THE IMPACT OF HOME VISITS

Lisa Levasseur
B. A., St. Mary’s College of California, 1999

THESIS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

MASTERS OF ARTS

in

EDUCATION
(Educational Leadership)

at

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO

FALL
2009
 THE IMPACT OF HOME VISITS

A Thesis

by

Lisa Michelle Levasseur

Approved by:

___________________________________________, Committee Chair

Virginia Dixon, Ed.D.

___________________________________________, Second Reader

Edmund W. Lee, Ed.D.

______________________________________
Date

ii
Student: Lisa Michelle Levasseur

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University

format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to

be awarded for the thesis.

___________________________________________ ________________________
Dr. Geni Cowan, Graduate Coordinator Date

Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

iii
 Abstract

of

THE IMPACT OF HOME VISITS

by

Lisa Michelle Levasseur

Brief Review of the Literature

The main idea of a home visit is to build a bridge between the parent and teacher

in order to work together to help the child become successful in school. Researcher

Delisio (2006) found that showing up at students’ doors—establishing a positive

relationship with students’ families—is one of the most important tools in school reform,

particularly in low-income, urban district. Epstein (2001) stated how parents remain

important influences in their children’s lives when it comes to academics, decisions about

schoolwork, and behaviors both at school and away. Mapp’s (2003) research has proven

that home visits increase grades and test scores, better school attendance, increase

graduation rates, and more produce positive attitudes.

Statement of the Problem

Currently, in many schools there is a huge disconnect between the home and the

school. The purpose of this study is to examine that disconnect and how home visits are

having an impact on closing it. The researcher has studied the following areas: parental

engagement, attendance, academics, and discipline in schools that have successfully been

doing home visits. This study will evaluate what impact home visits have made in
iv
bridging the gap between the home and the school. In addition, this study will evaluate

what is being done professionally to help teachers conduct successful home visits and

then examine what else can be done.

Methodology

The literature reviewed for this study came from numerous different sources. The

citations include journal articles, books, websites, and government documents. Data was

also collected from three questionnaires that were sent out to educators, parents, and

home visit site coordinators in a school district in Northern California.

Conclusions Reached

Overall, the impact of home visits is great. Literature reviewed and the

questionnaires collected indicate home visits have a positive impact on the relationship

between the home and the school. When home visits are conducted successfully in a

school, attendance and test scores rise and discipline decreases. Families are more

engaged and success is felt.

_________________________, Committee Chair

Virginia Dixon, Ed.D

_________________________
Date

v
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis to all the hardworking staff and teachers involved with The

Parent Teacher Home Visit Project. It is the teachers, trainers, and staff of The Parent

Teacher Home Visit Project whom have inspired me to do this research. It is their tireless

efforts to continue working on building the bridge between home and school that

motivated me to do this research. I would also like to dedicate this study to my wonderful

and supportive parents and in-laws that made it possible for me to continue professionally

developing my passion for education. Finally, there is no way any of this would have

been possible if it was not for my amazing and loving family. My two sweet children who

I hope will some day understand why Mommy was gone so many nights and weekends. I

hope they too will grow up always being life long learners. Last but not least, to my rock:

my husband. Without his devotion I would not be here. Thanks Dave, for encouraging me

to take this journey and for always supporting me every step of the way. I love you!

vi
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank Dr. Dixon for her advice and support throughout this

journey. She is an excellent and patient advisor and without her I would not have made it

to the end. I would also like to thank Dr. Lee for his time and guidance throughout the

past two years. Without him I would not be graduating.

vii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Dedication ......................................................................................................................... vi

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... vii

List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... x

List of Figures ................................................................................................................... xi

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1

Background ............................................................................................................. 1

Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................ 2

Definition of Terms................................................................................................. 3

Significance of the Study ........................................................................................ 5

2. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE ........................................................... 7

What is a Home Visit? ............................................................................................ 8

Legal Issues ........................................................................................................... 12

How Home Visits Impact a School ....................................................................... 18

Academic Benefits of Home Visits....................................................................... 26

Attendance and School Discipline ........................................................................ 31

Professional Development and the Education of Teachers................................... 35

Rationale of the Study........................................................................................... 40

Summary ............................................................................................................... 41

3. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 44
viii
 Setting of the Study............................................................................................... 44

Population and Sample ......................................................................................... 44

Data Collection ............................................................................................... 45

Instrumentation ............................................................................................... 46

Data Analysis Procedures ............................................................................... 47

Limitations ............................................................................................................ 47

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ....................................................................... 49

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 49

Home Visit Staff Survey ................................................................................. 49

Parent Survey .................................................................................................. 56

District Survey ................................................................................................ 63

Findings................................................................................................................. 68

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................... 71

Summary ............................................................................................................... 71

Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 72

Recommendations ................................................................................................. 74

Appendix A. Consent to Participate in Research ........................................................... 77

Appendix B. Surveys ...................................................................................................... 80

Appendix C. Survey Results .......................................................................................... 87

References ......................................................................................................................... 91

ix
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page

1. Question 2-Do You Feel We Need More Parent Volunteers at ABC School? ..... 50

2. Question 3-Do You Feel there is a Discipline Problem at ABC School? ............. 50

3. Question 8-Do You feel there is a Need at ABC Elementary School to Learn

More about the Home Visit Process?.................................................................... 53

4. Question 9-Do you have an Interest in Learning More about the Home Visit

Process?................................................................................................................. 54

5. Question 10-Would You be Interested in Learning How to Do a Home Visit? ... 54

6. Question 1-Do You Have More than One Child at ABC School? ....................... 56

7. Question 4-Did You Attend Back to School Night this Year? ............................. 57

8. Question 5-Have You Spoken with or Met Your Child’s Teacher Yet? .............. 58

9. Question 4-Do You Feel You Know What is Happening at ABC School?.......... 58

10. Question 8-How Important are Parent Teacher Conferences to You? ................. 59

11. Question 9-Are You Involved in the School’s PTA? ........................................... 60

12. Question 10-If You Are Not Involved, Would You Like to Join the PTA? ......... 61

13. Question 4-What Level Do You Teach? ............................................................... 63

14. Question 8-How Many Home Visits Took Place at Your Site Under the Nell Soto

Parent Teacher Involvement Grant? ..................................................................... 65

15. Question 10-Is Your Site Interested in Continuing Home Visits in the Future? .. 67

16. Question 11-Do You Feel Your Faculty was Prepared to Do Home Visits?........ 67

17. Question 12-Would Your Faculty Like More Training Regarding Home Visits? 67

x
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page

1. Number of Years at ABC Elementary School ...................................................... 49

2. Attendance Problem .............................................................................................. 51

3. Disconnect Among Students and Staff ................................................................. 51

4. Disconnect Among Parents and Staff ................................................................... 52

5. Will a Home Visit Program Help? ........................................................................ 53

6. Home Visit Training ............................................................................................. 55

7. What Grade is Your Child In? .............................................................................. 56

8. Years at ABC School ............................................................................................ 57

9. How the Participant Stays Informed ..................................................................... 59

10. Getting Involved ................................................................................................... 60

11. Meeting with the Teacher Outside of School ....................................................... 61

12. The Percentage of Teachers Who Were Trained .................................................. 63

13. Teachers Who Actively Did Home Visits ............................................................ 64

14. Materials Brought Along on Home Visits ............................................................ 64

15. Changes Attributed to the Home Visit Project ..................................................... 66

16. Future Training Ideas ............................................................................................ 68

xi
 1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background

It is a Friday night and there is another school sponsored “family game night” in

the cafeteria; unfortunately, the room is only one fourth full. The principal and teachers

are frustrated by the lack of family support at school-sponsored events. Attendance for

Back to School Night and parent teacher conferences was low. Teachers are struggling to

get across the important message of good attendance and coming to school on time, yet

the families are not attending these activities. Test scores are down, suspensions are up

and the frustration among faculty and staff in this urban elementary school is increasing.

At many public schools nationwide, one will often find teachers complaining

about the lack of support or parent involvement on the school campus (Peralta-Nash,

2003). Many teachers have formed their own assumptions as to why this lack of

involvement has happened such as; parents are too busy to involve themselves in the lives

of their children, or that parents believe it is only up to the teacher to educate the child.

Unfortunately, this problem is all too common in Title One or low socio-economic

schools (Peralta-Nash, 2003). Are these assumptions true or does the problem fall into a

miscommunication among families and school personnel?

The Parent Teacher Home Visit Project set out as part of their mission to squash

these assumptions, by creating an atmosphere of trust, respect, and to increase

communication between families and the schools via home visits. Home visits have been
 2

taking place for decades, but what impact do they have? Are home visits successful in

changing the relationship between the home and school?

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to research the impact of home visits. Do they make a

difference in the relationship between the home and school, and if so, what changes are

taking place in the schools? This study set out to answer the following questions:

1. Do home visits make a difference in the relationship between home and

school?

2. What impact do home visits have on attendance, academics and discipline?

3. What can districts do in the way of professional development to help educators

conduct successful home visits?

This study also examined what is being done professionally for teachers to

conduct successful home visits and asked what needs to happen next. Several schools in a

large school district in Northern California committed two years to conducting home

visits on a regular basis. All of these participating schools were suffering from the lack of

parent involvement on their campus. All the schools listed one or more of the following

as a problem at their school: poor attendance, low-test scores, low parent involvement,

and/or high suspension rate. The educators of these schools not only were frustrated with

what was happening on their campuses, but also had moved into problem solving mode.
 3

Definition of Terms

This section of the research includes all applicable terms that are specific to the

study to help illustrate and illuminate the subject.

Assembly Bill 33: A bill that allocated grants to schools in accordance with

prescribed criteria, for the purpose of strengthening communication between schools and

parents. The bill required that the grants awarded under the program be used for stipends

to pay teachers who conducted home visits and other purposes of the program (Assembly

Bill 33, 1999).

Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965: The most expansive federal education

bill ever passed to date, on April 9, 1965, as a part of President Lyndon B. Johnson's

"War on Poverty,” (United States Department of Education, 2001a).

Family Engagement: The act of participating/engaging oneself in an event or a

gathering that takes place at a school campus or school event.

Harvard Family Research Project: An organization that helps stakeholders

develop and evaluate strategies to promote the well being of children, youth, families and

their communities (Flanigan, 2005).

Head Start: A private not-for-profit membership organization dedicated

exclusively to meeting the needs of early childhood education for children ages three and

four (National Head Start Association, 2009).

Highly Qualified Teacher: Under No Child Left Behind (as cited in US

Department of Education, 2001b) a teacher is highly qualified if the teacher proves that

he or she knows the subjects he or she is teaching, has a college degree, and is state-
 4

certified. NCLB requires that students be taught by a HQT in core academic subjects (US

Department of Education, 2001b).

Home Visits: Visits with school families which are conducted by an educator that

take place off the school campus, in the home environment of the student.

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): A federal law passed in 2001 under the

George W. Bush administration. NCLB represents legislation that attempts to accomplish

standards-based education reform (US Department of Education, 2001b).

Parent Teacher Home Visit Project (PTHVP): An inexpensive and easily

replicated model of family engagement that has been documented to end the cycle of

blame between families and school staff by building trust and respect, instilling cultural

competency and increasing personal and professional capacity for all involved (Parent

Teacher Home Visit Project, 2009, www.PTHVP.org).

Professional Development: The act of enhancing one’s career by taking classes or

attending workshops relating to their field of work.

School Attendance Review Board (SARB): This board is composed of

representatives from various youth-serving agencies, to help truant or recalcitrant

students and their parents or guardians solve school-attendance and behavior problems

through the use of available school and community resources (SARB Handbook, 1974, as

cited in California Department of Education, 1999).

Socioeconomically: Relating to or concerned with the interaction of social and

economic factors.
 5

Significance of the Study

The significance of this research is extremely valuable for three reasons. First,

The Parent Teacher Home Visit Project (PTHVP) (2005) relied on the data collected

from the third survey to find out which schools actively did home visits, what schools

wanted to continue to do them, and what tools do the schools need next to make their

home visit programs more successful. Second, the significance of this research is

important to learn why there is a disconnect between the home and school and how home

visits can help administrators, teachers, and counselors ameliorate that disconnect.

Finally, this research is significant to prove why home visits work and to explain why it

is important to dedicate professional development to the topic.

There is a definite need for this study because with the federal No Child Left

Behind law and with grants such as the state funded Nell Soto, there is still a disconnect

at many educational sites between what happens at the home and what takes place at

school. There is also a need for this study because it helps The Parent Teacher Home

Visit Project to examine what is working and where they need to go next. The results of

the study will also help administrators to see the importance of home visits and how they

can positively impact a school and all who are involved with the school. This research

will contribute to the field of education by helping school leaders show evidence of

reliable and factual data, which in turn will help verify how home visits make a positive

difference in the relationship between the home and the school. The end goal for the

researcher is to take the information gathered and analyzed, and to share the results with

all educators who are interested in starting a home visit project. The information collected
 6

from the third questionnaire will help The Parent Teacher Home Visit Project in deciding

what steps are needed to best ensure that home visits continue in the school district and

beyond.

This study was undertaken in order to research the impact home visits were

having on the schools involved. The study is relevant for two reasons. First, its outcomes

impact the future of home visits at certain school sites. Second, it influences how future

generations of families and educators will commit to conducting home visits.

 7

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

At many public schools across the nation, there are teachers complaining about

the lack of support or parent involvement on their campus. Unfortunately, this problem is

all too common in Title One or low socio-economic schools (Delisio, 2006). Many

teachers have formed their own opinions as to why this has happened, with perceptions

such as, parents are too busy, they are not involved enough in the lives of their children,

or they simply just do not care. Is this really the problem or is there a miscommunication

between the schools and the families that attend them? Kyle and McIntyre (2000) stated

in their paper a very simple answer to this problem: “The more you know about a child’s

family, the better you can meet the child’s needs and the best way to learn about the

family is to be there with them” (p. 1). Researcher Karen Mapp (2003) found during

more than three decades of studies that regardless of economic, racial/ethnic, and

educational backgrounds, there continues to always be a strong tie between educational

benefits to children and family engagement at the school. So, how does one go about

achieving that family engagement?

How does one school go about changing the lack of parental support? How do

schools help parents and students to feel more connected to their school? Many schools

claim they welcome parent participation, yet do not provide a hospitable climate for

parents (Aronson, 1996). Visitors typically encounter notices directing them to report to

the front office, which can often be intimidating when a parent does not speak good
 8

English or is reluctant to approach the school in the first place. Research has documented

that parents want their children to do well in school, and that parents have a genuine and

deep-seated desire to help their child succeed academically, but the problem lies in the

fact that many parents do not know how to go about accomplishing that goal (Mapp,

2003). Parents may understand clearly that their involvement helps a child to succeed, but

they do not understand how to start. Epstein (2001) stated in her research that families

care about their children’s success, but most families need more and better information

from schools. How does one go about accomplishing that goal? How does a school raise

test scores and lower suspension rates on their campus? Many teachers and principals ask

these questions several times throughout the school year. There are numerous strategies

and ideas that work. However, are teachers prepared to take on these new approaches?

Have they received enough education and experience in their credential training

programs? Once they have become highly qualified teachers, do they receive enough

professional training to help them handle communicating with parents and students? One

solution for many of these questions has to do with the idea of teacher home visits.

What is a Home Visit?

The idea of doing a home visit is not a relatively new phenomenon; the program

Head Start has been doing them for years. Steele-Carlin (2009) wrote that many Head

Start teachers are expected to make at least two home visits for each student during the

school year. The main idea of a home visit is to build a bridge between the parent and

teacher in order to work together to help the child become successful in school. Home
 9

visits provide an opportunity to openly communicate and work more closely together to

support student learning. The philosophy behind home visits is to also build a relationship

with the family in order to assist the family in becoming more comfortable with the

education process. By doing a home visit, the teacher is able to gain a different

perspective of the child they see every day in the classroom, while in return the student

and parents are able to see a teacher who cares for them outside the hours of the school

day.

Over the past ten years, home visits have become more popular in schools where

there are low achievement scores, behavior problems, or a lack of parental support. With

the passing of The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001, many teachers are

becoming more open to the idea of trying to break down the barriers that a school

atmosphere might create for some parents. In Title I schools, parental involvement

always has been a centerpiece. However, for the first time in the history of the

Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, parental involvement has a statutory definition.

The statute defined parental involvement as the participation of parents in regular, two-

way, and meaningful communication involving student academic learning and other

school activities, including ensuring—

• parents play an integral role in assisting their child’s learning;

• parents are encouraged to be actively involved in their child’s education at

school; and,
 10

• Parents are full partners in their child’s education and are included, as

appropriate, in decision-making and on advisory committees to assist in the

education of their child (US Department of Education, 2001b).

The No Child Left Behind Act stressed shared accountability between the parent

and the school when it comes to higher achievement. A synthesis of the research

concluded that the evidence is consistent, positive, and convincing: families have a major

influence on their children’s achievement in school and through life. When schools,

families, and community groups work together to support learning, children tend to do

better in school, stay in school longer, and like school more (Henderson & Mapp, 2002).

One avenue that educators are starting to use is the ability to reach out past the

school walls and connect with students in their homes. In 1999, California passed

Assembly Bill 33, which provided $40 million in state funds over five years for school

districts to conduct home visits and set up programs to help get parents move involved in

education. “AB 33 encourages strong parent involvement by offering new opportunities

for parents to be engaged” (Rhee, 1999, p. 1). Ten schools in Sacramento experimented

with this program for a couple of years. The results were a huge success. Rhee (1999)

also stated that 89 percent of the parents felt that their children were doing better

academically, and 98 percent of the teachers agreed that students’ academic skills

improved since the home visit program started. A home visit can offer invaluable insights

about students (Kyle & McIntyre, 2000). One teacher stated how many of his students are

bussed across town, so going out to their neighborhood to do a home visit helps him learn

a lot about where they come from (Fisch, Hernandez & Trumbull, 2003). By visiting a
 11

home, a teacher can help the bridge from school to home. This can also reveal the

emotional and social needs and behaviors of students. Through a home visit, an educator

can identify students’ latest interests or concerns. These new findings can help a teacher

construct their lesson plans to make them more engaging to their students. According to

Delisio (2006), author of Home Visits Forge School, Family Links, “Educators today are

finding, that showing up at students’ doors—establishing a positive relationship with

students’ families—is an important tool in school reform, particularly in low-income,

urban districts where educators traditionally struggle to build parent involvement” (p. 1).

She also stated the importance of starting the school year off by making a casual visit to

the home. During this visit, grades are not discussed. She explained that this visit is

primarily an opportunity for the teacher to get to know the family on a more personal

level. This visit provides the teacher a chance to see what the atmosphere at home is like,

which in turn helps the teacher better prepare for the child at school.

A casual visit can serve as an invitation to parents to become a partner with the

teacher in educating the child throughout the school year. Once a relationship of trust has

been established, a teacher may choose to do a second home visit, where this time they

bring test scores, or informational resources to help the family. For example, Dryfoos

(1996) mentioned bringing resources on where a family may go for medical or dental

help, or where a family can go to receive mentoring for their child. It may also be as

simple as bringing a library card application or an application for a child to sign up for

community sports or after-school programs. In Making Connections between Home and

School, Furger (2002) stated that by doing these home visits in the beginning of the
 12

school year, the result is a commitment to building relationships between home and

school; that way everyone can work together towards a common goal.

Legal Issues

Although home visits seem like a great idea to help fix a problem, many teachers

are concerned about the legal ramifications behind doing them. They are concerned that

families will feel like they are getting in trouble if a teacher comes to their house. Most

teachers do not want the family to feel like they are going through the School Attendance

Review Board (SARB) process. Many educators have concerns about what they should

do if they visit a home and they see illegal activity or an unsafe living environment for a

child? Another concern many teachers have has to do with going alone on a home visit.

Finally, another common problem is how does one fit a home visit into their already busy

schedule? Many administrators are flooded with these types of questions when

scheduling a home visit training session for their teachers; however, if an administrator

has done their research the answers will do much to set an educator at ease with the

whole process.

In numerous schools across the nation, attendance is an issue; nevertheless, there

are several prevention steps one can take to making it less of a problem. In 1974, the

California Legislature enacted a statute to enhance the enforcement of school attendance.

The statute created School Attendance Review Boards (SARB), “composed of

representatives from various youth-serving agencies, to help truant or recalcitrant

students and their parents or guardians solve school-attendance and behavior problems
 13

through the use of available school and community resources” (SARB Handbook, 1999,

as cited in California Department of Education (CDE), 1999, p. v). SARB was created to

keep students in school and out of trouble. “A county SARB is established under the

authority of Education Code Section 48321” (SARB Handbook, as cited in California

Department of Education (CDE), 1999, p. 9).

Education Code Section 48321 stated who is qualified to be at a SARB meeting:

(2) The county school attendance review board, if established, shall include, but

need not be limited to, all of the following:

A. A parent.

B. A representative of school districts.

C. A representative of the county probation department.

D. A representative of the county welfare department.

E. A representative of the county superintendent of schools.

F. A representative of law enforcement agencies.

G. A representative of community-based youth service centers.

H. A representative of school guidance personnel.

I. A representative of child welfare and attendance personnel.

J. A representative of school or county health care personnel.

(3) The school district representatives on the county school. (SARB Handbook, as

cited in California Department of Education (CDE), 1999, p. 9)

According to the SARB Handbook (1999, students are referred to SARB if they

have a constant attendance problem and other avenues have not worked. The SARB
 14

process can be very intimidating for parents and students and therefore should try to be

avoided. There are several ways of prevention that a school can try; for example,

attendance awareness month, recognition of students and classrooms modeling high

attendance, and teacher home visits. With the right home visit training, teachers can help

prevent the student from ever having to go through the SARB process. A SARB meeting

should ultimately be the last resort for a school and the district and hopefully it is a final

resort that many schools will never have to use if a school brings in programs like a

parent/teacher home visit program.

A parent/teacher home visit program can be very time consuming. Calling

families, conducting home visits, and doing the follow-up paperwork can take a lot of

time and effort. Many teachers fear they do not have enough time and money to fit it all

in. The California state legislators agreed with the teachers on this concern and therefore

passed a bill to help solve this problem. California Assembly Bill 33 and Senate Bill 33

are evidence of the growing community support families and teachers have received in

regards to teacher home visit projects. “These bills provided and extended the availability

of small grants to support school efforts to conduct home visits and strengthen

teacher/parent involvement in other ways” (Parent Teacher Home Visit Project (PTHVP),

2004, p. 2). One of the grants that came from Assembly Bill 33 was the Nell Soto Grant.

This grant was designed to help schools in which a majority of parents and teachers agree

to strengthen relationships between the school and parents in order to help the student

succeed in academics. The grant also specified that priority for home visits shall be given
 15

to low-performing students. In order for schools to receive Nell Soto grant money, they

had to obtain the following:

• At least 50 percent of the educators at the school site had to voluntarily agree

to participate in periodic home visits.

• At least 50 percent of the parents of students enrolled in the school had to

voluntarily agree to allow periodic home visits.

• Teachers participating in the grant must receive training on how to do home

visits.

• Teachers shall be compensated for their time spent doing home visits at an

hourly rate comparable to their regular base salary.

If the school satisfies the requirements to receive money from the Nell Soto

Grant, the money will be allocated according to the enrollment size of the school. Small

schools will receive grant money of $15,000 and large enrollment schools will receive

grant money of $35,000 dollars. The funds may be used to compensate teachers and

teaching paraprofessionals, to provide training to teachers and teaching paraprofessionals,

and to defray other costs associated with the implementation of the Nell Soto

Parent/Teacher Involvement Program (CDE, 1999). This grant has calmed the fears of

many teachers who were concerned about putting forth all the time and effort and not

getting compensated for it. Under the Nell Soto Grant, teachers must be trained on how to

do a home visit, but once they are trained they can begin to be paid for their home visit

efforts.
 16

Another common legal concern when doing a home visit has to do with the issue

of mandated reporting. Many teachers fear when out doing a home visit they will see

something that might trigger the duty of mandated reporting. Law considers the following

person a mandated reporter, “Any citizen can make a report of suspected or known child

abuse to a child protective services agency. A Mandated Reporter is legally required to

report if they know of or have "Reasonable Suspicion" of child abuse and neglect,

encountered in the scope of their employment” (Child Abuse Prevention Council of

Sacramento, 2008). Whether at school or a child’s home, educators are required by law to

be mandated reporters. However, the Parent Teacher Home Visit Project (PTHVP) has

found the occurrence of mandated reporting to be very rare. The reason has to do with

their model of home visits. PTHVP has designed the model to be respectful and trains the

teacher to set up a home visit in advance so the families are not surprised when a teacher

shows up at their door. The purpose of home visits is to establish a relationship of trust

with the families; surprising them at home does not help to develop trust. By calling in

advance to set up a visit and then calling the day before to confirm, a teacher can begin to

build an equal partnership, where parent and teacher can empower each other in order to

help find academic and social success for the student.

Another concern about home visits is the idea of going alone. The Parent Teacher

Home Visit Project has two reasons for requiring their teachers to go with a colleague

when conducting a home visit. The first reason is simply a safety factor. Many visits are

done later in the afternoon and evening hours and going with a colleague to a new area is

simply safer than going alone. The second reason has to do with a school district’s
 17

insurance policy. According to the school district, a home visit is merely an extension of

the school day and therefore by going with a colleague, the teachers are covered by the

school district’s insurance policy.

Home visits will not be successful for a classroom or a school if the teachers do

not feel comfortable or prepared to do them. If a school is going to start carrying out

home visits, they must have the majority of the teachers involved or the program will not

reach its full potential, parents will talk, and those who are not visited will feel cheated or

even worse, just turned off by the educational system as a whole. In order for a home

visit program to really work, many things must fall into place. Key elements should

include motivated teachers, a school/community eager to improve their schools by

building community involvement and support, and adequate training for the school staff

so they feel comfortable stepping into a student’s home. It also helps to have an

administrator who is familiar with the laws behind home visits and district support when

starting a new project that involves the school and the community. Finally, it really helps

to have money in the beginning, but is definitely not a necessity in the end (Yeats, 2007).

After doing home visits, many schools found the process to be so successful and fulfilling

that even after the grant money ran out they continued to do home visits (Peralta-Nash,

2003). In fact, Reglin (2002) found that many teachers felt their job was much more

rewarding and enjoyable not because they had the best bulletin board in the school, but

because they had made a personal connection with many of their students and their

families and nothing could top that connection.

 18

How Home Visits Impact a School

Parents as Partners

Most teachers want their students’ parents to be involved in their classrooms and

at the school, but many teachers complain they never see their students’ parents on

campus and if they do, it is only for twenty minutes at parent teacher conferences. On

occasion, teachers make this complaint but never do anything about changing the

problem. Many believe that parents and teachers should be allies and partners, but

struggle on how to make that connection happen. “After all, they are both engaged in the

important and precious work of raising, guiding, and teaching our children” (Lawrence-

Lightfoot, 2003, p. 21). Numerous parents from “minority” backgrounds indicate they

would prefer a more personal relationship with their children’s teachers (Fisch et al.,

2003). In fact, many also indicated they would like the opportunities to interact

informally, not just through formal events like parent conferences or back to school night.

So how does this start? Allen (2008) stated, to start this conversation, schools should

gather groups of educators, students, and family members to brainstorm a list of

everything the school does to involve families. After examining the lists, the group

should ask themselves what families are benefitting and what families are missing, and

then make an effort to reach those parents who are absent from participating at their

child’s school.

Despite parent education, family size, student ability or school level parents are

more likely to become partners in their child’s education if they perceive the schools have

strong practices to involve parents at the school (Davies, Henderson, Johnson & Mapp,
 19

2007). Epstein (2001) stated how parents remain important influences in their children’s

lives when it comes to academics, decisions about schoolwork, and behaviors both at

school and away. There are many assumptions made by school employees as to why

parents do not come to school functions; however, oftentimes, it is as simple as calling

them up and inviting them to come step foot on the campus.

Long (2007) wrote in Parents in the Picture, “Sometimes all it takes is a friendly

invitation from one parent to another. In the right hands, that invitation can even break

long-standing cultural, language and socioeconomic barriers” (p. 27). In many cases,

parents just need to know they are welcomed at the school. One positive call home is

usually all it will take because most often, when a teacher calls home, it is not on a

positive note.

Epstein (2001) commented in her research if teachers, parents, principals, and

community partners all work together on a common goal, the student will be successful

in the end. When parents are respected as experts about their children, they tend to be

more open and in the end a trust is established. This carries over to success in the

classroom. Knowing a students’ outside interests, families, and home routines, and then

taking this information and using it to create meaningful and relevant curriculum, can

have huge rewards in helping to construct happier, healthier, and smarter kids (Kyle &

McIntyre, 2000).

Mapp (2003) found a school in Boston, Massachusetts, which decided to address

the issue of family involvement. The school year began by the staff creating a committee

which was made up of approximately ten teachers and parents. The committee was
 20

racially and socioeconomically diverse. The committee then began to meet regularly to

strategize how to reach out to families and encourage their involvement. The team

developed a program of home visitations to families in order to reach out for their

support. The committee developed a design for their home visits to make sure they were

not going out and lecturing parents on how they should be involved. Rather, they

delivered a message that families were respected and welcomed at the school. As a result

of the home visitation program, families who were not involved before began coming to

the school for the first time. After a few years of this program being successful, the

committee decided to develop positive relationships right from the start with families new

to the school. In the Fall, new families would receive a home visit from someone on the

committee. This too, became a huge success.

If educators are truly interested in establishing a dialogue with parents they need

to understand what parents are thinking (Finders & Lewis, 1994). Parents need to know

exactly how they can help. Finders and Lewis (1994) found in their research that many

low-income Latino parents want to help, but do not know how or they feel intimidated by

the educational system. In fact, the lowest rates of parent involvement are often among

minority homes (Gonzalez-DeHass & Willems, 2003). Many parent involvement

activities ignore cultural perspectives of the minority populations at their schools. Many

minority parents want to be involved in their child’s school but do not know how to

translate their desire into effective involvement.

To help a parent overcome their fear of the educational system and become

involved in their child’s school, a teacher can start by learning about a parent’s own
 21

school experience. This is a great discussion to have during a home visit. Finders and

Lewis (1994) discovered many parents had a problem with their own personal school

experiences; therefore, they do not feel comfortable or confident in school settings. Mapp

(2003) discovered that often, the history of their own parents’ experiences influenced

whether or not they participated at their child’s school. Many of those interviewed who

did not currently participate in their child’s school, did so because there was little to no

participation from their parents as they were growing up; therefore, they did not know

how to get involved.

In The Impact of Home Visit in Students’ Perception of Teaching, Peralta-Nash

(2003) stated how important it is to include the parents in the educational decision

making process. She felt home visits allowed her to hear the parents’ voices, as well as

help her to understand their perspectives. By visiting a child’s home a teacher is able to

listen to the parent’s experience with the educational system in a non-invasive

environment. The teachers should function as sensitive, active listeners. By doing this, it

helps the families to feel comfortable and a relationship will slowly start to grow.

Teachers must leave behind their preconceived notions of culture and history and become

listeners when doing a home visit (Gonzalez-DeHass & Willems, 2003). Teachers need to

put aside any blame in order to best meet the needs of their students. Lawrence-Lightfoot

(2003) recommended beginning with the assumption that all children have “special

needs” and on a home visit, the educator is there to find out what those needs are so they

can be met in the classroom and at home. If teachers do not go in to listen it is these

predetermined perceptions that can inhibit home-school connections.

 22

During the first home visit, many teachers take this opportunity with the parent or

guardian to have a conversation about the family background, their community/culture,

as well as the parents’ views of school. “In the first home visit, the conversation is open-

ended: encouraging parents to lead the conversation and share their thoughts and ideas

about their child and school” (Peralta-Nash, 2003, p. 4). By having this conversation it

provides the teacher with some insight into why a parent might be intimidated to

volunteer at the school and it lets the parent know the teacher cares about the families’

background and experiences. Researchers like Peralta-Nash (2003) found how important

it was to step outside the classroom and into a child’s home because it created an

opportunity to connect with the student and parent on another level, therefore allowing

the student to feel important and valued.

Researchers have also found the importance of bringing the life expertise and

knowledge of immigrant families into classroom learning. The Harvard Family Research

Project (1997) found that a majority of teachers and administrators lacked the training on

how to reach out to parents (as cited in Flanigan, 2005). Their research and literature

confirmed there was a need to listen to underrepresented parents of color in poor

communities. Parents of low-income or minority children face many barriers when

attempting to become active in the schools their children attend.

According to the findings of Gonzalez-DeHass and Willems (2003), parents have

fewer opportunities to meet and share information with teachers, to attend events at

school due to lack of transportation, money, or childcare. Home visits are a way to take

care of those problems. In order to truly reach these parents it was essential to establish
 23

authentic relationships that can help lead to greater than before parental involvement and

student success. “Researchers have found that when schools work with parents, everyone

involved benefits-students, families and schools” (Allen, 2008, p. 120).

In Margery Ginsberg’s (2007) article, Lessons at the Kitchen Table, she wrote

about the importance of doing home visits with immigrant families and how a visit can

lead to culturally relevant teaching. Ginsberg (2007) commented on how personal stories

of determination and struggle from immigrant families have helped to shape schools’

curriculum. Many times their stories of overcoming obstacles have created rich and

relevant lessons in the classroom. “Infusing the perspectives and talents of diverse

cultures into the curriculum can enhance motivation and achievement” (Quintanar &

Warren, 2008, p. 57). Ginsberg (2007) found when an educator does a home visit with

the expectation of learning about the family’s background, oftentimes the teacher walks

away with fascinating oral histories, interesting ways of organizing complicated lives,

and technical expertise that can enrich everyday curriculum in the classroom. The

researcher also emphasized the importance of taking on the role of listener when

conducting a home visit for the first time.

More often, immigrant parents are new to the education system of the United

States and are often intimidated by the whole process. When an educator does a home

visit for the first time it is very valuable to do more listening than speaking. Amanti,

Gonzalez and Moll (2005) also found in their research that when a teacher did a home

visit and began gathering new information about the family, their history and activities,

most teachers began making connections to instructional activities in the classroom. In

 24

homes with rich oral traditions, oral communication is important. It can help fracture

stereotypes that exist within the school. Amanti et al. (2005) called this concept a “funds

of knowledge” (p. 10), this concept is simply based on the premise, “People are

competent, they have knowledge, and their life experiences have given them that

knowledge” (Amanti et al., 2005, p. 10). Therefore, it is crucial to listen to the stories and

backgrounds of the parents on the first visit. The more elaborate understanding a teacher

can get, the more the teacher can transform curriculum into useful relevant instructional

activities (Amanti et al., 2005). By listening to their story, the parents will begin to

realize that the teacher has a vested interest in their child and will want to become more

invested in the school.

When the parent is involved success happens for the child. As a parent becomes

more familiar with curricular and instructional goals and activities, they often become

more supportive of the administrators and teachers (Aronson, 1996). Researcher, Gary

Reglin (2002), has documented this in a study he conducted in Escambia County, Florida.

Reglin (2002) set out to study the effectiveness of home visits and how they affect

parental involvement and student success. Research concluded that parental involvement

promoted positive change in performance in both the classroom such as improved scores

on standardized tests and in basic skills in reading and writing and at home based on

homework being completed and being turned in. Reglin (2002) found that the earlier the

parent became involved in their child’s education, the better the student did overall.

Another key reason to do home visits is the eye opening experience that happens

when stepping into a child’s home environment. Oftentimes, by looking around the
 25

home, it can explain a lot about a child’s disposition at school. Peralta-Nash (2003) stated

after a visit with a young boy from her class that she realized that the boy was very shy

and quiet because his family was similar. Another visit allowed her to meet some very

caring and loving parents who did not come on campus because they were hesitant due to

the language barrier. Due to the comfortable setting of the home, the parents were able to

open up (through their son translating) about how important it was that their son receives

a good education because they never made it past the eighth grade. She also heard during

another home visit a parent express how they “believe their needs to be a partnership

between the school and home since the school serves as a second home to her child”

(Peralta-Nash, 2003, p. 10).

Lawrence-Lightfoot (2003) recommended going into a home visit with a goal to

put the best plan in place for everyone involved with the child. If a teacher can leave the

home with collective decisions from the group on how to get the child to be successful in

school, the parent will often feel more connected as a team and want to start becoming

more involved. Lawrence-Lightfoot (2003) also emphasized when meeting with parents

the power of the word “we” and how when a teacher uses it, it can signal togetherness

and the desire for the educator to be inclusive in the education process.

Having these conversations is what makes home visits so valuable. The visit

provides the teacher the opportunity to hear about the realities faced by many parents, as

well as the value the parents place on the school system. Taking these steps enables the

teachers and parents to understand their roles better and then work together in helping a

student to be successful in school. It also helps the parents to not be afraid to ask a
 26

teacher questions or to admit they do not understand something (Furger, 2002). Meyer

and Mann (2006) found in their research one positive result from home visits was that it

allowed the parent to feel more comfortable when calling the school with a question. By

establishing that relationship in the beginning, many parents felt less intimated when they

called the teacher or principal with a concern or question.

However, doing one home visit does not always turn the parent around, at least

right away. Long (2007) stated in her research that it sometimes took many phone calls

and visits before drawing a parent out. There are many parents out there who have felt

alienated from schools. They feel uncomfortable with teachers and are intimidated by the

system. A lot of these types of parents blame themselves and are embarrassed if their

child is not successful in school. In cases like this, it is often important for teachers to

seek out help around the community or to come to community events to try to break

down the barriers between these parents and the education system. The bottom line is that

everyone has the same goal; they want the child/student to succeed and if teachers can

connect on some level with the family, more engagement and participation will happen.

Academic Benefits of Home Visits

Besides getting the parents involved in the school, there are many other benefits

that come from doing home visits. When a family is engaged in the child’s learning,

student achievement will rise (Davies et al., 2007). Researchers Goodwin and Judd

(2005) claimed by doing home visits, one is able to appreciate the student’s culture and

diversity better. By knowing a student’s background, one can have a strong impact on
 27

their educational experience. By getting to know a student’s culture, background, likes

and dislikes, a teacher can take what he/she learned from the visit and incorporate the

new knowledge into future lessons; therefore, helping to engage the students in class.

Worthy and Hoffman (2001) stated that doing home visits allows the teacher to discuss

goals and expectations of their students. It is a valuable time to listen to what the parents

expect from the teacher and then have the educator respond with what is expected at their

grade level.

A home visit is an ideal opportunity for a teacher to provide a family with

resources if a child is struggling academically at school. During a home visit, a teacher

might bring over a math tool kit with pencils and paper, or they might bring over a

dictionary if resources are limited in the house. Patton (2006) wrote about a school in

Rhode Island whose teachers visited over 160 homes, bringing with them baskets tailored

to the student’s reading or math level. The baskets included tools for reading and writing

and a gift certificate for a local bookstore. Visiting a child’s home for 20-40 minutes can

provide the teacher with a wealth of information on how to make the child successful

academically. During that visit, a teacher can also introduce several small learning

activities which a parent can do around the house to help support the skills a child is

learning at school. “For example: using cooking recipes to teach reading, sequencing, and

measuring; playing counting and spelling games; doing outdoor science projects” (Davies

et al., 2007, p. 67). A home visit should always emphasize how to help a child succeed in

school. By introducing simple ideas to parents on how they can help creates more buy in

at the home.
 28

Doing home visits also allows the teacher to observe traditions or living situations

they might not ever see when staying in the classroom. For example, if a third grade

student is only reading 47 words per minute and the teacher notices during a home visit

there are no books in the home, or there is not a quiet place for the student to sit and read,

a teacher can encourage the parents to provide a good home learning environment for

their child to study. One low-income school in Boston, Massachusetts posted some of the

highest reading test scores in the area and the families attribute the increase to home

visits (Davies et al., 2007). Parents and teachers got together and had extensive

conversations about how to improve scores. In the end it was not an award that worked, it

was what took place during the home visits. During the home visit the teacher brought

books for every child to read and now 95 percent of students and families at the school

are involved in the reading program. From these simple home visits, parents began to feel

more comfortable when visiting the school and began to participate in more school

activities. Parents also began to read more to their children in their native language and

borrowed simple to read books in English from the school library. As a result from all of

these increased activities, relationships were built and students’ academic performance

increased.

Another benefit of home visits has to do with the transition for kindergarten

students. Many children struggle with the transition from home to kindergarten,

increasing their risk of poor academic results throughout their educational career

(Schulting, 2009). Starting home visits in the beginning of a child’s academic career, a
 29

teacher is providing the opportunity to build a positive foundation upon which all future

communication is based.

Another benefit of home visits is the likely result of raising student achievement.

Delisio (2006) stated in her research that she saw many schools raise test scores after

three years of doing home visits. One particular school in this researcher’s district raised

its scores more than 200 points on the California State Test after starting a home visit

program. Attitudes in the classrooms changed and more learning took place. Delisio

(2006) reported that more students were cooperative because they knew their parents and

teachers were “on the same page” and they also knew their teacher cared about them

more than just inside the classroom.

Other schools in this urban school district that were also doing home visits saw an

increase in their test scores by an average of 9.8 percentage points in reading and

mathematics. The district averaged a gain of five percentage points in reading and seven

percentage points in math (Sandham, 1999). Dryfoos (1996) reported schools having

community involvement, often have higher reading and math scores than those schools

with less parent involvement. Meyer and Mann (2006) observed in their research that

37% of the teachers they studied commented that after doing home visits they had a

better understanding of what the child needed at school. For example, one teacher stated

some of their students were offered no help at home with their work; therefore, changing

the approach the teacher took at school regarding homework or class work made a

difference in helping the students to be successful.

 30

I have become more understanding of the children who are offered no help at

home. I have found time to work with them on spelling words and other

homework activities. I realized from a home visit that one mother was not able to

read. I’m not sure I would have discovered that without the home visit. (Meyer &

Mann, 2006, p. 95)

It is observations like these that have helped schools to raise their test scores.

In another study, researchers Arguea and Conroy (2003) studied the effect of

parental involvement at a school and the results it had on student achievement. According

to their research, it did not matter where the school was located when parents are

involved student achievement is higher. Their research showed results in schools that had

positive working relationships where the parents and teachers worked together, scores

rose as much as six percent, when compared with those schools where there was very

little parental engagement.

When doing an effective home visit regarding academics, it is important for a

teacher to be prepared. If a teacher is looking to establish a partnership with the parent

they must come ready to give the following advice to the parent:

1. There needs to be homework support and structure at home,

2. Clear, realistic homework expectations, and

3. Knowledge of the teacher’s expectations.

In return, in order for the student to be successful they must know the following:

1. Clear knowledge of homework assignments

2. Sufficient preparation to succeed, and

 31

3. The skills needed to complete the homework. (Reglin, 2002, p. 154)

If all parties involved know their roles and fulfill their responsibilities the children

will be successful and test scores will improve (Reglin, 2002). When a parent is better

able to understand what is taking place in the classroom, they become empowered to

better help their children with homework assignments. This understanding can lead to the

designing of additional lesson plans and creative curriculum; therefore, changing the way

children view and comprehend lessons. Reglin’s (2002) research demonstrated that home

visits helped students to complete more homework assignments, earn higher grades, and

overall, have a more positive attitude toward school.

Another positive academic result of home visits has to do with the structure and

set-up in the home. When doing a home visit an educator is able to see the structure of

the home. They allow an educator to see the space the child has to do his or her

schoolwork (Worthy & Hoffman, 2001). Is there a quiet place for the child to do their

homework? Is the television always on or is there a lot of videogame playing occurring in

the home? By getting a sense of the home’s atmosphere, the teacher can make

suggestions on how the parents could provide a more enriching learning environment in

the home; therefore, allowing the child to feel successful at home, which in return would

more likely translate to academic success in the classroom.

Attendance and School Discipline

Do home visits help with attendance and discipline issues at the school? Meyer

and Mann (2006) stated that in the schools they studied teachers reported increases of
 32

around 38% in average daily attendance. They also found attendance up, which seemed

to relate to parent involvement; 42% of teachers reported an increased number of parents

attending parent teacher conferences. Parents and students felt more connected to the

school after their home visit, thus making more of an effort to get their child to school

and to getting them there on time. Parents began to realize how many of their teachers

cared about their children and made it a priority to get their child to school everyday. In

addition to increased attendance during school, after school programs were also

positively effected (Yeats, 2007). According to Yeats’ (2007) research, many teachers

experienced an increase in their after-school tutoring sessions, which the researcher

contributes to the parents’ increased awareness of available resources.

Epstein and Sheldon (2002) found in their research on truancy and absenteeism,

students with better attendance score higher on achievement tests than their more

frequently absent peers. Epstein and Sheldon (2002) found that intensifying interpersonal

relationships between students and teachers helped to raise attendance as well. One

example studied was how doing a home visit on a student who was constantly absent

helped change the pattern. “When schools reached out to families and educators made

home visits, they reported decreases in the percentage of students who were chronically

absent” (Epstein & Sheldon, 2002, p. 316). Part of the problem with absent students is

schools rarely involve the parents until the problem is so severe that a student is failing.

Home visits can help prevent this problem from starting, if the school makes the effort in

the beginning of the school year to visit the homes of many of their students and establish

a relationship of trust.
 33

Dryfoos (1996) found in her research when it came to getting the parents

involved, attendance and graduation rates were significantly higher than in comparable

schools that had fewer connections with the families who attended their schools. She

found students were more eager to come to school because the teacher took a vested

interest in the values and culture of the family. One example of this comes from the

research area where a few high schools are trying to avoid attendance problems and

decrease dropout rates by doing a home visit for every incoming freshman (Parent

Teacher Home Visit Project (PTHVP), 2005). Research has shown when a high school

student is able to connect with someone who cares at the school, a relationship is formed

with the school and home the dropout rate is less (Minugh, 2008). “If they can make a

connection early, educators say there is less chance the students will flounder as they

begin a sometimes daunting stage of their education” (Minugh, 2008, p. 3).

In high school, parents often become less involved, but with home visits

happening during summer months before they start high school, the parents are able to

hear how important it is to continue to be involved in their child’s educational path.

Ferlazzo (2009) found in his research that making a home visit over the summer or early

in the school year helped to avoid problems in the classroom during the academic year.

During Ferlazzo’s (2009) home visits, he centered the conversation on the student and

what their hopes and dreams were. He found this type of discussion so rarely happened

between the home and school, that most parents were often shocked that a high school

teacher genuinely cared about their child. “Schools spend a lot of time with parents in

one-way communication but very little two way conversation” (Ferlazzo, 2009, p. 1). It is
 34

this two-way conversation that takes place during home visits that make the outcomes,

like less discipline problems, feasible.

Another important benefit from home visits has to do with the issue of discipline.

Dryfoos (1996) found with the connection of home and school property destruction and

graffiti began to diminish, along with a decrease in neighborhood violence rates

decreased. Many schools invest time and energy into a home visit program because the

school is having difficulty with the misbehavior of many students. Delisio (2006) stated

in her research that in a period of one year, a school which had suspended 140 students in

one year dropped that number to 60 students after they started doing home visits. The

students started to become more focused in class and began respecting their teachers and

peers more around the school. Also, Delisio’s (2006) research had many teachers who

stated that establishing a relationship with the parents helped the students see there was a

partnership there. Likewise, whatever happened at school was going to get back home.

The students began to realize throughout the year that their parents and teachers

communicated and shared similar goals for them. The students knew that if they

misbehaved, their teacher had no problem calling home and asking parents for help in a

certain area. In fact, many of the teachers encouraged the parents to stop by the classroom

or call at anytime if they had questions or concerns.

Goodwin and Judd (2005) indicated that trying to do a home visit within the first

months of schools and having the teacher and parents discuss their expectations of their

child’s behavior at school also helped with discipline at school. After that visit, the child

knew that Mom and Dad had a clear idea of the rules and expectations in the classroom
 35

and at the school; therefore, provided the child with no wiggle room to get around them.

Goodwin and Judd (2005) also discovered that because of this communication, students

seemed to try harder and goof off less. The researchers also found after home visits

started, more parents began to visit the campus, which also brought discipline issues

down, especially on the playground where they arose most often.

Professional Development and the Education of Teachers

Many teacher preparation programs are encouraging student teachers to build

home-school relationships with the children in their classrooms. Countless administrators

and credentialed teachers want to promote parent involvement in their schools; however,

this desire goes unrealized due to a lack of know-how (Gonzalez-DeHass & Willems,

2003). In fact, the question has been raised as to whether such training should be

addressed at the pre-service level, in-service level or both. Unfortunately, there are few

courses and professional experiences out there dedicated to parent involvement.

However, when it comes to communicating and establishing relationships with parents

through home visits, what is being done to train new teachers to feel comfortable with

this process?

The University of Maine took on a new approach to this topic when the professors

themselves starting doing home visits of the students in their credential classes. “We tell

these novice teachers that parents will be important, even essential, partners in their work.

But if there’s one thing we’ve learned as teacher educators, it’s that the things that will
 36

endure from our classes are those things our students have tried themselves” (Power,

2000, p. 10).

The professors at the University of Maine decided to do home visits with their

current credential students because why not practice what they preached. The results they

found were the following:

• Home visits were time consuming, but worth it.

• More student participation.

• An increase of attendance.

• The professors gained a better understanding of their student’s backgrounds

and what they really needed to emphasize in class. This insight led to the

development of a few changes in their program.

• Families have a vital role to play in facilitating learning for students of any

age.

• Finally, the actions of an educator sometimes far outweigh what they say.

(Power, 2000, p. 10)

The University of Maine professors found in their research the importance of connecting

with a student beyond the classroom walls. When there is a disconnect between family

and school, success for the student is harder to reach.

Carolyn Flanigan of Academic Development Institute/Illinois Professional

Learner’s Partnership asked this similar question in 2005. Flanigan (2005) did a study on

whether or not pre-service teachers were adequately prepared to communicate with

parents and communities. According to the Illinois Professional Standards and many
 37

other state standards, the topic of school, parent, and community partnerships must be

integrated into the required curriculum. However, in many states like Illinois, the

standards do not specify how much time needs to be spent on the subject. In Flanigan’s

(2005) study, she found that 84% of her respondents taught one or more courses that

included the theme, but only 16% taught a course on the topic of partnering with parents

and communities. Many professors who responded to Flanigan’s (2005) survey felt more

course work/experience was needed for pre-service teachers in the area of parent and

community communication, but many found it challenging to fit it into the curriculum.

Standing up in front of a classroom delivering a lesson is still the main focus of teacher

educational programs and many pre-service teachers are not in the classroom the first

week of school. Therefore, they miss how the mentor teacher introduces her/himself to

the families at back to school night. These problems could explain why so many first or

second year teachers struggle when it comes time to communicate with the parents or

community. So how do these new teachers get the help they need?

There are certain content areas that would benefit both pre-service and in-service

educators. Professional development is one answer to this problem. Critical content areas

might include the following:

• Presentations of techniques for involving parents.

• Discussions on different types of parent involvement.

• Approaches on how to get parents involved (i.e. home visits).

• Appropriate parent involvement for elementary, junior, and senior high.

• Teacher communication skills both in and out of conference situations.

 38

• Teacher knowledge of family support services in the community.

• Discussion on types of parent involvement strategies that work best with

families of varying socioeconomic status and ethnicity (Flanigan, 2005).

The value of parent involvement should be communicated to teachers getting ready to

enter the field, along with potential difficulties that may be encountered.

The Albuquerque Public Schools Parent Center decided to train school staff and

undergraduate education majors regarding parent involvement, as well as offer training to

parents in the community as well. The program parent training covers topics such as

supporting school learning at home, how to get the most out of a parent teacher

conference, and working together with educators. After educators and parents attended

these workshops, many saw the communication between home and schools flourish.

Parents felt more comfortable with coming to school, sharing ideas and expressing

concerns.

Many schools are realizing their new teachers come out with a strong curriculum

base, but lack knowledge in how to communicate with their students’ families. Research

has shown that strengthening the relationship between schools and families helps the

child to succeed (Reali & Trancredi, 2002). Districts have begun to recognize through the

help of the Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment Program that they must support

their new teachers with professional development opportunities in order for them to

successfully communicate with families. One example of this type of training is helping

educators learn how to do successful home visits. The Parent Teacher Home Visit Project

(PTHVP) in Sacramento has been conducting trainings since 1999 on how to connect
 39

teachers with families at their home. Their approach is now being used in hundreds of

schools in six states (Jehlen, 2009). The non-profit organization offers three different

types of trainings:

• Parents and Teachers as Co-Educators. This interactive training introduces

how to do a home visit, history behind the organization, research, steps one

must take to set up a home visit, and addresses likely barriers to building

effective relationships between parents and teachers as co-educators.

• Increasing Knowledge and Capacity. This training focuses on sharing

information about a child’s academic strengths and challenges. It prepares

teachers with a “tool kit” to boost parent capacity in order to help their child

academically.

• Creating Systems Change. This training is designed to work with educators to

strategize about changes in the school and at home to insure that parents and

teachers are recognized and supported as co-educators.

According to the PTHVP’s (2005) research, many teachers and school districts

have found the training to be very helpful for teachers with many different levels of

experience. Educators appreciated the different professional development trainings and

the opportunity to reflect on what they learned during a home visit. Teachers also enjoyed

the chance to develop their skills on how to communicate with families, especially

families who spoke another language. All the trainings provide time for the teachers to

role-play how they would make the first call to a family. During the PTHVP professional

development opportunities, the trainers advise educators to not only visit the students in
 40

trouble because that puts a stigma on getting other visits. The trainers also recommend

being flexible when doing a first visit, suggesting late afternoons and offering alternatives

other than meeting at the home, like a local coffee shop or library. They suggest not

pulling out any papers during the first visit and to expect the visit to last 30 to 45 minutes.

The trainings also provide time for educators to practice what type of questions they

might ask when they got there. “Find out whether the parents have other children in

school. What’s been their experience in schools up until now” (Jehlen, 2009, p. 42)?

Most found the professional development useful when taking the first steps to establish a

positive relationship with a family who might not have had such a positive experience in

the past with the educational system.

Researcher, David Williams (2002) found that promising programs like the Parent

Teacher Home Visit Project, made training available for both staff and parents

consistently throughout the year. Schools that sponsored workshops for both parents and

teachers found success for all, which in the end, translated into success for the students.

Rationale of the Study

Peralta-Nash’s (2003) findings as well as those of others validate the strong

impact home visits have on parent engagement, academics and school discipline. Projects

like the Parent Teacher Home Visit Project (2005) empower parents to get involved in

their child’s education. Mapp (2003) proved in her research that home visits made parents

feel like they belonged and in return students felt more success at home and at school.
 41

The rationale for this study was to examine the type of impact home visits have

on a school and the home. In the Review of the Related Literature, the research suggested

that conducting home visits produced a positive outcome for both the school and the

home. Studies such as these are essential because they provide valid data for non-profit

groups like the Parent Teacher Home Visit Project and allow them to show evidence that

their model is working. These studies are also significant for the area of professional

development because the research provides solid evidence that more work needs to be

done in regards to reaching out to families and home visits is a perfect way to start.

Summary

The literature review in Chapter Two clearly demonstrated that conducting home

visits produces many positive educational results. For example, research has proven that

home visits increase grades and test scores, better school attendance, higher graduation

rates, and more positive attitudes (Mapp, 2003). Parents also reported in Mapp’s (2003)

research how the home visit made them feel welcomed, which in return created a sense of

belonging. The home visits also made the families feel honored, respected, and

recognized as someone who was supporting their child to succeed in the education

process. The families also reported feeling connected to the school community more than

they had in the past.

Why do more schools or educators not attempt them? The teaching profession can

be a very overwhelming profession, especially when first starting. Doing home visits

takes planning and training and many teachers already feel overcommitted to their job in
 42

the classroom, along with the many school committees they sign up for. Also, home visits

have to be done outside the normal paid school hours, which make it very hard for some

teachers to fit them in. However, like any new project, there are going to be obstacles in

the way or excuses as to why something can not be done, but if a school is struggling to

find the answers on how to get parents connected, raise test scores, and/or lower behavior

problems, home visit programs and trainings are definitely something to investigate.

Furger (2002) stated in her research, “Throughout the 1998-99 school year,

teachers in nine Sacramento schools made three thousand home visits. The result was

greater parent participation, fewer behavior problems, and continuous improvements on

the state-mandated standardized tests” (Furger, 2002, p. 3). Considering the positive

results, many other schools in the Sacramento City Unified School District are now

starting to try home visit programs as well. In fact, based on the great success of these

schools in Sacramento, California has offered $15 million in grants for school districts

throughout the state who are interested in implementing home visit programs.

Home visits will not be successful for a classroom or a school if the teachers do

not feel comfortable or prepared to do them. If a school is planning to start doing home

visits, they must have the majority of the teachers involved or the program will not reach

its full potential. Parents will talk and those who are not visited will feel cheated and

perhaps even more disillusioned by the educational system. In order for a home visit

program to work well, many things must be arranged: there must be motivated teachers, a

school/community eager to improve their schools by building community involvement

and support, and there must be adequate training for the school staff so they feel
 43

comfortable stepping into a student’s home. It also helps to have administrative and

district support when starting a new project that involves the school and the community,

and in the beginning it helps to have money for the project, but is definitely not a

necessity in the end. After doing home visits, many schools found the process to be so

successful and fulfilling that even after the grant money ran out, they continued to do

home visits. In fact, many teachers found their job in the classroom to be much more

rewarding and enjoyable not because they had the best bulletin board in the school, but

because they had made a personal connection with many of their students and their

families through doing home visits. In the end, parents felt welcomed, listened to,

honored and valued. A bridge – via the school and the parents - can be built through

home visits with the final result being a successful and happy child.
 44

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

Setting of the Study

The study took place in a city in Northern California, in a diverse unified school

district of over 40,000 students. All schools involved were Title I schools with varying

populations. There were twenty-three elementary schools, five middle schools, and three

high schools studied. The researcher chose one elementary school at random to conduct

two questionnaires and a final questionnaire was sent out to all thirty-one schools

involved with the home visit program.

Population and Sample

When conducting research on the impact of home visits the researcher first took

into account the entire student body at ABC Elementary School. The elementary school

was a small school with a diverse population of 321 students. The school population was

a mix of four cultures, Hispanic, Hmong, African American and Caucasian. The

researcher then included the faculty and staff at the elementary school. The school staff

was less diverse, two teachers are Hispanic, one teacher is Hmong, and the rest were

Caucasian. Finally, when conducting the third survey the researcher examined thirty-

three schools in a particular Northern California School district all took part in the Nell

Soto Home Visit Grant. Ethnic make-up is unknown because the survey was sent out via

e-mail.
 45

The sample was collected from the first through fourth grade classes at ABC

elementary school. There were four classes total, three classes had twenty students each

and one class had thirty-three students. The study was narrowed down to just first

through fourth grade parents in order to follow those classes over two years. The second

sample also included the entire faculty and staff at ABC Elementary. There were a total

of eighteen staff members who filled out the survey. Finally, the third sample collected

consisted of survey results from all the home visit coordinators whose schools were

involved with the Nell Soto Grant. The last survey was passed out to thirty-three home

visit site coordinators from around the district.

Data Collection

A cover letter and questionnaire (Appendix A) was passed out to all faculty at a

staff meeting. Teachers were asked to keep the survey anonymous and put the

questionnaire back in the researcher’s mailbox by the end of the next day. The teachers

had a limited time filling out the questionnaire, therefore ensuring that most

questionnaires will be returned and not forgotten. The second source, a parent

questionnaire, was sent home with a cover letter (Appendix B). It was passed out and

then collected by classroom teachers. The teachers then returned the completed surveys

to the researcher’s box. The teachers had a week to return the questionnaires back to the

researcher. The third survey (Appendix C) was circulated via e-mail and was not

anonymous because the school site coordinator was asked to state the name of their

school. The researcher also needed to know if their school wished to participate in home
 46

visits in the future. The school site coordinators had three weeks to fill out the survey and

return it via e-mail.

Instrumentation

The research for this study was qualitative; relying primarily on three

questionnaires, interviews, and a review of the literature. There were three instruments

used in conducting this research. The funnel approach was used for the majority of this

study. The researcher started with a more general approach to the questions and then as

the data was collected and analyzed the researcher began to fine tune questions.

The first source was an anonymous questionnaire (Appendix B) passed out to the

entire faculty and staff at ABC Elementary School. The survey consisted of twelve

questions. The first couple of questions were more general. For example, “How many

years have you been working at ABC Elementary School?” The questions then became

more focused on the topic. For example, “Do you have an interest in attending a home

visit training program?” All questions were clear, precise and relatively short. There was

one open-ended question at the end of the survey.

The second source was a different questionnaire (Appendix B) passed out to the

parents/guardians of all first through fourth graders who attended ABC Elementary

School. The purpose of this questionnaire was to find out if the parents at ABC

Elementary School were interested in learning more about a home visit program. Similar

to the teacher questionnaire, the parent questionnaire started off with more general

questions in the beginning. For example, “How many years has your child attended ABC

Elementary School?” Towards the end of the questionnaire the questions became more
 47

focused on the researcher’s proposal; a home visit program. Again, just like the first

source, there was an open-ended question at the end. Finally, a third questionnaire

(Appendix B) was circulated to all schools involved with the Nell Soto Grant. The home

visit site coordinator answered the survey based on his/her knowledge of how the Nell

Soto Grant was used at their school. Again, the questionnaire started with general

questions like, “What grade level site do you work at?” Then moved to questions more

focused on the Grant itself, “How many teachers actively done home visits?” At the end

of the survey, the schools were asked if their site was interested in continuing home visits

in the future, if so, what training did they wish to receive?

Data Analysis Procedures

The researcher analyzed the data by first numbering all questionnaires collected.

The purpose of doing this was to keep an accurate record of everything collected. Once

the questionnaires were all numbered, the researcher recorded all data from the faculty

and parent surveys on two master tables (Appendix C). All open-ended questions were

recorded verbatim. From the information gathered, bar graphs were developed to

represent certain responses in order to help the researcher evaluate any common trends.

The third survey was collected via Zoomerang, an online database. The research was

collected and the data was broken down by each question and bar graphs were created.

Limitations

While conducting the surveys, the researcher found all of the faculty and staff at

ABC Elementary School to be very cooperative. During the investigation of this thesis
 48

the researcher experienced the following limitations. The first limitation was finding a

willing participant to translate the survey from English into Spanish. The second

limitation the researcher found was distributing the parent survey. The third limitation

was convincing all the parents to return the survey. The fourth limitation was the narrow

scope of the study. Only one district was used to research the impact home visits were

having on schools. Finally, the last limitation the researcher encountered was finding the

most efficient way to distribute the third survey to all schools involved with the Parent

Teacher Home Visit Project. The survey was to be distributed during the final month of

the school year and the schools were given a two-week deadline to return the

information. All schools involved were extremely busy and many home visit coordinators

were feeling multiple demands.

 49

Chapter 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

This chapter will present the actual data collected and analyzed. The data

presented in Chapter 4 is the result of three surveys sent out to various faculty, parents,

and home visit coordinators at different schools throughout a school district in Northern

California.

Data Analysis

Home Visit Staff Survey

Question 1 asked participants how many years they had been working at ABC

Elementary School.

Figure 1 Number of Years at ABC Elementary School

 50

The most frequently selected choice was “1-5 years”, at eight staff members. The

majority of the faculty at ABC Elementary School had been working there between one

and ten years.

Question 2 asked the participants if they felt there was a need for more parent

volunteers at the elementary school.

Table 1

Question 2 - Do You Feel We Need More Parent Volunteers at ABC School?

Yes 100% (18)

No 0% (0)

The choice among the faculty was unanimous; One hundred percent of the faculty

thought there was a need for more parent volunteers on campus.

Question 3 asked the participants their opinion on whether or not there was a

discipline problem at the elementary school.

Table 2

Question 3 - Do You Feel there is a Discipline Problem at ABC School?

A. Yes, it has gotten worse 0% (0)

B. No, there is no problem 11% (2)

C. Yes, the problem has stayed the same 89% (16)

The most frequently selected choice was “yes the problem has stayed the same” as

89% of the responses stated the discipline problem continues to remain the same at the

elementary school.
 51

Question 4 asked participants if they felt there was an attendance problem at the

elementary school.

Figure 2 Attendance Problem

The most frequently selected choice was “yes, there is an attendance problem” as

56% of the responses.

Question 5 asked participants if they felt there was a disconnect among the

students and staff at ABC School.

Figure 3 Disconnect Among Students and Staff

 52

The most frequently selected choice was “among certain groups” at 39%. Many of

the participants who answered “among certain groups” wrote in they felt the two groups

with the biggest disconnect were among the African-American and Hmong students.

Question 6 asked the participants if they felt there was a disconnect among parents and

staff at the Elementary School.

Figure 4 Disconnect Among Parents and Staff

The most frequently selected choice was “among certain groups” at 56%. More

than half of the respondents felt certain groups were disconnected from the school.

Question 7 asked in the staffs’ opinion, did they think a home visit program would

help address some of the problems at the Elementary School.

 53

Figure 5 Will a Home Visit Program Help?

In Question 7, every single response stated that a home visit program would either

“more than likely help” at 56%, or “possibly help” at 44%. Not one response came back

stating there was no need for a home visit program.

Question 8 asked the participants if they felt there was a need at the Elementary

School to learn more about the home visit process.

Table 3

Question 8 - Do You feel there is a Need at ABC Elementary School to Learn More about

the Home Visit Process?

Yes 100% (18)

No 0% (0)

Every survey returned felt there was definitely a need for the school to learn more

about the home visit process.

Question 9 asked the participants if they had an interest themselves in learning

more about the home visit process.

 54

Table 4

Question 9 - Do You Have an Interest in Learning More about the Home Visit Process?

Yes 94% (17)

No 6% (1)

The question elicited a very large “yes” response, at 94%. The majority of the staff

at the Elementary School had a strong interest in learning more about the home visit

process.

Question 10 asked the participants if they would be interested in learning how to

do a home visit.

Table 5

Question 10 - Would You be Interested in Learning How to Do a Home Visit?

Yes 94% (17)

No 6% (1)

The most frequently selected choice was “yes” at 94%. A majority of the faculty

at the Elementary School was interested in learning how to do a home visit.

Question 11 asked the participants if they would be interested in attending home

visit training.
 55

Figure 6 Home Visit Training

The most frequently selected choice was “yes” at 72%, while 28% stated they

were interested only if the training was done at the Elementary School.

Question 12 asked if there was anything else they would like to add. Some

comments included the following:

• “In regard to our discipline issues, I feel that this is improving but will be a

continuing process for the year ahead.”

• “I have done home visits at other school sites. It is well documented to work in

many areas.”

• “It seems like there is an improvement this year when it comes to discipline.”

• “The discipline problem is being handled 100% better this year.”

• “Home visits are helpful but not a miracle cure. Many teachers have families

of their own who can be neglected at the expense of a lot of extra time added

on to the extra time we already spend. I think that impact can be overlooked.”

Parent Survey
 56

Question 1 asked the participants if they had more than one child at the

elementary school.

Table 6

Question 1 - Do You Have More Than One Child at ABC School?

Yes 42% (30)

No 58% (41)

The majority of the participants (58%) had more than one child at the elementary

school. In fact, many of the people surveyed responded by saying they had more than two

students at the elementary school.

Question 2 asked the participants what grade their child or children were in at the

elementary school.

Figure 7 What Grade is Your Child In?

 57

The majority of participants (42) had students in either the second or third grade at

the elementary school. The lowest result from the survey was kindergarten and first grade

with only 18 of the participants with children in those two grades.

Question 3 asked participants how long their children had been attending the

elementary school.

Figure 8 Years at ABC School

The majority of participants (37 in the two to four years category and three in the

four to six years category) have attended the elementary school for more than two years.

Question 4 asked the participants if they attended back to school night.

Table 7

Question 4 - Did You Attend Back to School Night this Year?

Yes 76% (54)

No 24% (17)

The majority of the participants attended back to school night at the elementary

school for one or more than one of their children.

 58

Question 5 asked the participants if they have spoken or met with their child’s

teacher.

Table 8

Question 5 - Have You Spoken with or Met Your Child’s Teacher Yet?

Yes 77% (55)

No 23% (16)

Again, this question elicited a response that the majority of adults who

participated in the survey had either spoken with or met their child’s teacher within the

first two months of school.

Question 6 asked the participants if they felt informed about what was going on at

ABC School.

Table 9

Question 4 - Do You Feel Like You Know What is Happening at ABC School?

Yes 68% (48)

No 7% (5)

Sometimes 25% (18)

The majority of the participants felt either very informed or somewhat informed

about what was taking place at their child’s school.

Question 7 asked the participating adults how they receive their information about

what is happening at the school.

 59

Figure 9 How the Participant Stays Informed

This question elicited a very mixed response. Many participants chose several

answers on how they stayed informed. The most popular answer was “the child tells me”,

with 49 of the participants choosing that response.

Question 8 asked the participants the importance of parent teacher conferences.

Table 10

Question 8 - How Important are Parent Teacher Conferences to You?

Very Important 92% (65)

Somewhat Important 4% (3)

Not Important 4% (3)

An overwhelming majority of adults who participated in the survey (92%)

responded saying parent teacher conferences were “very important” in their child’s

education.

Question Nine asked the participants if they would circle all of the following ways

they would like to get involved in their child’s education.

 60

Figure 10 Getting Involved

The responses to this question were very mixed. However, the majority (29)

responded that “helping in the classroom” was the easiest way for them to get involved.

“Chaperoning on fieldtrips” was the second most popular answer with (19) of the

participants responding to that choice. The lowest response was “volunteering at recess”

with only six participants choosing that response.

The next two questions had to do with the school’s PTA. Question 9 asked if the

participant was involved in the school’s PTA.

Table 11

Question 9 - Are You Involved in the School’s PTA?

Yes 13% (9)

No 87% (62)

An overwhelming majority (87%) of the surveys that came back were not

involved in the PTA at the elementary school.

Question 10 was a follow-up to Question 9 asking the participants if they were not

involved in the PTA, would they like to be.

 61

Table 12

Question 10 - If You are Not Involved, Would You Like to Join the School PTA?

Yes 22% (14)

No 78% (49)

Many of the respondents who were not involved in the PTA did not plan on

joining during this school year.

Question 11 focused on meeting with the child’s teacher. The question asked the

participants if they would be willing to meet with their child’s teacher outside of school.

Figure 11 Meeting with the Teacher Outside of School

Many of the participants were willing to explore the idea of meeting with the

teacher outside of school (33), said “yes” they were open to meeting either at their home

or somewhere else besides school. A close second, (28) responded “need more

information” but required more information before making a final decision.

Question 12 was the last question on the survey and it asked the participants if

they had any additional comments. Some of the comments included the following:
 62

• “There have been some new and exciting changes this year. My child is more

involved and active in her school and personal growth. Thank you!”

• “When I was a teacher I did not want to do home visits. I needed my private

life.”

• “I work all the time, but I’m very interested in my child’s well being. I will

visit the school when time permits.”

• “We have wonderful and helpful teachers here. I appreciate their time and

attention to my son.”

• “Thanks for caring.”

• “I am very concerned about school bullies and what is done about the problem

if it should occur at the school.”

• “The crosswalk area seems to be very congested with parents parking in it.

There should be a crossing guard on duty at 8am too!”

• “I have seen positive changes this year.”

• “We are looking forward to meeting the teacher.”

• “Anything I can do to help at home because I have a little one.”

• “We want to thank you for helping the kids at school.”

 63

District Survey

Questions 1 through 3 asked the coordinators to identify their school site. In total,

there were 23 elementary schools, five middle schools, and three high schools. The fourth

question focused on what level the site coordinator taught.

Table 13

Question 4 - What Level Do You Teach?

a. Elementary/K-8 22% (14)

b. Middle School 17% (5)

c. High School 10% (3)

One school did not respond to this question.

Question Five asked what percentage of the school’s teachers had been trained to

do home visits.

Figure 12 The Percentage of Teachers Who Were Trained

The majority of schools (78%) responded to Question 5 by either choosing 50-

75% or selecting 75-100%. Very few schools (22%) had less than half their staffs trained

to do home visits.
 64

Question 6 focused on teachers actively doing home visits.

Figure 13 Teachers Who Actively Did Home Visits

Question 6 did not have a majority answer: six schools (19%) out of 31 total said

their teachers had actively done home visits. Nine schools (28%) responded by choosing

the second choice of 25-50%. Eight schools (25%) claimed to have 50-75% of their

teachers actively doing home visits, and nine schools (28%) said they had 75-100%

actively conducting home visits.

Question 7 asked what type of materials the teacher brought on the home visit.

Figure 14 Materials Brought Along on Home Visits

 65

In Question 7, teachers were able to choose more than one answer. Fourteen

teachers (47%), responded saying they brought a Language Arts toolkit, nine teachers

(30%) responded they brought Math toolkits, and fourteen (47%) responded to bringing a

book to the student when visiting them at their home. The last response was entitled

“other” and teachers were asked to please specify what else they brought on their home

visits. Nineteen teachers (63%) chose “other” as their answer. The responses included

flyers on upcoming events, dictionaries, resource brochures, homework kits, writing

practice, CST information, Healthy Start information, and hygiene information.

Question 8 asked approximately how many home-visits took place at their site.

Table 14

Question 8 – How Many Home Visits Took Place at Your Site Under the Nell Soto Parent

Teacher Involvement Grant.

a. 0-100 35% (11)

b. 100-200 32% (10)

c. 200-300 13% (4)

d. >300 10% (3)

Question 9 focused on changes that could be attributed to the home visit project.
 66

Figure 15 Changes Attributed to the Home Visit Project

Question 9 allowed teachers to again respond to more than one answer. The top

three responses to this question were “parent participation” with 22 responses at 71%,

academics with 21 responses at 68%, and attendance with 20 responses at 65%. The next

answer with the biggest response was “decrease in discipline problems” with 18

responses at 58%, followed up by decrease in transience rate with six responses at 19%,

and finally “other attributes” with six responses at 19%. Some of the “other” responses

included:

• overall relationships improved,

• closeness to the student visited occurred,

• more parents on campus, and,

• the teacher/parent/child relationship and communication improved.

Question 10 asked if the school sites were interested in continuing home visits in

the future.
 67

Table 15

Question 10 - Is Your Site Interested in Continuing Home Visits in the Future?

a. Yes 97% (31)

b. No 3% (1)

Question 11 focused mainly on how prepared teachers felt doing home visits.

Table 16

Question 11 - Do You Feel Your Faculty was Prepared to do Home Visits?

a. yes-felt prepared 75% (24)

b. did not feel prepared 3% (1)

c. somewhat prepared 22% (7)

Question 12 asked the schools if they would like more training in the future

regarding home visits.

Table 17

Question 12 - Would your Faculty Like More Training Regarding Home Visits?

a. yes 34% (11)

b. no 9% (3)

c. not sure 25% (8)

d. depends on training 34% (11)

This question elicited a very evenly distributed response regarding training in the

future. Most schools seemed open to the future training, but it depended on what type.

Question 13 asked what type of training would the schools like in the future.
 68

Figure 16 Future Training Ideas

The responses for Question 13 had two answers that were the most popular:

engaging with diverse families; 21 out of 31 schools chose that response at 66%. The

other most frequently selected answer was information on community resources

available; 21 out of 31 schools chose that answer at 66%. Two schools chose “other” as

their response. The schools specified other trainings they would like to see would be

Waldorf inspired parenting classes and home visits that require interpreters.

Findings

After reviewing the results of all three questionnaires, it is evident that the vast

majority of schools were positively impacted from conducting home visits. In addition,

from the data collected from the teacher questionnaire, the majority of parents welcomed

the idea of a home visit.

The data collected and analyzed from the teacher surveys confirmed several different

trends presented by the faculty at ABC Elementary School.

 69

• One strong trend was the need/interest among the faculty to learn more about

the home visit process and receive training in the area.

• Many teachers felt there was discipline problem at the school, but many

teachers felt it was starting to get better.

• One hundred percent of the faculty wanted to learn more about the home visit

process.

The second survey was the school survey and they were passed out to the parents

via their child’s classroom teacher. All surveys were anonymous. One hundred percent of

the surveys collected were used as data and analyzed. The data collected and analyzed

from the school questionnaire demonstrated several different trends presented by the

parents at the Elementary School.

• One positive response was many parents had either attended back to school

night, met or spoken with the teacher or had done both.

• Another positive trend was the understanding of the importance of parent

teacher conferences.

• One negative result was the lack of parent involvement in the school’s PTA.

Many parents were not a part of the PTA and did not plan on joining either.

• Finally, one last significant trend was the willingness to either participate or

learn more about a home visit program at the school.

The third survey was passed out via e-mail and the responses were collected

electronically. There were thirty-one schools surveyed and each school had two weeks to

respond. All surveys were in English and 100 percent of the information collected was
 70

used for data and analysis. The data was collected and tallied through a computer program

called Zoomerang. All responses were recorded and used for analysis. Many positive

outcomes were discovered through analyzing the data for example:

• The majority of schools saw positive outcomes with home visits.

• Ninety-seven percent of the schools would like to continue conducting home

visits.

• Fifty-nine percent of the schools would like more professional development

regarding home visits and 34% said it depended on the type of training.

• More than half the schools attributed home visits to raising test scores,

increasing attendance, helping with parent participation and decreasing

discipline problems.

In conclusion, all three surveys provided the researcher solid evidence that home

visits work.
 71

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The purpose of this study was to determine two key areas of home visit impact.

The first area examined was the different types of impact home visits had on a school.

The second area examined was what districts can professionally do to help their teachers

conduct the visits. The study set out to answer the following questions:

4. Do home visits make a difference in the relationship between home and

school?

5. What impact do home visits have on attendance, academics and discipline?

6. What can districts do in the way of professional development to help educators

conduct successful home visits?

After a review of the literature, three various questionnaires were passed out to

teachers, a sampling of parents, and to 33 home visit school site coordinators in an urban

school district in Northern California. All questionnaires were returned and analyzed, but

limited to one school district. Also, the entire group of parents and teachers participating

in the Home Visit Project was not surveyed; therefore not reflecting the entire teacher

population. After analyzing all data retrieved, information was recorded and put into

various graphs and figures. Results were then recorded with the intent to examine how

well the three initial questions were answered.

 72

Conclusions

Overall, the research has documented that home visits make a strong positive

impact on the relationship between the home and school. In Chapter 2, the Review of the

Literature clearly stated success is achieved when the home and the school communicate

and become partners. Long (2007) wrote that sometimes, all it took to break a long-

standing cultural, language, or socioeconomic barrier, was an invitation from the school

to help. Peralta-Nash (2003) emphasized the importance of including the parents in the

educational decision-making process. Listening to the parents and working with them

instead of against them, helps to provide success for the child.

The Literature in Chapter 2 documented how positive home visits made the

families feel welcomed, honored and respected and in return, the families became more

active in the school. The Review of the Literature found that when schools work with

parents, everyone involved benefits. When parents are listened to and treated as the expert

about their child, a relationship is built and trust is established. Home visits help make

connections, therefore resulting in partnerships between teachers and parents with the

ultimate goal of success for each child. Furger (2002) saw these exact results in her

research, with nine Sacramento schools. Now, these nine schools have expanded into

thirty-three schools conducting home visits and even though the Nell Soto Grant money is

gone, all but one school plans on continuing home visits.

The Literature Review in Chapter 2 also clearly stated the positive impact home

visits have on academics and school management. Many researchers like Goodwin and

Judd (2005) and Davies et al. (2007) documented in their research that home visits
 73

attributed to rising test scores. When a family was engaged in the child’s learning, student

achievement rose. Home visits provided teachers the opportunity to see what was already

being done at the home and then introduced new ideas to the family to help support the

skills a child can learn at home.

Another positive impact the Review of the Literature documented was a decrease

in discipline problems. Dryfoos (1996) found with the connection of home and school,

property destruction and graffiti began to diminish. Delisio (2006) stated in her research

that after home visits were completed, suspension rates decreased and students became

more focused in class. Epstein and Sheldon (2002) found in research that with the help of

home visits, truancy and absenteeism went down. Schools reached out to chronically

absent students and established a relationship of trust and attendance went up.

Finally, the Review of the Literature also focused on what is being done

professionally regarding home visits. Many teacher credentialing programs are

encouraging students to build home-school relationships. A few programs like the one at

the University of Maine have their professors leading as examples and have them

conducting home visits with their students. In Albuquerque Public Schools, teachers,

parents and education majors are all in training together focusing on communication

between the home and school. In Sacramento, The Parent Teacher Home Visit Project

trains teachers throughout the year on how to conduct a home visit. They offer three types

of trainings to help prepare the teacher when doing home visits. The literature clearly

stated professional development was extremely useful for educators who were taking the

first steps and setting up home visits. Currently, the problem is how schools continue to
 74

grow professionally once the educator has begun conducting home visits and no longer

needs the beginning trainings.

Not only did the literature state positive impacts from home visits, but the

teachers, and site coordinators surveyed documented positive results, too. The majority of

teachers (94 percent) and parents (61 percent) surveyed, wanted to participate in a home

visit project. In the schools who were actively conducting home visits, most of the

respondents (71 percent) claimed home visits were working to get parents more engaged

on campus. Again, a majority of the respondents (68 percent) cited home visits helped

raise their schools test scores, increase their attendance, and decrease their discipline

problems. In addition, it was quite clear from the questionnaire results that schools

wanted to continue doing home visits and would appreciate future professional

development opportunities. Many educators (78 percent) felt they had received enough

training on how to conduct a home visit and were ready for the next step in their

professional development. For example, many school site coordinators wanted the Parent

Teacher Home Visit Project to provide a training where educators could receive

information on what resources were out there to help families in need.

Recommendations

Facts from the Review of the Literature in Chapter 2 and the results from the

questionnaires, document that home visits positively benefit both the school and the

home. One recommendation would be to further investigate what other districts who

conduct home visits are doing and to examine what is working successfully within that
 75

district. This comparison and contrast of the data would be important to observe how

other districts around the nation are keeping their home visit programs running.

Another recommendation would be to investigate how to provide compensation

for teachers and administrators who are actively doing home visits. In California, the time

frame for the Nell Soto Grant money has run out. In the future, how are districts going to

pay their teachers and administrators for conducting home visits? This problem needs to

be examined because many teachers already work overtime with no extra pay. What can

districts and the state legislators do to fix this problem?

Finally, the last recommendation focuses on professional development.

Respondents strongly replied they are interested in receiving training for home visits in

the following two areas: engaging with diverse families and information on community

resources available to help when doing a home visit. Even though many teachers are

already trained, that training should not disappear. However, The Parent Teacher Home

Visit Project needs to research how to expand their project so teachers can continue

growing professionally on the topic of home visits and will want to continue to conduct

them and make a positive change for their school.

 76

Appendices
 77

Appendix A

Consent to Participate in Research

 78

Consent to Participate in Research

At an Elementary School in Sacramento

You are being asked to participate in research, which will be conducted by Lisa
Levasseur, teacher and graduate student in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at
California State University, Sacramento. The Department of Education supports the
practice of informed consent and protection for subjects participating in research. The
following information is provided for you to decide whether you would like to participate
in the present study.

The purpose of this project is to develop a program to demonstrate how to do a successful

home visit at an elementary school in Sacramento.

You will be asked to fill out the attached survey of questions about parent involvement at
the school and the relationships between teachers and parents.

The information gathered from this survey is important since it will represent a sampling
of teacher opinions on the how our elementary school is doing in regards to parent
support and determine whether or not a home visit program is needed.

Your participation is solicited, but strictly voluntary. The researcher assures you that all
surveys will remain anonymous.

If you have any questions about this research, you may contact Lisa Levasseur at
(916) 433-5420, or by e-mail at [email protected]

Thank you very much for your support. I appreciate your time and cooperation.

Sincerely,

Lisa Levasseur
Teacher/Graduate Student
 79

Consent to Participate in Research

At an Elementary School in Sacramento

You are being asked to participate in research, which will be conducted by Lisa
Levasseur, teacher and graduate student in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at
California State University, Sacramento. The Department of Education supports the
practice of informed consent and protection for subjects participating in research. The
following information is provided for you to decide whether you would like to participate
in the present study.

The purpose of this project is to develop a program to demonstrate how to do a successful

home visit at an elementary school in Sacramento.

You will be asked to fill out the attached survey of questions about the importance of
parent involvement at the school and the relationships between teachers and parents.

The information gathered from this survey is important since it will represent a sampling
of parent opinions on the how our elementary school is doing in regards to meeting you
and your child’s needs. The survey will also help the school determine whether or not a
home visit program is needed to help make your child successful at school.

Your participation is solicited, but strictly voluntary. The researcher assures you that all
surveys will remain anonymous.

If you have any questions about this research, you may contact Lisa Levasseur at
(916) 433-5420, or by e-mail at [email protected]

Thank you very much for your support. I appreciate your time and cooperation.

Sincerely,

Lisa Levasseur
Teacher/Graduate Student
 80

Appendix B

Surveys
 81

Home Visit Staff Survey

1. How long have you been working at ABC School?
a. 1-5 years b. 5-10 years c. 10 plus years

2. Do you feel we need more parent volunteers at ABC School?

a. Yes b. No

3. Do you feel there is a discipline problem at ABC School?

a. Yes, it has gotten worse b. No, there is no problem
c. Yes, the problem has stayed the same.

4. Do you feel there is an attendance problem at ABC School?

a. Yes b. No c. Possibly

5. Do you feel there is a disconnect among the students and staff at ABC School?
a. Yes b. No c. Among certain groups __________________

6. Do you feel there is a disconnect among parents and staff at ABC School?
a. Yes b. No c. Among certain groups __________________

7. In your opinion, would a home visit program help address some of the above
problems?
a. More than likely b. Possibly c. Not likely

8. Do you feel there is a need at ABC School to learn more about the home visit
process?
a. Yes b. No

9. Do you have an interest in learning more about the home visit process?
a. Yes b. No

10. Would you be interested in learning how to do a home visit?

a. Yes b. No
 82

11. Would you be interested in attending a home visit training?

a. Yes b. No c. Yes, if at school, only

12. Anything you would like to add?

__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
 83

School Parent Survey

Please fill out and return to your child’s teacher. Thank you!

1. Do you have more than one child at ABC School?

A. Yes b. No

2. What grade(s) is your child in at ABC School?

a. k-1 b. 2-3 c. 4-6

3. How many years has your child attended ABC School?

a. First year here b. 2-4 years c. More than 5 years

4. Did you attend back to school night this year?

a. Yes b. No

5. Have you spoke with or met your child’s teacher yet?

a. Yes b. No

6. Do you feel like you know what is happening at ABC School?

a. Yes b. No c. Sometimes

7. Where do you get your information about what is going on at ABC School?
a. My child tells me b. The Birney Bobcat c. Classroom newsletter

d. Somewhere else___________________

8. How important are parent teacher conferences to you?

a. Very important b. Somewhat important c. Not important

9. Are you involved in the school’s PTA?

a. Yes b. No

10. If no, would you like to join the school PTA?

a. Yes b. No
 84

11. Would you be willing to meet with your child’s teacher outside of school; for

example, at your home or at the public library?

a. Yes b. No c. Maybe, I would need more information

12. Any additional comments you would like to add:

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

___________________________
 85

Home Visit District Survey

Please circle the answer that best applies to your school site and then return it by June 5th via e-mail.

1. Please identify your Elementary Site:

2. Please identify your Middle School Site:

3. Please identify your High School Site:

4. What level do you teach?

a. Elementary/K-8 b. Middle School c. High School

5. What percentages of your teachers have been trained to do home visits?

a. 0-25% b. 25-50% c. 50-75% d. 75-100%

6. How many teachers have actively done home visits?

a. 0-25% b. 25-50% c. 50-75% d. 75-100%

7. If you brought materials on your home visit what were they?

a. Lang. Arts toolkit b. Math toolkit

c. A book d. Other________________________________

8. Approximately how many home visits took place at your site under the Nell Soto
Parent Teacher Involvement Grant?
a. 0-100 b. 100-200 c. 200-300 d. >300(#?____________)

9. Has your school noticed any progress in the following areas connected to home
visits? Please circle any that apply.
1. Academics 2. Attendance 3. Parent Participation

4. Decrease in Discipline Problems 5. Decrease in transient rate

6. Other____________________________________________________
 86

10. Is your site interested in continuing home visits in the future?

a. Yes b. No c. If no, why not? ____________________

11. Do you feel your faculty was prepared to do home visits?

a. Yes b. No, Why not?_________________________________

c. Somewhat d. Other________________________________________

12. Would your faculty like more training (Professional Development) regarding
home visits?
a. Yes b. No

c. Not Sure d. Depends on the training

13. What type of training would you like PTHVP to offer in the future?
a. Engaging with diverse families

b. Differentiated instruction after the home visit

c. Home visits for high school educators

d. Information on community resources available

e. Other _________________________________
 87

Appendix C

Survey Results
 88

Spreadsheet for Home Visit Staff Survey

Questions A B C D
1 8 6 3 1
2 18 0 - -
3 16 2 - -
4 10 3 5 -
5 5 6 7 -
6 6 2 10 -
7 10 8 0 -
8 18 0 - -
9 17 1 - -
10 17 1 - -
11 13 5 - -
12 Additional
comments

Question 12 additional comments:

• “In regard to our discipline issues, I feel that this is improving but will be a

continuing process for the year ahead.”

• “I have done home visits at other school sites. It is well documented to work in

many areas.”

• “It seems like there is an improvement this year when it comes to discipline.”

• “The discipline problem is being handled a 100% better this year.”

• “Home visits are helpful but not a miracle cure. Many teachers have families of

their own who can be neglected at the expense of a lot of extra time added on to

the extra time we already spend. I think that impact can be overlooked.”
 89

Spreadsheet of School Parent Survey Responses

Questions A B C D E
1 30 41 - - -
2 18 42 25 - -
3 26 42 3 - -
4 54 17 - - -
5 55 16 - - -
6 48 5 18 - -
7 49 29 33 3 -
8 65 3 3 - -
9 29 12 19 6 13
10 9 62 - - -
11 14 49 - - -
12 33 10 28 - -
13 Written
comments

Question 13 open-ended comments:

• “There have been some new and exciting changes this year. My child is more
involved and active in her school and personal growth. Thank you!”
• “When I was a teacher I did not want to do home visits. I needed my private life”
• “I work all the time, but I’m very interested in my child’s well being. I will visit
the school when time permits.”
• “We have wonderful and helpful teachers here. I appreciate their time and
attention to my son.”
• “Thanks for caring.”
• “I am very concerned about school bullies and what is done about the problem if
it should occur at the school.”
• “The crosswalk area seems to be very congested with parents parking in it. There
should be a crossing guard on duty at 8am too!”
• “I have seen positive changes this year.”
• “We are looking forward to meeting the teacher.”
• “Anything I can do to help at home because I have a little one.”
• “We want to thank you for helping the kids at school.”
 90

Spreadsheet for Home Visit District Survey Responses

Questions A B C D E F
4 22 5 3
5 2 5 9 16
6 6 9 8 9
7 14 9 14 19
8 11 10 4 3
9 21 20 22 18 6 6
10 31 1 1
11 24 1 7 0 1
12 11 3 8 11
13 21 14 2 21 2
 91

REFERENCES

Allen, J. (2008). Family partnerships. Educational Leadership, 66(1), 22-27.

Amanti, C., Gonzalez, N. & Moll, L. (2005). Funds of knowledge, Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Arguea, N. & Conroy, S. (2003). The effect of parental involvement in parent teacher

groups on student achievement. School Community Journal, 13(2), 119-133.

Aronson, J. (1996). How schools can recruit hard-to-reach parents. Educational

Leadership, 53(7), 58-60.

Assembly Bill 33. (1999). Parent involvement grant. Retrieved November 1, 2008, from

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com.

California Department of Education (CDE). (1999). School Attendance Review Boards

(SARB) Handbook. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from http://

www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ai/cw/documents/schoolattendance.

California Education Code Section 48321. (2009). Retrieved November 1, 2008, from

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com.

Child Abuse Prevention Council of Sacramento. (2008). The Child Abuse Prevention and

Treatment Act (CAPTA): Federal guidelines. Retrieved November 2, 2008, from

http://www.capcsac.org/training/laws.

Davies, D., Henderson, A., Johnson, V. & Mapp, K. (2007). Beyond the bake sales. New

York City, NY: New Press.

Delisio, R. E. (2006). Home visits forge school, family links. Retrieved November 15,

2007, from http://www.educationalworld.com/a_admin/admin342.html.

 92

Dryfoos, J. (1996). Full-service schools. Educational Leadership, 53(7), 18-23.

Epstein, J. (2001). Building bridges of home, school, and community: The importance of

design. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 6(1&2), 161-168.

Epstein, J. & Sheldon, S. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student

attendance through family and community involvement. The Journal of

Educational Research, 95(5), 308-318.

Ferlazzo, L. (2009). Going home. Retrieved August 9, 2009, from

http://www.teachermagazine.com.

Finders, M. & Lewis, C. (1994). Why some parents don’t come to school. Educational

Leadership, 1, 50-54.

Fisch, C., Hernandez, E. & Trumbull, E. (2003). Parent involvement in schooling-

According to whose values? The School Community Journal, 13(2), 45-72.

Flanigan, C. (2005). Partnering with parents and communities are pre-service teachers

adequately prepared? Harvard Family Research Project, 1-12.

Furger, R. (2002). Making connections between home and school. The George Lucas

Education Foundation. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://www.Edutopia.org.

Ginsberg, M. (2007). Lessons at the kitchen table. Educational Leadership, 64(6), 56-61.

Gonzalez-DeHass, A. & Willems, P. (2003). Examining the underutilization of parent

involvement in the schools. The School Community Journal, 13(1), 85-99.

Goodwin, M. & Judd, L. (2005). 20 ways to…Ensure success as a novice teacher.

Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(1), 24-9.

 93

Henderson, A. & Mapp, K. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school,

family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, TX:

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.

Jehlen, A. (2009). There’s no place like home. NEA Today, 28(1), 42-43.

Kyle, D. & McIntyre, E. (2000). Family visits benefit teachers and families-and students

most of all. Language Arts, 78(3), 264-72.

Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. (2003). The essential conversation, New York City, NY: Random

House.

Levine, T., Irizarry, J. & Bunch, G. (2008). Beyond open houses. National Staff

Development Council, 29(1) 29-33.

Long, C. (2007). Parents in the picture. NEA Today, 26-31.

Mapp, K. (2003). Having their say: Parents describe why and how they are engaged in

their children’s learning. The School Community Journal, 13(1), 35-64.

Meyer, J. & Mann, M. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of the benefits of home visits for

early elementary children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(1), 93-7.

Minugh K. (2008, July 24). Home Visits aim to keep students from floundering in high

school. Sacramento Bee. Retrieved June 1, 2009 from http:///www.sacbee.com.

National Head Start Association (NHSA). (2009). National Head Start Association

website. Retrieved March 20, 2009 from http://www.nhsa.org.

Parent Teacher Home Visit Project. (PTHVP). (2005). Evaluations. Retrieved April 2,

2009, from http://www.pthvp.org/data.html.

 94

Patton, J. (2006). Family extended. Retrieved March 8, 2009, from

http://www.TeachingK-8.com.

Peralta-Nash, C. (2003). The impact of home visits in students’ perception of teaching.

Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(4), 111-25.

Perry, C. & Power, B. (2000). Someone’s most precious darling: Building the home-

school connection in pre-service teacher education programs. The School

Community Journal, 10(2), 9-19.

Quintanar, A. & Warren, S. (2008). Listening to the voices of Latino parent volunteers.

Kappa Delta Pi Record, 44(3), 119-123.

Reali, A. & Tancredi, R. (2003). School-family relationship and school success: Some

lessons from a teacher education program, 3-8.

Reglin, G. (2002). Project reading and writing (RAW): Home visitations and the school

involvement of high-risk families. Education, 123(1), 153-158.

Rhee, C. (1999). Bill calls for parent-teacher home visitations. Daily Forty-Niner, 7(12),

12-13.

Sandham, J. (1999). Home visits lead to stronger ties, altered perceptions. Education

Week, 19(14), 14-16.

Schulting, A. (2009). Kindergarten home visit project. Family Involvement Network of

Educators, 1(1)1-2.

Steele-Carlin, S. (2009). Teacher visits home. Retrieved on August 9, 2009, from

http://www.educationworld.com.
 95

US Department of Education. (2001a). Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, Retrieved

on June 18, 2009, from http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html.

US Department of Education. (2001b). No Child Left Behind Act, Retrieved on June 18,

2009, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml.

Williams, D. (2002). Essential elements of strong parent involvement programs.

Educational Leadership, 51(8), 18-20.

Worthy, J. & Hoffman, J. (2001). Home visits, reading engagement, and farewell.

Reading Teacher, 54(5), 516-523.

Yeats, W. (2007). It’s all about perspective. Principal Leadership, 8(3), 30-34.