Testing a structural equation model of partnership program implementation and parent involvement

Elementary School Journal

Volumn 106, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 171-187

  Sheldon, Steven B ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744600092     PISSN: 00135984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/499197     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Berends, M., Chun, J., Schuyler, G., Stockly, S., & Briggs, R. J. (2002). Challenges of conflicting school reforms: Effects of New American Schools in a high-poverty district. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
2. Berends, M, Kirby., S. N., Naftel, S., & McKelvey, C. (2001). Implementation and performance in New American Schools: Three years into scale-up. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
3. Bodilly, S. J. (1998). Lessons from New American Schools' scale-up phase: Prospects for bringing designs to multiple schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
4. Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & Yourk, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
6. Cuban, L. (1998). How schools change reforms: Redefining reform success and failure. Teachers College Record, 99, 453-477.
7. Datnow, A., Borman, G., & Stringfield, S. (2000). School reform through a highly specified curriculum: Implementation and effects of the core knowledge sequence. Elementary School Journal, 101, 167-191.
8. Datnow, A., Hubbard, L., & Mehan, H. (1998). Educational reform implementation: A co-constructed process (Research Report 5). Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence.
9. Dauber, S. L., & Epstein, J. L. (1993). Parents' attitudes and practices of involvement in inner-city elementary and middle schools. In N. F. Chavkin (Ed.), Families and schools in a pluralistic society (pp. 53-72). Albany, NY: SUNY Press
10. Desimone, L. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: Do race and income matter? Journal of Educational Research, 93, 11-30.
11. Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully implemented? Review of Educational Research, 72, 433-179.
12. Desimone, L., Finn-Stevenson, M., & Henrich, C. (2000). Whole-school reform in a low-income African-American community: The effects of the CoZi model on teachers, parents, and students. Urban Education, 35, 269-323.
13. Epstein, J. L. (1991). Effects on student achievement of teacher practices of parent involvement. In S. Silvern (Ed.), Advances in reading/language research: Literacy through family, community, and school interaction (Vol. 5, pp. 261-276). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
14. Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview.
15. Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Saunas, K. C., Jansorn, N. R., & Van Voorhis, F. L. (2002). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action (2d ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
16. Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance through family and community involvement. Journal of Educational Research, 95(5), 308-318.
17. Finn-Stevenson, M., & Stern, B. M. (1997). Integrating early-childhood and family-support services with a school improvement process: The Comer-Zigler initiative. Elementary School Journal, 98, 51-66.
18. Fullan, M. B., & Miles, M. B. (1992). Getting reform right: What works and what doesn't. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 744-752
19. Griffith, J. (1999). The school leadership/school climate relation: Identification of school configurations associated with changes in principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 267-291.
20. Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
21. Hill, N. D., & Craft, S. A. (2003). Parent-school involvement and school performance: Mediated pathways among socioeconomically comparable African-American and Euro-American families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 74-83.
22. Ho, E. S., & Willms, J. D. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 69, 126-141.
23. Hoover-Dempsey K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1995). Parental involvement in children's education: Why does it make a difference? Teachers College Record, 97, 310-331.
24. Jordan, C., Orozco, E., & Averett, A. (2001). Emerging issues in school, family, and community connections. Austin, TX: National Center for Family and Community Connections with Schools/Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
25. Keith, T. Z., Keith, P. B., Troutman, G. C., Bickley, P. G., Trivette, P. S., & Singh, K. (1993). Does parental involvement affect eighth-grade student achievement? Structural analysis of national data. School Psychology Review, 22, 474-496.
26. Kessler-Sklar, S. L., & Baker, A. J. L. (2000). School district parent involvement policies and programs. Elementary School Journal, 101, 101-118
27. Kirby, S. N., Berends, M., & Naftel, S. (2001). Implementation in a longitudinal sample of New American Schools: Four years into scale-up. Arlington, VA: Rand Education.
28. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.
29. Knapp, M. S. (1997). Between systemic reforms and the mathematics and science classroom: The dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 227-266.
30. Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60, 73-85.
31. McNeal, R. B. (1999). Parental involvement as social capital: Differential effectiveness on science achievement, truancy, and dropping out. Social Forces, 78, 117-144.
32. Muller, C. (1993). Parent involvement and academic achievement: An analysis of family resources available to the child. In B. Schneider & J. S. Coleman (Eds.), Parents, their children, and schools (pp. 77-114). Boulder, CO: Westview.
33. Muller, C., & Kerbow, D. (1993). Parent involvement in the home, school, and community. In B. Schneider & J. S. Coleman (Eds.), Parents, their children, and schools (pp. 13-42). Boulder, CO: Westview.
34. Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education, 108, 259-299.
35. Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. Elementary School Journal, 83(4), 427-452.
36. Reynolds, A. J., & Walberg, H. J. (1991). A structural model of science achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 97-107.
37. Reynolds, A. J., & Walberg, H. J. (1992). A structural model of science achievement and attitude: An extension to high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 371-382.
38. Ross, S. M., Troutman, A., Horgan, D., Maxwell, S., Laitinen, R., & Lowther, D. (1997). The success of schools in implementing eight restructuring designs: A synthesis of first-year evaluation outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 95-124.
39. Salinas, K. C., & Jansoan, N. R. (2004). Promising partnership practices. Baltimore, MD: National Network of Partnership Schools.
40. Sanders, M. G. (1999). Schools' programs and progress in the national network of partnership schools. Journal of Educational Research, 92, 220-229.
41. Sanders, M. G., & Harvey, A. (2002). Beyond the school walls: A case study of principal leadership for school-community collaboration. Teachers College Record, 104, 1345-1368.
42. Sanders, M. G., & Simon, B. S. (2002). A comparison of program development at elementary, middle, and high schools in the national network of partnership schools. School Community Journal, 12, 7-27.
43. Sheldon, S. B. (2003). Linking school-family-community partnerships in urban elementary schools to student achievement on state tests. Urban Review, 35,149-165.
44. Sheldon, S. B., & Epstein, J. L. (2002). Improving student behavior and school discipline with family and community involvement. Education and Urban Society, 35(1), 4-26.
45. Sheldon, S. B., & Epstein, J. L. (2003, April). School programs of family and community involvement in children's reading and literacy development. Paper presented at the Developing Literacy for Students in Urban Schools: Research and Policy, International Reading Association and Urban Partnership Miniconference, San Diego State University.
46. Sheldon, S. B., & Epstein, J. L. (2004). Getting students to school: Using family and community involvement to reduce chronic absenteeism. School Community Journal, 14, 39-56.
47. Sheldon, S. B., & Epstein, J. L. (2005). Involvement counts: Family and community partnerships and math achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 196-206.
48. Sheldon, S. B., & Van Voorhis, F. L. (2004). Partnership programs in U.S. schools: Their development and relationship to family involvement outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15, 125-148.
49. Shumow, L., & Harris, W. (2000). Teachers' thinking about home-school relations in low-income urban communities. School Community Journal, 10, 9-24.
50. Simon, B. S. (2004). High school outreach and family involvement. Social Psychology of Education, 7, 185-209.
51. Spillane, J. (1996). School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Education Policy, 10, 63-87.
52. Stringfield, S., Datnow, A., & Ross, S. M. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring in multicultural, multilingual contexts: Early observations from Sunland County. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence.
53. Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2000). International handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer.
54. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55. Van Voorhis, F. L. (2003). Interactive homework in middle school: Effects on family involvement and science achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 96(6), 323-338.
56. Van Voorhis, F. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002, April). Five-year study: Developing quality partnership programs in schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.