B U I L D I N G E D U C A T I O N A L S U C C E S S T H R O U G H

(1)

B

U I L D I N G

E

D U C A T I O N A L

S

U C C E S S

T

H R O U G H

C O L L A B O R AT I O N I N L O S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y

Engaging Parents as Partners in Creating

College Going Cultures Conference:

Evaluation Report

Engaging Parents as Partners in Creating

College Going Cultures Conference:

Evaluation Report

April 26, 2007

Melissa Friedman MacDonald and Aimée Dorr, UCLA

(2)

Engaging Parents as Partners in Creating

College Going Cultures Conference:

Evaluation Report

April 26, 2007

Melissa Friedman MacDonald and Aimée Dorr, UCLA

The Conference

C

o-hosted by UCLA and the Los Angles County Office of Education (LACOE), the “Engaging

Parents as Partners in Creating College Going Cultures” conference is the fourth event sponsored by the BEST Collaboration in LA County initiative. The conference featured several activities designed to address the following four goals:

1. Participants gain information about how to carry out effective parent programs geared toward involving parents in the college process.

2. Participants become aware of existing parent programs (related to college preparation) and resources that can be of use to them.

3. Participants develop at least two action oriented goals with respect to college-minded parent programs.

4. Participants identify at least two other participants to continue consulting, working with, and learning from.

Representatives from the USC Rossier School of Education and the Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7 (LAUSD 7) also assisted with planning the conference. Teams representing four school districts, five institutions of higher education (IHEs), and LACOE began the day with an interactive poster session. Each partnership team presented at least one poster that included information about an existing parent program. One or more team representatives stayed with the poster while the remainder of conference participants were free to roam the gallery, review posters, and engage in dialogue with presenters.

(3)

Immediately following the poster session, participants listened to a one-hour panel presentation by three parents who have participated in different parent programs across Los Angeles County and who have at least one student in college. The purpose was to provide the audience with practical advice about the types of things that make a parent involvement program work well. Parent panelists addressed the following five questions in their presentations: (1) What initially got you involved in your student’s college going process? What kept you involved? (2) What types of activities were particularly useful for engaging you and your family in your child’s college going process? Why and in what ways? (3) Which existing activities might be improved in the future? In what ways? (4) Are there activities that were not part of your experience that you think would be effective in engaging parents as partners in creating college going cultures? Please describe these activities and any suggestions for implementation, and (5) Were there any activities that you felt were not productive? If so, what were they? In what ways might they be revised or replaced? Parent panelists included Mary Johnson from the UCLA Parent Curriculum Project, Guadalupe Torres from the USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative, and Donna Robertson from the College Bound Program at Loyola Marymount University. The panel discussion was moderated by Dr. Patricia McDonough, expert in college access and Professor of Education at UCLA’s Graduate School of Education and Information Studies.

This panel presentation and the subsequent question and answer period set the stage for two sets of small group discussions. Initial job alike sessions provided an opportunity for administrators, teachers, counselors, university representatives, parents, and parent liaisons to discuss existing parent program models and strategies for improving current efforts. A second round of small group discussions brought partnership teams together for group planning and the development of tangible action steps related to creating and/or expanding upon parent involvement programs. A closing discussion brought the large group together in order to review each team’s action plans. In addition to interactive activities, printed resources (e.g., clearinghouse of existing LA County parent programs) were also prepared and distributed in order to meet conference goals.

Conference Participants

In addition to representatives from ARCHES and the Irvine Foundation, five successful partnerships of school districts and institutions of higher education from across LA County participated in this conference. The goal was for each partnership to have a team representing at a minimum the district superintendent, a high school principal, a teacher from that school, a counselor from that school, a parent from that school, a parent liaison from that school, and a representative from a participating institution of higher education. Invitations were extended to all individuals who participated in the previous conference held in November 2006. District superintendents and districts were asked to compose their own teams. LACOE Superintendent

(4)

Robles reimbursed schools for two substitute days for each participating classroom teacher. The following list represents the participating school districts and their partner universities.

• Antelope Valley Union High School District, Antelope Valley College, California State University,

Bakersfield, and University of California, Los Angeles

• Burbank Unified School District and University of Southern California

• Long Beach Unified School District, California State University, Long Beach, and Long Beach City College

• Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7, and University of California, Los Angeles

• Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7, and University of Southern California

Of the 88 participants, 50 (57%) completed a written assessment that provided information about what they learned from the conference, their general perceptions of the event, and next steps. Twenty-seven

respondents were directly associated with public schools (2 superintendents, 4 district administrators, 4 school administrators, 3 teachers, 8 counselors, 6 parents, 1 student), and nine were associated with institutions of higher education. Fourteen people identified themselves as falling into the “other” category which included LACOE administrators and various program and activity directors at the high school level.

Reactions to the Conference

In general, participants were satisfied with the conference and felt that it met their personal needs. In fact, 91 % (N=43) of respondents rated the usefulness of the event’s content and activities to be either “more than some” or “a lot” (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Number of conference participants selecting each of the five rating points for the value of the conference for their work (47 respondents).

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Not at all A little Some More than Some

A lot

Overall Usefulness of Conference for Personal Needs

Frequency

Usefulness of the Poster Session For Identifying Best Practices

Frequency

Usefulness of the Parent Panel for Identifying Best Practices

Frequency

Usefulness of the Job Alike Discussion for Identifying Best Practices

(5)

In addition to commenting on the overall benefit of the event, participants provided feedback on the usefulness of each conference activity (i.e., poster session, parent panel, job alike discussion) for identifying best practices related to engaging parents as partners in creating college going cultures. Although all three activities were received favorably, respondents indicated that the parent panel and job alike discussions were particularly useful for identifying such best practices (see Figures 2-4).

Figure 2. Number of conference participants selecting each of the five rating points for the value of the poster session for identifying best practices related to engaging parents as partners in creating college going cultures (45 respondents).

Figure 3. Number of conference participants selecting each of the five rating points for the value of the parent panel for identifying best practices related to engaging parents as partners in creating college going cultures (46 respondents).

Frequency 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

A lot Usefulness of the Poster Session For Identifying Best Practices

Frequency

Frequency 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

A lot

Frequency

(6)

Figure 4. Number of conference participants selecting each of the five rating points for the value of the job alike discussion for identifying best practices related to engaging parents as partners in creating college going cultures (47 respondents).

Learning from the Conference

As a whole, the conference proved to be a valuable learning experience. The vast majority of participants (98%) reported learning at least one best practice related to engaging parents in creating college going cultures that they might consider implementing in their partnerships. Most respondents (90%, N=45) indicated learning two best practices.

The reported learning outcomes fell into six thematic categories (see Figure 5). The majority of respondents reported learning outcomes related to creating parent networks (based on the notion that parents listen most to other parents) and developing programs to train parents as leaders and workshop facilitators. The next most salient learning category was the improvement and/or development of parent centers at the school site. Many participants indicated learning the importance of and strategies for transforming parent centers from social spaces into academic environments focusing on the college process.

Smaller numbers of participants reported learning more about how to increase parental access to institutions of higher education (IHEs). Responses in this category included planning conferences, workshops, and tours for parents on an IHE campus. A roughly equal number of participants described learning strategies for how to create college materials in language that is accessible to parents. The “Other” category contained a wide range of responses that consisted mostly of comments about the general importance of listening to parents and educating them about the college process.

Frequency

Frequency 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

A lot

(7)

Figure 5. Number of conference participants reporting learning outcomes in any of six thematic categories (49 respondents).

A resource guide that listed existing parent programs in LA County was prepared and distributed at the event and when asked to report any additional parent programs not mentioned at the conference, only 12% (N=6) reported other parent programs. Other respondents commented on the knowledge gained about existing program models (via conference activities such as the poster session) and the usefulness of the parent program resource guide provided in the conference folder.

Plans for Continued Contact and Future Collaboration

A primary goal of this conference was to promote continued contact with colleagues met at the event and future collaboration. In general, the event was very successful in meeting these objectives. In fact, 98% of respondents indicated plans to continue contact with colleagues from the conference. Plans for sustained collaboration included scheduling regular meetings with colleagues, staying in touch via email/phone, collaborating to

sponsor a parent event, sharing resources, and developing new partnership activities related to increasing parent involvement.

In addition to reporting best practices related to engaging parents as partners in creating college going cultures, 82% (N=41) of respondents identified next steps for implementing their reported learning outcomes. Such plans for implementation fell into five thematic categories (see Figure 6). The most commonly mentioned next step included leveraging currently involved parents to establish a wider parent network. Similar numbers of respondents also described next steps related to the creation of parent programs geared toward training parents as leaders and workshop facilitators.

0 5 10 15 20 25

Learning Outcomes by Thematic Category

Frequency

Other

Parent _Networks _Parent Leadership T raining Improve/develop Parent Centers Parent Access to IHEs College Material in Accessible Language

Thematic Categories for Implementation Steps

Frequency Other Establishing a Parent Network

Developing Parent Leadership Programs _Improving/

developing Parent Centers Regular School Staf f Meetings

Thematic Categories for Groups With Whom to Share Conference Information

Other

School/District Administrators

Parents _Teachers _IHE

Administrators Counselors Student Groups College Preparatory Programs Frequency Frequency

Thematic Categories for Type of Action Step Commitment

Create New Parent Programs Other Contact Parents/Build Parent Network Plan a Family Day at IHE Adapt Existing Parent Programs 201726_Evalu.indd 6 7/11/07 6:04:18 PM

(8)

A smaller group of respondents reported next steps focused on the development/improvement of parent centers and holding regular staff meetings. The “Other” category consisted of a broad spectrum of responses and any potential subcategories contained two items at most. Examples of responses coded as “other” include sending monthly newsletters to parents, creating specialized committees for parental involvement programs, and working with the local district parent ombudsperson to operationalize best practices. Many “other” responses consisted of general comments about the significance of continued efforts to engage parents.

Figure 6. Number of conference participants reporting implementation steps in any of five thematic categories (41 respondents).

In addition to identifying tangible implementation steps, 90% (N=45) of respondents provided specific information about at least one group (some provided up to three groups) with whom they planned to share the information learned at the conference. Responses fell into eight thematic categories (see Figure 7). The majority of respondents indicated plans to share learning outcomes with school and/or district administrators. Roughly equal numbers of respondents reported plans to share conference information with parents, teachers, IHE administrators, and counselors. Smaller numbers of respondents indicated an intention to share information with student groups and other college preparatory programs (e.g., AVID, College Bound). The “Other” category contained a wide spectrum of responses that included specific groups, consortiums, or councils.

Frequency

Other

Parent _Networks _Parent Leadership T raining Improve/develop Parent Centers Parent Access to IHEs College Material in Accessible Language 0 5 10 15 20

Developing Parent Leadership Programs

Improving/ developing Parent Centers Regular School Staf f Meetings

Other

Create New Parent Programs Other Contact Parents/Build Parent Network Plan a Family Day at IHE Adapt Existing Parent Programs

(9)

Figure 7. Number of conference participants reporting groups of people with whom to share conference information in any of eight thematic categories (45 respondents).

Plans for Future Action

A primary goal of the small group team discussions was the development of an action plan. Partnership teams were asked to apply lessons learned from the poster session, parent panel presentation, and the job alike discussions toward creating tangible action steps for their own work. A large number of respondents (84%) reported they would take responsibility for a given action step.

Out of this 84% (N=42), many respondents (72%, N=36) provided specific information about the type of action step commitment made. The types of action step commitments fell into five thematic categories (see Figure 8). The majority of respondents reported taking responsibility for an action step related to creating new parent programs (e.g., workshops, parent centers). The next most salient type of action step commitment was related to contacting parents and developing plans to build a solid parent network. Roughly equal, smaller numbers of respondents reported a commitment to planning a family day at an IHE and developing a means of adapting existing parent programs to fit the needs of their school site. The “Other” category consisted of a broad spectrum of responses and any potential subcategories contained two items at most. Examples of responses coded as “other” include planning regular team meetings, creating a dedicated committee for parent involvement issues/programs, and continuing to build upon existing partnerships.

Frequency

Other

Developing Parent Leadership Programs

Improving/ developing Parent Centers Regular School Staf f Meetings 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0

Other

Create New Parent Programs Other Contact Parents/Build Parent Network Plan a Family Day at IHE Adapt Existing Parent Programs 201726_Evalu.indd 8 7/11/07 6:04:19 PM

(10)

Figure 8. Number of conference participants reporting action step commitments in any of five thematic categories (36 respondents).

Action Plans by Partnership

In addition to each respondent indicating what type of action step he/she committed to on an individual level, partnership teams created action plans and took collective responsibility for implementing certain action items. In general, the action plans contained information about conceptual learning outcomes to be applied at the school site (e.g., parents listen to other parents), listed current challenges, identified specific program areas that need revision, and documented ideas for the development of new programs and infrastructures. The majority of the action steps were related to creating a parent curriculum or training program, developing a specialized parent involvement committee, planning regular meetings to address parent engagement, establishing a parent network, and transforming parent centers from social spaces into academic, college-preparatory centers.

The actual action steps developed by partnership teams are listed in the appendix. All action plans are presented as written by the team during the conference (see Appendices A-F).

Frequency

Other

Developing Parent Leadership Programs _Improving/

developing Parent Centers Regular School Staf f Meetings

Other

Administrators Counselors Student Groups College Preparatory Programs Frequency 0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 Frequency

Create New Parent Programs Other Contact Parents/Build Parent Network Plan a Family Day at IHE Adapt Existing Parent Programs

(11)

0

Suggestions for Future Conferences

About half (54 %, N=27) of the respondents provided feedback regarding topics and suggested improvements for future conferences. However, there was such wide range of responses that only one significant category (consisting of more than two responses) emerged. Eleven participants provided responses in this category which was to follow up with and continue the parent engagement theme. Only 42% (N=21) of respondents made suggestions about how to improve future conferences. Similar to the feedback on future topics, there was a wide range of suggestions for future improvements. The only salient category, which consisted of more than two responses, was that the event was great as it was. Examples of the remaining responses which were coded as “other” include providing separate break out rooms for small group discussions, involving students, and inviting potential funders.

Next Steps for BEST Collaboration in LA County

The purpose of the BEST Collaboration in LA County initiative is to develop a regional partnership of

district-IHE partnerships focused on improving educational opportunity, academic performance, and college going for

all students throughout the county. The fourth in a series of conferences sponsored by the BEST Collaboration

in LA County initiative, the April 26th event was well-received by participants and 84% of respondents indicated that they would be interested in attending future conferences. The evaluation makes it clear that participants learned from the conference, met colleagues with whom they will continue contact, and developed action plans that look feasible, related to conference content, and worthwhile. Next steps for this initiative include a continued effort to solidify the regional network and moving forward with the planning of the next conference to be held in fall 2007.

Solidifying the Regional Network

An important effort for this initiative is to solidify membership in the regional network. The BEST

Collaboration in LA County initiative seeks to provide a meaningful forum for LA County educators to share practical strategies, collectively problem-solve common challenges, and develop action plans for improving upon existing partnership work. For this reason, it is desirable to have a certain level of continuity in network participation. All seven partnerships who attended the November 2006 event were invited to participate in the April 26th conference and five teams did so. For this reason, retention will be a central concern in planning the fall 2007 conference and the steering committee will revisit the recruitment strategy so as to maximize event attendance by all members of the network. Another important consideration for the steering committee will be

(12)

how to encourage the continuation of conference-inspired work and the implementation of action plans between events. One possibility to be explored includes maintaining continuity in the meeting theme across conferences.

Providing Meaningful Resources and Activities

Providing resources and sponsoring relevant learning opportunities for LA County educators are central

objectives of the BEST Collaboration in LA County initiative. Thus far, the initiative has hosted four

conferences and has released six reports documenting the work of these events. All publications are available to

download online at http://apep-bestla.gseis.ucla.edu/. The BEST Collaboration in LA County initiative intends

to continue this line of work and is currently in the process of planning a fifth conference to be held in fall 2007. The sponsors and topic for this event are still being determined. A likely focus for the upcoming conference will be a continuation of the parental involvement theme with an emphasis on the development of effective parent centers.

(13)

12

Appendix A

Antelope Valley Union High School District, Antelope Valley College, California State University, Bakersfield, and University of California, Los Angeles

• For increased buy-in with participating parents, invite parents who have previously been helped and feel the program has been successful.

• Select one focus event that has been successful and unite/partner to provide information.

• Target ninth grade students for focused collaborative approach.

• Time frame- see quarter grade in October.

• Success would be defined as ______________________.

• Provide education workshops to parents.

• Provide incentive (tickets, etc.) to increase participation.

• Target population = 700 students (freshman population).

• Make student event fun, social, with food, and educational with parent workshop.

• Promote activity by (marketing and branding).

• Start with 8th grade to start building interest and developing college going culture.

• Determine other incentives to attract families and students.

• Keep in mind families have serious time constraints!

(14)

Appendix B

Burbank Unified School District and University of Southern California

• Various vehicles of communication to parents regarding college information.

• Support for students (college prep.) who do not get into college of choice and those who fail a college

prep class in high school.

• More ways to get students to know what their four year plan is.

• Research the concept of “peer advisor”.

• Parent Welcome Center: provide college information.

• Teach students how to write resumes, brag letter, college applications (9th grade health and careers).

• Refine and expand preliminary steps: College Culture.

• Train people and call colleges regarding financial aid.

• More students need to be connected with career center.

(15)

Appendix C

Long Beach Unified School District, California State University, Long Beach, and Long Beach City College

1. Create menu of activities with schedule

• Action item: College Bound activities on campus/in the community.

• Create/Action item: Family Days at LBCC, CSULB.

• To do: High school staff must know what CSULB offers/requirements.

• Create/Schedule: High school-College specific family day, childcare that is also college prep, food, transportation.

• Start with a cohort of families; communicate success and recruitment of other families.

2. Parent Leadership Program

• Action item: develop curriculum for parents.

§ “What they need to know”

§ History of education

§ A-G requirements

§ Planning for post-secondary

§ Navigating High School

§ Look at College Bound program structure/curriculum

3. Look at College Bound program structure/curriculum

• Action item: Create a College Bound structure at all high schools with ongoing scaffolding, unfolding curriculum that will result in parents knowing their role and having the parenting courage to play it.

§ Scaffolding and unfolding curriculum that meets the needs of a diversity of parent-learners.

§ Work with a small group of families.

§ Survey CSULB parents on how their student made it through high school and to CSULB.

§ CSULB needs to talk directly to the parents.

4. Develop a vision of parent involvement

• This group is developing a vision of parent involvement that is consistent across all high schools

but relevant to diverse parents. Diversity means, in this case, a variety of education histories and experiences. Program begins with the development of curriculum-what parents should know and be able to do to assist child/student with preparation for college. Parent leadership program to develop an ongoing sustainable program. CLMER curriculum. Look at existing CSULB compendium of successful outreach programs to identify best practices.

• Action item: reach parents, teachers, administrators in middle and elementary schools regarding “What is A-G and how does early preparation assist with going to college”.

• Action item: Courses taught on CSULB campuses for Renaissance students (check with college of the arts).

• Goal: All PreK-20 parents (or guardian) in the greater Long Beach Community will effectively navigate

A-G, the high school experience, and post-secondary opportunities with their student(s).

(16)

Appendix D

Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) Action Steps to Increase Outreach:

• Analysis of what districts have in place and what LACOE has in place.

• Cross-divisional group to identify what Parent Involvement (PI) services we offer. Need to develop

catalogue of services.

• Reinforce the customer service values.

• Partnering with the community *content specialists.

• Develop a common mission among units for PI.

• Agency wide-develop talking points regarding PI (our beliefs).

• Compile information regarding research in the PI field.

• Parent Involvement, Open House.

• Conduct internal quarterly meetings to gather research.

Response:

• Nacho: begin meeting process by June 30.

• Notice to go out to units requesting information by May 30.

Progress:

• Team is here…we are starting.

Outcomes PI PLC:

• I.D. LACOE units doing PI and are involved.

• Develop mission and vision (LACOE PI).

• Develop short-term goals and long-term goals.

(17)

Appendix E

Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7, and University of California, Los Angeles What We Learned:

• Parents need to be welcomed.

• Offer child care for parents/family meetings.

• Building the parent center (transforming it from a social center to a resource center).

• Parents being involved in school leadership.

• We need to get the parents college minded to get the kids college ready.

• Parent-teacher time is often punitive.

• Parent outreach efforts have to be more cohesive (maximizing resources).

• We need to continue to network with other schools to find out what works/does not work.

• Teachers replicating lessons for parents.

• Articulation between middle school and high school students to get them ready for high school.

• Establish enduring principles for college readiness programs and parent centers.

What are our challenges?

• Sustainability of parents.

• Translation (language barriers).

• Getting the parents to focus on the primary goal: academics.

• Parents are not familiar with the campus (they need a tour of the school).

What Else We Learned:

• We need to redefine the role of the parent center to be more of a resource center focused on academics.

• We need to utilize the parent newsletter for outreach efforts.

• Reaching out to the community organizations/churches.

• Implementing the UCLA program that existed before to train the parents.

• The way we work must be authentic and meaningful.

• Parents should outreach to other parents.

• Parents as partners (include parents in the classroom instruction).

• Ongoing conversations.

Action Plan:

• Create an internal structure for parental involvement.

• Monthly meetings.

• Establish guiding principles.

• Focusing on parent centers to be more cohesive around a vision.

(18)

Appendix F

Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7, and University of Southern California Action Steps For Support For College Going Culture

Idea: Networking with parents from other T1 schools to share concerns and resources. Information mechanism (where parents are).

• School site council

• Parent Center

• CEAC

• ELAC

• DAC (central level)

• Community Coalition

Action Step:

• Research available resources for college-going students.

• Utilize existing rosters of parents to disseminate the information in a timely manner.

• Communicate with other schools through “College Pathways” Newsletter (Spanish and English), send

by email or school mail.

Who?

• Create a formalized College/Career Student, Parent, Community Think Tank.

§ APSCS

§ AP. RLA

§ College Advisor, Career Advisor

§ Parent Community Rep

§ Student Representative(s)

§ Parent Liaison (between H.S. and college)

§ Teachers

§ Partner Reps

1. Identify concerns locally regarding college access (data gathered from W.A.S.C. process). 2. Develop protocols and processes for the “College Pathways” Newsletter.

(19)

Acknowledgments

The “Engaging Parents as Partners in Creating College Going Cultures” conference would not have been possible without the contributions of many people including the participants, parent presenters, and the steering committee. A team from UCLA’s Graduate School of Education and Information Studies and Center X and a team from the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) played key leadership roles in planning and implementing the event. Instrumental support was also provided by other members of the steering committee, including Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7 Superintendent Carol Truscott, Los Angeles Unified School District, Local District 7 Small Learning Community Coordinator Lynn Snyder, USC Rossier School of Education Dean Karen Simms Gallagher, USC Rossier School of Education Director of Masters Programs and Research Associate, Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis Kristan Venegas, LACOE parent specialist Ignacio Robles, UCLA Center X parent expert Laila Hasan, and USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative Director Kim Thomas Barrios. A team of volunteers from UCLA’s Center X provided essential

administrative support at the conference. Special thanks to all partnership teams who provided posters and to the parent panelists, Mary Johnson, Donna Robertson, and Guadalupe Torres, for delivering excellent presentations. In addition, we would like to recognize Dr. Patricia McDonough for moderating the panel. Thank you also to Matt Keleman from the Irvine Foundation for attending the conference and providing important information about funding opportunities for parent programs. We would also like to acknowledge ARCHES for sharing information about their upcoming June 2007 conference on Building Parent Involvement. Financial and in-kind support for the conference was provided by LACOE and UCLA.

(20)

(21)

0