School leadership practices that enhance family involvement: Narratives of Chinese immigrant parents in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By comparing the perceptions and educational experiences of Chinese immigrant parents from two different cultures, China and Canada (Ontario), this research aimed to reveal the impact of school leaders in promoting parental involvement. The research was qualitative, and three participants were recruited through snowball sampling. This research used a narrative inquiry methodology with interviews guided by a semi-structured interviews. The study is grounded on two key theoretical frameworks: Epstein’s (2007) Model of Parental Involvement, and Walker’s Psychological Model of Parental Involvement (Walker et al., 2005). Through thematic analysis of participants’ narratives, three themes were identified: home-school communication, types of parental involvement, challenges of parental involvement, and school management. Study findings and implications for schools, immigrant parents, and other stakeholders are presented. These include the need for diverse parent representation, cultural sensitivity training, and effective communication between school and families. The results of the study revealed that school leaders play an important role in supporting teachers in promoting parental involvement and are also critical in creating a safe and welcoming school environment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".