Inequality of access to educational resources by different social classes has been widely documented, and schools have instituted parent programs to ameliorate this situation. However, lacking are theoretically based studies that explain how and why a program may be effective in bringing about change. The authors studied a 12-week parent leadership program for Hispanics that provided opportunities for interaction, knowledge exchange, leadership development, trust building, and collective action—important components of social and intellectual capital. Their research shows that when parents participate in leadership development, they are empowered to effect changes that benefit their children through individual and collective actions. Some parent graduates founded organizations that continue to affect the educational system. The authors argue that the concepts of social and intellectual capital can inform parent involvement research and practice because they explain a community’s capability to engage in new forms of action.
AllenJ.BarrD.CochranM.DeanC.GreeneJ. (1989). The empowerment process: The underlying model. Networking Bulletin—Empowerment and Family Support, 1, 1–12.
2.
BechelyL. N. (1998). Building parent leadership in curriculum reform through school/university collaboration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
3.
BoisotM. (1995). Information space: A framework for learning in organizations, institutions and culture. London, UK: Routledge.
4.
BolandR.TenkasiR. (1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowing. Organization Science, 6(4), 350–373.
5.
BronfenbrennerU. (1978). Who needs parent education?Teachers College Record, 79, 767–787.
6.
BurtR.S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 339–365.
7.
CarbonaroW. (1998). A little help from my friend’s parents: Intergenerational closure and educational outcomes. Sociology of Education, 71, 295–313.
8.
CarrA. A. (1996). The participation “race”: Kentucky’s site-based decision teams. School Community Journal, 6(2), 27–45.
9.
ClarkR. M. (1983). Family life and school achievement: Why poor Black children succeed or fail. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
10.
ClarkR. M. (1987). Family organization, communication styles, and children’s competence development. Equity and Choice, 4, 27–34.
11.
CochranM.DeanC. (1991). Home-school relations and the empowerment process. Elementary School Journal, 91(3), 261.
12.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Suppl.), S95–S120.
13.
CorbettD.WilsonB. (2008). Knowledge is empowering: Commonwealth Institute for Parent Leadership Fellows’ involvement and influence after training. Louisville, KY: Prichard Committee Commonwealth Institute for Parent Leadership.
14.
Delgado-GaitanC. (1991). Involving parents in the schools: A process of empowerment. American Journal of Education, 100(1), 20–46.
15.
Delgado-GaitanC.TruebaH. (1991). Crossing cultural borders: Education for immigrant families in America. London, UK: Falmer.
16.
DornbuschS. M.RitterP. L. (1988, Winter). Parents of high school students: A neglected resource. Educational Horizons, 75–77.
17.
EmersonR.FretzR.ShawL. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18.
EpsteinJ. L. (1991). Effects on student achievement of teachers’ practices of parent involvement. Advances in Reading/Language Research, 5, 261–276.
19.
FineM. (1993). [Ap]parent involvement: Reflections on parents, power, and urban public schools. Teachers College Record, 94(4), 683–710.
20.
FreireP. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
21.
FukuyamaF. (1995). Trust: Social virtues and the creation of prosperity. London, UK: Hamish Hamilton.
22.
FullanM. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. New York, NY: Falmer.
23.
HendersonA. T. (2002). No Child Left Behind: What’s in it for parents. Arlington, VA: Parent Leadership Associates.
24.
HendersonA. T. (2004). The case for parent leadership. Lexington, KY: Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence.
25.
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 & Community Connections With Schools, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Hoover-DempseyK.SandlerH. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education?Review of Educational Research, 67, 3–42.
28.
HorvatE.WeiningerE. B.LareauA. (2003). From social ties to social capital: Class differences in the relations between schools and parent networks. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 319–351.
29.
JacksonB.CooperB. (1989). Parent choice and empowerment: New roles for parents. Urban Education, 24(3), 263–286.
30.
KellaghanT.SloaneK.AlvarezB.BloomB. S. (1993). The home environment & school learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
31.
KonzalJ. L. (1997). Teachers and parents working together for curriculum reform: Possibility or pipe dream?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
32.
KramerR. M.GoldmanL. (1995). Helping the group or helping yourself? Social motives and group identity in resource dilemmas. In SchroederD. A. (Ed.), Social dilemmas (pp. 49–68). New York, NY: Praeger.
33.
LareauA. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60(2), 73–84.
34.
LareauA. (1989). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary schools. London, UK: Falmer.
35.
LareauA. (2002). Invisible inequality: Social class and childrearing in Black families and White families. American Sociology Review, 67, 747–776.
36.
LareauA. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
37.
LareauA.WeiningerE. (2003). Cultural capital in educational research: A critical assessment. Theory and Society, 32(5–6), 567–606.
38.
LinN. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
39.
LopezM. E.KreiderH.CoffmanJ. (2005). Intermediary organizations as capacity builders in family education involvement. Urban Education, 40(1), 78–105.
40.
MarsdenP. V. (1998). Homogeneity in Confiding Relations. Social Networks, 57, 57–76.
41.
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. (n.d.). Mission statement. Retrieved May 10, 2007, from http://maldef.org/about/mission/
42.
MedirattaK.ShahS.McAlisterS. (2008). Organized communities, stronger schools: A preview of research findings. Providence, RI: Brown University, Annenberg Institute for School Reform.
43.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
44.
MisztalB. (1996). Trust in modern societies. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
45.
MoranP.GhoshalS. (1996). Value creation by firms. In KeysJ. B.DosierL. N. (Eds.), Academy of Management best paper proceedings (pp. 41–45). Cincinnati, OH: Academy of Management.
46.
NahapietJ. (1996). Managing relationships with global clients: Value creation through cross-borders networks. Paper presented at the 16th annual conference of the Strategic Management Society, Phoenix, AZ.
47.
NahapietJ.GhoshalS. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
48.
OakesJ.RogersJ. (2007). Radical change through radical means: learning power. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 193–206.
49.
PortesA. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.
50.
PutnamR. D. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. American Prospect, 13, 35–42.
51.
ReamR. K. (2005). Toward understanding how social capital mediates the impact of mobility on Mexican American achievement. Social Forces, 84(1), 201–224.
52.
ReamR. K.PalardyG. (2008). Reexamining social class differences in the availability and the educational utility of parental social capital. American Educational Research Journal, 45(2), 238–273.
53.
RingP. S.Van de VenA. H. (1992). Structuring cooperative behaviors between organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 483–498.
54.
SandersM. G. (1998). The effects of school family and community support on the academic achievement of African-American adolescents. Urban Education, 33(3), 385–409.
55.
SarasonS. B. (1995). Parent involvement and the political principal. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
56.
SergiovanniT. J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
57.
SheldonS. B.EpsteinJ. L. (2005). Involvement counts: Family and community partners and mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 98(4), 196–209.
58.
SpenderJ.-C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 387–412.
59.
Stanton-SalazarR. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1–40.
60.
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, 116–135.
61.
StelmachB. L. (2004). Unlocking the schoolhouse doors: Institutional constraints on parent and community involvement in a school improvement initiative. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 31. Retrieved April, 21, 2008, from https://www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/stelmach.html
62.
ValdezG. (1996). Con respeto: Bridging the distances between culturally diverse families and schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
63.
VincentC. (1996). Parent empowerment? Collective action and inaction in education. Oxford Review of Education, 22(4), 465–482.
64.
YinR. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
