This case study examined parent groups’ involvement in school activities and their participation in decision making. Research questions included the following: (1) What is the nature of parent groups in schools? (2) What activities and issues gain parent groups’ attention and participation? (3) How do parent groups communicate concerns about school policies and practices? (4) What differences, if any, exist between formal and informal parent groups? Social network theory provided the framework for analysis. Seventeen parents in one K–6 elementary school participated in semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed with analytic induction. Participants’ interactions around shared activities created dense networks that supported school activities and influenced school leaders’ decision making.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BogdanR. C., & BiklenS. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. (Originally published 1983)
3.
BradleyC. P. (1992). Turning anecdotes into data: The critical incident technique. Family Practice, 9(1), 98–103.
4.
BurtR. S. (1992). Structural holes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
BurtR. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 345–423.
6.
BurtR. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In LinN., CookK., & BurtR. S. (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research (pp. 31–56). Boulder, CO: NetLibrary.
7.
BurtR. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.
8.
BrykA. S., & SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
ButterfieldL. D., BorgenW. A., AmundsonN. E., & MaglioA-S. T. (2005). Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954–2004 and beyond. Qualitative Research, 5(4), 475–497.
10.
CheekJ., O'BrienB., BallantyneA., & PincombeJ. (1997). Using critical incident technique to informed aged and extended care nursing. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 19(5), 667–682.
11.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(suppl), 95–120.
12.
ColemanJ. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory.Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
13.
ColemanJ. S., & HofferT. (1987). Public and private high schools: The impact of communities.New York: Basic Books.
14.
ColemanT., & MurphyE. (1999). Combining qualitative interviews with video-recorded consultations: Gaining insight into GPs’ decision-making. Family Practice, 16(2), 173–178.
15.
CreswellJ. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the five traditions.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
DikaS. L., & SinghK. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: a critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 31–60.
17.
EllingerA. D., & BostromR. P. (2002). An examination of managers’ beliefs about their roles as facilitators of learning. Management Learning, 33(2), 147–179.
18.
EpsteinJ. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. In EpsteinJ. L. (Ed.), School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools (pp. 403–426). Boulder, CO: Westview.
19.
FlanaganJ. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327–358.
20.
GlaserB. J., & StraussA. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.Chicago: Aldine.
21.
GoddardR. D. (2003). Relational networks, social trust, and norms: A social capital perspective on students’ chances of academic success. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(1), 59–74.
22.
GoldsmithP. A. (2004). Schools’ racial mix, students’ optimism, and the Black–White and latino–White achievement gaps. Sociology of Education, 77, 121–147.
23.
GranovetterM. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.
24.
GranovetterM. S. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–233.
25.
GremlerD. D. (2004). The critical incident technique in service research. Journal of Service Research, 7(1), 65–89.
26.
GriffithJ. (1998). The relation of school structure and social environment to parent involvement in elementary schools. Elementary School Journal, 99, 53–80.
27.
GriffithJ. (2000). School climate as group evaluation and group consensus: Student and parent perceptions of the elementary school environment. Elementary School Journal, 101, 35–61.
28.
HendersonA. T., & MappK. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement.Austin, TX: National Center for Family and Community Connections With Schools.
29.
KanyangaleM., & MacLachlanM. (1995). Critical incidents for refugee counselors: an investigation of indigenous human resources. Counseling Psychology Quarterly, 8(1), 89–101.
30.
LareauA. (2000). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
31.
LareauA. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life.Berkeley: University of California Press.
32.
LinN. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28–51.
33.
LinN. (2008). A network theory of social capital. In CastiglioneD., van DethJ., & WollebG. (Eds.), Handbook on social capital (pp. 50–69). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
34.
MarshallC., & RossmanG. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
MorganS. L., & SorensenA. B. (1999). Parental networks, social closure, and mathematics learning: A test of Coleman's social capital explanation of school effects. American Sociological Review, 64, 661–681.
36.
Nestor-BakerN. S., & HoyW. K. (2001). Tacit knowledge of school superintendents: Its nature, meaning, and content. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 86–129.
37.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
PongS. (1998). The school compositional effect of single parenthood on 10th-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 71(1), 23–42.
39.
PortesA. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.
40.
RedmannD. H., LambrechtJ. J., & Stitt-GohdesW. L. (2000). The critical incident technique: a tool for qualitative research. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal42(3), 132–153.
41.
SantanaR., & SchneiderB. (2007). Social capital and education. In RitzerG. (Ed.), The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology (pp. 4354–4356). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
42.
SheldonS. B. (2002). Parents’ social networks and beliefs as predictors of parent involvement. Elementary School Journal, 102(4), 301–316.
43.
SheldonS. B. (2005). Testing a structural equation model of partnership program implementation and parent involvement. Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 171–187.
44.
SheldonS. B. (2007). Improving school attendance with school, family, and community partnerships. Journal of Educational Research, 100(5), 267–275.
45.
SheldonS. B., & Van VoorhisF. L. (2004). Partnership programs in U.S. schools: Their development and relationship to family involvement outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(2), 125–148.
46.
StakeR. E. (2000). Case studies. In DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
Stanton-SalazarR. D., & DornbuschS. M. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school students. Sociology of Education, 68(2), 116–135.
48.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
