Principal Practices of Authentic Parental an Community Engagement in Urban Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The notion of parents more engaged in their children’s education has been enthusiastically embraced during the last quarter of a century. The acknowledgement of the significance of conferring with parents about their opinions of school and learning has increased. Moreover, the Ontario Ministry of Education published its Parent Engagement Policy and enabling regulations in 2010. Parent engagement practices are delineated as procedures in which parents have chances to affect decisions that will influence their children’s learning. Research demonstrates how consulting parents benefit the parents as well as the schools. There is a gap in the research explicitly investigating the practices of school principals in engaging parents. This qualitative study investigated the practices of elementary principals who had keenly pursued parent engagement. Eleven administrators from three Ontario school boards were interviewed about their practices expediting parent engagement. It was found that these principals used comparable practices, and experienced similar supports and barriers. When exploring the data from the first set of interviews, it became clear that the conceptual framework needed to shift the focus to the practices of principals who strive to meet the needs and work with the strengths of the parents (Hornby, 2011). Also, six of the participants were found to be more reflective practitioners. They had previously published in the field of education or were profoundly influenced by their professional reading. The significance of more reflective practice on parent engagement is discussed. The importance of trusting relationships as the foundation of parent engagement is emphasized. Principals build relationships with and among staff, students and parents to engage parents. Suggestions are proposed for the roles that teachers, students and parents need to play to facilitate parent engagement. Recommendations have been made for professional development for staff, engaging parents, as well as suggestions for the ministry and school boards. Where participants have been able to develop trusting relations with parents, parents are more engaged in their child’s schooling. Keywords: parents, relationships, strengths, reflection
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 | 0.014 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".