Schools and teachers benefit in a variety of ways when teachers work together. A small but growing body of evidence suggests a positive relationship between teacher collaboration and student achievement. They found lower turnover rates among beginning teachers in schools with induction and mentoring programs that emphasized collegial support.
Epstein notes that strong programs of partnership include all aspects of these types and they are not presented hierarchically. But the model is set out in terms of what parents can do to support the efforts of their children through agendas directed by the school.
While basic obligations are set out for parents, none are noted for schools--either related to settings for learning or for finding out about home settings. The model is silent regarding issues of power and status beyond suggestions that school people invite all parents into relationships and that they vary their schedules to accomodate the needs of diverse families.
The meanings that reside within each of the partnership types are not examined nor are the power relations within the roles that these types inscribe. Partnerships frame answerability in terms of school people who develop programs that set up conditions that allow parents into school curriculum.
Partnerships provide opportunities for individuals to play the market--they fail or thrive by their ability to take advantage of the investments made by relevant parties. The model is framed in terms of what educators can do--ways that they can facilitate various types of invovlement by families.
Therefore addressivity, in the Epstein model, is focused on teachers and administrators who provide contexts for parents to support learning.
Her work is to describe successful programs that can be replicated by schools to increase the spheres of overlap. This is a universalistic perspective on interactions between families and the institution of school, flexible in its adaptation in local settings but that to be comprehensive, must include all six types.
Because it is seen as a generalizable program type, it is something that should benefit all communities, with failure residing in individuals unable to take advantage of the opportunities partnerships provide. Conceptualizing education as a system, the Comer model works to change that system by building participation and partnership to bring about the optimal development of each child.
Two distinct aspects of this model guide activities: Our conclusion is that most programs designed to improve schooling fail because they do not adequately address the developmental needs of children and the potential for conflict in the relationship between home and school, among school staff, and among staff and students.
This is necessary to be able to cope with the kind of problems too many children present. Focusing on strengthening relationships by promoting dialogue among relevant participants forces attention to issues of power and engagement in education at a variety of levels: Parents are more likely to support a school program in which they are partners in decision-making and welcome at times other than when their children are in trouble.
Parent interest and support for the school and its staff makes it easier for youngersters to relate to and identify themselves with the goals, values, and personnel of the school, a powerful motivation to tune in and turn on to education.
At the same time, parental involvement insures that their cultural values and interests are respected. Parents provide support, children relate to programming, and school people think more inclusively when relationships are framed in terms of partnership.
The program has been extensively researched in multiple sites but rather than describing what is it is promoted as what can beto change the relations among educational stakeholders. The School Development Program SDP is seen as a school level participatory program addressing all aspects of operation.
These teams and activities are driven by three guiding principals: As can be seen from this configuration, relationships and responsibility are at the core of the program.
Addressivity is something shared by all participants as they are responsible for making schooling work for children by designing programs for specific participants. The notion of a system, in which all aspects of the program must be simultaneously functioning, forces attention to all elements in the school-home collaboration.
The multiphasic approach builds improvement into the program by assessing needs, prompting action, and evaluating implementation. The system is a concrete program which, by its shared decisionmaking and responsibility, is addressed to diverse audiences.
According to this design, no one agenda takes preference in the program, no one group has the upper hand. If it works, both answerability and addressivity is diffuse and diverse. The Comer model is built on psychological perspectives on development and interaction.
Its strength is the relational aspects of individuals including children, school people and families. Individuals are advanced through systems in which there is balance of needs, voice, and power.
What is missing however, is full attention to the social, cultural, and political aspects of these interactions. The strong emphasis placed on programs derived from child development knowledge appears to be put forward without attention to the cultural and political tensions that exist in the construction of the norms on which child development knowledge has been constructed.
Child development is an area of study and knowledge production that represents particular values, aspirations, and cultural dynamics--that privileges particular ways of being by placing them as more developed Burman, ; Lubeck, That authority inscribes the characteristics of the status quo into the model, regardless of where and with whom it is implemented.The purpose of Collaborative Family-School Relationships for Children’s Learning: Beliefs and Practices is to provide an overview of how educators can develop productive family-school relationships that promote student learning.
Family Relationships essays What kinds of relationships are people pursuing today?
The most important thing to most Americans today is the type and quality of relationships that they have with other people. Everyone is trying to have the abundance of friends that has been adopted to be the major d. Cooperation Between School and Family - Introduction There is overall consensus at the theory level, legislation level, in public and among professionals on the importance of cooperation between family and school.
Epstein: School, Family, and Community Partnerships. Joyce Epstein's large-scale inquiries into parent, teacher, and student views of and actions related to education have provided the materials for the development of a theoretical model of what she now calls school and family partnerships.
Cooperation Between School and Family - Introduction There is overall consensus at the theory level, legislation level, in public and among professionals on the importance of cooperation between family and school.
Establishing a Parent-Teacher Relationship. The first contact with your child’s teacher, in many ways, is the most important, This is the time you are building rapport and developing a relationship of trust. otherwise the conference outcome can be disastrous. Strive for cooperation between you and your child’s teacher.