![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
The study examines the combined effects of key elements in parental leadership on academic performance. In the wake of inadequate learning resources, parental leadership becomes an indispensable learning input for children’s academic performance. The discourse utilized data collected from 2005 to 2010 in a longitudinal study involving 1,549 children who sat for the national standardized examination in Kenya. Our findings showed that monitoring and aspirations are essential elements of parental leadership and have direct and positive effect on children’s learning achievement. The effects were stronger among children from urban informal settlements compared with those from urban formal settlements. The effect of parental aspiration on children’s performance was mediated through parental support and monitoring in informal settlements. The study provides evidence on the extent to which parental leadership enhances academic performance. This is useful to parents, teachers, and policy makers in their efforts to secure effective mechanisms for improving learning outcomes.
Introduction
Parental leadership is the influence process whereby parents interact with their children in a context of home and school environments toward achievement of the desired academic goals. There is limited use of parental leadership concept in the context of children’s academic performance. The concept is commonly used in development practice. For example, Parent Leadership Training Institute (PLTI; 2005) in Connecticut defines parental leadership as “the capacity to interact within civic society with purpose and positive outcomes for children” (p. 7). Although the concept is captured in this PLTI definition, it focuses narrowly on parental involvement in civic society for children’s education and other matters of community well-being. In this article, we conceptualize parental leadership as the intentional intermingling effect of parental support, involvement, aspiration, and monitoring of their children for higher academic performance. Our definition is drawn from separate academic discussions on parental support, involvement, aspiration, and monitoring. Parental leadership as a functional behavior has not been subjected to rigorous empirical inquiry compared with some of the elements that constitute it. Independently, parental support, monitoring, aspirations, and involvement are exclusively addressed in many works but seldom in combination. This approach invariably fragments parental leadership functions, losing the total sum effect of parental influence in academic performance at a glance. Research focus on relationship between parents’ and pupils’ academic performance underscores how and to what degree the family actively creates an enabling environment for effective learning. The impact of the combination of parental leadership elements is still unclear.
Students’ academic performance has always been a vital area of interest to every community, parents, educators, governments, and development practitioners (Hattie, 2009). This single interest has generated a number of studies on determinants of student performance. Much as some of the efforts have generated useful evidence on academic performance, there still remains a lot to be understood on what drives academic performance. Recently, parental leadership has been identified as a critical factor in the discussion on students’ performance in different geographical regions (Hattie, 2009; Hong & Ho, 2005; Rosenzweig, 2000). Particularly, parental leadership roles in students’ academic performance have become an important component of the learning process. Students’ academic performance is significantly influenced by parents’ education aspiration for their children, parental support, and monitoring (Bolivar & Chrispeels, 2011; Hattie, 2009; Hong & Ho, 2005; Stewart, 2008).
The concept of parental leadership in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) education systems is new, and little is known about how it affects student performance. More importantly, the education systems in SSA, Kenya included, have not specifically addressed the role of parental leadership in academic performance. There are very few studies, mainly in Western countries that explore the linkage between parental leadership and academic performance. Currently, there is no study in Africa on parental leadership and academic performance in spite of the role parents play in education and schooling. The few studies conducted in the developed countries focused on the effects of parental monitoring, support, or aspiration separately (see, for example, Epstein & Sheldon, 2002; Israel, Beaulieu, & Hartless, 2001; Sheldon & Epstein, 2005). Although, these elements studied separately reflect the effects of individual components of parental leadership on academic performance, they do not estimate their combined effect. Furthermore, reviewed studies have mainly relied on descriptive and correlational methods which do not allow them to disentangle the direct and indirect effect of parental leadership on academic performance. In this study, we used structural equation modeling to demonstrate the mediating relationships among the elements of parental leadership through a path analysis. It also helps to incorporate measured and latent constructs, and explicitly specifies measurement errors.
Parental leadership impinges on the success of the education system to improve students’ academic performance. Inevitably, understanding the relationship between student academic performance and parental leadership cannot be over emphasized. Knowledge of specific elements of parental leadership such as monitoring and support, and how they work together to influence students’ performance, will help educators to engage parents in the learning process. Regardless of the social and economic status of a household, parents need to know and appreciate the influence they have on their children’s success in education. The purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which parental leadership influences student academic performance in formal and informal urban contexts. The article further aims to decompose the effects of parental leadership into direct, indirect, and total effects. Therefore, the central questions to be addressed in this article are how and to what extent does parental leadership matter in academic performance?
The Context
Free primary education (FPE) was introduced by the Government of Kenya in 2003 with the aim of improving access to basic education. This program succeeded in increasing enrollment in public primary schools by more than one million children; nevertheless, the program was not without challenges (Government of Kenya, 2005; Ngware, Oketch, Ezeh, Mutisya, & Epari, 2012). Challenges associated with the delivery of the FPE program included overcrowding of pupils inside the classrooms and a decline in the teaching and learning quality. Different communities responded in various ways to the challenges and opportunities of the FPE. In the urban communities, there were formal and informal settlements. The informal settlements included Viwandani and Korogocho in Nairobi city. These are known as “urban slums” characterized by inadequate supply of social amenities such as piped water, sewerage systems, proper housing, and electricity. The settlements are largely as a result of rural–urban migration over the last four decades. Viwandani is located within the industrial area on the southern part of Nairobi whereas Korogocho is in Nairobi’s Eastlands.
The formal settlements included Harambee and Jericho estates also in the Eastlands area of Nairobi. They are low to medium income settlements and were established in the pre-independence period as predominantly African settlements. When compared with Viwandani and Korogocho, they have relatively better residential structures and provision of public services, including accessible roads, drainage, and sewerage systems. The communities from formal and informal urban settlements responded differently to FPE with regard to parental leadership, and its role in academic performance will be discussed in this article.
Literature
Policy engagement has established that providing guidance and counseling in elementary schools in Kenya is necessary in helping students deal with challenges that affect their academic performance. Contrarily, parental leadership has far-reaching consequences in academic performance than often envisaged. It is a critical element that deserves the full attention of policy makers. Prevailing literature indicate that there is direct correlation between parental leadership practices and academic performance. Some researchers have noted that parent-initiated involvement in school activities has significant impact on academic performance (e.g., Becker & Epstein, 1982; Ingram, Wolf, & Lieberman, 2007; Rumberger & Palardy, 2005; Stevenson & Baker, 1987). Evidently, this implies that academic performance goes beyond cognitive skills required for a successful learning achievement (Meyer, 1980).
Parental monitoring is a multidimensional construct that ranges from selecting schools for children to reading with children, attending parent–teacher’s conferences, and supervision of homework. It is consistently associated with higher grades, fewer absences, and higher school graduation rates (Davis, 2000). Clark noted that monitoring children’s after-school activities such as homework, sports, and peer interactions are important in achieving educational goals. Therefore, parents who monitor their children’s behavior after school are more likely to have high achieving children than parents who do not monitor their children’s after-school activities (Clark, 1993). Monitoring is an important determinant of academic performance among adolescents (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002; Israel et al., 2001; Sheldon & Epstein, 2005). Monitoring children’s educational life is a crucial component of influencing them toward specific choices in life. It is exemplified in participation of parents in different areas in a child’s life and specifically their academic performance. Sometimes the socioeconomic status (SES) and educational status of a parent may determine the level of monitoring they provide and the subsequent impact on child progress (Featherman & Hauser, 1976; Marjoribanks, 1979). Parental monitoring, a function of leadership, influences two social contexts of home and school as relationship with teachers is enhanced and accountability for a common goal is achieved at home. However, parental monitoring is closely linked to parental involvement. For instance, LeFevre and Shaw (2012) posited the activities of parental monitoring described so far as essential part of formal and informal parental involvement. They describe formal parental involvement to include actions such as being physically present in school and making inquiries about child’s progress and what is happening at school. Informal parental involvement takes place at home and includes psychosocial and academic support.
The aspiration of parents serves as a major motivation in parental leadership. Aspiration, which is a mental image of the future, invokes a desire in parents for their children’s success in academic performance. The operation of explicit aspiration in parental leadership underscores goals, objectives, and values that children imbibe. Researchers have identified how aspiration influences children’s school attendance and learning goals (Astone & McLanahan, 1991; Crandall, Dewey, Katkovsky, & Preston, 1964; Keeves, 1972; Pugh, 1976).
Evidently, parental support serves as a major motivation in parental leadership and undergirds parental monitoring, involvement, and aspiration. It involves emotional support that parents provide for their children over a period of time (Barnes & Farrell, 1992). It is a behavior that fosters self-confidence in a child, developing the propensity for higher achievement. Parental support provide insights into parental monitoring, allowing children to succeed academically (Rath et al., 2008). The process of praising, encouraging, and giving physical affection as forms of parental support not only improves academic performance but also demonstrates the level of acceptance children enjoy from their parents (Barnes & Farrell, 1992; Green, 2007). If parental leadership holds such promise to the influence of a child’s academic performance, why is there limited multivariate investigation into the confluence effect of this engagement? The reviewed literature ascertains that each variable has certain measure of impact on a child’s academic performance, and therefore, parental leadership, which is the combination of these elements, presents a unique resultant effect.
This study establishes that elements of parental leadership do not work in isolation, rather they are interdependent and influence academic performance in elementary schools in Kenya. The study fills an important gap in the discourse on parental leadership and academic performance in Kenya and contributes to the global debate on parental role in children’s learning.
Data and Method
Data for this study were extracted from a household-based prospective education survey conducted from 2005 to 2010 by African Population and Health Research Center (APHRC) in two informal and two formal settlements in Nairobi City. The data on Kenyan Certificate of Primary Examination (KCPE) scores, the outcome variable, were obtained from the Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC) assessment records. In the two informal settlements (Korogocho and Viwandani), the education survey was nested within the Nairobi Urban Health and Demographic Surveillance System (NUHDSS), an Urban Demographic Surveillance System (DSS). For comparison purpose, the education survey was also conducted in the two formal settlements (Jericho and Harambee). The two informal settlements are characterized by poor housing conditions, lack of basic infrastructure such as roads and sanitation, and residents of low SES compared with the two formal settlements. The survey, which was administered in Kiswahili language, covered all children aged 5 to 19 years in 2005, who were followed-up over the study period. New children who entered the study sites in subsequent years were also included.
The analysis includes a sample of 1,549 primary school students (779 girls and 770 boys) who sat for KCPE examinations between 2005 and 2010 within the study sites. Data on key independent variables (parental support, monitoring, and aspiration) as well as individual and household background characteristics come from the household survey. The data from the household survey were merged with the KCPE scores of the sample students using unique KCPE ID assigned to each of the students when they sat for the exam.
Measurement
The dependent variable is an aggregate of KCPE scores on five subjects (English, Kiswahili, mathematics, science, and social studies), each subject marked out of 100 and the total score of each student is out of 500. The score ranges from 82 to 442 with the mean of 240.5 and standard deviation 68.3. The mean score was below the expected pass mark of 250; the KCPE is a summative evaluation administered to the students at the end of the primary school cycle. It assesses student’s ability to demonstrate learning at the various cognitive levels. The independent variables were generated through household survey instruments designed to collect schooling data, parent/guardian information, and household and individual members’ background characteristics. Data on schooling include school enrollment status at the time of the survey, type of school, and level of grade attended. These data were updated in subsequent years or survey rounds to establish changes in school enrollment, grade progression/repetition, and school dropouts.
Indicators of parent/guardian monitoring and support were collected through a battery of questions. Parental monitoring was measured by a five-item scale, “How much do you know about: where the child spend weekends, after school, where a child spends free time, what TV program the child watches, and who the friends are?” Each question was measured on a 3-point scale (1 = always, 2 = sometimes, 3 = never); the Cronbach’s alpha reliability measure (α = .76) indicates that the measurements are internally consistent. A scale with α = .70 or more are considered reliable (Nunnaly, 1978). Parental support was measured with four questions “Would you say you are doing enough to: help the child do homework, not skip school, stay in school and finishing secondary school, and avoid or abstain pre-marital sex?” measured by a 3-point scale (1 = more than enough, 2 = just enough, 3 = not enough). The Cronbach’s alpha is very high (α = .94)—implies that the measurements were adequately reliable. In addition, parents’/guardians’ aspiration for the child education was also measured by a question “What is the highest level of education you would want the child to complete?” In addition, parents were asked about their aspirations for the child’s highest level of education.
Data on household and individual members’ background characteristics include household asset ownerships, sex of household head, level of education, and child’s age and sex. Household wealth index was computed using principal components analysis based on basic durable assets owned by a household. The durable assets include sofa set, telephone, a radio, refrigerator, bicycle, motorcycle, water source, toilet facilities, construction materials of the house (roof, floor, and walls), fuel for lighting, and cooking.
Statistical Analysis
For descriptive analysis, t tests were carried out to explore whether there are differences in mean KCPE scores and mean ages by study sites—formal and informal settlements. Chi-square tests were used to examine bivariate associations between the study sites and categorical independent variables (sex of child, levels of parental aspiration). Pearson’s correlation analysis was carried out for each sample population separately to explore the relationship between parental leadership measures (parental support, monitoring, and aspiration) and KCPE scores (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2013).
For the multivariate analysis, we estimated a structural equation model (SEM) to examine direct, indirect, and total effects of explanatory variables on learning outcomes measured by KCPE score. In addition to enabling us to estimate direct and indirect effects, SEM allows for the inclusion of latent variables, such as the concepts of parental monitoring and support that were computed based on multiple indicator measurements and justified by confirmatory factor analysis incorporated in SEM. The SEM also explicitly models measurement error and covariance between independent variables. These two features help to minimize the biases in estimated coefficients that could result from a failure to specify disturbances and presence of correlation between independent variables (Marsden & Wright, 2010). The SEM conceptual model is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1, and results of direct, indirect, and total effects are presented in the appendix.
Results
Descriptive Results
Table 1 provides the means, proportions, and t tests or chi-square tests for continuous and categorical variables to test differences between the two study populations. Significant differences were found between the two populations on most variables. The mean KCPE score is significantly higher in the formal settlements (292.9) than in the informal settlements (227.2). The result also shows that levels of parental monitoring and aspiration for children’s education are significantly higher in the former than the latter. In the informal settlements, only 31% of the household heads reported to have at least some secondary education, while 82% of the household heads in the formal settlements had secondary or more education.
|
Table 1. Mean/Proportions of Study Variables by Study Sites.
As shown in Table 2, the Pearson’s correlation statistics show significant correlation between parental monitoring score and KCPE score for both subsamples, though the magnitudes are small. Parental aspiration is significantly correlated with KCPE score for the informal settlement sample. However, the result indicates no significant correlation between parental support score and KCPE score.
|
Table 2. Correlation Between Key Parental Variables and KCPE Score.
Results from SEM Analysis
We hypothesized the SEM presented in Figure 1. In the figure, rectangles show the observed variables, ovals show latent factors, whereas circles show error terms for each of the measured or latent variables for easy distinction. Using STATA version 12, we carried out a SEM analysis based on data from 1,549 children who had completed their end of primary exams between 2005 and 2010.
In Figure 1, boxes represent measured variables. We chose maximum likelihood parameter estimation over other estimation methods as the KCPE score is fairly normally distributed (see Figure 2). The hypothesized model was a good fit to the data. Standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) is 0.035, the values range from 0 to 1 with a smaller value indicating better model fit. Acceptable model fit is indicated by a value of 0.06 or less (Hu & Bentler, 1999; Kline, 2005); and the coefficient of determination (CD) is 0.255 (the closer it is to 1, the better the fit; Hu & Bentler, 1999). Post hoc modifications were not necessary as the model was a good fit of the data.
Direct Effects
From the appendix, for the overall sample, that is, when children from both informal and formal settlements are combined, parental monitoring and parental aspiration were significantly related to student academic performance—standardized coefficients of 0.07 and 0.13, respectively. However, after disaggregating the data into informal and formal settlement sites, the relationship between these two components of parental leadership and student academic performance only hold for children from informal settlements.
Indirect Effects
In our model, we hypothesized that the influence of parental aspiration was mediated through the other two components of parental leadership (support and monitoring). The results (standardized indirect coefficient is 0.01, p < .05, both for the overall data and informal settlements data) were statistically significant. Our model also hypothesized that observed variables (such as child age and sex, household head education, and wealth index) had a relationship with student academic performance that was mediated by parental leadership, especially parental support and monitoring. Results show that in informal settlements, school type (government or nongovernment) and child sex each had an indirect standardized effect on academic performance of −0.01. This negative effect, though small, was statistically significant, p < .001. These observed variables did not have a statistically significant indirect effect on learning achievement among children in formal settlements. These same observed variables had a statistically significant standardized indirect effect on learning in the overall data meaning that this effect was being driven by the presence of children from the informal settlements.
Total Effects
Our results show that among the components used to indicate parental leadership, parental support had no statistically significant standardized total effects in all data sets considered. It is the parental monitoring and parental aspiration that have statistically significant total effects on academic performance, and this only applies for children in informal settlements. In the informal settlements, results show standardized total effects of 0.07, p < .05, and 0.15, p < .001, for parental monitoring and parental aspirations, respectively. Our results do not show any statistically significant total effect of parental leadership components on academic performance among children in formal settlements.
Discussion
This study established that monitoring and parental aspirations were directly related to students’ academic performance, and this was more evident in urban informal settlements. Parental aspiration was mediated through parental support and monitoring, hence demonstrating the symbiotic relationship among the elements of parental leadership. Overall, it was the parental monitoring and aspiration that had the greatest total effect on academic performance of children in informal settlements.
Our analytical approach included four aspects of parental leadership—aspiration, monitoring, support, and involvement. Although they are all important, as shown by literature (Becker & Epstein, 1982; Ingram et al., 2007; LeFevre & Shaw, 2012; Stevenson & Baker, 1987), we find monitoring and aspiration to be more critical elements in parental leadership. However, in informal settlements, parental monitoring and aspiration emerge as significant impetus for academic performance. In the formal settlement, no element of parental leadership had direct significant influence on academic performance, perhaps because of the small sample size involved, n = 314.
The effect of parental leadership in formal settlements may have been obscured by availability of other resources that influence academic performance, such as household access to learning materials and facilities (Hattie, 2009). Through family activities and exposure, children from formal settlements gain insight to professional disciplines in society. This creates a mental image for the future profession that generates motivation for learning. In the case of the informal settlement, the significant direct effect of parental monitoring could be explained by the inadequate household resources for education. In the absence of adequate education resources, parental leadership becomes a critical input in children’s education as it provides motivation for academic performance. Parents’ aspiration for their children’s education directly motivates children to perform well in school, which is a necessity for upward social mobility. High aspiration posits a positive future image which in turn inspires children to strive for high academic achievement.
The indirect effect of aspiration was mediated through parental support and monitoring. Our discussion focuses on the significant effects observed in the informal settlements. Parental aspiration is an underlying factor for support and monitoring. Parents who have high aspiration are more likely to provide the necessary support for school homework and attendance. They are also likely to promote an environment that encourages abstinence from early sex and drug, and substance use that are associated with low academic performance (Clark, 1993).
Aspiration motivates parents to strive to monitor children’s after-school activities, how they spend their weekends and free time, frequency of TV watch, and relationships with their peers. By so doing, they ensure that the children have more learning opportunities at home. This is how they create a comparable learning environment in the absence of adequate learning materials and facilities at home.
The literature shows that parental monitoring is consistently associated with higher grades (Davis, 2000). Our finding confirms that this holds among children from poor urban population. According to Clark (1993), monitoring includes parental oversight of after-school academic activities and ensures that they are consistent with in-school learning objectives. Our study is consistent with Clark’s explanation in that it measured parental monitoring through after-school academic support provided to the children, supervision of how well they utilize their free time, and with whom they associate. A qualitative study carried out in the same context vividly captures the challenges associated with parental leadership in the context of informal settlement in Kenya. For example, a village elder reiterated,
Most parents leave early in the morning to look for food for the children to eat, so they are unable to monitor if the child went to school and arrived on time or didn’t go at the right time. Does the child attend school regularly or not? There are parents who leave home at 5am in the morning and come back at 8pm or 9pm. This parent is unable to check the child’s school books or homework, so monitoring is very poor especially with the girl child, and even boys. (Abuya et al., 2013, p. 86)
According to Featherman and Hauser (1976) and Marjoribanks (1979), SES and education status of a parent influence monitoring which in turn affects children’s academic performance. This means that socioeconomic and education backgrounds of parents influence the level of monitoring. In our study we controlled for socioeconomic and education background of parents and found that monitoring has a net effect on academic performance independent of SES and educational status of parents. Contrary to available literature, parents do not need to have higher education or belong to high social economic groups for them to provide effective monitoring. However, the living conditions may not always provide conducive environment to reinforce parental leadership. In our context, for example, families that live in one-roomed house may experience difficulties in providing effective parental leadership due to early exposure of their children to adult sexual behaviors. A village elder in an informal settlement lamented,
Many children start being involved with men at an early age. Mothers come to live in the slum with their children in a small house. The house measures ten feet by ten feet, the child is aged seventeen, and the mother comes home with her male friend. The children sleep on the floor whilst the mother is on the bed with her friend. Don’t you think this exposes the child to such behavior yet she is only aged sixteen or seventeen? (Abuya et al., 2013, p. 89)
According to Hong and Ho (2005), parent aspiration for their children’s education attainment has the most influence compared with parental monitoring. Hong and Ho argue that the “high the hope and expectations of parents with respect to their children’s education attainment, the higher the learning achievement” (Hattie, 2009, p. 69). This is mediated through enhanced children’s educational expectations (Hattie, 2009). The positive effect of parental aspiration is confirmed in this study, particularly for children living in the informal settlements. However, in our study, we find that the effect of aspiration on learning achievement is higher among children from low SES; this is contrary to literature from the West, for example, United States, that shows higher effects of parental aspirations on academic performance among children from high SES families.
In our study, parents differ with respect to their educational aspirations for their children (see Table 1). The results of Astone and McLanahan (1991) study in the United States are consistent with ours, although the contexts are different. Parents from formal settlements had higher aspirations for their children than those from informal settlements. However, it is the children from informal settlements that benefit most from their parents’ aspirations. Perhaps in formal settlements, parental aspirations may have influence on other outcomes apart from academic performance.
As much as parental aspiration and monitoring are important in children’s academic performance, Harris and Goodall (2007) delineated that parental aspiration has a stronger impact on learning outcomes than monitoring. Our findings in the informal urban settlements are consistent with this finding and indicated that the direct effect of aspiration is double that of monitoring.
The findings are relevant to education policy in that majority of the target children in this study come from low resource environments and would therefore benefit more from parental aspirations and monitoring. These aspects of parental leadership should be nurtured through official fora such as parent teachers associations to improve learning outcomes (Garcia-Reid, Reid, & Peterson, 2005). The findings will enlighten policy makers to broaden the guidance and counseling programs to incorporate parents. This will circumvent some social and economic challenges, such as parental absenteeism at home, and other distractive behaviors that inhibit the provision of parental leadership. It will also enlighten parents from formal settlements that parental leadership coupled with enabling learning environment can have far-reaching benefits on children’s academic performance. Even in households where parental leadership is observed such as in formal settlements, parents must endeavor to consistently monitor and sustain high aspirations for their children’s academic performance.
This study provides very useful findings on the role of parental leadership in academic performance. However, the sample is drawn from two informal settlements and two formal settlements in Nairobi and, therefore, cannot claim to be representative of Kenya. Considering the diversity of regions and the population groups in Kenya, this study is limited in its generalizability, in that support from parental leadership toward children’s academic performance tends to vary from region to region. Despite this caveat, the findings are relevant to global debate on parental leadership. Parents anywhere in the world are viewed as the immediate role models of their children and this has implications, specifically in their children’s academic performance. The Kenya situation may not be completely different from other parts of SSA where these results may be applicable. Specifically, many households in SSA find themselves in low-resourced environments and therefore are not able to provide adequate learning materials for their children. Parental leadership therefore bridges the gap of inadequate learning materials by providing aspiration, support, monitoring, and involvement in school activities.
Several areas of future research emerge from this study: (a) the concurrence between parents’ and children’s aspirations for educational attainment. A study in this area would provide evidence on effective ways in which parents can harmonize their aspirations with that of their children to enhance learning outcomes. (b) Relationship between teacher monitoring and aspiration, and parental leadership with regard to children’s academic performance. Study in these areas will provide a framework on how the teamwork of teachers and parents can affect children’s performance and the possible mediating factors. (c) Finally, teacher motivation and expectations, and how it affects children’s performance in low-resourced contexts. Research in this area will provide evidence on the role of teacher motivation for children’s academic performance in different parental leadership contexts.
Conclusion
The current study examined the role of parental leadership in academic performance. Our working definition of parental leadership included monitoring, support, and involvement. In our computation of the latent variable (parental leadership), we found that in monitoring and support, there exists aspect of parental involvement. However, we realized the significant role aspiration plays in parental leadership.
From the literature, the effects of the aspects of parental leadership and aspiration are examined separately. In this article, we examine the confluence of all these aspects of parental leadership including aspiration. By so doing, the article assesses the net effect of these aspects on academic performance.
This study considers parental leadership as a necessary contributor to children’s academic performance. The components of parental leadership such as monitoring and aspiration were found to have direct effects on academic performance. Moreover, aspiration was mediated through parental support and monitoring.
The influence of parental leadership was more prominent in informal settlements than in formal settlements. Evidently, low income populations which characterized the informal settlements utilized parental leadership in the absence of adequate learning materials and facilities, which are available in the formal settlements. Children from formal settlement may perform much better than they are currently doing if they could combine parental leadership with adequate learning materials and facilities.
The results have implications for school communities and households with school going children in informal settlements. School authorities can emphasize the important role parental leadership plays in improving academic performance. This can be done through parent–teacher forums to enhance parental support, monitoring, and aspiration for their children’s education. Similarly, policy makers will have a good course to enact policies that enhance parental leadership by taking special interest in training and equipping parents to lead.
|
Appendix SEM Results for Parental Leadership.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the important contribution of APHRC staff who participated at various stages of the development of this article including data collection and processing, and giving valuable comments during the internal review process. They are also grateful to their partners including the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in Kenya, and the County Government of Nairobi, Department of Education, for providing useful information and study authorization. Last but not least, they are very grateful to the school principals, teachers, learners, and household heads who participated in this study.
Authors’ Note
The views presented in this article are only those of the authors and not necessarily shared by those mentioned.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Funding for this study was provided by The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation through grant numbers 2008-2098, 2011-6393, and 2013-8421.
References
|
Abuya, B., Ngware, M., Hungi, N., Mutisya, M., Nyariro, M., Mahuro, G., Oketch, M. (2013). Improving learning outcomes and transition to secondary school through community participation and after school support among disadvantaged girls: A pilot study in informal settlements. Nairobi, Kenya: APHRC. Google Scholar | |
|
Astone, N. M., McLanahan, S. S. (1991). Family structure, parental practices, and high school completion. American Sociological Review, 56, 309-320. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Barnes, G. M., Farrell, M. P. (1992). Parental support and control as predictors of adolescent drinking, delinquency, and related problem behaviors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 54, 763-776. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Becker, H. J., Epstein, J. L. (1982). Parental involvement: A study of teacher practices. Elementary School Journal, 83, 85-102. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Bolivar, J. M., Chrispeels, H. J. (2011). Enhancing parent leadership through building social and intellectual capital. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 4-38. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Clark, R. M. (1993). Homework-focused parenting practices that positively affect student achievement. In Chavkin, N. F. (Eds.), Families and schools in pluralistic society (pp. 85-105). Albany: State University of New York. Google Scholar | |
|
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for behavioral sciences. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Crandall, V., Dewey, R., Katkovsky, W., Preston, A. (1964). Parents attitudes and behavioral and grade school children’s academic achievement. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 104, 53-66. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Davis, D. (2000). Supporting parent, family, and community involvement in your school. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrived from http://www.pacer.org/mpc/pdf/titleipip/SupportingInvolvement_article.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Epstein, J. L., Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance through family and community involvement. Journal of Educational Research, 95, 308-318. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Featherman, D. L., Hauser, R. M. (1976). Equality of schooling: Trends and prospects. Sociology of Education, 49, 99-120. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Garcia-Reid, P., Reid, R. J., Peterson, N. A. (2005). School engagement among Latino youth in an urban middle school context: Valuing the role of social support. Education and Urban Society, 37, 257-275. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Government of Kenya . (2005). Kenya education sector support programme 2005-2010. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Education Science and Technology. Google Scholar | |
|
Green, C. L. (2007). Why do parents homeschool? A systematic examination of parental involvement. Education and Urban Society, 39, 264-285. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Harris, A., Goodall, J. (2007). Engaging parents in raising achievement: Do parents know they matter? A research project commissioned by the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (Research Report DCSF-RW004). University of Warwick, Coventry, England. Google Scholar | |
|
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London, England: Routledge. Google Scholar | |
|
Hong, S., Ho, S. Z. (2005). Direct and indirect longitudinal effects of parental involvement on student achievement: Second order latent growth modelling across ethnic groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 32-42. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Hu, L., Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Ingram, M., Wolf, R. B., Lieberman, J. M. (2007). The role of parents in high-achieving schools serving low-income, at-risk populations. Education and Urban Society, 39, 479-497. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Israel, G. D., Beaulieu, L. J., Hartless, G. (2001). The influence of family and community social capital on educational achievement. Rural Sociology, 66, 43-68. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.66.7676&rep=rep1&type=pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Keeves, J. P. (1972). Educational environment and student achievement. Stockholm Student Educational Psychology, 20, 1-309. Google Scholar | |
|
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar | |
|
LeFevre, A. L., Shaw, T. V. (2012). Latino parent involvement and school success: Longitudinal effects of formal and informal support. Education and Urban Society, 44, 707-723. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Marjoribanks, K. (1979). Families and their learning environments: An empirical analyses. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Google Scholar | |
|
Marsden, P. V., Wright, J. D. (2010). Handbook of survey research (2nd ed.). London, England: Emerald Group. Google Scholar | |
|
Meyer, J. (1980). Levels of the educational system and schooling effects. In Bidwell, C., Windham, D. (Eds.), The analysis of educational productivity. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, Vol 2, pp. 15-63. Google Scholar | |
|
Ngware, M. W., Oketch, M., Ezeh, A. C., Mutisya, M., Epari, C. (2012). Assessing the impact of FPE using retrospective and prospective data: Lessons from the Nairobi case study. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 35, 71-92. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar | |
|
Parent Leadership Training Institute . (2005). A Connecticut Commission on Children Civic Leadership Initiative. Hartford: Connecticut Commission on Children. Retrieved from http://www.cga.ct.gov/coc/PDFs/plti/080306_PLTI_curriculum.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Pugh, M. D. (1976). Statistical assumptions and social reality: A critical analysis of achievement models. Sociology of Education, 49, 34-40. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Rath, J. M., Gielen, A. C., Haynie, D. L., Solomon, B. S., Cheng, T. L., Simons-Morton, B. G. (2008). Factors associated with perceived parental academic monitoring in a population of low-income, African American young adolescents. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education, 31(8), 1-11. Google Scholar | |
|
Rosenzweig, C. J. (2000). A meta-analysis of parenting and school success: The role of parents in promoting students’ academic performance (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY. Google Scholar | |
|
Rumberger, R. W., Palardy, G. J. (2005). Test scores, dropout rates, and transfer rates as alternative indicators of high school performance. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 3-42. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Sheldon, S. B., Epstein, J. L. (2005). Involvement counts: Family and community partnerships and mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 196-206. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Stevenson, D. L., Baker, D. P. (1987). The family-school relation and the child’s school performance. Child Development, 58, 1348-1357. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Stewart, E. B. (2008). School structural characteristics, student effort, peer associations, and parental involvement: The influence of school- and individual-level factors on academic achievement. Education and Urban Society, 40, 179-204. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI |
Author Biographies
Emmanuel O. Bellon is a professor of leadership and senior advisor to African Population and Health Research Center (APHRC) Training Programs and International Leadership University. He has a PhD in intercultural leadership from Fuller School of Intercultural Studies, Pasadena, CA. His research interest includes higher education leadership and management, and executive coaching through transitions.
Moses Waithanji Ngware is senior research scientist and head of the Education Research Program at the APHRC. He has a PhD in economics of education from Egerton University, Kenya. His main research interest is in learning outcomes and teaching effectiveness.
Kassahun Admassu is an independent consultant in population studies and reproductive health. He holds a PhD in social-demography from Brown University. His research interest includes education, population, and reproductive health.