Bridging the Gap Between Home and School—Perceptions of Classroom Teachers and Principals: Case Studies of Two Jamaican Inner-City Schools

Introduction

While the deficit lens through which families from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are often viewed have been challenged in the recent years, very few, if any, can dispute that the vicious cycle of poverty and its impact on the lives of children are major factors that put them at risk for future years (Brooks-Gunn, 2003; Grantham-McGregor et al., 2007; Karoly et al., 1998; Samms-Vaughan, 2001). Undoubtedly, the ripple effects of this “epidemic” and its implicit features, namely the exposure to poor parenting practices, nutritional deficiencies, and the lack of cognitive stimulation, significantly increase the likelihood that children under such circumstances will perpetuate the cycle and will themselves drop out of school, become teenage parents, and become involved in criminal activities (Ferguson, Bovaird, & Mueller, 2007; Harding, 2003, Hoffman & Maynard, 2008; Moser, & Holland (1997).

Many of these children from disadvantaged circumstances, particularly those in the first 5 years of life, when compared with their more socioeconomically privileged counterparts, display greater social, emotional, developmental, and academic delays and face major hurdles as they transition through the phases and milestones of their lives (Grantham-McGregor et al., 2007; Magnuson, 2013; Samms-Vaughan, 2001). From a Jamaican standpoint, though not mutually exclusive, the reasons for these are numerous as more often than not many of these children have nutritional deficiencies, have frequent encounters and experiences with violence and crime, and are born to teenage mothers who lack the requisite parenting skills to support the psychological and emotional developmental needs of a demanding young child. Jamaica’s experience with this challenge is severe (Samms-Vaughan, 2001, 2008). So much so in fact that the Government of Jamaica moved to enact the National Parenting Support Act in 2012 as a means of stemming the tide of social issues and problems that plagued the society due to questionable parenting practices. Overseen by the Ministry of Education (MoE), the National Parenting Support Act was specifically aimed at encouraging and working with (often) young unemployed parents, who struggled with meeting their parenting demands.

With the challenges these children encounter, it is fair to say that those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have unique needs and ultimately seek to gain more from their early childhood learning experiences than their more privileged counterparts. Locally derived anecdotal evidence from our cultural context, the research emerging from Samms-Vaughan’s (2001, 2008) longitudinal studies along with the data emerging from the MoE and unfortunately Jamaica’s Ministry of National Security, only confirmed what many teachers and administrators in communities labeled as low income, inner city, and violence prone have known for years. First, children from such communities need a structured social environment and second, children whose parents are integrally involved in their learning significantly outperform those whose parents show little interest or involvement. Simply stated, quality early learning experiences matter, and parenting partners make a difference. When home and school work in tandem, children benefit significantly.

Aim of the Study

Stemming from the aforementioned background, this small-scale qualitative research, using two inner-city schools as case studies, focused on how the said schools were able to challenge the mind-set about parenting practices and home–school relations in such communities. Through collaboration and partnering between parents and the school, the study examines how the gap that existed between home and school was minimized. It outlines how parents were empowered and how the schools were able to challenge perceptions held by the parents to change their mind-set from apathy, ignorance, and nonchalance to the experiences that took place behind the school gate.

Two primary research questions guided this small-scale study:

Profile of the Participating Schools

Two early childhood institutions (Kingston Early Childhood Centre and Simpson’s Basic School) were used as case studies in this research. Both schools were located in violence-ridden communities in Kingston, Jamaica. The communities were considered to be heavily gang populated. Both schools were basic schools, which are privately owned community schools in Jamaica. Kingston Early Childhood Centre (pseudonym), located on the boundary of two violence-torn communities, has a registered population of 176 students. This figure comprised of 101 boys and 75 girls. It should be noted that despite these figures, the average attendance on any given day was approximately 130 to 140 students. According to the principal, Antoinette Gordon (pseudonym), several reasons account for low student turnout. Some of the reasons include “war” or violence in the community, inability to pay the school fees, no money to purchase lunch, parents who “could not be bothered to get their child/ren ready for school,” and days when children would go with their parents to sell at the market (this specifically happened on Fridays).

Simpson’s BasicSchool (pseudonym), though smaller in size and population, also boasted similar features to Kingston Early Childhood Centre. Simpson’s Basic School has 98 students registered. It is a mission school of a small church located in one of Kingston’s most violent communities. The children and all but one of the teachers come from the community, and as such most of them are familiar with each other. The three teachers including the principal are all members of the home church, and as such lean heavily on the church for support. Similar to Kingston Early Childhood Centre, student attendance was “average to poor,” according to the principal, Gwendolyn Taylor, who was also a classroom teacher. According to Ms. Taylor, it was not uncommon to have attendance figures as low as 40 students. She does admit that though uncommon, several factors account for this. Similar to Mrs. Gordon, Principal of Kingston Early Childhood Centre, the predominant reasons for nonattendance was the inability to pay the school fees and violence in the community. Ms Taylor maintains that the children are encouraged to come to school even if they have no money to purchase lunch as there is a system in place to cover this. She does however admit that school fees need to be paid as these funds are predominantly used to pay staff and pay for the day-to-day running of the school. According to Ms. Taylor, though the school is a mission of the church, there needs to be some amount of independence as the church is not able to meet all the financial obligations of the school.

Method

Two early childhood institutions (also known as basic schools) were used as a part of the study. These schools were selected as they were the schools that participated in the annual teaching practicum experience for students seeking to complete their bachelor’s degrees in early childhood education at two teacher training colleges in Kingston.

The data for this study were collected over 4 years during the 12-week student-teaching practicum which students complete in the third year of their studies. During this time, approximately 60 visits were made to both institutions. The data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with school administrators, parents, and teachers, and observation of school and classroom practices.

Selection of Participating Institutions

The participating institutions were purposefully selected because these were the two schools in which I supervised students during their teaching practicum experience. As a supervisor, making my weekly visits to my “student-teachers” over the past 4 years, I was able to see (what I considered) a significant difference in how the schools were operated based on increased parent involvement. Within the past 2 years, I noticed a robust parent partnership program at the schools. In contrast, my anecdotal observations during my earlier visits to the schools were that they both were struggling with student attendance, parent involvement, and dealing with the violence that constantly affected the communities. The schools were closed several times throughout the 12-week Student Practicum each year because violence plagued the communities in which they existed. It was not uncommon for me to receive phone calls from my supervisees warning me not to come to visit them on specific days because gun shots were being fired by members of opposing gangs or that the community was not safe to visit, and that the teachers and students (ages 3-5 years) had to seek shelter under desks, tables, and behind board partitions.

Benefits of Home and School Partnerships

Locally and internationally derived research is replete with the significant benefits for children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds as it pertains to how quality early learning experiences can change the trajectory of their lives and ultimately mitigate against the many obstacles they will likely face in the future. To offset this, young children’s early learning experiences must be designed in ways that support their unique needs and ultimately provide for them in ways that allow them to overcome the plethoric challenges they may come to the classroom with.

In spite of the challenges, within the past few years, educators have recognized the importance of home–school partnerships and have come to accept that despite their perceptions that families from poor socioeconomic backgrounds provide little stimulation to their children, current research has now contradicted this “deficit perspective.” In this, a shift has emerged where research has shown the value of the experiences they provide their children. In addition, researchers have come to consider ways to take advantage of these experiences, and have sought to build on and work with families and ultimately use the family experiences (even those not usually considered stimulating) in the classroom context (Kinkead-Clark, 2015; Pahl & Kelly, 2005). To this end, opportunities to build on the valuable experiences of home, and to use these to enhance the teaching and learning experiences, involve minimizing the dissonance that exists between home and school (Barnard, 2004; Jeynes, 2005; Velsor & Orozco, 2007).

Minimizing the dissonance between home and school is not an easy feat, especially when taking into account the many challenges that prevent parents (from lower socioeconomic backgrounds) from visiting and participating in school activities, especially when compared with their more privileged counterparts. For many poorer parents, their inflexible work schedules (if they are employed), other responsibilities in the home, inability to meet or deal with perceived school demands, expectations and (for many Jamaican parents) the inability to afford the transportation costs to travel are some of the barriers that prevent them from getting involved in their child’s education (Gettinger & Geutschow, 1998; Jeynes, 2005; Velsor & Orozco, 2007).

How well children perform in school is inextricably linked to parent involvement. According to Chrispeels (1996), Epstein (2001), and Rosenthal and Sawyers (1996), parent involvement is a critical aspect and contributor to the success of children at all levels of their academic lives. According to Meyer and Mann (2006), not only do strong home–school relations benefit children academically, but there are also the benefits of having a “better understanding of the child,” more improved communication with the parents/guardians, and a better understanding of how the home and community shape the child (p. 93). These benefits are very important as how the home, family, and school connections are perceived by each party is crucial in the establishment and maintenance of a strong relationship.

Research has outlined that socioeconomic prowess is a marker of how strong the relations are. According to Epstein (1995), schools in wealthier communities and those attended by children from higher socioeconomic backgrounds have (on average) been shown to have more parent involvement. Epstein (1995), however, cautions that to mitigate against this, schools in poorer communities have to implement sustainable solutions and strategies to overcome this practice. To this end, Byrd (2012) maintains that to achieve this there needs to be a level field whereby cultural, language, and social differences are dismissed. This practice will essentially allow parents to feel more welcomed by the school community and allow the school community to feel more supported and embraced by the parents.

Results

The research suggests that having a strong partnership benefits both the home and school on a number of levels. The teachers and principals of both participating schools indicated that having strong home–school connections is important to not only student success but to their success as professionals as well. According to Miss Gordon, principal of Kingston Early Childhood Centre, for schools such as hers, located in violent communities, more often than not parents have the perception that the educational system has failed them. With massive unemployment, gang violence, truancy, and teenage pregnancy, Miss Gordon maintains that it is tremendously difficult to gain the support of parents, even for those with children at the early childhood level.

According to Miss Gordon, the impetus behind her decision to earnestly seek a partnership with the community emerged after several break-ins at the school. According to the principal, within a 1-year period there were seven break-ins at the school. This situation posed disadvantageous on a number of levels, in that it significantly affected the school and teachers’ ability to provide quality learning due to the theft of valuable teaching resource materials.

At her wits end, with the final break-in at the school Miss Gordon stated that she, along with the other teachers, walked around in the community and visited the homes of many of the children to plea for the assistance of the parents and guardians. Miss Gordon admits that this was the first time she had visited many of the homes, and the parents were surprised by her visits. According to her, this spontaneous event resulted in many of the parents developing a better understanding of her and the other teachers, and as such they “warmed up to her.” Having had the opportunity to explain to the parents the negative effects of the robberies on the school, the parents promised their full support to “protect the school and look out for the interests of the teachers.”

From the negative experience of the robberies and the promise of their support, a few parents started to visit the school and speak with Miss Gordon about issues concerning their children and other personal matters. Miss Gordon maintains that she used these moments to encourage the parents to visit the school more often and to spend time in their children’s classroom. This encouragement, as she highlights, was crucial in getting the parents involved in the day-to-day classroom activities. She explains that since the entire experience began 2 years ago, she now has the support of parents at all levels. She has on roll five parents who volunteer as teacher assistants, three parents who work in the kitchen to prepare the meals for lunch, and many more who help with the beautification of the school. In addition, Miss Gordon explains that the parents also turnout in larger numbers for school meetings. She admits while not everyone turns up, she has seen a significant increase, especially when compared with her earlier years as principal.

According to the principal, school meetings were normally attended by approximately 10 to 15 parents along with the teachers. Miss Gordon however maintains that now that she has the support of the community, she on average sees between 30 and 40 parents. While not the entire parent population, the increase in parental support motivates Miss Gordon who believes that the school has made significant strides now that the parents are actively involved. According to her,

This parenting partnership has opened my eyes to what the children and the parents go through on a daily basis to survive. (A. Gordon, Personal communication, March 22, 2015)

Miss Gordon explained that she really did not understand the impact of poverty on the lives of many of her students, and that by developing a closer bond with her students and their parents she is able to empathize more and make special accommodations to meet their needs. She stated,

. . . a child at school and a child at home are very different, when you visit the homes and get to know the parents, you get a chance to see behind the mask. In these communities that isn’t always easy to do. I believe I really know them (students and parents) and they trust me now. They know I am genuine. (Personal communication, January 9, 2015)

Elisa Nelson, teacher at Simpson’s Basic, also agrees. According to Miss Nelson, now that a parent partnership exists, the home and school now complement each other as opposed to working against each other. This stance is also supported by her colleague Michelle Johnson (pseudonym), another classroom teacher at the school. Miss Johnson, speaking specifically about student behaviors, explains that the parents now support and promote the expected school behaviors in the home. One such instance she explains is that of a child who constantly fought and used expletives in the classroom. She explains that despite her best efforts to stop him from doing this, he continued to do so both in the classroom and on the playground with other children. This challenge was particularly difficult, she explains, because some parents began complaining about the impact and influence of the child and his behavior on their child.

Miss Johnson explained that after all else failed, she sought the intervention of the mother and grandmother during a visit to the child’s home. She explains that her visit made her have a better understanding of the child and the factors that contributed to his behavior. Miss Johnson stated,

I realised that he did not know anything else. His home environment promoted the use of expletives. His mother cursed them, the older brother cursed them and his neighbours cursed . . . I always thought he was just being rude, but now I know I really shouldn’t have punished him, he just didn’t know better what pleased me however was that after I visited the home and spoke to the mother she realised her son was following her. Despite telling him not to curse he followed her actions . . . she had to make the decision to stop cursing. (Personal communication, March 16, 2015)

Gwendolyn Taylor, principal of Simpson’s Basic School, in highlighting another benefit explained that home–school relations make the work a bit easier for teachers and principals. According to Mrs. Taylor,

This is a difficult profession. Anything that I can do to make the work lighter for my teachers or myself . . . I will do it . . . in my community to do home visits, you have to be trusted by the parents. When parents trust you and know that whatever you do is in their best interest or their child’s best interest you can’t go wrong. Believe me when I say to develop trust in these communities is difficult. If you have the parents back then they will support you. (Personal communication, March 18, 2015)

The findings suggest that both institutions employed systematic and sustainable strategies to have successful home–school relations. Both Ms Gordon and Ms Taylor agree that they did not have an established plan for developing a successful reciprocal relationship. Rather, their actions to develop positive relations were based on the needs of the community, the school, and the children. In spite of this, both principals admit that to develop strong relations takes a great deal of time, effort, and importantly money. According to Miss Taylor, a major issue in communities, such as the one where her school is located, is the financial challenge that the community members face. Poverty, as she suggests, is at the root of many issues, and as such the parents often highlight their inability to afford basic services or items.

For the families in the community where her school exists, Miss Taylor maintains that inevitably, food will have to be provided if meetings are called. She explains, “. . . this really is the only way they will come out.” She further states, “In some instances we have to provide bus fare. It is not uncommon for me to take money out of my own pocket and lend/give to parents.” Essentially, Miss Taylor believes that a significant part of developing strong home–school connections requires an understanding of the persons in the community and requires the ability to help them. Miss Nelson, one of the teachers interviewed, agreed. According to Miss Nelson, the children and the families she serves believe that no one cares for them. Speaking from the position of one who grew up in the community (though she has since relocated), she understands what the persons in the community want from the school. They are used to persons making blind promises to them. They are used to being labeled as unimportant and have essentially accepted their lives on the periphery of a society that embraces and lauds middle- and upper-income persons while looking down on the poor.

Miss Nelson maintains that she has taken advantage of her intimate knowledge and experience of the families and community she serves. She admits that she has used this to help her gain the trust and respect of the families she serves as they can see that she is still a part of them. Miss Nelson explains that trust is crucial. She admits that some of her parents are involved in illegal activities. She explains that the children tell her about events that have taken place in the home and about conversations that are held. According to Miss Nelson, there have been instances where the parents have told her not to turn up for school because they were going to have “war” or shootouts with rival gang members, and they did not want her or her colleagues to get caught up in the violence. She believes that this example, though unfortunate, really serves to show that the school and its leaders have been embraced by the community.

Heather Moncreiffe also agrees with Miss Nelson. According to Miss Moncreiffe, now that she has a closer bond with her children and their families, she now has a better understanding about the circumstances from which they come. She explains,

Now I know that there is a great likelihood that Jordan didn’t have lunch money on Monday because his mother did not sell at the market on the weekend or that Lisa will be out of school for 2 weeks because her mother had to go to take care of her sickly grandmother in anther parish. (Personal communication, January 16, 2015)

According to Mrs. Moncreiffe, her strategy for maintaining a strong bond with her students and their families is to be an advocate on their behalf. She admits though that it is not always easy, she has learned not to make rash decisions or judgments about them. Miss Moncreiffe gave the example of a parent who had asked her to be a referee for her as she wanted to apply for a job. Mrs. Moncreiffe explained that she happily did it, and after a few weeks went by she asked the parent about her application. It was then that the parent told her that she was not even interviewed because according to the parent (she assumed), it was because she “did not come from a good community,” and the company manager believed that only thieves and other criminals came from the community.

Miss Moncreiffe explained that she had to intervene on the parent’s behalf and personally speak with the manager. The parent was interviewed and was successful in her application. This, Miss Moncreiffe, believed was important as this is currently the job that now allows the parent to afford to send her child to school each day.

Discussion

This article adds to the current dearth of locally derived literature that speaks to how Jamaican early childhood institutions have begun to dialogue with parents to develop strong alliances while minimizing the gap that exists between home and school. As outlined by the MoE, there is a strong need for parents to take responsibility for their children and work with the school to increase the likelihood of their child’s success.

While the findings from this small-scale case study cannot be generalized, it does provide a foundation on which to examine home–school relations at the early childhood level. Furthermore, it does spur insight into how more structured and sustainable approaches can be followed as it relates to working with families in low resource communities.

From the data collected, three dominant themes emerged from the findings:

Conclusion

This small-scale study, using two schools as case studies, outlined strategies that can be used to minimize the gap between home and school. While not reflective of all early childhood institutions, there is a growing problem that exists in the Jamaican context where parents remain conspicuously absent from the classroom. This practice, especially for young children, has a significant impact on their academic lives.

What this study aims to do is to open the discussion as to how our schools can develop a stronger partnership with the home. As the literature suggests and as averred by the teachers in this study, when home and school work in tandem, the children reap the rewards and have a head start.

Schools need to develop an embracive culture whereby parents feel that they are accepted and valued. Guided by this, schools need to ensure that sound sustainable practices are employed that will build and support strong home–school partnerships. I declare this is not easy, and wholesale approaches might not be as effective as those specifically tailored to the unique social and cultural realities reflective of the homes and communities from which many of these students come. The strategies to employ which support the development of strong connections are as diverse as the communities in which many of these schools exist. Whether through use of volunteer Parent-Liaison personnel, as suggested by Howland, Anderson, Smiley, and Abbott (2006) and Sanders (2008) or by employing “community centric” strategies as suggested by Velsor and Orozco (2007) or by the development of parenting programs as stated by National Parenting Support Programme in Jamaica, it is fair to state that, particularly for children from low resource communities, effort must be made to develop sustainable home–school connections. From a Jamaican standpoint, our children, now more than ever, require this to ensure their success for future years to come.