What We Now Know About Parental Engagement,Which Will Guide the Future

We Know That the Subtle Aspects of Parental Engagement Are the Most Important

Until about 20 years ago, the research community thought of parental involvement much more simplistically than it does today (Jeynes, 2010; Goodall, 2017). Most teachers and parents thought of this involvement in terms of simply checking homework, maintaining household rules, volunteering in the classroom, attending school functions, etc. (Jeynes, 2010; Goodall, 2017). If mothers and fathers inquired of educators how they could become more active in aiding their children in school, they generally were greeted with this kind of response (Cherlin, 2013; Lowe & Dotterer, 2015). However, in the academic community, as a result of undertaking quite a few meta-analyses, social scientists are now aware that although these activities are still regarded as components of family participation in the educational process, they generally are not regarded as the most salient ones (Ogg & Anthony, 2020). Meta-analyses have been an excellent means of determining which aspects of parental engagement are the most important (Jeynes, 2024). It is vital that principals and teachers inculcate parents in these truths, so that parental involvement, as practiced, will maximize its efficacy (Constantino, 2021; McDowell, 2020; Mo & Singh, 2008).

Largely as a result of conducting meta-analyses and the examination of nationwide data sets, it is apparent that the aspects of parental involvement that possess the greatest efficacy are the more subtle components (Jeynes, 2010). These less obvious components include having long-term positive interactions between the parents and the child, high but reasonable expectations of the child by both the mother and the father, and a parenting style that reflects a balanced combination of love and structure (Eggerichs, 2013; Rubio, 2010). Often teachers do not recognize that it is these expressions of family engagement that are paramount, because these are qualities that usually go unseen by instructors in the classroom because they are home-based in nature, that is, they are expressions of family-rearing that take place in the home (Eggerichs, 2013; Rubio, 2010). Through quantitative studies over the years, it has been discovered that home-based components of parental involvement are generally considerably more important than their school-based counterparts (Jeynes, 2010, 2024). Moreover, there is evidence that African Americans and Latinos are more likely to practice them than are other groups. Therefore, their influence should be taken very seriously.

These meta-analyses and the examination of nationwide data sets reinforce the notion that has been affirmed by some social scientists that it is the subtler aspects of parental –involvement and -engagement such as having high expectations and a parental style that both shows love and provides structure, that are more important than the most overt expressions of family commitment to education (Jeynes, 2010, 2024). From the extensive effects that emerge from maintaining high family expectations and the appropriate child-rearing style, one can see that just from these two family-oriented expressions of involvement alone, why: (1) it is vital to duly respect the considerable effects that these family-focused expressions have and (2) social scientists are increasing their respect for the subtle aspects of parental –involvement and -engagement and realizing they are likely of much greater consequence than more overt expressions of the participation, such as attending school functions, and volunteering during class.

One example regarding just how salient these subtler home-based components are versus their school-based counterparts is that when a child’s caregivers demonstrate having low expectations and call the youth “stupid,” for example, they have generally done considerably more damage than any good they would have done in attending a school function or volunteering in school. Unfortunately, before more sophisticated quantitative analyses was undertaken on the various specific expressions of parental involvement, beginning 20 years ago or more, academics just like teachers, tended to emphasize what they could see in the classroom far more than what took place in the home. One of the most prominent parental involvement theories of the time proposed that there were six aspects of parental involvement, which in itself was a helpful idea, but it recognized home involvement of making up only one of those, or 16.7% of the total (Epstein & Becker, 1982). That theoretical underpinning was initially very helpful and it encouraged a lot of additional practice in parental involvement. However, the later quantitative studies were helpful in another sense, that is, they enabled educators, social scientists, and parents understand that home-based components of that involvement, which tended to be much more subtle, were actually overall the most influential aspects of parental involvement (Jeynes, 2010).

Admittedly, it takes time before educators communicate to parents new research-based breakthroughs in the understanding of which aspects of parental involvement are the most effective. There are a variety of reasons for this fact. First, most teachers give advice to parents based on what they were taught in college, which can sometimes be outdated. Second, most teachers do not keep track of research developments and recent practices in the sphere of parental involvement.

Third, scholars are often protective of theories that are either their own or those that they cherish. Often academics prefer to cling theories which may or may not reflect reality and are reluctant to embrace what most of the populace believes is “common sense.” Supposedly, this propensity reflects the emphasis at so many universities on “critical thinking.” The idea is that one should be suspicious of “common sense” and almost any widely held perspective that has existed for a pretty reasonable period of time. Instead, one should be reluctant to support a perception that is logical or adheres to the principles of “common sense.” In contrast, the idea is that one should approach perspectives that would normally appear well thought out with criticality (Carter, 1991; Rendtorff, 2020). Over the years apparently the idea of objectivity which used to be valued in many academic circles, as a means to determining truth and what has transpired versus what has not, is no longer the valued goal that it once was. “Critical thinking” has replaced “objective thinking.” The enquirer is therefore encouraged to be skeptical, questioning, and not encouraging. If one has subjective reasons to resist a certain truism, then this is okay, because the goal is no longer “objective thinking,” but rather “critical thinking.” Within the framework of a worldview in which the discovery of truth is the goal, objectivity is the inquirer’s friend. However, within the framework of a worldview in which the criticality is the goal subjective experience is often viewed above objectivity. Contrary to the focus being on the pursuit of truth, instead there is a general belief that there is no truth at all and that everything is relative (Dupuis, 1966; Robertson & Haines, 2019).

In a world in which children in cities benefit from certain family attitudes and practices more than others, it would seem that the pursuit of objective truth has considerable value. If parents, teachers, and principals are going to do their best for girls and boys, then it is important to know what will help these children to thrive the most.

We Know That Technology Does Not Replace the Value of Parental Engagement

Clearly, the world is in a new era with its reliance on technology. The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has created a surge in the interest in technology and stirred a new wave in human imagination about the potential of technology to have a prime place in facilitating higher levels of scholastic accomplishments for urban youths, especially those of color.

Naturally, most people hope that technology, especially AI, can have a powerful impact in encouraging parental involvement, as well as the increased student academic achievement that typically follows. The reality is, however, that the studies that have examined the relationship between communicative technology and the levels of parental engagement have shown a weak relationship between the two. On the surface, it may seem disappointing that the effects of technology appear to be limited, at least at this point in history, in the degree to which it can raise parental engagement and scholastic outcomes. However, probably the greatest significance of this finding is that it points to the reality that, as much as the wise use of technology leads to some pupil benefits, nothing really can replace family stability and involvement in terms of bolstering pupil achievement and behavior (Jeynes, 2015). Ironically, given that increasingly there are concerns about AI becoming too powerful in modern day society, this quantitative declaration of the primacy of the family in terms of impacting student outcomes is probably welcome news.

Concurrent to research that indicates that communicative technology can likely, at least at this stage of its development, help only slightly in increasing levels of parental involvement and scholastic outcomes, has arisen a meta-analysis indicating that relational parental involvement is broadly related to pupil achievement, and behavior (Jeynes, 2024). By relational parental involvement and these findings what is meant is that the quality of relationships that parents have with each other, with their children, and with teachers really matters. In other words, as discussed earlier in this paper, parental involvement is much more than engaging in the right activities. Also, as acknowledged earlier, it is the subtle components of parental involvement that are the most important, particularly with people of color. The quality of the family relationships is very important. One can take all the recommended overt parental engagement actions and even care enough to value and apply the foremost subtler aspects of parental involvement that have the highest efficacy. When these actions are taken, that is wonderful. Nevertheless, the quality of relationships still matter and this must not be overlooked. Even when communicative technology is used to help bolster communication relationships between family members and those between parents and educators, technology can only help so much.

The foundational realm of relationships still matters. Does ongoing friction between parents and the teacher still matter? Does parent divorce still matter? Can ongoing family fights still matter? Does a poor parent-child relationship still matter? On average, yes they all still matter. Moreover, one can argue that they matter more than ever.

The reality is that communicative technology can help some, but there is only so much succor that it can offer. If the other elements of parental engagement are not being practiced, that is, the overt and specific actions, the subtle components, and the relational aspects, the benefits of communicative technology alone will rarely amount to much. Yes, as the meta-analysis on the effects of communicative technology describes, communicative technology may possess advanced benefits for urban children of color, as advances take place over time. Nevertheless, it has often been said, “Nothing beats the family”; and the results of the meta-analyses of relational parental involvement and communication technology are vivid reminders that there is a reason why that quote is the conclusion of many.

We Know That Relational Parental Engagement Is Important

Scholarly exchanges and theorizing about parental engagement have become especially pronounced in the last four decades or more, in part because of the swelling rates of divorce from 1963 to 1980, that is, the nature of these debates has changed. Research on parental engagement in the 1980s and 1990s was overwhelmingly school- based in emphasis (Epstein & Becker, 1982). In most of the more prominent parental involvement theories of the time, 80% to 85% of the components of parental engagement tended to be school-based (Epstein & Becker, 1982). However, the growing usage of meta-analyses and examination of nationwide data sets over the last two quarter century has caused many people to base their notions of parental involvement on data and facts more than mere supposition (Henderson et al., 2011).

The academic studies that utilized the strategies mentioned above began to shed light on home-based aspects of parental involvement. As time has passed and more sophisticated quantitative studies have been done, it has become evident that theoretical scholars have not only underestimated the efficacy of home-based parental involvement, but also examined it in a very constricted way. Increasingly, meta-analyses have revealed that the “how to” directives that are the essence of myriad expressions of school-based family involvement generally do not have particularly large effects sizes, when it comes to raising grades and test scores (Jeynes, 2010, 2011). Moreover, over the years an increasing body of research suggests that the quality of parental relationships are important. What was argued first and foremost, of course, was that the quality of relationships between parents, and their children is salient. However, true holistic parental involvement also requires that mothers and fathers do what they can to have strong positive relationships with the teachers (Dettmers et al., 2019). Moreover, the quality of the relationship between the parents will also tend to be associated with higher scholastic outcomes among their children (Cherlin, 2013).

To be sure, the concept of parental involvement, at least its most salient components, is undergoing a reevaluation. Decades ago, Horne (1931, 1932) warned that the emphasis on school-based teaching methodology was becoming so overemphasized and unbalanced at the expense of cultivating relationships. that it would do much harm to schooling children. Even if Horne was only partially right, his observations may help explain why parental engagement, as conceptualized by many, tends to emphasize “how to” school-based activities more than it does relationships. It clearly benefits parents, teachers, children, and education as a whole, if there is a purer understanding of the most important aspects of parental involvement. This includes attaining a better understanding of the importance of the parental relationships component of parental involvement. The results may also give insight to some parents about alternative expressions of involvement, if they are unable to be as engaged as they would like in school-based activities.

Combined with the results of other meta-analyses on parental involvement, the overall trend is clear, that is, interactions matter (Jeynes, 2024). Interactions and relationships that are highlighted by love, consistency, and balance apparently are more important than simply engaging in the right activity. Admittedly, for centuries a lot of writings in sacred texts in churches, synagogues, and other houses of worship have communicated these same conclusions. However, the availability of meta-analytic data to support these conclusions will make it more likely that these truths will actually be practiced.

The meta-analytic results indicate that urban children thrive scholastically when there is a foundation of positive and upbuilding parental relationships with the other parent, educators, and the parents’ children should be an encouragement to many. A surfeit of parents are frustrated by not being able to attend every school function that they would like. However, they can be encouraged that finding the time to love, care, and connect.

The results clearly show a strong association between relational parental involvement and student academic and behavioral outcomes. There is a real possibility, based on this meta-analysis, that relational parental involvement is even more strongly related to student behavior than it is their scholastic outcomes. There are many other studies that are included in meta-analyses, that suggest that the presence of a father in particular, has a greater positive impact on student behavior than it does on academic achievement (Jeynes, 2015). In a real sense, this combination of results makes perfect sense, results. A large part of relational parental involvement is based on the quality of the relationship that exists between the parents. This includes examining non-intact families (Everett, 2021). When there is a broken family, whether it is caused by divorce, an out-of-wedlock birth, etc., research indicates that this has a huge impact, on average, on socioeconomic status (SES). Family dissolution also has a considerable on the psychological welfare of youths (Everett, 2021).

Existing Parental Engagement Is More Powerful Than When It Is Taught (Programs)

One trend that has been clear in doing meta-analyses, in particular, is that when schools initiate parental involvement programs, the effects of those programs do not equal, or generally approach, the results of mothers and fathers who are already practicing these efforts (Jeynes, 2011). This reality is important to note, especially because it raises the very important question of the extent to which parental engagement can be taught to educators and family members.

It is vital to know effect sizes not only for certain aspects of parental engagement that are already practiced, but also what is the extent to which these components can or cannot be taught to family members. In other words, given that parental involvement programs necessitate teaching parents who often do not ordinarily practice these components of parental involvement, the effects will indubitably be smaller, on average, than for mothers and fathers who faithfully have practiced these precise concepts for many years. Given the dynamics just described, in designing a parental involvement program in a specific classroom or school, it is important not only to determine: (1) which components of parental engagement are generally most effective, but also (2) are these components also possess the most efficacy in parental involvement programs, and (3) what are the aspects that can be most easily taught.

Naturally, it would be nice if this was an ideal world in which parental involvement programs taught parents who were not presently practicing high levels of parental involvement to be just as good at the various expressions of this engagement as those already practicing it. However, from a logical standpoint, which the reader can surely understand, one cannot expect those who are trained in parental engagement that have not been practicing it and may not have an inherent desire for it to immediately thrive in practice. The leading two obstacles are that some parents resist being trained in parental involvement, for one reason or another and others are simply inexperienced in parental involvement and struggle in its implementation.

Many city schools are interested in parental involvement largely because they want to either inaugurate parental involvement programs or improve existing ones that they have in place. With the previous paragraph’s thoughts in mind, educators realize they need to discern such truths as: (1) how well parental engagement programs work overall, (2) are the same components of this involvement that work best overall, also the ones that contribute the most in parental engagement programs? (3) Which are the aspects of parental involvement that are easiest to teach parents? What is clear at this point, however, regarding the future is that schools are going to be increasingly interested in how well parental engagement programs work, especially with reference to how they compare versus mothers and fathers who have been practicing such engagement all or nearly all of their adult lives. To whatever extent the findings of meta-analyses and other studies indicate that the difference is pretty substantial, it may be the schools and society will be directed to intervene early to instruct families how to be more engaged in their children’s education. One can certainly make an argument that such instruction and guidance should begin as early as in kindergarten. It seems logical that “the earlier the better” is a good adage to follow, in this case.

School Choice Is Becoming the Quintessential Expression of Parental Engagement; Carson vs. Makin (2022) Has Changed Much

In past decades it was not absolutely imperative that a discussion of parental involvement should also include some reference to school choice. However, the surge in statewide school choice bills passing within just a few months of the U.S. Supreme Court 6-3 decision of Carson v. Makin (2022) has changed much (Garnett, 2023). The percentage of American students that are homeschooled has also surged and now is approximately 6.8% of the U.S. K-12 student population (U.S. Department of Education, 2024). Just a few years ago, that percentage was a bit over 3% (U.S. Department of Education, 2024). Adding to this momentum is the fact that Chief Justice John Roberts penned the majority decision in the Carson v. Makin (2022) case. Chief Justice Roberts is generally considered the most moderate of the nine U.S. Supreme Court justices. His approval and, truth be told, his authorship of a given court decision is usually an indication that a decision is quite centrist and mainstream in nature and that the vote was not a narrow (5-4, for example) decision.

The Carson v. Makin (2022) case has opened up new opportunities for the expression of parental involvement. There are two primary reasons for this fact. First, school choice provides a wider variety of options for education than are available under the rather restricted structure of traditional public schools (Jeynes, 2000). The contemporary situation, arguably more than ever, reminds one of Tyack’s (1974) thesis in his book, The One Best System. In Tyack’s book he warns against, among other things, what he perceives as an inherent rigidity and insular perspective that arises when the public schools, often in the name of diversity, seek to establish a near monopoly on how schooling is done. Over the years public schools have crowded out a broadly defined concept of education that emphasized compassion, love, civics, science, physical fitness, the classics of literature, volunteerism at places of worship, and local clubs, integrity (Jeynes, 2008, 2019, 2020). Instead, there is an emphasis on having standardized testing and having a dictated ideology (Hodgson, 2018).

The huge national movement toward homeschooling specifically and private schooling generally since the Carson v. Makin (2022) case has dramatically changed the parental involvement conversation. Prior to this decision, researchers largely limited the conversation to public schools. The debate was focused on how public education parents could maximize their engagement in the public schooling sphere. The understanding was that the joys, challenges, and instructor resistance, that is, both the positive and the negative, were quite similar across schools. This was because these schools, after all, were United States Government schools and to the degree that they were designed to be similar across a multitude of campuses and in numerous ways, they were quite similar.

However, with the Carson v. Makin (2022) case and the sudden surge in the number of homeschoolers and those attending other private schools, the nature of the parents most highly esteemed parents by social scientists suddenly changed. Prior to the Court’s decision, public schools had almost a monopoly on K-12 teaching in the United States (U.S. Department of Education, 2024). At the time about 91% of American K-12 pupils attended government schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2024). With that significant a skew in the percentage of American school children attending public versus private schools, many social scientists saw little need to pay much attention to students in non-public schools. In the eyes of many researchers, the private sector seemed both small and dormant (Garnett, 2023; U.S. Department of Education, 2024). However, the Carson v. Makin (2022) case radically changed this perception (Garnett, 2023). Granted, the percentage of children and adolescents in public schools was still small. Nevertheless, the extent of the momentum now favoring private education, homeschooling together with traditional private schools, is unprecedented for the post-World War II period.

It seems that many parents, given the opportunity to embrace school choice for their children, are taking action. Many are educating their children at home or sending their children to private schools. Given that students schooled in this way on average well outperform their counterparts in public schools, even when controlling for prior achievement, socioeconomic status, race, and other factors, many people see such parental action as the ultimate expression of parental involvement. Moreover, a large number of parents take this action cognizant of the fact that private faith-based schools strongly encourage and welcome parental involvement. Hence, they seem to provide the ideal arrangement for engaged parents. Increasingly, in this atmosphere, often parents that take action on school choice programs are often seen as the epitome of involved mom and dads.

Where to Now and the Challenges to Going This Route

Based on the findings presented thus far, a likely outcome is that there will be a new push for schools providing additional instruction and guidance to families in the area of parental involvement. Parents need to be informed more than they are and more accurately than they are (Henderson et al., 2011; Mapp et al., 2008). Admittedly, much of the responsibility for this rests with mothers and fathers themselves (Goodall, 2017). Nevertheless, a good portion of the responsibility also rests with educators, especially because these meta-analyses and quantitative statistical examinations focused on scholastic outcomes (Henderson et al., 2011; Mapp et al., 2008). The need for such a push is patent also because it is quite clear from these analyses that the engagement of parents in the elementary school years helps form a foundation for the vital aspects of that engagement that are especially effective for the middle- and high- school years (Jeynes, 2010, 2011). This effort needs to exist at both the classroom and educational leadership levels.

It is probably axiomatic that more instruction and guidance to families in the area of parental involvement is needed beginning in kindergarten and at the early elementary school levels. However, what is unfortunate is that such a strategy may be challenging to implement in many classrooms across the country. There are various reasons for this challenging environment, but two of the leading ones should be acknowledged here. First, in decades past there was a wide acknowledgment in North America and in many areas around the globe that family priorities, togetherness, and support were keys in order for children to succeed (Eavey, 1964; McClellan, 1999). However, the emphasis in contemporary times is to avoid such topics in order to be sensitive to parents from single-parent families, etc. However, the reality is that in the name of being sensitive few attitudes could be as insensitive to children as this avoidance manifested in these modern times (McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994).

Second, many teachers in the name of professionalism especially, resist the idea of inviting higher levels of parental engagement (Gatto, 2001). There are a series of ostensible contradictions between what educators say about parental engagement and what they actually do. Given the long and strong historical trend in the findings of large meta-analyses and the examination of nationwide data sets, one would think that educational leaders and instructors would be crying out in unison, calling for more parental participation (Jeynes, 2010, 2011). Moreover, people have known for centuries that parental involvement is important. In terms of American history, the Pilgrims and Puritans practiced parental engagement to levels that would be difficult for most Americans to fathom (Bailyn, 1960; Bartlett, 1978; Cremin, 1970; Eavey, 1964). They advocated the household adoption of what they viewed as the “holy triad” in schooling, that is the strong cooperation of the home, the church, and the school in order to maximize the scholastic achievement of pupils (Bailyn, 1960; Bartlett, 1978; Cremin, 1970; Eavey, 1964). With this in mind, there were family traditions in that era that were practiced that helped ensure that the rates of literacy would remain extraordinarily high. A common family tradition was an hour family and reading time following dinner (Bailyn, 1960; Bartlett, 1978; Cremin, 1970). During this time the family would read the Bible, read from a classic book, and discuss events in the newspaper (Bailyn, 1960; Bartlett, 1978; Cremin, 1970). With these practices in mind, it is no wonder that from 1630 to 1960 New England had the highest rate of literacy in the world (Bailyn, 1960; Bartlett, 1978; Cremin, 1970).

In addition, boys would often spend large portions of the day following their father (Bailyn, 1960; Bartlett, 1978; Cremin, 1970). Girls would often spend much of the day following their mother. If boys wanted to become farmers, when they grew older and their father was a farmer, they would learn about that occupation from following their father. If mom ran the village store and their girls wanted to run the store when they got older, they would spend large portions of each day with mother to learn about how to take inventory, ordering seasonal products, etc. The Pilgrims and Puritans believed that it was especially through the father that children learned about the love, character, and integrity of the Heavenly Father. Therefore, it is no surprise that father engagement was practiced at a high level that is difficult for most people in modern day society today (Bailyn, 1960; Cremin, 1970).

It should be noted, that high levels of parental engagement with regards to education go all the way back to at least 1700 or 1750 B.C. in the Bible, particularly evident in the books of Exodus, Deuteronomy, and before. It would be unwise to view parental engagement as something new (Marrou, 1956).

Regarding the first reason for public school resistance to parental involvement, it is really sad that so often in modern day society what is best for the youngest and most vulnerable in society is often placed lowest on the priority list, in the name of political expediency (Bekwith & Koukl, 1998; Sterrett, 2015). At some point, broader society needs to consider the welfare of the very young, in particular, much more than it currently does, if those in future generations are going to thrive in their adult lives (Bekwith & Koukl, 1998; Sterrett, 2015). It has been said that one measure of how advanced a civilization is can be measured by how that country treats its most vulnerable citizens, which are often the youngest and the oldest, because they often cannot fend for themselves (Bekwith & Koukl, 1998; Sterrett, 2015). By that measure, modern society in myriad nations does not fare very well (Bekwith & Koukl, 1998; Sterrett, 2015). Admittedly, not everyone in a given society will agree on each issue that displays inhumanity toward the very young or the very old, as well as what age range defines each of these two categories. Nevertheless, ultimately there will be a near unanimity of opinion that whatever issues are included under the definition of inhumanity toward the very young or the very old, that such inhumanity not only exists, but heartlessness and brutality also rife worldwide.

It is unfortunate that convincing urban teachers to have an invitational attitude toward parental engagement needs to be such a struggle. It was less of a battle in the 1960s and 1970s when rates of divorce and unwed motherhood were skyrocketing much to society’s chagrin (Everett, 2021; Jeynes, 2008) At that time, when the College Board in their investigation of a 17 consecutive year decline in average SAT scores concluded that single-parenthood was a major contributing factor to the plummeting scores, there was an understanding across the globe that for the sake of the children and the families, something had to be done to reverse these trends and also make families more aware of the salience of parental engagement (Jeynes, 2008; Wirtz, 1977). Moreover, there was an awareness that in order to reduce the impact of single-parenthood on the children who lived in these families, especially the custodial-parent needed increased guidance regarding how to best be involved in the child’s education, in spite of dealing with the increased challenge of being a single parent. One of the advantages of this strategy is that it acknowledged that there are many single-parents who are doing the best they can and are intent on minimizing the challenges for the child of being raised in a single-parent family (Cooksey & Fondell, 1998). This strategy appeared to work reasonably well, although as one would anticipate, it did not come close to erasing effects of family structure on youths coming from these families (Jeynes, 2011). However, now there appears to be more school- and society-based resistance to parental involvement, because many people no longer want to talk about home-based challenges that children face, but instead want to dismiss their significance and focus only societal challenges, which generally are more politically expedient. Such an approach is incomplete and unwise, because it handcuffs the degree to which family action can be taken to help children.

Conclusion

To be sure, there have been a lot of advancements in the last 20 or 25 years, when it comes an understanding the post powerful components of parental engagement. A huge portion of the improvement is due to undertaking meta-analyses and the examination of nationwide data sets. Nevertheless, it is vital that the actual practice of parental involvement reflect these advancements. Hence, the need of the hour is for educators to familiarize themselves with this practical research. Not only that, but it is very important to accurately convey this information to parents, that they might to maximize the efficacy of parental involvement.