Citation
A Survey of school psychologists' practice regarding home-school collaboration among culturally and linguistically diverse families

Material Information

Title:
A Survey of school psychologists' practice regarding home-school collaboration among culturally and linguistically diverse families
Creator:
Donate, Abigail
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Doctorate ( Doctor of psychology)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
School of Education and Human Development
Degree Disciplines:
School psychology
Committee Chair:
Harris, Bryn
Committee Members:
Crepeau-Hobson, Francis
Stein, Rachel

Notes

Abstract:
Collaboration between schools and families is an opportunity for the education community to work together with a common goal in mind; in most cases, home and school collaboration improves students educational, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). There have been minimal studies conducted to gather school psychologists’ perception of current strategies and implementations used to increase home-school collaboration, especially among culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families. The purpose of this study is to understand what interventions, under Epstein’s framework (1995), school psychologists use when working with CLD students and families. This current study used Epstein’s tool and modified it to see the areas of need with CLD populations. Results indicated that participants of the study Occasionally used home-school strategies within most of the domains from Epstein’s, et al., (2002) study, except for the domain of Communication to which participants indicated that they used more Frequently.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright Abigail Donate. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
A SURVEY OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS’ PRACTICE REGARDING HOME-SCHOOL
COLLABORATION AMONG CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE
FAMILIES
By
ABIGAIL DONATE
B.A., Rockford University, 2014
A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in Partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Psychology School Psychology Program
2019


©2019
ABIGAIL DONATE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
11


This Thesis for the Doctor of Psychology degree by Abigail Donate has been approved for the School Psychology Program by
Bryn Harris, Chair Francis Crepeau-Hobson Rachel Stein
Date: May 18, 2019


Donate, Abigail (PsyD, School Psychology Program)
A Survey of School Psychologists’ Practice Regarding Home-School Collaboration among Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families Thesis directed by Associate Professor Bryn Harris
ABSTRACT
Collaboration between schools and families is an opportunity for the education community to work together with a common goal in mind; in most cases, home and school collaboration improves students educational, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). There have been minimal studies conducted to gather school psychologists’ perception of current strategies and implementations used to increase home-school collaboration, especially among culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families. The purpose of this study is to understand what interventions, under Epstein’s framework (1995), school psychologists use when working with CLD students and families. This current study used Epstein’s tool and modified it to see the areas of need with CLD populations. Results indicated that participants of the study Occasionally used home-school strategies within most of the domains from Epstein’s, et al., (2002) study, except for the domain of Communication to which participants indicated that they used more Frequently.
Key words: home-school collaboration, culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families, home-school interventions
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Bryn Harris
IV


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to all my friends, fellow graduate students, and professors who helped make this study possible. Special thanks to my advisor, Dr. Bryn Harris who provided me the tools to continue and succeed; I cannot express my gratitude for all the opportunities, guidance and advice throughout the whole process since year one of the graduate program. I would also like to say thank you to my husband, Alvaro Montenegro, for the endless support, patience and encouragement, especially when the tasks seemed impossible. Finally, a special thanks to my parents, Carlos and Jaimie Donate who showed me how to work hard, live life, and love education.
v


CHAPTER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION...................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem....................................... 2
Significance of the Problem.................................... 2
II. LITERATURE REVIEW................................................. 4
Six types of Interventions Framework........................... 4
Parenting...................................................... 5
Communicating.................................................. 6
Volunteering................................................... 7
Learning at Home...............................................8
Decision Making................................................10
Collaborating with the Community............................... 11
Conclusion..................................................... 13
Purpose........................................................ 13
III. METHOD............................................................ 15
Description of Research Design and Procedures Used............. 15
Sampling Procedures............................................ 18
Methods and Instruments of Data Gathering...................... 19
IV. RESULTS...........................................................20
Parenting Domain...............................................20
Communicating Domain...........................................22
Volunteering Domain............................................26
Learning at Home Domain........................................29
vi


Decision Making Domain..................................... 30
Collaborating with the Community Domain.....................33
Qualitative Results........................................ 37
V. DISCUS SION AND LIMITATIONS....................................40
Six Domains of Interventions Discussion.....................40
Limitations................................................ 46
VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION........................................ 48
REFERENCES...............................................................50
APPENDIX.................................................................53
A. Survey Questions...............................................53
B. Demographic....................................................58
vii


CHAPTERI
INTRODUCTION
Collaboration between schools and families is an opportunity for the education community to work together with a common goal in mind; in most cases, home and school collaboration improves students educational, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). When home-school collaboration is successful, the benefits are mutual for establishing trust and growth within the community. Home-school collaboration can be seen as an intervention for students with special needs or preventive practice for all students in general (Epstein, et al., 2002; Jonak, 2014). However, it is becoming more difficult to bridge the gap of home-school collaboration due to great diversity between parental culture and school climate (Mundt, Gregory, Melzi, & McWayne, 2015). English Language Learners (ELLs) are defined as individuals who speak another language other than English at home or within a community, and it is estimated that one out of four students will be an ELL by 2025 (Van Roekel, 2008). Complexities can arise when a school serves a population of students who are culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD). According to Public Law 103-382, CLD populations is generally understood as individuals who were not born in the U.S., whose native language is a language other than English, their culture has had significant impact on English proficiency (e.g. Native American or Alaska Native), or any other environment where a language other than English is dominant (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). With great diversity at schools, stakeholders need to take a closer look at implementing strategies that increase home-school collaboration among CLD population.
1


Statement of the Problem
Family engagement with the school and vice-versa is essential for overall student success, however initiating and maintaining home-school collaboration can prove to be difficult, especially when there is a disconnect of culture and language between home and school (Olivos, 2009). Studies have shown that parents are more likely to disengage with the school community when they feel there is no shared value or too much of a difference between language and culture (Mundt, Gregory, Melzi, & McWayne, 2015; Olivos, 2009). When connections between home and school are lost, not only are schools impacted with issues such as school staff burnout and reduction of funds for educative programs, but students also suffer academically, behaviorally, socially and emotionally (Shulkind & Foote, 2009). CLD students with academic disabilities are at an even greater risk for disadvantage because not only are they learning to adapt in a new culture and language but also struggling to reach grade-level standards (Van Roekel, 2008). If schools are to strive for better home-school collaboration, it is imperative that sensitivity and awareness of the variety of cultures and languages exist within the school.
Significance of the Problem
School psychologists play an important role for improving home-school collaboration with CLD families (Jonak, 2014). For years, CLD families have appeared to educational institutions to be disinterested or uninvolved with their students' education (Olivos, 2009). Many times, this is presumed because families do not speak the language, are afraid of being reported to immigration (depending on immigration status), have had negative experiences in schools (Jonak, 2014) or simply believe that schools know best for their children and therefore do not question authoritative figures (Thorp, 1997). It would be a disservice to families if schools were to presume all CLD families had equal access to be a part of school collaboration activities
2


(Olivos, 2009, Thorp, 1997). Because school psychologists have a unique training, they can provide perspectives for both the home environment and school climate that could be otherwise dismissed or overlooked in another circumstance.
With the increasing demographic shifts in the educational system the services for school psychologists also change (Merrell, Ervin, & Peacock, 2012). Services such as assessments, consultations and interventions require cultural and linguistically diverse sensitivity. Under NASP (National Association of School Psychology) guidelines, one of the roles of a school psychologist is to improve support strategies, especially when it comes to raising awareness regarding home-school collaboration among diverse populations (NASP, n.d.). In terms of home-school collaboration needs, school psychologists should also take into consideration the social-emotional and academic gaps resulting from the lack of supports for CLD families in schools. School psychologists can be the bridge to help enhance collaborations among CLD families and schools.
3


CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Home-school collaboration is essential for all communities, however, higher-risk populations who are at a disadvantage for academic, social-emotional and behavioral success due to language and culture diversity, could benefit greatly from home-school intervention activities (Olivos, 2009). As mentioned earlier, school psychologist are trained to be more keen and sensitive in developing and regulating interventions for home-school collaboration with diverse populations (NASP, n.d.). As a mental health provider, school psychologists are usually the first in line to observe CLD students' gaps in academic, behavior and social-emotional success at schools. A study conducted by Jonak, (2014), surveyed students and school staff from the mid-western part of the United States in order to review their perceptions of home-school collaboration best practices. Responses from 117 respondents indicated that school efforts to increase family involvement in CLD population were only implemented in one-third to one-half of the participating schools. The results of this study was important to realize that even though there are best intentions to involve all families, there still exist barriers to implement and maintain strategies that would increase home-school collaboration with CLD families (Jonak, 2014). Due to the mental health professional’s significant impact on the day to day family involvement with the school, school psychologists’ participation and perception for implementing home-school collaboration strategies are needed to improve home-school collaboration with CLD families.
Six Types of Interventions Framework
School psychologists are trained to be familiar with research-based interventions (NASP, n.d.). When it comes to home-school collaboration, it is important to not only be familiar with
4


theoretical implications and benefits for positive relationships between home and school, but also be knowledgeable with interventions that are well planned and effective. Epstein (1995) developed an intervention model for schools to implement in order to assist with home-school collaboration. This model was developed by partner programs associated with Johns Hopkins University and discussed in detail by Epstein et al., (2002), and the purpose for this model was so that the theory of best practices for home-school collaboration could become an actuality by organizing the interventions into practical categories. The following are the six types of interventions recommended for all schools to implement throughout the school year in order to increase productive home-school collaboration: Parenting, Communicating, Volunteering, Learning at Home, Decision making, and Collaborating with the Community.
Parenting
Parenting intervention activities are used to incorporate an exchange of information between families and schools regarding students’ health, development, safety and other topics that would benefit the student in the end (Epstein et al., 2002). For example, Epstein et al. discussed the success of one high school in Shaker Heights, Ohio. The high school involved families to organize a parent support group for incoming 9th graders so that new families could feel welcomed and learn about important topics and conversations to have with their teen students. There are many other examples on how other schools have used parental engagement interventions to incorporate home-school collaboration by simply being in tuned with family/community needs. Similar practices can also be used with CLD families as interventions to promote parental engagement activities, and school psychologists can be the ones to investigate in their specific school/district how to incorporate family activities.
5


When it comes to individual educational plans (IEPs) parental involvement is not just recommended but legally warranted (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). Laws dictated by IDEA require that parents be involved in the identification process of their students and maintain involvement as long as the student has an IEP. Engagement of the legal matters of their students’ accommodations and modifications can be complex and frustrating, especially if it is not in the language the family dominates. Taking the extra step an ensuring family understanding in these important meetings will help later on in family engagement with CLD families.
Communicating
Home-school communication is key to continued collaboration (Epstein et al., 2002). Without communication, it would be extremely difficult to monitor student progress at home or school, to incorporate any accommodations or assess needs, and most importantly, it would be almost impossible to understand family and school culture. To obtain direct insight with Hispanic/Latino culture, a Mexican-American mothers were interviewed regarding their experience with communication issues at their school, especially during the IEP process (Salas, 2004). Language alienation and lack of respect were two main topics that stood out during the parent interviews.
Language alienation that CLD parents often experience (Salas, 2004) can prove to be frustrating for any family, especially if a family is completely new to the educational system (Pappas, 1997; Olivos, 2009). Not only are there the new rules and regulations to understand and navigate, but also the school system as a whole is considerably different from their country/culture of origin. Therefore, trying to grasp a completely new system in an unfamiliar language can be quite intimidating or frustrating for CLD families. In the study by Salas (2004), the mothers expressed special concern in this area because they felt they could not be a part of
6


the school system due to so many differences in their language. Salas observed significant cultural barriers which impacted the parents’ involvement in their child’s school, especially when it came to communicating important information. The mothers from this study reported feeling ashamed and embarrassed that they could not speak English, and expressed frustration for the constant miscommunication during school meetings. It is not uncommon for CLD families to feel left out, embarrassed and generally misunderstand about how schools work in the U.S. (Pappas, 1997). In this case, many of the mothers felt they were silenced and not allowed to be involved in their students' education, interrupting their ability to have a successful home-school collaboration (Salas, 2004).
It is important for schools to incorporate home and school communication interventions by designing appropriate ways to communicate to home and a method where families can communicate effectively back to the school. In such communications, language barriers should always be considered. Therefore it is essential for school to have a translating/interpreting service so CLD families can feel included in important communication details (Olivos, 2009). Volunteering
Many times, when people think of home-school collaboration, they think about how families can be involved with the school by volunteering in activities. However, volunteering is only one part for positive home-school collaboration. (Epstein et al., 2002). Volunteering activities is a perfect opportunity for families to support their community by giving their time and incorporating their ideas with their school. However, many schools/districts struggle with recruiting volunteers, and/or families do not know how they can participate in such activities. School psychologists should be aware of the barriers that exist for recruiting CLD families as volunteers and determine best approaches so that all families are aware of their value in being
7


part of school activities (NASP, n.d.) A school in Williamston, Michigan recognized the challenges that existed in recruiting volunteers, so in order to meet the need of parent volunteers in their school activities they created a directory with parent information via survey at the beginning of the year (Epstein, et al., 2002). The survey explained its purpose (to recruit parents as volunteers) asked questions such as family talent, skills, resources and time availabilities. That way, throughout the year, the school could use the directory to find parent volunteers depending on the upcoming activities. Examples such as these are resources school psychologist can incorporate to include CLD families as well. It is important for schools to know their diverse families from the beginning of the school year until the end, and know what talents they have that they could use to improve overall school parent involvement.
Learning at Home
Although students are supposed to be educated at school, students also need to continue learning at home (Epstein, et al., 2002). However, with CLD populations, sometimes homework instructions are confusing or are not in the family’s native language, and therefore the families leave learning solely to the educative system. Learning at home interventions are even more needed with CLD families who have students on an IEP. Students with IEP’s are at higher risk of developing academic, social, emotional and behavioral complications (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). As IEP members, school psychologists should take extra precaution to ensure CLD families are fully comprehending what is being said and ensure families know what to incorporate at home for the students’ learning.
Smiley conducted a study (2006) to analyze the dynamics and roles of educators and parents during IEP meetings. In this study, there was a discussion of power roles and inequalities that exists between families of color and the educative system and how it impacts overall home-
8


school relationships and learning at home. Such inequalities are observed when at least one member of the IEP team is knowledgeable regarding special education laws and requirements but others (perhaps family members who do not speak English) are not. Power seems to shift to the person who knows the most in any given topic. The study stressed the importance of empowering parents by providing them with the tools, such as verbal explanations along with additional hands-outs in their native language, to understand difficult processes. This could be one way schools can eliminate inequalities of power during meetings held at schools, and another way to ensure families are understanding their services and its application at home. Legally, parents have the right to advocate for their children with needs to ensure that they receive appropriate accommodations and modification (Yell, 2006). However, parents who do not understand the education system and processes will have a difficult time supporting their student at school and home, possibly negatively impacting their students' education (Salas,
2004). Knowing how to empower CLD families throughout any school process could facilitate families’ understandings of how they can assist with teaching at home.
Not only is it important for the schools to be aware if families are understanding assignments sent home, but also to ensure that learning at home is appropriate with language development and culture. Strategies such as rephrasing certain words, or repeating meaning in a different contexts are some simple steps schools can take that will help with learning at home strategies (Eckert, Russo, & Hier, 2004). Another example that schools can facilitate learning at home for CLD populations is to incorporate an after/before school tutoring program where parents come in to work with their students (Epstein, et al., 2002). Specialized staff (e.g. teachers, school psychologists, family liaisons etc) could be available during this time, so that if families have any questions about an assignment or about their students’ learning, they could use
9


that time to talk to the school staff and work together to facilitate learning at home later. School psychologists can also ensure that academic, social/emotional and behavioral skills are being practiced at home with their families, and keep families involved in their students’ progress in order to understand what works with the students’ learning and what does not.
Decision Making
Schools and families make countless decisions on a daily basis regarding students. By incorporating a decision making activity that includes both school and families is just one other way to improve home-school collaboration (Epstein, et al., 2002). Having parent-teacher organizations/associations, or a family member as a representative in school councils is just a few ways schools and families work together to make decisions. It is important that such organizations are reflective with the school’s CLD population, and a school psychologist could be the one to educate CLD families of how these organizations are important for the students’ and communities’ development. School psychologists can also help schools be more sensitive to cultural values and avoid families feeling disrespected during decision making activities.
CLD family involvement in decision making is especially crucial when making legal decisions that affect students’ education, such as decisions in IEPs. One other theme that Salas found (2004) was that the mothers of her study felt they were disrespected due to their ethnic and cultural differences. When it comes to building the collaboration with CLD families, just by telling parents the importance of their involvement in the IEP process is not enough. It is hard for families to feel comfortable in meetings, especially with educators or school staff members who are complete strangers or are not sensitive with families' culture (Olivos, 2009) and then to be told to agree with the decision or disagree without much thought or knowledge of the process. Such forceful attempts of collaboration in making decisions might come off as disrespectful and
10


inconsiderate to families’ cultures and values. Also, many of the mothers in Sala’s study (2004) reported that they did not understand their rights because no one in the school explained it to them. Educational law requires that during meetings, such as IEPs, the public agency (i.e. school) needs to make reasonable efforts to ensure parents understand (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). However, the mother’s stated that they were almost always handed information with big words that they could not read or interpret on their own (Salas, 2004). Overall, the common message that these mothers received in the study was that the school did not care for them nor their student, and that the only reason why schools would involve parents was because they were legally obligated to.
Having families involved in decision making is important for home-school collaboration (Epstein, et al., 2002) especially among CLD populations. The themes Salas found in her study (2004), are common themes discussed in other studies as well (Olivos, 2009). There exists gaps between school staff culture and student/family cultures that could be causing issues of disconnect between home and schools. Although there might appear to be many challenges, school psychologists can help avoid the disconnect that CLD families and schools have when it comes to making decisions. One way schools can embrace such challenges is by being informed and staying in tune to the CLD families’ traditions, customs and expectations during decision making meetings.
Collaborating with the Community
Collaborating with the community activities involves not just home and school, but other community groups and organizations that could work together to benefit overall student outcome (Epstein, et al., 2002). There exists a vast majority of community agencies that partner with schools such as clinics, museums, libraries and so forth. A school psychologist should be aware
11


of the different communities that exist outside the home and school and determine how and when
the school and families would benefit from these collaborations. More importantly, a school psychologist should be sensitive to the CLD populations that exist within their school and what communities would benefit them the most and in the long run. Such mutual collaborations among organizations is the pillar stone to what make a community successful and progressive.
When working with CLD populations it is important to be aware of the variety of CLD communities that could be involved with the school. It becomes difficult engaging CLD families especially when there is a gap between home’s culture and school’s culture. The school in where Salas (2004) conducted interviews with parents was considered to be made up of 90% Hispanic/Latino students, however, 80% of the teachers were Euro-Americans. School psychology organizations are aware of such difference in many schools with culture and language and encourage the involvement with CLD communities in order to help schools close these cultural gaps (NASP, 2015).
To work with CLD communities it is also important for school psychologists to be knowledgeable of language and cultures of the local communities (NASP, 2015). NASP wrote a position statement acknowledging the importance of having school staff, especially in mental health, who are culturally, and if possible, linguistically competent to work with CLD populations. NASP recommends that mental health staff, such as school psychologists, receive training in order to be culturally and linguistically responsive in the areas of assessment, consultation, intervention, advocacy and home-school collaboration with CLD families. This way, schools can provide equitable and culturally responsive services to all their families within the school and extend resources out to the CLD communities as well.
12


Conclusion
There are many barriers and negative perceptions that CLD families and schools have between each other (Olivos, 2009). However, collaboration between CLD families and schools becomes possible when educative systems are able to align values, beliefs and culture with that of their diverse communities. It can become very confusing and complex for many CLD families, and in order to know how best to serve its population, schools and districts need to be aware of current practices and methods used to serve their unique CLD cultures within their community. School psychologists have received specific training to work with CLD families (NASP, n.d.), therefore there perception of current strategies and implementations are essential to improve home-school collaboration with CLD families. School psychologists can help facilitate the engagement of CLD families with the school by focusing on building trust between home and schools, recognize the diversity of cultures that exist within a school culture, respect and address families unique needs, and share this same power and responsibility with the families as well (Epstein, et al., 2002). Epstein (1995) created an intervention framework that incorporates six different domains of home-school activities. By having a clear and concise model to follow, schools can extend such intervention to CLD populations with the help of school psychologist.
Purpose
There have been minimal studies conducted to gather school psychologists’ perception of current strategies and implementations used to increase home-school collaboration, especially among CLD families. Gathering this information could be relevant for educators and school administrators who seek to improve students’ home-school collaboration with CLD families. The purpose of this study is to understand what interventions, under Epstein’s framework (1995),
13


school psychologists use when working with CLD students and families. More information is needed to better understand what roles school psychologists play in order to maintain CLD family’s involvement in schools. Furthermore, the following questions are asked in this present study:
1. What interventions do school psychologists use to ensure home-school collaboration among CLD populations?
2. What are the major factors that contribute and limit the success of home-school collaboration among CLD populations?
14


CHAPTER III
METHOD
Description of Research Design and Procedures Used
Based on Epstein’s six type framework (1995) and in partnership with Johns Hopkins University, an instrument was designed to measure a school’s home-school collaboration (Salinas, et al., n.d.). The purpose of the measure was for schools to challenge themselves to discover areas of growth and see what areas of the six domains of interventions needed improvement. Therefore, this tool could be used to increase student success by improving school climate strengthening home-school relationships (Salinas, Epstein, Sanders, 1997). Although this measure has not been validated in a study as of yet, the items of the survey are closely aligned to various literatures regarding the effectiveness of incorporating Epstein’s six type framework (Epstein, 1995; Yap & Enoki, 1995; & Salinas, Epstein & Sanders, 1997). Because of its design to measure home-school collaboration strategies, this instrument was chosen to answer the research questions of this study. However, the instrument developed by Salinas, et al. (n.d.) does not specify whether the schools are improving home-school relationships with CLD populations. Therefore, the researcher of this study adapted the original measure to reflect specific CLD home-school interventions that a school psychologist might use.
The original measure was adapted for online administration via Qualtrics (a program designated to create and distribute surveys). Similar to the original measure, the survey was separated into sections reflecting the six domains of interventions (parenting, communication, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaboration with community). There were 6-15 items in each section, totaling a 62-item survey that included a rating scale and open-ended questions (see Appendix A). The rating scale consisted of a 5-point Likert scale where 1
15


indicated as not occurring and 5 indicated that the activity stated extensively occurs. At the end of every section the measure allowed the participants to include other interventions they do that was not included in the list of options.
At the end of the six sections, there were four open-ended questions. The first three were adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool and asked participants what factors they believed contributed and limited their success to establishing a successful home-school collaboration with CLD families, and what participants’ major goal within the next few years to improve home-school collaboration. The last question was added by the researcher and asked the participants to describe what their school’s primary population was. Initial analysis was conducted by coding individual responses. The researcher coded in two rounds (emergent and a priori) in order to organize and describe the data.
During the emergent coding process, there were no restrictions regarding the types of code created. Each code was described accordingly to fit the research questions. This aligns with Saldana’s (2009) assertion that descriptive coding is an appropriate choice for exploring questions that seek understanding of actions and processes. Once emergent codes were identified and described, the researcher assigned a priori codes to create a consistent and structured process (Creswell, 2013). Afterwards the codes were consolidated, after deleted or revised based on the exploration of similarities and differences found among the various responses. The final step in the data analysis was to include identifying themes that arose from a priori codes. Further analysis of the identified themes are discussed in the results section of this study.
All the wording of the entire survey was used verbatim from the original measure with the exception that most items were also modified slightly. The items were modified to ensure that the items referred to CLD population and not the general population as the original measure
16


was intended (Epstein, et al., 2002). The total amount of time to complete the survey was approximately twenty to thirty minutes. The survey was sent out twice between the months of September and October 2018.
The participants demographics was collected at the end of the survey and participants were asked to share their age range, years of experience, and race/ethnicity, etc. (see Appendix B). There were a total of 30 participants (Table 1), however, not all 30 participants included demographic information. Therefore, included in the table, was the number of unknown demographics. The participant’s demographic was important since such variables could affect perception of school policies regarding home-school collaboration and current strategies (Fink, 2017). However, due to the small sample size, the association between demographics and item responses could not be determined in a statistically significant manner. Demographic information collected was still included in the study for future reference.
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for participant demographics
N Percentage
pant Age
20-25 0 0%
26-35 5 17%
36-45 4 13%
46-55 6 20%
56+ 2 7%
Unknown 13 43%
N Percentage
of Experience
1-3 years 4 13%
4-6 years 3 10%
7-10 years 1 3%
11-20 years 4 13%
21-30 years 4 13%
31-40 years 1 3%
More than 50 years 0 0%
Unknown 13 43%
N Percentage
17


Level of Education
Ed.S 9 30%
Psy.D 2 7%
PhD 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 13 43%
N Percentage
Multicultural Training
This year 1 3%
1-3 years ago 8 27%
4-6 years ago 2 7%
7-10 years ago 4 13%
Never 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 13 43%
N Percentage
Ethnicity
White/Caucasian 13 43%
Hispanic/Latino 2 7%
Asian 1 3%
Unknown 14 47%
Responses were anonymous, and names did not appear on any of the instruments. Data was presented in a way that participants could not be linked to their individual responses. Neither the researcher, nor anyone else, knew which response belonged to which individual. Data was stored in a secure place in a password-protected laptop and email. The researcher and faculty advisor were the only people who viewed the completed surveys.
Sampling Procedures
The researcher contacted Colorado Society of School Psychologists (CSSP) as a mean to send out the survey link to school psychologist members. From the approximately 382 regular members (not including students) and 15 retired school psychologists, only a total 30 responses were returned from the list. From the 30 total participants, 17 participants completed the survey fully, the other 13 participants partially completed the survey. The participants of this study were
18


considered a convenience sample due to the specificity needed for this study. In order to be a part of this study, participants needed to be currently practicing, or have practiced in mental health services as a school psychologist within the last 5 years. It was important that the school psychologists in this study had sufficient experience working at a school, and that they could accurately remember their experiences. Academic preparation and years of experience along with other demographics were also taken into consideration as this added to diversity and variability within the participants.
Methods and Instruments of Data Gathering
There were two main components of the survey, understanding what interventions school psychologists most commonly used when working with CLD students and families, and what were the major factors that contribute and/or limit the success of implementation of home-school collaboration among CLD families. Qualtrics was used to gather descriptive statistics to answer the questions prompted by this current study. Such examination provided an in-depth look of school psychologists’ perceptions of what is currently working at their schools/districts, or what areas of intervention need improvement. Validity of these analyses were based on face validity. Reliability was not determined due to the unavailability of raters to retake the survey, but because the survey based on various peer-reviewed literatures (Epstein, 1995; Yap & Enoki, 1995; & Salinas, Epstein & Sanders, 1997) it is assumed that the scales of this present study were reliable.
19


CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
According to the survey results, the participants indicated that when it comes to home-school collaboration in the domains of parenting, communication, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and collaborating with community, there were a mix of responses of what is practiced in their schools. Participants were asked to use a scale of 1-5 when responding to questions, with 1 being that the action in question Does Not occur at all, followed by 2 being Rarely occurs, 3 being Occasionally occurs, followed by 4 which indicated that the action in question Frequently occurs, and finally, 5 which indicated that the action in question happens Extensively at their school. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the participants’ responses and the mean was obtained for every item response by adding the responses and dividing them by the number of responses per item. The average per item was rounded up to the nearest whole number (e.g. 2.4 = 2, or 3.5 =4). Whole numbers were then translated to their value of “does not”, “rarely”, “occasionally”, “frequently”, and “extensively” as mentioned above.
Parenting Domain
The first domain adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool asked participants about how school psychologists and/or schools help CLD families establish home environment to support children as students (see Figure 1). Question 1 asked participants if they or their school conduct workshops or provide information for CLD families on child development. Out of 22 total responses for this question, the average response (m=2.14) indicated that participants and/or their schools Rarely conduct workshops or provide information for CLD families on child development.
20


Question 2 asked participants if they or their school provides information, training, and assistance to all CLD families who want it or who need it, not just to the few who can attend workshops or meetings at the school building. Out of 21 participants who answered this question, the average response (m=2.76) indicated that participants and/or their schools Occasionally provide information, training, and assistance to all CLD families.
Question 3 asked participants if they or their school produce information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and linguistically appropriate, and linked to children’s success in school. Out of 22 participants, the average response (m=3.41) indicated that participants and/or their schools Frequently produce information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and linguistically appropriate.
Question 4 asked participants if they or their school ask CLD families for information about children’s goals, strengths and talents. Out of 23 participants, the average response (m=3.52) indicated that participants and/or their schools Frequently ask CLD families information about children’s goal, strengths and talent.
Question 5 asked participants if they or their school sponsor home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help CLD families understand schools and to help schools understand families. Out of 22 participants, the average response (m=2.77) indicated that participants and/or their schools Occasionally sponsor home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help CLD families understand schools and to help schools understand families.
Question 6 asked participants if they or their school provide CLD families with information/training on developing home conditions or environments that support learning. Out of 22 participants, the average response (m=2.45) indicated that participants and/or their schools
21


Occasionally provide CLD families with information/training on developing home conditions or environments that support learning.
Question 7 asked participants if they or their school respect the different cultures represented in their student population. Out of 20 participants, the average response (m=3.90) indicated that participants and/or their schools Frequently respect the different cultures represented in their student population.
Finally, question 8 asked participants if they or their school perform any other types of activities relating to parenting domain of home-school collaboration. Only two participants indicated that other activities are done Occasionally and Extensively, although no participant gave detail to describe what the other activities were.
Parenting Domain
14
Q.l Conducts Q.2 Provide Q.3 Produce workshops trainings information
Q.4 Ask Q.5 Sponsor Q.6 Provide Q.7 Respects Q.8 Other about home visitinginfo on home culture children's development
strenghts
â–  Notoccuring â–  Rarely â– Occasionally â–  Frequently â–  Extensively
Figure 1: Frequency per number of responses
Communicating Domain
The second domain adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool asked participants how school psychologists and/or their schools design effective forms of home-
22


school communications about school programs and children’s progress for CLD families (see Figure 2). Question 1 asked participants if they or their school reviews the legibility, clarity, form, and frequency of all memos, notices, and other print and non-print communications. Out of 20 total responses for this question, the average response (m=3.60) indicated that participants and/or their schools Frequently review the printed information that goes out to CLD families.
Question 2 asked participants if they or their school develop communication for CLD
families who do not speak English as a first language. Out of 20 total responses, the average response (m=4.05) indicated that they or their school Frequently develop communication for CLD families.
Question 3 asked participants if they or their school establish clear two-way channels for communications between home and school for CLD families. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.67) indicated that they or their school Frequently establish clear two-way channels for CLD families.
Question 4 asked participants if they or their school conduct formal conferences with CLD families at least once a year. Out of 21 responses, the average response (m=3.43) indicated that they or their school Occasionally conduct conferences with CLD families.
Question 5 asked participants if they or their school conduct annual surveys for CLD families to share information and concerns about student needs and reactions to school programs, and their satisfaction with their involvement in school. Out of 18 total responses, the average
23


(m=2.89) response indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally conduct
annual surveys for CLD families.
Question 6 asked participants if they or their school conduct an orientation for new CLD families. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=2.72) indicated that they or their school Occasionally run orientation for new CLD families.
Question 7 asked participants if they or their school send home folders of student work weekly or monthly for CLD family review and comment in an appropriate and understandable language. Out of 19 total responses, the average response (m=2.95) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally send home folders of student work weekly or monthly in an appropriate and understandable language.
Question 8 asked participants if they or their school provide clear information about curriculum, assessments, achievement levels, and report cards in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families. Out of 20 total responses, the average response (m=3.20) indicated that they or their school Occasionally provide clear information in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families.
Question 9 asked participants if they or their school contact CLD families of students having academic or behavior problems. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=4.29) indicated that the participants and/or their school Frequently provide clear information to CLD families.
24


Question 10 asked participants if they or their school develop school’s plan and program
with CLD family and community involvement. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.57) indicated that the participants and/or their school Frequently develop school’s plan and program with CLD families.
Question 11 asked participants if they or their school train teachers, staff and principals on the value and utility of contribution of CLD families and ways to build ties between home and school. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.38) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally train staff on the value of contribution of CLD families.
Question 12 asked participants if they or their school build policies that encourage all teachers to communicate frequently with CLD families about their curriculum plans, expectations for homework, and how families can help. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.38) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally build policies that encourage teachers to communicate to CLD families about their curriculum plans, expectations, and so forth so families can help.
Question 13 asked participants if they or their school produce a regular school newsletter with up-to-date information about school, special events, organizations, meetings, and parenting tips in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families. Out of 20 total responses, the average response (m=3.45) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally produce newsletters for CLD families.
25


Question 14 asked participants if they or their school provide written communication in the language of their families. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=4.0) indicated that the participants and/or their school Frequently produce written communication in the language of the families.
Question 15 asked participants if they and/or their school provide any other type of
communication to which there were no responses to this item.
Communicating Domain
12
10
8
Jill
II
â–¡


V O' c,
o> 2? 4°
/V
* .y .J? JT 4
*
fa° o-- V
o? o--
> o--

o--
0.>”
INotoccuring â–  Rarely â–  Occasionally â–  Frequently â–  Extensively
Figure 2: Frequency per number of responses
Volunteering Domain
The third domain adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool asked participants concerning how school psychologists and/or their schools recruit and organize CLD families to help and support their school (see Figure 3). Question 1 asked participants if they or their school conduct an annual survey to identify interests, talents, and availability of CLD family volunteers to match their skills/talents with school and classroom needs. Out of 14
26


responses, the average response (m=2.36) indicated that the participants and/or their schools
Rarely conduct surveys.
Question 2 asked participants if they or their school provide a family room for CLD volunteers and family members to work, meet, and access resources about parenting, childcare, tutoring, and other things that effect their children. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=2.28) indicated that the participants and/or their schools Rarely provide a family room for CLD volunteers.
Question 3 asked participants if they or their school create flexible volunteering and school events schedules, enabling CLD families who work to participate. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=3.0) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally create flexible volunteering schedules for CLD families.
Question 4 asked participants if they or their school train CLD volunteers so they use their time productively. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.28) indicated that the participants and/or their school Rarely train CLD volunteers.
Question 5 asked participants if they or their school recognize CLD volunteers for their time and efforts. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=3.0) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally recognize CLD volunteers.
Question 6 asked participants if they or their school schedule school events at different times during the day and evening so that all CLD families can attend some throughout the year. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=3.33) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally provide different schedules for evening events.
Question 7 asked participants if they or their school reduce barriers to family participation by providing transportation, childcare, flexible schedules, and addresses the needs
27


of English language learners. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.47) indicated that the participants and/or their school Rarely attempt to reduce barriers for CLD family participating in events.
Question 8 asked participants if they or their school encourage CLD families and the community to be involved with the school in a variety of ways (assisting in classroom, giving talks, monitoring halls, leading activities, etc.). Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.88) indicated that the participants and/or their school Occasionally encourage CLD families and the community to be involved with the school.
Question 9 asked participants if they or their school had other forms of volunteering activities with CLD families. None of the participants indicated any other type of volunteering activities performed at their school.
Volunteering Domain
9
8
7
6
5
Q.1 Q.2 Q.3 Creates Q.4 Trains Q.5 Q.6 Q.7 Q.8 Q.9 Other
Conducts Provides a flexible volunteers Recognizes Schedules Reduces Encourages
surveys family room events volunteers events barriers families
â–  Notoccuring â–  Rarely â– Occasionally â–  Frequently â–  Extensively
Figure 3: Frequency per number of responses
28


Learning at Home Domain
The fourth domain adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool asked participants about how school psychologists and/or their schools provide information and ideas to CLD families about how to help students at home with homework and other curriculum-related activities, decision, and planning (see Figure 4). Question 1 asked participants if they or their school provide information to CLD families on how to monitor and discuss school work at home. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.75) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally provide information to help CLD families monitor and discuss school work at home.
Question 2 asked participants if they or their school provide ongoing and specific information to CLD families on how to assist students with skills that they need to improve. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.65) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally provide ongoing information on how to assist students with skills.
Question 3 asked participants if they or their school make CLD families aware of the importance of reading at home, and ask families to listen to their child read or read aloud with their child. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=3.41) indicated that participants and/or their school Frequently make CLD families aware of the importance of reading.
Question 4 asked participants if they or their school assist CLD families in helping students set academic goals, select courses, and programs. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.71) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally assist CLD families in helping students set goals.
Question 5 asked participants if they or their school schedule regular interactive homework that requires students to demonstrate and discuss what they are learning with a family
29


member. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.53) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally schedule regular interactive homework.
Question 6 asked participants if they or their school practiced any other types of learning at home activities with CLD families to which no participant indicated a response.
Learning at Home Domain
Q.l Provides Q.2 Provides Q.3 Makes Q.4 Assist set Q.5 Schedule Q.6 Other information ongoing skills families aware goals interactive
homework
â–  Notoccuring â–  Rarely â– Occasionally â–  Frequently â–  Extensively
Figure 4: Frequency per number of responses
Decision Making Domain
The fifth domain adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool asked participants about how school psychologists and/or their schools include CLD families in school decision, developing parent leaders and representatives. Question 1 asked participants if they or their school have active PTA, PTO, or other parent organization for CLD families. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.13) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally have organization for CLD families.
Question 2 asked participants if they or their school include CLD family representatives on the school’s advisory council, improvement team, or other committees. Out of 16 total
30


responses, the average response (m=2.94) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally include CLD family representatives.
Question 3 asked participants if they or their school have CLD families represented on district-level advisory councils and committees. Out of 14 total responses, the average response (m=2.93) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally have CLD families represented on district-level advisory council.
Question 4 asked participants if they or their school involve CLD families in an organized, ongoing, and timely way in the planning, review, and improvement of programs. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.53) indicated that participants and/or their school occasionally involve CLD families in an organized way.
Question 5 asked participants if they or their school involve CLD families in revising the school/district curricula. Out of 13 total responses, the average response (m=1.77) indicated that participants and/or their school rarely involve CLD families in revising the school/district curricula.
Question 6 asked participants if they or their school include family leaders from all racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and other group in the school. Out of 13 total responses, the average response (m=2.88) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally include family leaders.
Question 7 asked participants if they or their school develop formal networks to link families with their parent representatives. Out of 14 total responses, the average response (m=2.57) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally develop formal networks to link all families.
31


Question 8 asked participants if they or their school include students (along with CLD families) in decision-making groups. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.63) indicated that participants and/or their school Occasionally include CLD students along with their families in decision-making groups.
Question 9 asked participants if they or their school deal with conflict openly and respectfully. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.88) indicated that participants and/or their school Frequently deal with conflict openly and respectfully among CLD population.
Question 10 asked participants if they or their school ask CLD families to make contact with other CLD families who are less involved to solicit their ideas. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.87) was that participants and/or their school Occasionally ask CLD families to make contact with other families.
Question 11 asked participants if they or their school partake of any other type of activities that include CLD in decision making. Only one participant answered that they and/or their school do so Occasionally, but did not indicated what the other activity was.
32


Decision Making Domain
9
8
7 ---------- —
6
5
â–  Notoccuring â–  Rarely â–  Occasionally â–  Frequently â–  Extensively
Figure 5: Frequency per number of responses
Collaborating with the Community Domain
The sixth and final domain adapted from Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool asked participants about how school psychologists and/or their schools identify and integrate resources and services from CLD communities to strengthen school programs, family practices, and student learning and development. Question 1 asked participants if they or their school provide a CLD community resources directory for parents and students with information on community services, programs, and agencies. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.38) indicated that they and/or their school Occasionally provide a directory of information on community services for CLD families.
Question 2 asked participants if they or their school involve CLD families in locating and utilizing community resources. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.69) indicated that they and/or their school Frequently involve CLD families in utilizing community resources.
33


Question 3 asked participants if they or their school work with local business, industries,
and community organizations on programs to enhance student skills and learning. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=3.13) indicated that they and/or their school Occasionally work with local business to enhance CLD student skills and learning.
Question 4 asked participants if they or their school provide “one-stop” shopping for CLD family services through partnership of school counseling, health, recreation, job training, and other agencies. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.25) indicated that they and/or their schools Rarely provide a “one-stop” shop for community or related services.
Question 5 asked participants if they and/or their school open the building for use by the CLD community after school hours. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.20) indicated that they and/or their school Rarely open the building for CLD community after school hours.
Question 6 asked participants if they and/or their school offer after-school programs for students with support from CLD communities, businesses, agencies, and volunteers. Out of a total of 13 total responses, the average response (m=2.38) indicated that they and/or their school Rarely offer after-school programs for students with support from CLD communities.
Question 7 asked participants if they and/or their school solve community problems and responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations for collaborative activities to occur. Out of 10 total
34


responses, the average response (m=2.20) indicated that they and/or their school Rarely solve
problems related for collaborative activities to occur.
Question 8 asked participants if they and/or their school utilize CLD community resources, such as business, libraries, parks, and museums to enhance the learning environment. Out of 14 total response, the average response (m=2.50) indicated that they and/or their school Occasionally use CLD resources to enhance the learning environment.
Question 9 asked participants if they and/or their school partake in any other activities related to collaboration with CLD community to which no participant answered.
Collaborating with the Community Domain
8
7
6 ' —■----- — —— — —
5
â–  Notoccuring â–  Rarely â–  Occasionally â–  Frequently â–  Extensively
Figure 6: Frequency per number of responses
A descriptive analysis was also conducted on the average score per domain in order to see if any one domain was practiced or observed more than another. A mean score was obtained by adding up all the means scores per domain except for the activities that had a score of zero
35


(e.g. other types of activities). See Figure 7. Although the items within the domain varied in responses, the broader average indicated that overall participants and/or their school occasionally observe and/or have activities that increase CLD involvement in the areas of parenting, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and community. In other words, an average of 3 out of 5 times school psychologists and their schools use a variety of tools in the mentioned domains to increase home-school collaboration with CLD population. Participants also indicated that in terms of providing overall appropriate communication to CLD populations, they or their schools will do so on average 4 out of 5 times. At this point, the data indicate that communication in general is the most common method, when compared to the other domains that school psychologists observed to be most practiced intervention in order to increase home-school collaboration.
Mean per Domain
4
Parenting Communication Volunteering Learning at Home Decision Making Community
â–  Mean per Domain
Figure 7: Average response per domain
36


Qualitative Results
What factors have contributed to the success of your home-school collaboration?
Three major themes were identified from the open-ended survey question regarding factors that contribute to the success of the participants’ home-school collaboration. One major factor reported by the participants was having appropriate staff in building, such as bilingual liaisons, exceptional ESL teachers, and bilingual community advocates. Another identified factor was intentional planning and effort to involve CLD families. For example, some participants reported that in their schools/districts, they consciously set aside time to reach out and connect with CLD families. Other participants reported that they intentionally started a parent advisory council that included CLD families. Finally, another factor that participants believed contributed to the success of home-school collaboration among CLD populations was creating a culture of respect for diversity. In other words, participants have seen success in home-school collaboration among CLD populations when a culture of respect for diversity in acknowledged and practiced.
What major factors have limited the success of you home-school collaboration?
Two major themes were identified from the open-ended questions regarding factors that limit the success of home-school collaboration. One consistent theme reported by participants was that their schools did not have appropriate staff. For example, their school lacked a parent/family liaison to connect with their CLD populations, and staff members could not communicate with CLD families. Another major theme that participants reported was that there was a lack of understanding and/or training regarding CLD populations. For examples, participants indicated that many teachers, including special education teacher, do not fully understand the impact language has on education. Other concerning limitations included schools
37


not knowing how to find a way to engage CLD families, or miscommunication of culture in which resulted in families feeling intimidated by the school personnel contacting them.
What is one of your school’s major goals for improving its home-school collaboration with culturally and linguistically diverse families over the next 3 years, and how do you plan to be involved?
Three major themes were identified from the participants’ response to the open-ended question regarding how they planned on improving home-school collaboration over the next 3 years. Many participants indicated hiring and/or including appropriate staff for the position of reaching out and connecting with CLD families. For example, the participant responded that they or their school plans to hire a CLD parent/family liaison within the near future and/or more interpreters for conferences and meetings. Participants stressed the importance of having staff who could engage with families at a more meaningful level. Another common goal that was identified from the participant responses was to promote culturally sensitivity. Some activities they recommended was to have more flexible meeting times and afterschool programs that could meet the needs of CLD families. Also, it was suggested that they could be more involved with the CLD community and activities outside of school. Finally, a common theme among the responses was that the participant did not personally have involvement with CLD population, and therefore did not have a goal to improve the system. The participant indicated that they were unsure what goal or plan they could implement.
Would you consider your school to have a high, medium or low population of CLD?
Of the participants who answered, 56% reported having high population of CLD population at their school (n=9), 25% reported having a medium population (n=3), and 19% reported having a low population of CLD population in their school. However, since the
38


researcher did not provide a criteria or definition of what was a high, medium or low CLD population, this particular question becomes difficult to interpret even with educated estimation, and therefore the results of this question should be interpreted with caution.
39


CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION AND LIMITATIONS Six Domains of Interventions Discussion
Descriptive data from the participants’ responses along with qualitative data from the participants’ open-ended responses provided a better understanding of school psychologists’ perspective regarding home-school collaboration with CLD population. Epstein’s six type framework (1995) tool was meant to capture domains of strengths and weakness’ per school regarding home-school collaboration. It is important to note that with a very small sample size, this information should be interpreted with caution, as it might not be a true representation of school psychologists’ perspective in general. Results from this current study indicated that the participants, school psychologists, believe that they and/or their school use home-school collaboration strategies under the domains of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, Decision Making, and Collaborating with the Community equally at least 3 out of 5 opportunities. In other words, when responses were rounded up it was observed that the trend of the responses showed that participants and/or their schools are Occasionally using home-school strategies under mentioned domains. When it came to the strategy of Communication as a mean to increase home-school collaboration, the participants believed that they and/or their schools use this strategy 4 out of 5 opportunities and more Frequently compared to the other strategies. Creating communication tools has shown to be an effective way to maintaining collaboration over time (Epstein, et al., 2002). It is also mandated by law (US. Dept, of Ed, 2015) that schools provide effective communication to all families regardless of language that they speak.
Therefore, it was not surprising that the communication domain was the strategy participants indicated they and/or their schools conducted more than the other strategies.
40


Although there were a variety of individual responses ranging from 1 -5, or Not Occurring to Extensively Occurring, the average score of each item was measured since it provided a more general understanding of the most common responses among the participants. There was no item that had an average score in the far extremes of 1st and 5th (e.g. Not Occurring and Extensively Occurring), and the majority of items were in the Occasionally Occurring range. However, a closer analysis was done of the items that fell in the 2nd and 4th range (e.g. Rarely Occurring and Frequently Occurring) in order to understand the general areas that schools and stakeholders might want to focus on if they are to increase home-school collaboration among CLD families.
In the area of Parenting, most participants endorsed that they and/or their school Frequently produce information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and linguistically appropriate, and linked to children’s success in school, ask CLD families for information about children’s goals, strengths and talents, and respect the different cultures represented in our student population. Producing appropriate information would be consistent with the Communication domain as the most common method to increase home-school strategy, and since this is mandated by law (US. Dept, of Ed, 2015) it would make sense that schools are extending this strategy more directly to parents and not just students. It is also positive that schools are frequently using CLD families as resources to gather information regarding children’s goals, strengths and talents because data has shown that the best resources to helping a student in school is accessing family information, such as history and background (Olivos, 2009; Salas, 2004). Finally, as more studies come out regarding the importance of cultural difference, an increase of mutual respect for cultures is reflected in the schools. (Salas, 2004). The participants of the study indicated that they and/or their school show respect to the different cultures represented in the study.
41


Under the Parenting domain, participants also endorsed that they and/or their school Rarely conduct workshops or provide information for CLD families on child development. There is a number of reasons why the schools represented in the study rarely provide workshops. Studies have shown that the most common reasons why schools do not participate in such activities are due to lack of understanding of the importance workshops, and no resources (staff, space, materials etc.) to run workshops (Jonak, 2014; Olivos, 2009), which was generally consistent by the participants of this current study. Further investigation might be insightful to learning in more detail reasons why schools prefer using other home-school strategies.
The Communication domain in general was the home-school intervention most practiced according to the response of the participants. Specifically, participants endorsed that they and/or their school Frequently review the legibility, clarity, form, and frequency of all memos, notices, and other print and non-print communications, develop communication for CLD families who do not speak English as a first language, establish clear two-way channels for communications between home and school for CLD families, contact CLD families of students having academic or behavior problems, develop school’s plan and program of CLD family and community involvement with input from educators, parents, and others, and provide written communication in the language of the families. It is assumed that the communication domain is the most practiced or generally used strategy in CLD home-school collaboration because most CLD families speak another language other than English (Ovando, 2010). Since schools are generally aware of this barrier, and as mentioned earlier, it is legally mandated to provide resources in the primary language of families, it is possible that schools make more of an effort to reduce the language gap between home and school through the use of appropriate communication tools.
42


Volunteering as a strategy for home-school collaboration was generally practiced Occasionally according to participants. However, there were several endorsed items that indicated needing more attention from stakeholders to increase home-school collaboration. For example, participants indicated that they and/or their school Rarely conduct an annual survey to identify interests, talents, and availability of CLD family volunteers, in order to match their skills/talents with school and classroom needs, rarely provide a family room for CLD volunteers and family members to work, meets, and access resources about parenting, childcare, tutoring, and other things that effect their children, Rarely train CLD volunteers so they use their time productively, and Rarely reduce barriers to family participation by providing transportation, childcare, flexible schedules, and addresses the needs of English language learners. Similarly, with the Parenting domain, there is no information as to why schools do not use these strategies as often. More research would need to be conducted to understand what schools need to begin using more volunteering strategies to increase home-school collaboration among CLD population.
The importance of reading at home is a commonly known message schools send home. The message of such importance is being extended to CLD families as well according to the responses from the survey. In the domain of learning at home, participants indicated that they and/or their school frequently make CLD families aware of the importance of reading at home, and ask families to listen to their child read or read aloud with their child.
The Decision-making domain includes home-school collaboration strategies for schools to include CLD families in school decision, developing parent leaders and representatives (Epstein, 1995). Participants indicated that they and/or their school frequently deal with conflict openly and respectfully. It is important that schools and CLD families feel safe to talk openly
43


regarding concerns, issues or changes (Salas, 2002), and it is encouraging that most school represented in the sample are frequently practicing having safe conversations during decision. However, when it comes to discussing revision and changes to school/district curricula, participants indicated that rarely are they or their schools involving CLD families. One can hypothesize that schools rarely include CLD families to discuss revision and changes to school/district curricula because of the gaps in language and culture. Many CLD families come from extremely different educational backgrounds (Pappas, 1997; Olivos, 2009), making discussion in this area complicated. More information is needed in this domain from the participants to understand what barriers exist.
Finally, collaborating with the community is essential for any population in order to have a successful home-school relationship (Jonak, 2014; Olivos, 2009). Participants of this study indicated that they and/or their school involve CLD families in locating and utilizing community resources. This is important because school may not have all the resources to support CLD families. However, by using outside resources within the community, schools are not only increasing home-school collaboration but also increasing home-community and community-school collaborations.
Some areas in this domain might need more attention, according to the participants’ responses. For example, participants indicated that they or their school rarely provide “one-stop” shopping for CLD family services through partnership of school, counseling, health, recreation, job training, and other agencies. Additionally it was reported that schools rarely open their building for use by the CLD community after school hours, rarely offer after-school programs for students with support from CLD communities, businesses, agencies, and volunteers, rarely attempt to solve turf problems and responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations for collaborative
44


activities to occur. Again, further investigation to why the participants indicated these strategies as a weakness to increase home-school collaboration is needed to reduce these identified gaps.
There were some limitations identified by participants in the open-ended responses that warrant further discussion. For example, many participants reported that schools often do not have appropriate bilingual staff. A study by Harris and Sullivan (2017) indicated the importance of having appropriate bilingual and or culturally sensitive staff as a means of increasing supports for CLD families. Participants agreed with their responses that many times they lack funding for staff who are specialized or educated to work with CLD populations. It is interesting to note that this area of limitation was also identified as an area of success for some participants. Participants who indicated success with increasing home-school collaboration reported that by having staff such as CLD liaisons and bilingual staff, they noted a positive association with their home-school collaboration.
Another barrier to home-school collaboration reported by the participants was that their schools lacked the understanding of the importance CLD family involvement. Olivos indicated that due to the lack of understanding, students suffer in many areas (2009). A final limitation to increase home-school collaboration, was that although some schools did realize the importance of home-school collaboration, there existed a lack of understanding how to increase it with diverse population. This is a general concern in many areas (Epstein et al., 2002) in that many stakeholders are realizing the impact and necessity of having positive home-school collaboration with CLD families but do not know where to start. Epstein’s (1995) modified survey used in this study is originally meant for the very purpose that schools/districts evaluate their own areas of strengths and areas of need. Epstein’s study proposed that one way to begin planning appropriate strategies is to use such survey to find strengths and weaknesses within a school/district.
45


With the open-ended responses, participants provided more information to what they, as school psychologists, can do and will do in the future to increase home-school collaboration among CLD families. A common theme was reported that participants would begin intentional planning around CLD participating in home-school collaboration. Some of the planning included hiring appropriate staff and increasing awareness of the importance of CLD involvement. Some participants indicated that they planned on doing nothing, because their area of expertise and passion lied elsewhere and there were other individuals within the school that specialized in the area of home-school collaboration. More information would be needed to understand what might discourage school psychologist to be active participants in home-school collaboration among CLD populations.
Limitations
The current study provided insightful information regarding school-psychologists perspective on home-school collaboration strategies. One major limitation however, as mentioned above, was the sample size. There were approximately 367 members in CSSP, and to have obtained a significant sample, 107 participants would have been needed (allowing for an 8% margin of error). Unfortunately, due to time limitations, the sample size was below expected and therefore the data in this study should be interpreted with caution. It is important to note that the organization (CSSP) is a state-wide organization of school psychologists. The researcher had considered utilizing a national sample with a national organization of school psychologists, however, in order to gain insight on local practice the researcher decided on sampling within current state of practice. Future studies might consider including a broader scope of sampling in order to obtain more varied responses by state.
46


Another limitation was that the tool used did not allow for participants to explain specific barriers pertaining to the question. For example, the survey allowed participants to provide general limitations, but it was unknown why most participants indicated for example why their school did not provide workshops for CLD families. Assumptions could only be made based on other literatures and not based on participant comment. A final limitation observed by the researcher was that it was difficult to determine if school psychologists and/or their school did or did not use strategies equally with non CLD populations. Results do not show if there is a gap between the use of strategies between CLD population and non CLD populations.
For future studies regarding increasing home-school collaboration among CLD populations, the researcher would encourage implementing the same tool developed by Epstein (1995), but include adaptations such as allowing for individual comments of why/why not certain strategies are used. That way specific barriers could be better identified per item. Another change recommended for future studies is that items asked what participants do for CLD populations versus what is done for non CLD population to understand if there is a significant gap due to the CLD variable. Finally, a larger sample size is needed to have the ability to determine if results are generalizable to a larger population.
47


CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Collaboration between schools and families is an opportunity for the educative community to work together with a common goal in mind; in most cases, home and school collaboration improves students educational, behavioral, and social-emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). As mentioned before, when home-school collaboration is successful, the benefits are mutual for establishing trust and growth within the community. Studies show that school psychologists play an important role for improving home-school collaboration with CLD families (Jonak, 2014), therefore by having gathered their perspective of what they and/or their schools are doing will add on to the research of improving home-school collaboration with diverse populations.
There is increasing diversity in urban schools (Olivos, 2009). With great diversity at schools, stakeholders need to take a closer look at implementing effective home-school strategies. Epstein (1995) created a tool for stakeholders to use that would identify weaknesses and strengths their schools/districts. This current study used Epstein’s tool and modified to identify the areas of need for CLD populations. Results indicated that participants of the study Occasionally used home-school strategies within most of the domains from Epstein’s, et al., (2002) study, except for the domain of Communication to which participants indicated that they used more Frequently.
Due to the minimal research conducted prior to this study to gather school psychologists’ perception of current strategies and implementations, more information is needed to continue better understanding of the exact limitation and barriers to certain strategies discussed earlier in this study. School psychologists can continue conducting research and implementing actions that
48


will improve home-school collaboration among CLD population. What is evident is that collaboration between CLD families and schools becomes possible when educative systems are able to align values, beliefs and culture with that of their diverse communities (Olivos, 2009). It is encouraged that stakeholders use tools, such as surveys similar to Epstein’s framework (1995) along with the knowledge and expertise of school psychologists as a start to identifying areas of needs pertaining to their specific school and district.
49


References
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eckert, T. L., Russo, N., & Hier, B. O. (2014). Best practices in school psychologists' promotion of effective collaboration and communication between school professionals. In P. L. Harrison & A. Thomas (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology: Data-Based and Collaborative Decision Making (pp. 541-552). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Epstein, J.L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, (76): 701-712.
Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Jansom, N. R., & Van Voorhis, F. L. (2002). School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Your Handbook for Action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Fink, A. (2017). How to conduct surveys. A step-by-step guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Harris, B., & Sullivan, A. L. (2017). A framework for bilingual school consultation to facilitate multitier systems of support for English Language Learners. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1-26.
Jonak, J. (2014). School personnel’s perceptions of their schools’ involvement in culturally and linguistically diverse school-family-community partnerships. Health Psychology Report, 2(1), 19-26.
Merrell K. W., Ervin, R. A., & Peacock, G. G. (2012). School psychology for the 21st century. Foundations and practices. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
50


Mundt, K., Gregory, A., Melzi, G., & McWayne, C. M. (2015). The influence of ethnic match on latino school-based family engagement. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 37(2), 170-185. doi: 10.1177/0739986315570287
National Association of School Psychology, (2015). NASP position statement: bilingual services. Retrieved from www.nasponline.org on 5/13/2018.
National Association of School Psychology, (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.nasponline.org/about-school-psvchology on 5/10/2018.
Olivos, E. M. (2009). Collaboration with Latino families: A critical perspective of Home— School interactions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 75(2), 109-115. doi: 10.1177/1053451209340220
Ovando, C. J. (2010). Bilingual education in the United States: Historical development and current issues. Bilingual Research Journal, 27(1), 1-24.
Pappas, G. (1997). Forgoing home-school partnerships with Latino families. La Raza Report, 1-
6.
Rhodes, R. L., Ochoa, S. H., & Ortiz, S. O. (2005). Assessing culturally and linguistically diverse students. A practical guide. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Salas, L. (2004). Individualized educational plan meetings and Mexican American parents: let's talk about it. Journal of Latinos and Education, 3(3), 181-192.
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks,
London: Sage.
Salinas, K.C., Epstein, J.L. & Sanders, M.G. (1997). Starting points: An inventory of present practices of school-family community partnerships. In J.L. Epstein,.L. Coates, K.C.
51


Salinas, M.G. Sanders, & B.S. Simon. School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Your Handbook for Action (pp. 122-125). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Salinas, K.C., Epstein, J.L. Sanders, M.G. Davis, D., & Douglas, I. (n.d.) Measure of school,
family, and community partnerships. In partnership with Johns Hopkins University, and Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Shulkind, S. B., & Foote, J. (2009). Creating a culture of connectedness through middle school advisory programs. Middle School Journal, 41{ 1), 20-27. doi:10.1080/00940771.2009.11461700
Skaggs, M. (2001). Facing the facts: overrepresentation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education. Multicultural education, 9, 42-44.
Smiley, A.D. (2006). Power, families of color, and special education: A qualitative examination of discourse between families and professionals in urban settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Thorp, E. K. (1997). Increasing opportunities for partnership with culturally and linguistically diverse families. Intervention in school and clinic, 32, 261-269.
United Stated Depart of Education, (2015). Civil Rights Division. Obtain on 11/17/2018 at
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl-factsheet-lep-parents-201501.pdf
Van Roekel, N. P. D. (2008). English language learners face unique challenges. An NEA Policy Brief National Education Association.
Yap, K.O. & Enoki, D. (1995). In search of the elusive magic bullet: Parental involvement and student outcomes. The School Community Journal. 5(2), Fall/Winter 1995: 97-106.
Yell, M. L (2006). The law and special education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
52


Appendix A Survey Questions
The purpose of this study is to understand what interventions mental health support staff, such as school psychologists use individually or as part of a team when working with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students and families in order to increase home to school collaboration. CLD population is generally understood as individuals who were not born in the U.S., whose native language is a language other than English, culture has had significant impact on English proficiency (e.g. Native American or Alaska Native), or any other environment where a language other than English is dominant. More information is needed to better understand what roles school psychologists play in order to maintain CLD family’s involvement in schools.
This instrument is designed to measure how you and/or your school is reaching out to involve CLD parents, community members, and students in a meaningful manner (Salinas et al., 1997). At this time, you and/or your school may conduct all, some, or none of the activities or approaches listed. Not every activity is appropriate at every grade level. Your school may be conducting other activities for each type of involvement. These may be added and rated to account for all major partnership practices that your school presently conducts.
Directions: Carefully examine the scoring rubic below before rating your school on the six types of involvement. As you review each item, please circle the response that comes closest to describing your school. A score of 4 or 5 indicates that the activity or approach is strong and prominent. A score of 1, 2, or 3 indicates that the activity is not yet part of the school’s program, or needs improvement. If you currently work at more than one site, please consider all of the approaches you and the schools practice, if possible. If you are currently not at a site, please consider the last school you were placed in to answer these questions.
Scoring Rubic
1- Not Occurring: Strategy does not happen at our school.
2- Rarely: Occurs in only one or two classes. Receives isolated use or little time. Clearly not emphasized in this school’s parental involvement plan.
3- Occasionally: Occurs in some classes. Receives minimal or modest time or emphasis across grades. Not a prevalent component of this school’s parental involvement plan.
4- Frequently: Occurs in many but not all classes/grade levels. Receives substantive time and emphasis. A prevalent component of this school’s parental involvement plan.
5- Extensively: Occurs in most or all classes/grade levels. Receives substantive time and emphasis. A highly prevalent component of this school’s parental involvement plan.
I. PARENTING: Help culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families establish home environment to support children as students.
Rating
1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively
Our School:
53


1. Conducts workshops or provides information for CLD families on child development.
2. Provides information, training, and assistance to all CLD families who want it or who
need it, not just to the few who can attend workshops or meetings at the school building._______
3. Produces information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and
linguistically appropriate, and linked to children’s success in school.__
4. Asks CLD families for information about children’s goals, strengths and
talents._____
5. Sponsors home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help CLD families
understand schools and to help school understand families.______
6. Provides CLD families with information/training on developing home conditions or
environments that support learning.______
7. Respects the different cultures represented in our student population.___
8. Other types of activities__________________________________________________________.
II. COMMUNICATIONS: Design effective forms of home-school communications about school programs and children’s progress for culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families.
Rating
l.Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively
Our School:
1. Reviews the legibility, clarity, form, and frequency of all memos, notices, and other
print and non-print communications._____
2. Develops communication for CLD families who do not speak English as a first
language.______
3. Establishes clear two-way channels for communications between home and school for
CLD families._______
4. Conducts a formal conference with CLD families at least once a year.____
5. Conducts an annual survey for CLD families to share information and concerns about
student needs and reactions to school programs, and their satisfaction with their involvement in school.______
6. Conducts an orientation for new CLD families._____
7. Sends home folders of student work weekly or monthly for CLD family review and
comment in appropriate and understandable language.________
8. Provides clear information about curriculum, assessments, and achievement levels
and report cards in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families.____
9. Contacts CLD families of students having academic or behavior problems._____
54


10. Develops school’s plan and program of CLD family and community involvement
with input from educators, parents, and others.___
11. Trains teachers, staff and principals on the value and utility of contributions of CLD
families and ways to build ties between home and school.______
12. Builds policies that encourage all teachers to communicate frequently with CLD
families about their curriculum plans, expectations for homework, and how families can help.______
13. Produces a regular school newsletter with up-to-date information about school,
special events, organizations, meetings, and parenting tips in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families.______
14. Provides written communication in the language of the families.___
15. Other types of activities______________________________________________________
III. VOLUNTEERING: Recruit and organize culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families help and support.
Rating
1 .Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively
Our School:
1. Conducts an annual survey to identify interests, talents, and availability of CLD
family volunteers, in order to match their skills/talents with school and classroom needs._______
2. Provides a family room for CLD volunteers and family members to work, meets, and
access resources about parenting, childcare, tutoring, and other things that effect their children._______
3. Creates flexible volunteering and school events schedules, enabling CLD families
who work to participate._______
4. Trains CLD volunteers so they use their time productively._______
5. Recognizes CLD volunteers for their time and efforts._______
6. Schedules school events at different times during the day and evening so that all CLD
families can attend some throughout the year._______
7. Reduces barriers to family participation by providing transportation, childcare,
flexible schedules, and addresses the needs of English language learners._______
8. Encourages CLD families and the community to be involved with the school in a
variety of ways (assisting in classroom, giving talks, monitoring halls, leading activities, etc._____
9. Other types of activities____________________________________________________________.
55


IV. LEARNING AT HOME: Provide information and ideas to culturally and
linguistically diverse (CLD) families about how to help students at home with homework and other curriculum-related activities, decision, and planning.
Rating
1 .Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively
Our School:
1. Provides information to CLD families on how to monitor and discuss school work at
home.________
2. Provides ongoing and specific information to CLD families on how to assist students
with skills that they need to improve._____
3. Makes CLD families aware of the importance of reading at home, and asks families
to listen to their child read or read aloud with their child._
4. Assists CLD families in helping students set academic goals, select courses, and
programs._______
5. Schedules regular interactive homework that requires students to demonstrate and
discuss what they are learning with a family member.______
6. Other types of activities_________________________________________________________.
V. DECISION MAKING: Include culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families in school decision, developing parent leaders and representatives.
Rating
1 .Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively
Our School:
1. Has active PTA, PTO, or other parent organization for CLD families.________
2. Includes CLD family representatives on the school’s advisory council, improvement
team, or other committees._______
3. Has CLD families represented on district-level advisory council and committees.
4. Involves CLD families in an organized, ongoing, and timely way in the planning,
review, and improvement of programs._______
5. Involves CLD families in revising the school/district curricula.____
6. Includes family leaders from all racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and other group in the
school.______
7. Develops formal networks to link all families with their parent representatives.__
8. Includes students (along with CLD families) in decision-making groups.______
9. Deals with conflict openly and respectfully._____
10. Asks involvement CLD families to make contact with other families who are less
involved to solicit their ideas, and report back to them.___
56


11. Other types of activities
VI. COLLABORATING WITH COMMUNITY: Identify and integrate resources and services from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) communities to strengthen school programs, family practices, and student learning and development.
Rating
1 .Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively
Our School:
1. Provides a CLD community resources directory for parents and students with
information on community services, programs, and agencies._________
2. Involves CLD families in locating and utilizing community resources.________
3. Works with local business, industries, and community organizations on programs to
enhance student skills and learning._______
4. Provides “one-stop” shopping for CLD family services through partnership of school,
counseling, health, recreation, job training, and other agencies.____
5. Opens its building for use by the CLD community after school hours._________
6. Offers after-school programs for students with support from CLD communities,
businesses, agencies, and volunteers.______
7. Solves turf problems and responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations for collaborative
activities to occur._____
8. Utilizes CLD community resources, such as business, libraries, parks, and museums
to enhance the learning environment._______
9. Other types of activities___________________________________________________________.
A. Would you consider you school to have a high, medium, or low population of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families?
B. What major factors have contributed to the success of your home-school collaboration involvement efforts with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) populations?
C. What major factors have limited the success of your home-school collaboration involvement efforts with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) populations?
D. What is one of your school’s major goals for improving it’s home-school collaboration with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families over the next three years, and how do you plan to be involved?
57


Appendix B Demographics
1. What is your age range?
a. 20-25
b. 26-35
c. 36-45
d. 46-55
e. 56 or older
2. How long have you practiced as a School Psychologist?
a. 1-3 years
b. 4-6 years
c. 7-10 years
d. 11-20 years
e. 21-30
f. 31-40
g. 41-50
h. More than 50 years
3. What level of education did you complete?
a. Ed.S
b. Psy.D
c. PhD
d. Other
4. Have you taken Multicultural class for personal learning or per degree requirements?
a. Yes, this year
b. Yes, 1-3 years ago
c. Yes, 4-6 years ago
d. Yes, 7-10 years ago
e. Other
f. Never
5. Do you speak another language other than English?
a. Yes, I am proficient in at least one other language
b. Yes, I can speak and/or understand sufficiently to hold a conversation
c. No, but I can speak or understand some words of another language
d. Not at all
6. What is your school’s primary population?
7. What is your own race/ethnicity?
58


Full Text

PAGE 1

SCHOOL COLLABORATION AMONG CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE FAMILIES By ABIGAIL DONATE B.A., Rockford University, 2014 A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in Partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Psychology School Psychology Program 2019

PAGE 2

ii © 2019 ABIGAIL DONATE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

iii This Thesis for the Doctor of Psychology degree by Abigail Donate has been approved for the School Psychology Program by Bryn Harris, Chair Francis Crepeau Hobson Rachel Stein Date: May 18 , 2019

PAGE 4

iv Donate , Abigail (Psy D, School Psychology Program) A Survey of School Psychologists Practice Regar ding Home Sc hool Collaboration among Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families Thesis directed by A ssociate Prof essor Bryn Harris ABSTRACT Collaboration between schools and families is a n opportunity for the education community to work toge ther with a common goal in mind; in most cases , home and school collaboration improves students educational , behavioral, and soc ial emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). current strategies and implement ations used to increase home school collaboration, especially among culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families. The purpose of this study is to understand what intervention school psychologists use when working with CLD students and families. modifie d it to see the areas of need with CLD populations. Results indicated that participants of the study Occasionally used home et al., (2002) study, except for the domain of Communication to which p articipants indicated that they used more Frequently. Key words: home school collaboration, culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families, home school interventions The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. App roved: Bryn Harris

PAGE 5

v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to all my friends, fellow graduate students, and professors who helped make this study possible. Special thanks to my advisor, Dr. Bryn Harris who provided me the tools to continue and succeed; I cannot express my gratitude for all the opportunit ies, guidance and advice throughout the whole process since year one of the graduate program. I would also like to say thank you to my husband, Alvaro Montenegro, for the endless support, patience and encouragement, especially when the tasks seemed impossi ble. Finally, a special thanks to my parents, Carlos and Jaimie Donate who showed me how to work hard, live life, and love education.

PAGE 6

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem .............................. 2 Significance of the Problem ............................... 2 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 4 Six types of Interventions Framework 4 Parenting 5 Communicating 6 Volunteering 7 Learning at Home 8 Decision Making 10 Collaborating with the Community 11 Conclusion 13 Purpose 13 III. METHOD 1 5 Description of Research Design and Procedures Used 15 Sampling Procedures 18 Methods and Instruments of Data Gathering 19 IV. RESULTS 20 Parenting Domain 20 Communicating Domain 22 Volunteering Domain 26 Learning at Home Domain 29

PAGE 7

vii Decision Making Domain 30 Collaborating with the Community Domain 33 Qualitative Results 37 V. DISCUSSION AND LIMITATIONS 40 Six Domains of Interventions Discussion 40 Limitations 46 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 48 REFERENCES 50 APPENDIX 53 A. Survey Questions 53 B. Demographic 5 8

PAGE 8

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Collaboration between schools and families is a n opportunity for the education community to work toge ther with a common goal in mind; in most cases , home and school collaboration improves students educational , behavioral, and social emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). When home schoo l collaboration is successful, the benefits are mutual for establishing trust and growth within the community. Home school collaboration can be seen as an inte rvention for students with special needs or preventive practice for all students in general ( Epstein, et al., 2002; Jonak, 2014) . However, i t is becoming more difficu lt to bridge the gap of home school collaboration due to great diversity between parental culture and school climate (Mundt, Gregory, Melzi, & McWayne, 2015). English Language Learners (ELLs) are defined as individuals who speak another language other than English at home or within a community , and i t is estimated that one out of four students will be an ELL by 2025 (Van Roekel, 2008). C omplexities can arise when a school serves a population of students who are culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) . According to Public Law 103 382, CLD populations is generally understood as individuals who were not born in the U.S., whose native language is a language other than English, their culture has had significant impact on English proficiency (e.g. Native Amer ican or Alaska Native), or any other environment where a language other than English is dominant ( Rh odes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). With great diversity at schools, stakeholders need to take a closer look at implementing s trategies that increase home school c ollaboration among CLD population.

PAGE 9

2 Statement of the Problem Family engagement with the school and vice versa is essential for overall student success, however ini tiating and maintaining home school collaboration can prove to be difficult, especially when there is a disconnect of culture and language between home and school (Olivos, 2009) . Studies have shown that parents are more likely to disengage with the school community when they feel there is no shared value or too much of a difference between la nguage and culture (Mundt, Gregory, Melzi, & McWayne, 2015 ; Olivos, 2009) . When connection s between home and school are lost, not only are schools impacted with issues such as school staff burnout and reduction of funds for educative programs, but students also suffer academically , behaviorally , socially and emotion ally (Shulkind & Foote, 2009). CLD s tudents with academic disabilities are at an even greater risk for disadvantage because not only are they learning to adapt in a new culture and language but a lso struggli ng to reach grade level standards (Van Roekel, 2008). If schools are to strive for better home school collaboration , it is imperative that sensitivity and awareness of the variety of cultures and languages exist within the school. Significance of the Problem School psychologists play an im portant role for improving home school collaboration with CLD families (Jonak, 2014). For years, CLD families have appeared to educational institutions to be disinterested or uninvolved with their students' ed ucation (Olivos, 2009). Many times, this is presumed because families do not speak the language, are afraid of being reported to immigration (depending on immigration status), have had negative experiences in schools (Jonak, 2014) or simply believe that schools know best for their children and therefore do not question authoritative figures (Thorp, 1997). It would be a disservice to families if schools were to presume all CLD families had equal access to be a part of school collabor ation activities

PAGE 10

3 (Olivos, 2009, Thorp, 1997). Because s chool psychologists have a unique trainin g, they can provide perspectives for both the home environment and school climate that could be otherwise dismissed or overlooked in another circumstance. With the increasing demographic shifts in the educational system the services for school psychologists also change (Merrell, Ervin, & Peacock, 2012). Services such as assessments, consultations and interventions require cultural and linguistically diverse sens itivity. Under NASP (National Association of School Psychology) guidelines, one of the roles of a school psychologist is to improve support strategies, especially when it comes to raising awaren ess regarding home school collabor ation among diverse populati ons ( NASP, n.d. ). In terms of home school collaboration needs, school psychologists should also take into consideration the social emotional and academic gaps resulting from the lack of supports for CLD families in schools. School p sychologists can be the bridge to help enhance collaborations among CLD families and schools.

PAGE 11

4 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Home school collaboration is essential for all communities , however, higher risk populations who are at a disadvan ta ge for academic, social emotional and behavioral success due to language and culture diversity , could benefit greatly from home school intervention activities (Olivos, 2009). As mentioned earlier, school psychologist are trained to be more keen and sensitive in developing and regulating interventions for home school collaboration with diverse populations (NASP, n.d.). As a mental health provider, school psychologi sts are usuall y the first in line to observe CLD students' gaps in academic , behavior and social emotional success at schools. A study conducted by Jonak, (2014), surveyed students and school staff from the mid western part of the United States in order to review their perceptions o f home school collaboration best practices. Responses from 117 respondents indicated that school efforts to increase family involvement in CLD population were only implemented in one third to one half of the participating schools. The results of this study was important to realize that even though there are best intentions to involve all families, there still exist barriers to implement and maintain strateg ies that would increase home school collaboration with CLD families (Jonak, 2014) . Due to implementing home school collaboration strategie s are needed to improve home school collaborat ion with CLD families. Six Types of Interventions Framework School psychologists are trained to be familiar with research based interventions (NASP, n.d. ). When it comes to home school collaboration, it is important to not only be familiar with

PAGE 12

5 theoretical implications and benefits for positive relationships between home and school, but also be knowledgeable with interventions that are well planned and effective. Epstein ( 1995 ) developed an intervention model for schools to implement in order to assist with home school collaboration. This model was developed by partner programs associated with Johns Hopkins University and discussed in detail by Epstein et al ., (2002), and the purpose for this model was so that the theory of best practices for home school collaboration could become an actuality by organizing the interventions into practical categories. The following are the six types of interventions recommended for all schools to implement throughout the school year in order to increase productive ho me school collaboration: Parenting, Communicating, Volunteering, L earning at Home, Decision making, and Collaborating with the Community. Parenting P arenting intervention activities are used to incorporate an exchange of information between families and that would benefit the student in the end (Epstein et al., 2002) . For example, Epstein et al. discuss ed the success of one high school in Shaker Heights, Ohio. The high school involve d families to organize a parent support group for incoming 9 th graders so that new families could feel welcomed and learn about important topics and conversations to have with their teen students. There are many other examples on how other schools have used parental engagement interventions to incorporate home school collaboration by simply being in tuned with family /community needs. Similar practices can also be used with CLD families as interventions to promote parental engagement activities , and school psychologists can be the ones to investigate in their specific school/district how to incorporate family activities.

PAGE 13

6 When it comes to individual educational plans (IEPs) parental involvement is not just recommende d but legally warranted (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). Laws dictated by IDEA require that parents be involved in the identification process of their students and maintain involvement as long as the student has an IEP. Engagement of the legal matters of th accommodations and modifications can be complex and frustrating, especially if it is not in the language the family dominates. Taking the extra step an ensuring family understanding in these important meetings will help later on in family eng agement with CLD families. Communicating Home school communication is key to continued collaboration (Eps tein et al., 2002). Without communication, it would be extremely difficult to monitor student progress at home or school, to incorporate any accommodations or assess needs, and most importantly, it would be almost impossible to understand family and school culture. T o obtain direct insight with Hispanic/Latino culture, a Mexican American mothers were interviewed regarding their experience with communication issues at their school, especially during the IEP process (Salas, 2004). Language alienation and lack of respect were tw o main topics that stood out during the parent interviews. Language alienation that CLD parents often experience (Salas, 2004) can prove to be frustrating for any family, especially if a family is completely new to the educational system ( Pappas, 1997; Oli vos, 2009). Not only are there the new rules and regulations to understand and navigate, but also the school system as a whole is considerably different from their country /culture of origin. Therefore, trying to grasp a completely new system in an unfamili ar language can be quite intimidating or frustrating for CLD families. In the study by Salas (2004), the mothers expressed special concern in this area because they felt they could not be a part of

PAGE 14

7 the school system due to so many differences in their lang uage. Salas observed s ignificant school , especially when it came to communicating important information. The mothers from this study reported feeling ashamed and embarrassed that they could not speak English, and expressed frustration for the constant miscommunication during school meetings. It is not uncommon for CLD families to feel left out, embarrassed an d generally misunderstand about how schools work in the U.S. (Pappas, 1997). In this case, many of the mothers felt they were silenced and not allowed to be involved in their students' education , interrupting their ability to have a successful home school collaboration (Salas, 2004). It is important for schools to incorporate home and school communication interventions by designing appropriate ways to communicate to home and a method where families can communicate effectively back to the school. In such com munications, la nguage barrier s should always be considered. T herefore it is essential for school to have a translating/interpreting service so CLD families can feel included in important communication details (Olivos, 2009). Volunteering Many times, when people thin k of home school collaboration, they think about how families can be involved with the school by volunteering in activities. However, volunteering is only one part for positive home school collaboration. (Epstein et al., 2002). Volunteering acti vities is a perfect opportunity for families to support their community by giving their time and incorporating their ideas with their school. However, many schools/districts struggle with recruiting volunteers, and/or families do not know how they can part icipate in such activities. School psychologists should be a ware of the barriers that exist for recruiting CLD families as volunteers and determine best approaches so that all families are aware of their value in bei ng

PAGE 15

8 part of school activities (NASP, n.d. ) A school in Williamston, Michigan recognized the challenges that existed in recruiting volunteers, so in order to meet the need of parent volunteers in their school activities they created a directory with parent information via survey at the beginning o f the year (Epstein, et al., 2002). The survey explained its purpose (to recruit parents as volunteers) asked questions such as family talent, skills, resources and time availabilities. That way, throughout the year, the school could use the directory to f ind parent volunteers depending on the upcoming activities. Examples such as these are resources school psychologist can incorporate to include CLD families as well. It is important for schools to know their diverse families from the beginning of the scho ol year until the end, and know what talents they have that they could use to improve overall school parent involvement. Learning at Home Although students are supposed to be educated at school, students also need to continue learning at home (Epstein, e t al., 2002). However, with CLD populations, sometimes homework , and therefore the families leave learning solely to the educative system . Learning at home interventions are even more developing academic, social, emotional and behavioral complications (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005 ). As IEP members, s chool psychologists should take extra pre caution to ensure CLD families are fully co mprehending what is being said and ensure families know what to Smiley conducted a study (2006) to analyze the dynamics and roles of educators and parents during IE P meetings. In this study, there was a discussion of power roles and inequalities that exists between families of color and the educative system and how it impacts overall home -

PAGE 16

9 school relationships and learning at home . Such inequalities are observed when at least one member of the IEP team is knowledgeable regarding special education laws and requirements but others (perhaps family members who do not speak English) are not. Power seems to shift to the person who knows the most in any given topic. The study stressed the importance of empowe ring parents by providing them with t he tools, such as verbal explanations along with additional hands outs in their native language, to understand difficult processes. This could be one way schools can eliminate inequalit ies of power during meetings held at schools, and another way to ensure families are understanding their services and its application at home. Legally, parents have the right to advocate for their children with needs to ensure that they receive appropriate accommodations and modification (Yell, 2006) . However, parents who do not understand the education system and processes will have a difficult time supporting their student at school and home, possibly negatively impacting their students' education (Salas, 2004). Knowing how to empower CLD families throughout any school process could facilitate understandings of how they can assist with teaching at home. Not only is it important for the schools to be aware if families are understanding assignment s sent home , but also to ensure that learning at home is appropriate with language development and culture. Strategies such as rephrasing certain words, or repeating meaning in a different contexts are some simple steps schools can take that will help with learning at home strategies ( Eckert, Russo, & Hier, 2004). An other example that school s can facilitate learning at home for CLD populations is to incorporate an after/before school tutoring program where parents come in to work with their students ( Epstein, et al., 2002) . Specialized staff (e.g. teachers, school psychologists, family liaisons etc) could be available during this time, so that if families

PAGE 17

10 that time to talk to the school staff and work together to facilitate learning at home later. School psychologists can also ensure that academic, social/emotional and behavioral skills are being practiced at home with their families, and keep families involved in t Decision Making Schools and families make countless decisions on a daily basis regarding students. By incorporating a decision making activity that includes both school and families is just one other way to improve home school collaboration (Epstein, et al., 2002). Having parent teacher organizations/associations, or a family member as a representative in school councils is just a few ways schools and families work together to make decisions. It is important that such be the one to educate CLD families of how these organizations are important for the students help schools be more sensitive to cultural values and avoid families feeling disrespected during decision making activities. CLD f amily involvement in decision making is especially crucial when making legal s in IEPs. On e other theme that Salas found (2004) was that the mothers of her study felt they were disrespected due to their ethnic and cultural differences. When it comes to building the collaboration with CLD families, just by telling parents the importance of their involvement in the IEP process is not enough. It is hard for families to feel comfortable in meetings, especially with educators or school staff members who are complete strangers or are not sensitive with families' culture (Olivos, 2009) and then to be told to agree with the decision or disagree without much thought or knowledge of the process . Such forceful attempts of collaboration in making dec isions might come off as disrespectful and

PAGE 18

11 Also, many of the mothers reported that they did not understand their rights because no one in the school explained it to them. Educational la w requires th at during meetings, such as IEP s, the public agency (i.e. school) needs to make reasonable efforts to ensure parents understand (Rhodes, Ochoa, & Ortiz, 2005). However , big words that they could not read or interpret on their own (Salas, 2004). Overall, the common message that these mothers received in the study was that the school did not care for them nor their student, and that the only reason why schools would involve parents was because they were legally obligated to. Having families involved in decision making is important for home school collaboration (Epstein, et al., 2002) especially among CLD populations. The themes Salas found in her study (2004), are common th emes discussed in other studies as well (Olivos, 2009). There exists gaps between school staff culture and student/family cultures that could be causing issues of disconnect between home and schools. Although there might appear to be many challenges, s chool psychologists can help avoid the disconnect that CLD families and schools have when it comes to making decisions . One way school s can embrace such challenges is by being informed and staying in tune to the CLD traditions, customs and expect ations during decision making meetings. Collaborating with the Community Collaborating with the community activities involves not just home and school, but other community groups and organizations that could work together to benefit overall student outcome (Epstein, et al., 2002). There exists a vast majority of community agencies that partner with schools such as clinics, museums, libraries and so forth. A school psychologist should be aware

PAGE 19

12 of the different communities that exist outside the home and scho ol and determine how and when the school and families would benefit from these collaborations. More importantly, a school psychologist should be sensitive to the CLD populations that exist within their school and what communities would benefit them the mos t and in the long run. Such mutual collaborations among organizations is the pillar stone to what make a community successful and progressive. When working with CLD populations it is important to be aware of the variety of CLD communities that could be inv olved with the school. It becomes difficult engaging CLD families The school in where Salas (2004) conducted interviews with parents was considered to be made up of 90% Hispanic/La tino students, however, 80% of the teachers were Euro Americans . School psychology organizations are aware of such difference in many schools with culture and language and encourage the involvement with CLD communities in order to help sc hools close these cultural gaps (NASP, 2015) . To work with CLD communities it is also important for school psychologists to be knowledgeable of language and cultures of the local communities (NASP, 2015). NASP wrote a position statement acknowledging the importance of having school staff, especially in mental health, who are culturally, and if possible, linguistically competent to work with CLD populations. NASP recommends that mental health staff, such as school psychologists, receive training in ord er to be culturally and linguistically responsive in the areas of assessment, consultation, in tervention, advocacy and home school collaboration with CLD families. This way, schools can provide equitable and culturally responsive services to all their fami lies within the school and extend resources out to the CLD communities as well .

PAGE 20

13 Conclusion There are many barriers and negative perceptions that CLD families and schools have between each other (Olivos, 2009) . However, co llaboration between CLD families and schools becomes possible when educative systems are able to align values, beliefs and culture with that of their diverse communities . It can become very confusing and complex for many CLD families, and in order to know how best to serve its p opulation, schools and districts need to be aware of current practices and methods used to serve their unique CLD cultures within their community. School psychologists have received specific training to work with CLD families (NASP, n.d.) , therefore there perception of current strategies and implementations are essential to improve home school collaboration with CLD families. School psychologists can help facilitate the engagement of CLD families with the school by focusing on building trust between home an d schools, recognize the diversity of cultures that exist within a school culture, respect and address families unique needs, and share this same power and responsibility with the families as well (Epstein, et al., 2002). Epstein (1995) created an interve ntion framework that incorporates six different domains of home school activities. By having a clear and concise model to follow, schools can extend such intervention to CLD populations with the help of school psychologist. Purpose There have been minimal current strategies and implement ations used to increase home school collaboration, especially among CLD families . Gathering this information could be relevant for educators and school administrator s home school collaboration with CLD families. The purpose of this study is to understand what intervention s , framework (1995) ,

PAGE 21

14 school p sychologists use when working with CLD students and families. More information is needed to better understand what roles school psychologists play in order to maintain CLD in schools. Furthermore, the following questions are asked in this present study: 1. What interventions do school psy chologists use to ensure home school collaboration among CLD populations? 2. What are the major factors that contribute and limit the success of home school collaboration among CLD populations?

PAGE 22

15 CHAPTER I II METHOD Description of Research Design and Procedures Used school collaboration (Salinas, et al., n.d.) . The purpose of the measure was for schools to challenge themselves to discover areas of growth and see what areas of the six domains of in terventions needed improvement. T herefore , this tool could be used to increase student success by improving school cli mate strengthening home school relationships (Salinas, Epstein, Sanders, 1997). Although this measure has not been validated in a study as of yet, the items of the survey are closely aligned to various literatures regarding the effectiveness of incorporati (Epstein, 1995; Yap & Enoki, 1995; & Salinas, Epstein & Sanders, 1997). Because of its design to measure home school collaboration strategies , this instrument was chosen to answer the research questions of this study. Howeve r, the instrument developed by Salinas, et al. (n.d.) does not specify whether the schools are improving home school rel ationships with CLD populations. T herefore , the researcher of this study adapt ed the original measure to reflect specific CLD home schoo l interventions that a school psychologist might use. The original measure was adapted for online administration via Qualtrics (a program designated to create and distribute surveys). Similar to the orig inal measure, the survey was separated into sectio ns reflecting the six domains of interven tions (parenting, communication , volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaboration with community). There were 6 15 items in each section, totaling a 62 item survey that include d a rating scale and open ended questions (see A ppendix A). The rating scale c onsisted of a 5 point Likert scale where 1

PAGE 23

16 indicated as not occurring and 5 indicated that the activity stated extensively occurs . At the end of every section the measure allowed the participant s to include other interventions they do that was not included in the list of options . At the end of the six sections, there were four open ended questions . The first three were adapted from and asked participants what factors they believed contributed and limited their success to establishing a successful home school improve home school collaborat ion. The last question was added by the researcher and asked the participants to describe what their conducted by coding individual responses. The researcher code d in two rounds (emergent and a priori ) in order to organize and describe the data. During the emergent coding process, there were no restrictions regarding the types of code created. Each code was described accordingly to fit the research questions. This aligns with that descriptive coding is an appropriate choice for exploring questions that seek understanding of actions and processes. Once emergent codes were identified and described, the researcher assigned a priori codes to create a consistent and structured proce ss (Creswell, 2013). Afterwards the codes were consolidated, after deleted or revised based on the exploration of similarities and differences found among the various responses. The final step in the data analysis was to include identifying themes that aro se from a priori codes. Further analysis of the identified themes are discussed in the results section of this study. All the wording of the entire survey was used verb atim from the original measure with the except ion that most items were also modified slightly . The items were modified to ensure that the items referred to CLD population and not the general population as the original measure

PAGE 24

17 was intended (Epstein, et al., 2002) . The total amount of time to complete the survey was approximately t wenty to thirty minutes . The survey was sent out twice between the months of September and October 2018. The participant s demographic s was collec ted at the end of the survey and participants were asked to share their age range, years of experience , and race/ethnicity , etc. (see A ppendix B) . There were a total of 30 participants (Table 1 ) , however, not all 30 participants included demographic information . Therefore, included in the table, was the number of unknown demographics. ic was impor tant since such variables could affect perception of sc hool policies regarding home school collaboration and current strategies ( Fink, 2017 ). However, due to the small sample size, the association between demographics and item responses could not be determined in a statistically significant manner. Demographic information collected was still included in the study for future reference. Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for participant demographic s N Percentage Participant Age 20 25 0 0% 26 35 5 17 % 36 45 4 13 % 46 55 6 20 % 56+ 2 7 % Unknown 13 43 % N Percentage Years of Experience 1 3 years 4 13% 4 6 years 3 10% 7 10 years 1 3% 11 20 years 4 13% 21 30 years 4 13% 31 40 years 1 3% More than 50 years 0 0% Unknown 13 43% N Percentage

PAGE 25

18 Level of Education Ed.S 9 30% Psy.D 2 7% Ph.D 3 10% Other 3 10% Unknown 13 43% N Percentage Multicultural Training This year 1 3% 1 3 years ago 8 27% 4 6 years ago 2 7% 7 10 years ago 4 13% Never 1 3% Other 1 3% Unknown 13 43% N Percentage Ethnicity White/Caucasian 13 43% Hispanic/Latino 2 7% Asian 1 3% Unknown 14 47% Responses were anonymous, and names did not appear on any o f the instruments. Data was presented in a way that participants could not be linked to their individual responses. Neither the researcher, nor anyone else, knew which response belonged t o which individual. Data was stored in a secure place in a password protected laptop and email . T he researcher and faculty advisor were the only people who view ed the completed surveys . Sampling Procedures The researcher contacted Colorado Society of School Psycholo gists (CSSP) as a mean to send out the survey link to school psychologist member s . From the approximately 382 regular members (not including students ) and 15 retired school psychologists , only a total 30 responses were returned from the list. From the 30 total participants, 17 participants completed the survey fully , the other 13 partici pants partially completed the survey . The participants of this study were

PAGE 26

19 considered a convenience sample due to the specificity needed for this study. In order to be a part of this study, participants need ed to be currently practici ng , or have practiced in mental health services as a school psychologist within the last 5 years . It was important that the school psychologists in this study had sufficient experience working at a school, and that they could accurately remember their experi ences. Academic preparation and years of experience along with other demographics were also taken into consideration as this added to diversity and variability within the participants. Methods and Instruments of Data Gathering There were two main components of the survey, understand ing what interventions school psychologists most commonly use d when working with CLD students and families , and what were the major factors that contribute and/or limit the success of implementation of home sch ool collaboration among CLD families. Qualtrics was used to gather descriptive statistics to answer the questions prompted by this current study. S uch examination provided an in depth look of areas of intervention need improvement. Validity of these analyses were based on face validity . Reliability was not determined due to the unavailability of r aters to retake the survey, but because the survey based on various peer reviewed literatures ( Epstein, 1995; Yap & Enoki, 1995; & Salinas, Epstein & Sanders, 1997) it is assumed that the scales of this present study were reliable.

PAGE 27

20 CHAPTER IV RESULTS According to the survey results , the participants indicated that when it comes to home school collaboration in the domain s of parenting, communication, volunteer ing, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating with community, there were a mix of r esponses of what is practiced in their schools . Participants were asked to use a scale of 1 5 when responding to questions , with 1 being that the action in question Does N ot occur at all, followed by 2 being R arely occurs, 3 being O ccasionally occur s, followed by 4 which indicated that the action in question F requently occurs , and finally, 5 which indicated that the action in question happens E xtensively at their school. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the responses and the mean was ob tained for every item response by adding the responses and dividing them by the number of responses per item. The average per item was rounded up to the nearest whole number (e.g. 2.4 = 2, or 3.5 =4). Whole numbers were then translated to their as mentioned above . Parenting Domain The first domain adapted from asked participants about how school psychologists and/or schools help CLD families establish home environment to support children as students (s ee Figure 1) . Question 1 asked participants if they or their school c onduct workshops or provide information for CLD families on child development. Out of 22 total responses for this question, the average response (m=2.14) indicated that participants and/or their schools R arely conduct workshops or provide information for CLD families on child development.

PAGE 28

21 Question 2 asked participants if they or their school p rovide s information, training, and assistance to all CLD families who want it or who need it, not just to the few who can attend workshops or meetings at the school building. Out of 21 particip ants who answered this question , t he average response (m=2.76) indicat ed that participants and/or their schools O ccasionally provide information, training, and assistance to all CLD families. Question 3 asked participants if they or their school p roduce information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and linguistically appropriate, and linked to chi success in school. Out of 22 participants , t he average response (m=3.41) indicated that participants and/or their schools F requently produce information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and linguistically appropriate. Question 4 asked participants if they or their school a sk CLD families for information als, strengths and talents. Out of 23 partici pants, the average response (m=3.52) indicated that participants and/or their schools F requently ask CLD families . Question 5 asked participants if they or their school sponsor home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help CLD families understand schools and to help s chool s understand families. Out of 22 participants, the average response (m=2.77) indicated that participants and/or their schools O ccasionally sponsor home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help CLD families understand schools and to help schools understand families. Question 6 asked participants if they or their school provide CLD families with information/training on developing home conditions or environm ents that support learning. Out of 22 participants , the average response (m=2.45) indicated that participants and/or their schools

PAGE 29

22 O ccasionally provide CLD families with information/training on developing home conditions or environments that support learning. Question 7 asked participants if they or their school respect the different cultures represented in their student population. Out of 20 participants, the average response (m=3.90) indicated that participants and/or their schools F requently respect the diff erent cultures represented in their student population. Finally, q uestion 8 asked participants if they or their school perform any other types of activities relating to parenting domain of home school collaboration. Only two participants indicated that other activities are done O ccasionally and E xtensively , although no participant gave detail to describe what the other activities were. Figure 1: Frequency per number of responses Communicating Domain The second domain adapted from asked participants how school psychologists and/or their schools design effective forms of home 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Q.1 Conducts workshops Q.2 Provide trainings Q.3 Produce information Q.4 Ask about children's strenghts Q.5 Sponsor home visiting Q.6 Provide info on home development Q.7 Respects culture Q.8 Other Parenting Domain Not occuring Rarely Occasionally Frequently Extensively

PAGE 30

23 e Figure 2) . Question 1 asked participants if they or their school reviews the legibility, clarity, form, and frequency of all memos, notices, and other print and non print communications. Out of 20 total responses for this question, the average response ( m=3.60) indicated that participants and/or their schools F requently review the printed information that goes out to CLD families. Question 2 asked participants if they or their school develop communication for CLD families who do not speak English as a fir st language. Out of 20 total responses, the average response (m=4.05) indicated that they or their school F requently develop communication for CLD families. Question 3 asked participants if they or their school establish clear two way channels for communi cations between home and school for CLD families. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.67) indicated that they or their school F requently establish clear two way channels for CLD families. Question 4 asked participants if they or their school conduct formal conferences with CLD families at least once a year. Out of 21 responses, the average response (m=3.43) indicated that they or their school O ccasionally conduct conferences with CLD families. Question 5 asked participants if they or t heir school conduct annual survey s for CLD families to share information and concerns about student needs and reactions to school programs, and their satisfaction with their involvement in school . Out of 18 total responses, the average

PAGE 31

24 (m=2.89) response in dicated that the participants and/ or their school O ccasionally conduct annual surveys for CLD families. Question 6 asked participants if they or their school conduct an orientation for new CLD families. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=2 .72) indicated that they or their school O ccasionally run orientation for new CLD families. Question 7 asked participants if they or their school send home folders of student work weekly or monthly for CLD family review and comment in an appropriate and u nderstandable language. Out of 19 total responses, the average response (m=2.95) indicated that the participants and/ or their school O ccasionally send home folders of student work weekly or monthly in an appropriate and understandable language. Question 8 asked participants if they or their school provide clear information about curriculum, assessments, achievement levels , and report cards in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families. Out of 20 total responses, the average response (m=3.20) indicated that they or their school O ccasionally provide clear information in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families. Question 9 asked participants if they or their school contact CLD families of students having academic or behavior prob lems. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=4.29) indicated that the participants and/or their school F requently provide clear information to CLD families.

PAGE 32

25 am with CLD f amily and community involvement. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.57) indicated that the participants and/or their school F requently program with CLD families . Question 11 asked participants if th ey or their school train teachers, staff and principals on the value and utility of contribution of CLD families and ways to build ties between home and school. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.38) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasionally train staff on the value o f contribution of CLD families. Question 12 asked participants if they or their school build policies that encourage all teachers to communicate frequently with CLD families about their curriculum plans, expectations for homework, and how families can help. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=3.38) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasionally build policies that encourage teachers to communicate to CLD families about their curriculum plans, expectations , and so forth so families can help. Question 13 as ked participants if they or their school produce a regular school newsletter with up to date information about school, special events, organizations, meetings, and parenting tips in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families. Out of 20 total responses, the average response ( m= 3.45) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasionally produce newsletters for CLD families.

PAGE 33

26 Question 14 asked participants if they or their school provide written communication in the language of the ir f amilies. Out of 21 total responses, the average response (m=4.0) indicated that the participants and/or their school F requently produce written communication in the language of the families. Question 15 asked participants if they and/ or their school provi de any other type of communication to which there were no responses to this item. Figure 2 : Frequency per number of responses Volunteering Domain The third domain adapted from asked participants concerning how school psychologists and/or their schools recruit and organize CLD families to help and support their school (see Figure 3) . Question 1 asked participants if they or their school conduct an annual survey to identify intere sts, talents, and availa bility of CLD family volunteers to match their skills/talents with school and classroom needs. Out of 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Communicating Domain Not occuring Rarely Occasionally Frequently Extensively

PAGE 34

27 responses, the average response (m=2.36) indicated that the participants and/or their schools R arely conduct surveys. Q uestion 2 asked participants if they or their school provide a family room for CLD volunteers a nd family members to work, meet , and access resources about parenting, childcare, tutoring, and other things t hat effect their children. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=2.28) indicated that the participants and/or their schools R arely provide a family room for CLD volunteers. Question 3 asked participants if they or their school c reate flexible volunteering and school events schedules, enabling CLD fa milie s who work to participate. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=3.0) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasionally create flexible volunteering schedules for CLD families. Question 4 asked participants if they or thei r school t rain CLD volunteers so they us e their time productively. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.28) indicated that the participants and/or their school R arely train CLD volunteers. Question 5 asked participants if they or their sch ool recognize CLD volunteers for their time and efforts. Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=3.0) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasionally recognize CLD volunteers. Question 6 asked participants if they or their school schedule school events at different times during the day and evening so that all CLD families can attend some throughout the year . Out of 18 total responses, the average response (m=3.33) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasiona lly provide different schedules for evening events. Question 7 asked participants if they or their school reduce barriers to family participation by providing transportation, childcare, flexible schedules, and addresses the needs

PAGE 35

28 of English language learn ers. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.47) indicated that the participants and/or their school R arely attempt to reduce barriers for CLD family participating in events. Question 8 asked participants if they or their school encourage CL D families and the community to be involved with the school in a variety of ways (assisting in classroom, giving talks, monitoring halls, leading activities, etc.). Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.88) indicated that the participants and/or their school O ccasionally encourage CLD families and the community to be involved with the school. Question 9 asked participants if they or their school had other forms of volunteering activities with CLD families. None of the participants indicated any other type of volunteering activities performed at their school. Figure 3 : Frequency per number of responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q.1 Conducts surveys Q.2 Provides a family room Q.3 Creates flexible events Q.4 Trains volunteers Q.5 Recognizes volunteers Q.6 Schedules events Q.7 Reduces barriers Q.8 Encourages families Q.9 Other Volunteering Domain Not occuring Rarely Occasionally Frequently Extensively

PAGE 36

29 Learning at Home Domain The fourth domain adapted from asked participants about how school psychologists and/or their schools provide information and ideas to CLD families about how to help students at home with homework and other curriculum related activities, decision, and planning (see Figure 4). Question 1 asked participants if they or their school provide information to CLD families on how to monitor and discuss school work at home. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.75) indicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally provide information to help CLD families monitor and discuss school work at home. Question 2 asked participants if they or their school provide ongoing and specific information to CLD families on how to assist students with skills that they need to improve. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.65) indicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally provide ongoing information on how to assist students with skills. Question 3 asked participants if they or their school make CLD families aw are of the importa nce of reading at home, and ask families to listen to their child read or read aloud with their child . Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=3.41) indicated that participants and/or their school F requently make CLD families a ware of the importance of reading. Question 4 asked participants if they or their school assist CLD families in helping students set academic goals, select courses, and programs. Out of 17 total responses, the average response (m=2.71) indicated that par ticipants and/or their school O ccasionally assist CLD families in helping students set goals. Question 5 asked participants if they or their school schedule regular interactive homework that requires students to demonstrate and discuss what they are lear n ing with a family

PAGE 37

30 member. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.53) indicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally schedule regular interactive homework. Question 6 asked participants if they or their school practiced any other types of learning at home activities with CLD families to which no participant indicated a response. Figure 4 : Frequency per number of responses Decision Making Domain The fifth domain adapted from asked participants about how school psychologists and/or their schools include CLD families in school decision, developing parent leaders and representatives. Question 1 asked participa nts if they or their school have active PTA, PTO, or other parent organization for CLD families. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.13) indicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally have organization for CLD families. Question 2 asked participants if they or their school include CLD family representatives Out of 16 total 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q.1 Provides information Q.2 Provides ongoing skills Q.3 Makes families aware Q.4 Assist set goals Q.5 Schedule interactive homework Q.6 Other Learning at Home Domain Not occuring Rarely Occasionally Frequently Extensively

PAGE 38

31 responses, the average response (m=2.94) indicated that participants and/or th eir school O ccasionally include CLD family representatives. Question 3 asked participants if they or their school have CLD families represented on district level advisory council s and committees. Out of 14 total responses, the average response (m=2.93) in dicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally have CLD families represented on district level advisory council. Question 4 asked participants if they or their school involve CLD families in an organized, ongoing, and timely way in the plannin g, review, and improvement of programs. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.53) indicated that participants and/or their school occasionally involve CLD families in an organized way. Question 5 asked participants if they or their school i nvolve CLD families in revising the school/district curricula. Out of 13 total responses, the average response (m=1.77) indicated that participants and/or their school r arely involve CLD families in revising the school/district curricula. Question 6 asked participants if they or their school include family leaders from all racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and other group in the school. Out of 13 total responses, the average response (m=2.88) indicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally includ e family leaders. Question 7 asked participants if they or their school develop formal networks to link families with their parent representatives. Out of 14 total responses, the average response (m=2.57) indicated that participants and/or their school O ccasionally develop formal networks to link all families.

PAGE 39

32 Question 8 asked participants if they or their school include students (along with CLD families) in decision making groups. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.63) indicated that p articipants and/or their school O ccasionally include CLD students along with their families in decision making groups. Question 9 asked participants if they or their school deal with conflict openly and respectfully. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.88) indicated that participants and/or their school F requently deal with conflict openly and respectfully among CLD population. Question 10 asked participants if they or their school ask CLD families to make contact with other CLD families who are less involved to solicit thei r ideas . Out of 15 t otal responses, the average response (m=2.87) was that participants and/or their school O ccasionally ask CLD families to make contact with other families. Question 11 asked participants if they or their school partake of any other type of activities that include CLD in decision making. Only one participant answered that they and/or their school do so O ccasionally , but did not indicated what the other activit y was.

PAGE 40

33 Figure 5 : Frequency per number of responses Collaborating with the Community Domain The sixth and final domain adapted from asked participants about how school psychologists and/or their schools identify and integrate resources and services from CLD communities to strengthen school programs, family practices, and student learning and development. Question 1 asked participants if they or their school provide a CLD community resources directory for parents a nd students with information on community services, programs, and agencies. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.38) indicated that they and/or their school O ccasionally provide a directory of information on community services for CLD famil ies. Question 2 asked participants if they or their school involve CLD families in locating and utilizing community resources. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=3.69) indicated that they and/or their school F requently involve CLD families in utilizing community resources. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Decision Making Domain Not occuring Rarely Occasionally Frequently Extensively

PAGE 41

34 Question 3 asked participants if they or their school work with local business, industries, and community organizations on programs to enhance student skills and learning. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=3.13) indicated that they and/or their school O ccasionally work with local business to enhance CLD student skills and learning. Question 4 asked participants if they or their school provide CLD family service s through partnership of school counseling, health, recreation, job training, and other agencies. Out of 16 total responses, the average response (m=2.25) indicated that they and/or their schools R arely Q uestion 5 asked participants if they and/or their school open the building for use by the CLD community after school hours. Out of 15 total responses, the average response (m=2.20) indicated that they and/or their school R arely open the building for CLD co mmunity after school hours. Question 6 asked participants if they and/or their school offer after school programs for students with support from CLD communities, businesses, agencies, and volunteers. Out of a total of 13 total responses, the average respo nse (m=2.38) indicated that they and/or their school R arely offer after school programs for students with support from CLD communities. Question 7 asked participants if they and/or their school solve community problems and responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations for collaborative activities to occur. Out of 10 total

PAGE 42

35 responses, the average response (m=2.20) indicated that they and/or their school R arely solve problems related for collaborative activities t o occur. Question 8 asked participants if they and/or their school utilize CLD community resources, such as business, libraries, parks, and museums to enhance the learning environment. Out of 14 total response, the average response (m=2.50) indicated that they and/or their school O ccasionally use CLD resources to enhance the learning environment. Question 9 asked participants if they and/or their school partake in any other activities related to collaboration with CLD community to which no participant ans wered. Figure 6 : Frequency per number of responses A descriptive analysis was also conducted on the average score per domain in order to see if any one domain was practiced or observed more than another. A mean score was obtained by adding up all the means scores per domain except for the activities that had a score of zero 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Collaborating with the Community Domain Not occuring Rarely Occasionally Frequently Extensively

PAGE 43

36 (e.g. other types of activities). See Figure 7. Although the items within the domain varied in response s, the broader average indicated that overall participants and/or their school occasionally observe and/or have activities that increase CLD involvement in the areas of parenting, volunteering, le arning at home, decision making, and community. In other words, an average of 3 out of 5 times school psychologists and their schools use a variety of tools in the mentioned domains to increase home school collaboration with CLD population. Participants also indicated that in terms of providing overall appropriate communication to CLD populations, they or their schools will do so on average 4 out of 5 times. At this point, the data indicate that communication in general is the most common method, when compared to the other domains that school psychologists observed to be most practiced intervention in order to increase home school collaborati on. Figure 7 : Average response per domain 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Parenting Communication Volunteering Learning at Home Decision Making Community Mean per Domain Mean per Domain

PAGE 44

37 Qualitative Results What factors have contributed to the success of your home school collaboration? Three major themes were identified from the open ended survey question regarding factors that contribute to the school collaboration. One major factor reported by the participants was having appropriate staff in building, such as bilingual liaisons, exceptional ESL teachers, and bilingual community advocates. Another identified fac tor was intentional planning and effort to involve CLD families. For example, some participants reported that in their schools/districts , they consciously set aside time to reach out and connect with CLD families. Other participants reported that they inte ntionally started a parent advisory council that included CLD families. Finally, another factor that participants believed contributed to the success of home school collaboration among CLD populations was creating a culture of respect for diversity. In ot her words, participants have seen success in home school collaboration among CLD populations when a culture of respect for diversity in acknowledged and practiced. What major factors have limited the success o f you home school collaboration? Two major them es were identified from the open ended questions regarding factors that limit the success of home school collaboration. One consistent theme reported by participants was that their schools did not have appropriate staff. For example, their school lacked a parent/family l iaison to connect with their CLD populations, and staff members could not communicate with CLD families. Another major theme that participants reported was that there was a lack of understand ing and/or training regarding CLD populations. For examples, participants indicated that many teacher s , including special education teacher, do not fully understand the impact language has on education. Other concerning limitations included school s

PAGE 45

38 not knowing how to find a way to engage CLD families, or miscommunication of culture in which resulted in families feeling intimidated by the school personnel contacting them. school collaboration with culturally and linguistically diverse families over the next 3 years, and how do you plan to be involved? ended question regarding how they planned on improving home school collaboration over the next 3 years. Many particip ants indicated hiring and/or including appropriate staff for the position of reaching out and connecting with CLD families. For example, the participant responded that they or their school plan s to hire a CLD parent/family l iaison within the near future an d/or more interpreters for conferences and meetings. Participants stressed the importance of having staff who could engage with families at a more meaningful level. Another common goal that was identified from the par ticipant responses was to promote cultu rally sensitivity. Some activities they recommended was to have more flexible meeting times and afterschool programs that could meet the needs of CLD families. Also, it was suggested that they could be more involved with the CLD community and activities ou tside of school. Finally, a common theme among the responses was that the participant did not personally have involvement with CLD population, and therefore did not have a goal to improve the system. The participant indicated that they were unsure what goal or plan they could implement. Would you consider your school to have a high, medium or low population of CLD ? Of the participants who answered, 56% reported having high population of CLD pop ulation at their school (n=9), 25% reported having a medium population (n=3), and 19% reported having a low population of CLD population in their school . However, since the

PAGE 46

39 researcher did not provide a criteria or definition of what was a high, medium or low CLD population, this particular question becomes difficult to interpret even with educated estimation, and therefore the results of this question should be interpreted with caution.

PAGE 47

40 C HAPTER V DISCUSSION AND LIMITATIONS Six Domains of Interventions Discussion D escriptive data from the responses along with qualitative data from the perspective regarding home school collaboration with CLD population. six type framework (1995) tool was regarding home school collaboration. It is important to note that with a very small sample size, this information should be interpreted with caution, as it m ight not be a true representation of school psychologist in general. Results from this current study indicated that the participants, school psychologist s , believe that they and/or their school use home school collaboration s trategies under the domains of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, Decision M aking, and Collaborating with the C ommunity equally at least 3 out of 5 opportunities. In other words, when responses were rounded up it was observed that the trend of the responses showed that participants and/or their schools are Occasionally using home school strategies under mentioned domains. W hen it came to the strategy of C ommunication as a mean to increase home school collaboration, the participants believed that the y and/or their s chools use this strategy 4 out of 5 opportunities and more Fr equently compared to the other strategies. Creating c ommunication tools has shown to be an effective way to maintaining collaboration over time (Epstein, et al., 2002) . It is also mandated by law (US. Dept. of Ed, 2015) that schools provide effective communication to all families regardless of language that they speak . Therefore, it was not surprising that the communication domain was the strategy participants indicated they and/or their schools c onducted more than the other strategies.

PAGE 48

41 Although there were a variety of individual responses ranging from 1 5, or Not O ccurring to Extensively Occurring , the average score of each item was measured since it provided a more general understanding of the most common responses among the participants. There was no item that had an average score in the far extremes of 1st and 5th (e.g. Not Occurring and Extensively Occurring ), and the maj ority of items we re in the Occasionally Occurring range. However, a closer analysis was done of the items that fell in the 2nd and 4th range (e.g. Rarely Occurring and Frequently Occurring ) in order to understand the general areas that schools and stakeholders might want t o focus on if they are to increase home school collaboration among CLD families. In the area of P arenting, most participants endorsed that they and/or their school F requently produce information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and lingui stically appropriate, and linked to chi ask CLD families for als, strengths and talents, and respect the different cultures represented in our student population. Producing appropriate informatio n would be consistent with the C ommunication domain as the most common method to increase home school strategy, and since this is mandated by law (US. Dept. of Ed, 2015) it would make sense that schools are extending this strategy more directly to parents an d not just students. It is also positive that schools are frequently using CLD families as resources to gather information regarding student in school is ac cessing family information, such as history and background (Olivos, 2009 ; Salas, 20 0 4 ). Finally, as more studies come out regarding the importance of cultural difference , an increase of mutual respect for cultures is reflected in the schools. ( Salas, 2004 ) . The participants of the study indicated that they and/or their school show respect to the different cultures represented in the study.

PAGE 49

42 Under the P arenting domain, p articipants also endorsed that they and/or their school R arely conduct workshops or provide information for CLD families on child development. There is a number of reasons why the schools represented in the study rarely provide workshop s . Studies have shown that the most common reasons why school s do not participate in such activities are due to lack of understanding of the importance workshops, and no resources (staff, space, materials etc.) to run workshops ( Jonak, 2014 ; Olivos, 2009 ) , which was generally consistent by the participants of this current study . Further investigation might be insightful to learning in more detail reasons why schools prefer using other home school strategies . The C ommunication domain in general was the home school intervention most practiced according to the response of the partic ipants. S pecifically, participants endorsed that they and/or their school F requently review the legibility, clarity, form, and frequency of all memos, notices, and other print and non print communications, develop communication for CLD families who do not spe ak English as a first language, establish clear two way channels for communications between ho me and school for CLD families, contact CLD families of students havin g academic or behavior problems, community involvement with input from educators, parents, and others, and provide written communication in the language of the families. It is assumed that the communication domain is the most practiced or generally used strategy in CLD home school collabo ration because most CLD families speak another language other than English ( Ovando, 2010 ). Since schools are generally aware of this barrier, and as mentioned earlier, it is legally mandated to provide resources in the primary language of families, it is p ossible that schools make more of an effort to reduce the language gap between home and school through the use of appropriate communication tools .

PAGE 50

43 Volunteering as a strategy for home school collabo ration was generally practiced O ccasionally according to pa rticipants. However, there were several endorsed items that indicated needing more attention from stakeholders to increase home school collaboration. For example, participants indicated that they and/or their school R arely conduct an annual survey to identify interests, talents, and availability of CLD family volunteers, in order to match their skills/talents with school and classroom needs, rarely provide a family room for CLD volunteers and family members to work, meets, and access resources about parenting, childcare, tutoring, and other things that effect their children, R arely train CLD volunteers so they use their time productively, and R arely reduce barriers to family participation by providing transportation, childca re, flexible schedules, and addresses the need s of English language learners. Similarly , with the P arenting domain, there is no information as to why schools do not use these strategies as often. M ore research would need to be conducted to understand what schools need to begin using more volunteering strategies to increase home school collaboration among CLD population. The importance of r eading at home is a commonly known message schools se nd home. The message of such importance is being extended to CLD fa milies as well according to the responses from the survey. In the domain of learning at home, participants indicated that they and/or their school frequently make CLD families aware of the importance of reading at home, and ask families to listen to their child read or read aloud with their child. The Decision making domain includes home school co llaboration strategies for schools to include CLD families in school decision, developing parent leaders and representatives (Epstein, 1995). Participants indicated that they and/or their school frequently deal with c onflict openly and respectfully. It is important that schools and CLD familie s feel safe to talk openly

PAGE 51

44 regarding concerns, issues or changes ( Salas, 2002 ), and it is encouraging that most school represented in the sample are frequently practicing having safe conversations during decision. However, when it comes to discussing revis ion and changes to school/district curricula, participants indicated that rarely are they or their schools involving CLD families. One can hypothesize that schools rarely include CLD families to discuss revision and changes to school/district curricula bec ause of the gaps in language and culture. Many CLD families come from extremely different educational backgrounds ( Pappas, 1997; Olivos, 2009 ), making discussion in this area complicated. More information is needed in this domain from the participants to u nderstand what barriers exist. Finally, c ollaborating with the community is essential for any population in order to have a successful home school relationship ( Jonak, 2014; Olivos, 2009 ). Participants of this study indicated that they and/or their school involve CLD families in locating and utilizing community resources. This is important because school may not have all the re source s to support CLD families. H owever , by using outside resources within the community, schools are not only increasing home school collaboration but also increasing home community and community school collaborations. Some areas in this domain might need more attention, according to the parti responses. For example, participants indicated that they or their school rarely shopping for CLD family services through partnership of school, counseling, health, recreation, j ob training, and other agencies. Additionally it wa s reported that schools rarely open their building for use by the CLD community after school hours, rarely offer after school programs for students with support from CLD communities, busine sses, agencies, and volunteers, rarely attempt to solve turf proble ms and responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations for collaborative

PAGE 52

45 activities to occur. A gain, further investigation to why the participants indicated these strategies as a weakness to increase home school collaboration is needed to reduce these identi fied gaps. There were some limitations identified by participants in the open ended response s that warrant further discussion. For example, many par ticipants reported that schools often do not have appropriate bilingual staff. A study by Harris and Sullivan (2017) indicated the importance of having appropriate bilingual and or culturally sensitive staff as a means of increasing supports for CLD families. Participants agreed with their responses that many times they lack funding for staff who are spec ialized or educated to work with CLD populations. It is interesting to note that this area of limitation was also identified as an area of success for some participants. Participants who indicated success with increasing home school collaboration reported that by having staff such as CLD liaisons and bilingual staff, they noted a positive association with their home school collaboration. Another barrier to home school collaboration reported by the participants was that their schools lack ed the understanding of the importance CLD family involvement . Olivos indicated that due to the lack of understanding, students suffer in many areas ( 2009 ). A final limitation to increase home school collaboration, was that although some schools did realize the importance of home school collaboration, there existed a lack of understanding how to increase it with diverse populat ion. This is a general concern in many areas ( Epstein et al., 2002 ) in that many stakeholders are realizing the impact and necessity of having positive home school collaboration 1995 ) modified survey used in this study is originally meant for the very purpose that schools/districts evaluate their own areas of strengths and areas of need. Epstein proposed that one way to b egin planning appropriate strategies is to use such survey to find strengths and weaknesses within a school/district.

PAGE 53

46 With the open ended responses, participants provided more information to wha t they, as school psycholo gists, can do and will do in the future to increase home school collaboration among CLD families. A common theme was reported that participants would begin intentional planning around CLD participating in home school collaboration. Some of the planning inc luded hiring appropriate staff and increasing awareness of the importance of CLD involvement. Some participants indicated that they planned on doing nothing, because their area of expertise and passion lied elsewhere and there were other individuals within the school that specialized in the area of home school collaboration. More information would be needed to understand what might discourage school psychologist to be active participants in home school collaboration among CLD populations. Limitations The current study provided insightful information regarding school psychologists perspective on home school collaboration strategies. One major limitation however, as mentioned above , was the sample size. There were approximately 367 members in CSSP, and t o have obtained a significant sample, 107 participants would have been needed (allowing for an 8% margin of error). Unfortunately, due to time limitations, the sample size was below expected and therefore the data in this study should be interpreted with c aution . It is important to note that the organization (CSS P) is a s tate wide organization of school psychologists. The researcher had considered utilizing a national sample with a national organization of school psychologists, however, in order to gain ins ight on local practice the researcher decided on sampling within current state of practice. Future studies might consider including a broader scope of sampling in order to obtain more varied responses by state.

PAGE 54

47 Another limitation was that the tool used did not allow for participants to explain sp ecific barriers pertaining to the question . For example, the survey allowed participants to provide general limitations, but it was unknown why most participants indicated for example why their school did not provid e workshops for CLD families. Assumptions could only be made based on other literatures and not based on participant comment. A final limitation observed by the researcher was that it was difficult to determine if school psychologists and/or their school d id or did not use strategies equally with non CLD populations. Results do not show if there is a gap between the use of strategies between CLD population and non CLD populations. For future studies regarding increasing home school collaboration among CLD p opulations, the researcher would encourage implementing the same tool developed by Epstein ( 1995 ) , but include adaptations such as allowing for individual comments of why/why not certain strategies are used. That way specific barriers could be better ident ified p er item. Another change recommended for future studies is that items asked what participants do for CLD populations versus what is done for non CLD population to understand if there is a significant gap due to the CLD variable. Finally, a larger sam ple size is needed to have the ability to determine if results are generalizable to a larger population.

PAGE 55

48 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION Collaboration between schools and families is an opportunity for the educative community to work toge ther with a common goal in mind; in most cases , home and school collaboration improves students educational , behavioral, and social emotional outcomes (Olivos, 2009). As mentioned before , when home school collaboration is successful, the benefits are mutual for establ ishing trust and growth within the community. Studies show that school psychologists play an important role for improving home school collaboration with CLD families (Jonak, 2014), therefore by having gathered their perspective of what they and/or their sc hools are doing will add on to the research of improving home school collaboration with diverse populations. There is increasing diversity in urban schools (Olivos, 2009). With great diversity at schools, stakeholders need to take a closer look at implemen ting effective home school strategies. Epstein (1995) created a tool for stakeholders to use that would identify weaknesses and strengths their schools/districts. modified to identify the areas of need for CLD pop ulations . Results indicated that participants of the study Occasionally used home (2002) study, except for the domain of Communication to which participants indicated that they used more Frequently. Due to the minimal research conducted prior to this study perception of current strategies and implement ations , more information is needed to continue better understanding of the exact limitation and barriers to certain strategies discussed earlier in this study. School psychologists can continue conducting research and implementing actions that

PAGE 56

49 will improve home school collaboration among CLD population. What is evident is that c o llaboration between CLD families and schools becomes possible when educative systems are able to align values, beliefs and culture with that of their diverse communities (Olivos, 2009) . It is encouraged that stakeholders use tools, such as surveys simila al ong with the knowledge and expertise of school psychologists as a start to identifying areas of needs pertaining to their specific school and district.

PAGE 57

50 References Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches 3 rd edition . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Eckert, T. L., Russo, N., & Hier, B. O. (2014). Best practices in school psychologists' promotion of effective collaboration and communication between school professionals. In P. L. Harrison & A. Thomas (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology: Data Based and Collaborative Decision Making (pp. 541 552). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. Epstein, J.L. (1995). School /family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, (76): 701 712. Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Jansorn, N. R., & Van Voorhis, F. L. (2002). School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Your H andbook for Action . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Fink, A. (2017). How to conduct surveys. A step by step guide . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Harris, B., & Sullivan, A. L. (2017). A framework for bilingual school consultation to facilitate multitier systems of support for English Language Learners. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1 26. linguistically diverse school family community partnerships. Health Psychology Report, 2 (1), 19 26. Merrell K. W. , Ervin, R. A., & Peacock, G. G. ( 2012). School psychology for the 21 st century. Foundations and practices. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

PAGE 58

51 Mundt, K., Gregory, A., Melzi, G., & McWayne, C. M. (2015). The influence of ethnic match on latino school based family engagement. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 37(2), 170 1 85. doi:10.1177/0739986315570287 National Association of School Psychology, (2015). NASP position statement: bilingual services. Retrieved from www.nasponline.org on 5/13/2018. National Association of School Psycho logy, (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/about school psychology on 5/10/2018. Olivos, E. M. (2009). Collaboration with L atino families: A critical perspective of Home School interactions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45 (2), 109 115. doi:10.1177/1053451209340220 Ovando, C. J. (2010). Bilingual education in the United States: Historical development and current issues. Bilingual Research Journal, 27 (1), 1 24. Pappas, G. (1997). Forgoing home school partnerships with Latino families. La Raza Report , 1 6. Rhodes, R. L ., Ochoa, S. H., & Ortiz, S. O. (2005 ). Assessing culturally and linguistically diverse students. A practical guide. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Salas, L. (2004). Individualized educational plan meetings and Mexican American parents: let's talk about it. Journal of Latinos and Education, 3 (3), 181 192. Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers . Thousand Oaks, London: Sage. Salinas, K.C., Epstein, J.L. & Sanders, M.G. (1997). Starting points: An inventory of present practices of school family community partnerships. In J.L. Epstein,.L. Coates, K.C.

PAGE 59

52 Salinas, M.G. Sanders, & B.S. Simon. School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Your Handbook for Action (pp.122 125). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Salinas, K.C., Epstein, J.L. Sanders, M.G. Davis, D., & Douglas, I. (n.d.) Measure of school, family, and community partnershi ps. In partnership with Johns Hopkins University, and Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Shulkind, S. B., & Foote, J. (2009). Creating a culture of connectedness through middle school advisory programs. Middle School Journal, 41 (1), 20 27. doi:10.1080/00940771.2009.11461700 Skaggs, M. (2001). Facing the facts: overrepresentation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education. Multicultural education, 9 , 42 44. Smiley, A.D. (2006). Power, families of color, and special education: A qualitative examination of discourse between families and professionals in urban settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington. Thorp, E. K. (1997). Increasing opportunities for partnership with culturally and l inguistically diverse families. Intervention in school and clinic, 32 , 261 269. United Stated Depart of Education, (2015). Civil Rights Division. Obtain on 11/17/2018 at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl factsheet lep parents 201501.pdf . Van Roekel, N. P. D. (2008). English language learners face unique challenges. An NEA Policy Brief. National Education Association . Yap, K.O. & Enoki, D. (1995). In search of the elusive magic bullet: Parental involvement and student outcomes. The School Community Journal. 5 (2), Fall/Winter 1995: 97 106. Yell, M. L (2006). The law and special education (2 nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

PAGE 60

53 Appendix A Survey Questions The purpose of this study is to understand what intervention s mental health support staff, such as school psychologists use individually or as part of a team when working with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students and families in order to increase home to school collaboration . CLD population is genera lly understood as individuals who were not born in the U.S., whose native language is a language other than English, culture has had significant impact on English proficiency (e.g. Native American or Alaska Native), or any other environment where a languag e other than English is dominant. More information is needed to better understand what roles school psychologists play in order to maintain CLD This instrument is designed to measure how you and/or you r school is reaching out to involve CLD parents, community members, and students in a meaningful manner (Salinas et al., 1997). At this time, you and/or your school may conduct all, some, or none of the activities or approaches listed. Not every activity i s appropriate at every grade level . Your school may be conducting other activities for each type of involvement. These may be added and rated to account for all major partnership practices that your school presently conducts. Directions: Carefully examine the scoring rubic below before rating your school on the six types of involvement. As you review each item, please circle the response that comes closest to describing your school. A score of 4 or 5 indicates that the activity or approac h is strong and prominent. A score of 1, 2, or 3 indicates that the activity is not yet part of If you currently work at more than one site, please consider all of the approaches you and the schools practice, if possible. If you are currently not at a site, please consider the last school you were placed in to answer these questions. Scoring Rubic 1 Not Occurring : Strategy does not happen at our school . 2 Rarely : Occurs in only one or two classes. Receives isola ted use or little time. Clearly 3 Occasionally : Occurs in some classes. Receives minimal or modest time or emphasis lan. 4 Frequently : Occurs in many but not all classes/grade levels. Receives substantive time 5 Extensively : Occurs in most or all classes/grade levels. Receives substantive ti me and I. PARENTING: Help culturally and linguistically diverse ( CLD ) families establish home environment to support children as students. Rating 1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively Our School:

PAGE 61

54 1. Conducts workshops or provides information for CLD families on child development. _____ 2. Provides information, training, and assistance to all CLD families who want it or who need it, not just to the few who can attend workshops or meetings at the school building. _____ 3. Produces information for CLD families that is clear, usable, culturally and linguistically appropriate , 4. Asks CLD families for talents._____ 5. Sponsors home visiting programs or neighborhood meetings to help CLD families understand schools and to help school understand families. _____ 6. Provides CLD families with information/training o n developing home conditions or environments that support learning._____ 7. Respects the different cultures represented in our student population. _____ 8. Other types of activities_________________________________________________. _____ II. COMMUNICATIONS: Design effective forms of home school communications culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families . Rating 1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively Our School: 1. Reviews the legibility , clarity, form, and frequency of all memos, notices, and other print and non print communications. _____ 2. Develops communication for CLD families who do not speak English as a first language. _____ 3. Establishes clear two way channels for communica tions between home and school for CLD families . _____ 4. Conducts a for mal conference with CLD families at least once a year. _____ 5. Conducts an annual survey for CLD families to share information and concerns about student needs and reactions to school progra ms, and their satisfaction with their involvement in school. _____ 6. Conducts an orientation for new CLD families._____ 7. Sends home folders of student work weekly or monthly for CLD family review and comment in appropriate and understandable language. ______ 8. Provides clear information about curriculum, assessments, and achievement levels and report cards in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families . _____ 9. Contacts CLD families of students having academic or behavior problems._____

PAGE 62

55 10. CLD family and community involvement with input from educators, parents, and others._____ 11. Trains teachers, staff and principals on the value and utility of contributions of CLD families and ways to build ties between h ome and school. _____ 12. Builds policies that encourage all teachers to communicate frequently with CLD families about their curriculum plans, expectations for homework, and how families can help. _____ 13. Produces a regular school newsletter with up to date in formation about school, special events, organizations, meetings, and parenting tips in appropriate and understandable language for CLD families . _____ 14. Provides written communication in the language of the families._____ 15. Other types of activities___________ ______________________________________. _____ III. VOLUNTEERING: Recruit and organize culturally and linguistically diverse ( CLD ) families help and support. Rating 1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively Our School: 1. Conducts an annual survey to identify interests, talents, and availability of CLD family volunteers, in order to match their skills/talents with school and classroom needs._____ 2. Provides a family room for CLD volunteers and family members to work, meets, a nd access resources about parenting, childcare, tutoring, and other things that effect their children. _____ 3. Creates flexible volunteering and school events schedules, enabling CLD families who work to participate. _____ 4. Trains CLD volunteers so they use t heir time productively. _____ 5. Recognizes CLD volunteers for their time and efforts._____ 6. Schedules school events at different times during the day and evening so that all CLD families can attend some throughout the year._____ 7. Reduces barriers to family par ticipation by providing transportation, childcare, flexible schedules, and addresses the needs of English language learners. _____ 8. Encourages CLD families and the community to be involved with the school in a variety of ways (assisting in classroom, giving talks, monitoring halls, leading activities, etc. _____ 9. Other types of activities_________________________________________________. _____

PAGE 63

56 IV. LEARNING AT HOME: Provide information and ideas to culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families about how to help students at home with homework and other curriculum related activities, decision, and planning. Rating 1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively Our School: 1. Provides information to CLD families on how to monitor and dis cuss school work at home. _____ 2. Provides ongoing and specific information to CLD families on how to assist students with skills that they need to improve. _____ 3. Makes CLD families aware of the importance of reading at home, and asks families to listen to t heir child read or read aloud with their child._____ 4. Assists CLD families in helping students set academic goals, select courses, and programs. _____ 5. Schedules regular interactive homework that requires students to demonstrate and discuss what they are lea rning with a family member. _____ 6. Other types of activities_________________________________________________. _____ V. DECISION MAKING : Include culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families in school decision, developing parent leaders and representat ives. Rating 1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively Our School: 1. Has active PTA, PTO, or other parent organization for CLD families. _____ 2. team, or other committees. _____ 3. Has CLD families represented on district level advisory council and committees. _____ 4. Involves CLD families in an organized, ongoing, and timely way in the planning, review, and improvement of programs. _____ 5. Involves CLD f amilies in revising the school/district curricula. _____ 6. Includes family leaders from all racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and other group in the school. _____ 7. Develops formal networks to link all families with their parent representatives. _____ 8. Includes st udents (along with CLD families) in decision making groups. _____ 9. Deals with conflict openly and respectfully. _____ 10. Asks involvement CLD families to make contact with other families who are less involved to solicit their ideas, and report back to them. __ ___

PAGE 64

57 11. Other types of activities_________________________________________________. _____ VI. COLLABORATING WITH COMMUNITY: Identify and integrate resources and serv ices from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) communities to strengthen school programs, f amily practices, and student learning and development. Rating 1. Not Occurring 2. Rarely 3. Occasionally 4. Frequently 5. Extensively Our School: 1. Provides a CLD community resources directory for parents and students with information on community services, programs, and agencies. _____ 2. Involves CLD families in locating and utilizing community resources. _____ 3. Works with local business, industries, and community organizations on programs to enhance student skills and learning. _____ 4. ng for CLD family services through partnership of school, counseling, health, recreation, job training, and other agencies. _____ 5. Opens its building for use by the CLD community after school hours. _____ 6. Offers after school programs for students with support from CLD communities, businesses, agencies, and volunteers. _____ 7. Solves turf problems and responsibilities, funds, staff, and locations for collaborative activities to occur. _____ 8. Utilizes CLD community resources, such as business, libraries, par ks, and museums to enhance the learning environment. _____ 9. Other types of activities_________________________________________________. _____ A. Would you consider you school to have a high , medium , or low population of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families? B. What major factors have contributed to the success of your home school collaboration involvement efforts with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) populations? C. What major factors have limited the success of your home school collab oration involvement efforts with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) populations? D. school collaboration with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) families over t he next three years, and how do you plan to be involve d?

PAGE 65

58 Appendix B Demographics 1. What is your age range? a. 20 25 b. 26 35 c. 36 45 d. 46 55 e. 56 or older 2. How long have you practiced as a School Psychologist? a. 1 3 years b. 4 6 years c. 7 10 years d. 11 20 years e. 21 30 f. 31 40 g. 41 50 h. More than 50 years 3. What level of education did you complete? a. Ed.S b. Psy.D c. Ph.D d. Other 4. Have you taken Multicultural class for personal learning or per degree requirements? a. Yes, this year b. Yes, 1 3 years ago c. Yes, 4 6 years ago d. Yes, 7 10 years ago e. Other f. Never 5. Do you speak another language other than English? a. Yes, I am proficient in at least one other language b. Yes, I can speak and/or understand sufficiently to hold a conversation c. No, but I can speak or understand some words of another language d. Not at all 6. What is primary population? 7. What is your own race/ethnicity?