WHILE PREVIOUS STUDIES HAVE shown the potential benefits of parental involvement for children's learning and development, certain types of parental involvement are considered by some researchers to be ‘ineffectual’ and ‘meaningless’, which leads to the question: What types of parental involvement are meaningful? Adopting Grounded Theory Method (GTM), the study aimed to identify elements that constitute meaningfulness of parental involvement in early childhood education. Interviews were conducted with 23 participants (11 teachers, 12 parents) from three types of early childhood settings in New Zealand. The findings showed that a combination of desirability, practicality and effectuality determined meaningfulness of parental involvement, which was a complex interplay between the dynamics of involvement, activity of involvement and impact of involvement that engaged all parties of the parent–teacher–child trinity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArthurL., BeecherB., DeathE., DockettS., & FarmerS. (2015). Programming and planning in early childhood settings (6th edn). South Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning.
2.
BaumeisterR. F., & VohsK. D. (2002). The pursuit of meaningfulness in life. In SnyderC.R. & LopezS.J. (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 608–618). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
3.
BriggsF., & PotterG. (1999). The early years of school: Teaching and learning (3rd edn). Melbourne, VIC: Longman.
4.
BrunerJ. (1980). Under five in Britain.London, UK: Grant McIntyre.
5.
CoppleC., & BredekampS. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd edn). Washington, DC: NAEYC.
6.
CrowleyM., & WheelerH. (2014). Working with parents in the early years. In PughG. & DuffyB. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in the early years (6th edn) (pp. 217–234). London, UK: Sage.
EpsteinJ. L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 701–712.
9.
EpsteinJ. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools.Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
10.
EpsteinJ. L. (2010). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(3), 81–96.
11.
GalindoC., & SheldonS. B. (2012). School and home connections and children's preschool achievement gains: The mediating role of family involvement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(1), 90–103.
12.
GiudiciC., KrechevskyM., & RinaldiC., (Eds.). (2001). Making learning visible: Children as individual and group learners.Reggio Emilia, Italy: Project Zero and Reggio Children.
13.
GlaserB. G., & StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.Chicago, IL: Aldine.
14.
GlaserB. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory.Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press.
15.
GoodwinW. L., & GoodwinL. D. (1996). Understanding quantitative and qualitative research in early childhood education (Vol. 59). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
16.
HenrichC., & GadaireD. (2008). Head Start and parent involvement. Infants and Young Children, 21(1), 56–69.
17.
Hoover-DempseyK. V., & SandlerH. M. (1995). Parental involvement in children's education: Why does it make a difference? Teachers College Record, 97(2), 310–331.
18.
Hoover-DempseyK. V., & SandlerH. M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children's education? Review of Education Research, 67(1), 3–42.
19.
HughesJ., JewsonN., & UnwinL. (Eds.). (2007). Community of practice: Critical perspectives.London, UK: Routledge.
20.
JosselsonR. (2013). Interviewing for qualitative inquiry: A relational approach.New York, NY and London, UK: Guilford Press.
21.
MasonM. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), 1–19.
22.
Ministry of Education (MoE). (1996). Te Whāriki: Early childhood curriculum.Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
New Zealand Parent Teacher Association (NZPTA). (2015). NZPTA objectives: Parent/Family/Whanau involvement programme. Retrieved 22 October, 2015, from www.nzpta.org.nz/about-nzpta/vision-mission.
26.
NokaliN. E., BachmanH. J., & Votruba-DrzalE. (2010). Parent involvement and children's academic and social development in elementary school. Child Development, 81(3), 988–1005.
27.
OrsatiF. T., & Causton-TheoharisJ. (2013). Challenging control: Inclusive teachers' and teaching assistants' discourse on students with challenging behaviour. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(5), 507–525.
28.
RitchieJ. (2010). Being ‘sociocultural’ in early childhood education practice inAotearoa. Early Childhood Folio, 14(2), 2–7.
29.
SheridanS. M., KnocheL. L., EdwardsC. P., BovairdJ. A., & KupzykK. A. (2010). Parent engagement and school readiness: Effects of the Getting Ready Intervention on preschool children's social-emotional competencies. Early Education and Development, 21(1), 125–156.
30.
StonehouseA., & Gonzalez-MenaJ. (2008). Making links: A collaborative approach to planning and practice in early childhood services (2nd edn). Sydney, NSW: Pademelon.
31.
UrguhartC. (2013). Grounded theory for qualitative research: A practical guide.London, UK: Sage.
32.
WilliamsN. M., BroadleyM. E., & Te-AhoK. L. (2012). Ngä taonga whakaako: Bicultural competence in early childhood education.Wellington, New Zealand: Ako Aotearoa National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence.
33.
YamamotoY., HollowayS. D., & SuzukiS. (2006). Maternal involvement in preschool children's education in Japan: Relation to parenting beliefs and socioeconomic status. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 332–346.
34.
ZhangQ., KeownL., & FarruggiaS. (2014). Involvement in preschools: Comparing Chinese immigrant and non-Chinese parents in New Zealand. International Research in Early Childhood Education, 5(1), 64–82.
