Abstract
The growing population of young bilingual learners in the U.S. accentuates the need to analyze the dynamic interplays between the perceptions of parents and their children about the students’ learning environment. This study investigates the latent factors undergirding the perceptions of parents and bilingual students regarding various aspects of the learning environments by comparatively analyzing the Bilingual Parental Engagement and Support Survey (BPESS), a parental survey of students’ learning environments, and the Bilingual Academic and Socio-emotional Environment Survey (BASES), a student survey of their learning environments. A factor analysis was performed on parents’ responses (n = 1,212) to BPESS, and three latent factors were identified: Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers, Parental Socio-emotional and Academic Support, and Parental Interest in Children’s Future. A correlation analysis indicated that these factors have weak relationships with the four factors identified from BASES. The three factors from the parental survey did not significantly predict their children’s academic performance. The paper discusses the implications of the findings and limitations of the study.
Keywords
Introduction
The number of young bilingual learners has been growing apace in the USA in recent years, and it is estimated to continue to do so (Paz et al., 2024; Rubio et al., 2024). This demographic shift presents both opportunities and challenges for the educational system, inasmuch as bilingual students exhibit discernible diversity influenced by a sundry of factors, including the learning environment, parental involvement, family emotional nexus, perspective pertaining to school, and interactions with parents and teachers. These pivotal elements not only shape students’ academic outcomes but also influence their socio-emotional development, identity formation, and sense of belonging within the classroom and broader community (Dolean, 2022; MacLeod et al., 2024; Mak et al., 2023).
In education, understanding the complex dynamics that shape the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of bilingual students is essential for creating enriching learning environments and supporting their academic success (MacLeod et al., 2024). A key component of this understanding lies in examining students’ learning environments, which can significantly influence their academic experiences and outcomes (Rivera et al., 2024). Importantly, gaining meaningful insights into these environments requires not only considering students’ perspectives but also understanding how their perceptions relate to those of their parents. The relationship between parental and student perceptions can reveal underlying tensions, shared expectations, or gaps in support that may directly impact learning and well-being. This study investigates how these perceptions are related and explores the factors that shape bilingual students’ educational experiences through the lens of both students and their parents.
Parental involvement is often considered a cornerstone of school performance and student success (Berkowitz et al., 2021; Pinneo & Nolen, 2024; Shi, 2013), yet parents and students may hold differing views on what constitutes effective support and engagement. These differences in perceptions can create a disconnect between what parents believe they are offering in terms of emotional and academic support and how students experience and interpret that support (Barge & Loges, 2003). The significance of this misalignment can be especially pronounced in bilingual households, where cultural, linguistic, and generational differences may further compound these discrepancies (Lopez, 2001). Addressing this issue is essential for shaping educational outcomes and fostering effective collaboration between parents and students, ultimately enhancing the academic success of bilingual learners.
To this end, this study comparatively examines the latent factors or dimensions of parents’ and their bilingual students’ perceptions of the learning environment by analyzing data from two large-scale surveys: the Bilingual Academic and Socio-emotional Environment Survey (BASES), which explores students’ experiences (viz., their relationships, perceptions toward school, academic performance, anxiety, studying and learning styles, and their experiences in both school and home environments) and the Bilingual Parental Engagement and Support Survey (BPESS). The parental survey (BPESS) focuses on measuring the perceptions of various aspects of students’ learning environments (e.g., school safety, communication with teachers, parental involvement in schoolwork, academic and emotional support for students, family routines, discipline practices, and conversations about college, career aspirations, and behavioral expectations). These surveys, developed based on extensive literature review, provide comprehensive insights into the perceptions of parents and students vis-à-vis the learning environment. Informed by Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory—which underscores the importance of understanding how various social systems, including home and school, interact to shape students’ development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Woolley & Grogan-Kaylor, 2006)—this research seeks to deepen our understanding of the learning environment factors that influence and shape bilingual students’ learning experiences by comparatively analyzing the results of parent survey and student survey on students’ learning environment.
Literature Review
Theoretical Perspectives: Ecological Systems Theory and Home Learning Environment Perceptions
Ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998) offers a comprehensive lens for examining how children’s development is shaped by interactions across nested environmental systems. These systems range from immediate settings such as family and school to broader cultural and societal influences (Bronfenbrenner, 2009; Kim et al., 2020). The theory emphasizes the importance of socialization processes within the family, especially the reciprocal interactions between children and parents, in shaping academic and emotional outcomes (Coll et al., 1996; Eccles, 2007).
The ecological environment is conceptualized as a series of interconnected layers, each exerting its own influence (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Ebadi et al., 2024; Rosa & Tudge, 2013; Tiv et al., 2022). These layers include the microsystem, which encompasses the immediate environment and individuals directly interacting with the developing person (e.g., family members); the mesosystem, which involves broader contexts pertaining to the individual, like peers and classmates; the exosystem, which includes the interactions and influences between different contexts, such as the relationship between a parent’s workplace and their colleagues; and the macrosystem, which represents the overarching cultural or societal framework integrating the microsystem, mesosystem, and ecosystem (e.g., the educational system and national culture; Bronfenbrenner, 1977, 1979; Ebadi et al., 2024; Tiv et al., 2022). The chronosystem, as another facet, was later introduced by Bronfenbrenner to capture the dimension of time in human development, including transitions, historical events, and changes in socio-cultural conditions that unfold across the lifespan (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006).
Bronfenbrenner and Morris (2006) further emphasized that the developing individual should not be seen as a passive recipient of environmental inputs. Rather, the child is an active agent whose personal characteristics—such as motivation, temperament, and resilience—mediate and shape the effects of environmental factors. These are often referred to as demand, resource, and force characteristics, each playing a role in how individuals perceive and respond to their ecological context (Rosa & Tudge, 2013).
Interactions within the microsystem—particularly those involving parents—play a significant role in shaping students’ academic engagement and motivation (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). These everyday exchanges influence how children experience support, structure, and encouragement at home. The mesosystem, in turn, includes the quality of relationships between families and schools, which can affect students’ perceptions of school and their learning environment (Neal & Neal, 2013). The macrosystem situates these interactions within broader sociocultural expectations, such as beliefs about education or language use in bilingual households (Eccles, 2007).
Recent work in bilingualism research has extended ecological theory to capture the complexity of multilingual students’ experiences. Tiv et al. (2022), for example, advance a Systems Framework of Bilingualism that builds directly on Bronfenbrenner’s model. Their framework conceptualizes bilingual experience as shaped by intersecting interpersonal, ecological, and societal forces, emphasizing that bilingual students’ educational pathways cannot be explained solely at the individual level. Instead, they must be understood through the interplay of home, classroom, and wider sociocultural contexts.
Together, these systems underscore how both parental and student perceptions of the learning environment are shaped through dynamic, interrelated contexts. When perceptions diverge—such as when parental expectations emphasize academic discipline while students seek emotional support—tensions may arise, affecting students’ engagement and well-being. Understanding how perceptions are formed and expressed within these ecological layers provides a useful foundation for examining the ways in which home learning environments support or hinder students’ academic and achievement (Liang et al., 2020; Niklas & Schneider, 2017; Tam & Chan, 2009; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2019).
Perceptions of the Learning Environment: Parents and Students
Understanding how bilingual students and their parents perceive the learning environment is central to improving academic support and equity in educational settings. Parental perceptions are shaped by a range of sociocultural factors, including educational attainment, socioeconomic background, length of residency, and cultural values (Merali & Violato, 2002; Mohamed et al., 2025; Rivera, Chang, Eslami, et al., 2025; Rivera et al., 2024). Research by Lee et al. (2015) and Surrain (2018) indicates that these perceptions can vary widely, significantly affecting parental engagement in their children’s education. Surrain (2018) emphasizes the importance of recognizing bilingual families’ unique cultural and linguistic experiences, which shape parental beliefs about their role in supporting students’ education. For example, while many bilingual parents highly value education, their involvement may emphasize behavioral expectations, future aspirations, or emotional care, rather than direct academic instruction (LeFevre & Shaw, 2012; Perrigo et al., 2024). Such culturally situated practices can lead to gaps between how support is offered and how it is perceived by children.
The nexus between positive parental perceptions of education and increased academic achievement among students has been documented in previous studies. These perceptions shape how parents engage with and support their children’s learning within the home environment (Ben-Tov & Romi, 2019). For instance, Hughes and Kwok (2007) found that positive parent–teacher relationships are associated with higher levels of student engagement, which in turn contribute to improved academic achievement.
From the student perspective, perceptions of their home and school learning environments are closely tied to emotional well-being and academic performance (Rivera et al., 2026). Narad and Abdullah (2016) and Wilder (2014) found that parental support and encouragement contribute to higher academic achievement. Research has also shown that psychosocial school setting predictors (e.g., students’ perceptions of teacher support, peer relationships, and overall school climate) are associated with students’ perceived academic achievement (Samdal et al., 1999). Parental involvement has also been associated with key student outcomes, particularly social adjustment, which has been identified as a significant and direct correlate of parental involvement (Ben-Tov & Romi, 2019).
The importance of student perception extends into school-based experiences. For example, research showed that students who perceive a lack of safety or feel threatened at school face significant academic pitfalls and are more prone to dropping out; in the meantime, students who feel secure in their school environment tend to perform better academically (Grover, 2015; Kibriya & Jones, 2021). Teacher behaviors—particularly fairness and emotional responsiveness—further shape how students perceive support and affect students’ academic performances (F. Chen & Cui, 2020; Han et al., 2019). Also, feeling respected and heard is essential to students’ academic and social development (Demetriou, 2019).
Using 644 bilingual students’ survey responses, Rivera et al. (2026) examined the latent factors shaping bilingual students’ perceptions of their learning experiences and their relationship to academic performance. Using large-scale survey data from the BASES instrument, the study identified four latent factors: students’ relationships with parents, teachers, and peers (Factor 1); perceptions of school safety and support (Factor 2); academic performance (Factor 3); and anxiety related to home and school contexts (Factor 4). The analysis revealed positive correlations between both interpersonal relationships (Factor 1) and school perceptions (Factor 2) with academic performance (Factor 3). In contrast, higher levels of anxiety (Factor 4) were negatively associated with academic success, signaling that higher levels of anxiety—particularly when rooted in both home and school contexts—can detract from academic success through several interconnected mechanisms. From a cognitive perspective, anxiety can impair working memory and executive functioning, which are essential for concentrating, processing information, and problem-solving during academic tasks (Owens et al., 2012). Emotionally, anxiety may reduce students’ confidence and academic self-efficacy (NikMehr, Salmani, & Jafari, 2021), which may in turn contribute to avoidance behaviors, disengagement, or fear of failure. Environmentally, experiences of instability at home or a perceived lack of safety or support at school may exacerbate stress responses, leaving students in a heightened emotional state that is not conducive to learning. Thus, the negative association between anxiety (Factor 4) and academic performance (Factor 3) is likely shaped by this triad of psychological strain, diminished cognitive functioning, and unsupportive contexts. These insights suggest the importance of fostering not only strong interpersonal relationships but also emotionally safe and predictable learning environments to mitigate anxiety and enhance student success.
Overall, these findings underscore the importance of fostering supportive environments—both at home and at school—to promote students’ academic outcomes and emotional well-being. The results further highlight the value of nurturing positive relationships and emotionally responsive settings, consistent with previous research on the role of student perceptions in shaping student achievement. Crucially, prior studies have shown that learning environments and individuals’ perceptions of them, as well as students’ perceptions of school contexts, are associated with a range of academic, socio-cognitive, and emotional outcomes (e.g., Arens & Jude, 2017; Samdal, Wold, & Bronis, 1999). For example, Liang et al. (2020) found that the quality of the home learning environment at 36 and 54 months was significantly associated with externalizing problems, social competence, and language skills in 6th grade. Similarly, Tamis-LeMonda et al. (2019) demonstrated that early learning environments predict children’s 5th grade academic skills, with these associations partially mediated by pre-kindergarten skills and later learning environments, and that these developmental pathways generalize across diverse ethnic and racial groups.
While both perspectives matter, few studies have examined how bilingual parents and students construct their understanding of the learning environment in relation to each other. A comparative, latent-level investigation of these perspectives can shed light on where alignment exists, where it breaks down, and what implications this has for student outcomes. Informed by ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1986), this study examines the latent dimensions of learning environments as perceived by parents and their bilingual children and investigates how these perceptions are related. By analyzing both perspectives together, this study aims to provide a empirical understanding of how students’ learning environments are co-constructed within families—and how these constructions may support or hinder academic success.
The Present Study
The preceding research underscores how student development is embedded within a web of home, school, and societal learning environments. However, it is not only the presence of support that matters but also how that support is experienced and perceived within and across systems. While parents may perceive themselves as actively engaged in their child’s education, students may perceive those efforts differently—sometimes as pressure, sometimes as encouragement, and sometimes as disengagement. Such perceptual mismatches, especially in bilingual households navigating cultural and generational complexities, may have far-reaching implications for students’ motivation, emotional well-being, and academic performance.
Despite a rich body of literature examining either parental perceptions or student perceptions in isolation, relatively few studies have comparatively examined how bilingual students and their parents perceive the home learning environment. Even fewer have done so using complementary survey instruments capable of uncovering latent factors and the relationship among those latent constructs. This study addresses this gap by drawing on two purpose-built instruments: BPESS, which captures parent-reported practices and beliefs about students’ learning environment, and BASES, which captures students’ perceived experiences in learning environments across academic, social, and emotional dimensions.
Using data from a large, predominantly Hispanic bilingual student population in a Southern U.S. school district, this study first examines the underlying structure of parental perceptions through exploratory factor analysis on BPESS. It then investigates the relationship among the latent constructs of parental perceptions measured by factor scores and juxtaposes the four latent factors or constructs of students’ perceptions of their learning environment, identified in the BASES student survey (Rivera et al., 2026). By analyzing how the latent factors from both surveys relate, we can gauge the extent of perceptual relationships between parents and students. Finally, it assesses whether specific factors of parental perception bear any predictive relationship to students’ self-reported academic performance (Factor 3 of BASES). Specifically, the study is guided by the following research questions:
What latent factors emerge from BPESS?
How are the latent factors from BPESS related to the latent factors from BASES?
To what extent do the latent factors from BPESS predict bilingual students’ academic performance, as reported in BASES?
By taking a comparative, multi-informant approach, this study seeks to advance understanding of how bilingual families perceive and navigate students’ learning environments. It moves beyond questions of how much parents are involved to probe how parental involvement is perceived by their children. The insights gained here are intended to inform more nuanced approaches to bilingual family support and engagement, with the ultimate goal of better supporting the academic and emotional well-being of bilingual learners.
Methods
Participants
The data consisted of two sets of survey responses: parents’ responses (n = 1,212) to a BPESS of the learning environment and their children’s responses (n = 394) to BASES. These children attended bilingual education programs in an independent school district in a southern state of the U.S. The district predominantly served Hispanic students (about 70%), with the majority receiving reduced-cost or free lunches (around 95%). About 89% of the participating parents were Hispanic, with lower percentages of White European (not Hispanic; about 8%), African American (about 1%), American Indian or Alaska Native (less than 1%), and Asian or Pacific Islander (less than 1%). Approximately 19% of the parents indicated that they lived in the U.S. for their entire lives, 75% indicated they lived in the U.S. for 6 or more years, 4% indicated 3 to 5 years, and about 2% indicated 2 or less years. About 48% of them indicated that their household income is $19,999 or less, 18% indicated $20,000 to 29,999, 12% indicated $30,000 to 39,999, and about 9% indicated that their household income is over $70,000.
Procedure
Both parental and student surveys (BPESS and BASES) were developed based on a thorough, extensive review of the literature on effective bilingual education and dual language program models (e.g., Collier & Thomas, 2004; Gómez et al., 2005; Tong et al., 2011, 2014), learning environments, and parental involvement (e.g., Peterson et al., 2005; Ramsdal et al., 2015; Sad & Gürbüztürk, 2013; Urdan et al., 2007). This process ensured that the surveys comprehensively addressed factors related to bilingual students’ learning experiences and parental perceptions. Both surveys were piloted with focus groups consisting of bilingual parents and students, respectively. These focus groups, conducted separately in Spanish and English, helped refine the surveys by addressing any language ambiguities and revising poorly written items. The finalized surveys were distributed to students and parents across the participating schools. Trained bilingual research team members administered the surveys, accompanied by an introductory letter in both English and Spanish. Consent forms for parents and assent forms for students were collected prior to survey administration. The language of the survey packages was determined based on the participants’ preferences indicated during consent.
Instrument
The BPESS consists of 74 question items, designed to gather a wide range of information about bilingual students’ perceived experiences of their learning environment, including but not limited to demographic and family background, activities that parents and their children do at home, parental academic and socio-emotional support, autonomy support, and parental perceptions about children’s schools and teachers. The demographic question items and nominal or construct-response items were excluded from the analysis because their data structure does not fit the factor analysis. Thirty-three ordinal question items were subjected to factor analysis to investigate latent factors or sub-constructs undergirding the BPESS (RQ1). Then, factor scores were computed for each participating parent based on the identified factors.
To capture students’ perspectives, the study also incorporated data from BASES, completed by the children of participating parents. Similarly, BASES, developed based on an extensive literature review, consists of 64 survey items that assess various domains of students’ home and school learning environments, including but not limited to academic performance, relationship with other people at home and school, college awareness, family relations, learning habits, and emotional health. Based on the four latent factors identified from 644 bilingual students’ responses to BASES in Rivera et al. (2026; i.e., Factor 1: Students’ relationship with parents/teachers/others, Factor 2: Students’ perceptions toward school, Factor 3: Students’ academic performance, Factor 4: Students’ anxiety due to their classmates at class or problems at home), a set of four factor scores were also computed for each child of the participating parents, whose response was available. Table 1 shows the list of the BASES items according to the four-factor structure. The complete list of question items for both instruments—the BPESS and BASES—is provided in Supplemental Appendices A and B.
Items Representing Each Factor in BASES (Rivera et al., 2026).
Data Analysis
To investigate the relationships between the latent factors identified in BPESS and BASES, the following analyses were conducted. Factor scores were computed for each participating parent based on the latent factors identified in the BPESS. Similarly, four factor scores were calculated for each child based on the latent factors from the BASES. Pearson correlation analysis was then performed to examine the relationships between the factor scores from BPESS and the four factor scores from BASES, addressing RQ2. Finally, a regression analysis was conducted to assess whether the latent factors identified from the BPESS could predict students’ academic performance, as measured by Factor 3 of the BASES (students’ academic performance). This analysis controlled for students’ grade levels, addressing RQ3.
Results
RQ1 Finding: Latent Factors of BPESS
To explore the latent factor structure of the BPESS, a factor analysis was carried out on the 33 survey items, with the principal axis factoring extraction and Promax rotation methods. Barlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant, χ2(528) = 18,062.58, p < .001, and the Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin index was .95, which is greater than the recommended cut-off value of .50 (Hair et al., 2006). Both indices consistently suggest the suitability of the data for factor analysis. Based on the scree plot criterion (i.e., the elbow method), a three-factor solution was selected, which accounted for about 50.59% of the total variance.
Table 2 displays the three-factor structure with the factor loadings of the 33 items. The items with higher factor loadings in magnitude indicate higher representations of the corresponding factors. For example, Items P60–74 have high loadings (greater than 0.65) on Factor 1, indicating that these items more represent Factor 1 than any other items. Similarly, Items P26, P28–32, P50, and P54 (greater than 0.30) represent Factor 2, and P44–46 (greater than 0.30) are representative of Factor 3. A loading greater than 0.30 in magnitude is generally considered a meaningful loading, and based on this criterion, no meaningful negative loading (i.e., items with factor loading less than −0.30) or cross-loading (i.e., items with meaningful loadings in more than one factor) items are identified. Table 3 presents the list of the survey items representing each factor.
Three-Factor Solution With Loadings.
Loadings ≥ |.30|.
Items Representing Each Factor.
Note. The response scales for items in Factors 2 and 3 were reverse-coded prior to analysis to ensure that higher scores consistently reflected higher levels of the measured construct.
The three latent factors are identified based on the representative items of each factor. Factor 1, accounting for the largest proportion of explained variance, comprised 15 items (P60–P74) reflecting parents’ views of the school climate and teacher engagement. These items captured parental assessments of academic expectations, safety, inclusivity, communication, and teacher responsiveness (e.g., “The school promotes academic success for all students,” “My child’s teacher encourages me to be an active partner in educating my child,” “The school is respectful of all students”). This factor was labeled Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers.
Rivera, Chang, Eslami, et al. (2025) found that parental perceptions of bilingual schools and teachers can form psychometric uni-dimensionality, respectively, based on the Rasch analyses, but the factor analysis in this study shows that these two sets together can also form a unified sub-construct of the survey. This finding indicates that parents who have positive (or negative) perceptions toward children’s schools tend to also have positive (or negative) perceptions toward the teachers, and vice versa.
Factor 2 is found to measure Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support, based on the content of the items representing Factor 2. The distributions of the factor loadings indicate that parents who frequently help with their children’s homework (P26) or take the initiative to read with their children at home (P32) tend to eat dinner together (P28) talking about the events of the school day (P29) as well as to show affection (e.g., give a hug, saying “I love you,” etc.; P30) to or praise their children more often (e.g., saying “good job”; P31). Interestingly, the parents with these behavior patterns are also more prone to collaborate with their children on deciding the recreational activities for the family (P50) and to believe parents’ discipline is effective in improving their children’s behaviors (P54).
Factor 3 is found to represent Parental Interest in Children’s Future, indicating that parents who discuss more often with their children about going to college (P44) also tend to have more discussions with their children about what they want to become in the future (P45). A tendency also exists for these parents to discuss with their children more often regarding the expectations the parents have for the children’s behaviors (P46). However, the association between P44 and P45 is stronger than between P44–45 and P46.
RQ2 Findings: Latent Factor Relationship
To examine the relationship between parent and student perceptions of the learning environment, factor scores were computed for each participant based on the latent structures identified through the exploratory factor analyses of the BPESS and BASES instruments. For the BPESS (parent survey), three factor scores were computed using a sum score approach—a desirable approach for analyzing an exploratory scale (DiStefano et al., 2009). Standardized scores were computed for each item, and items with factor loadings ≥ |0.30| on a given factor were selected. The standardized scores of these representative items were then summed to produce three composite scores for PF1 (Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers), PF2 (Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support), and PF3 (Parental Interest in Children’s Future), respectively. Similarly, the same method was used for BASES to compute four factor scores based on the four-factor structure identified by Rivera et al. (2026): SF1 (Students’ Relationships with Parents, Teachers, and Peers), SF2 (Students’ Perceptions Toward School), SF3 (Students’ Academic Performance), and SF4 (Students’ Anxiety). Higher scores indicate greater presence of the latent construct, with SF3 denoting higher academic self-perception and SF4 denoting greater self-reported anxiety.
To examine relationships between parent and student perceptions, Pearson correlations were examined between the three parent factor scores (PF1–PF3) and the four student factor scores (SF1–SF4). The analyses were based on a subset of matched parent–student pairs, where both parties had complete responses for the relevant measures; the number of matched observations ranged from N = 323 to 374 across pairwise comparisons. Among the parent-perception factors, the highest correlation was observed between PF2 (Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support) and PF3 (Parental Interest in Children’s Future), r = .35. A small correlation was found between PF1 and PF2 (r = .12), while PF1 and PF3 showed minimal association (r = .02).
Correlations between parent and student factor scores were consistently small. The highest observed cross-informant correlation was between PF1 and SF4 (Students’ Anxiety), r = .17. Other parent–student correlations among the latent factors ranged from r = –.01 to .11. Correlations between parent factors and SF3 (Student Academic Performance) were negligible: PF1 (r = .06), PF2 (r = –.01), and PF3 (r = .02). PF3 showed minimal associations with all student-reported outcomes. Overall, the results indicate generally weak associations between parents’ and students’ perceptions of the learning environment as measured by the BPESS and BASES instruments. The next section examines whether parent-reported factors are predictive of students’ academic performance (RQ3).
RQ3 Findings: Predictive Relationship Between BPESS Factors and Student Academic Performance
To determine whether parent-reported perceptions of the learning environment predict student-reported academic performance, a multiple regression analysis was conducted using SF3 (student academic performance) as the dependent variable. The predictors included the three parent factor scores derived from the BPESS: PF1 (Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers), PF2 (Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support), and PF3 (Parental Interest in Children’s Future). Student grade level was included as a control variable to account for potential developmental differences in academic self-perception.
The analysis was based on N = 284 matched parent–student pairs with complete data on all variables included in the model. None of the parent-reported factors emerged as meaningful predictors of student-reported academic performance: PF1 (β = .032, p = .191), PF2 (β = .014, p = .703), and PF3 (β = .045, p = .569). The covariate, Grade, approached statistical significance (β = .414, p = .057), suggesting a trend toward higher self-reported academic performance among older students. These findings indicate that parent perceptions of schools, academic and socio-emotional support, and future orientation did not explain variation in how students evaluated their own academic performance.
Discussion
The present study identified the latent factors from BPESS pertaining to bilingual students’ learning environments and examined their relationships with the four factors identified in BASES (Rivera et al., 2026). It also investigated whether parental factors could predict students’ academic performance. BASES gauged pivotal aspects of bilingual students’ academic and socio-emotional development, including grades, study habits, and experiences at both school and home. The BPESS zeroed in on the perceptions of the parents regarding their bilingual children’s learning environment. By analyzing these perceptions, the study highlights how parental perceptions align or diverge from students’ views or what possible nexus could be identified. This contributed to understanding latent factors of students’ learning environments that shape and impact bilingual students’ educational experiences.
RQ1: Interpretation of Latent Factors of BPESS
The factor analysis revealed three parent-reported dimensions: (1) Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers, (2) Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support, and (3) Parental Interest in Children’s Future. The elicited factors could underscore the complexity of parental involvement in bilingual students’ education, aligning with previous research that emphasizes the multifaceted nature of parental engagement (Ben-Tov & Romi, 2019). The first factor reflects parents’ perceptions of their interactions with teachers and the broader school environment, which plays a pivotal role in shaping their attitudes toward their children’s academic success. However, counterintuitively and contrary to the implications of some previous studies (see Hughes & Kwok, 2007, for example), positive perceptions of school and teachers are not necessarily linked to higher student achievement.
It is worth discussing some potential reasons for this disconnect. Firstly, parental perceptions may be influenced by their expectations and aspirations for their children, which do not always align with the realities of their children’s experiences at school. Parents, for example, may feel positively about teachers and schools based on their interactions but may not fully understand the specific challenges their children face, particularly in a bilingual context. Secondly, the complexity of the educational environment, including factors such as classroom dynamics, peer relationships, and curriculum relevance, may play a more significant role in student achievement than parental perceptions alone. Even if parents view schools positively, these other factors could overshadow their influence. Lastly, there might be a gap between parental engagement and student support, where positive perceptions do not translate into active involvement in their children’s educational experiences. Parents may feel optimistic about their children’s schools but may not engage in behaviors that promote academic success, such as helping with homework or fostering an environment conducive to learning at home.
The second factor, Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support, highlights the importance of emotional and academic support provided by parents at home. This finding suggests that parents who provide socio-emotional support (e.g., eat dinner together with and praise or show affection to their children) often are also more likely to offer academic support to their children, such as helping homework or taking initiative to read. This factor emphasizes the significance of socio-emotional support, as underscored by research from Kim et al. (2020), which points to the crucial role of proximal parental influences in enhancing students’ emotional well-being and academic performance. The strong loading of items related to emotional and academic support within this factor illustrates the important role that parents play in shaping their children’s educational experiences through both emotional encouragement and practical academic assistance.
The third factor, Parental Interest in Children’s Future, suggests parents’ tendency to discuss college and career goals with their children, as a substantive factor undergirding parents’ perceptions of students’ learning environment. While this aligns with research demonstrating that parental expectations and involvement are associated with students’ academic achievement and educational trajectories (e.g., Erickson et al., 1996; Jacobs & Harvey, 2005). the present study did not find a significant predictive relationship between this factor and student-reported academic performance. This may suggest that while future-oriented parental conversations are common, their direct impact may be mediated by other factors, such as student developmental stage, cultural influences, or communication dynamics. The factor still resonates with Bronfenbrenner’s macrosystem, as it captures how broader cultural norms (e.g., valuing higher education) shape parental engagement and expectations (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Eccles, 2007).
RQ2: Associations Between BPESS and BASES Latent Factors
Correlational analyses revealed generally weak associations amongst the latent factors undergirding parental and student perceptions of learning environments. For instance, the modest correlation between PF1 (Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers) and SF4 (Students’ Anxiety) suggests that even when parents view schools positively, students may still experience emotional strain or feel disconnected. Similarly, the correlation between PF2 (Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support) and SF1 (Student Relationships with parents, teachers, and others) was small, indicating that perceived support at home does not necessarily translate into how students experience relationships with other people at school and home. The weak correlation between Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers (PF1) and Students’ Relationships with Parents, Teachers, and Others (SF1) suggests that although parents may hold positive views about schools and teachers, these views are only weakly related to students’ favorable experiences with their relationships at school and home.
Tam and Chan (2009) reported that parental involvement in homework influences students’ academic outcomes differently based on the specific type of involvement and the educational context. In this study, the weak correlation between PF1 and SF1 might point to a gap in how parental perceptions translate into student experiences, as parental engagement in homework or school may not always align with students’ relational experiences, particularly in bilingual environments. This interpretation aligns with research suggesting that parental involvement is not uniformly beneficial and that its effects depend on how and under what conditions it occurs (Pomerantz et al., 2007).
Meanwhile, PF2 (Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support) and PF3 (Parental Interest in Children’s Future) were moderately correlated, indicating that parents who provide socio-emotional and academic support are also likely to express interest in their children’s long-term success. This is consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998), which emphasizes interconnected influences within the microsystem. However, the lack of significant associations between BPESS and BASES factors overall suggests that parental support—though valuable—may not directly shape how students perceive their academic or social experiences.
Overall, the findings broach the broader debate in the literature on parental involvement. While some scholars consistently find that parental involvement boosts student achievement (e.g., Burcu & Sungur, 2009; Wilder, 2014), others contend that its effects are either infinitesimal or even negative (e.g., Desimone, 1999; Domina, 2005). Moreover, there is a view that the impact of parental involvement varies depending on student characteristics (e.g., Hill et al., 2004; McNeal, 2015). This underscores the need for continued research into how the relationship between parental and student perceptions influences students’ academic and emotional development. Such complexity aligns with broader perspectives emphasizing the relational and sociocultural nature of learning environments (Genesee, 2023; Feinauer et al., 2024). Understanding these dynamics can aid educators in developing targeted interventions to improve parental engagement and support students’ overall success.
RQ3: Parent Factors and Student Academic Performance
Regression analysis revealed that none of the three BPESS factors significantly predicted students’ self-reported academic performance (SF3), even after controlling for grade level. This suggests that, although these factors are deemed to be of the essence, they may not have a direct and significant impact on students’ academic performance within the scope of this study. This implies that, on their own, these factors may not be sufficient to drive improvements in students’ academic performance. Previous research suggests that while positive parental perceptions and support are crucial, they may not directly enhance academic performance without considering other various factors (Ben-Tov & Romi, 2019; Hill et al., 2004; McNeal, 2015).
One possible explanation relates to the developmental stage of the student participants, who ranged from approximately 8 to 13 years old. Parental influence may manifest differently across this age span, with greater salience during early elementary years and diminishing direct effects as students gain independence. Alternatively, the role of parents may become more influential only at later stages (e.g., transition to high school) when academic stakes become more visible. At this developmental window—spanning late childhood through early adolescence—children tend to respond more substantively to proximal, autonomy-supportive forms of parental engagement (e.g., help with homework, emotional encouragement, and shared daily activities) than to abstract or generalized parental beliefs about school quality or teacher competence, consistent with research emphasizing the importance of how parents become involved in shaping children’s academic outcomes (Pomerantz et al., 2007). Consequently, parents’ positive attitudes toward schools and teachers may not yet translate into students’ perceptions of their own academic experiences, as such institutional orientations are less visible or salient to children at this age. This pattern aligns with developmental research suggesting that parental influences are complex, context-dependent, and shaped by interactions between individual and environmental factors (Collins et al., 2000). Notably, however, PF2 and PF3 captured parents’ proximal support factors but also did not significantly predict students’ self-reported academic performance; it is possible that these two factors did not sufficiently capture the full complexity of proximal, autonomy-supportive forms of parental support in our sample. Future research could therefore benefit from disaggregating responses by narrower age or grade levels and from modeling interaction effects between age and different types of parental engagement/support to examine students’ developmental variation more precisely.
Additionally, the factors examined may represent a mesosystemic process indicating a perceptual disconnect between home-based parental intentions and school-based student experiences. The BPESS factors may reflect a mesosystemic orientation more substantively than the BASES factors, which more closely capture students’ microsystemic experiences in and out of school. In Bronfenbrenner’s ecological framework, the mesosystem bridges the home and school environments; misalignments at this level can confine the translation of parental attitudes into children’s academic experiences. Recognizing this mesosystemic chasm pronounces the importance of creating intentional structures that connect home-based parental beliefs to school-based student experiences.
Moreover, while parental involvement is widely acknowledged as a critical factor in students’ academic success, not all parents possess the necessary knowledge and skills to properly support their children’s academic efforts (Pinneo & Nolen, 2024). This may further explain the limited influence of parental perceptions observed in this study. Some parents may lack familiarity with the curriculum, the language of instruction, or effective strategies to assist their children academically, which might dilute the impact of their support. This gap in parental capacity can affect how effectively they are able to contribute to their children’s learning experiences, particularly in bilingual settings where language barriers and unfamiliarity with the educational system may present additional challenges.
Furthermore, the survey measures, while capturing key aspects of parental practices in students’ learning environments, may not reflect the full complexity of students’ learning environments and academic performances. It is possible that other contextual factors not examined in this study—such as variations in school environments, instructional practices, or individual student characteristics—may interact with parental influences in subtle and multifaceted ways. These considerations suggest the value of further research that incorporates additional variables and perspectives. Future studies could explore how aspects, such as the home learning environment, individual students’ personal dispositions, or broader socio-cultural dynamics, intersect with parental perceptions to influence students’ academic achievement. A deeper understanding of these interactions may help inform more comprehensive strategies for supporting bilingual students and strengthening the connections between home and school environments (Liang et al., 2020; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2019).
The factors examined may also represent a mesosystemic process pointing to the disconnect that may exist between parents and the school system. It may be the case that the microsystemic process between parents and students is more evident regarding academic engagement and motivation, which are more concrete aspects that children at this developmental age range may respond better through home interactions with parents. In this study, the BPESS factors seem to be more detached from students and more relevant to parental engagement at the school level (e.g., mesosystemic). In other words, it is possible that our analysis is pointing to that disconnect between parents and school environments. This is an important preliminary finding that warrants further examination in future research.
To address these findings more concretely, the consideration of targeted, practice-based strategies that can bridge perceptual gaps between parents, students, and schools is of paramount importance. One auspicious direction is the implementation of bilingual family engagement initiatives that explicitly aim to align expectations between school, home, and student experiences. For example, student-led conferences that include discussions around emotional well-being, academic support needs, and family-school relationships may help surface hidden discrepancies in perception as well as disconnections between the home and school environments. Moreover, culturally responsive workshops that help parents understand the school’s academic demands—and vice versa, help teachers understand the cultural norms and communication styles within bilingual homes—could foster more accurate mutual understanding. At a structural level, schools might consider co-designing feedback mechanisms where students and parents reflect together on perceived support and educational experiences. These interventions, grounded in reciprocal communication and cultural awareness, have the potential to turn perceptual divergence into actionable dialogue that enhances bilingual students’ educational and emotional outcomes. Beyond these practice-based approaches, schools can also cultivate environments that validate and integrate parental expertise into instructional and decision-making processes. When parents’ cultural and experiential knowledge is recognized as an educational asset rather than a barrier, home–school partnerships become more sustainable. Such reciprocal, trust-based engagement can help counteract the mesosystemic disconnect by ensuring that parents’ perspectives meaningfully inform classroom practices and school policies.
Conclusion
This study examined how parents and their bilingual children perceive the learning environment by analyzing responses from two large-scale surveys: BPESS and BASES. Through exploratory factor analysis, three latent constructs were identified from the BPESS: (1) Parents’ Perceptions of Schools and Teachers, (2) Parental Socio-Emotional and Academic Support, and (3) Parental Interest in Children’s Future. These factors offer a meaningful framework for understanding different dimensions of parental engagement in shaping bilingual students’ learning experiences.
Although the BPESS factors captured important aspects of parental perceptions, the relationships between these and the student-reported BASES factors were generally weak. Minimal correlations were found between matched parent–student factor scores, suggesting that parents’ and students’ perceptions of the learning environment may diverge in substantive ways. This was particularly evident in the weak associations between parents’ perceived support or satisfaction with bilingual schools/teachers and students’ academic performance. Moreover, the regression analysis revealed that none of the BPESS factors significantly predicted student-reported academic performance. Together, these findings suggest that while parents may hold positive beliefs about their role, school quality, or their children’s futures, these beliefs may not directly affect or shape bilingual students’ learning experiences.
These findings underscore the complexity of parent–child dynamics in bilingual education. Perceptual alignment between parents and students may be influenced by a host of contextual factors, such as developmental stage, family communication patterns, or sociocultural norms, which were not fully captured in the current study. While parents may engage in supportive behaviors or express high aspirations, their impact may be indirect, moderated by students’ individual experiences and interpretations. Through a comprehensive review of classroom observation instruments used in bilingual education research, Jimenez et al. (2026) underscored the need for developing new instruments capable of capturing the multiple dimensions of bilingual and dual-language classrooms. The findings of this study can contribute to the design and development of such tools.
Limitations include the study’s regional focus, reliance on self-reports for the measure of students’ academic performance, and cross-sectional design. Future research can build on these findings, by examining these dynamics longitudinally across more diverse contexts and by using more objective academic performance measures. Given the extensive body of literature and data available at the primary level on the factors explored in this study, future research may benefit from employing more sophisticated statistical methods, such as meta-structural equation modeling (meta-SEM; see Raeisi-Vanani et al., 2022), to examine the extent to which the relationships identified in this study—such as those between parental perceptions and student outcomes—hold consistently across multiple studies or different populations.
Building upon this methodological trajectory, future analyses could also employ multilevel modeling or structural equation modeling to investigate the indirect, mediated, and contextual pathways through which parental engagement influences student outcomes across school, classroom, and student levels. For example, using multilevel structural equation modeling, Rivera, Chang, Kwok, et al. (2025) report that both parental involvement and teacher support were strong predictors of bilingual students’ self-efficacy and activity engagement in STEM class at the student level, but only teacher support showed a significant effect on students’ activity engagement at the classroom level. Such analytical approaches would enable more ecological interpretations of how parental involvement and perceptions operate, providing a more granular understanding of the mesosystemic alignment discussed in this study.
A more expansive and longitudinal research design would also help clarify how parent–student perceptual alignment develops across different stages of childhood and adolescence. For instance, while parental influence may be more salient in early elementary years, its impact may either decline as students gain independence or reemerge in later stages when academic pressures intensify (e.g., transitions to middle or high school). Future research that includes developmental perspectives and mixed-methods approaches could thus offer a more nuanced and generalizable understanding of the evolving interplay between familial, academic, and sociocultural factors. Importantly, cultural practices, preferences, and expectations can vary substantially across sociocultural groups, reflecting distinct patterns of culture-specific norms even in everyday life (e.g., Strauss et al., 2018); therefore, it would be meaningful for future research to investigate how the cultural backgrounds of students and parents can shape their perceptions and interactions within diverse learning environments.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-hjb-10.1177_07399863261437944 – Supplemental material for Investigating the Latent Factors of Parental and Bilingual Student Perceptions of Learning Environment: Evidence From Two Large-Scale Surveys
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-hjb-10.1177_07399863261437944 for Investigating the Latent Factors of Parental and Bilingual Student Perceptions of Learning Environment: Evidence From Two Large-Scale Surveys by Heesun Chang, Hector Rivera and Amin Raeisi-Vanani in Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-2-hjb-10.1177_07399863261437944 – Supplemental material for Investigating the Latent Factors of Parental and Bilingual Student Perceptions of Learning Environment: Evidence From Two Large-Scale Surveys
Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-hjb-10.1177_07399863261437944 for Investigating the Latent Factors of Parental and Bilingual Student Perceptions of Learning Environment: Evidence From Two Large-Scale Surveys by Heesun Chang, Hector Rivera and Amin Raeisi-Vanani in Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences
Footnotes
Ethical Considerations
This study was conducted in accordance with ethical standards for research involving human participants.
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their participation in the study.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition (T365Z160222).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
Author Biographies
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
