Understanding Heterogeneous Patterns of Family Engagement With Educational Technology to Inform School-Family Communication in Linguistically Diverse Communities

Abstract

We leverage log data from an educational app and two-way text message records from over 3,500 students during the summers of 2019 and 2020 and in-depth interviews in Spanish and English to identify patterns of family engagement with educational technology. Based on the type and timing of technology use, we identify several distinct profiles of engagement, which we group into two categories: independent users who engage with technology-based educational software independently and interaction-supported users who use two-way communications to support their engagement. We also find that as the demands of families from schools increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, Spanish-speaking families were significantly more likely than English-speaking families to engage with educational technology across all categories of families, particularly as interaction-supported users.

Keywords

descriptive analysis Hispanic Latino/a mixed methods parents and families technology

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Asher

C. A.

Scherer

Kim

J. S.

(2022). Using a factorial design to maximize the effectiveness of a parental text messaging intervention. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 15(3), 532–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2021.2009073

Bacher-Hicks

Goodman

Mulhern

(2021). Inequality in household adaptation to schooling shocks: Covid-induced online learning engagement in real time. Journal of Public Economics, 193, Article 104345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104345

Bergman

(2019). How behavioral science can empower parents to improve children’s educational outcomes. Behavioral Science & Policy, 5(1), 53–67.

Bergman

(2020). Nudging technology use: Descriptive and experimental evidence from school information systems. Education Finance and Policy, 15(4), 623–647.

Bergman

Lasky-Fink

Rogers

(2020). Simplification and defaults affect adoption and impact of technology, but decision makers do not realize it. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 158, 66–79.

Cortes

Fricke

H. D. U.

Loeb

Song

York

(2019). When behavioral barriers are too high or low – how timing matters for parenting interventions (No. w25964). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w25964

Cortes

K. E.

Fricke

Loeb

Song

D. S.

York

B. N.

(2021). Too little or too much? Actionable advice in an early-childhood text messaging experiment. Education Finance and Policy, 16(2), 209–232. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00304

Doss

Fahle

E. M.

Loeb

York

B. N.

(2019). More than just a nudge: Supporting kindergarten parents with differentiated and personalized text messages. Journal of Human Resources, 54(3), 567–603. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.54.3.0317-8637R

Entwisle

D. R.

(1997). Children, schools, and inequality. Routledge.

10.

Epstein

J. L.

(1990). School and family connections: Theory, research, and implications for integrating sociologies of education and family. Marriage & Family Review, 15(1–2), 99–126. https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v15n01_06

11.

Escueta

Nickow

A. J.

Oreopoulos

Quan

(2020). Upgrading education with technology: Insights from experimental research. Journal of Economic Literature, 58(4), 897–996. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20191507

12.

Fan

Chen

(2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1–22.

13.

Garcia

Gerard

S. N.

Christensen

Tiruke

Zamora

M. C.

Grindal

(2022). Sparking connections: Evaluations of mobile messaging on responsive caregiving. SRI International.

14.

Gershenson

(2013). Do summer time-use gaps vary by socioeconomic status? American Educational Research Journal, 50(6), 1219–1248. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213502516

15.

Grolnick

W. S.

Slowiaczek

M. L.

(1994). Parents’ involvement in children’s schooling: A multidimensional conceptualization and motivational model. Child Development, 65(1), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131378

16.

Guryan

Hurst

Kearney

(2008). Parental education and parental time with children. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(3), 23–26.

17.

Hill

N. E.

Castellino

D. R.

Lansford

J. E.

Nowlin

Dodge

K. A.

Bates

J. E.

Pettit

G. S.

(2004). Parent academic involvement as related to school behavior, achievement, and aspirations: Demographic variations across adolescence. Child Development, 75(5), 1491–1509. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00753.x

18.

Houtenville

A. J.

Conway

K. S.

(2008). Parental effort, school resources, and student achievement. Journal of Human Resources, 43(2), 437–453.

19.

Kim

Gilbert

Gale

(2021). Measures matter: A meta-analysis of the effects of educational apps on preschool to grade 3 children’s literacy and math skills. AERA Open, 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211004183

20.

Kim

J. S.

Asher

C. A.

Burkhauser

Mesite

Leyva

(2019). Using a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) to develop an adaptive K–2 literacy intervention with personalized print texts and app-based digital activities. AERA Open, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419872701

21.

Kim

J. S.

Burkhauser

M. A.

Relyea

J. E.

Gilbert

J. B.

Scherer

Fitzgerald

Mosher

McIntyre

(2023). A longitudinal randomized trial of a sustained content literacy intervention from first to second grade: Transfer effects on students’ reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(1), 73. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000751

22.

Kraft

M. A.

Bolves

A. J.

(2022). Can technology transform communication between schools, teachers, and parents? Evidence from a randomized field trial. Education Finance and Policy, 17(3), 479–510. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00344

23.

Kraft

M. A.

Monti-Nussbaum

(2017). Can schools enable parents to prevent summer learning loss? A text-messaging field experiment to promote literacy skills. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 674(1), 85–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217732009

24.

Linse

C. T.

(2011). Creating taxonomies to improve school -home connections with families of culturally and linguistically diverse learners. Education and Urban Society, 43(6), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124510380908

25.

Masyn

K. E.

(2013). Latent class analysis and finite mixture modeling. In Little

T. D.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of quantitative methods (pp. 551–611). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199934898.013.0025

26.

Nylund

K. L.

(2007). Latent transition analysis: Modeling extensions and an application to peer victimization [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles]. https://www.statmodel.com/download/Nylund%20dissertation%20Updated1.pdf

27.

Pila

Lauricella

A. R.

Wartella

(2019). Using short message (SMS) and multimedia messaging (MMS) to encourage positive parent–child engagement around literacy and language development. Mobile Media & Communication, 7(2), 265–285.

28.

Quiñones

Fitzgerald

A. M.

(2019). Cultivating engagement with Latino children and families: Examining practices at a community school. Bilingual Research Journal, 42(3), 343–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2019.1624280

29.

Raftery

J. N.

Grolnick

W. S.

Flamm

E. S.

(2012). Families as facilitators of student engagement: Toward a home-school partnership model. In Christenson

S. L.

Reschly

A. L.

Wylie

(Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 343–364). Springer.

30.

Robinson

C. D.

Bisht

Loeb

(2022). The inequity of opt-in educational resources and an intervention to increase equitable access. (Ed Working Paper No. 22-654). Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/ja2n-ys82

31.

Rouse

C. E.

Krueger

A. B.

(2004). Putting computerized instruction to the test: A randomized evaluation of a “scientifically based” reading program. Economics of Education Review, 23(4), 323–338.

32.

Todd

P. E.

Wolpin

K. I.

(2007). The production of cognitive achievement in children: Home, school, and racial test score gaps. Journal of Human Capital, 1(1), 91–136.

33.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2022). Impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on public and private elementary and secondary education in the United States (Preliminary Data): Results from the 2020-21 National Teacher and Principal Survey (NTPS). https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2022019

34.

Weisner

T. S.

Coots

J. J.

Bernheimer

L. P.

Arzubiaga

(1997). The ecocultural family interview manual. UCLA Center for Culture and Health.

35.

York

B. N.

Loeb

Doss

(2018). One step at a time: The effects of an early literacy text messaging program for parents of preschoolers. Journal of Human Resources, 54(3), 537–566. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.54.3.0517-8756R

36.

Zvoch

Stevens

J. J.

(2015). Identification of summer school effects by comparing the in- and out-of-school growth rates of struggling early readers. The Elementary School Journal, 115(3), 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1086/680229

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.

0.00 MB

0.36 MB