Page 27 of 28
Previous Page     Next Page        Smaller fonts | Larger fonts     Go back to the flash version

Target Specific Populations. Not all parent involvement activities have to be school-wide. Some successful partnership activities target specific populations. Cooper Magnet Elementary School for Technology in Hampton, Virginia held a Father/Daughter Princess Ball that attracted more than 175 participants. Then, mothers at the school suggested hav- ing an activity involving their sons. In response, the ATP and teach- ers organized a Mom & Son Mad Scientist Lab Extravaganza. First, a local community member made a dynamic presentation. Then, mothers and sons worked in small groups conducting science experiments with household items. For example, in the activity “Ice Cream, You Scream,” boys and moms combined ingredients (e.g., vanilla, milk, sugar,) and used rock salt and ice to make a simple and delicious treat that demon- strated how liquids become solids. The families also received instruc- tions to replicate the experiments at home.

Dedicated educators, parents, and community partners are working together to design and implement activities that engage all families, improve students’ attitudes and achievements in math and science, and enable parents and students to enjoy these subjects together. !

NATIONAL NETWORK OF

PARTNERSHIP SCHOOLS (NNPS) Joyce L. Epstein, Director

Schools, districts, and state departments of

education are invited to join the National Net- work of Partnership Schools (NNPS) at Johns Hopkins University. Schools are guided to use an action team approach and a research-based framework of six types of involvement. Each school tailors its plans and practices to address specific school goals and to meet the needs and interests of its students, parents, and teachers. District and state leaders are helped to organize their leadership activities to assist all schools to conduct this work. NNPS provides a handbook; certificate;

newsletters; website; on-call phone and e-mail assistance; and annual research and evaluation activities. For more information, visit NNPS at partnershipschools.org.

Darcy J. Hutchins, PhD, is a Senior Program Facilitator at the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships and the National Network of Partnership Schools at Johns Hop- kins University. dhutchins@jhu.edu

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by a grant from MetLife Foundation to the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships. The opinions expressed are the author’s and do not necessarily repre- sent the position of the funding agency.

NOTES

1. Epstein, J. L., et al., School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Your Handbook for Action, third edition (Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2009).

2. Valadez, J. R., “The Influence of Social Capital on Mathematics Course Selection by Latino High School Students,” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 24 (2002):319–39.

3. Bleeker, M. M., & J. E. Jacobs, “Achievement in Math and Science: Do Mothers’ Beliefs Matter 12 Years Later?” Journal of Educational Psychology 96 (2004):97–109.

4. Yan, W., & Q. Lin, “Parent Involvement and Mathematics Achievement: Contrast Across Racial and Ethnic Groups,” Journal of Educational Research 99 (2005):116–27.

5. Hyde, J. S. et al., “Mathematics in the Home: Homework Practices and Mother-Child Interactions Doing Mathematics,” Journal of Mathematical Behavior 25 (2006):136–52.

6. Sheldon, S. B., & J. L. Epstein, “Involvement Counts: Family and Community Partnership and Math- ematics Achievement,” Journal of Educational Research 98 (2005):196–206.

7. Starkey, P., & A. Klein. “Fostering Parental Support for Children’s Mathematical Development: An Intervention with Head Start Families. Early Education and Development 11 (2000):659–80.

8. Van Voorhis, F. L., “Adding Families to the Homework Equation: A Longitudinal Study of Mathemat- ics Achievement,” Education and Urban Society 43 (2011):313–38.

9. Van Voorhis, F. L., “Interactive Homework in Middle School: Effects on Family Involvement and Sci- ence Achievement,” Journal of Educational Research 96 (2003):323–38.

10. Epstein, et al., 2009. 11. Van Voorhis, 2011. 12. Van Voorhis, 2003. 13. Hutchins, D.J., et al., Promising Partnership Practices 2010 (Baltimore, MD: National Network of Partnership Schools, 2010).

14. Hutchins, D.J., et al., Promising Partnership Practices 2011 (Baltimore, MD: National Network of Partnership Schools, 2011).

©SYNERGY LEARNING • 800-769-6199 • MARCH/APRIL 2012

Connect • PAGE 25

Previous arrowPrevious Page     Next PageNext arrow        Smaller fonts | Larger fonts     Go back to the flash version
1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11  |  12  |  13  |  14  |  15  |  16  |  17  |  18  |  19  |  20  |  21  |  22  |  23  |  24  |  25  |  26  |  27  |  28