Perceived Parental Involvement and Engagement of Students with Learning Difficulties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parental involvement is crucial in student engagement, particularly for students with learning difficulties. Despite various initiatives by the Department of Education in the Philippines to enhance parental participation, such as through scouting activities, Brigada Eskwela, and Parent-Teacher Associations, parental involvement remains a significant challenge. This study investigates the correlation between parental involvement and student engagement among junior high school students with learning difficulties in Davao City, Philippines. Using a descriptive-correlational research design, the study assessed parental involvement in terms of acceptance, aspiration, attention, encouragement, guidance, influence, decision-making, provision of physical facilities, and care for physical fitness. Student engagement was evaluated across cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions. Data from 115 students with learning difficulties were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The findings revealed a significant positive relationship between parental involvement and student engagement, with parental aspiration and the provision of physical facilities being key predictors. The results underscore the importance of fostering strong parental engagement to enhance student engagement, particularly for students with learning difficulties. Recommendations include enhancing communication between schools and parents, providing resources and training for parents, and focusing on student engagements emotional and cognitive aspects. Further research should explore additional factors influencing student engagement to support educational outcomes effectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".