INSTALACION DE ENLACE

disadvantaged areas but appreciates parents who deliver ‘the student ready for school and learning’ (Principal: Ash 1: 15). The HSCL teacher defines partnership as

communicating with, and welcoming parents, and providing opportunities for parents to engage with their child’s learning. The HSCL co-ordinator says ‘they are told from the very minute they have contact with us this is a partnership, and we are all on the one side’, (HSCL: Ash 2: 10-11). The JCSP co-ordinator sees the importance of a team effort between school and the home as this results in students being happier and staying in school longer. Planning for home-school partnership takes place at monthly DEIS committee meetings, with the HSCL co-ordinator taking overall responsibility. A DEIS target for involving parents, according to the JCSP co-ordinator, is for parents to be more familiar with subjects and programmes taken by their children. The HSCL co-ordinator outlines her immediate partnership goals as developing the role of a parents’ group, providing additional transfer meetings, continuing to invite parents to student award ceremonies and enhancing communication with parents through newsletters, postcards,

Home-School Learning Partnership Relations

Developed in DEIS Post-Primary Schools

Vision, purpose and planning for home-school partnership relations

Structures in place in schools to promote parental involvement in

student learning Barriers to engaging parents instudents’ learning

Models of parental involvement which contribute to positive home-

school learning partnerships

Collaboration between the HSCL co-ordinator, JCSP co-ordinator,

class teachers and parents Involvement choices made byparents

Other aspects of parental involvement to promote student

webtexts, home visits and school reports. Planning for the development of literacy at DEIS committee meetings is delegated to the JCSP co-ordinator, the head of the english department, the JCSP librarian, resource teacher and special needs co-ordinator. The head of the mathematics department has overall responsibility for the development of

numeracy.

In Beech College the principal considers that ‘no matter what school you are in when parents take an interest in the education of their children their education is enhanced, where there are a lot of disadvantaged kids you can see the difference’ (Principal : Beech 1: 5-8). The principal interprets partnership as parents supporting their children, and the work of the school, by providing a suitable learning environment in the home and taking responsibility for their children’s school attendance and setting boundaries. The HSCL co-ordinator considers that partnership relations are developed when parents feel at ease approaching the school with problems which she helps to resolve. The JCSP co-ordinator focuses on the beneficial effects for students when positive relations with parents are transferred onto relationships with students which she describes as ‘a win-win situation’ (JCSP: Beech 1: 5-14).The JCSP co-ordinator considers that partnership with parents within Beech College is ‘absolutely promoted. I am not saying that we get it right all the time or we get all parents that we need to get’ (JCSP: Beech 3: 3-4).

To ‘break down barriers’ (Principal: Hazel 5: 21-22) the principal of Hazel College would like to see parents more involved in the life of the school rather than just being members of a parents’ association. The HSCL co-ordinator finds it difficult to measure the benefits of his role, yet is confident that partnership relations exist between all stakeholders in the college. As a member of the DEIS committee the HSCL co-ordinator is responsible for looking after partnership with parents. His focus is on providing information to parents, and students, regarding outside organisations and agencies. The HSCL co-ordinator is not convinced that teachers consider parents in their everyday work as he says:

I don’t think teachers have changed their mindset yet. When I started teaching in 1993 there was nearly a perception the parent- teacher meeting was the teacher’s right. I’m not quite sure we’re there yet with the idea that this is a two way process (HSCL: Hazel 1: 19-24).

The JCSP co-ordinator, who considers that partnership with parents ‘is an area that we haven’t got a great track record in’ (JCSP: Hazel 2: 14) defines partnership with parents as having parents come into the school and help the school ‘and maybe give a more positive attitude towards school and around literacy and numeracy as well and all aspects of social development too’ (JCSP: Hazel 1: 5-6).

While in agreement that home-school partnership enhances student achievement the principal of Larch College says ‘if I have evidence to back this up, no’ (Principal: Larch 1: 4). The principal considers that only a small number of school staff promote this partnership and he considers that this ‘needs to be changed within the school’ (Principal: Larch 2: 42). The principal is concerned that there is an acceptance that the students have difficulties and that the ‘parents presenting them have their difficulties as well’

(Principal: Larch 2: 44-45). The Larch College HSCL co-ordinator agrees that a home school partnership relationship enhances student achievement and sees the partnership relationship as:

like a three-legged stool. You have the professionals, you have the students and you have the parents and if you believe that as fundamental then everything builds from that. You are really looking to build on the constitutional statement that parents are the primary educators, so you are looking to build bridges all over the place (HSCL: Larch 1: 12-18)

The HSCL co-ordinator describes attempts at building bridges to bring parents into the educational system as very fragile. Emphasis is placed on ‘mutual respect and

understanding’ (HSCL: Larch 1: 45-46) with the most marginalized parents. DEIS partnership goals are decided at team meetings but, according to the JCSP co-ordinator, ‘our home school liaison person takes responsibility for linking with parents’ (JCSP:

Larch 2: 20-21). Despite partnership with parents being promoted collaboration with parents varies and is dependent on the individual needs of students.

An ‘open door policy’ (Principal: Spruce 1: 35) is promoted in Spruce College but the principal considers that partnership with parents is very general, and not focused enough on homework or reading. The previous year sanctions for non-completion of homework had been implemented without involving parents in the process. A DEIS partnership target is to see ‘less involvement around discipline and more involvement around learning’ (Principal: Spruce 7: 17). The principal argues that good relationships with parents are ‘vital’ (Principal: Spruce 1: 6) if students are to stay in school longer.

The HSCL teacher, who works in partnership with another HSCL co-ordinator in Spruce College, agrees that a priority is the retention of at risk students in school, and she acts as an intermediary between parents and teachers. Partnership with parents is promoted by ‘just trying to get the parents in’ (HSCL: Spruce 3: 9) to coffee mornings and

information sessions on courses offered by the college. Planning for parental engagement takes place at weekly DEIS committee meetings between school management and other key personnel. Planning for literacy and numeracy is examined across the whole school in DEIS plans. The JCSP co-ordinator, who is also a class teacher with responsibility for pastoral care, is the literacy and numeracy representative on the DEIS team. She sees partnership as a reciprocal relationship between the school, parents and students and considers that her role as class teacher involves letting ‘parents know what is happening with their child, how their child is getting on’ (JCSP: Spruce 3: 6-7). The JCSP co- ordinator invites parents into the college for JCSP initiatives but considers that

‘partnership with parents is dealt with mostly by Home School Liaison Co-ordinator’ (JCSP: Spruce 1: 9-10).

4.2.1 Vision, purpose and planning for home-school partnership relations analysis

All insider participants agree that home-school partnership relations enhance student achievement and retention. This conforms to the broad consensus which has emerged internationally which supports constructive home-school partnerships, for students of all

ages, as a means of improving students’ academic achievement and attitude to school (Bastiani, 1993; Epstein, 1995; Desforges and Abouchaar, 2003; Feiler, 2010).

The findings from inside participants suggest that partnership with parents in DEIS schools is concerned with how parents can support the work of the school and teachers, rather than how teachers can support parents in helping their child to learn. Parents are expected to show their support by ensuring students are prepared for school and attend regularly. There is also an expectation that parents should be involved in the life of the school, and help resolve behavioural or other difficulties associated with individual students. A school’s function is to inform parents regarding academic programmes and student progress, celebratory events, school meetings and provide information regarding outside agencies. A small number of staff including management, and other key

personnel, plan for partnership at DEIS meetings with the HSCL co-ordinator taking overall responsibility. There is a perception that the only parents who present in schools are those who have difficulties. The HSCL co-ordinator supports parents in resolving these difficulties and provides parents with information on adult courses.

Policy rhetoric emphasising parents as partners has been accompanied in the literature by a search for ideal partnership arrangements. Pugh and De’Ath (1989, p.68) see

partnership as ‘a working relationship that is characterised by a sense of purpose, mutual respect and the willingness to negotiate’. This implies a sharing of information,

responsibility, skills, decision making and accountability. Hornby and Lafaele (2011, p.46) in agreement with Reay (1998) and Wolfendale (1983), argue that the use of the term ‘partnership’ is problematic as it ‘masks the inequalities that exist in reality in the practice of parental involvement’. Swap (1993) identifies four partnership models, a protective model, a school-to-home transmission model, a curriculum enrichment model and a partnership model. Views on partnership relations with parents suggest that DEIS schools are operating between a protective model, where parents hand over responsibility for educating their children to the school, and a school-to-home transmission model where the direction of contact is from the school to the parents. Schools see parents as a resource for transmitting school values to children. The findings indicate that DEIS

planning is confined to a small number of key school personnel, with the HSCL co- ordinator mainly responsible for parental involvement. This suggests that Swaps’

partnership model, which involves a whole school approach and commitment to working with families and communities, has not yet evolved in DEIS schools. The prevailing view that students in DEIS schools and their parents present with difficulties is according to Hornby and Lafaele (2011) a recipe for doomed partnership relations as it is based on the premise that one party is a problem.

There is little evidence to suggest that school personnel are involved in developing learning partnership relations with parents to advance student achievement. Ashton and Cairney (2001) maintain that the avoidance of consultation and collaboration with parents concerning pedagogical approaches highlight the power inherent in position, authority and discourse which have the potential to enhance or stifle debate. Ashton and Cairney (2001) found that while parents were invited to help in classrooms, to provide unpaid assistance for staff and supervise homework, they were less likely to be invited to share dialogue about their children’s strengths and interests. Ashton and Cairney contend that what is important is that partnership discourses and practices be matched.

4.3 Specific school structures, and collaboration among school personnel, to