Parent–teacher e-mail strategies at the elementary and secondary levels

Qualitative Research Reports in Communication

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 17-25

  Thompson, Blair ^a  

^a WESTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

E Mail strategies; Parent teacher communication; Parent teacher e mail

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860278046     PISSN: 17459435     EISSN: 17459443     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17459430902756203     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bernard, H. R. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. Cutrona, C. E., Cole, V., Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Russell, D. W. (1994). Perceived parental social support and academic achievement: An attachment theory perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 369-378.
3. Edwards, C., Edwards, A., Qing, Q., & Wahl, S. T. (2007). The influence of computer-mediated word-of-mouth communication on student perceptions of instructors and attitudes toward learning course content. Communication Education, 56, 255-277.
4. Epstein, J. L. (1996). Perspectives and previews on research and policy for school, family, and com-munity partnerships. In A. Booth & J. F. Dunn (Eds.), Family–school links: How do they affect educational outcomes (pp. 209-246). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Howell, C. L. (2002). Reforming higher education curriculum to emphasize student responsibility. College Teaching, 50, 116-118.
6. Jacobson, L. (2003). Phila. parents to receive marks for “home support” of students. Education Week, 23, 4.
7. Johnson, D. (2000). Techno-parenting. Library Talk, 13, 64.
8. Laursen, B. & Collins, W. A. (2004). Parent–child communication during adolescence. In A. L. Vangelisti (Ed.), Handbook of family communication (pp. 333-348). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Lewis, A. C. (2002). Building connections with parents. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 1-3.
10. Rodriguez, J. L. (2002). Family environment and achievement among three generations of Mexican American high school students. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 88-94.
11. Schwartzman, R. (2007). Refining the question: How can online instruction maximize opportunities for all students? Communication Education, 56, 113-117.
12. Skipp, C. & Campo-Flores, A. (2003, August 4). School: The Web ate my homework. Newsweek, 10.
13. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Thompson, B. (2008). Characteristics of parent–teacher e-mail communication. Communication Education, 57, 201-223.
15. Timmerman, C. E. & Kruepke, K. A. (2006). Computer-assisted instruction, media richness, and college student performance. Communication Education, 55, 73-104.
16. Tobolka, D. (2006). Connecting teachers and parents through the Internet. Tech Directions, 66, 24-26.
17. Waldeck, J. H., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (2001). Teacher e-mail message strategies and students’ willingness to communicate online. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 54-70.
18. Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-90.
19. Walther, J. B. (2008). Social information processing theory of computer-mediated communication: Impressions and relationship development online. In L. A. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 391-404). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Wolfendale, S. (1983). Parental participation in children’s development and education. New York: Gordon & Breach.