studying family engagement in low-income
communities (Hands & Hubbard, 2011; Hill & Taylor, 2004; Van
Velsor & Orozco, 2007; Williams & Sanchez, 2011)
• To facilitate family engagement research that captures
all families’ involvement, this study investigates:
RQ: What measures or methods can best
capture low-income, elementary school
families’ engagement?
Methods
• Qualitative systematic review of research on family
engagement in education
• Empirical articles included if:
• Peer reviewed; published after 1990; in the first
200 search results on ERIC (9,344 total*) and
Academic Search Premiere (57,715 total*)
databases
• Search terms: “low-income parent involvement
in elementary education” - singly or in
combination
• Sample comprised of: native, U.S. low-income,
elementary school-age students (grades K – 5)
and their families
• Methodology included: parent(s)’ self-report of
involvement **
• Articles not considered if:
• The research evaluated parent involvement
program, compared parents of different
ethnicities, or described trends in only mothers’
or fathers’ involvement
• Inductive and emergent coding were used to identify
common themes in methodology (e.g., theoretical
frameworks, measurement instruments)
• Descriptive statistics were used to display trends in
methodology
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Brown University Professors Margary Martin, Ph.D.
and Yoko Yamamoto, Ph.D. and Professor Alaina Brenick, Ph.D. at the University of
Connecticut.
Results
Qualitative Studies (n = 14)
• Primarily descriptive studies focused on parents’ perspectives and practices
• Most common methods: case studies and semi-structured, in-depth interviews focused on understanding parents’ reports of their behaviors
(e.g., Smrekar & Cohen-Vogel, 2001), beliefs about their roles (e.g., Mapp, 2003), parent-child interactions (e.g., Delgado-Gaitan, 1992), and expectations for
their children (e.g., Lawson, 2003)
Quantitative Studies (n = 19)
• Primarily outcome based studies (e.g., the impact of parent involvement on academic achievement (Fan & Chen, 2001; Fishel & Ramirez, 2005) using parent self-
report surveys and multilevel, multivariate, linear modeling
Mixed -Methods Studies (n =8)
• Used multidimensional approaches and adaptations on Epstein’s (1988,1990) and Hoover-Dempsey’s (1995, 1997) models (e.g., Kohl et al., 2002; Manz,
Fantuzzo & Power, 2004)
• Considered dynamic reciprocity between home-school connections via interviewing/ethnography & by presenting perspectives from a
variety of different stakeholders/measures
Table 1: Selected Theoretical Frameworks by Methodology
Note. *total number of articles generated does not account for overlap between databases; **results report studies that include measures of parent involvement based
on parent self-report instruments – studies may include other measures (i.e., student academic achievement, teacher perceptions) not reported here; *** indicates
theoretical framework was inferred from literature review & methodology of study; quantitative studies include meta-analyses and research syntheses; Meta-analyses and
research syntheses may include studies with samples of students in grades K-12
Discussion
• Experiments/quasi-experiments are mostly evaluations
of programs and prescribed means of involvement -
Parents’ perspectives should be reciprocally
considered with researchers’ recommendations in the
creation of these programs
• Variation across/within disciplines (i.e., lack of common
definition of parent engagement and the theoretical framework(s) with
which to approach research) makes comparing parent
engagement research and determining high quality,
impactful research methods difficult
• Frameworks that account for influence of background
and context, such as historical and socio-economic
influences, (i.e., Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bourdieu & Coleman
Social/Cultural Capital, 1977, 1988) on family engagement may
improve research on family involvement for low-
income families
Melissa Lovitz
Urban Education Policy, Brown University
Recommendations for Research
• Operationalize and empirically validate definitions of
family engagement for diverse families
• Systematically document and report low-income
parents’ involvement by:
• Testing the reliability of parental engagement
measures by subgroups - especially if instruments
measure parent engagement differently
• Conducting in-depth, descriptive, qualitative
research using ecological, multidimensional
frameworks to enhance quantitative measures of
family engagement
• Revise or adapt measures to be more culturally and
socially sensitive, and better reflect how parents are
involved
• Focus analyses beyond the impact of family
engagement on academic achievement
• Measure family engagement practices over time (i.e.,
longitudinally) to account for developmental
differences/stages and subsequent differences in the
ways parents are involved in their children’s education
• Interview experts in the field about their methods and
suggestions regarding studying low-income families
Exploring Next Steps in Research Methods for Family
Engagement in Low-Income Families
Theoretical/
Conceptual Framework
(n = 16)
Example Quantitative Qualitative Mixed-Methods
Bronfenbrenner
Ecological Systems
Theory (1979)
(n=8)
Used “Family Involvement Questionnaire
for Elementary School (FIQ-E)…Consisting
of 44 parent-reported items… developed
for lower-income urban families and
validated with a large sample” (p. 283)
Subscales included a variety of contexts of
involvement such as home-school
communication, home-based involvement,
and school-based involvement. (McCormick et
al., 2013)
Dearing, Kreider &
Weiss (2008); Delgado-
Gaitan (1992); Lee &
Bowen (2006);
McCormick et al. (2013);
McWayne et al. (2004)
Barton et al. (2004);
Cormer & Haynes (1991)
Overstreet et al. (2005)
Epstein Typology &
Overlapping Spheres of
Influence (1988, 1990)
(n=8)
“By gathering parents’ own descriptions of
their participation in their children’s
education, the study explored whether
parents’ descriptions would match existing
typologies such as Epstein’s… six types of
involvement” (Mapp, 2003, p. 38)
Barnard (2004); Clark
(1993); Ingram, Wolfe &
Lieberman (2007); Mckay
et al. (2003); McWayne
et al. (2004)
Hara & Burke (1994);
Mapp (2003)
Overstreet et al. (2005)
Bourdieu & Coleman
Social/Cultural Capital
(1977, 1988)
(n=8)
“…parents’ cultural and social resources
become forms of capital when they
facilitate parents’ compliance with
dominance standards in school
interactions” (Lareau & Horvat, 1999, p. 42)
Lee & Bowen (2006);
McDonald, Miller, &
Sandler (2015)
Lareau & Horvat (1999);
Lewis & Forman (2002);
O’Connor (2001); Smith
(2006); Smrekar & Cohen-
Vogel (2001)***; Warren,
Hong, & Rubin (2009)
Chavkin & Williams
Parent Involvement Roles
(1993)
(n=5)
Used rating scales and open-ended
questions to examine “what parents say, in
their own words, they should be doing to
help their children succeed in school”
(Drummond & Stipek, 2004, p. 201)
Chavkin & Williams
(1993)
Mapp (2003); Pena (2000);
Smrekar & Cohen-Vogel
(2001)***
Drummond & Stipek
(2004)
Hoover-Dempsey &
Sandler (1995, 1997)
(n=4)
“Assessed parents’ sense of efficacy with a
scale developed by Hoover-Dempsey et al.
(1992).. focused on parents’ perceived
ability to influence their children’s school
outcomes.” (Anderson & Minke, 2007, p. 315)
Anderson & Minke
(2007); Dearing,
Simpkins, & Weiss (2006);
Ingram, Wolfe &
Lieberman (2007)
Mapp (2003)
Limitations
• Not an exhaustive search of the literature
• Focused primarily on methods rather than specific
measures
• Excluded studies on immigrant families from analyses